Counter-cult Salvation Controversy

Update on the Counter-cult Salvation Controversy

We want to take this opportunity to update those who are interested in the controversy that arose among Counter-cult and apologetics based ministries of recent times. This is a follow-up to our original article on the subject which is available on line at the following web address: http://www.visi.com/~steved/cam/salvation.htm

What is at Issue?

One thing remains clear; there is definitely a difference of opinion on what the actual gospel message is. That is, when you try to reduce to a minimum what the essential facts are that someone must believe in order to be saved (the notitia), there is not agreement among evangelicals.

It is certainly true that we are not saved (justified) by believing certain facts alone. We must act upon those beliefs with faith. Nor can we be saved without belief in certain facts. The facts that we must believe for salvation are all centered around the person of Jesus Christ. Salvation results from exercising faith in the person of Jesus Christ, and what he has done for us.

But here is where it gets tricky, and where the point of controversy arises. There seems to be broad consensus that the works of Christ that we must believe in, in order to be saved are his atoning death and his resurrection from
the dead.

But when we say that one must exercise faith in the person of Jesus Christ, the question arises; how much does one need to know about the person of Jesus Christ to be saved? Specifically, does one need to know (and believe) that Jesus Christ is God to be saved? Some argue strongly that it is necessary; others argue with equal passion that it is not necessary.

In surveying the theological landscape for his recent multi-volume systematic theology, Norman Geisler assessed the situation in this way:

"Is faith in Christ's Deity necessary for salvation? While there is wide agreement among evangelicals that explicit belief in the death and resurrection of Christ is a soteriological mandate, there is still considerable debate over whether belief in the deity of Christ is a salvific requirement for today" (Norman Geisler, Sytematic Theology, Volume Three, Sin and Salvation, Bethany House, 2004, p. 539).

Clarifying Our Position

Our position is that it is not necessary to know or believe in the deity of Christ in order to be saved. We are not saying that one can be saved who denies the deity of Christ.

Rather, we are saying that one can be saved, and later come to a belief in the deity of Christ. This is the same thing that happens with many essential teachings of the Christian faith. We don't demand that converts learn or believe other essential doctrines to get saved like the Trinity, the virgin birth, or the inspiration and authority of Scripture. We trust that as new converts progress in their faith, the Holy Spirit will guide them into all truth. This is the case with the deity of Christ as well. While many may become aware of or believe in the deity of Christ before they are saved, it is possible that they can be saved without having reached this point.

On the other hand, a denial of the deity of Christ before salvation leaves one with an unworthy object of salvation. This is because a Jesus who is less than God cannot save. A Jesus that is less than God is not the biblical God, but a false Jesus. This is why we have argued that one can have a limited understanding of the true and biblical Jesus and be saved, but not a false one.

Greg Koukl makes this point well: "The word Christian and being a Christian entails a couple of particular things historically. One of those particular things is that you believe in the unique deity of Jesus Christ--the Trinity, God become man, Jesus Christ being fully God and fully man, two natures, one person. If you reject that, you might have a very nice religion, but you just don't have Christianity. So in that sense you can't be a Christian and reject the deity of Christ . . . And if you reject such a thing, [the biblical Jesus] I don't see how you can then say I have put my faith in Jesus because the Jesus that you put your faith in is not the Jesus of the Scriptures, and it is only the Jesus of the Scriptures who really saves you" "(Gregory Koukl, Must We Believe Jesus is God?, available at the" Stand To Reason" website http://www.str.org/free/commentaries/theology/mustweb.htm.

How Christian Leaders Define the Gospel

In our original article, we included evidence from evangelical leaders in support of our position that the saving gospel is that which is most clearly defined by the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. The following quotations offer further support for that position. Notice that in these descriptions, there is consistently an absence of the need to believe in the deity of Christ to be saved.

We have just quoted from the fine article by Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason Ministries. In this article he also stated:

"Must a person believe that Christ is God in order to be saved? I don't think it is necessary for you to be aware of that doctrine and hold to it before you can become a Christian and receive forgiveness. But I think you have to know some doctrine in order to be a Christian, in order to receive God's gift of salvation . . .Basically, you need to know your need and God's provision in Jesus, and then respond to that by trusting Jesus for your salvation. In other words, you trust in the person of Jesus Christ. It may be after that that you find out that Jesus is also God. You don't need to know that Jesus is God before the fact" (Gregory Koukl, Must We Believe Jesus is God?, available at the Stand To Reason website http://www.str.org/free/commentaries/theology/mustweb.htm.

