Some questions for Christians (non-fundies)

Great Debates
21

1.) Do you believe that a belief in the divinity of Jesus is necessary for salvation?

No, although I do believe in His divinity.

2.) If the answer is yes, do you then believe that all non-Christians go to hell?

No such thing as a traditional hell of eternal torment.

3.) If the answer is no, then doesn’t that mean the crucifixion was meaningless?

No, the sacrifice was itself perfect and unconditional.

4.)Is it possible to follow the pure ethical teachings of Jesus without a belief in Christ as a saviour?

Yes, but the question begs the question.

22

Diogonese wrote:

No apology is necessary as no offense was taken. I just wanted to clarify for the sake of those who might take a misleading inference. You didn’t say or do anything wrong.

Yes.

The Bible is no more authoritative than the Qu’ran. And since contradictions do not exist, I don’t fret over them. There are even contradictions in the Bible itself. Quite many, in fact, especially given the popular notion held by many that it is the inerrant “word of God”.

But books are not the source of my knowledge; my epistemology is the Holy Spirit. It isn’t that I choose Jesus over Mohammed; rather, I choose “Be Perfect” as a moral imperative that is better than any other.

Not applicable. (Thank God! :D)

23

I know, hon…I think the difference, at least as my friend sees it, is that being a “fundie” is different than being a “fundamentalist”…and that being judgemental is the main difference between the two. Just in case that isn’t clear, he feels that “fundie” is a derogative term applied to the more legalistic and judgemental among the fundamentalist community. Fundamentalist being a flat statement of fact…ie, believing that the Bible is the literal and true word of God.

I don’t know, I guess it makes a lot of sense to me, but maybe your opinion differs.

24

There is a logical contradiction here. Either you believe that A is a necessary condition for salvation or you do not. B is just a rephrasing of A. If A is true, then B must be true. To hedge on the second question is begging the first question.

Let me put this another way:
Let us say that we are looking at a Canadian phone booth. We have been told that only Canadian quarters will work on the pay phone. A person approaches us and asks, “Does this machine only take Canadian quarters?”
We say “yes.”
The other person then says, “well I guess that a shilling won’t work then.”
We say, “that’s not for us to judge.”

If A is true then B is true. Don’t be wishy-washy. If B is not true then A is not true. I know that this is an uncomfortable point of Christian theology (at least fundamentalist theology) that’s why I asked it.

25

I am purposely answering these before reading Poly’s post, because on the chance that we might disagree, I want my answer to not be swayed by my respect for him.

1.) Do you believe that a belief in the divinity of Jesus is necessary for salvation?
I don’t know it to be requisite for salvation. However, I wonder how someone who has put their faith in Jesus for their salvation would come to that decision without believing that the fullness of God is present in Him in some way.

2.) If the answer is yes, do you then believe that all non-Christians go to hell?

My answer was a qualified no, but I’ll answer anyway: Fortunately, I don’t have to make that choice. What I know is that God is Just, so that no one will be able to say on That Day that they did not get a fair deal. I believe that people who never had the opportunity to know Jesus will be judged according to what they did know about God and how they responded to Him.

3.) If the answer is no, then doesn’t that mean the crucifixion was meaningless?

Not at all! The crucifixion and resurrection is the turning point of history. Christ offered Himself as a sacrifice for all of us, making our reconciliation with God possible. Whether that gift is accepted or rejected is the decision each individual must make.

4.)Is it possible to follow the pure ethical teachings of Jesus without a belief in Christ as a saviour?

It sure is. And there are plenty of other good ethical teachers you could follow as well. The key is less about what Jesus taught (not to diminish His teaching) than who He was and what He did. We are not saved by merely following his ethical example, we are saved by placing our faith in His saving power and grace, and living our lives in devotion to Him.

26

Not necessarily. They may not believe Hell exists. Perhaps non-believers simply cease to exist after death; going to neither heaven nor hell.

27

I see your point here. Perhaps I phrased my questions incorrectly. When I said “go to hell” I was really just referring (maybe a little flippantly) to any failure to recieve “salvation.”

28

One openly non-fundie here:

1.) Do you believe that a belief in the divinity of Jesus is necessary for salvation?

Not necessarily. My belief is that it is an important part, but it’s not 100% essential. I believe that at death all is revealed and if you’ve sinned/don’t believe, you still get what you might construe as a chance to get into heaven.

