1689 London Confession

[atpollard]

Can people be saved without Jesus?
Rather than OUR OPINIONS, let us examine FIRST the BAPTIST CONFESSION and THEN the Scripture it presents as its "proof":

Of the Holy Scriptures​

Chapter 1​

Paragraph 1​

The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience,1 although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet they are not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and His will which is necessary unto salvation.2

The CONFESSION is clear that NATURAL REVELATION is sufficient to leave men "without excuse" for their choice to refuse to give God the honor due him, but us not sufficient to give knowledge "necessary unto salvation".
What do the verses it points to actually say:

• 2. Romans 1:19-21 [NLT] 19 They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. 20 For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God. 21 Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn't worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused.
• 2. Romans 2:14-15 [NLT] 14 Even Gentiles, who do not have God's written law, show that they know his law when they instinctively obey it, even without having heard it. 15 They demonstrate that God's law is written in their hearts, for their own conscience and thoughts either accuse them or tell them they are doing right.
• 2. Psalm 19:1-3 [NLT] 1 For the choir director: A psalm of David. The heavens proclaim the glory of God. The skies display his craftsmanship. 2 Day after day they continue to speak; night after night they make him known. 3 They speak without a sound or word; their voice is never heard.

So TWO Questions:

1. Do these verses support the claim that "natural revelation" is insufficient for salvation?
2. Does some other verse (not listed) either support or refute the claim that "natural revelation" is insufficient for salvation?

 

[Fastfredy0]

Do these verses support the claim that "natural revelation" is insufficient for salvation?

No. There is nothing in the verses mentioned concerning the means to appropriate eternal life.
The verses show that natural revelation causes all people to know a God exists and there is no excuse to not thinking He does. It also says God's laws are known to our conscious.

Does some other verse (not listed) either support or refute the claim that "natural revelation" is insufficient for salvation?

There is no scripture supporting "natural revelation" as a means to eternal life.

There are verses that refute the idea that "natural revelation" by itself leads to eternal life. Knowledge of Christ is essential to salvation. Therefore, those with no knowledge of Christ are hell bound. (possible age of accountability exception). Following verses are evidence of such:

• John 3:18 Whoever believes and has decided to trust in Him [as personal Savior and Lord] is not judged [for this one, there is no judgment, no rejection, no condemnation]; but the one who does not believe [and has decided to reject Him as personal Savior and Lord] is judged already [that one has been convicted and sentenced], because he has not believed and trusted in the name of the [One and] only begotten Son of God [the One who is truly unique, the only One of His kind, the One who alone can save him].
• 1 Corinthians 6:22 If anyone has no love for the Lord, let him be accursed. Our Lord, come!
• 1 John 2:23 No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also.
• 1 John 5:12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.
• Acts 4:12 And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among people by which we must be saved [for God has provided the world no alternative for salvation].”

Technically, one could argue the "natural revelation" is part of the needed formula for salvation for no verses says "natural revelation" has nothing to do with salvation.

 

[atpollard]

Romans 1:19-21 [NLT] 19 They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. 20 For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God. 21 Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn't worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused.

When I read this, it occurred to me that it actually says TWO things about these people:

1. It says that "natural revelation" was enough for them to know of God ... thus they are without excuse.
2. It also says that the DID KNOW (through natural revelation) and they DID NOT believe ... thus the natural revelation was clearly insufficient to save THEM.

The second fact might be construed as evidence that "natural revelation" is insufficient for salvation since it was insufficient for their salvation.

 

[GodsGrace]

You are welcome to, but I offer this caveat:

I am a Particular Baptist, so MY CONFESSION is the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message (which is neutral on the Particular/General Baptist question since most Baptist Churches contain a mixture). Since the current Baptist Faith and Message traces its roots to the original 1689 Baptist Confession (and both the 1689 and I are Particular Baptist in outlook) I am willing to defend what it states [or admit that I disagree].

Not getting another Confession!
Will use the 1689, which I know is the one you like and use in your "denomnation". (is it a denomination?)

The WCF has true Presbytyrian/Reformed origins, rather than Baptist origins and does not represent my beliefs. The writings of John Calvin represent the opinions of John Calvin and, also, are not representative of Baptist beliefs. Therefore, I will discuss similarities and differences, but I will not attempt to defend EITHER the WCF or John Calvin in this topic.

