Why isn’t the Divine Holy Writ a bit more clear on this topic? How is it that we have a bunch of Christians here all disagreeing about a manifestly important topic? Who’s the True Christian ™ and who’s not?
To City Gent:
Don’t worry about mute people! They’re all going to Hell anyway; their disability is a punishment from God, don’t you know?
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0101/sciencequiz.html
(question 2)
When I was in Catholic school, our class used to torment Sister Adrianne by asking questions like “what if you confess your sins, and then walk out of church and immediately see an attractive person, think impure thoughts, and then right after get hit by a bus? do you go to heaven or hell?” which eventually prompted Sister to finally break down and shout “Heaven is not a game show, the important part is NOT getting confession in under the buzzer!” (one of the more amusing things I have heard a nun say.)
For a very long time, the Catholic church did take a hard line on suicide, but not any more. Now there is a much greater understanding about depression as a mental illness. A person who commits suicide is considered to be very ill. After the suicide, supposedly what happens to you is between you and God, and we like to believe that God is not going to start punishing people for being mentally ill. Of course there is no “proof” of this, but I think it conveys the basic view of today’s Catholic Church on the issue.
On a more personal note, in my own observation, Catholics still come down a little strict on the idea of contemplating suicide. I think this is an attempt to get across the notion that suicide is never the answer. At the same time, the family of a person who did commit suicide is not going to get the hellfire lecture from the Catholic Church. I guess I’m making a broad generalization, because I’m sure someone reading this will say “oh, but I had a friend who killed himself and the Catholic priest told his mother that he was burning in hell” and I’m sure this does happen, because there are priests out there who are not very good at their jobs. But this would be more of the exception than the rule.
Jesus is perfectly clear regarding who is saved and who isn’t. No one can be saved unless they are reborn with the Holy Spirit. No one is sent this spirit except those who keep Jesus’s teachings.
Paul was writing to people in Rome who already kept Jesus’s teachings but were unsure whether they needed to preach the Gospel themselves and were dubious, as would be expected, as to whether Jesus’s resurrection took place. That is why Paul tells them that yes, they should profess Jesus as Lord and believe in the ressurection for their salvation.
Some people who claim to be Christians are really Paul-out-of-contextians. Sad really.
Now that is funny, because Jesus specifically said that wasn’t true, although I don’t know the passage. That is something Jews believed back in the day though.
You can see once again why these paul-out-of-context cults need to take the whole Bible literally, though. Even though you have to be quite an ego-maniac to believe a letter written two thousand years ago that has the word “you” in it is talking about YOU, with hyper-literalism, all things are possible.
Oh, and one more thing from that site you found Opus –
Funny, I don’t recall Jesus wearing a suit and tie. Or being able to pay fines. Idiots.
As a Christian you are reborn by accepting and believeing in Jesus. As a Christian I keep Jesus’s teaching because I am saved, I am not saved because I keep Jesus’s teachings. The bible is quite clear that we saved through grace alone, not through works. Salvation is a gift, it is not something that has to be earned. It is not something than can be lost because of something you do or don’t do.
Jesus himself said
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, [6] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
17
For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.
18
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.
that is not taking paul out context, it has nothgint to do with paul. It seems pretty clear to me.
You may not think it is to be taken literally because a literal interpretation seems unjust. But who are you to question God’s motives or what he considers just? Evidently God causes or allows earthquakes and volcanoes to kill innocent people; doesn’t that suggest that God’s morality and man’s morality may be very different indeed?
If you believe in Jesus, you must therefore keep his teachings.
You are trying to confuse the issue. Jesus said anyone who had faith in him would do works. James also said that faith without works is dead. What Paul said was not all people have the same powers to perform miracles, and so their inability to perform miracles should not be counted against them. You are trying to redefine how Paul used the word and stretch it into your own meaning.
No – grace is a gift.
Salvation can be lost by sin, which can indeed be something you do or don’t do. If you do not keep Jesus’s teachings,you do not love him, he will not give you the Spirit and you will not be saved. The scriptures are perfectly clear.
If anyone truly believes in him then they should bear the fruit of such belief and cease a life of sin. Merely calling Jesus “Lord” will not save you.
