What must I do

 THE QUESTION:

What must I do to be saved?

THE ANSWER:

Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved.

Acts 16:31

The word saved (or salvation) is used with the understanding that one is not right with God and needs deliverance from the resulting consequence (to be identified later).

The word saved simply speaks of “deliverance.”

The question is seeking the answer (or solution) to one's present situation of not being right with God and the consequence.

The answer is that one is saved by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ for that deliverance.
Sin is why one is not right with God and faces the consequence.

The issue with sin is that it is a violation of God’s nature and moral law.

Everyone is guilty of sin: For all have sinned.... Romans 3:23

Sin is subject consequence or penalty.

The penalty is also called death: The wages of sin is death. Romans 6:23

The wages of sin is the penalty of sin, being death.

Death means one is separated from God, and if this is not corrected, it continues forever.

Salvation can also be understood as the forgiveness of sins.

To Him all the prophets witness that, through His [Jesus'] name, whoever believes in Him [Jesus] will receive forgiveness of sins." Acts 10:43

Forgiveness of sins speaks of being released from the penalty (being death) of sin.

This release is salvation.

This forgiveness is spoken of by all the prophets.

This forgiveness is according to God’s word and promise.

This forgiveness is offered through Jesus because He died for those sins as the substitute for everyone.

The death that Jesus died on the cross was to bear the penalty (wages) of sin.

Who Himself [Jesus] bore our sins in His own body on the tree [the cross]. 1 Peter 2:24

This death of Jesus was how God so loved the world.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. John 3:16

It is because of the death of Jesus for our sins that we can be forgiven and be delivered from death, resulting in everlasting life.

Everlasting life is salvation, because the alternative is to perish.

The word perish means “destruction.”

Destruction is ultimately being assigned to that place called Hell, apart from God, forever.

Jesus said, do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Matthew 10.28

Hell is destruction of body and soul apart from God, while everlasting life is life with God forever.

Why must it be this way?

It is because God created man with a free will. Man in his free will sinned against God, and the result was separation from God. This separation is death.

Yet God made provision for this through the death of Jesus for our sins who Himself did not sin:

God made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us. 2 Corinthians 5:21

This forgiveness and life comes through believing in Jesus who was made sin for us.

Consider that we did not choose our parents, and yet our parents usually love us and want a relationship with us, and us with them.

The situation is similar with God.

Most people want to enjoy life and have meaningful relationships.

These things are fulfilled by God through that salvation which is through believing or trusting in Jesus for that salvation.

This life and salvation is the possession of those who believe in Jesus for it:

That whoever believes in Him [Jesus] should not perish but have everlasting life.

John 3:15

This answers the question as to how to be saved.

Inordinate desire

 I see the sin nature as an inclination we all have of inordinate desire. By inordinate desire, I mean desire outside the moral will of God. That inordinate desire could be stronger in certain areas, differing from person to person. Maybe one has more of inclination to steal or lie or lose their temper. The evidence of the inordinate desire is brought out by God’s moral law when we try to keep the law, as Paul talks about in Romans 7, when he discovered the inability of the law to keep him from coveting, because of a “law” that “evil” was present within him. So why couldn’t homosexual attraction be that inordinate desire that is unique in a person like lying or stealing in another? In my youth, I had this inclination to steal. I knew it was wrong, but I chose to give into that drawing to do so. Does an inordinate desire have to hurt someone to be a sin—as some will claim? Covetousness doesn’t really hurt anyone, but it is still sin, and I believe it is equated with idolatry. We all can have a tendency towards covetousness. Anyway, it has been my understanding of the sin nature that it is inordinate desire within us, being a desire outside the moral will of God, and it can be stronger in some areas than others depending on the person.

impossible repentance

 Hebrews chapter 6 speaks of the impossibility

of renewing again to repentance

those who have experienced several things

that speak of salvation and then fall away:

“For it is impossible

for those who were once enlightened,

and have tasted the heavenly gift,

and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit,

and have tasted the good word of God

and the powers of the age to come,

if they fall away,

to renew them again to repentance.”

