• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

All non Christians ought to be crucified....

DavidFirth

Well-Known Member
That's why I went back to faith. It seemed convincing but I feel faith is largely guided by our emotions. My mind just doesn't trust the Bible or any religion as being anything other than man made inventions. So that's where I'm at with it all right now.

Well, you're being objective about it, which is good. There is no Christian on this planet that has not ever doubted his/her faith.

Satan is very good at causing us to doubt our faith, he did a great job on Eve in the garden and his methods still work to this day.

One can't trust his/her own understanding according to Proverbs 3:5, which I'm sure you've heard before: Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding;

It's tough to not trust in our own understanding and there are some things that are tough about being a Christian. It isn't an easy walk and it was never meant to be.

Anyway, I hope you don't think I'm preaching at you because I'm not. I'm trying to help you understand your situation better, that's all I'm doing. I hope I am helping rather than hindering.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Is this the logical implication of rejecting a Christ who suffered the punishment due to us?

Is there enough wood in the world to build all the crosses it would take to carry out this proposal? Who's going to build them all? Who's going to round up all the non-Christians and nail them to crosses? This sounds like a monumental undertaking. Who will pay for all this?
 

Deidre

Well-Known Member
Well, you're being objective about it, which is good. There is no Christian on this planet that has not ever doubted his/her faith.

Satan is very good at causing us to doubt our faith, he did a great job on Eve in the garden and his methods still work to this day.

One can't trust his/her own understanding according to Proverbs 3:5, which I'm sure you've heard before: Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding;

It's tough to not trust in our own understanding and there are some things that are tough about being a Christian. It isn't an easy walk and it was never meant to be.

Anyway, I hope you don't think I'm preaching at you because I'm not. I'm trying to help you understand your situation better, that's all I'm doing. I hope I am helping rather than hindering.

This is a better side of you, yes. :)
 

Purple1

Member
You have good and new points I havent read before. When I practice, jesus did not save me. I was saved In him. He didnt save me from my sins but by my devotion, I chose to put myself in his suffering so in one body/one mass we would be blessed and forgiven by god, to live enternally or have salvaton.

In the bible, it ways I think Peter was "crucified IN jesus", and the church says "in him, through, him,..." but none says that he directly saved us without our effort (most lurtigical churches).

Its protestants that separate their act in the salvation process.

According to your points, do you think it makes more sense that believers are saved in christ rather than christ saving each person individually?


“I was saved in Jesus.”

Do you mean (?): Through the story, teachings and beliefs of Jesus; I was saved. // “I was saved by the teachings of Jesus” (?)

Please detail and clarify what you mean by “I was saved in Jesus”, reformulate and/or explain. As I am not sure what you mean by it.

(Also, I assume – and I mean no offense by it – that English is not your “first language”. It isn’t mine either. But could you please tell me what your first language is so I can try to understand better what you are saying? – Because I know that sometimes we tend to deform other languages with formulation found within our primary language. =My primary language is French.) ((I don’t want to say that you don’t mean exactly what you write, but since I’m a bit confused reading you, it is a possibility that it’s language related – i.e. a misplaced word – then again it could just be that I don’t understand what you mean, that it’s on my side))

“According to your points, do you think it makes more sense that believers are saved in christ rather than christ saving each person individually?”

If I understand correctly, you are saying that the Christian believer, is saved in the knowledge of Christ and in the acknowledgement of Christ. That the stories (or histories) told in the New Testament, are accepted by the Christian Believer as Truth, as Good.

So I repeat.

Therefor; the Christian is saved in his knowledge of Christ, in his acknowledgement of Christ.

If this is what you mean, then I think it makes sense.

And I must conclude that; as the Christian is saved “IN” Christ by “BELIEVING” in Christ therefor have “FAITH” in Christ; it also means that Jesus “Saved” each Christian individually.

So the believer is saved by believing in Jesus (If he was or was not in peril in the first place; because following Christ protects the Believer…

((**And I just realised that I changed your use of the word *Believer for *Christian during my investigation, and that I was wrong to do so; as you do mean “Believer in Christ” and believing in Christ doesn’t make one a “Christian”. Sorry about that :)**))

…whether the believer was in peril or not in peril in the first place is irrelevant; whether the believer was a sinner or a non-sinner is also irrelevant. Because in this understanding of the words “Christ saved us all”, means that by adhering to and following his teachings (Christ’s) the believer is following the Path of Good. Therefor was saved, and is constantly saved; by Jesus and by himself for following Jesus.

