Is the gospel necessary to save?

[Sovereign Grace]

I ask this as I have been debating a Brother who says that God uses other means than the word of God to save. I call that hyper-Calvinistic heresy, and I believe that God uses means to save the elect. I do not think anyone can be saved without having heard about the Christ through the gospel.

What say ye blokes?


I just can't seem to get through to this Brother. He wants to use Noah, Abraham, Enoch, and Paul, as God using other means to save ppl. I believe he is using these accounts where God spoke verbally to them and trying to superimpose them into today. I even showed him Hebrews 1.

Any help from ye blokes would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Sovereign Grace]

If this is not in the correct forum, please move it to where it needs to be, and I offer my apology upfront.

 

[Von]

There are stories of people getting saved without hearing the gospel - in a moment of clarity/God revealing Himself to them. It is definitely not the usual way of people getting saved and relying on it in a hyper calvinistic manner is to be in error. I would, however, be wary of saying never. You can end up like Eliphaz saying to Job:
"Remember: who that was innocent ever perished? Or where were the upright cut off? As I have seen, those who plow iniquity and sow trouble reap the same. (Job 4:7-8 ESV)
He made his experience the basis of his doctrine, when the exception to the rule was sitting in front of him.

Or the Pharisees:
They replied, "Are you from Galilee too? Search and see that no prophet arises from Galilee." (John 7:52 ESV)

Now it's easy to poo-poo these characters from the Scriptures, but be careful to say such and such a thing will never happen.
The Lord once spoke through a donkey!

 

[Sovereign Grace]

There are stories of people getting saved without hearing the gospel - in a moment of clarity/God revealing Himself to them. It is definitely not the usual way of people getting saved and relying on it in a hyper calvinistic manner is to be in error. I would, however, be wary of saying never. You can end up like Eliphaz saying to Job:
"Remember: who that was innocent ever perished? Or where were the upright cut off? As I have seen, those who plow iniquity and sow trouble reap the same. (Job 4:7-8 ESV)
He made his experience the basis of his doctrine, when the exception to the rule was sitting in front of him.

Or the Pharisees:
They replied, "Are you from Galilee too? Search and see that no prophet arises from Galilee." (John 7:52 ESV)

Now it's easy to poo-poo these characters from the Scriptures, but be careful to say such and such a thing will never happen.
The Lord once spoke through a donkey!

Thank you for your response. I just can't get around Romans 10:17 that says faith comes by hearing the word of God. And I think Paul was referring to the words of another witness, not God speaking directly to them.

I'm looking at this more through the unreached. Someone in a remote place that has never read a bible or had someone witness to them, I just can't find any bible to support of them coming to saving faith outside of hearing/reading the word.

I just see it that God uses means to save the elect, and the means being the word of God. Thanks again.

 

[Von]

Your brother's problem is that he wants you to confirm the exception to prove the rule (if he is indeed espousing hyper-calvinism). So rather argue about that which is clear in the Scripture:
It is not on you to disprove his few exceptions - it rests on him to disprove the rule.

Just to get back to the example of Eliphaz:
His general rule was correct: Those that plow iniquity, reaps the same (Job 4:8; cf Galatians 6:8). Where he overstepped his bounds was when he was so desperate to prove to Job that it ALWAYS happens, that he said: Remember: who that was innocent ever perished?
In our zeal to prove the rule, we often overstep our bounds.

Focus on the big argument: Hyper-calvinism.

 

[Von]

With regards to Romans 10:17 - Deaf people also come to Christ.

 

[Sovereign Grace]

With regards to Romans 10:17 - Deaf people also come to Christ.

Agreed. But they can also read and read sign language.

 

[Sovereign Grace]

Your brother's problem is that he wants you to confirm the exception to prove the rule (if he is indeed espousing hyper-calvinism). So rather argue about that which is clear in the Scripture:
It is not on you to disprove his few exceptions - it rests on him to disprove the rule.

Just to get back to the example of Eliphaz:
His general rule was correct: Those that plow iniquity, reaps the same (Job 4:8; cf Galatians 6:8). Where he overstepped his bounds was when he was so desperate to prove to Job that it ALWAYS happens, that he said: Remember: who that was innocent ever perished?
In our zeal to prove the rule, we often overstep our bounds.

Focus on the big argument: Hyper-calvinism.