Hebrews 6:4-6

It would seem that when someone “falls away” from what they once believed, it will be next to impossible for them to have a change of mind back to (repentance) what they once believed.

They not only have changed their mind and fallen away from their former belief, but they look for every argument under the sun to strengthen their opposition to that former belief, digging themselves into a hole so deep, that it would take Divine intervention to lift them out.

If a person falls away from the truth, what will it take to bring them back--maybe a special Divine  manifestation—like Saul of Tarsus experienced on the road to Damascus when he was “breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord.” Acts 9:1

Has anyone ever seen it happen...believers who were once Bible teachers and evangelists who became agnostic-atheists who are now apologists in opposition to God and enemies of the gospel of Christ? Has anyone ever seen such come to repentance before they died? I know of those who have fallen and are now enemies of God.

(Actually, I don't believe Hebrews 6 is specifically talking about becoming an agnostic or atheist but about leaving the gospel of grace in Christ for the Law of Moses for justification before God, but the principle is the same.)

The author of Hebrews speaks of the impossibility of being renewed again to repentance, but is it impossible with God?

There is this Scripture:

“a servant of the Lord must not quarrel

but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient,

in humility correcting those who are in opposition,

if God perhaps will grant them repentance,

so that they may know the truth,

and that they may come to their senses

and escape the snare of the devil,

having been taken captive by him to do his will.”

2 Timothy 2:24-26

So maybe there is still hope before they pass away from this life.

But there is this warning in what follows in Hebrews 6:

“⁷ For the earth which drinks in the rain

that often comes upon it,

and bears herbs useful for those by whom it is cultivated,

receives blessing from God;

⁸ but if it bears thorns and briers,

it is rejected and near to being cursed,

whose end is to be burned.”

Hebrews 6:7-8

And then we read in Hebrews 10:

^“30 For we know Him who said,

"Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord.

And again, "The LORD will judge His people."

³¹ It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

³² But recall the former days in which,

after you were illuminated,

you endured a great struggle with sufferings:

³³ partly while you were made a spectacle

both by reproaches and tribulations,

and partly while you became companions

of those who were so treated; ...

³⁵ Therefore do not cast away your confidence,

which has great reward.

³⁶ For you have need of endurance,

so that after you have done the will of God,

you may receive the promise:

³⁷ "For yet a little while,

And He who is coming will come and will not tarry.

³⁸ Now the just shall live by faith;

But if anyone draws back,

My soul has no pleasure in him."

Hebrews 10:30-38

Do not cast away your confidence.

You are called to endurance.

He is coming.

But take heed, lest you fall (1Cor10.12).

But God …

”is able to keep you from falling,

and to present you faultless

before the presence of His glory

with exceeding joy.”

Jude 1:24

Future kingdom

 There is the claim that Christ is reigning in his kingdom now, that there is no future millennial reign of Christ before the final, eternal state.  The millennial reign is now through the church.  I believe it is significant that it is written that Jesus spent 40 days with his disciples after the resurrection, speaking on things pertaining to the kingdom of God:  "... He also presented Himself alive after His suffering by many infallible proofs, being seen by them during forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God." Acts 1:3 After Jesus told them to wait in Jerusalem for the Holy Spirit, they asked him if the kingdom would be then restored to Israel: "Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, "Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" Acts 1.6  How could they ask this after being taught about the kingdom of God, if there wasn't to be any restoration of Israel?  Jesus doesn't correct them by saying that there will be no restoration of Israel, instead, he says the timing is not for them to know:   "And He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority. But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth." Acts 1:6-8   

