I’m beginning to get it, I think, but it still seems that God could save the righteous unbeliever if he so chose.
First, I deny that there is such a thing. No one is righteous — not in the sense of meriting salvation. We really need to get that whole, legalistic, humanistic idea out of our system. We do not deserve salvation. No one does.
But there’s another angle regarding faith in Jesus that we often overlook. It may be the most important one. You see, Jesus is King of the Universe. He has a kingdom. Those with faith — loyalty — are subjects and citizens of the Kingdom. No one else is, although all are invited.
For some reason, we Protestants got in the habit of equating “church” to “kingdom” so much so that we read the kingdom passages entirely out of the Bible. We just mentally replace “kingdom” with “church” and interpret the passage in church terms. We completely ignore the fact that God says “kingdom” because he wants us to think “kingdom.”
Consider Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream —
(Dan 2:44-45 ESV) 44 “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall the kingdom be left to another people. It shall break in pieces all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever, 45 just as you saw that a stone was cut from a mountain by no human hand, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold. A great God has made known to the king what shall be after this. The dream is certain, and its interpretation sure.”
— and —
(Isa 9:6-7 ESV) 6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. 7 Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this.
God promised a kingdom. Therefore, what we have is a kingdom. And what makes a kingdom a kingdom? What would have been the essential elements to an iron age prophet?
Well, a kingdom must have a king. And must have subjects who serve the king. And borders, because not everyone is in the kingdom.
Even if we take “kingdom” in a spiritual sense — as we must — there must still be a king, and that King is the Messiah, Jesus. He sits on David’s throne. He rules the kingdom with justice and righteousness.
Yes, he touches the leper and eats with prostitutes — he’s not like earthly kings — but he is still the king. He therefore must be obeyed.
And any kingdom must have subjects, whom we call “Christians.” If an adult enters a new kingdom, he must swear a loyalty oath — promising to be loyal to the king of the territory he has entered. And so we must. We pledge our loyalty to Jesus by confessing our faith that “Jesus is Lord.”
To repent, therefore, is to realize that all other kings are pretenders and that the one true King is Jesus — who must therefore be obeyed. It’s to submit to the true King. This is both repentance and faith/faithfulness/trust. The two words heavily overlap.
After all, we willingly enter the Kingdom and submit to Jesus because we trust him — to rule with righteousness and justice, to keep his promises, to bring the full culmination of the Kingdom at the end of time. It’s easy to be loyal to someone you trust — especially in a world filled with untrustworthy pretend kings.
It is, therefore, absurd to imagine someone being a loyal subject of a king he’s never heard of.
(Yes, we Americans really want to be part of an autonomous collective, not a kingdom. And we are just that cheeky to the true king.)
So, perhaps, this is why faithful Jews were required to have faith in Jesus to be saved, even though they believed in God?
Part of it. Yes. It seems odd to us that good, God-fearing Gentiles and Jews were required to learn about Jesus and submit to him to be saved. Why? Why wasn’t their faith in God enough? Why must it be Jesus?
I’ve struggled with that one, but it’s plain that Paul, for example, went to God-fearing Gentiles to preach Jesus to save them. Why would a God-worshiping Gentile be damned? Why isn’t his faith in God good enough?
And you can’t help but notice that when Paul says that Christians are saved by faith just as Abraham was, indeed, as part of God’s covenant with Abraham, Paul subtly seems to shift from Abraham’s faith in God to the Christian’s faith in Jesus, all the while distressed that the Jews believe in God but not Jesus.
But I think it’s the hard questions that teach us the most, even if we never quite sort out the answers. There’s nothing to fear in seeking God’s will and truth.
Ray Vander Laan explains that from Abraham to John the Baptist, the Jews had faith in a Messiah who was to come, but the Christians had faith in the Messiah who had come.
Until Jesus came, faith in a Messiah to come was sufficient. But once God’s Messiah arrived, that would no longer be enough. After all, Jesus was God in the flesh. If the Jews rejected him as Messiah, they tacitly rejected God as God. You can’t really claim to have faith in God and yet call the Image of God a false prophet and pretender.
I think we often get off track by failing to fully associate Jesus with God. In our minds, Jesus and God are different, even at odds. We see God is distant and judgmental. We see Jesus as close, intimate, and forgiving. But Jesus is the Image of God. He reveals God as well as God can be revealed in flesh and blood.
