Doctrines, How Wacky Do They Have to Get, to Disqualify You as Christian?

[HyperHobbes]

My ilk are known for damning Arminians. Some Arminians have returned the favor. Jews (the tribe of Judah and those tribes of the Southern Kingdom condemned Samaratins, yet Jesus spoke to one at the well, and in addition made one the deliberate hero of a parable. Samaratins were well known for mixed marriages with nations that were not of Israel and more well known for their idolatries.

Watching the "New Post" section of this forum shows regular attempts to condemn Catholics and occasional attempts by Catholics to condemn those that condemn them. I was invited to start a thread justifying, why I think Full Preterists should be viewed as Christian, but I could not see such a narrow scope as being worth pursuing. So I tried this more general discussion instead. Do we think Solomon will be crying for mercy with Lazarus' Rich Man from their seat in eternal torment with all the Arminians (or Calvinists) or all the Partial Preterists (or FP's)? Or do we realize that Christ did not require much in the way of affirmation to consider someone a believer? Don't we realize that some will arrive with not much to show for their faith, but arrive they will, as if through fire? Don't we believe that Nehemiah's benediction and condemnation of Solomon still graded him fairly well on the curve? Frankly, I think we should realize that people have all sorts of dumb ideas wandering around in their heads trying to avoid desperately the contradictions they create for their faith. I think that is handicapping, but not the equivalent of spiritual death.

HHobbes

[cbro]

My ilk are known for damning Arminians. Some Arminians have returned the favor. Jews (the tribe of Judah and those tribes of the Southern Kingdom condemned Samaratins, yet Jesus spoke to one at the well, and in addition made one the deliberate hero of a parable. Samaratins were well known for mixed marriages with nations that were not of Israel and more well known for their idolatries.

Watching the "New Post" section of this forum shows regular attempts to condemn Catholics and occasional attempts by Catholics to condemn those that condemn them. I was invited to start a thread justifying, why I think Full Preterists should be viewed as Christian, but I could not see such a narrow scope as being worth pursuing. So I tried this more general discussion instead. Do we think Solomon will be crying for mercy with Lazarus' Rich Man from their seat in eternal torment with all the Arminians (or Calvinists) or all the Partial Preterists (or FP's)? Or do we realize that Christ did not require much in the way of affirmation to consider someone a believer? Don't we realize that some will arrive with not much to show for their faith, but arrive they will, as if through fire? Don't we believe that Nehemiah's benediction and condemnation of Solomon still graded him fairly well on the curve? Frankly, I think we should realize that people have all sorts of dumb ideas wandering around in their heads trying to avoid desperately the contradictions they create for their faith. I think that is handicapping, but not the equivalent of spiritual death.

HHobbesHere in C201 is the thread "what are the essential doctrines" where we talk about knowing essential Christian doctrine. Which is as Theonomy said, "If you mean essential to presenting the fundamental truths of Christianity, and excluding error that would make Christianity into something else,..." However, that is in addition to having assurance of heaven because all you know is that Jesus is alive and has forgiven what you agree with Him is your sin, which saves you from Hell.

[HyperHobbes]

My list of essentials would be based on what Christ listed as elements of Salvation. It would be fun to make an inventory of those.

HHobbes

[cbro]

My list of essentials would be based on what Christ listed as elements of Salvation. It would be fun to make an inventory of those.

HHobbes
To say that salvation is all of christianity is like saying all of life is knowing how to eat.

[HyperHobbes]

"To say that salvation is all of christianity is like saying all of life is knowing how to eat."Certainly it is not, and I left the definition deliberately and perhaps too minimal for a reason so as to provoke discussion. But salvation is the primary purpose of Christianity. God wants us in the big tent. The clear fact that God wants more of us after we get in that tent is not denied by the minimal nature of the requirements of salvation.

There are those that will be saved "as if by (or through) fire." They will be in eternal fellowship with us and with God forevermore in "Paradise" as Christ promised to the man being crucified with him. I'm not asking the "how do we live as christians question, am asking who do we ask that question of.

HHobbes

[themuzicman]

1) Faith in Christ for salvation (which results in the sealing of the HS)
2) Belief and hope in a future bodily resurrection

I don't see any other requirements from scripture other than these.