QUOTE]*Originally posted by Joff-Rey! *
**
[/QUOTE]
For a very long time, the Catholic church did take a hard line on suicide, but not any more. Now there is a much greater understanding about depression as a mental illness. A person who commits suicide is considered to be very ill. After the suicide, supposedly what happens to you is between you and God, and we like to believe that God is not going to start punishing people for being mentally ill. Of course there is no “proof” of this, but I think it conveys the basic view of today’s Catholic Church on the issue.
**
[/QUOTE]
This is what I was taught in Catholic school in the early 90’s (90-91). That your mentally unstable and can’t be held accountable for what you did. But I guess this would go for any irrational act. When you get to the gates, plead temporary insanity.
No, but believeing it will.
Let me ask you, do you believe? do you love Jesus, or is this just an accademic exercise for you? And if you do, have you never sinned once since you started believing?
The whole Idea, as I see it, is that God wants us to live a sin free life, and he wants us to do the right thing. But doing the right thing is meaningless if you are forced to do so. Through grace, God offers us salvation, all we have to do is accept his son, and we are saved. After that, is truely up to us to do the right thing BECAUSE it is the right thing, not out of fear. I try to live a sin free life because I love Jesus, and because it is right, not because I fear etarnal damnation. I have no doubt in my mind or in my heart that I am saved, and that I am going to heaven because that is what Jesus said. He said if you believe you will not perish, and I believe. If you wish to twist it fit your definition, go ahead.
But that is not what you said earlier. You said “you cannot be good enough to earn your way into heaven, and you can’t be bad enough to lose it.” Either you think obeying the Gospel is required of those who believe, or you do not.
The bible says “works” is the performing of miracles. I dont’ think one can perform a bad miracle – but if you believe in witchcraft I may just have misunderstood you.
Going forward? There is no reason it should not be possible. There should be no reason to be defeatest and not try, and to give up to the point of suicide is certaintly unholy.
Yes, and I agree with this. Grace, which opens non-circumsized Gentiles to the possibility of salvation, is a gift, and because this gift those with faith are saved. You still have to live a life of faith. Unless you think Pauls meant Jews have to keep the gospel but gentiles do not?
Where? In fact I can think of a few places where they say one must stay the course or risk losing the crown of life.
But you still need to repent of your sin. If you do not repent, you can not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Again, I disagree. But who is to say? Very few people I know who call themselves believers love their God above all else and serve him alone. So I must be cautious that you don’t use the Devil’s logic that if one is doomed to fail, then why try?
I have friends who are believers. But I am only a sinner. But I know that if one repents and accepts God’s forgiveness, one can be free of sin for some time.
I agree. And God does give us the free will to choose right and wrong.
To presume that God is powerless to condemn you should he wish, even if you do not keep up your side of the convenant, seems dangerous. But if you try to live a holy life out of love you have taken the better part.
Would you agree that someone who does not keep his teachings does not believe in him?
To jmullaney et al:
I was going to post my essay entitled “How are we Saved?” which analyzes what various Biblical authors had to say about the issue. But, seeing how the various Christians in this thread have managed to get into another debate already, I think it’s safe to say that my point stands. The Bible is hopelessly confused on the matter of salvation. If it weren’t, we wouldn’t have thousands of different denominations.
I will still post my essay if anyone is interested, tho.
P.S. The Qur’an has a specific and direct injunction not to commit suicide, something along the lines of “Don’t commit suicide, for Allah is great!” Why doesn’t the Bible say so in as many words? Virtually every anti-suicide argument I’ve seen based upon the Bible goes something like this:
Ditto for things like drug use and wife beating.
I just have to disagree Opus. The Bible is perfectly clear. Some just close their eyes to what is says. “Surely those who disbelieve, it being alike to them whether you warn them, or do not warn them, will not believe. Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing and there is a covering over their eyes, and there is a great punishment for them. And there are some people who say: We believe in Allah and the last day; and they are not at all believers. They desire to deceive Allah and those who believe, and they deceive only themselves and they do not perceive.” – Quran 2:6-9. The blame doesn’t lay in the book, but the reader.
The Sermon on the Mount makes all these things clear. Suidide is killing, right? Do not kill. If you don’t hate someone, why hit them? So beating is also clearly wrong, even in self defense as the text makes clear.
Drug use there is apparently nothing wrong with :shrug:. But the Holy Spirit is a real person, and if you keep what Jesus did taught it will guide you in such other matters.
jmullaney wrote:
That’s it! You asked for it:
How are we Saved?