Well, here’s one of his posts...

I completely understand the necessity of Scriptures. I understand the sufficiency of scripture from your point of view. But scripture is NOT entirely sufficient to save. Preaching of scripture is not sufficient to save. Because your audience doesn't have the understanding that you have. What it will take to cause one person to come to Christ may be completely different from what it will take for another to come to Christ.


But then, when, exactly is a person saved? Is it when they become aware of their Salvation? Or is it when God initially draws them to Christ? If it is when God initially draws them then as soon as a person contemplates the words of the gospel that the preacher has preached they are immediately saved.

If it takes a little more than that and the person actually has to come to Christ to be saved then that would be when they became aware of their Salvation. And the preaching of the gospel was ONE of the ways in which God was drawing them to Christ. Reading Scripture and Prayer and Lifes Events being some of the others.

 

[Von]

OK...now I am on board!

Then, what about the following:
And the Lord said to Paul one night in a vision, "Do not be afraid, but go on speaking and do not be silent, for I am with you, and no one will attack you to harm you, for I have many in this city who are my people."
(Acts 18:9-10 ESV)

It shows God's sovereignty in electing whilst at the same time commanding Paul to continue preaching.

 

[Jack K]

Many, many people are "saved without hearing about the Christ through the gospel"—or at least without hearing the way we typically think about it, with the details we would expect a good gospel presentation to include.

The children of believers (or maybe all children) who die in infancy or in the womb are saved. They haven't heard the gospel as fully as we would have hoped to present it to them, or in many cases they haven't heard it at all as far as we can tell and as far as we understand hearing. But God still works faith in them and saves them.

Old Testament believers heard the gospel (Galatians 3:8), but it was rudimentary and did not yet include many of the details we would insist on today. Yet they were saved by faith in Christ without the knowledge of those details. In some cases, these believers had only the barest understanding of God and his saving purposes. Consider Rahab in Joshua 2:9-11. Her knowledge was severely limited, but based on what little she did know she exercised faith and was saved.

There are even hints that God may save some people merely by "speaking" through what is seen in creation. When Romans 1:20-21 says men are without excuse because God's divine nature (which is a saving nature) may be seen in creation and should result in honor and thanks to God, we can suspect that God might cause some people to respond in exactly that way and that he might consider it to be faith in Christ, the Creator. In fact, the very Romans 10 passage that speaks of the importance of preaching—"How are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard?" (Romans 10:14)—goes on to insist that those who have not been preached to have nevertheless heard the word of Christ: "But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have, for 'Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world'" (Romans 10:18). That's a citation from Psalm 19, in which "the heavens declare the glory of God," so that Paul seems to be affirming that God in some way calls men to himself merely by the witness of the creation. How many (if any) respond in saving faith is unclear, and not for us to know. But I do not want to place limits on God's saving mercy by completely ruling out the possibility that, given these hints, he might sometimes work faith this way.

None of this should make us think that preaching which fully proclaims the gospel of Christ is unimportant. If God might work through lesser means, how much more beautiful is the gospel fully revealed! How much more confident we can be that the Spirit will use it to work faith in those who hear! How much more eager we should be to preach it everywhere, to everyone! And surely we should think that God primarily would use the means of gospel preaching, given how glorious it is, and we should fear that those to whom we fail to bring this good news are still lost.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

WCF X. Of Effectual Calling
IV. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the laws of that religion they do profess. And to assert and maintain that they may, is very pernicious, and to be detested.

Dort III&IV, Human Corruption, Conversion to God, and the Way It Occurs
Article 4: The Inadequacy of the Light of Nature
There is, to be sure, a certain light of nature remaining in man after the fall, by virtue of which he retains some notions about God, natural things, and the difference between what is moral and immoral, and demonstrates a certain eagerness for virtue and for good outward behavior. But this light of nature is far from enabling man to come to a saving knowledge of God and conversion to him--so far, in fact, that man does not use it rightly even in matters of nature and society. Instead, in various ways he completely distorts this light, whatever its precise character, and suppresses it in unrighteousness. In doing so he renders himself without excuse before God.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

I have found many of the responses in this thread deeply troubling. The suggestion that one may attain to a saving knowledge of Christ without the special revelation contained in the gospel is a profoundly dangerous error. The revelation of God in creation is enough to leave a sinner without excuse; it is not enough to impart a saving knowledge of God. Only the gospel can do that.