I agree. No problem.
I just want to say that all the confession's beginnings must start with Calvin.
He's the one that changed even from what Luther believed...
He's the first "Calvinist" with other important ones to follow.
If you go back, even the 1689 has Calvin's teachings.

Here is a simple BAPTIST HISTORY explanation of why: The earliest reformers (Luther, Calvin) attempted to reform the corruption in the Catholic Church of Rome from which they came. Even the ANGLICANS share this distinction of being "reformed Catholics" in origin. To them and their doctrines, "Sola Scriptura" means that Tradition and Scripture both have value and where they conflict, SCRIPTURE takes preeminence.

Agreed re Anglicans.
(I do believe Anglicans accept Scripture, Tradition and the Papacy,
The Orthodox accept Scripture and Tradition only).
Don't really care to get into this.

Baptists emerge a century or two after Luther and Calvin (and the earliest reformers) as a second wave shaped by a new understanding and a new tool for understanding. With PRINTING and VERNACULAR BIBLES, the word of God was available for people to read unfiltered by a professional clergy. From this emerged the Baptist movement and distinctives:

• Priesthood of believer: The Holy spirit is capable of leading each individual into the truth of God and each person is resposible for their own relationship with God ... God saves specific INDIVIDUALS, not groups.
• "Sola Scriptura" means that the only "tradition" that matters is the tradition recorded in the 66 books of the sacred Bible. All HUMAN traditions are rejected as non-authoritative.

The list goes on, but these TWO explain why neither the WCF nor JOHN CALVIN can accurately speak for Baptists like ME ... They do not hold our core beliefs, so their conclusions are shaped by Catholic Traditions which we openly reject because they ARE Traditions not recorded by God in His Holy Scripture ... our ONLY AUTHORITY. [ie. Paul created independent LOCAL CHURCHES in each town, so Baptists create independent local churches in each town; the biblical word "baptizo" (baptize) means to plunge under, so Baptists baptize by plunging under, etc.]

This is interesting.
The WCF and Calvin are shaped by Catholic traditions?
I'm wondering what they are and will end up doing some study on this --- not here or now.
OK for the rest.

 

[Fastfredy0]

It also says that the DID KNOW (through natural revelation) and they DID NOT believe ... thus the natural revelation was clearly insufficient to save THEM.

The object of what they didn't believe is "the truth about God"... but there are countless truths about God. Who is to say that one of the many truths was a salvific truth especially since salvation is not mentioned in the whole chapter.
Knowledge of Christ (John 3:18) is one definite truth to be known about God for salvation and "natural revelation" does not reveal that truth: "natural revelation" relationship to salvation being at the crux of your questions.
As far "natural revelation" relationship to salvation and only use of "natural revelation" is evidence to cause one to believe, but since we know there is only one efficacious cause from other verses we know "natural revelation" is of no salvific use ... maybe helpful for assurance of salvation I suppose.
My 2 cents.

 

[GodsGrace]

Romans 1:19-21 [NLT] 19 They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. 20 For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God. 21 Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn't worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused.

When I read this, it occurred to me that it actually says TWO things about these people:

1. It says that "natural revelation" was enough for them to know of God ... thus they are without excuse.
2. It also says that the DID KNOW (through natural revelation) and they DID NOT believe ... thus the natural revelation was clearly insufficient to save THEM.

The second fact might be construed as evidence that "natural revelation" is insufficient for salvation since it was insufficient for their salvation.

Actually, natural revelation is enough to save a person according to Romans 1.
This is why they're without excuse - because God revealed Himself to man, and some men refused Him...
how could they be hold responsible, without excuse, otherwise?

Natural revelation is enough to know God in some limited way.
God made it obvious to them.
They could clearly see attributes of God - His eternal power and divine nature. DIVINE nature.
Verse 21 but they wouldn't worship Him....So they KNEW what they were doing.
Some worshipped Him, and some didn't.

