Theology in the Raw - 675: Questions and Answers

Episode Date: June 11, 2018

On episode #675 of Theology in the Raw Preston answers questions submitted by listeners. Questions covered on the show included: 1) How does one who believes in non-violence deal with the very violent themes in the Psalms? 2) How do I talk to a youth group member who is gay-affirming? 3) What are your thoughts on Pope Francis’ response to a distraught boy? 4) What are the foundations of the faith and is Calvinism one of them?

Hello, friends, and welcome to another episode of Theology in the Raw. My name is Preston Sprinkle, and in this show, we are going to address several of the questions that you guys sent in. As most of you know, my Patreon supporters are the ones who vote on the questions that you send in. So they are the ones who pick these. You guys sent in a lot of really good questions, but my Patreon supporters are the ones who vote on the questions that you send in. So they are the ones who pick these. You guys send in a lot of really good questions, but my Patreon supporters are the ones who decided which ones they wanted me to address. If you would like to become a Patreon supporter, you can go to patreon.com forward slash theology

in the raw. Also, for those of you who are listening to the show, this is also a YouTube show. Okay, so I am here in my studio, i.e. my basement with poor lighting and okay sound. And I am recording this podcast on video as well. It's going to be up on my YouTube channel. And if it's not up already, it's kind of weird talking about something that's going to happen in the future at some point, not knowing exactly when that's going to happen or who's listening to this first. So if you are listening to the show and you want to watch me sit in my basement and answer your questions, you are free to do so. Go to my YouTube channel, Press and Sprinkle, and you will find this video. If you are watching this video on YouTube and you want to listen to it, then you can go to my podcast, Theology in the Raw, through iTunes or other platforms where podcasts are listened to.

So there we are. I'm going to jump in and address your questions. The first one is about nonviolence and the Psalms. This questioner says, how does one who believes in nonviolence deal with the very violent themes in the Psalms? This person goes on to say, as a Christian who believes the Bible teaches nonviolence, how do we use the Psalms that have heavy war themes and references in devotional time or application to our lives? You go on to say, I'm a big fan of Fight, the book I wrote on nonviolence. And you totally agree with my perspective on nonviolence, but occasionally you come across some brutal lines in the Psalms like,

silence my enemies, destroy my foes, Psalm 143, 12, or destroy those who look at this world for their reward, Psalm 17, 14. And there's several other violent Psalms that I'm sure if you've been a Christian for a number of years, you've come across these verses. I remember talking to my kids about, I was reading Psalm 139 to my kids, which is a beautiful Psalm about God knitting our inward parts and forming us in our mother's womb. And it's a really endearing, intimate psalm. But then there's a line that just jumps out of nowhere about, you know, God, please dash the kids of my enemies up against the rocks. And like, what in the world does that mean? So the psalms are very devotional. They're very heartwarming in many places, but they're also very violent. So what do we do with

the violence in the psalms? Well, a couple of things. Number one, as I talked about in my book Fight, I do believe there are ethical trajectories in scripture, meaning some things are permitted in the Old Testament and prohibited in the New, or vice versa. Some things are permitted in the Old Testament and prohibited in the New Testament. Not everything. I mean, Some things are permitted in the Old Testament and prohibited in the New Testament. Not everything. I mean, some things are prohibited in the Old and prohibited in the New, and some things are permitted and permitted and so on and so forth. So it's not that everything is on an ethical trajectory, but I do believe that with regard to violence, we do have violence endorsed, sometimes even commanded in the Old Testament. And I know various Christian

thinkers and writers who try to say it wasn't God commanding the violence. It was the Old Testament Israelites that misunderstood God's command. I don't take that approach. I think it presents other hermeneutical and interpretive problems. So I do take the approach that I do believe that God met Israel where they were at, and he sanctioned violence. He tolerated violence. In fact, in some cases, he even commanded violence, but that was not a revelation of his perfect will. Just like when he said, don't eat catfish, I don't think that was a revelation of his perfect will. When he said, you know, when he commanded a man with two wives to make sure you don't play favorites with the son of the wife that you love the most, I don't think that's a revelation of God's perfect will. I think God would rather have people not to have two wives, but he met them where they're at. He