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.—Romans 1:16​

​

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved... For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.—Romans 10:9, 13-17​

​

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.—1 Cor. 18-24​

​

This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?—Galatians 3:2​

​

And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.—2 Tim. 3:15 ​

​

And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables? The sower soweth the word. And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts. And these are they likewise which are sown on stony ground; who, when they have heard the word, immediately receive it with gladness; And have no root in themselves, and so endure but for a time: afterward, when affliction or persecution ariseth for the word's sake, immediately they are offended. And these are they which are sown among thorns; such as hear the word, And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful. And these are they which are sown on good ground; such as hear the word, and receive it, and bring forth fruit, some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some an hundred.—Mark 4:13-20​

​

Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.—James 1:21 ​

​

 

[py3ak]

In addition to what was cited above, WCF X.3 is relevant:

3. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit,[1] who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth. [2]So also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.[3]

1. Luke 18:15-16 and John 3:3, 5 and Acts 2:38-39 and Rom 8:9 and 1 John 5:12 compared together.
2. John 3:8.
3. Acts 4:12; 1 John 5:12.

In the case of those capable of an outward call, the absence of the outward call gives us no reason to expect that effectual calling would take place.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

From the Baptist Catechism (1693):

Q. 3. How may we know there is a God?​

A. The light of nature in man and the works of God plainly declare there is a God; (Rom. 1:19,20; Ps. 19:1, 2, 3; Acts 17:24) but his Word and Spirit only do it fully and effectually for the salvation of sinners. (1 Cor. 2:10; 2 Tim. 3:15, 16)​

​

Q. 27. How doth Christ execute the office of a prophet?​

A. Christ executeth the office of prophet in revealing to us, by his Word and Spirit, the will of God for our salvation. (John 1:18; 1 Pet.1:10-12; John 15:15; and 20:31)​

​

Q. 34. What is effectual calling?​

A. Effectual calling is the work of God’s Spirit, (2 Tim. 1:9; 2 Thess. 2:13, 14) whereby convincing us of our sin and misery, (Acts 2:37) enlightening our minds in the knowledge of Christ, (Acts 26:18) and renewing our wills, (Ezek. 36:26, 27) he doth persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ freely offered to us in the gospel. (John 6:44, 45; Phil. 2:13)​

​

Q. 94. How is the Word made effectual to salvation?​

A. The Spirit of God maketh the reading, but especially the preaching of the Word, an effectual means of convincing and converting sinners, and of building them up in holiness and comfort through faith unto salvation. (Neh. 8:8; Acts 26:18; Psalm 19:8; Acts 20:32; Rom. 1:15-16, 10:13-17; 15:4; 1 Cor. 14:24-25; 1 Tim. 3:15-17)​

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

Let me also add the testimony of John concerning his gospel:

But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God,
and that by believing you may have life in his name.—John 20:31​

He very clearly asserts that life in Christ is predicated upon believing the testimony of Christ contained in the gospel.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

Consider the plain teaching of our Lord...

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.—John 5:24​

 

[Contra_Mundum]

That infant children (or in utero) may be saved is certainly true and evidenced in Scripture. But some apprehension of Christ supernaturally endowed is still required for anyone to be saved. It may be rudimentary, but it still has to be the One saving Object of faith. The supernatural change of heart is needed, so that even a person of very little ability (for whatever reason) accepts whatever is taught it concerning individual sin, estrangement from God, and restoration by grace alone, through the mercy of God in Christ.

To be left afar from God, through the strange disposition of Providence in any age of the world, is no "luck of the draw," any more than to be born close to the church is a matter of happenstance. The earth has been under judgment since the fall, and men have forgotten God and in general been pleased to do so; and to inflict ignorance on their progeny. In this way they have hated their own seed, so great is their hatred of God their Judge. It is grace even to hear the gospel, and to know of some kind of Savior.

Otherwise, men under the weight of condemnation and feeling their burden, in worldly sorrow (2Cor.7:10) imagine a god with whom they can treat. They aim for acceptance on such terms as seem most good to them; while the effort only increases their condemnation. The believer has hope for his children because God has made such promises that the saint is able to lay hold on them and claim them for the sake of another, pleading God's own testimony before his throne.

