FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-10-2002, 12:29 PM   #11
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 6,261
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by ex-preacher:
<strong>
Most Christians would question the premise that Xty teaches salvation by grace alone.
The teachings of Jesus certainly do not include this concept - he repeatedly taught the importance of works (read the Sermon on the Mount).</strong>
Importance of works does not infer salvation through works.

Quote:
<strong>Christians also disagree, sometimes violently, about what exactly Paul taught on this subject. The overwhelming majority of Christians are not Calvinists. At best, I think you can say that Christians teach salvation based on the sacrifice of Jesus. This is not a unique concept, as Judaism and many religions contemporary with Xty taught sacrifice-based redemption.</strong>
First, it would be useless to refer to some christian denominations teaching works+grace. The person I was arguing with seriously believes that all such ideas are put into the heads of people by Satan, and these other denominations are perverting God's word. Second, I would say that in sacrificial traditions it is usually the people doing the sacrifice instead of God/Jesus.

Quote:
Further, even if someone could show Xty alone taught salvation by grace, totally apart from works, this may just prove its absurdity. Pure Calvinism is utterly devoid of justice and reason.
True.
Jayjay is offline  
Old 04-10-2002, 12:57 PM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Indianapolis area
Posts: 3,468
Question

Out of curiosity, Jayjay, why does your friend think that this one (supposedly) unique doctrine makes Xianity more likely to be true? What standard of religious truth mandates that salvation by grace is a property of true religions?
Pomp is offline  
Old 04-11-2002, 04:39 AM   #13
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Winter Park, Fl USA
Posts: 411
Post

The belief that suicide would land them on a UFO trailing the Hale-Bopp comet was a pretty "unique" belief, but I don't see too many people arguing that the uniqueness of this belief indicates that the Heaven's Gate believers were right.

Uniqueness seems to be no indication of truth unless it's your religion and you're desparately grasping at straws in an attempt to defend it.
Echo is offline  
Old 04-11-2002, 06:56 AM   #14
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: St Louis area
Posts: 3,458
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Echo:
<strong>The belief that suicide would land them on a UFO trailing the Hale-Bopp comet was a pretty "unique" belief, but I don't see too many people arguing that the uniqueness of this belief indicates that the Heaven's Gate believers were right.

Uniqueness seems to be no indication of truth unless it's your religion and you're desparately grasping at straws in an attempt to defend it.</strong>
The cargo cults of the South Pacific islands were also pretty unique as well.
MortalWombat is offline  
Old 04-11-2002, 07:30 AM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 6,261
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Pompous Bastard:
<strong>Out of curiosity, Jayjay, why does your friend think that this one (supposedly) unique doctrine makes Xianity more likely to be true? What standard of religious truth mandates that salvation by grace is a property of true religions?</strong>
I am not in a position to corner her and demand answers, but since I am talking about a biblical literalist who shrugs off pretty much everything with a bible verse, my guess is that she believes the uniqueness argument because of the uncanny (...sarcasm...) coincidence that it happens to be exactly what she believes anyway.

Quote:
Uniqueness seems to be no indication of truth unless it's your religion and you're desparately grasping at straws in an attempt to defend it.
What if you are grasping at straws? The original argument was strictly about the uniqueness of one particular issue, i.e. salvation. If one makes a generalization to uniqueness in general (for example the cargo cults or Heaven's Gatists), then there's already a slight deviation in topic. And for a fundamentalist, out of mind is out of sight.
Jayjay is offline  
Old 04-15-2002, 11:45 AM   #16
TheDiddleyMan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

I would like to mention that salvation by grace through faith alone is not necessarily a Christian idea. I'm surprised that a Christian would say it is only a Christian idea, because many *Christians* argue that Judaism believed it as well. I don't want to open the whole argument over whether or not salvation was by works or grace in Old Testament times (which is a real can of worms in christian discussion groups), but the fact of the matter is that many christians, I would say most, would argue that Old Testament believers would say they were saved by grace. There are many old testament statements that would seem to agree, e.g. Genesis 15 where it says "Abraham believed and it was credited to him as righteousness." Paul quotes this in Romans 4 to show that abraham's justification - being right in the eyes of God, although not perfect in actuality - came through faith, before deeds of the law:

1What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? 2If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about--but not before God. 3What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."[1]
4Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. 5However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. 6David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
7"Blessed are they
whose transgressions are forgiven,
whose sins are covered.
8Blessed is the man
whose sin the Lord will never count against him."[2]
9Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham's faith was credited to him as righteousness. 10Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! 11And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them.

The whole discussion of law vs. grace is too nuanced for me to go into a whole discussion, and I'm no expert. And, of course, Christians disagree. Some would say that Christians are saved by works, though in conjunction with faith. Anyhow...

Kevin
 
Old 04-15-2002, 03:07 PM   #17
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,777
Post

For what it's worth, the following <a href="http://www.ettl.co.at/uc/ws/theme066" target="_blank">Web Site</a> begins:
Quote:
Most religions recognize that, due to humanity's fallen and
degraded condition, it is difficult if not impossible for an individual to
attain the goal and purpose of life unaided. In fact, help is available;
God's grace is sufficient support for people on the journey of faith.
It appears as if the idea is not so unique as your friend believes ...
Jayhawker Soule is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:35 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.