Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

My personal feeling in that regard is this: if anyone is going to presume to speak on God's behalf, they must meet one of the following criteria:
1. Be God himself.
2. Be one of his divinely appointed representatives (i.e., a prophet or apostle).
3. Know what God himself or his divinely appointed apostles have had to say on a particular subject.

As a called and ordained servant of God's Word, there is a certain extent that I do fit the 2nd category. And my theological training insures that I do fit the 3rd.

Of course, why would an atheist care whether we are saved by good works or grace alone, anyway? An atheist wouldn't recognize salvation as such anyway.

_________________

Good point. But as I said, I was just being a jerk.

_________________
So, so you think you can tell Heaven from Hell, blue skies from pain. Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail? A smile from a veil? Do you think you can tell?

So, what, all Jews, Buddists, Muslims, and Hindu's are going to Hell?

Greg: what do you think "Christ Alone" means?

_________________

It's a loaded question, but I'll bite.
Yes. Pretty much. Unless they accept Christ, in which case they wouldn't be very good Jews, Hindus or Muslims.

That's what I believe, anyway.

Before some self-righteous person goes off on me about being close-minded, I would like to remind them that it is as much my right to believe this as it is their right to criticize me for it.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Not all people are as mindless as sheep, and even not all sheep return to the flock ONLY when a shepherd steers them in that direction. In fact, considering the nature of herd animals, I'd say that sheep have been adept at more or less staying with their own flock without the interference of people for some time before we stopped being nomadic, so my second point there relies on more than just random chance of location and movement.

Moreover, in regards to salvation, there is still the issue of cultures and peoples on this planet who, due to lack of contact with much of the world outside their own small communities, never even HEAR of Christianity, let alone are given the chance to convert and be "saved." And yes, I realize that the Bible calls people to witness, and people go overseas all the time to do just that, but that doesn't mean that every last person has yet heard of Christianity. When THEY die, what becomes of them, in the eyes of Christianity?

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

So did the people before Christ not attain salvation?

_________________

Sorry, I just need to stay away from this forum. I find it hard to accept other beliefs, and I'm ignorant of details.

That has always been a tough question, PMG. On one hand, I don't think we Christians are at liberty to simply dismiss the need to bring them the Word, but at the same time, it does not seem right that God would not save them by some other means when the Word is not available to them.

But there might be some glimmer of hope found in THIS PASSAGE in Acts. Focus on this particular verse from that passage:


A couple of things to understand, though:
1. God forgives ignorance for a time. That time is not unlimited.
2. A question remains about whether he counts from the time the command goes forth or at the time it is delivered.
3. Even if God does forgive their ignorance, that forgiveness only comes on account of Christ's sacrifice. So even if he forgives them apart from faith as we know it, it can only be done because Christ accomplished redemption for them. So basically, if that is the case, salvation is still by God's grace (that is, forgiveness and mercy).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEWY:

My understanding is that, while the Patriarchs lived before the actual event, the promises of redemption had already been given to them. Abraham, for example, was told that his offspring would cause all nations to be blessed. His call to sacrifice Isaac (which was stopped and replaced by a ram) in itself was a foreshadowing of the Father sacrificing his own Son for the sins of the world.

The point is, while they did not have complete knowledge of what God was going to do, they did have the promises that God was going to accomplish it for them, and they trusted him. "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him as righteousness."

But what they looked forward to, Christ did accomplish for them. So even though they lived before Jesus' time, his sacrifice "retroactively" covered their sins as well.


Ah, but there actually are sects of Judaism that do accept Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God. Cobalt might say they weren't good Jews, but I wouldn't.

_________________

Re: works and grace, my stance is and always has been that we cannot be saved on our own. We require the saving grace of Jesus Christ to be saved from sin and death.

That said, God does require of us our hearts and good works. It's a 2 part deal.

Again, we CANNOT do it by ourselves, but God can't save someone who doesn't want to be saved.

And about



I believe everyone who lives, has lived, and will live on the earth will have the chance to accept Christ as their Savior. They will have the opportunity to learn the principles of the gospel of Christ and accept it as they wish.

There is no sense in damning someone who didn't do God's will out of 100% complete ignorance.

_________________

Oh, I don't deny that. I just deny that he requires it FOR US TO BE SAVED. There's simply too much in Scripture that says that good works cannot and do not contribute to our salvation.


Says who?

Oh, I do concur that God does not force people to trust him, but the last time I checked, he was still God. Therefore, I cannot see any reason why he couldn't save someone like that if he wanted to.

_________________

How about this?

God could if He wanted to, but He doesn't, so He won't.

God's gift of freedom to everyone one of us is probably the biggest gift of all. He'll never take that from us.

_________________

first of all, there aren't "sects of Judaism that do accept Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God." there are organizations run by Christians who take advantage of the ignorance of some Jews, who don't realize that it's impossible that Jesus was the messiah, and who also don't realize that belief in Jesus as the messiah is completely in contradiction with Judaism.

in point of fact, there are far more Jews who believe that the late Lubavicher Rebbe is the messiah than those who believe that Jesus is, and even they come pretty close to being apostates despite being otherwise completely Jewishly observant.

by the way, Didymus, you don't get to decide who's a "good Jew" and who isn't. believing in Jesus is pretty much the #1 most blatant example of being a bad Jew.