To whom much is given, much will be required.
To whom more is given, more will be required.
Luke 12:48

 

[Fastfredy0]

The Gospel of Christ only saves those that hear and believe it. Those that cannot hear the GOSPEL (like the OT saints) are saved by the mercy of God THROUGH the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (even if they never knew about Jesus).

I'm not an expert on how O.T. people were saved. If that caveat of my ignorance ...
Calvin: The efficient cause of our salvation is placed in the love of God the Father; the material cause in the obedience of the Son; the instrumental cause in the illumination of the Spirit, that is, in faith; and the final cause in the praise of the divine goodness.
Everyone, at anytime was/is/will be saved by FAITH ALONE (maybe exception of 'age of accountability). Faith requires content, something to be believed. My best guess is one thing to be believed is that the Messiah was coming. Whatever it was, from the time of Jacob onward it seems all Gentiles had no chance very rare exception. (Eph. 2:12 ... I think there is at least one other verse in this vain, but I don't recall it)

 

[GodsGrace]

No. There is nothing in the verses mentioned concerning the means to appropriate eternal life.
The verses show that natural revelation causes all people to know a God exists and there is no excuse to not thinking He does. It also says God's laws are known to our conscious.

There is no scripture supporting "natural revelation" as a means to eternal life.

There are verses that refute the idea that "natural revelation" by itself leads to eternal life. Knowledge of Christ is essential to salvation. Therefore, those with no knowledge of Christ are hell bound. (possible age of accountability exception). Following verses are evidence of such:

• John 3:18 Whoever believes and has decided to trust in Him [as personal Savior and Lord] is not judged [for this one, there is no judgment, no rejection, no condemnation]; but the one who does not believe [and has decided to reject Him as personal Savior and Lord] is judged already [that one has been convicted and sentenced], because he has not believed and trusted in the name of the [One and] only begotten Son of God [the One who is truly unique, the only One of His kind, the One who alone can save him].
• 1 Corinthians 6:22 If anyone has no love for the Lord, let him be accursed. Our Lord, come!
• 1 John 2:23 No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also.
• 1 John 5:12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.
• Acts 4:12 And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among people by which we must be saved [for God has provided the world no alternative for salvation].”

Technically, one could argue the "natural revelation" is part of the needed formula for salvation for no verses says "natural revelation" has nothing to do with salvation.

John 3:18
The one who DOES NOT BELIEVE...is already judged.
DOES NOT BELIEVE.

None of your verses support your claim.
They all state that they DID NOT love God, or believe in Him....it's all negative reaction toward God.
Of course those will be lost.

 

[GodsGrace]

I'm not an expert on how O.T. people were saved. If that caveat of my ignorance ...
Calvin: The efficient cause of our salvation is placed in the love of God the Father; the material cause in the obedience of the Son; the instrumental cause in the illumination of the Spirit, that is, in faith; and the final cause in the praise of the divine goodness.
Everyone, at anytime was/is/will be saved by FAITH ALONE (maybe exception of 'age of accountability). Faith requires content, something to be believed. My best guess is one thing to be believed is that the Messiah was coming. Whatever it was, from the time of Jacob onward it seems all Gentiles had no chance very rare exception. (Eph. 2:12 ... I think there is at least one other verse in this vain, but I don't recall it)

Those that acknowledge God,
Love Him and live accordingly,
have faith.

If you don't love a person, you cannot have faith in them.

 

[Fastfredy0]

The one who DOES NOT BELIEVE...is already judged.
DOES NOT BELIEVE.

Whoever believes and has decided to trust in Him [as personal Savior and Lord] is not judged [for this one, there is no judgment, no rejection, no condemnation]; but the one who does not believe [and has decided to reject Him as personal Savior and Lord] is judged already [that one has been convicted and sentenced], because he has not believed and trusted in the name of the [One and] only begotten Son of God [the One who is truly unique, the only One of His kind, the One who alone can save him].

We disagree. It is plain to me ... believe in Christ and not be judged; otherwise, judged
those that believe/trust in Christ not judged.
but the one who does not believe [and has decided to reject Him as personal Savior and Lord] is judged already [that one has been convicted and sentenced], because he has not believed and trusted in the name of the [One and] only begotten Son of God.