I must say this is very interesting.

Although, for the believer to be completely saved that way; we must first assume that the teachings of Jesus are ultimately good. And if they are, then the believer must follow these teachings, and not just believe in them; i.e. acting in and out of these boundaries (or morals) as his will dictates.

Since Jesus did not write these words; it is other people’s rendition of the word and life of Christ that we are reading. We are therefor not reading the word of Christ; but the words of his apostles.

Which doesn’t imply that they are false or bad. But also doesn’t imply that they are true or good.

The best way to fully understand if these teachings are good is to read them, analyse them. Be critical about them.

I will be honest, I am not well versed in these texts. I’ve read some of them, but not all of them – and it was a long time ago, when I was younger. I would have to read them again to be able to have a better grasp of them.


Thank you for your answer, it was really interesting for me to think about all that.
 

Socratic Berean

Occasional thinker, perpetual seeker
You misunderstand. I'm saying that if a position is well supported and reasonable, it's generally accepted.
Christianity is not generally accepted and, even amongst Christians, there is general disagreement over important points of theology.
ergo: Christianity is not reasonable or well supported.
Understood; but when we point out your errors in reasoning and inconsistencies in your textbook -- because we care about you -- you completely ignore us.
I can only conclude that your religion is an idee fixe and you're not really interested in truth.
Back in the day, it was a well supported (and reasonable) fact that Betamax was better than VHS...:)
 

The Emperor of Mankind

Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
The Bible is a historical book. Many of the places the children of Israel destroyed during the Exodus have been discovered by archaeologists in the places indicated within the book of Exodus.

That is evidence. You may not believe it to be true but it is evidence, nonetheless.

By that standard of argument, Harry Potter must be a historical book & a true story because London, King's Cross and Surrey are all real places.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Are you a Christian?

Early church, Jesus adherent/ so yes, that means christian, generally

You do know that Christianity isn't the only religion, right? That there are other people on this forum who don't follow Christianity, and probably think that non-believers of their faiths may face hell.

You don't have to like their religion, but simply claiming that their beliefs are wrong, is not an argument, or excuse really. Not preaching to you, either. lol

This doesn't change the beliefs of traditional Christians, and it doesn't change Scripture. You might have your ideas concerning this, however, they aren't Biblical. Since my theism is Biblical, and I follow traditional belief system, I am going to present my beliefs in that manner.
 

Socratic Berean

Occasional thinker, perpetual seeker
Yes, it is a historical book, you're just wrong about that. As I said, archaeology verifies it and does not contradict it...
David - I think we need to keep in mind that the Bible is actually a collection of 66 books, written by at least 40 authors on three continents in three languages over a period of 1500 years (or so). Some of those books document accounts of man (are "historical" in some sense), while others are poetry or prophecy or letters of communication.

It is true that archaeology continues to shed light on some accounts in the Bible. For example, our only initial records of any Roman ruler named Pontius Pilot were New Testament accounts, and many used that fact to try to prove the Bible inaccurate, until an archaeologist's spade was able to back it up much later. That said, if we try to look at the Bible as a single book of history, we are not only being inaccurate, but we are opening up a lot of room for misinterpretation and misrepresentation.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Ironically, English is my first language and I'm an English teacher. I had brain surgery for seizures; so, I can't put together full paragraphs without breaking it up. With grammar and spelling, I type faster than I think. 'bout time I get to the end, I've written a whole page and sometimes I'll go back to edit but I don't catch them all.
“I was saved in Jesus.”

Do you mean (?): Through the story, teachings and beliefs of Jesus; I was saved. // “I was saved by the teachings of Jesus” (?)

Actually, no. I came into the Catholic Church as an adult for a good four years. I wasn't indoctrinated though my outside family are protestant. Given the history of christianity, everything I based christianity on is from the Church. Whether it's Orthodox or Roman is up for grabs.

One day I was going to work. On my way through the city, there are many people holding signs to ask for money and food because they are homeless. I saw one sign that quoted Galations 2:20 which said,

"I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me."

When I was confirmed, I went to Mass daily. Then I realized that Christianity (like Judaism) isn't an individual faith. It's a communal faith. When you come together in one body, you make jesus present. (Mathew 18:20). Then you have verses that talk about the body of christ and all the parts of the body have to work together. When I think of The Church, I think of the body of christ-christ himself. When you are in one body, you are as one. So you are crucified (die in/with) christ by communion, and together when you die in christ, you no longer live for yourself but for the brothers and sisters that make up christ body. You don't worship christ himself-the person. That's idolism. He spoke against that. You worship in the body and as the body of christ so you are in service to each other and to the people around you. "With him, in him, through him" is all about the people not the person. It's about communing in one mass and when you come together in one mass, you come together as children of god. You are in god's presence when you commune as one body. You can't commune alone.