Faith
The clearest statement of salvation is found in John 3:16-18. There, the author informs us, those who believe in Jesus "shall not perish but have eternal life." But, "whoever does not believe stands condemned." Simple, right? If one wishes eternal life, believe in Jesus. Unfortunately, other authors serve to muck up this remarkably simple equation.
Our first problem is with Mark, verse 16:16. Now we are told that one must both believe and be baptized in order to earn salvation. The second criterion is absent from John. One wonders why John would exclude such a vitally important piece of information. Wasn't he worried that a potential convert, upon reading his gospel, would immediately believe in Jesus, but fail to get himself baptized, and therefore fail to earn eternal life? Apparently not.
The next question we are faced with is what exactly does it mean to believe in Jesus. Must one believe his message? That he was the Messiah? That he was the son of God? That the Bible accurately records his every word? Fortunately, we have Mark again to clear up the problem. Rather than telling us what we must believe, he instead informs us how to tell whether we believe. The test is outlined in verses 16:17-18. Believers will be able to drive out demons, speak in new tongues, handle deadly snakes, drink poison, and heal the sick. Well, that makes things easy! Let's just give all the Christians some poison, toss them in a room with a bunch of angry rattlers, and, if they somehow manage to escape that, let them try to heal cancer patients with their hands. If they succeed, then they obviously believe! But alas, things are not nearly that simple for two reasons. Firstly, the Bible tells us not to put God to a test, which makes this checklist in Mark somewhat useless. It essentially tells us "Christians will be able to drink poison, but only if they don't actually do so." The second problem comes from Paul, who claims in his first epistle to the Corinthians, verse 13:8, that tongues will cease. Presumably, the other gifts listed in Mark will cease also. Thus, only the first Christians, the apostles and the early martyrs possessed these gifts. For the rest of us, other methods must be used to determine whether we believe. Maybe Jesus can help us out.
In Mark 9:23, we are told that all things are possible to those that believe. One can only wonder what the point of the list in chapter 16 was if Christian believers can do all things. But we know that Christians aren't omnipotent, so Jesus was not speaking literally. He was simply exaggerating to emphasize the importance of faith. Apparently he did the same when he told people that with faith the size of a mustard seed, they could move mountains (Mt. 17:20). So, we're still left without a test for salvation. No matter, for as we shall soon see, what one believes is totally irrelevant. It is only works that matter.
Works
In Matthew 25:31-46, Jesus tells the parable of the sheep and the goats. When the son of Man comes in his glory, we are told, he will separate the people just as a shepherd separates sheep and goats. The sheep he shall place on his right, to receive their inheritance, the kingdom prepared for them since the beginning of creation. The goats shall be placed on the left, and sent off to eternal punishment. What criterion will the king use to make such a determination. Why, surely it is faith, right? If John is accurate, then the "sheep" must be those that believe (and possibly are baptized as well), and the goats those who do not. How much simpler could it be? Well, it would be simple if that's what it says, but it doesn't. Instead, Jesus says that the sheep are those who fed the hungry, clothed the naked, looked after the sick, and visited people in prison. The goats are those who failed to do those things. Nowhere are we told anything about faith in Jesus, or even in God.
Some believers may argue that good works flow naturally out of faith. But even they cannot deny that there are many good people who do the things listed, but who are not Christians. How can these verses be reconciled with John 3:16-18? They cannot.
Lest you think that the parable of the sheep and the goats is an anomaly, several other Biblical passages highlight the important of works as well. Another pericope in Matthew, chapter 19, verses 16-18 has Jesus telling a man that in order to achieve eternal life, he must follow the commandments, and sell all that he has. Revelations 20:12-15 has the dead being judged by what they have done, not what they have believed.
Faith and Works
The epistle of James is unique in that it stresses the importance of both faith and works, unlike any of the previous verses. This does not provide a reconciliation, however. The passages stressing the importance of faith or works are dogmatic and exclusive. John 3:16-18 says that belief is sufficient. As does Romans 3:28, which states that faith alone, without following the law, is sufficient for salvation. The passages which stress works are equally exclusive. Nowhere does Jesus say that he will save those who feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the sick, and believe in him. Righteous deeds alone are enough. But James argues that both faith and works are required. So we have yet a third means to salvation.