Earl Radmacher, President Emeritus of Western Conservative Baptist Seminary, Portland Oregon in his excellent book "Salvation" stated:

"What was the content of the good news that especially Paul was commissioned to present? He stated this clearly in 1 Corinthians 15:1, 3-5: 'Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel [euangelion] . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve.' . . . How readily some fall into the trap of adding requirements to the gospel beyond simply believing that Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead" (Earl D. Radmacher, Salvation, Word Publishing, 2000, pp. 116-117).

Warren Wiersbe is well known as the former Pastor of Moody Memorial Church and General Director and Bible teacher for Back to the Bible, and for his many books. His teaching about the gospel is very clear:

"Gospel means 'the Good News.' It is the message that Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose again, and now is able to save all who trust him (1 Cor. 15:1-4) . . . Jesus Christ is the center of the Gospel message . . . It is this miraculous event of substitutionary death and victorious resurrection that constitutes the Gospel; and it was this Gospel that Paul preached" (Warren Wiersbe, Be Right, Nineteenth printing, Victor Books, 1989, pp. 9-10).

In a different commentary, Wiersbe stated: "It simply means 'to preach the Gospel, to share the Good News of Jesus Christ.' (See 1 Cor. 15:1-8 for the official statement of the Gospel message" (Warren Wiersbe, BE Dynamic, Victor Books, 1987, p. 81).

Wiersbe also said: "Paul has declared the Gospel to them, 'the word of this salvation' (v. 26) and 'the glad tidings' (v. 32). Christ died, He was buried, and He arose again!" (Warren Wiersbe, Be Daring, Third printing, Victor Books, 1989, p. 14).

Ron Rhodes is the highly respected President of "Reasoning from the Scriptures Ministries" and a prolific author. His view of the gospel is as follows:

"What is the gospel? Perhaps the best single definition of the gospel in Scripture is found in 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4: 'For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: That Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.' The 'gospel,' according to this passage, has four components: (1) man is a sinner; (2) Christ is the Savior; (3) Christ died as man's substitute; and (4) Christ rose from the dead. This is the gospel Paul and the other apostles preached; it the gospel we too must preach" (Ron Rhodes, The Complete Book of Bible Answers, Harvest House Publishers, 1997, p. 179).

M.R. De Haan, known for his work with the Radio Bible Class stated:

"For Jonah preached the Gospel of the Death and Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, eight hundred years before Christ was born . . . We have, for instance, a clear shadow of the Gospel of the Death and Resurrection of Christ in the very beginning of the Bible . . . This was the Gospel of Death and Resurrection . . . It was undoubtedly to these incidents that Paul referred when he said in 1 Corinthians 15: . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day According to the Scriptures (1 Cor. 15:3, 4)" (M.R. De Haan, M.D., Jonah Fact Or Fiction, Zondervan, 1957, pp.9-11).

In another work, De Haan said:

"The Gospel, therefore, is the message of the death, and particularly the resurrection of Christ" (M.R. De Haan, Studies in First Corinthians, Zondervan, 1956, 1963, p. 168).

Adrian Rogers is Pastor of the 27,000 member Bellevue Baptist Church and three time President of the Southern Baptist Convention. He is also host of television and radio ministry "Love Worth Finding." In his new book, Rogers leaves no doubt what he believes is the message of the gospel:

"And so we need to ask, what is the gospel? . . . stories like these make it imperative that we be crystal-clear about the nature and message of the gospel. And the wonderful thing is that the gospel is plain and simple. Paul tells us exactly what it is in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. We will deal with these verses, but let me summarize them up front by saying that the gospel, plain and simple, is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ . . . The word gospel literally means 'good news.' It is the good news of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ" (Adrian Rogers, The Passion Of Christ and the Purpose of Life, Crossway, 2005, pp. 47-50).

Lorne Sanny was on the team of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association at the time of the publication of his book, The Art Of Personal Witnessing, when the book was published in 1957. He stated:

"What Is The Gospel? The scriptural definition of the gospel is given in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4, 'For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures.' These constitute the essential facts of the gospel. He was buried, and rose again the third day according to the Scriptures . . . The gospel concerns a certain body of facts . . . Just what is the gospel? I know of no better definition than that which is given in 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4 . . . This is God's definition of the gospel" (Lorne Sanny, The Art Of Personal Witnessing, Moody Press, 1957, pp. 81-82, 85).