The disciples were not taught that there was no future restoration of Israel.   They still expected it, and they were not corrected about it, except that the timing of it was not for them to know.  hat they did not know was what God was going to do in the near future that would involve creating a new people for his purposes, being the gentile-jew assembly, commonly called the "Church."  This "dispensation," being a new divine administration or stewardship, is only a temporal purpose of God in time.  This is the time of the millennial kingdom of Christ.  The kingdom is in a sense represented in the church, as Christ's ambassadors, but it is not the kingdom in the sense in which Christ will reign over the earth from Jerusalem over the nations in a manifested way, as we see in the Old Testament prophets, like Isaiah or Micah:  

² Now it shall come to pass in the latter days
That the mountain of the LORD's house
Shall be established on the top of the mountains,
And shall be exalted above the hills;
And all nations shall flow to it.
³ Many people shall come and say,
"Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
He will teach us His ways,
And we shall walk in His paths."
For out of Zion shall go forth the law,
And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
⁴ He shall judge between the nations,
And rebuke many people;
They shall beat their swords into plowshares,
And their spears into pruning hooks;
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
Neither shall they learn war anymore. Isaiah 2:2-4

​¹ Now it shall come to pass in the latter days
That the mountain of the LORD's house
Shall be established on the top of the mountains,
And shall be exalted above the hills;
And peoples shall flow to it.
² Many nations shall come and say,
"Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
He will teach us His ways,
And we shall walk in His paths."
For out of Zion the law shall go forth,
And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
³ He shall judge between many peoples,
And rebuke strong nations afar off;
They shall beat their swords into plowshares,
And their spears into pruning hooks;
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
Neither shall they learn war anymore.
⁴ But everyone shall sit under his vine and under his fig tree,
And no one shall make them afraid;
For the mouth of the LORD of hosts has spoken.
⁵ For all people walk each in the name of his god,
But we will walk in the name of the LORD our God
Forever and ever. Micah 4:1-5

Futurists believe the kingdom is yet future, and not all of them would agree in an "already/ not yet" kingdom of Christ, but I believe you could say Christ reigns in a sense through the Church now, being that His kingdom authority is represented in the Church, but his manifested reign over the earth and nations is yet future.   It will involve a restoration of Israel as a people and Nation in which Romans 11:16 is fulfilled when "all Israel will be saved":  this is the restoration of the nation as a people of God in which all of its members will have salvation; it will be a new dispensation, being the millennial reign of Christ in which Israel will be restored as a people in special relationship and role for God.  This will not change the terms of salvation any more than how someone was justified during the Old Testament times--Abraham was justified by faith, but it is a change of people for God's purposes in time. During the future reign of Christ,  people will be identified by their nation, Israel being one of them:   

"In that day Israel will be one of three with Egypt and Assyria—a blessing in the midst of the land,  whom the LORD of hosts shall bless, saying, 'Blessed is Egypt My people, and Assyria the work of My hands, and Israel My inheritance.'" Isaiah 19:24-25

moral decline

 The apostle Paul in his last letter (to Timothy) prophesied a moral decline as time progresses...

" But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away!" 2Tim3.1-5

"But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived."
2Tim3.13

In saying these things, Paul instructs Timothy...

"But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." 2Tim3.14-17

Women elders

Some seek to justify women in the role of elder (same as overseer) by appealing to certain references about women of significance in Scripture (especially the New Testament), but none of those references specifically state that they were in acting in the role as an elder.

What we see is that women, like men, can have the same spiritual gifts or functions toward edifying the Church assembly, but many conflate those functions with that role that has qualifications, being an elder, and that role is by appointment.  Functions like "pastor" or "preacher" have become common designating terms for the lead elder, but they are really functions that can have an application to either sex.  One who pastors or preaches or teaches can do it without being an elder.  You could say that all elders are teachers, but not all teachers are elders.  Elders must meet specific qualifications; the Apostle Paul set forth these qualifications in First Timothy and in Titus.   Paul sent Titus to "appoint" elders.  Elders are not self-appointed.  But pastor or teacher and preacher are functions, not the exact same thing as an elder which has certain qualifications.  