Grace
This is a uniquely Pauline concept, found only in the epistle to the Romans. In chapter 9, verse 18, Paul says that God will have mercy on whom he chooses to have mercy on, and that he will harden whom he wants to harden. That is, God's decision is completely arbitrary. It does not depend upon man's "desire or effort, but on God's mercy" (Rom., 9:16).
Predestination
A favorite of the Calvinists. It is another Pauline concept, expressed in his epistle to the Ephesians. Paul writes that God "chose us in him before the creation of the world," and that "he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ" (Eph. 1:4-5). Predestination is not necessarily incompatible with grace. God may choose ahead of time whom to harden and whom to favor with grace, thus allowing for both concepts. But predestination does forbid both free will and works.
Universalism
This is a relatively recent concept, favored by religious liberals, and those who find the concept of an eternal torture for certain people a bit unfavorable. This concept is found only a handful of times in the New Testament, and is weakly supported compared to the dozens of verses which speak quite clearly and explicitly of perishing of Hell for certain people. But supporting verses do exist. The chief among them is John 12:32, where Jesus says that he will draw all men unto him. Another verse supporting this idea is in Paul's first epistle to Timothy, 4:10, where God is said to be the savior of all men, and especially of those who believe. Note that the verse says especially of those who believe, not just those who believe. Thus while believers seem to have some sort of fringe benefits, God still saves us all.
Taking the Eucharist
Again, this is a less common theme in the New Testament than either belief or works, but it is one of the most explicit. From John 6:53-55: "'I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink." What must one do to "eat the flesh" and "drink the blood" of the Son of Man? Well, the disciples did it at the Last Supper, where Jesus took bread and said that it was his flesh, and poured wine and said that it was his blood. Thus, one must take communion in order to achieve eternal life. Furthermore, since Jesus makes a dogmatic, incontrovertible statement here, this is all one needs to do. Take the Eucharist, and you are saved. Do not, and you are damned.
Some may wonder whether the Eucharist is really the blood and flesh of Jesus, like Catholics believe, or merely symbolic, as most Protestants think. It better be real! For if it's not, then only the disciples at the Last Supper are saved, and the rest of us are damned, since we will have no chance to eat of Jesus' body and drink of his blood.Ah. You show yourself to be a good study.
Wrong. That is not what Mark 16:16 says:
It does not say someone who has not been baptized will be condemned, only those who do not believe.
Well, that seems like a no brainer. If you believe in someone, you trust them and, usually, trust that what they say is true.
Yes, well, unfortunately these verses were added to some manuscripts long after Mark died so some might object to your reasoning. But being able to perform miracles is a fair sign that a person believes in Jesus.
This is a very flimsy arguement. Paul only says that love is eternal, while men are not. That doesn’t imply that men who believe in Jesus can’t still do works.
Jesus himself says in John 14:12
Jesus doesn’t set a time limit on these abilities.
Omnipotence is not a thing which is done.
What did you do today? Omnipotence.
But, OK, if you really want to nail Jesus down on this one… 
Ah, well. If you only knew the truth. I assure you this is a true statement anyway.
Huh? You were just discussing whether works were a test for salvation or not. You are making the common mistake of confusing works with sin.
But now you get your answer as to what “believing in Jesus” means – and that involves keeping his teachings. See how simple that is?
Poppycock. Jesus makes clear that anyone who keeps his teachings loves him. It is a one to one set.
And so it becomes even more clear what “believing in Jesus” means.
Except perhaps for what Jesus said as I mentioned above. Again, anyone who has faith will do works. Again, this is a 1:1 set. Not everyone can perform the same works and that should not be a matter for boasting or judgement.
Yes, one more time: you don’t have to get circumsized to believe in Christ. Paul is clearly talking about the law of the Old Testament. James’s epistle specifically clarifies this passage – that Christians must still keep the new law of Love.
But to believe in him is to keep his teachings. It is like you are complaining he says in some places 2 + 2 and in other places 4. You don’t know what 4 means, but you don’t think it equals 2+2. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t. Yet, Jesus does say if you love him you will keep his commandments. That’s a good enough statement of 2+2=4 for me. You see how the problem comes down to the reader?