Rahab was delivered because she did not wallow in self-pity with others, but forsook her Canaanite identity to join with the people of God. We know the word of God's salvation for Israel had come to her; we don't know how much residual knowledge of the faith of the patriarchs lingered in the land still, in spite of the iniquity of the Amorites. She knew that salvation and rest for the people of God meant destruction for his (and their) enemies. Being saved, she embraced the fullness of knowledge of the truth into which she and her father's house were subsequently catechized.

If we understand that salvation is an event (sometimes with a very clear start), an end, and a process--all three--we can affirm that the way of an individual's salvation may start in a very obscure place. But we must be extremely hesitant to spare our pitiful feelings for the lost by affirming their anxious zeal, or their presumed clearness of conscience (or if they have much of a conscience), as if those stood in the place of helpless abasement before the holy God followed by an assurance of his love through and for the sake of the One and only Mediator.

If God loves (eternally, through election in Christ) anyone, from any time or place, if it is his intent to leave that person in the world as his witness, then he will make it possible for the light of his truth to be seen by such an one. And ever since the Lord's resurrection, the saving truth that has been in the world has been nothing less than the finished work of redemption through the cross of Christ. Otherwise, they are without hope or God in the world, Eph.2:12.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

If God loves (eternally, through election in Christ) anyone, from any time or place, if it is his intent to leave that person in the world as his witness, then he will make it possible for the light of his truth to be seen by such an one.

Cornelius and the Ethiopian Eunuch are perfect examples of this. When God would save them, what does he do? He sends them a preacher who preaches Jesus to them and they are saved by believing the Word preached.

 

[Scott Bushey]

There are stories of people getting saved without hearing the gospel - in a moment of clarity/God revealing Himself to them.

Many, many people are "saved without hearing about the Christ through the gospel"—or at least without hearing the way we typically think about it, with the details we would expect a good gospel presentation to include.

I have found many of the responses in this thread deeply troubling.

That infant children (or in utero) may be saved is certainly true and evidenced in Scripture. But some apprehension of Christ supernaturally endowed is still required for anyone to be saved.

Bruce and Sheff are correct; There is only one gospel and that gospel is transmitted via the internal call of God. No man can be saved otherwise. The God who makes stones cry out 'Hosanna', is quite capable of carrying his message of grace and love to whomever he will; whenever He wills. In fact, the infant in the womb, will have better theology than u or I upon entering into glory. No bad theologies are in heaven!

 

[Scott Bushey]

I would lastly add, my above statement would be only applicable in scenarios where an elect person is without an option in actually hearing the outward/external call of God; is this normal? No. It is highly unlikely that the elect is in such a place; however, given the grace and love of Christ and the fact that the gospel is set forth to go to every tribe, tongue, and nation, one must believe that these scenarios exist.

 

[lynnie]

This is interesting: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/muslims-dream-Jesus/

They end up with renewed minds, but start with dreams and visions.

I first heard about this in my PA PCA church years ago. A missionary to the Muslim world came in and talked about people who had visions of Jesus Christ appearing to them and telling them that He was God. They knew nothing of Christianity but went looking for answers and ended up in the church. A lot of WTS people went to my church and I never heard any backlash about it.

You could say they were not actually saved until they heard the gospel later. But from some of the stories out there they believed and put their trust in Jesus before they understood anything except that He is God.

Is the whole idea of confess with your mouth and believe in your heart that He was raised from the dead strictly a New Covenant change from the OT? I mean, did any of them under the OC grasp him dying as a man and coming back to life? In retrospect we can see it in prophetic passages, but weren't they saved by faith in a Messiah without a lot of mental understanding- the incarnation, resurrection ,etc? If so, would it not still be possible to have faith in the Jesus of a vision or dream, without knowing much more, especially if they were in an unreached isolated area?

 

[Scott Bushey]

Lynnie,
The gospel is 'good news'. In different epochs, different dispensations; but all good news. The internal call makes it efficacious. It is God's good news. In our age, a clearer view than in Abraham's day. This is not to say we have a hands up on those of Abe's day, mind u as their good news was as good news as ours.

 

[lynnie]

Lynnie,
The gospel is 'good news'. In different epochs, different dispensations; but all good news. The internal call makes it efficacious. It is God's good news. In our age, a clearer view than in Abraham's day. This is not to say we have a hands up on those of Abe's day, mind u as their good news was as good news as ours.

