a mere housewife
Not your cup of tea
I should make very clear that I am not confused about cases where someone has enough knowledge to *reject* any fundamental doctrine of Christianity, such as Christ being God. I think if a person rejects such, they have enough knowledge to have made a response to the truth, and they demonstrate that they do not recognise the Shepherd's voice. However I am time and again confused as to what is 'necessary for salvation' when discussions come up about such doctrines, because I don't understand how the prerequisites can be consistently applied when the things we speak of as 'necessary for salvation' in adults are assent to things infants cannot understand.
For instance, in a situation where missionaries go into unreached territory and begin giving the gospel, and someone responds to this with joy -- at what point are they able to be regenerated? Their knowledge, because they have to wait on what is taught to them, is incomplete; but they are responding to the Word of God with acceptance as it is given to them. It seems like their hearts must have already been turned to God through this means of His grace, and they do know His voice -- just as a child recognises its mother's voice, but learns what her words mean as it grows?
That sort of scenario may not happen often, but I hope it highlights my confusion as to our being able to quantify how much knowledge is 'necessary' to be saved -- it seems like that kind of quantification is inconsistent with the idea that we are changed, and respond to Christ, not merely mentally, but wholly? Because we respond completely, the amount of *data* that our responding faculties are working with does not seem like the prerequisite of saving grace. I don't understand how it can be the prerequisite, without changing the nature of salvation into a transaction of information that takes place on the surface of the mind, rather than a recreated will and heart?
Please be assured I am not trying to advocate for anything unorthodox -- I'm trying to understand something I don't.
For instance, in a situation where missionaries go into unreached territory and begin giving the gospel, and someone responds to this with joy -- at what point are they able to be regenerated? Their knowledge, because they have to wait on what is taught to them, is incomplete; but they are responding to the Word of God with acceptance as it is given to them. It seems like their hearts must have already been turned to God through this means of His grace, and they do know His voice -- just as a child recognises its mother's voice, but learns what her words mean as it grows?
That sort of scenario may not happen often, but I hope it highlights my confusion as to our being able to quantify how much knowledge is 'necessary' to be saved -- it seems like that kind of quantification is inconsistent with the idea that we are changed, and respond to Christ, not merely mentally, but wholly? Because we respond completely, the amount of *data* that our responding faculties are working with does not seem like the prerequisite of saving grace. I don't understand how it can be the prerequisite, without changing the nature of salvation into a transaction of information that takes place on the surface of the mind, rather than a recreated will and heart?
Please be assured I am not trying to advocate for anything unorthodox -- I'm trying to understand something I don't.