That's what I mean by crucified in christ. You die in his passion. In Mass, you repent, live, die, and resurrected all in one setting. You take part in the sacrificial meal (the Eucharist) and when all people take part in the meal, christ is present in that meal-that bonding glue that makes people one body officially. Then you are resurrected when you receive the final blessings and penance or prayer after mass.

I don't agree that you can be saved by the teachings of jesus. I believe to be saved, you have to be in communion with brothers and sisters in christ.

“According to your points, do you think it makes more sense that believers are saved in christ rather than christ saving each person individually?”

Yes. Christ, the person, isn't alive. He can't physically save you. You have to take an action for him to be present. I actually don't like the phrase "jesus saved me from my sins." Jesus taught that god forgives through jesus' crucifixion. God saved you not jesus. Jesus is an intermediary not god himself. In Mass, you are saved because jesus becomes an intermediary to your salvation. It's against OT laws to worship the person who brought you to the mountain rather than the person at the top of the mountain.

If I understand correctly, you are saying that the Christian believer, is saved in the knowledge of Christ and in the acknowledgement of Christ. That the stories (or histories) told in the New Testament, are accepted by the Christian Believer as Truth, as Good.

No. It's through the body or people in christ that come to mass and make christ present in his sacrificial meal. It's repentance (confession), communion (eucharist and mass), and saying jesus is your lord and savior (confirmation). Salvation is an action not a gift. It's a lifestyle.

I mean, anyone can believe jesus' teachings. Bahai believes in jesus teachings and so do Muslims. That doesn't make them christians.

So I repeat.

Therefore; the Christian is saved in his knowledge of Christ, in his acknowledgement of Christ.

If this is what you mean, then I think it makes sense.

The Christian is saved within the body of christ by the sacrificial meal, repentance, confession, and confirmation. Satan acknowledges christ. He isn't part of the body, though.

And I must conclude that; as the Christian is saved “IN” Christ by “BELIEVING” in Christ therefor have “FAITH” in Christ; it also means that Jesus “Saved” each Christian individually.

I saw it differently. I wouldn't say right or wrong since I don't practice. Anyone can believe anything. Believing doesn't do anything. Faith is just believing in things one can't prove. It's trust. That doesn't do anything. Christ taught actions come with faith. That belief has to be strong and he compared it to different soils on who has surface level belief/understanding and who has devotional/deep levels of understanding.

I mean, I can trust jesus and believe in jesus all I want if I wanted to, but if I don't participate in his body, then christ isn't present. It's just how I would want to feel but not what is actually taught in scripture and by the body itself.

((**And I just realised that I changed your use of the word *Believer for *Christian during my investigation, and that I was wrong to do so; as you do mean “Believer in Christ” and believing in Christ doesn’t make one a “Christian”. Sorry about that :)**))

Haha. It's okay. I didn't catch it. Honestly? No. Believing in christ doesn't make one a christian. Acting and participating with his body does.

Believing that I want to kill someone does not make me a murderer. Actually killing someone does.

…whether the believer was in peril or not in peril in the first place is irrelevant; whether the believer was a sinner or a non-sinner is also irrelevant. Because in this understanding of the words “Christ saved us all”, means that by adhering to and following his teachings (Christ’s) the believer is following the Path of Good. Therefor was saved, and is constantly saved; by Jesus and by himself for following Jesus.

Christ can't save you if he isn't present. You have to make him present through communion.

I must say this is very interesting.

Yeah. My Catholic friend told me that I'd be a very devoted Christian if I ever went back to christianity. Some people don't believe that I'm not a christian (I don't participate in Mass).

Although, for the believer to be completely saved that way; we must first assume that the teachings of Jesus are ultimately good. And if they are, then the believer must follow these teachings, and not just believe in them; i.e. acting in and out of these boundaries (or morals) as his will dictates.

Seeing the teachings as good doesn't save. Believing doesn't make you a christian. The act of faith does. The actual participation does. I mean, in mass, I noticed a lot of people have never even owned a bible. Yet, when we talk, it's like they know the bible more than many protestants that quote the bible back to back. It's based on devotion not knowledge.