Not to go off topic exactly, but I was thinking about this. Do you think Isaiah actually saw by the spirit the resurrection as we know it? Ch 53 seems like what we know as the gospel was revealed to him. Maybe David too in some of those prophetic passages, saw the crucifixion and resurrection. I know from Heiser's book that the OT Jews were very aware of the earthly visible Yahweh as God. I wonder if some of them saw him being put to death and rising again. I guess we will find out in heaven.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Not to go off topic exactly, but I was thinking about this. Do you think Isaiah actually saw by the spirit the resurrection as we know it? Ch 53 seems like what we know as the gospel was revealed to him. Maybe David too in some of those prophetic passages, saw the crucifixion and resurrection. I know from Heiser's book that the OT Jews were very aware of the earthly visible Yahweh as God. I wonder if some of them saw him being put to death and rising again. I guess we will find out in heaven.

Like an onion...

 

[Jack K]

WCF X. Of Effectual Calling
IV. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the laws of that religion they do profess. And to assert and maintain that they may, is very pernicious, and to be detested.

Dort III&IV, Human Corruption, Conversion to God, and the Way It Occurs
Article 4: The Inadequacy of the Light of Nature
There is, to be sure, a certain light of nature remaining in man after the fall, by virtue of which he retains some notions about God, natural things, and the difference between what is moral and immoral, and demonstrates a certain eagerness for virtue and for good outward behavior. But this light of nature is far from enabling man to come to a saving knowledge of God and conversion to him--so far, in fact, that man does not use it rightly even in matters of nature and society. Instead, in various ways he completely distorts this light, whatever its precise character, and suppresses it in unrighteousness. In doing so he renders himself without excuse before God.

Right. I know that's the answer. General revelation is insufficient; special revelation is necessary. But that answer also seems not to account for some situations, such as elect infants dying in the womb. Presumably, the Spirit somehow speaks to them about Christ in a way other than through gospel preaching, and works faith in Christ in them through somewhat different means than he does in you and me.

So, I'd appreciate any guidance the gang here might give in how to state things, given that exceptions like elect infants dying before they are born do seem to exist. My instinct is to affirm with vigor that to have faith in Christ a person needs to hear the gospel. I like the argument that if God elects someone for salvation, God will also find a way to bring a preacher to that person. Of course! How could God withhold such a blessing from one who is his child? But... we could just as easily say that if God elects someone he will also cause that person to be born and to become old enough to understand gospel preaching. Yet we don't.

Why do we apply one "rule" about the need to hear the gospel when God's providence means a person is incapable of understanding due to age or mental disability, but another when God's providence means a person is incapable of hearing due to having been born in pre-colonial America? I can think of some reasons why we might: God's faithfulness and his promises within covenant families, his affection for children, the childlike nature of faith, the Bible's emphasis on preaching to the nations, the fact that God appoints where and when people live based on his purposes (Acts 17:26)—but none of these quite provides the airtight explanation I'd like to have. My gut tells me that the first explanation (God's faithfulness and his promises within covenant families) is the strongest, but I wonder what the Baptists here or those who believe all dying infants are saved might say. Am a missing some stronger biblical argument? If so, what is it?

And how are we to account for Romans 10:18-20, where Paul takes a psalm that's clearly about general revelation in creation and treats it like special, gospel-proclaiming revelation? Dare we suggest that perhaps, as these verses seem to say, distant nations heard of Christ in some rudimentary way through the witness of creation, and some people truly found him? Or, as I would find it easier to affirm, is it just another case of a New Testament writer freely quoting Scripture without due regard for our neat theological categories and our proof-texting sensibilities?

If it were up to me to pick, I would much prefer the earlier verses in Romans 10 about how faith comes through hearing, and hearing through gospel preaching. They jive better with passages like Acts 14:15-17, which acknowledges the witness of general revelation but seems to find it insufficient without the arrival of gospel preaching. That's better, right? Certainly, it's the working model the church is called to follow. But I also have to acknowledge that the purpose of Romans 10 is to inspire missionary zeal, not to give us a blow-by-blow blueprint that reveals the secret workings of the Spirit as he speaks the call of God into every elect person's heart. So I pause before insisting that I know exactly what means the Spirit always uses to tell of Christ in every situation. I feel a need to acknowledge that the Spirit blows where he wishes, and we are not privy to all of his workings.

