btw, I did exagerrate- the I Peter refs say that Christ has preached to those in prison & that the dead of that time have heard the Gospel- so I think it’s safe to infer that such evangelism continues to those who have died since.
I fully believe salvation only comes through trusting Jesus- but that human mortality does not totally close the opportunity to trust.
We LDS don’t have a problem with this issue because we believe those that have already died also get an opportunity to hear the Gospel message.
Thanks, BrightNShiny, I was just about to say that.
Sorry, Edlyn, but I fail to see how this relates to my OP. Could you elaborate?
It always amazes me how these things can be taken out of context. First, keep in mind that Jesus was a Jew and not a Christian. Paul or Saul was a Jew too who died a Jew. It was successive generations that became Christians and re-interpreted these teachings in light of their new rulers, the Romans. The New Testament was written well after Jesus’ time by various authors whose writings would be viewed by this new oppressive government.
Secondly, we all make it to heaven! We’re not kept out for some obscure reason or for a lack of “salvation”. God is everything and everywhere and if there’s a hell it’s right here on Earth. We’re made from God and to God we return.
“Jesus said, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one gets to the Father except through me.””
Notice he didn’t say no one gets to heaven. He also didn’t say pray to me. He was referring to his message and your connection to God. No one gets to God except through the way of truth and life would be a more accurate interpretation. Jesus never claimed to be the son of God or a demigod of any sort. He was a Jew and a rabbi and very much a human concerned with life here and not in some distant after life. His message was to make Earth into heaven now and not to wait for some reward after we’re dead.
If Jesus died for our sins then why do babies need to be baptized? Aren’t they already sin free? And isn’t “original sin” still sin and if he died for our sins doesn’t that include the original one?
Our souls aren’t like food that needs to be saved (in tupperware) or it goes bad. Saved from what? We all have a unique purpose on this Earth that only each one of us can fulfill. If we as mortals deem our deeds as good or bad it’s only our own judgment and God who is omnipotent has a far greater understanding of goodness and wickedness than any one of us. Good and bad are over simplistic labels when judging someone’s soul and not their human deeds.
There is no fire and brimstone awaiting those who don’t believe in Jesus. God is formless and so are our souls. Fire and brimstone would have no effect on a non-corporeal being. It’s just a metaphor. Just like there’s no one standing there with a pitchfork, horns and a pointy tale (right out of Dante’s Inferno) nor is God sitting on a throne with a white robe and a large white beard. These are the images of children who can’t conceive of a formless being.
So what happens to that poor kid who never heard of Jesus and dies? He goes to heaven. There’s no need for salvation because we all are reunited with God in death regardless of if you ever heard the name Jesus or not.
Yours is a pleasant interpretation of the scipture, MacMike, but it’s pretty directly in contravention with the majority of Christian thought on the issue. If it’s true that those who don’t hear the “good” news aren’t doomed for it, then that’s one less thing we have to hold against God, but the clergy of most religions who believe Jesus was the messiah say that salvation is only available to those who accept Jesus as their savior and that everlasting torment is the lot of all the rest of us.
–Cliffy
Well, according to the obviously inerrant theology of the Left Behind series of novels 
, when the Pre-Tribulation Rapture occurs, all children under the age of 8 will automatically get taken away to Heaven whether they’re Believers or not. (Something about not being old enough to be able to decide such a thing for themselves.)
Presumably, under such a theology, the same selection process applies before the Pre-Tribulation Rapture too. Children who die before they’re 8 years old will also be Saved and get to live forever in Heaven, even if they’re not Christian.
God is the God of us all and is not reserved to just one group or one small religion. Those that say their religion offers salvation are humans just as you and I and have no more claim to heaven or the dispensing of such salvation than anyone else. God made us all and loves everyone of us. You might punish your child if they transgress, but you certainly wouldn’t stop loving them or torment them for eternity… neither would God who is a better “parent” than any one. No one needs a savior for there’s nothing to be saved from (except maybe ourselves and our own ignorance). Jesus never claimed to be the messiah. People after his time attributed him as being such. If there is such a thing as being doomed or damned of what benefit would it be to us? Just as you want your child to do right what would be the point of punishing them indefinitely? You’d want them to learn from those mistakes and try again. I have to believe God is at least as smart as me and has already thought of this. It’s only mortal men here on Earth that perhaps haven’t. Trust in God and not in the words of men who twist those teachings to suit their own needs.
I know you’re saying this with a smile, but this is something that I find enormously disturbing. Seriously, if people believe that ignorance of God protects you from damnation, why would anyone deliberately set out to end that ignorance, and then claim they are trying to “save” people?
I don’t think there is an answer that would make me happy, but I’d definitely be willing to listen.
