MachineGod

I've never met one, but not impossible for some of them to think that I guess.

Those might be the Christians who have been making Christianity a bad name.

secular buddhist

Hello, MachineGod.

The question is, Does one need to accept Jesus as their personal savior in order to avoid eternal damnation, or do they not? If so, what about the millions of people who lived and died before they ever heard the Gospel?

If not, then what, exactly, is the "escape clause"? Is it merely never, ever having someone tell the Gospel to you? What about those who hear the Gospel, but the Gospel is buried in an ancient book full of self-contradictions and of uncertain origin? This is not meant to be a silly jab, but an indication of certain problems that can arise if you start assuming that there are other possibilites of salvation.

Sven

Nice straw man. Since nobody at this time knew anything about these continents, it's something entirely different to tell the disciples about these than to tell them the name of every town.

Read the OP again

Similar straw men like above.

Do you like to build an army of straw men or what is the purpose of this blather?

Since there doesn't seem to be a reasonable answer apart from "He didn't know", you are perhaps right.

Imagine this situation: You are a preacher who likes his message told the whole world. And you are the only one who knows that the world is far greater than everyone else knows. Now ask yourself: What would be the most sensible thing to do? Tell your disciples about it or simply hope that their descendants will find out 1500 years later?
Please really think about this.

Sven

It's strange that these Christians would say exactly the same about your way of interpreting the bible...
How do you determine that you are right and they are wrong?

secular buddhist

An interesting question, one deserving of discussion, Sven. However, I would hate to see this thread go off-topic. The question of the salvation of the millions of people who lived and died without ever hearing the Gospel is one that I was never able to answer in a satsifactory manner when I was a fundamentalist Christian. I really am curious as to how Christians respond to this issue.

But perhaps there is room enough in the thread for two conversations?

MachineGod

If you heard the Gospel, and then didn't accept it, you can still be forgiven. I think the deciding factor would be in the heart of the individual. I've met atheists that were much better people than a believer. And I've met atheist who would give Satan a run for his money.
Jesus tells, "forgive and you shall be forgiven". There was no clause or what if, or none of that. If you are a forgiving person, you will be shown forgiveness.

If they never heard it, so what? If the Gospel is true, they will get their chance.

Walking the path of righteousness. You need no bible for that.

Stay on the safe side. Make no judgment, and just keep digging.
And be a good person.
Consider...

Matthew 10:33 - but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.

Matthew 10:34 Then the King will say to those at his right hand, 'Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; 35 for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.' 37 Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink? 38 And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee? 39 And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?' 40 And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.'

Mark: 33 And he [Jesus] replied, "Who are my mother and my brothers?" 34 And looking around on those who sat about him, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 Whoever does the will of God is my brother, and sister, and mother."

[edited] see aslo Romans 12 (whole chapter)

I didn't take you post as a jab, but...
Why should there not be other possibilities of salvation?

Because they don’t say I am wrong. Besides, I have never met a Christian that claims what you are claiming.

Give the personal attacks a rest will ya. Your entire first postis a “straw man�. What up?

secular buddhist

Sorry, MachineGod, I read your posts and jumped to the wrong conclusions as to your beliefs. My apologies. Your reply is pretty sensible. Thanks.

Sven

Until your demonstration why it is a straw man, I can just repeat this:

Imagine this situation: You are a preacher who likes his message told the whole world. And you are the only one who knows that the world is far greater than everyone else knows. Now ask yourself: What would be the most sensible thing to do? Tell your disciples about it or simply hope that their descendants will find out 1500 years later?
Please really think about this.

Edited to add:
Concerning the different "Christian" views on how to "get" salvation - have you read B. Steven Matthies' article "Christian Salvation?" on this?

Corvidae72

And thus we get the Mormon solution to this problem.

The population of the Americas was actually much higher than the early settlers thought because so many of the native americans died from disease. Population estimates range from 112 million to 8 million. Even the lower estimate is still a lot of people. At the height of its power Tenochtitlan, the Aztec capitol was the largest city on earth

Corvidae72

The reason this issue is relevant and not a straw man is because it gets at the argument from non-belief which in my opinion is one of the strongest arguments against the existence of the Christian god.

1) Jesus knew of the Americas. Jesus is god, god knows everything.

2) It would have been very easy for Jesus to tell his followers about the Americas. He could have said look there are lands west beyond Britannia and Iberia, which you can reach by following the currents. There are people living there who don’t know God, it is really important that you bring my message to those people too.

3) It would have been within the means of the early Christians in late antiquity to reach North America. Carthage reached the Azores which are in the middle of the Atlantic and a third of the way there in 500 BC. The Vikings did it in 1000 AD with no new technology beyond what the Romans had. The biggest impediment was the fact that no one knew it was there, the Christians would know because God told them and God doesn't lie.

4) First benefit, it is a fantastic prophecy fulfilled. The remaining pagan Romans will say “those crazy Christians, they think there are new lands to the west, they are just going to hit China if they don’t die first� A couple of years later the first missionaries return with Corn, Tobacco and red skinned American converts. Who looks more credible?

5) Second benefit, spiritual benefit for the natives. We don’t have to assume that they would be damned to hell for there to be tremendous spiritual gains. The natives don’t know god loves them, many of them think god will kill them if they don’t feed him human hearts. Christians take great comfort and joy that god loves them and his son Jesus died to save them. It would nice to share that comfort and joy with millions of native Americans who never got that chance. Also, if the natives fully know about God it will be easier for them to live righteously.

6) Third benefit, worldly benefits. The natives get St. Patrick instead of Cortez. OK, maybe the diseases still happen (why does god let that happen?). But instead of the contact with Europe being a bunch of competing expansionist nation states it is with a loosely held together decaying empire which really doesn’t have the resources for transatlantic conquest. I don’t think there is any reason why the mission to America would have been any less successful than the historic missions to pagan Europe (such as Norway). Unlike in history the missions won’t be two faced: god loves you BUT the king of Spain wants to steal your gold, rape your wives and enslave you and will be much more successful. The successful missions will also lead to the abandonment of evils in America such as human sacrifice. So in the end the people of the Americas will meet the Europeans more as equal fellow Christians than as heathens suitable for being slaves.

So it would been easy for Jesus to start in motion a late antiquity American mission (he wouldn’t even have to do anything supernatural beyond his god like knowledge) that would have had tremendous spiritual and worldly benefits and would of prevented the whole Native American genocide that is a blot on the Christian moral record. Why didn’t he?