met Israel where they were at to slowly bring them to where he wanted them to be. Okay, so that's what I mean by ethical trajectory. So, and if you've read my book, this questioner has read my book. And so, you know how I explain these ethical trajectories. So, when I go to the Psalms, I mean, the Psalms are right smack dab in the middle of that trajectory. go to the Psalms. I mean, the Psalms are right smack dab in the middle of that trajectory. I do believe that the Psalms are written from a perspective of an old covenant view of violence, where it was permitted under certain circumstances, sometimes even commanded. So I read the Psalms through the lens of the cross. I read the entire Old Testament through the lens of the cross,

that there may be certain things in the Old Testament that was good and holy for Israel in that time, but that doesn't necessarily mean that reflects a Christian or Christocentric ethic. Also, I mean, the Psalms are interesting because they capture not just characteristics about God and his ways in the world, but they also capture our sometimes imperfect or very human response to God. So just because the Psalms capture a way in which people are responding to God, that doesn't necessarily mean that God is sort of sanitizing or endorsing that kind of response or is saying that's how people should respond to God at all times of all places. The Psalms simply capture a very raw, very human, very real response to God.

And so, I mean, in some ways it's true in the sense that it captures a truthfulness about a human response to God, but doesn't mean it's necessarily God's intended way in which we should respond to God. So just because you have a psalmist, for instance, crying out, God, destroy their enemies and dash their children up against the rocks, that doesn't necessarily mean that comes directly from God. Rather, that is divinely inspired piece of literature, the Psalms, that capture a human response to God. So those are two things. Number one, understand the genre of the Psalms and that it's a bit more messy than maybe other parts of the scripture. And also the Psalms are still part

of this ethical trajectory leading to the perfect revelation of God's will in the New Testament. Next question, how to talk to a youth group member who is gay affirming? You say that, you go on to explain, how do you broach this subject with a student in the youth group who is same-sex attracted and is pursuing those attractions. So quick pause. This questioner is coming obviously from a perspective that same-sex sexual relationships are not God's will, not God's intention. Okay. So somebody who holds to an affirming theology is going to respond to this question very

differently than I would. And this questioner is coming from a perspective that is shared by me. So we're having kind of an in-house discussion here. So if you're not of this theological persuasion, then this answer is going to perhaps not make much sense because you're coming from a different point of view. You're going to say, this is a student who has been part of our youth group for a couple of years, has joined us on missions trips, et cetera. He's been fairly open with this small group about his attractions. He has no problem sharing about a certain crush that he has on another boy. You say he genuinely does believe in Jesus, I think, in parentheses. But my guess is that he's never taken the time to evaluate the biblical view of marriage,

sexuality, etc. And given the way he feels about his own sexuality. As time goes on, he's gotten even more and more comfortable about sharing about his sexuality in small group, which on the one hand, I'm grateful for, you say, because it shows that his comfort level has grown. But on the other hand, I feel that I need to broach the subject with him the hand, I'm grateful for, you say, because it shows that his comfort level has grown. But on the other hand, I feel that I need to broach the subject with him theologically, simply as a desire to help him on the pathway of discipleship. I'm just not sure how. So my response, so first of all, let me just give a massive caveat. And I do this quite a bit with these particular kind of relational questions. I have a hard time giving specific, concrete, relational advice from a distance. I don't know this person. I mean, I don't know

the questioner asking this question. I don't know the leaders. I don't know the nature of the church. I don't know the ecclesiology, the views even of the church as a whole. So it's hard for me to give really kind of A to Z, here's what you should do, not knowing so many relational particulars that I would need to know to give actual like sound pastoral advice. So my advice is going to be at a 30,000 foot level. I would ask a few questions before I even give any advice. I would want to know what's your sort of philosophy of ministry in your youth group? What's your ecclesiology? Is it more of a missional focused? Like you just want to get as many teens in a room so that you can share Jesus with them? Like you're trying to