Eph. 2:12 remember that at that time you were separated from Christ [excluded from any relationship with Him], alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise [with no share in the sacred Messianic promise and without knowledge of God’s agreements], having no hope [in His promise] and [living] in the world without God. This verse also shows people before Christ had no hope because of a lack of knowledge.

.... I think you agree that faith is required for salvation (we'll skip potential other requirements). What must be believed to be saved if one has not heard of Christ and what scripture verse(s) support that contention? To support the contention requires 2 elements: 1) The verses(s) must mention salvation(eternal life) and 2) the contents of faith. For example Romans 10:9-10 mentions both.
... then answer questions like:
What is a more efficient method of salvation; your method or ones like Romans 10:9-10?
What happens to a person saved by your method but doesn't believe Romans 10:9-10? ... or vise versa

If you don't love a person, you cannot have faith in them.

I don't love the cop that gives me a ticket, but in certain respects I have faith in him and what he says.
(I was going to use Joe Biden as an example, but was having a difficult time thinking of anything he does that I have faith in (assent to being true).
Faith-The assent of the mind to the truth of a proposition or statement for which there is not complete evidence; belief in general.

 

[GodsGrace]

Paragraph 1 appears to make several very bold statements about SCRIPTURE:

1. Knowledge of salvation is impossible without scripture (nature will not tell you enough for salvation).
2. Everything God has revealed for us is preserved in the written scripture (there is no extra-biblical tradition revealed by God).
3. God's revelation is now complete (no new revelation from God is needed).

Do the verses listed support the conclusions?
Does anyone agree or disagree with any points 1689 made or my interpretation of those points?

Regarding 1.8 and 1.9 I did say that when there's a controversy, I do turn to the Apostolic and Early Fathers.
I don't see how it could be otherwise since different denominations believe different "truths".
There can only be one truth and I've believed this all my Christian life and will probably die not knowing all of it.
God, in His mercy, will forgive me for what I didn't comprehend, or what I seemed to comprehend, but was incorrect.

I don't agree with your number 1.
People were saved even before scripture.
God revealed Himself personally to the Hebrews, but persons all over the earth knew about God in different ways, as noted in the bible. We seem to be discussing this so I won't post any verses right now.

I agree with number 2.
I agree with number 3.

 

[GodsGrace]

Whoever believes and has decided to trust in Him [as personal Savior and Lord] is not judged [for this one, there is no judgment, no rejection, no condemnation]; but the one who does not believe [and has decided to reject Him as personal Savior and Lord] is judged already [that one has been convicted and sentenced], because he has not believed and trusted in the name of the [One and] only begotten Son of God [the One who is truly unique, the only One of His kind, the One who alone can save him].

Whether someone believes in a limited atonement or an unlimited atonement, it must be said that it is THROUGH the sacrifice of Jesus that anyone who desires to be saved, can be saved.
God is working outside of time and the death of Jesus is valid for those that were born BEFORE His death and AFTER His death. His sacrifice is sufficient for anyone in the world to be saved, and anyone that IS saved, even those that have never heard of Jesus, are saved through Him.

Had God not planned for our salvation through some atonement process, NO ONE would be able to enter into heaven because the sin against God was so great - so did the sacrifice have to be so great.

We disagree. It is plain to me ... believe in Christ and not be judged; otherwise, judged
those that believe/trust in Christ not judged.
but the one who does not believe [and has decided to reject Him as personal Savior and Lord] is judged already [that one has been convicted and sentenced], because he has not believed and trusted in the name of the [One and] only begotten Son of God.

You're referring to John 3 I believe.
John 3:17
17God sent his Son into the world not to judge the world, but to save the world through him.
The NT is about Jesus.
But Jesus is God.
If someone believes in God, they also believe in Jesus.
If someone believes in Jesus, they also believe in God.
Otherwise we run into some doctrinal difficulty.
God sent His Son to save the world through Him.
If we do not believe we are judged already.
Many believed that never heard the gospel and never heard of Jesus.

John 3:19-21
19And the judgment is based on this fact: God’s light came into the world, but people loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil.
20All who do evil hate the light and refuse to go near it for fear their sins will be exposed.
21But those who do what is right come to the light so others can see that they are doing what God wants.”