Michael

[HyperHobbes]

"1) Faith in Christ for salvation (which results in the sealing of the HS)"Humbly, I'd like to add that it is important who God is, because it defines who Christ is. There is that mormon "god" you know."2) Belief and hope in a future bodily resurrection."Is this an inevitable result of salvation, or a necessary belief for salvation? By this I mean that if the scripture says we'll all be blond in paradise, does a lack of belief in our future blondness condemn us or just make us ill informed?

HHobbes

[themuzicman]

Humbly, I'd like to add that it is important who God is, because it defines who Christ is. There is that mormon "god" you know.

Yes, I do know that. Not being familliar enough with Mormon doctrine, I have no basis upon which to know whether they place their faith in Christ or not. Doctrinally, it is clear that they are way off base.

Is this an inevitable result of salvation, or a necessary belief for salvation? By this I mean that if the scripture says we'll all be blond in paradise, does a lack of belief in our future blondness condemn us or just make us ill informed?

HHobbes

Well, faith in Christ does a few different things: First and foremost, we receive the atonement of Christ's sacrifice, freeing us from the condemnation of sinning. Paul makes a particularly big case for this in 1 Cor 15, so, while it should be taken as a natural result of the first one, I think it is worth noting separately.

Michael

[HyperHobbes]

"Not being familliar enough with Mormon doctrine, I have no basis upon which to know whether they place their faith in Christ or not. Doctrinally, it is clear that they are way off base."And this is because their God who fathered their Christ is a finite being, he's not in charge."Paul makes a particularly big case for this in 1 Cor 15, so, while it should be taken as a natural result of the first one, I think it is worth noting separately."I am by no means diminishing Paul, but I keep coming back to how minimal Christ's definitions of saving faith were. Also, being the "Hyper" that I am, no matter how simple the definition is, no one will accept it without God's first moving them to accept it. We keep getting told that it is "foolishness" to unbelievers, that Christ is a "stumbling block". Salvation confounds the wise. Mostly because it is so "dumb" or "simple".

HHobbes

[themuzicman]

And this is because their God who fathered their Christ is a finite being, he's not in charge.

Well, they claim to follow the God of the bible and place their faith in the Christ of the bible. Does misconception of who God is void one's salvation?

I am by no means diminishing Paul, but I keep coming back to how minimal Christ's definitions of saving faith were. Also, being the "Hyper" that I am, no matter how simple the definition is, no one will accept it without God's first moving them to accept it. We keep getting told that it is "foolishness" to unbelievers, that Christ is a "stumbling block". Salvation confounds the wise. Mostly because it is so "dumb" or "simple".

HHobbes

I'm not going to disagree with you in principle, however, the "stumbling block" is specifically to the Jews, (Isaiah 28), and "foolishness" is aimed toward the Greek philosophers, who often scoffed at Christians as being foolish.

Michael

[HyperHobbes]

"Does misconception of who God is void one's salvation?"The Mormon version of God is defined downwards to the point of being a "friggin' huge guy" if I may quote "Boondock Saints".

HHobbes

[themuzicman]

The Mormon version of God is defined downwards to the point of being a "friggin' huge guy" if I may quote "Boondock Saints".

HHobbes

Yeah, ok, and?

[Rowland]

The requirements for being a Christian are very high indeed. One should have a basic grasp of truth plus not be embroiled in false doctrine. All of this plus the Christian must have died to self and love God above everything else and love his neighbor and his enemy. Many people are called to be Christian and think that they are, but, in reality, few are chosen for this tough vocation. When one is a Christian, a believer in the person of Jesus Christ and in God's written word, the Bible, one is freed from the corruption of this world and slavery to sin. The truth has made him free.

A Christian is called by God to serve the people of the world primarily by example and by speaking the truth to it. God calls a person to be a Christian for service. Service to God and service to mankind.

The question posed by the author of this thread is difficult enough to answer, but what really makes it difficult are the misunderstandings regarding being a Christian and being saved, regarding being a Christian and being loved by God, regarding being a Christian and being a good non-Christian.