So you are constantly saying. They (these Jewish organizations that believe in Jesus) would disagree with you. But I suppose I should take your word over theirs.


Again, so you say.

But in response, I will answer with the words of a man who was himself a devout Jew and a devout Christian.



Once again, Cobalt, thank you for your opinions. I will give them due consideration.

_________________

yeah, i'm sure you will.

the thing is, saying that one can be a good Jew and yet believe in Jesus is like saying that you can be a good Christian and yet believe that Mohammed was God's final and greatest prophet. it's like, dude, if you believe that, you're a Muslim, not a Christian. the two contradict each other, you can't be both. can you be a good Christian without believing in Jesus?

Can you honestly tell me that you KNOW for a FACT that EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON THIS PLANET has heard of Christianity and will EVER hear of it in their entire lifetime? If some very remote tribe in Africa is never approached with it, how are they supposed to be "saved" by converting to a religion they've never even heard of?!

Also, for the "has lived" part of your statement--that's even more baloney than talking about currently living people, because 1) people were around a HECK of a lot longer than Christianity. What about all those people living in B.C. times, huh? And 2) even when Christianity was getting started, there were STILL people dotted all around the earth who never heard of it while the movement was spreading. When Christianity was slowly fighting to gain recognition by Rome, there were still plenty of civilizations on the other side of the planet in the Americas. How can you just sit there and claim that EVERYONE who has ever lived had a chance to hear about Christianity?!

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

I'm sorry, I should have been more clear.

I believe our existence is not confined to our lives here on Earth. After we die, our spirits live on and go to a place known as the Spirit World. There, we are ourselves. All of our knowledge and passions and habits are with us.

And there, everyone has the chance to accept or reject Jesus. This way, everyone, even those who had no chance to hear of the Gospel while alive, will be given the knowledge necessary to make a choice.

_________________

What about the parts in the Bible that obviously point out that those who die without believing in Jesus will go to hell? Like the parable Jesus told about the rich man and the beggar?

But back to good works, I agree with you Didymus; good works are not what saves us, but good works are a product of our salvation; good works kind of show that we are saved, if that makes any sense.

_________________

I have to admit I've never understood this idea. Let's see... I could be a really, really great guy who's nice to everybody and everything, never does what God would consider a sin, yadda yadda, but in addition consider that I frankly don't have a lot of evidence to go on when it comes to fully accepting Jesus as the Son of God, and I think my beliefs are quite reasonable considering the circumstances, etc., etc.... so I get cast into the eternal fire. Um, OK. I've said before, if that's the way he's going to be about it, I wouldn't want to worship him anyway. I know that religious people are going to say I'm in no position to judge God, but I don't really believe that either. If God did something crazy like go on a mass-murdering spree just 'cause his waffles were two degrees cold that morning, I think I'd have every right to be contemptuous of him. Not that he does that, of course... I'm just saying that I don't think that being God gives you some special judgement immunity. Maybe if you believe God is perfect, but then, perfect by whose standards? God's? Why, I'm perfect by my own standards too!

Sigh. I'm sure every single thing I've said has been said and argued about here before. Still, that's how I feel about it.

- Kef

_________________
404 sig not found

Link?

_________________

Careful about that one, Stupendous. Because from the context of the passage, it is clear that the rich man was condemned, not for never hearing the Gospel, but because he was a greedy miser who cared more about his own wealth than he did about the life and welfare of that beggar. It's a clear case where the Law condemns, and in this case, it condemns his greed and his lack of compassion.


Ah, but that's the problem. What person on this planet has never done anything wrong in his life? Only one I can think of, and he was God Incarnate. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God."

But what about the first couple of Commandments?

"I am the Lord your God. You shall have no other gods."

"You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain."

(Incidentally, modern translations that use the phrase "misuse God's name" are not capturing the full aspect of the Hebrew language here. To take the name in vain means to treat it as something useless. The Sacred Name YHWH was given to God's people so that they might call upon him in every need, in prayer, praise, and thanksgiving. Failure to call upon that name is just as bad as cursing it or using it to deceive).

"Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy."

These three commands essentially tell us that, while doing good and being upright citizens within our communities is important, what is far more important for us is our disposition toward God (or, more precisely, our acceptance of our place as his creatures, subjects of his kingdom, and his dear children).

Or what about the one Commandment that Jesus himself said was THE most important: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength" (Mark 12:30).

So, considering these commands - all of which tell us that God expects us to trust, serve, and obey him - if someone does not do these things, then how can they claim to be without sin?

_________________

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+16:19-31&version=31;
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2018:8,9;&version=50;

_________________

the thing is, the New Testament is full of instances of Jesus committing sins -- as he was, after all, a Jewish man and subject to Torah law -- and the only way that you can say he was absolutely sinless is by saying "well, obviously that law was negated by his coming so he wasn't really sinning after all" which you must admit is completely circular reasoning.



non-Jews aren't required to keep these commandments, though. never were. they were given to the Israelites at Mount Sinai exclusively.