If we don’t see God in Jesus, we don’t know God.
(John 14:8-12 ESV) 8 Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.”
9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves. 12 “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father.”
But for someone who hasn’t heard of Jesus, but who has faith in God, that seems a harsh result.
But that is exactly the case of Cornelius and countless other Jews and God-fearing Gentiles converted by Paul. They were saved by their faith in Jesus. They could not remain in their ignorance.
After all, you see, Jesus is our king, and we cannot enter his kingdom without faith, without loyalty to him as king.
Consider these words from (again) N. T. Wright from Simply Jesus: A New Vision of Who He Was, What He Did, and Why He Matters
The disciples wanted a kingdom without a cross. Many would-be “orthodox” or “conservative” Christians in our world have wanted a cross without a kingdom, an abstract “atonement” that would have nothing to do with this world except to provide the means of escaping it.
You see, the whole question of why God doesn’t save those who’ve never even heard of Jesus assumes that the fundamental question of life is how to get to heaven and avoid hell. And much of Christianity has been distorted to become all about getting saved to go to heaven.
But the reality is that we are called to submit to Jesus as King. To set the world right, to be restored to our proper place in the Universe, to be re-created in God’s image, we must first submit to Jesus.
The Scriptures spoke of the coming Kingdom going back to the Torah. For 1,500 years the Jews anticipated the coming Messiah, and they (largely) rejected him because he was not the King they expected — because they misunderstood the character of God so severely that, to them, Jesus didn’t look like God.
But a precious few received the word gladly and submitted to Jesus as King. They repented to see the world as it really is — in rebellion to its true Lord — and they chose to be on the side of the One True King. They changed sides. They submitted to be loyal to the rightful King.
They thereby become subjects of the King and therefore citizens of the Kingdom. They didn’t earn that position; it was a gift to be on the same side as the King of the Universe. And it changed everything.
Many died as martyrs. Many left home and families to spread the good news that God’s King had been enthroned, was then and there battling the demons and the darkness, and joined forces with him.
And they loved each other as only kings could do. Because those who submit to the King become kings.
Because faith is submission to Jesus as king. And Jesus rewards his subjects with crowns.
“You see, Jesus is King of the Universe. He has a kingdom. Those with faith — loyalty — are subjects and citizens of the Kingdom. No one else is, although all are invited.”
Jay I beg to differ, A kingdom consist of a certain territory, whether or not there are loyal subjects of the king, living with in it’s boundaries. A king is one who has the power to rule, one who sets rules, and penalties for those who do not obey those rules.
“Jesus is King of the Universe” is that what Jesus told us or did he say his Father is King, and he is the overseer of his father’s kingdom. was Joseph king of Egypt, or overseer of the king’s kingdom.
If as you say a kingdom requires loyal subjects, does that mean there are other beings on all bodies in the universe, or does that mean that the earth is the center of the universe. Just a few questions to see where your certainty comes from.
“although all are invited.” If one has never heard of Jesus or the gospel. how is that person invited to join “Jesus’ kingdom”?
Everyone who hears the gospel is invited to become subjects of the King of Kings. “We” are instructed to tell everyone they are invited. Asked, “How is one who has never heard of Jesus invited to join the Kingdom of Jesus Christ?” we must reply, “They are invited because WE invited them.” Is that not what we are called to do? Living for Jesus demands that we love others. If we love others, will we not tell them about our King? Surely we will invite them to join us in the Kingdom of love and light! Won’t we?
Laymond, you may be astonished to find that I agree with your first point here. The borders of the Kingdom are found in Ephesians 1:19-22– “all things” have been placed under the feet of Jesus. The very nature of a kingdom, as you point out, is that it is territorial, that is, all the area which is under the power and authority of the king. Borders are not established by the people under rule, but by the power of the king.
Now, in any kingdom there are loyal subjects, and there are rebels. As Jay notes, there are those who have received the king gladly and pledged their fealty. But the rebels are also under the power of the king. There are even spiritual “principalities and powers” which are under the aegis of the king, rather like rebellious provinces. The king’s current forebearance of their rebellion should not be interpreted as a lack of current jurisdiction over them. Luke 19 is instructive in this regard. It is good to read verses 11-15 and then the conclusion of that matter in verse 27.