2.) If the answer is yes, do you then believe that all non-Christians go to hell?

The answer was no, so I believe this one is no as well.

3.) If the answer is no, then doesn’t that mean the crucifixion was meaningless?

No, I think it was a powerfully symbolic act. I also believe that certain people twist it to fit their agendas. Jesus was crucified to get rid of all sins, not just every other sin except for unbelief.

4.)Is it possible to follow the pure ethical teachings of Jesus without a belief in Christ as a saviour?

Yes.

I have follow-up questions to these based on the answers I get but I’m not trying to set any logical traps here, I’m genuinely interested in your answers. **
[/QUOTE]

Well even if you did have traps, these are just my current opinions and they are open to change.

29

Forgive me for merely skimming the preceding posts (sorry poly).

I believe this,
Those who are offered the chance at salvation and reject it are the ones who should worry.
For me, I have chosen to believe that Christ died for our sins so that we may be saved.
If you truely believe in some other method of salvation then I shan`t judge you.

To answer the OP`s questions

  1. No
  3. No
  4. of course

To explain the answer in q3.

God sent his only Son to die on the cross so that the believers can be saved. Those who believe in him WILL be saved.

Those who don`t believe are judged by God and MAY be saved.

I find it hard to believe that God creates life and then would allow a technicallity to damn that life to an eternity of pain.

I am still stuggling with the whole concept of who is saved and who isn`t. I am comfortable with my position and others who hold my beliefs but I have not reached a definitive position regarding others.

Upon Preview I see a parrallel with Meatros.

30

I believe Jesus was killed because of his radical teachings. He was viewed as a potential problem by the Roman rulers. He was from a known hotbed of dissidents and he was dealt with accordingly. I don’t believe his death has any bearing on salvation.

I don’t believe there is a hell in the traditional “Lake of Fire” sense. I also don’t believe in heaven. Too much of traditional Christianity is focused on the afterlife. We don’t know if there really is an afterlife, so we must focus on this life. Jesus taught us about how to live this life.

Because this life is all we are sure of, I lean towards a more process theology or panentheism. Also, subsequently, Jesus’ teachings on how to live this life are the most important part of the Scriptures for me. The works of the Apostles are interesting accounts of how these men thought about Jesus and his teachings. However, they are no more divine, in my estimation, than the works of Paul Tillich, Charles Hartshorne, Rev. John Shelby Spong or Marcus Borg (to name a few of my influences). I approach the orthodox teachings of the church with skepticism and rationality. I also look for wisdom in the teachings of the Buddha, Lao Tzu, Walt Whitman, Thich Nhat Hanh and Martin Luther King Jr.

I’ll go even farther and say that and that I’m not convinced that Jesus was anymore God than any of the rest of us. But that can conversely mean that God is part of all of us and that, like Jesus and Buddha, we all have the potential to be divine. I, for one, think that if Jesus was human and not God Incarnate, it makes his story even more powerful. If he was a man who truly served God (defined as Love) as we all strive to do, then he one of the best examples we have. And he was courageous.

Hell is separation from God, in this life. The Kingdom of God is our communion with God in this life. That’s all we have. That is enough. Of course, most people wouldn’t consider me a Christian.

31

Well, I think we have already established the fact that I shouldn’t have posted to this thread ANYWAY, since I am a fundamentalist. However, I will try to explain what I believe.
quote:

Q.) Do you believe that a belief in the divinity of Jesus is necessary for salvation?

A.) (Scotticher): Yes.

Q.) If the answer is yes, do you then believe that all non-Christians go to hell?

A.) (Scotticher): Not for me to judge, THANK THE GOOD GOD…He judges, I just do the best I can to express His love and present his message. Not very well, according to some.

I believe in the divinity of Christ. I don’t see how the sacrifice of the crucifixion and the miracle of the resurrection have any meaning if Jesus was just a REALLY good man. LOTS of REALLY GOOD people have died for their beliefs. Jesus was God and came to live as a man so He could die for our sins and as expiation for our sins…only a perfect God could DO that, according to the Scripture. Only a person without sin could DO this and have it be the perfect sacrifice. Otherwise, it would just have been a case of a human martyr, and besides which…Jesus was either the Son of God, or he WASN’T a “really good person”…according to the Scriptures, He SAID he was the Son of God, so if He WASN’T, he was a liar and a phoney and quite probably crazy. At the very least, he had delusions of Divinity if He WASN’T who He said He was.