Eph. 2:12 remember that at that time you were separated from Christ [excluded from any relationship with Him], alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise [with no share in the sacred Messianic promise and without knowledge of God’s agreements], having no hope [in His promise] and [living] in the world without God. This verse also shows people before Christ had no hope because of a lack of knowledge.

Ephesians 2 is speaking about Jesus breaking the barrier between the Jews and the Gentiles.

Acts 17:27-30
27“His purpose was for the nations to seek after God and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him—though he is not far from any one of us.
28For in him we live and move and exist. As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’
29And since this is true, we shouldn’t think of God as an idol designed by craftsmen from gold or silver or stone.
30“God overlooked people’s ignorance about these things in earlier times, but now he commands everyone everywhere to repent of their sins and turn to him.

Paul explained about the unknown God to the Athenians.
Even they, who loved philosophy, knew there was a God they didn't know about.
At then end of Paul's teaching, some believed and some thought it was foolish.
As from the beginning of time.

God purposed for nations to seek after God and feel their way toward Him.
And find Him.

God overlooked people's ignorance...He OVERLOOKED people's ignorance.
But NOW (at the time when we learn of the gospel) He commands everyone everywhere to repent and turn to Him.

.... I think you agree that faith is required for salvation (we'll skip potential other requirements). What must be believed to be saved if one has not heard of Christ and what scripture verse(s) support that contention? To support the contention requires 2 elements: 1) The verses(s) must mention salvation(eternal life) and 2) the contents of faith. For example Romans 10:9-10 mentions both.
... then answer questions like:
What is a more efficient method of salvation; your method or ones like Romans 10:9-10?
What happens to a person saved by your method but doesn't believe Romans 10:9-10? ... or vise versa

I don't have a method. I'm speaking to you about biblical matters.
There was a time before the bible.
Not everyone everywhere knew about the bible. Hence God OVERLOOKING THEIR IGNORANCE.

Please remember that we have a merciful God that desires all men to be saved.
1 Timothy 2.4 that is a really important verse.

I don't love the cop that gives me a ticket, but in certain respects I have faith in him and what he says.
(I was going to use Joe Biden as an example, but was having a difficult time thinking of anything he does that I have faith in (assent to being true).
Faith-The assent of the mind to the truth of a proposition or statement for which there is not complete evidence; belief in general.

Faith: Believing an escalator will take you to the top.
And you STEP ON IT.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Whether someone believes in a limited atonement or an unlimited atonement, it must be said that it is THROUGH the sacrifice of Jesus that anyone who desires to be saved, can be saved.
God is working outside of time and the death of Jesus is valid for those that were born BEFORE His death and AFTER His death. His sacrifice is sufficient for anyone in the world to be saved, and anyone that IS saved,

agreed. The meritorious cause for anyone's salvation is Christ.

even those that have never heard of Jesus, are saved through Him.

The meritorious cause for any salvation is Christ. You've given no scriptural proof that one can be saved without knowledge of Christ in the last 2000 years. (Simpler to evaluate salvation now then before Christ and thus the 2000 year reference to keep it simple).

Had God not planned for our salvation through some atonement process, NO ONE would be able to enter into heaven because the sin against God was so great - so did the sacrifice have to be so great.

Agreed

If someone believes in God, they also believe in Jesus. If someone believes in Jesus, they also believe in God.

Jesus has a human nature. It is impossible to believe in any aspect of Christ's human nature without knowledge of the N.T. Example: you can't know about His death and resurrection which seems salvific according to 1 Cor. 15:1-4.

Many believed that never heard the gospel and never heard of Jesus.

You keep avoiding my question. What must be believed to be saved if one has not heard of Christ and what scripture verse(s) support that contention? To support the contention requires 2 elements: 1) The verses(s) must mention salvation(eternal life) and 2) the contents of faith. For example Romans 10:9-10 mentions both. (Aside: I see later in your post you answer my question)

God purposed for nations to seek after God and feel their way toward Him.
And find Him.