just preach Jesus to people that probably don't know Jesus? Or is it more discipleship focused? Like you're getting teenagers who are actually committed to Jesus, or at least they say they want to follow Jesus. Like it's that they've already made that commitment. Sure, there may be some unbelievers there, but your focus is more on discipleship. I would need to know kind of your philosophy here. Is it more missional? Is it more discipleship focused? Or is it kind of a both-and? I mean, I would kind of hope it would be somewhere of a both-and. If it's so far on the missional side, I'm going to say, that's awesome. Preach Jesus. What happens when they make that confession? And are they getting a full, true picture of who Jesus is? And if it's heavy on the discipleship side, I would say, well,

you know that there's going to be probably many youth that are going to come and they're going to bring their friends and boys from school are going to be chasing the cute girls in your youth group to come to youth group. And so most youth groups inevitably are going to have unbelieving kids there. So you still need to have that missional focus. So I think, I don't think it's an either or, but I would want to know kind of like what's your emphasis here? I think that would shape maybe how you'd respond to this person. Either way, if this, you say this person is a believer, I think, which, okay, so basically he's making a confession, says he loves Jesus, he's engaged. Which, okay, so basically he's making a confession, says he loves Jesus, he's engaged.

You're not quite sure if he's totally redeemed. I mean, with a lot of youth across the board, when do you really know if they've made that long-term commitment? But if he's making that confession, the main thing I would want is that he would have a firm understanding of what it means to follow Jesus, that the impossible cost of following Jesus, the countercultural, uncomfortable, counterintuitive, illogical, seemingly impossible confession that he's making, that I want to follow this Savior who called his followers to die to themselves, to pick up their cross, to count the cost, to not make a hasty decision to want to follow Jesus,

who want to follow him to the grave in the midst of pain and difficulty and suffering and self-denial, where it's in that place of self-denial and picking up your cross, where you find otherworldly, unspeakable, unexpected joy and uncanny fulfillment in life. Like I would want that really rich, very challenging, and in many ways divisive message of following Jesus to be made very clear to this person so that he can get him to a place where he has a very realistic and honest perspective on what it means to follow Jesus. Oh, and by the way, I would want to make sure every single kid in the youth group has that

perspective. So, and again, see, I don't know anything about your youth group, but if youth group is just a place to kind of gather and entertain and provide space for Christian kids to kind of get together and have some fun. That's a great start. But a true encounter with Jesus is disruptive. It's uncomfortable. A genuine encounter with Jesus oftentimes is followed with the response of, oh, I don't want that. So vibrant, flourishing, well-populated youth groups sometimes make me a little nervous. I think that might be a good place to start. That's not a bad thing. Maybe God is really working in their hearts, but I would want to make the radicality of the gospel publicly and clearly and constantly known.

And again, so just to reiterate again, I am not talking about offering a really challenging gospel to all the gay kids and youth group. That is not what I said. That is not at all what I would advise. I would want to make every sexually broken kid in that room, which is every kid in that room, very aware of the high calling of following Jesus, the dangerous nature of Christian discipleship, the pain and suffering that often comes with following Jesus who embodied pain and suffering. So that would be one thing I would want to, I like to think in terms of discipleship, well, in terms of like a public aspect of discipleship

and a private aspect of discipleship. So with this conversation, I would want to be very public with God's desire for sexual integrity. Gay or straight or bi or trans doesn't matter. Like there is a high standard and high calling for sexual integrity that God calls all people to, those who want to follow Jesus at some point or another are going to be faced with this, wow, this Christian thing is really difficult, especially when it comes to sexual integrity. I'm avoiding the term sexual purity because I think that has a lot of kind of baggage in Christianity, but I think we can all agree

that sexual integrity, following God's design for sexual expression and our sexuality, like that is something we're all called to at least ask, what is God's design and intention for that? And you, the youth pastor asking this question, obviously has a certain standard of that, which would say same-sex sexual relationships are not part of God's design. So I would want to make that publicly, again, don't pick on gay people, don't pick on LGBT people. Just promote sexual integrity to all of the people in that room, not as a means of salvation or a means of getting God's favor or whatever, but as a realistic articulation of what it means, part of what it means to follow

Jesus faithfully. So publicly, I'd want to make that clear. Privately, given the situation that you described, I think it probably would be good to have a private conversation with this individual where you can communicate to him with tons of compassion and care and sensitivity and love and grace and honesty and truthfulness. And, you know, a clear understanding of what the Bible says. I communicate to him on a private, eye-to-eye, one-to-one loving level of, hey, I'm so thankful you're here. I'm not just thankful you're here. Like, you're a gift to this group. Like, you bring gifts to this group that we value immensely.