So now on to the other question. I see that you might be justified in saying that I was being “wishy-washy.” The thing is, I DO believe that you have to accept Christ’s sacrifice in order to gain eternal life. I believe that you DO have to love God and accept Christ in order to gain salvation.

BUT…it is NOT MY PLACE to judge whether or not you or anyone else has done so. I am not privy to God’s mind, and I don’t KNOW what He considers acceptible in terms of “loving” Him or “accepting” Christ’s sacrifice. I know what the Bible says, but the Bible has been translated from languages I don’t know, so I am not going to state with any certainty that what MY Bible says is completely and totally “word perfect…” I am of the opinion that it mostly IS fairly accurate, but in the final analysis, *I am not God, so I can’t make any judgement as to whether or not YOU have fulfilled God’s “requirements” in terms of YOUR salvation. *

I really only have the right to judge my OWN relationship with God. And I have, and do. It is, to me, so VERY clear that I am not qualified to judge anyone else’s relationship with God. When I have lived a perfect life, I will get back to you…OOPS, TOO LATE!

I realize that this might STILL sound wishy-washy to you. Sobeit. It is what I believe, and how I feel.

32

Well, I lost power for several hours the first time I tried to write this. The original was far more brilliant.

Somewhere in between moderate and conservative… so I might be throwing your curve-

I tend to believe yes

I trust that God knows what He’s doing. And as I’m not Him, I’m not the one to say who does and does not.

I think of those as independent from each other. It is possible to believe that the sacrifice was necessary without thinking that belief in the sacrifice is necessary for salvation.

Due to my belief that people aren’t perfect, I tend to think that it’s not all that possible to follow the ethical teachings with or without a belief in Christ as savior. However I think someone who doesn’t believe can come just as close as someone who does believe (however, I still think that it might be easier for the person who does believe and has help)

33

It’s more like -
a person approaches and says “Does this machine only take Canadian quarters?”
I say “I think so.”
The other person then says, “well I guess that a shilling won’t work then.”
I answer “I don’t know, I’ve never tried a shilling. However, I’m sure that Canadian quarters will work.”

34

Izzy and Diogenes, I don’t really have a good answer to that question. I can only say what I am obliged to do (and that first post of mine really should have been done in first person, not as a generalization, a fault I should have thought of – one of my great faults is a tendency to pontificate :(). Further, I’d say it’s incumbent on me to spread the Good News and that it’s likely incumbent on those who hear it (fairly – I can grant that people might be put off by a poor or unbalanced expression of it) to respond to it in grateful acknowledgement of God’s love for them. (And yes, I can respect the individual who does not himself see adequate evidence to convince him that there is such a god.)

Knowing God’s providential love as I do, I’m quite willing to leave in His hands the question of what somebody else in a quite different situation who has not been called as I have is supposed to do when and where he is and with what information he may have or not have. To quote Amarinth, I have Canadian quarters, so I’m supposed to use them. I don’t have a clue whether shillings will work – but there seems to be some evidence that somebody one can take as an authority says they won’t. But I’ll be glad to give some of my Canadian quarters to anybody who needs them. :slight_smile:

Miracles are signs of God’s love and providential caring for people, not “signs and wonders” of a magical nature. With all the miracles described in the Gospel According to John, the author never once uses the word “miracle,” preferring “sign” in its place. Ergo, I have no particular need to affirm any given “miracle story,” from the Christian tradition or otherwise.

Except to note that I have been the subject of a miracle (in John’s and my sense) that did not violate the laws of science three times in my life, the most recent this past week and right here on this board.

As for the founders and leaders of other religions, the best answer I can give is that they’re in much the same boat as those of the Christian tradition – some were actually influenced by God – the God I believe in – and may not have gotten their facts completely straight; some were misled or misled themselves; some were demagogues using religion for power; some were a combination of all these; and other possibilities allowing for every possibility of wisdom and foolishness available to human beings.

I said once that Mohammed got one thing right, and it’s the key to Islam – God is one. It’s profoundly and tragically ironic that much of the Middle East conflict is between two people whose focal proclamations are nigh on to identical: the Shema and the classic Islamic credo (Ijmah? Anybody who can supply the proper term) “there is no god but god, and Mohammed is his prophet.”

