How Were Old Testament People "Saved”?

In this post, and comments, and perhaps series of posts, I will be asking a lot of probing questions. I want to show how and explore if we have truly thought out this issue fully, and not simply dismissed it with cliché and platitudes. This issue brings up so much, and it is entirely relevant for today, as we will see when we progress into what I hope will be the fruitful discussion on this matter. What did they have to do at the moment to be saved?

Let me state clearly that I have ideas that I will be putting forth, but not at first. Perhaps they will develop in the comments to this post, but I want to stimulate discussion, and see where people are coming from. Many have heard that looking forward to a redeemer, which is and was Christ, saved OT saints, and looking back at what He did saves NT saints.

Perhaps many will agree with that, yes, but more detail is what we are looking for. What I mean to say is don’t simply parrot out the lines you have heard, as if we haven’t heard or considered them before, without explanation, and hopefully exegesis. Tell us what you believe based on the biblical record, don’t just try and be a smart guy. Please don’t condescend to others with different opinions, especially with an “of course” sort of attitude. That isn’t wanted here.

Okay. Just as we look back in history to Christ's sacrifice for our sins on the cross, Old Testament believers looked forward to His sacrifice for them. Jesus fulfills the OT types and shadows, but come now; do we really think that they understood all this? That they understood a man would die on a cross for their sins? If so, why didn’t they recognize this when Christ was on earth? Why were they looking for a Messiah who would give them an earthly kingdom?

Some believe that Old Testament saints were saved by keeping the Law, or at least by trying to and not going after other gods. This to them is what constituted faith. Others believe that they were saved by grace through faith, but how was this manifested? By grace, through faith, on account of Christ alone: yes, but by grace through faith in what, God? And what did they believe about God that saved them? And did God do something forensic, or what, to those that believed?

By faith, yes, but what was the content, the focus of faith, God? Certainly not Jesus Christ revealed, as we know Him, correct? What then does this say of others today who never hear of Christ? The questions this brings up are many, varied, and important as well.

Too many times I hear simplistic, and I believe cop out answers like, “if they follow the light they have, God will give them more light”, or this might even lead to “people not having to believe in Jesus but be saved by His work anyway” like C.S. Lewis and others claim.

Things and verses to think about and discuss:

Salvation – David in Psalms, and statements like, “let the redeemed of the Lord say so”.

John 8:56 – Abraham saw Jesus? Then what about Luke 10:24 / 1 Peter 1:12?

Hebrews 11:26 – Moses foresaw Christ?

1 Peter 1:11 – did the Holy Spirit indwell OT believers? John Piper believes so.

Let’s get to it…

The Power in Proclamation

…the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life
(John 6:63)

The Holy Spirit of God gives life unto the Word today, changing it from mere letter to life giving water. Likewise, in all our religious pursuits, we must be ever mindful of the need for the Spirit to bring to life our proclamation of the Gospel. The Spirit is the only thing that can possibly succeed for more than a season.

The talent of mankind preaching to the lost, or reading the Scriptures without the Spirit can only convince our minds, but the Spirit is needed to reach the heart for everlasting change. The famous scientist, mathematician, and philosopher Blaise Pascal said, “The heart has its reasons which reason does not know of”.

Many have known about Jesus, but haven’t known Jesus. Jesus tells us in John 17:3 that eternal life is to know the Father and the Son who He has sent. If something isn’t in the head it isn’t likely in the heart, but knowing the Father and the Son requires more than intellectual assent to doctrine. Both theology and devotion must be present in order to truly know God.

And so heart knowledge is critical to a man’s eternal destiny, but what is the difference between knowing about someone and actually knowing someone? How can we know Jesus personally, if He ascended to heaven 2000 years ago? How do we take head knowledge and turn it into heart knowledge?

Let’s give you an example of the difference between knowing about and actually knowing someone. Think about this: You may have studied the life of a famous person, say Martin Luther, to the point that you know basically everything there is to know about him. You know his doctrine, his birthday, his ideas, and where he lived. But someone else, who actually lived with him, say his wife, might not know everything he believed or might even forget his birthday, but she talked with him everyday, slept with him, ate supper with him; she actually knew him.

See the difference?

This is a key as to why experience is as important as reason in the pursuit of God, for reason alone is not sufficient in the Christian walk, and reason will not bring conversion. Only the Spirit converting someone’s heart will count for eternity. To quote Pascal once again, “It is the heart which experiences God, and not the reason. This then, is faith: God felt by the heart, not by the reason”. Only the power of the Spirit can turn head knowledge into heart knowledge.