But I've heard you say some things or seen you say some things. I just want to be clear. I want to be honest with you because it would be deceitful for me not to tell you what I believe and what this youth group believes about sexuality and marriage and all that comes with that. So let me just – I just want to tell you, out of love and honesty, here's what we believe. And this is what I would expect for those who name the name of Jesus in this youth group. But again, see, this brings us back to the missional versus discipleship. If it's just kind of a missional, more of a missional focused group, then your sort of standards for right living are probably going to be really low

because you're just trying to introduce Jesus to people and let them kind of maybe figure it out from there. And you don't want to push people away who may not know Jesus, but who need to encounter Jesus, you know, maybe for the first time. So I think you do need to, I think asking that question, what is my philosophy of ministry is super important because that will be kind of the grid through which you view the situation. At the end of the day, I like to say, swim in the tension of grace and truth. Okay, next question. What are my thoughts on Pope Francis's response to this distraught boy? And the questioner gives me a link to metro.co.uk dated April 20th, where the title is something like the Pope comforts a boy with dead father who was an atheist or something like that.

a boy with dead father who was an atheist or something like that. And I clicked on the link, took me to an article that was filled with typos, by the way, which always makes me nervous when an article is filled with tons of typos. And there was a little video clip in that article, about two and a half minute video clip of Pope Francis sitting in kind of an outside area. He's got people coming up to talk to him through a microphone. And this little boy comes up and is just sitting there. He can't talk, can't talk. He's, you know, just, you know, cat has his tongue. And all of a sudden he starts crying.

And then the Pope, very, this is such a cool video. He says, you know, tell him to come up here. So the boy comes up, he still can't talk. And then he whispers into the Pope's ear something. And then the Pope responds. You don't really hear anything. Now, this is what makes me nervous. We're kind of left up to the reporter to reveal what the boy said to the Pope and what the Pope said to the boy in the video itself. And maybe the Pope gave an interview after where he talked about what he said. I didn't see anything where I actually saw exactly what the Pope said from the Pope's mouth, nor did I see anything where I can

see what the boy was saying. Plus it was in a different language that I don't know. So we are left up to, I think, some editorial honesty here with the journalist to understand what's going on. But okay. So according to the article, the boy asked if his father, father who died and who was an atheist if he was in heaven. And the Pope answered, and according to the reporter, something like, yes, he's in heaven or whatever. But even in the quotes within the article, the quotes that the reporter says, this is what the Pope said, he didn't quite say that. He came really close in In the article, it said, it recorded the Pope as saying, if that man was able to make his children like that, then it's true. He was a good man. Not super clear exactly what he means there, but this is, again, the reporter summarizing the Pope's words, or not summarizing, but quoting. That man did not have the gift of faith. He wasn't a believer, but he had his children baptized.

He had a good heart, the Pope said, according to the article. Describing Emmanuel, Emmanuel's the boy, Emmanuel's father, he said, do you think God would be able to leave him far from himself? Does God abandon his children when they are good? The children in the crowd responded, no. And the Pope then told Emmanuel, there, Emmanuel, that is the answer. God surely was proud of your father. We didn't quite say he was in heaven.

It does seem like he's, you know, trying to reassure this kid who's bawling, you know, about that his father's in good hands or however you want to put it, that God was proud of his father, that his father's a good man. I mean, this honestly, when I watched this and read it, it just seems like one of those awkward pastoral moments, you know, where somebody asks you, they're just distraught. They ask you some theological question. They want some reassurance. And yet, theologically, you can't really give them the reassurance you want because it may, it's not true. But at the same time, it's not the time or place to kind of go into a full A to Z, like theological articulation of the afterlife or the nature of

hell or whatever. Anybody who's been a pastor has been in these situations where there's just, there's a time and place for this kind of conversation. And sometimes that time or place is not now when the person is distraught and asking the question. So I, I mean, I want to, I want to, I want to respond some more in between, not in between, but being both, as I said in my last question, both gracious and truthful. I don't want to lie. I don't want to give false assurance. But you also, again, there's a time and a place for clear theological reasoning. And there's some pastoral moments when this is not really the moment to just give a very insensitive and unnecessary theological answer. So in situations like this, my recommendation is to go to the Genesis 18 passage.