Again, you are avoiding the question: HOW DO PEOPLE WHO NEVER HEAR OF CHRIST, HOW ARE THEY SAVED. Faith cometh by hearing. What must they hear to be saved? Give scripture please. (Aside: I see later in your post you answer my question)

I don't have a method. I'm speaking to you about biblical matters.
There was a time before the bible.
Not everyone everywhere knew about the bible. Hence God OVERLOOKING THEIR IGNORANCE.

AH, thank you for answering my question. There is not scripture telling us what a person who has never heard of Christ must believe to be saved. I am confining the discussion to the last 2000 years as we have more biblical information with which to determine God's will.

Please remember that we have a merciful God that desires all men to be saved.
1 Timothy 2.4 that is a really important verse.

Well, I don't want to go that deeply into the weeds. Short story: Words like ALL and EVERYONE are ambiguous and people who don't recognize this misinterpret verses. I'm not saying 1 Timothy 2:4 doesn't mean what you are saying, I am saying one such seek explicit verses to validate verses that could be ambiguous. Any verse with ALL or EVERYONE is ambiguous.
Example of ALL in scripture that could not mean "everyone without exception":

• Matthew 3:5 At that time Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea and all the district around the Jordan; it would be incredulous to believe everyone including babies, the blind, the disabled went to see Jesus
• Acts 26:4 Paul says, The Jews all know the way I have lived ever since I was a child, from the beginning of my life in my own country, and also in Jerusalem. Does he mean that every Jew without exception knew him? How about those who lived in the past and those who would live in the future?

 

[GodsGrace]

agreed. The meritorious cause for anyone's salvation is Christ.


The meritorious cause for any salvation is Christ. You've given no scriptural proof that one can be saved without knowledge of Christ in the last 2000 years. (Simpler to evaluate salvation now then before Christ and thus the 2000 year reference to keep it simple).


Agreed


Jesus has a human nature. It is impossible to believe in any aspect of Christ's human nature without knowledge of the N.T. Example: you can't know about His death and resurrection which seems salvific according to 1 Cor. 15:1-4.


You keep avoiding my question. What must be believed to be saved if one has not heard of Christ and what scripture verse(s) support that contention? To support the contention requires 2 elements: 1) The verses(s) must mention salvation(eternal life) and 2) the contents of faith. For example Romans 10:9-10 mentions both. (Aside: I see later in your post you answer my question)



Again, you are avoiding the question: HOW DO PEOPLE WHO NEVER HEAR OF CHRIST, HOW ARE THEY SAVED. Faith cometh by hearing. What must they hear to be saved? Give scripture please. (Aside: I see later in your post you answer my question)


AH, thank you for answering my question. There is not scripture telling us what a person who has never heard of Christ must believe to be saved. I am confining the discussion to the last 2000 years as we have more biblical information with which to determine God's will.


Well, I don't want to go that deeply into the weeds. Short story: Words like ALL and EVERYONE are ambiguous and people who don't recognize this misinterpret verses. I'm not saying 1 Timothy 2:4 doesn't mean what you are saying, I am saying one such seek explicit verses to validate verses that could be ambiguous. Any verse with ALL or EVERYONE is ambiguous.
Example of ALL in scripture that could not mean "everyone without exception":

• Matthew 3:5 At that time Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea and all the district around the Jordan; it would be incredulous to believe everyone including babies, the blind, the disabled went to see Jesus
• Acts 26:4 Paul says, The Jews all know the way I have lived ever since I was a child, from the beginning of my life in my own country, and also in Jerusalem. Does he mean that every Jew without exception knew him? How about those who lived in the past and those who would live in the future?

It could be limited to the last 2000 years.
How would you explain Lydia in Acts 16?
She was a worshiper of God.
THEN Paul explained the gospel.
If she had died only being a worshiper of God, do you believe she would have been lost?

OTOH, if she was Not a worshiper of God And heard about Jesus and refused Him, her outcome would surely have been sad.

 

[Fastfredy0]

It [salvation via faith requiring the knowledge of Christ] could be limited to the last 2000 years.

I assume "it" means 'salvation via faith requiring the knowledge of Christ'.
.... well, as I said, the knowledge of the contents of saving faith before Christ and how one obtained it is a matter for debate as there is not a lot of info so I avoid it for the most part though a I general inclinations.