Let us understand that all this language is human metaphor and as such we will find eventual breaks in the model if we become too literal about it. But the conclusion that is important to me is that Jesus of Nazareth is Lord Of All even now, not just Lord Of All Who Want Him To Be.
Sorry about that. I should have said, “ALL who hear the gospel are invited…”
Ray, I believe your English is proper in both cases. — anyway I believe Mrs Eudaly would say so. 🙂
Jay wrote:
Perhaps Abraham’s faith was that God’s promise of blessing all nations of the earth in his seed would be kept. Thus, his faith really was in the yet-to-appear Jesus.
I agree that there is no such thing as a righteous unbeliever. But I would ask – isn’t there an intrinsic difference between someone who has heard the gospel and rejected it (let’s call them “disbelievers” for clarity) and those who have never heard the gospel and therefore cannot believe it (let’s distinguish them as “non-believers”)?
Paul recognizes this possible in Romans 10:14 – “How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?”
Does scripture specifically, unequivocally, inarguably deny the possibility of salvation for all those who have not heard the gospel?
I understand, I think, Paul’s message of God’s kindness and sternness, but he is speaking to people who have heard the gospel and urging the importance of accepting each other – Jew and Gentile – and cooperating in the sharing of the gospel, which carries with it the promise of salvation made originally to Abraham. Isn’t God still free to deliver the gift even to those who are not aware of the promise, even those who are as undeserving as we believers are? Won’t He judge them by their words and actions as we will be and judge with justice and mercy with them as well as with us?
This isn’t an all-or-none proposition, to me, when God’s choice is involved; nothing in scripture says all those who haven’t heard are in darkness and lost and condemned — nor does it say that all is forgiven for those who never heard because they couldn’t have known about the promise. What I am trying to plumb out is whether God’s justice is so overpowering that mercy toward those who don’t know of the promise is impossible.
What I’m trying to say is, should we presume either salvation or condemnation for the non-believer (who has not heard) with regard to a judgment that has not yet taken place and in the absence of incontrovertible clear specific scripture? Or just tell the Story of Christ indiscriminately like a sower who has no compunction to stop sowing no matter what kind of soil lies beneath?
I completely agree that anyone who has not heard the gospel is in danger of judgment going against them. But, by the way, so are we believers if we hear and fall and reject. There is power in the Story and the promise within it to transform lives and begin the process of salvation right here and now in this life. Yet is that power categorically denied to those who have not heard?
Keith,
There wouldn’t even be an argument at all if everyone just left it in Gods hands. The problem is there have been some and especially in the COC that say for certain all are lost but us, and only a few of us.
That position causes us to bring this up and it is so silly to speak for God like that.
This stance has caused more hard feelings among those we want to help than any other I know of.
I hope it is not a position taken to raise ourselves above all others like the Philistines did.
There is no stronger judgment against all others professing to be Christians than this and none other causes us to be thought of as being sorta goofy than this.
Keith said;
“I agree that there is no such thing as a righteous unbeliever. But I would ask – isn’t there an intrinsic difference between someone who has heard the gospel and rejected it (let’s call them “disbelievers” for clarity) and those who have never heard the gospel and therefore cannot believe it (let’s distinguish them as “non-believers”)? ”
Keith, since we have “disbelievers” among those who have heard, howis God to judge those who would “disbelieve” from those who would believe if they were given the opportunity ? Wasn’t there something about God being able to judge the heart? Like AJ said I think we had better leave this one up to God.
AJ and Laymond, I have to agree. Judgment is in God’s hands.
Keith,
Thanks for your thoughtful comment. I’ve written a reply, but I’m saving it for the end of the series. It’ll show up in about a week — Lord willing and the tornados don’t blow up all away.
Looking forward to it! (Then I may be the one who owes you lunch!)
Is it not true that any righteousness which accrues to us accrues as an act of God apart from any righteous act on our part, or lack thereof?
“righteous unbeliever” ~ I have met many who do not reject the Lordship of Christ but do reject the expression of that Lordship through the church. They reject the “kingdom” as well as the “church” in part because the church cannot separate the two. If I thought that “kingdom” and “church” were synonymous I would become a righteous unbeliever on the spot.
Pingback: Baptism/Amazing Grace: A Conversation Over Lunch, Part 24 (In Reply to Keith Brenton, Part 1) | One In Jesus