You don't actually literally need to go to the passage, but that statement where, I believe it's the angel of the Lord says, Will not the judge of all the earth do what is right? Like in a sense, I don't, and this is theologically true as it gets. Like my hope is not in making sure that this person is in heaven or making sure this person's saved or this person can't be in hell. Like, oh my gosh, my faith's going to be destroyed if you tell me this person's in hell. Like that's not Christianity. Like my faith is not in me making sure that all the people go to the right place.

And God forbid, God would make a decision that would, you know, make me really sad. Like that's not Christianity. That's a shaky foundation. I want to always push people back to trusting in God. Don't trust in knowing where somebody is or isn't in the afterlife. Put your trust in the fact that God is good. Do you believe God is good? Yes, I believe God is good. Do you believe that he will do, he will execute justice in the most perfect way, that he will not, that he is incapable of doing something bad, of doing something unjust according to his standard. Like that's where I want people's hope.

I want their hope to be in God, not in, you know, having whatever thing they're going through to be massaged or every question they have to be answered according to their, you know, what they can handle in that moment. I want them to be thrown, throw themselves upon God. That is both pastorally and truthfully where their hope needs to be. So if I was in a situation, I would say, do you believe that God is good? The Bible says God is good. Do you believe that?

Yes, I believe that. Do you believe God is incapable? Maybe you don't want to say it. Maybe, do you believe God will always do what is right? He's incapable of doing wrong. Yes, yes, I believe that. Then your father is in good hands. He's with God who will always do what is right. And leave it at that. I mean, I think that it steers the focus away from trying to give some false assurance to a child who lost his father, who's an atheist. I mean,

yeah, I have a hard time saying an atheist is in heaven. If atheism gets you to heaven, then I need to really revisit my entire, you know, religion. So next question, what are the foundations of the faith? Is Calvinism one of them? Quick answer, no, Calvinism is not one of them. And I say that as one who is kind of Calvinistic with several footnotes and caveats. So this questioner says, Word of Life, you've been a student at Word of Life Bible Institute. I believe that's in the state of New York and several campuses around the world. I've had friends that have been to Word of Life, have had really good experiences. In fact, I believe my brother-in-law, who teaches in Israel, also teaches at a Word of Life school

in Europe somewhere. I want to say it's Hungary. I don't know. Not that the school is Hungary, but it's in the country of Hungary. And so you say you've been a student at Word of Life Bible Institute, and they hold to a two to four point Calvinism. I'm going to leave that aside for those of you who don't know what those points are. It's not really super important right now. But they hold to a two to four point Calvinism, a pre-tribulational, pre-millennial eschatology, a dispensational hermeneutic. And beginning my theological journey, well, you began your theological journey with a, and you say, I quote, a very Southern Baptist theology. I don't know if that means like very Southern or very Baptist or very Southern Baptist,

whatever, but I found that to be funny. I was very unaware of diversity in theological thought because of the bubble nature of the Bible Institute culture. And I was convinced without much research that everything I taught was true. As I've continued to listen to your podcast and other Reformed speakers and have read scriptures for myself, I have come to disagree with many points that I was taught. Now, you say many of my peers would say that other theological systems would lead someone to not really be a born again believer. These would include Arminianism, Universalism, and even some charismatic theology. So let me

say, yeah, your friends are wrong. And it seems like you don't even believe that anymore. And you're right, they're wrong. That's just the way it is. So you go on to say, this doesn't sit well with me. Good doesn't sit well with me either. I believe there is beauty in theological diversity. And I'm sure that once I get to heaven, the Lord will reveal how wrong many of my beliefs are. That's a great perspective. This leads to my question.