I know you don't agree, but the following verses IMO point out that Gentiles before Christ (I assume after Israel came about) all went to hell (isolated exceptions)
Eph 2:12 remember that at that time you were separated from Christ [excluded from any relationship with Him], alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise [with no share in the sacred Messianic promise and without knowledge of God’s agreements], having no hope [in His promise] and [living] in the world without God. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

Circumstantial Evidence that Gentiles excluded from salvation
Acts 10 ... the story of Peter and Cornelius ... 28 He said to them, “You know that it is unlawful for a Jewish man to associate with or befriend a Gentile,... next thing you know Peter learns that Christ is for the Gentiles too. Peter, at Christ's side for years and only after Christ's death does he (probably years later) come to realize Christ died for Gentiles too.
Matthew 12:21 “And in His name the Gentiles (all the nations of the world) will hope [with confidence].”
Granted, not open and shut proof ... but implied truth
Matthew 15:24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (more weak proof)


Premise 1: Romans 10:17 So faith comes from hearing [what is told], and what is heard comes by the [preaching of the] message concerning Christ. AMP
Premise 2: Billions of people never heard of Christ
Conclusion: No chance of salvation for those who never heard of Christ (at least of last 2000 years)
.... of course, this has larger implications that I know you don't care for like:

• God doesn't love everyone (or at least doesn't love them enough to give them a chance for salvation ... God loves everyone in the sense that "the rain falls on the good and the wicked")
• Christ died for everyone makes no sense as dying for most people has not purpose.

 

[atpollard]

Will use the 1689, which I know is the one you like and use in your "denomnation". (is it a denomination?)

A quirk of being a Baptist is that we do not have “denominations” in the traditional sense of the word. The BAPTIST CHURCH HIERARCHY is Local Congregation, then Local Leadership (typical title is Deacon and Pastor), then Jesus Christ. That’s it. Every local church (body of believers) is fully autonomous and guided by God the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit … with no human BISHOPS or other man made hierarchy above them.

Some would argue that means we have TENS OF THOUSANDS of denominations each comprised of one local church, but I think that is a silly use of the term “denomination”.

 

[atpollard]

He's the first "Calvinist" with other important ones to follow.

I would argue that in many ways, Huss was closer to the first “Baptist” (although, of course the Hussites and Moravians are not ‘Baptists’ and predate the actual “Baptist” movement). The Hussites share many Baptist characteristics that later reformers like Luther and Calvin do not. Others argue Zwingli as the origin of Baptists, which is also a ‘partial truth’ since there are some doctrinal similarities and many doctrinal differences. In any event, I think it a mistake to over emphasize the role of John Calvin on Particular Baptists, except indirectly … Calvin inspired the later reformed that in turn inspired the Reformed Baptists two centuries later.

 

[atpollard]

Natural revelation is enough to know God in some limited way.

You are only assuming that “knowing God in some limited way” is sufficient to save you (someone, not YOU specifically). Romans 1 doesn’t actually SAY THAY, does it. All it says is that they knew there was a God and are GUILTY and WITHOUT EXCUSE for their choice to not HONOR HIM as God.

The strength of your view is that is makes God merciful and kind, but the flaw of that view is that it means people don’t NEED Jesus … He is not THE DOOR, but only A DOOR to God (and that ain’t Biblical).

 

[atpollard]

I don't agree with your number 1.

“Paragraph 1 appears to make several very bold statements about SCRIPTURE:

1. Knowledge of salvation is impossible without scripture (nature will not tell you enough for salvation).”

You may disagree with the CONFESSION, but I am almost 100% certain that I have read and understood the confession correctly and MY “number 1” is a correct statement of what the Confession teaches.

“The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience,1 although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet they are not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and His will which is necessary unto salvation.2 Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in diversified manners to reveal Himself, and to declare (that) His will unto His church;3 and afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which makes the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of God's revealing His will unto His people being now completed.4”

Would you like to examine the SCRIPTURE that the Confession claims support its case and see if they say what the Confession claims they say (like the Bereans)?

 

[Fastfredy0]

atpollard You're very good at explaining concepts ... knowledgeable, concise, organized

I heard the other day that there is a correlation between scientists and Reform theology ... both gravitate to organization of concepts.