This is precisely why we must accept no preacher who may have all the letters of academia but does not have the unction of the Holy Spirit, the enduement of power from On High for service to the Kingdom. Of course we must not confuse adrenaline with anointing, but the question is this: Has God called the man to preach?

To the extent that a man shows his talent, he is the worst preacher of all time. To the extent he shows power by the Holy Spirit, he is the greatest preacher of all time.

ASHAMED OF THE GOSPEL

The new head of the Episcopal Church, USA (ECUSA) is continuing to show her true colors. This article from Time magazine, July 17, 2006 speaks for itself…

UTTER APOSTASY. PERIOD. It is only getting worse…GET OUT NOW!

Here are some comments on this interview and on the ECUSA and PCUSA’s direction…

http://www.erwm.com/AntonBosch73.htm

http://www.breakpoint.org/listingarticle.asp?ID=2588

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-allen9jul09,0,2668973.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

Here is the Time interview and a link to it: (emphases mine)

http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,1211587,00.html

Rough waters aren't new to Katharine Jefferts Schori, 52, a former oceanographer who is the Presiding Bishop-elect of the Episcopal Church of the U.S.A. Bishop Katharine, as she's known, takes over a denomination rocked by controversy at home and abroad for its liberal stance on gay clergy. She talked with TIME's Jeff Chu about her mission of social justice, the relationship between science and religion and whether faith in Jesus is the only path to heaven.

What will be your focus as head of the U.S. church?

Our focus needs to be on feeding people who go to bed hungry, on providing primary education to girls and boys, on healing people with AIDS, on addressing tuberculosis and malaria, on sustainable development. That ought to be the primary focus.

The issue of gay bishops has been so divisive. The diocese of Newark, N.J., has named a gay man as one of its candidates for bishop. Is now the time to elect another gay bishop?

Dioceses, when they are faithful, call the person who is best suited to lead them. I believe every diocese does the best job it's capable of in discerning who it is calling to leadership.

Many Anglicans in the developing world say such choices in the U.S. church have hurt their work.

That's been important for the church here to hear. We've heard in ways we hadn't heard before the problematic nature of our decisions. Especially in places where Christians are functioning in the face of Islamic culture and mores, evangelism is a real challenge. [But] these decisions were made because we believe that's where the Gospel has been calling us. The Episcopal Church in the U.S. has come to a reasonable conclusion and consensus that gay and lesbian Christians are full members of this church and that our ministry to and with gay and lesbian Christians should be part of the fullness of our life.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, who leads the Anglican Communion, wrote recently that a two-tier Communion may be a solution. What did you read in his message?

The pieces that I saw as most important had to do with the complexity of the situation and the length of time that this process will continue. He's very clear that we're not going to see an instant solution. He's also clear about his role: it is to call people to conversation, not to intervene in diocesan or provincial life--which some people have been asking for.

There's much debate about whether science and religion can comfortably coexist. You're a scientist and a pastor. What do you think?

Oh, they absolutely can. In the Middle Ages, theology was called the queen of the sciences. It asks a set of questions about human existence, about why we're here and how we should be in relationship with our neighbors and with the divine. And science, in this more traditional understanding, is about looking at creation and trying to understand how it functions.

What is your view on intelligent design?

I firmly believe that evolution ought to be taught in the schools as the best witness of what modern science has taught us. To try to read the Bible literalistically about such issues disinvites us from using the best of recent scholarship.

Is belief in Jesus the only way to get to heaven?

We who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box.

Pastoral work can be all-consuming. How do you relax?

I run regularly. I like to hike, and I take one long backpacking trip a year. Flying is also a focusing activity. I come from a family of pilots, and it's always been part of my experience. It takes one's full attention, and that's restful in an odd kind of way. It takes your mind away from other concerns, not unlike meditation.

Do you have a favorite Bible verse?

Chapter 61 of Isaiah is an icon for me of what Christian work should be about. That's what Jesus reads in his first public act. In Luke, he walks into the synagogue and reads from Isaiah. It talks about a vision of the reign of God where those who are mourning are comforted, where the hungry are fed, where the poor hear good news.

What is your prayer for the church today?

That we remember the centrality of our mission is to love each other. That means caring for our neighbors. And it does not mean bickering about fine points of doctrine.