Julie
I’ll try to answer Julie, although it is only my attempt at understanding. First, I’ve never bought the arguement that only a missionary can bring God’s message to people. Tath if a missionary hasn’t come they haven’t heard God’s message, that God hasn’t spoken to them. That makes no sense to me. If God is everywhere and able to speak to people’s hearts then why wouldn’t he try to speak to people’s hearts wether or not there was a missionary there? I beleive peoples’ hearts are drawn to God seperate from any missionary, and if a missionary comes with truth then what God has already testified to their hearts will be confirmed. Anyone who rejects God’s message would’ve done so with or without the missionary, unless the missionary comes in arrogance or in any such attitude not from God, then they might actually turn some people off although that doesn’t mean they still can’t seek God and find him, perhaps better than the missionary. Using the flip side the missionary can have a positive role. We affect other people. Maybe that is what is unfair. How can we be accountable for our actions when so much of who we are and our decisions are influenced by other people. I have a hard time imagining how people can be so hateful at times, but I think part of that is that I have been such love in my life, not all the time, but I’ve had people that have been such good role models of humilty and kindness. If I have kindness it seems to me that it comes from the kindness I have been shown. That at times seems unfair to me, that I have had so much in my life when others have had so little and I’m not just talking about material things. I think a true missionary doesn’t try to pound something into someone from a pulpit but simply shows people a light tht draws them closer to God. That to me is the difference between heaven and hell. Not that one is full of brimstone, but that one is a place where one is seperated from God, from goodness and love. I couldn’t imagine anything worse. When we sin we distance ourselves from goodness, but I think God is constantly calling us back through people, through nature, through everything around us. One doesn’t have to know the exact semantics to hear that call.
You touch on a lot of issues, but this conversation will go completely out of control if I try to respond with questions to each one. So, I’m going to pick this one as the most relevant to the OP.
If God is everywhere, touching people’s hearts, why are there missionaries? A missionary (as you pointed out) could end up driving that heart-touched person away from God. It seems that there’s the potential for a bad outcome (driven away from God), and potential for a neutral outcome (still in touch with God), but no potential for a good outcome (bringing someone to God).
What am I missing?
Julie
What if you question one of his children’s finite wisdom?
“You dare question my son? To the pits of hell with you!”
Yeah, lotsa love there. :rolleyes:
Strange thing, my stereo keeps playing Helter Skelter and it’s not plugged in. :eek:
Hey Julie,
Glad you found it thought provoking. You would think the conservative crowd would have figured it out by now that they would have a better batting average if they would just let people go to their grave having never heard of Jesus or the Word. 
I generally use this spill as comedy, but I would like to hear from believers who have really thought this out on what they really think they have just done, in particular among conservative and moderates who believe in a literal Hell. Quite a few quote scripture saying they can’t say specifically who goes to Hell. Others will not mince words, and will flat out tell those that don’t believe that they are going straight to Hell to burn in eternity unless they have a change of venue. Nearly all don’t have any problem forming opinions on who they think are saved. Many believers often feel quite certain that the five year old boy who went to his grave having never heard of the Word would be saved. Also they don’t have any problem making proclamations that a certain number were saved of the thousands that the missionaries preached too, and obviously if they were saved, then the others were not, who heard and didn’t accept or believe. You rephrase the question, but still stay on mark:
Seriously, if people believe that ignorance of God protects you from damnation, why would anyone deliberately set out to end that ignorance, and then claim they are trying to “save” people?
Most of the fire and brimstone crowd I’ve talked to in my life say they are just doing what they are told in the Bible, by going out and preaching the gospel. They are not responsible for what happens to those that don’t believe. So, I‘ll be hoping we hear from the conservative or moderate crowd and they will address it.
**”The inspiration of the Bible depends upon the ignorance of the gentleman who reads it.”–Robert G. Ingersoll
“I have read it [the Bible] carefully. And if Bob Ingersoll isn’t in hell, God is a liar and the Bible isn’t worth the paper it is printed on.”**
JZ
oops,
“I have read it [the Bible] carefully. And if Bob Ingersoll isn’t in hell, God is a liar and the Bible isn’t worth the paper it is printed on.” --Billy Sunday
Forgot to attribute that last quote to Billy Sunday.
JZ
What about those who haven’t heard the message of Christ?
Yeah, why should they have all the luck?
According to an uncountable amount of well meaning Christians, I’m doomed.
It’s even in the very deepest pit of the hellfire for me: My mother was Catholic. Very much praticing, her priest in our house every day to say mass… I was already doomed as a child because I discussed many times with him … About the for me incredible unbelievable Jesus=God and Jesus = The Only Way and Jesus = The Salvation things. No innocence for me, no way out. Damnation was all over me since day 1 of my life (no baptism).
Have to leave. Time to pray.
Sorry dooming Christians, but I’m absolutely sure God listens when I pray, no matter what you may think or say.
Salaam. A.
Two responses from a non-Christian:
This presents a troubling paradox. I would argue that Christian doctrine needs some serious re-consideration to unravel it. I don’t know when this doctrine was finally formulated, I would guess by such people like Augustine and Aquinas. Given the philosophical and social changes that have occured since then, Christian doctrine is sorely in need of an overhaul.
The question is monotheistically myopic. It assumes there is only one god and it’s specifically the Christian god without acknowledging the beliefs and practices of the child’s own people.
Freyr, a response to your response:
What, exactly, do you think is myopic about that? The question under discussion is “What do Christians believe happens in such-and-such situation?” Obviously “what Christians believe” is going to include, well, Christianity.