What do you believe are the foundations of the faith? Okay. So when we talk about what are the foundations of the faith, I think we need to make several distinctions here. Number one, a distinction between one's individual salvation. Like what is the basic necessity for becoming a Christian, like getting saved? So that's what are the things I need to believe or do or say or whatever that for my personal individual salvation, what are the basics for that happening? But another thing to think about is what are the basics for what I call the architecture

of the Christian faith? So there's certain things that are important for you to believe to become a Christian. So there's certain things that are important for you to believe to become a Christian. There's also other things that are just crucial to the architecture of the Christian faith, whether you know them or not. For instance, I would put the Trinity in this category. I might get some emails for this. That's fine. I might get some emails for this. That's fine. But I don't think that the, I think the Trinity is crucial to the architecture of the Christian faith because part of that architecture, part of

what makes Christianity, Christianity is we are monotheists. We believe in one God. And yet we also have the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Especially, I mean, the Holy Spirit can be tricky. That's a little more difficult to sort out. Is it a power emanating from God? Is it a separate personality, part of the triune God? No, obviously, it should be obvious. I believe it is a personality, part of the triune God.

But biblically, you have to work a little harder to get there. But clearly, Jesus is divine and human. And clearly Jesus worships the father as divine. So you have, if I can say at the very basic level, plurality within that monotheistic belief. Now let me ask you a question. Does every individual Christian need to understand that to be saved? be saved? Let that linger for a little bit because the answer is kind of no. I don't think the thief on the cross would be able to articulate a really sound Trinitarian theology. I don't think most early Christians in the first century would have had a full-blown, clear articulation of the Trinity. I don't think most Christians in America would be able to articulate a Trinitarian theology in a way that would satisfy the sort of creedal formulations of the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries of Christianity. Okay. So, as far as an individual getting saved, I don't think they need to be able

to understand the full understanding or even a basic understanding really of the Trinity. They confess Jesus as Lord, believe in their heart, God raised them from the dead, and they're saved. You don't have clear articulations of the Trinity being promoted as sort of the necessary thing you must believe in order to get saved. At the same time, when you step back and look at the architecture of the Christian faith, understanding the Trinity is really important for that. So, Understanding the Trinity is really important for that. So do you need to understand all the ins and outs of inspiration and biblical authority? Do you need to understand all the ins and outs of the workings of, let's just say, the spirit, the indwelling of the spirit? Do you need to understand the doctrine of justification by faith through grace alone. Well, for the

architecture of the Christian faith, yeah, biblical authority is pretty important. Inspiration, justification by faith. But as N.T. Wright said, you're saved by faith or you're justified by faith. You're not justified by believing in justification by faith. It's a brilliant line that's got him in hot water. I think he's dead on. Like there's a difference between saying a doctrine is important for the Christian faith and, oh, by the way, you also need to have a really clear formulated understanding of that doctrine in order for you as an individual to be saved. So that's one distinction I'd want to make between necessary criteria for becoming a Christian as an individual versus aspects or beliefs about Christianity that are crucial for the architecture of the Christian

faith as an objective reality, as a religion out there. I also want to make a distinction as you talk about, you know, what are the foundations of the faith, I want to make a distinction between orthodoxy, which is right belief, and orthopraxy, right behavior. See, oftentimes we get caught up on what are the necessary things to believe to be saved? And those are important questions. Sometimes we forget that when the Bible talks about salvation

or when it threatens, when it warns people to not fall away, oftentimes it talks about obedience or lack thereof. You know, for instance, in 1 Corinthians 6, 9, 1 Corinthians 6, 9 to 11, it talks about these will not inherit the kingdom of God. And who are the types of people that will not inherit the kingdom of God. And who are the types of people that won't inherit the kingdom of God? Well, the sexually immoral, the greedy, the

slanderous, like it talks about behavioral things that will exclude somebody from the kingdom of God. In the parable of the sower in the Luke, gosh, Luke 6, Luke 7, something like that. And in Matthew 13, it talks about, talks about the good seed falling upon good ground are the ones who grow up and persevere. And there's this idea of the one who is genuinely saved will demonstrate an ongoing life of faithfulness and repentance and belief, not just signing off on some creed. But again, in order to rightly behave, in order to respond to God with the proper obedience, you have to have some basic understanding