IMHO, the Bible and the Koran were inspired by God and written by fallible human beings who may have not gotten all of their ducks lined up correctly. For obvious reasons, I give more credence to much of the Bible than to the Koran.

I leave the question of the probability and possibility of contra-natural-law miracles firmly in the hands of those who care to discuss them. There are enough miracles happening in the world on a regular basis that do not violate such laws to satisfy my need for signs and faith strengtheners. Many such miracle accounts are legendary embroidery on the facts, some are misassumptions of accurate stories. (Look up the feeding of the 5,000 – there is not one word in that account that says overtly that Jesus miraculously transformed the five loaves and two fishes into a picnic dinner for a massive crowd with everyone having their full and ten baskets of leftovers. What is said is that He accepted the boy’s contribution of them, publicly gave thanks for them, and distributed them. It’s equally as accurate an assumption, given the actual accounts, that the boy’s and His actions noodged the folks who had held out a bit of food for themselves into generosity and willingness to share what they’d brought with strangers. (And after this past week’s experience, I find that explanation strangly attractive! :))

35

Once again, I have no quibble with either Libertarian or Homebrew. Both of them have answered my questions in a manner which seems logically consistent, thoughtful and inclusive. (although they are not answers which would be approved of by the Jerry Falwells of the world. :wink: )

Some people, though, such as Scotticher, Whuckfistle, skammer and to a lesser degree Poly still seem to be equivocating (I think) on the question of whether salvation can be attained without accepting Christ. Since “I don’t know” is a fair answer, and not an assailable one, let me ask this hypothetical:

If it can be shown to you, either through natural means or otherwise, that accepting Christ as one’s Saviour is indeed an absolute prerequisite for salvation, (I’ll limit this only to people who have had the opportunity to make that choice. We can exclude virtuous people who have never heard of Jesus, babies, the mentally handicapped, etc.) would this still be an acceptable God for you? Could you love or show devotion to a God who would condemn Gandhi to hell, but allow the Son of Sam into Heaven?

Six million non-Christians were murdered in Nazi death camps. These were six million people (excluding the children) who knew all about Christianity, yet chose to reject Christ as their Saviour. Is there anyway at all that a loving, compassionate God would deliberately withhold salvation from these people based simply on a doctrinal technicality?

This is the major sticking point to Christianity to me. I refuse to accept or respect a deity who values dogma more than virtue.

36

Scripture makes it quite clear that one must accept Christ in order to attain salvation – but then one gets into the problem of a putatively just and merciful God condemning people for the heinous sin of dying before the Gospel was brought to them, or worse, being non-Jews living before the Crucifixion, plus the issue of babies and small children who die before they can possibly act to accept Christ. So even the most staunch of Bibliocentric believers start looking for loopholes, so to speak – consider Jersey Diamond’s post in another religion thread about what happens to babies when they die for a good example of this (and I am in no way criticizing what she says – it’s my firm belief that God is not the sort of evil tyrant who would damn a baby for dying before it was old enough to believe; His grace is sufficient for them, by itself).

I don’t feel I’m equivocating – if you have been presented the Gospel in its fullness, then you have a choice to make of whether to accept it or not. All I’m doing is stating that the God in whom I believe is sufficiently merciful to have “made room” in His Plan for the salvation of those who just plain didn’t get the message, for one reason or another. I will guarantee there was some teenager killed in Afghanistan in the past year who never heard of Jesus Christ, much less had any evidence before him on which to make an informed choice to believe in Him or not. And I believe God has adequately provided for him and all the others like him – and I have not a clue what or how, and am content to leave that bit of metaphysics in His capable hands.

37

With all due respect, Poly, you still haven’t addressed the issue of those who do know about Jesus, and yet still choose to reject him. Is it possible to consciously and deliberately reject Christ as Saviour and still be saved?

38

Ultimately and perpetually? No.

At a given point in time? Absolutely. Examples abound, starting with Paul.

The problem is that you’re analyzing questions relative to eternity from the perspective of a single point in time. Neither you nor I nor anyone else knows what you or I or anyone else will think about the issue twenty years from now.

But, if I may make a point here that I have already made elsewhere on the board recently, a focus on one’s own individual salvation is trying to do it yourself – and what we’re told to do is to have faith in God – believe in Him, not in the sense of giving intellectual assent to His existence, but rather with the radical idea of placing one’s trust in His goodness.