Grace is basically Paul’s word for luck, and his pep talk to the Gentiles is: even though y’all ain’t God’s Chosen People the Jews, God in his mercy has, lucky you, allowed you to be saved by your faith. (Paul considers faith keeping the Gospel).
Your other understandings are real stretches – I’m amazed they’ve caught on. As Paul said – a man hears want he wants to hear and disregards the rest. (Well, OK, Paul Simon.) Although I should mention:
Yes, and he was talking here to 11 guys whose bodies are long since dust. The meaning here is spiritual (or symbolic as you might say), but his message is not hard to unravel. As he says elsewhere: “I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.” And later he says “the Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life.”
I hope a little symbolism won’t warp your fragile little mind! 
These two verses imply to me that once we are safe in Jesus’ hands, we can’t be taken from them by any earthly action, even our own.
Even Judas, who comitted suicide after betraying Christ (two different versions of his death . . . one in which he hangs himself, and the other in which he falls headlong into a field, and his bowels gush out) is not condemned to hell by the Scriptures . . . it merely states that he went to his “own place.” Of course that is open to interpretation as well.
Thoughts?
“These two verses imply to me that once we are safe in Jesus’ hands, we can’t be taken from them by any earthly action, even our own”
They imply to me that no man has power to remove them, however jesus can and he probably would if you turn away from him.
I would also dissagree with the eternal damnation thing. As I interpreted hell eternal punishment is eternal death. Not eternal damnation.
The original position of the Catholic Church on suicide, (the “hard line” originally mentioned by delphica), was that suicide was one manifestation of the “Sin against the Holy Spirit” that is mentioned as the only sin that cannot be forgiven. The RCC position has been that despair cannot be forgiven–not because any sin is too heinous, but because the attitude of a despairing person closes a person in on themself and does not allow God’s healing forgiveness to break through their shell.
In this scenario, a person who closes himself off from God, choosing to deny the hope of Salvation that the Holy Spirit wishes to impart to him, cannot be forgiven because they have allowed their despair (literally: lack of hope) to dominate them. Suicide was looked upon as the ultimate act of despair.
(As an example, it is noted that both Peter and Judas betrayed Jesus (in different ways), but Peter opened his heart to Jesus and was forgiven while Judas committed suicide, denying that God could forgive him.)
Of course, other groups assign the “Sin against the Holy Spirit” to other acts. I won’t debate the issue; the “Sin” was apparently understood by the original audience, but no one at the time wrote down a commentary explaining what the Gospel author intended.
Today, the RCC looks on suicide as more likely a result of depression or of mental illness, thus mitigating the circumstances under which a suicide would be viewed. God does not damn people operating under “diminished capacity.”
jmullaney wrote:
Huh? Are you saying that there is not a single individual who has clothed the naked, fed the hungry, and given money to the poor, but is not an avowed Christian? Not one? Do some people love Jesus even if they’ve never heard of him?
Frankly, I don’t care what the Bible says about salvation since I don’t think the Bible is the word of God. I posted this only to point out the fact that Christians can’t agree on one of the most important issues in their entire religion. Your attempt to reconcile all the problems is weak indeed. May I ask you bluntly whether baptism is required for salvation or not? Infant baptism, or adult baptism? You’ll find Christians on all sides of this issue. You seem to think that baptism is not required. But check out these verses:
Acts 2:38
Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 2:41
So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls.
Acts 10:48
And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.
Romans 6:4
Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
Galatians 3:27
For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.
Ephesians 4:5
one Lord, one faith, one baptism,
1 Peter 3:21
Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you–not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience–through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
I’m sure you can explain away all of these verses, just like the pro-baptism’ers can explain away all of the verses that appear not to require baptism.
You say that ideas like predestination and universalism are “weakly supported” and you’re surprised that they caught on. Well, I think that Christianity is weakly supported, and I’m surprised that it caught on! But that’s another topic.
I suggest you go to http://www.tentmaker.org to learn more about universalism. Specifically, check out:
http://www.tentmaker.org/tracts/TheFateOfTheWicked.html
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/ScripturalProofs.html
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/QuestionsWithoutAnswers.html
You’ll find that universalism has tons of Biblical support, just like annihilationism, and eternal torment-ism.
If the Bible is so clear about who is saved and how, then why are there literally thousands of different Christian denominations? Is everybody except for you just deliberately distorting God’s word?
There are those who would ascribe that exact thought to jmullaney.