Dependencies for 'Chrisitan' salvation

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
So actually you don't believe anything written in the Bible but you want to tell me what it is saying from your position of unbelief?

What I am saying is that what you are claiming about the reality in which we both live, for the reasons you give, does not make any sense, let alone sound like it is 'divinely inspired'. If you don't want to discuss your beliefs and claims with people who are not Christians, you should consider preaching to the choir on some Christianity Forum somewhere instead.

Originally posted by FMF
What's your response to the other 220 words I addressed to you?

Your interpretation would appeal to people who were content to live bad lives but arrange (for all intents and purposes) to "forgive" themselves and get "saved" by 'believing that believing is all it takes' (along with being "repentant" about that bad life, even at death's door) to wind up living forever... in 'paradise' no less.

No actually it doesn't. It shows that people who have lived the worst possible lives can still be saved by the grace of God. Grace is undeserved mercy.

Such a convoluted let-yourself-off-the-hook philosophy does not appeal to me on any level (least of all on what may be my hard-wired-morality level) and the far-fetched supernatural angle makes it impossible to even pretend to subscribe to it.

Of course the grace of God does not appeal to you. I am not surprised by this.

I see no reason to believe that the stuff you talk about is based on any revelation of God. Meanwhile, Jesus' teaching about philanthropy and empathy and endeavouring to live a righteous life and and do good works consistent with His teachings makes some sense to me, philosophically.

Of course those teachings make sense, but so does the grace of God. To me at least.

But most of the Christians around here don't want to talk about that ~ they just want to talk about how they are already "saved" because of stuff going on inside of their heads that don't seem to believe HAS to be translated into action.

I agree with this. I still feel the good works are a natural outworking of their faith. Someone who claims to be saved but does not do good works is clearly lying. I am not saying that everyone who claims to 'repent' on their deathbed will be saved.

Originally posted by FMF
What I am saying is that what you are claiming about the reality in which we both live, for the reasons you give, does not make any sense, let alone sound like it is 'divinely inspired'. If you don't want to discuss your beliefs and claims with people who are not Christians, you should consider preaching to the choir on some Christianity Forum somewhere instead.

Of course they don't make sense to you because you don't believe the words written in the Bible to be true. It does not surprise me at all.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Someone who claims to be saved but does not do good works is clearly lying.

So "good works" are not optional, right? They are required - by Christ - of a believer in Christ?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Of course they don't make sense to you because you don't believe the words written in the Bible to be true. It does not surprise me at all.

The claims you make about reality are not coherent because of what you say when you try to explain them. You should try to make a case as to exactly why you believe them and the actual sense you think they make - and you need to do this by offering something more than just 'it says so in a book'.

Originally posted by FMF
So "good works" are not optional, right? They are required - by Christ - of a believer in Christ?

Obedience to the words of Christ are not optional.

Originally posted by FMF
The claims you make about reality are not coherent because of what you say when you try to explain them. You should try to make a case as to exactly why you believe them and the actual sense you think they make - and you need to do this by offering something more than just 'it says so in a book'.

How do you know that your interpretation of reality is coherent?

-Removed-

If you simply reply without quoting someone then nobody knows who you are talking to.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
It shows that people who have lived the worst possible lives can still be saved by the grace of God. Grace is undeserved mercy.

And I think that this is, a moral philosophy, a complete cop out.

Forgive me for rehashing something I said on another thread recently.

Christian notions of "the grace of God", "sin" and "forgiveness" - at least as we hear them from some Christians - are rhetorical cop out mechanisms used for declaring their own immortality, and they have nothing to do with "morality" in real life in the real world.

Christians essentially "forgive" their own "sins" by conjuring up convoluted notions about the "grace" of a supernatural being and propagating these notions is a self-serving amoral pursuit.

"Morality" ought surely to govern actual relationships and actual interactions between all people, regardless of their religious affiliations or lack thereof.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
How do you know that your interpretation of reality is coherent?

I am testing it - on this issue at least - by discussing it with you.

Originally posted by FMF
And I think that this is, a moral philosophy, a complete cop out.

Forgive me for rehashing something I said on another thread recently.

Christian notions of "the grace of God", "sin" and "forgiveness" - at least as we hear them from some Christians - are rhetorical cop out mechanisms used for declaring their own immortality, and they have nothing to do wit ...[text shortened]... ual interactions between all people, regardless of their religious affiliations or lack thereof.

How about the notion of repentance and regeneration as a step before forgiveness? Do they sit well with you?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Of course they don't make sense to you because you don't believe the words written in the Bible to be true.

If you want me to believe that the things you are saying to me are divinely inspired then you need to actually demonstrate it. Simply asserting that you believe the book you keep referring to is divinely inspired will not suffice. It might suffice if you were preaching to the converted but it amounts to no 'ministry' at all if you are talking to people of other religious faiths or who have no religious faith.

Originally posted by FMF
If you want me to believe that the things you are saying to me are divinely inspired then you need to actually demonstrate it. Simply asserting that you believe the book you keep referring to is divinely inspired will not suffice. It might suffice if you were preaching to the converted but it amounts to no 'ministry' at all if you are talking to people of other religious faiths or who have no religious faith.

So how do you propose I demonstrate to you that something is divinely inspired? Do you even believe it is possible for something to be divinely inspired?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
How about the notion of repentance and regeneration? Do they sit well with you?

Do I think people should reflect and repent and try to renew themselves and grow when they fall short in their efforts to live a righteous life? Yes.

Do I think concepts of "repentance and regeneration" apply to notions of thoughtcrime (a lack of belief, for example) and that doubleplusgoodthink (I believe therefore I am "saved", for example) reap some supernatural rewards that are gained regardless of efforts to live a righteous life (or a lack of such efforts)? No.