of who it is you're even responding to. Who is this God? Who is this Jesus? How does this work together? What is salvation? So I don't wanna clean up the messiness here. I wanna almost just expose the messiness that we need to ask

questions about individual salvation versus the architecture of the Christian faith. We need to talk about orthopraxy versus orthodoxy. So in terms of, yeah, individual salvation, I think there is this emphasis on allegiance to Christ, which is what I think faith in Jesus is. I like the idea of allegiance because biblical faith, like the Greek word pistis, this is one of those seminary, yeah, I was the goofball in the back whenever the teacher would say pistis, he said pistis. The pistis is the Greek word for faith. Well, the Greek word pistis is a little bit more well-rounded, a little bit more involved, a little bit more complex and in depth than the English word faith. And so I like the word, because faith, sometimes we just think, oh, it's just intellectual assent. Well, biblical faith is a little more than that,

especially the Hebrew equivalent emunah, which is often translated faith or faithfulness. You see, faithfulness has to do with not just intellectual ascent, but it involves like right response, right living. And I think that the biblical concept of faith in Jesus Christ, it's not, you don't want to spill over in the works. Like, oh, so you're just saying it's your obedience that in Jesus is what gets you saved? Well, no, but it's more than just intellectual assent. And this is where I like the idea of allegiance, giving your allegiance to Jesus, I think is hands down the fundamental necessary thing for salvation. That's what Paul says in Romans 10. I mean, confess with your mouth, Jesus is Lord, believe in your heart, God raised him from the dead and you'll be saved.

And even there, when the Bible talks about confession, it's more than just a verbal confession. It is more of a, I'm confessing in the sense that I'm giving my allegiance to him as Lord. And I believe in my heart that God raised him from the dead and heart belief or allegiance issues in responsive behavior, if it's a true heart response. So in terms of orthopraxy, allegiance to Jesus, absolutely necessary, which necessitates or assumes some basic knowledge of who Jesus is and was. As far as orthodox or orthodox, like what are some of the beliefs that are necessary for,

that's the basic necessity of salvation? I would say that Jesus is the Messiah. You can say Holy One of Israel, the Christ, whatever, that he is the only way to salvation. That by giving your allegiance or believing in him, you are saved. Some basic understanding of his death and resurrection.

It's hard to say somebody can get saved without understanding and believing in the resurrection of Jesus. The first Corinthians 15 makes that really central. makes that really central. I would also say, you know, monotheism and the Trinity are following close behind. I'm not saying that for an individual to be saved, they must have a full articulation of the Trinity. This is more the architecture of the Christian faith that we are monotheists, and yet there is plurality within the divinity. So modern systems like pre-mill, ah-mill, charismatic gifts and Calvinism versus Arminianism. No, these, sorry, these are not part of the foundations of the faith. Otherwise, there's millions of Christians that are screwed because global Christianity, historic Christianity has not made these very

significant or central. And it's really just modern Western people who have these modern systems that may be good, that maybe they're good organizing systems that help us understand scripture. Maybe some are better than the others, but to say that these are sort of fundamental to salvation. I mean, I think that's just absolutely flies in the face of what Paul said was the essentials of the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15. It flies in the face of what the apostles preached when they preached the gospel throughout the book of Acts. They did not preach a pre-trib rapture view of salvation. So yes, going back to your question, people who say that those other theological systems could threaten you from losing your born-again believing status,

that's absolutely ridiculous and part of the reason, part of the things that are wrong with modern-day American Christianity. So thanks for listening, folks. Again, this is Theology in the Raw. If you want to support the show, you can go to patreon.com forward slash theology in the raw, support the show for as little as five bucks a month, five bucks a month, and you will get a monthly Patreon-only podcast, which I'm about to record here in the next couple of days for my supporters for the month of June. So five bucks a month, or you can support higher than that. If you have, uh, more money, you can give me more money. That'd be great. Um, also check out the YouTube version of the show. And if you're watching on YouTube, check out the podcast version through iTunes. Thanks for listening to Theology of the Round. Thank you.