hatsoff

You can never "prove" that, although I agree with you it's probably what has happened. That is, by the way, the first such point of yours to which I don't object. Your thoughts on Biblical teachings seem somewhat skewed...

You've taken verses out of context, then used them to support your declaration that to be saved you must "obey God." To be saved, all you must do is believe. There is no other prerequesite.

So, can a "skeptic" be saved? That depends. Considering that there are degrees of both skepticism and belief alike, who knows where to draw the line? For example, all Christians have doubts at one point or another. Does that preclude them from Salvation? Probably not. On the other hand, many unbelievers go through similar spells, where they wonder if perhaps there is a God after all--maybe the Christian God. Is that enough for Salvation? Maybe, maybe not.

The Bible, however, is very clear on a few other issues, namely that we should love God and strive to please Him. These academic exercises, where we debate who gets into Heaven and who doesn't, are really quite irrelevant from a Christian perspective.

That doesn't mean they aren't fun, though!

Johnny Skeptic

But I can try to prove it.

My topic is "what is required for a person to go to heaven," not "what is required for initial salvation"? The texts clearly state that a Christian can lose his salvation, and that in order for Christians to go to heaven they must love and obey God. I provided the proof in one of my previous posts. I was a fundamentalist Christian for over 35 years, and I attended many different churches, including Baptist, United Methodist, Wesleyan, Assemby of God, Church of God, and Church of the Nazarene, so I believe that I am well qualified to know what fundamentalist Christians believe.

The Bible draws the line. In order to go to heaven, believers must love God and obey his commandents. The greatest commandment requires a total commitment to God. It says that Christians must love God with all of their heart, soul, and mind. How much more clear of a line do you require? The Bible is serious business. It says that it is next to impossible for a rich man to go to heaven. It doesn't talk about vacations to the Riviera. It says that only a few people will go to heaven. Matthew 7:13-14 say "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." If that doesn't indicate a total commitment, I don't know what does.

Helpmabob

Hi Johnny Skeptic – You begin with the following quick ‘assumptions’ and ‘exemptions’ about God: But the rest of your post contains more detailed and more far-fetched assumptions of God and His character:My question to you is – are you in a good position to make assumptions about God’s character?

My answer to your thread question is that Christ has won the victory over death for us, but we must have faith in that being sufficient for us to be admitted to heaven. It is not complicated stuff.

Johnny Skeptic

I am in a good position to make assumptions about human character. If a human were to cause a person to become blind or deaf, he would be sent to prison, and with your blessing I might add. Exodus 4:11 says "And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord?" The point is, if God were to show up in person and be willing to have some personal discussions with me, maybe I would not find his explanations for his questionable character to be acceptable, but then again, maybe I wouldn't. I have a right to know more about his character and supernatural powers BEFORE being required to accept him.

Spiritual/emotional experiences are subjective. Tangible experiences are objective. While most people of all world views can easily agree that President George Bush exists, they frequent disagree regarding physical/emotional experiences. Consider the following scriptures:

John 2:23 says "Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did."

John 3:2 says "The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him."

On those occasions, the eyewitnesses were fully informed that Jesus had supernatural powers, and they chose to follow him because his supernatural powers confirmed his message, not because his message confirmed his supernatural powers. Acts 14:3 says "Long time therefore abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of his grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands." 'The NIV translates the verse "So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to do miraculous signs and wonders." What I am getting at is that since the texts show that God only very selectively confirmed subjective spiritual/emotional experiences with much more convincing objective tangible experiences, rational minded people are left with only two choices, either to conclude that God is not really serious about letting as many people as possible know about his existance, or to much more logically conclude that since the Bible says that God is loving, and since it is not loving to deliberately show the truth to some people and conceal the truth from other people, the God of the Bible does not exist. Spiritual/emotional experiences do not confirm tangible experiences. Rather, as I have shown you, tangible experiences confirm spiritual/emotional experiences. In the NIV, John 10:37-38 say "Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does. But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father." So, there should be no doubt whatsoever that spiritual/emotional experiences must be confirmed by tangible experiences in order to be valid, and if heaven and hell are actually at stake, every person deserves to personally experience tangible confirmations of God's existance and power for himself. Why would a loving God want to clearly demonstrate his supernatual powers to only a few people, with the specific stated purpose of encouraging people to accept him, reference the aforementioned scriptures, and refuse to offer everyone else the same evidence to consider?

First of all, there is not any evidence at all that Jesus' shed blood and death actually remitted the sins of mankind, nor is there any credible evidence at all that he was conceived by the Holy Spirit, was born of a virgin, and never sinned, along with hundreds of other completely non-verifiable claims that are found in every book in the Bible. Second of all, faith alone is sufficient for initial salvation, but subsequent to initial salvation believers will not go to heaven unless they love God with all of their heart, soul, and mind, and obey him. I will quote the pertinent scriptures again if you wish.

ggazoo

A lot of your comments center around the assumption that God is not a loving God, and I tend to disagree.

God has given man every chance to believe in Him... people get their whole lives to decide that... he's not asking a lot. He gave us life and this world that we live in. So if we turn our backs on Him, can you blame Him if he's a little pissed?

Julian

Then you have a lot of explaining to do regarding the OT.
Wrong. He has provided us with no direct evidence.
He is asking us to believe in spite of contrary evidence, after having endowed us with rational brains. He is asking far too much.
Yet provided no evidence of that. He did, apparently, provide us with an abundance of evidence against his existence.
We are the ones who should be be pissed if he really did exist. We have to believe in him to avoid going to hell, yet he has not provided any evidence of his existence. He did, however, create a large profusion of contradictory religions, however. Nice going, god!

Julian

hatsoff

The text may imply that, but it's far from clear. But really, it's a separate issue.

I'm sorry, but the passages you've posted don't mean what you seem to think they do.

When the Bible talks about "you must do this" or "you must do that," it's usually in the context of what man must do without Christ. We must love and obey God perfectly in order to get to Heaven, but we have not done this, nor are we even capable. That's why God sent the Christ to pay the price for our sin, so that our evil deeds are wiped away. We must love and obey God, but we can't--at least, not to the perfect degree God requires. No problem, though, because we've got Jesus to vouch for us!

I'd rather talk about what the Bible says, not what people say. Also, I can assure you I am fairly well educated, too.

That, or they can be saved by Christ's sacrifice through faith, apart from observing the Law.

It sure is. That's why God sent Jesus to pay the price for our sins, because we can't help ourselves from disobedience.

Yes, because a rich man is a slave to his riches, and to sin. You cannot serve both God and money. Luckily for rich folks, Jesus paid the price for their sin.

It speaks not to total commitment, but to total inability. We can't enter through the narrow gate ourselves. God must take us.

ggazoo

And there will never be any, at least not if your eyes. You've already made up your minds against the very basis of my beliefs (the Bible), in which all of my explanations stem from - a concept which you have already refuted to begin with.

Some people need evidience of God's exsistence and some don't.

"Fos those who get it, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't, no explanation will do."

Julian

My beliefs follow the evidence. A lack of evidence gives rise to a lack of beliefs. My mind is never made up, it changes all the time based on what is reasonable when evaluating the facts. The bible is not evidence of the contents of the bible, except in cases where the claim is reasonable or we have independent verification. Surely, this is a reasonable and rational approach.
What nonsense. I feel sorry for either group and belong in neither.

Julian

ggazoo

Fair enough.

I think a lot of it has to do with has society operates today. Most of us live our non-eventful mundane lives - get up, go to work, come home, repeat. To accept anything "supernatural" is outlandish to us because we can't imagine it outside of our daily routines.