One of the qualifications is that the elder is the "husband of one wife."  One of the arguments against women pastors is that a woman obviously cannot be the husbands of one wife.  The comeback is either that this is a saying that was meant to be non-gender specific, since there are actually no male pronouns in the Greek in the text,  or that women could not practice polygamy, and so Paul is addressing specifically men in that case. Neither seems likely, because in the same letter to Timothy, in setting forth the restrictions concerning taking in widows by the church, Paul says, "Do not let a widow under sixty years old be taken into the number, and not unless she has been the wife of one man ..." 1 Timothy 5:9 Surely, he was gender specific concerning widows.  Of course, the comeback will be that the requirement concerning widows would be gender specific, because men cannot be widows.  Yet the singling out of wives or women in verse 11 to have certain qualities would suggest that the qualifications--including being the husband of one wife--are gender specific to the men.  (Was he referring to polyandry, being a woman with more than one husband, or was it about divorce or being devoted to one man at a time?  That's another issue that one has to wrestle with.)

When Paul gives the qualifications for Deacons, he says, "Likewise, their wives must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things." 1 Timothy 3:11  "Wives" can be translated "women," and this why some believe women can be deacons.  Those who point out that male pronouns are not used in the preceding qualifications for elder and deacon but added to the text would need to explain why a specific reference to women and their conduct needs to be made.  If the qualifications are non-gender specific, then why single out women?   The non-gender specific claim so that the qualifications can be applied to women is not helped by saying the reference in verse 11 is about women and not wives.  Aren't those qualifications needed by men too?  Why make a specific reference to women?  

Nevertheless, I believe it is referring to wives of the deacons (and surely of the elders), because why single out women for a few specific qualifications apart from men?  But to have these requirements of the wives of the men who would be considered for the role of elder or deacon would make sense.  Women serving as deacons does not receive as much opposition as with elder because of 1 Timothy 3:11, and the role doesn't have the same weight as elder, when it comes to having authority over another.  But I believe that "wives" is more likely than "women."

The word "submit" is brought up on this issue.  The claim is made that though Scripture says that wives are to submit to their husbands:  Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.  For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.  Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Ephesians 5:22-24   It also says we are to submit to one another:  submitting to one another in the fear of God. Ephesians 5:21  Submission speaks of being "put under," or to come under the authority of another.   In the church, we submit to one another by respecting the differing functions or roles each have. The roles of husband and wife are not the same.  It has been said that submission could be understood as "being supportive of."  Recognizing and respecting the role of another would be "being supportive of."   Are the roles of men and women or husband and wife exactly the same?  We are told in Scripture that the "head" of woman is man:  But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 1 Corinthians 11:3.  This shows a distinction in some sense.   It has been claimed that this word in the Greek means something like "first soldier in."  What exactly does that mean, and why such a distinction?  Men and women are obviously different, and even the "head" reference reveals something different between the sexes.  Equality doesn't mean that there are not differences in roles, especially in this temporal existence.  Submission to all would involve recognizing and supporting those distinctive roles.

updated 8/11/2026

temporal and eternal

 Though I am not a classical dispensationalist--which is a system of theology that recognizes distinct Divine stewardships--I do believe we see distinctions in the purposes of God involving people that are temporal.  The temporal needs to be distinguished from the eternal.   God can have a people for his purpose that is temporal, while from an eternal perspective, there is only one people of God.  Israel was the people of God for His purposes in time, Israel being a distinct nation of people. Presently, the "Church" is the people of God for His purposes in time, the Church being believers of all nations.  God will again restore Israel as a people and nation for His purposes in time.  These distinct people groups are temporal for the Divine purpose in time.  But eternally, there is only one people of God, which looks like the Church does now, because it consists of all believers, while Israel did not consist of all believers, though there may have been very few among the gentiles apart from Israel--not even every Israelite was a believer under the Mosaic law.  It's no different than the fact that all believers are one in Christ, but they have different roles in their service to God, but I suppose that even in the final eternal state, there will be some distinction of roles among the people of God.   That will have to do with rewards and how the world to come will function.