My job is not to make sure that I’m “saved” in some metaphysical system – it’s to trust in Him and, doing so and drawing strength for the task from His Spirit, to do the work He has called me to do in His Name.

39

I’m talking about people who die rejecting Christ but who live exemplary lives otherwise (Gandhi, Einstein, Schweitzer, Mohammed, the Dalai Lama). Does God really care what religion they are? What about the Jews who were murdered in the holocaust? Are they unworthy of salvation?

This is what troubles me the most about doctrinal Christianity, the insistence on an exclusivity of spiritual revelation. I don’t see how this can be reconciled with a compassionate (and rational) God.

Libertarian, it seems to me has been able to transcend this notion of dogmatic exclusivity without surrendering the specificity of a Christian life and outlook. What do you think of his answers to my questions on these issues?

BTW, Lib, are you familiar with the life and teachings of a nineteenth century Bengali mystic named Ramakrishna? A lot of what you say reminds me of his teachings.

40

Lots of good questions, and lots of good answers.

So, I will just muddle things up with a lot of personal observations.

I know and love a lot of people who are just not smart enough to declare, or even understand that Jesus Christ died for their sins. I know some that are not even aware of the concept of God, or salvation. It is simply beyond their understanding. They have no theology, nor any philosophy. But among them there are some who are as good, and kind, and loving as any person I have ever met. Not all of them, by the way, but a few. One in particular is as much a saint as any person I have ever met.

So, I think about divine love. I think about a love so great and so all encompassing that it could be the love of God. I am able to think about such things. Christ is this being, who is born to bring this love to man, in the world of men, by the works of a man. Could this man, this embodiment of divine love, abandon, or worse, punish this saintly child of His, because he cannot understand? I think not.

God did what none of us think a man can do. He lived as a man, and did not sin. He died as only a few men must die, and did not hate those who killed him. He did it because we needed it. Am I obliged to follow His example? Yes. I am obliged to love, as I am loved. I am obliged to be as kind, and good, and loving a man as ever I can be. What obliges me?

I sputter. I pause, I mumble. What alternative is there? Should I hate? Should I place my own self above my brother? Is it so hard to see that love is just the obvious thing to choose? Common sense obliges me; and common decency obliges me; and an uncommon grace that is given to me obliges me. I am worthy of love, but I am loved, even unworthy as I am. My spirit flows over with the love God pours into me. Shall I then spit upon some other child of God, because He has walked a path I have not walked upon? What obliges me is that God has loved, and has created love, and has created me so that I too can love. I am obliged because I am. I live. I shall die. And either I shall give to God’s own children the love that I can, or I shall never know God. And when I die, that part of me that has come to know God will go on. The rest will rot.

It isn’t punishment for not attending the right church. It is the inescapable consequence of entropy. But the flesh does not bind the spirit, and the act of love itself is the means to salvation. For God is in us, as we love. And Christ is God, in man, come to earth, to show us His love. And by His love, we become immortal in our spirit. Without it, we perish.

And those who never said His name will answer, “But Lord, we did not know you.” But they did. They just did not know His name. Or, perhaps it is I who does not know the right name. It doesn’t matter. It’s not about the name. It is about giving your spirit over to love, and giving your love to all God’s children.

And if you decide that Heaven is not to your liking, because Jesus let sinners in there, and Mormans, and Buddhists, and IRS agents, and Gay Jewish Lawyers, and lots of other folks who are no where near as wonderful as you and I, then I think He will let you stay out of Heaven, if that is what you choose. I think he will weep, at the loss of your soul. And I think ten thousand angels will weep with Him. And me too.

But I also think that if you never believed in Him, and did not read the Bible, and never went to Church, and walked across the street to avoid Baptists with Bibles in their hands, that it will still happen that He will come to you. And if you did love His children, while you lived upon this earth, then He will say, “Yes, I know you. You fed me, when I was hungry. You gave me water, when I was thirsty. You came and visited me, in jail.” Then I think you will see Him, and know, that you did know Him.

And me and the Angels will be doing a happy dance. And some of the greatest theologians of all time will explain to all the hosts of Heaven exactly how this miracle is reconciled with scripture. I know some of them will be there.

Tris

“And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” ~ 1 Corinthians 13:13 ~