Since Jesus did not write these words; it is other people’s rendition of the word and life of Christ that we are reading. We are therefor not reading the word of Christ; but the words of his apostles.

Pretty much. Thats why I wonder why people quote the bible so much. It's not about the bible itself-the words.

It's about Christ-the Word (of god).

Ironically, even the bible says this.

I will be honest, I am not well versed in these texts. I’ve read some of them, but not all of them – and it was a long time ago, when I was younger. I would have to read them again to be able to have a better grasp of them.

The bible text? I read the bible once and read half of it the second time. I can't understand how people can get to god through the bible. It's a devotional practice not knowledge of scripture.

Thank you for your answer, it was really interesting for me to think about all that.

You're welcome.
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
I'm not going to "rationalize" anything away. But I don't see where Windwalker was complaining about what I said.

So answer her question for me and others, because she is right on point with her statement, and questions, about what most of Christianity is teaching. Jesus' parable about himself - says if they don't want to follow me - KILL THEM. Most Christians are teaching that if you don't accept and follow their God - you are dead, - hellfire, - etc.

Windwalker said:
That doesn't sound like an invitation of love to me. Does it to you? If a guy held a gun to a woman's head and said, "I will not kill you if you marry me," would you consider that an ideal relationship? If this is God, then we are all in hell, the "saved" included.

*
 

DavidFirth

Well-Known Member
So answer her question for me and others, because she is right on point with her statement, and questions, about what most of Christianity is teaching. Jesus' parable about himself - says if they don't want to follow me - KILL THEM. Most Christians are teaching that if you don't accept and follow their God - you are dead, - hellfire, - etc.



*

Your twisted. In which parable did Jesus say tHat?

Her questions were asked in ignorance and don't make sense.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Well, they are entitled to their opinion about Christianity, too. But it's just an opinion.

Sure. I was merely suggesting that an opinion about a God who wants to burn them for eternity is perhaps understandable, regardless of whether you agree.
 
Last edited:

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
Your twisted. In which parable did Jesus say tHat?

Her questions were asked in ignorance and don't make sense.

Baloney! She was spot on!

WindWalker said:
That doesn't sound like an invitation of love to me. Does it to you? If a guy held a gun to a woman's head and said, "I will not kill you if you marry me," would you consider that an ideal relationship? If this is God, then we are all in hell, the "saved" included.

Her, - Marry me or I'll kill you, - is the same as Accept and follow me or I'll kill you.

The Jesus parable about himself -


Luk 19:11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.

Luk 19:12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.

Luk 19:13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.

Luk 19:14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.

Luk 19:15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.

Luk 19:16 Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds.

Luk 19:17 And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.

Luk 19:18 And the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five pounds.

Luk 19:19 And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five cities.

Luk 19:20 And another came, saying, Lord, behold, here is thy pound, which I have kept laid up in a napkin:

Luk 19:21 For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.

Luk 19:22 And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow:

Luk 19:23 Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?

Luk 19:24 And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give it to him that hath ten pounds.

Luk 19:25 (And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)

Luk 19:26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.

Luk 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

*
 

DavidFirth

Well-Known Member
Baloney! She was spot on!



Her, - Marry me or I'll kill you, - is the same as Accept and follow me or I'll kill you.

The Jesus parable about himself -


Luk 19:11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.

Luk 19:12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.

Luk 19:13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.

Luk 19:14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.

Luk 19:15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.

Luk 19:16 Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds.

Luk 19:17 And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.

Luk 19:18 And the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five pounds.

Luk 19:19 And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five cities.

Luk 19:20 And another came, saying, Lord, behold, here is thy pound, which I have kept laid up in a napkin:

Luk 19:21 For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.

Luk 19:22 And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow:

Luk 19:23 Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?

Luk 19:24 And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give it to him that hath ten pounds.

Luk 19:25 (And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)

Luk 19:26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.

Luk 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

*

You do realize that Jesus has not yet received His kingdom and that He was speaking of Judgement Day? Yes, on that day all will be judged. The righteous will receive eternal life while the wicked will be cast into hell. What's so horrible about that?
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
You do realize that Jesus has not yet received His kingdom and that He was speaking of Judgement Day? Yes, on that day all will be judged. The righteous will receive eternal life while the wicked will be cast into hell. What's so horrible about that?

The point is that it is crap like this that lets me, and others here, know that Christian doctrine is not from any God.

Bow to me or die, is human.

It is skitzo.

I am love, love, love. - What! They don't want to be ruled by me? KILL THEM! I am love, love, love.

*
 
Top