Arno Gaebelein was the author of more than 50 books during his lifetime (1861-1945), and was a widely respected leader on subjects dealing with Jews, prophecy, and world events. His view of the gospel is:

"The first thing mentioned in opening up this subject is the gospel which Paul had preached to the Corinthians, which they had received and wherein they stood. This is the order: The preaching of the Gospel, the good news, its reception by faith, followed by the standing in salvation and the enjoyment of it. By this gospel is salvation as it is so fully revealed in the epistle to the Romans . . . The three great facts according to the Scriptures (the Old Testament Scriptures) are: (1) Christ died for our sins. The death of Christ, the cross and the mighty work accomplished there, is the great foundation . . . (2) He was buried . . . The death of Christ was real and not a deception . . . And the third great fact of the gospel, 'He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures.' This is the great truth of this chapter, a truth, if denied, must result in the complete collapse of the gospel" (A. C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible, The New Testament, Volume two, Publication Office "Our Hope," 1916, pp.135-136).

The Position of Norman Geisler

Earlier we mentioned the new systematic theology by Norman Geisler. He has a very detailed discussion about the nature of the saving gospel in this volume, which is very helpful (though his position is slightly different than our own).

The following is a summary of his position in his new volume (Systematic Theology, Volume Three, Sin and Salvation, Bethany House, 2004).

1. Geisler makes a distinction between what is normatively required for salvation versus some possible exceptions to the general rule.

2. What is normatively required for salvation (justification) is belief in three primary things,

- The atoning death of Christ,
- The resurrection of Christ
- The deity of Christ. In this respect, he agrees with the Witness Inc. position, in that belief in the
deity of Christ is a part of the notitia for salvation.

3. While Geisler believes that belief in the deity of Christ is normatively required for salvation, nonetheless, it is possible that some can be truly saved before believing in the deity of Christ. He gives two possible exceptions: a. For those who have simply not heard of that doctrine and hence were not able to believe it. b. For those who reject the deity of Christ because they were mislead by false teachers, and will/would believe it when it is explained properly.

4. Geisler agrees with those who make the distinction between rejecting something (i.e. the deity of Christ, the Trininty etc.) on the one hand, and simply not having faced something on the other hand.

5. He makes a proper distinction between what it necessary to the gospel and salvation (a wider range of doctrines including the Trinity, virgin birth,), and what among those is actually required to be believed in order to be saved (a narrow list: the deity of Christ, and his atoning death and resurrection). See his helpful chart on pages 544-555.

One implication of Geisler's view (see 3 b above) is that it is possible that some people can be saved while denying the deity of Christ. This is because such ones have been mislead by false teachers. If this is so, some members of cults, such as the Jehovah's Witnesses could be saved. This is in fact the testimony of former Jehovah's Witness Don Nelson, who believes he was saved while still a Jehovah's Witness.

Here is Geisler's position in his own words:

"First, can one be saved today and not believe in Christ's deity? Second, can one be saved today if he denies Christ's deity? As to the first question, in view of the above discussion, we must answer that it is normatively not possible, but it may be actually possible-if God wills to do so. God has done it in the past, and he can do it again, if He so pleases . . . As to the second question, it is difficult to see how someone who explicitly denies Christ's deity can be saved while he remains in this denial . . . Of course, it is always possible that he disbelieves it because, for instance, he was poorly taught by an unorthodox teacher. What then? Again, first of all, we must fall back on what is normatively prescribed-any exceptions must be left up to the prescriber . . . It is best left to the God who knows the secrets of every heart as to who will ultimately stand in his presence . . . In conclusion, it is possible that God could save someone without explicit faith in Christ's deity, provided if that one had a correct understanding, he or she would believe" (Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Three, Sin and Salvation, Bethany House, 2004, pp. 549-550).

Geisler's position is very close to our own. In practical terms, when sharing the gospel, most people don't confine themselves to sharing only what they think is the bare minimum content of the saving gospel. Usually, there is a wide variety of related issues raised, such at the deity of Christ, that provide context to the discussion.

Since the deity of Christ is normally shared in gospel presentations, but is not required, our position is very similar to Giesler who believes that converts should normally believe in the deity of Christ to be saved, but that it is not absolutely required.

In Conclusion

Christians are called to be unified in our common faith in Jesus Christ. We are also called to be discerning about potential false teachings that arise in the church. We are to be ever vigilant in exposing false teachers, while being careful not to turn on brothers and sisters in the body of Christ who are orthodox in the essential teachings of the Christian Faith.

There are areas of disagreement among evangelicals. Advocates of Calvinism versus those of Arminianism. Advocates of infant baptism versus those of believer's baptism. Lordship advocates versus Free Grace advocates, and so on. This is another area where biblically committed Christians do not agree. However, since we agree in the essentials of the Christian Faith, we believe the wisest course of action is to agree to disagree on these very difficult questions of theology, trusting that the Holy Spirit will guide the church into all truth.

Steve Devore and Steve Lagoon
Christian Apologetics Ministries
April 9, 2005