Am I wrong to pause that way? It would feel better to be more certain. Is there an argument I'm missing?

 

[Von]

There are stories of people getting saved without hearing the gospel - in a moment of clarity/God revealing Himself to them.

Allow me to clarify what I said here. If I meant that one can be saved without Christ - please boot me off the PB (and pray for me...).
What I meant was that God can save someone (through Christ) without the use of a preacher. Is this the usual manner? No! Will this hypothetical person remain satisfied without the Word? No! He will long and gravitate towards like-minded believers.

The suggestion that one may attain to a saving knowledge of Christ without the special revelation contained in the gospel is a profoundly dangerous error.

For the record: I agree wholeheartedly with you. The question in my mind is: Can God give this "special revelation contained in the gospel about the saving knowledge of Christ" without a preacher/Bible. In other words: Can God give a revelatory dream to a Hindu containing the essential elements of the Gospel in order that he might be saved?

 

[JP Wallace]

Is the whole idea of confess with your mouth and believe in your heart that He was raised from the dead strictly a New Covenant change from the OT? I mean, did any of them under the OC grasp him dying as a man and coming back to life? In retrospect we can see it in prophetic passages, but weren't they saved by faith in a Messiah without a lot of mental understanding- the incarnation, resurrection ,etc? If so, would it not still be possible to have faith in the Jesus of a vision or dream, without knowing much more, especially if they were in an unreached isolated area?

I believe the OT saints did indeed know these things, not with the same, great clarity that we do, yet they saw them from afar. I was just reading in my devotions this morning in Acts 26, here are some of the verses I noted in my journal on this very subject,

(Acts 26:6-8 ESV) " 6 And now I stand here on trial because of my hope in the promise made by God to our fathers, 7 to which our twelve tribes hope to attain, as they earnestly worship night and day. And for this hope I am accused by Jews, O king! 8 Why is it thought incredible by any of you that God raises the dead?"

Here Paul says the hope of the Gospel is grounded in the promises (including the covenants of the OT) made by God to our fathers...and note his immediate question given that grounding, "Why is it thought incredible by any of you that God raises the dead?" - in other words you ought to know this from the OT Scriptures.

Note Paul's conclusion,

(Acts 26:22-23 ESV) " 22 To this day I have had the help that comes from God, and so I stand here testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses said would come to pass: 23 that the Christ must suffer and that, by being the first to rise from the dead, he would proclaim light both to our people and to the Gentiles.""

Paul says he is saying nothing about Christ and his life death and resurrection that is new, all these things were previously and earlier and anciently revealed by GOd through the prophets and Moses...they said these things would come to pass. What things? "23 that Christ must suffer and that, by being the first to riase from the dead, he would proclaim light both to our people and to the Gentiles.

So specifically the OT does indeed reveal that the Christ, the Messiah would be a man who would suffer and die, but rise again, and furthemore would proclaim (through his apostles initially) the light of the Gospel to both Jew and Gentile peoples.

These things are not merely interpreted retrospectively by NT saints, rather they were prospectively revealed to the OT saints.

 

[Von]

If God loves (eternally, through election in Christ) anyone, from any time or place, if it is his intent to leave that person in the world as his witness, then he will make it possible for the light of his truth to be seen by such an one.

I'm pondering this one...
I do see that if God has elected you from before the world was created, he would make a means available for you to be saved at the right time. But then, why not save everyone in exactly the same manner with a Damascus bright light moment?

 

[Eyedoc84]

The man on the island is not incapable of hearing the outward call. God in his providence may never send a preacher, but the man nonetheless is without excuse by the light of nature, which he never responds rightly to. The Confession is pretty clear.

In terms of God revealing Himself by special revelation in dreams/visions: God obviously can do what He wants, just as he can elect infants dying in infancy, but we confess in WCF II that those former ways of special revelation are now ceased.

 

[De Jager]

I'm pondering this one...
I do see that if God has elected you from before the world was created, he would make a means available for you to be saved at the right time. But then, why not save everyone in exactly the same manner with a Damascus bright light moment?

Because it didn't please him to do it this way...the majority of Christians in the world were raised in Christian homes, and many of them do not have a damascus road experience. Paul is the exception, not the rule.