Yes, generally speaking only Christians are saved in this life, that is, have the truth that frees them from the corruption of the world and slavery to sin. Christians still struggle with sin but in the eyes of God they are as perfect as He who lives in their hearts-Jesus Christ. But what about heaven and hell? I believe that Christians are only the firstfruits of God, not the only harvest. During the next age into which Christians will be resurrected unto life and unbelievers resurrected unto shame and the unto the second death-the death of their false self, God will complete His plan that He has always had, that of saving every creature He has ever created. During this Age of Judgment or Kingdom Age, Jesus will rule along with his lieutenants for the purpose of bringing out all of the truth that had been hidden in this age. The works of all will be judged to see what truth lies in them. At the end of the last age, those that had entered as unsaved will be resurrected a second time unto full life. So, there are three salvations: salvation in this life, salvation or life in the Kingdom Age, and life in the eternal age. All will share in the life of the eternal age. So not being a Christian in this life does not shut a person out of heaven. In fact the Christian calling is for the benefit of those who are not called to be Christian in this life. The Christian will be a sort of guide in the Kingdom Age to those who were not called to be Christian in this life just like the Jews were called to be guides for the Gentiles in this life. Both Jews and Christians have failed to understand that they were especially chosen to serve others. The Jew was called to be a light unto the Gentiles. The Christian is called to be a light unto our unbelieving world. The Christian is not called to threaten the unbelieving with eternal damnation should they not become Christian. The Christian is to preach the Good News of God's love for all of mankind.

Furthermore, God does not love the unbeliever, the non-Christian, any less than He loves the Christian. The declaration made by a representative of the Baptist churches that God does not listen to the prayers of Jews because of their unbelief is a monstrous declaration. Jesus died for unrepentant unbelievers just as much as he died for those who would come to believe in him in this life. God is no respecter of persons.

Lastly, the word "Christian" is not a synonym for "good" or "decent" or "loving". Many people misuse the word "Christian" as such a synonym. I've heard people say that Mahatma Ghandi was a better Christian than most Christians. What a ridiculous statement. Ghandi was a Hindu. Why not just say that he was a decent, loving good Hindu person? Saying that someone is not a Christian is not saying that that person is not a good person. Or even vice versa. A person can be a rather pain in the neck and still be a Christian. Being a Christian is having a special calling like a doctor has a special calling. One wouldn't say something like, "Oh, he's not a doctor. He's a nasty person." So one shouldn't use the word "Christian" in this manner either. (I know that this is a bad analogy-so sue me.)

Again, good question, but one that is caught up in all sorts of misconceptions.

Rowland

[cbro]

I'm not asking the "how do we live as christians question, am asking who do we ask that question of.

HHobbeshow we live as christian is part of essential Christian doctrine. that doctrine is as Theonomy said, "If you mean essential to presenting the fundamental truths of Christianity, and excluding error that would make Christianity into something else,..."
However, that is in addition to having assurance of heaven because all you know is that Jesus is alive and has forgiven what you agree with Him is your sin, which saves you from Hell. Which is who we should be asking that question. So that as long as the person agrees with that idea, I don't think it matters how wacky is their doctrine otherwise. Of course how the question of if a person can lose his salvation is answered will change how we look at it but not the answer itself.

[Sparko]

I would say that one would have to first have the right belief about who God is. Which most orthodox (little o) Christians define to mean holding to the Trinity, that God is ONE, that He is YHWH of the Old Testament, etc.

Then one must understand that he is a sinnner and NEEDS salvation, and WANTS salvation. (exception: those who are not able to understand: little children, retarded, etc)

And finally one must believe that Jesus is their salvation and their Lord. That he paid the price for their sin. They must believe (trust) that he will stand up on the last day and claim them as his own.

Part of believing that Jesus paid for their sins, is to believe that he was ABLE to (him being God) and that he proved he was able (he was bodily resurrected)

So there are a lot of doctrines involved that mostly go to showing who Jesus is, and why we need him, and who God is, but the actual gospel itself is simple:

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

[themuzicman]

Let me ask this then:

Are the Muslims attempting to worship the right God in the wrong way? They claim to worship the God of Abraham, but reject Christ as the messiah.

Michael

[HyperHobbes]

"Are the Muslims attempting to worship the right God in the wrong way?"My limited knowledge of the "Muslim God" casts doubt on him being the same God as Abraham followed."They claim to worship the God of Abraham, but reject Christ as the messiah."Rejection of Christ is a "Deal Breaker". BTW I should be able to play in the Basketball Court next week.