Yeah, I guess I didn't make that clear. I was just pointing out an example of hell being spoken about, not necessarily the cause of the man going there.

What instances? Where does Jesus ever sin?

_________________

The sin of Adam is in all people, Cobalt. There.

Now, I believe that good works have nothing to do with salvation. I believe that murderers, rapists, and others who have committed horrible crimes can go to heaven if they have been saved by God.

_________________

That's funny, after years of studying the New Testament, I don't remember a single instance of him disobeying a single command. Can you elaborate on this?

If you're referring to the healing, you might note that Jesus himself offered a reason why it was entirely appropriate for him to heal on the Sabbath, namely because it was an act of redemption.



In the Torah, the Sabbath is intimately connected both with creation and redemption (i.e., God freeing his people). Therefore, it is highly appropriate that he would heal on the Sabbath to show God's redemptive power.

And furthermore, the prohibitions regarding the Sabbath were of hard labor. And if you want to be technical, exactly what was "hard labor" about Jesus healing? All he did was touch somebody, something I hardly consider to be "hard labor" to start with.

But the most important reason is that He Himself is Lord of the Sabbath (that is to say, he is the YHWH to whom the Sabbath belongs anyway), and demonstrates that by healing right in the very synagogue where YHWH's people are gathered for prayer.

So, do you have any other instances of "sins" you claim Jesus committed?


Study the entire Old Testament sometime. You might find it interesting that, throughout the historical writings and the prophets, God always expressed his will that ALL nations worship him. So while the Torah was given specifically to the Hebrew people, the intent was that they would share this teaching with other peoples. It was, in fact, a failure on their part that they did not do so.

But even if in the Torah they were only commanded to the Hebrew people (a point that I do not concede), they are still commanded in the New Testament.

Cobalt, I know you're an Orthodox Jew. But I really don't care if you are. I am a Christian, one who is well-versed in both the Old and New Testaments. By now, you should already know that, not only are you not going to convince me that I'm wrong, but I do already have answers for all of your challenges. So let me ask you this: why do you keep doing this?

_________________

first of all, it's not true at all that the prohibitions regarding the Sabbath were of hard labour. there are 39 categories of "work" that are prohibited, and most of them do not qualify as hard labour at all -- one of them, for example, is erasing letters from paper. hardly back-breaking.

the method of Jesus's healing is irrelevant. if it was not a matter of life and death, it should have been left until after the end of the Sabbath. Jesus can offer as many justifications for breaking the law as he wants, but it's the same as anyone justifying breaking the law. everyone thinks it's okay when THEY do something wrong, everyone has their own reasons. doesn't make them right.



sure. he also violated the Sabbath by picking grain, and incited others to do the same. so not only sinning, but enticing others to sin, which is pretty serious. he dismissed the observance of the dietary requirements, which as a Jew he was obligated to keep. he violated the commandment of honouring one's parents by dissing his mother in front of his disciples, and he also encouraged people to "hate" their parents and said that he would set parents against their children and vice versa. he disregarded the authority of the Rabbis, whom God specifically stated in the Torah people must respect and obey; he verbally and physically attacked people; he destroyed property that did not belong to him, not to mention killing a poor innocent a fig tree (destroying fruit trees is explicitly forbidden). he just was not a very good Jew. he sinned all the time, the gospels aren't even afraid of documenting it.



it's the knowledge of God that the Jewish people are supposed to share with the world, not the laws. only the 7 Laws of Noah are incumbent upon all humanity. why are you simultaneously insisting that everyone in the world has to follow the laws, while also saying that the laws aren't in effect anymore anyway? it makes no sense.



because i want the other people reading this forum to realize that there are alternatives to Christianity, ones that don't require you believe six impossible things every day before breakfast in order to be "saved" or whatever. that Jesus is not the only way, despite your insistence that he is. i'm not trying to change your mind, i'm just trying to undo any damage you might be doing just think of it as the fairness doctrine in action. also, i just really enjoy debating stuff. it's a hobby of mine.

I'd still like a response to this post (there was more in the post than that; go back and look at it if you need to). I know Didymus responded to this point before some months (years?) ago, but I forgot what the answer was and have no idea how to search for it, so...

- Kef

_________________
404 sig not found

Actually, Kef, I offered a response to this earlier today, I'm pretty sure.

http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?p=606207#606207

_________________

(a)I know there are alternatives, the fact is, I don't believe any of them are effective. Also, what six impossible things? The only way I believe to be saved is for God to reveal to you that you are lost and for you to repent.

(b)I believe he is.

(c)What damage? Well what if I said I think you're making damage, well I don't, because you aren't.

(d)Don't you mean arguing?... Joking!:mrgreen:

Seriously, chill, and capitalize your sentences. I enjoy your opinions, but they come on a little strong to me.

_________________