HHobbes

[themuzicman]

My limited knowledge of the "Muslim God" casts doubt on him being the same God as Abraham followed.

Why? Obviously they have a false prophet who has directed them in the wrong ways, but if they claim to want to worship the God of Abraham, who is to say that they're wrong?

Rejection of Christ is a "Deal Breaker". BTW I should be able to play in the Basketball Court next week.


No disagrement, there.

Michael

[HyperHobbes]

"They claim to want to worship the God of Abraham, who is to say that they're wrong?"As I said my knowledge is limited, however they cannot worship the God we do in "spirit and truth" and not know Christ. They might have a roughly accurate description of who he is and claim to worship that God, but they cannot without it altering their lives and turning them away from the Muslim Religion.

HHobbes

[themuzicman]

As I said my knowledge is limited, however they cannot worship the God we do in "spirit and truth" and not know Christ. They might have a roughly accurate description of who he is and claim to worship that God, but they cannot without it altering their lives and turning them away from the Muslim Religion.

HHobbes

Never said that they worshipped "in spirit an in truth". I just said that they were trying to worship the right one in the wrong way.

Why can't they attempt to worship Him without altering their lives, if they do so in the wrong way?

michael

[HyperHobbes]

They really can't "attempt" to worship the right God in the wrong way. We're back to predestination and who is his and who are not his again. James says the devils know who the right God is, it doesn't help that they know.

HHobbes

[themuzicman]

They really can't "attempt" to worship the right God in the wrong way. We're back to predestination and who is his and who are not his again. James says the devils know who the right God is, it doesn't help that they know.

HHobbes

Well, I'm not suggesting that they are saved or even could be as Muslims. I'm just pointing out that they claim to worship the God of Abraham, just as we do.

Michael

[cbro]

[QUOTE=cbro]how we live as christian is part of essential Christian doctrine. that doctrine is as Theonomy said, "If you mean essential to presenting the fundamental truths of Christianity, and excluding error that would make Christianity into something else,..."
However, that is in addition to having assurance of heaven because all you know is that Jesus is alive and has forgiven what you agree with Him is your sin, which saves you from Hell. Which is who we should be asking that question. So that as long as the person agrees with that idea, I don't think it matters how wacky is their doctrine otherwise. Of course how the question of if a person can lose his salvation is answered will change how we look at it but not the answer itself.

No comment on my idea because no body understands it or because it is clearly true and needs no comment?

[Sparko]

muz, worshipping the right God in the wrong way neither saves nor condemns them.

Trusting in Christ to forgive their sins as their Lord is what saves a person. You can worship the right God in the right way and still not be saved if you don't have Christ as your savior.

[cbro]

[QUOTE=Ye Cup of Piracy]muz, worshipping the right God in the wrong way neither saves nor condemns them.

Trusting in Christ to forgive their sins as their Lord is what saves a person. You can worship the right God in the right way and still not be saved if you don't have Christ as your savior.

PS John, muz would have a better chance of seeing your reply if you made sure it was connected to his post.

[Sparko]

Trusting in Christ to forgive their sins as their Lord is what saves a person. You can worship the right God in the right way and still not be saved if you don't have Christ as your savior.

PS John, muz would have a better chance of seeing your reply if you made sure it was connected to his post.

I am sure he will see it.

But cbro when you edit your post, don't remove the [/quote] at the end of the previous person's text. Or the quote won't be complete, as has happened in the last few of your posts.

[Apollo]

How much doctrine or theology did the thief on the cross need to know in order to be with Jesus in Paradise?

[themuzicman]

muz, worshipping the right God in the wrong way neither saves nor condemns them.

Trusting in Christ to forgive their sins as their Lord is what saves a person. You can worship the right God in the right way and still not be saved if you don't have Christ as your savior.

I think I said that

[cbro]

[QUOTE=Apollo]How much doctrine or theology did the thief on the cross need to know in order to be with Jesus in Paradise?

Apollo, I see you don't post much. I hope you don't feel ignored by the OP not replying to you. I guess he has lost intrest in this thread.

If it means anything to you, I agree that being saved is like being born physically and then growing in what it means to be alive. I earlyer did post something like this.