Joe & Jane Schmoe and "Salvation"?

[roger1440]

I was just joking, which is why I posted the , so I'm sorry to offend since you took it differently.

You didn't offend me. What does the story with Moses and the snake mean? I don't understand it.

 

[metis]

You didn't offend me. What does the story with Moses and the snake mean? I don't understand it.

I have to leave right now but please respond to this post so I can respond hopefully adequately tomorrow.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

How about Jane?

Jane?

 

[metis]

Jane?

See OP.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

How about Jane?

I'd assume the same applies to Jane. Salvation isn't based on if jesus is god or not. It's based on whether christians go through jesus to be with his father. It's about the creator's divinity not jesus.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

To be honest, I have enough trouble accepting the idea of redemption. I simply do not understand the idea of salvation save for a latter day component of an effort to work out an answer to the problem of good and evil - sort of the fools gold of an apocalyptic age.

 

[metis]

I'd assume the same applies to Jane. Salvation isn't based on if jesus is god or not. It's based on whether christians go through jesus to be with his father. It's about the creator's divinity not jesus.

Thanks for the clarification, and your response makes a lot of sense to me.

As for myself, and we may be possibly in agreement on this, I cannot see how it is possible that simply just having a politically-correct belief would supposedly "save" anyone. Both Torah and Jesus' words in the gospels point to what we do as being so very important, therefore I'm more inclined to think that people in other religions, or in no religion at all, could at least hypothetically be "saved" if they are compassionate and just towards all.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It seems to me that once one retreats to talking about 'hypothetical salvation', the topic becomes one of faith versus works. I vote works.

 

[metis]

You didn't offend me. What does the story with Moses and the snake mean? I don't understand it.

I had to look it up as I wasn't sure myself, so here's where you can get an explanation, and apparently the key is found in Numbers, 21st chapter: Nehushtan - Wikipedia

 

[roger1440]

Thanks for the clarification, and your response makes a lot of sense to me.

As for myself, and we may be possibly in agreement on this, I cannot see how it is possible that simply just having a politically-correct belief would supposedly "save" anyone. Both Torah and Jesus' words in the gospels point to what we do as being so very important, therefore I'm more inclined to think that people in other religions, or in no religion at all, could at least hypothetically be "saved" if they are compassionate and just towards all.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Thanks for the clarification, and your response makes a lot of sense to me.

As for myself, and we may be possibly in agreement on this, I cannot see how it is possible that simply just having a politically-correct belief would supposedly "save" anyone. Both Torah and Jesus' words in the gospels point to what we do as being so very important, therefore I'm more inclined to think that people in other religions, or in no religion at all, could at least hypothetically be "saved" if they are compassionate and just towards all.

I agree Actually new age and many mainstream christian denominations (outside of liturgical denomoni) are the only religions I know that focus more on belief and abstract things rather than practice. I mean, for me having a religion or spirituality that has no practice is like siting, looking at the bowl of soup, saying that the recipe book says it's delicious without picking up the spoon to test it themselves. It takes discipline and many associate practice with Catholicism rather following the actions their faith promotes instead of comparing it to another faith or denominations.

A lot of politics. I think we generally agree on a lot of things. I promote practice religions. How does one get the "essence" of a faith without the culture, practice, and tradition that make it up. Just sayin'

 

[roger1440]

Thanks for the clarification, and your response makes a lot of sense to me.

As for myself, and we may be possibly in agreement on this, I cannot see how it is possible that simply just having a politically-correct belief would supposedly "save" anyone. Both Torah and Jesus' words in the gospels point to what we do as being so very important, therefore I'm more inclined to think that people in other religions, or in no religion at all, could at least hypothetically be "saved" if they are compassionate and just towards all.

Simply believing in something isn’t going to save anyone from anything. It’s only when we apply to our lives what we believe in, and then it may save us. We have to walk the walk rather than just talk the talk. Here is a real life example. I smoke. I have been smoking for over 40 years. I believe smoking is bad for my health. I may get lung cancer or some other disease. That belief does not save me.

 

[Falvlun]

[This thread is a carryover from a discussion I've had with @Deeje on another thread, so I'm hoping she joins us here]

Joe Schmoe is a truly nice man who is very compassionate towards all and also is very just (fair) towards all. Even though he attends a local Anglican (Episcopalian) church, he has some doubts about the nature of God, including even at times questioning whether there is a God, and he also sometimes questions Jesus' divinity.

Jane Schmoe, Joe's wife, is an observant Jew who also is both very compassionate and just towards all, believes in God but doesn't see Jesus as being God or being divine. She feels that Jesus was spot-on with his statements about love, compassion, justice, and the need to put these into action, but she strongly doubts the divine claims about him. She feels at home in Joe's church even if she can't identify with all that is taught there.
As they are right now, do you think that it might be possible that God may grant them "salvation"? Why or why not?

What generated this discussion is how we may look at John 3:16, which reads "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life", plus what are the ramifications of this?

I'm not sure how important accepting Jesus' divinity is-- which seems to be the crux of both Joe and Jane's issues.

I do think, though, that Christianity requires the belief that Jesus sacrificed himself for our sins, and our acceptance of that salvation. I think the Bible makes it pretty clear that faith and belief are critical. Good works are evidence of salvation, but not the cause of salvation itself.

 

[ronandcarol]

Joe & Jane Schmoe and "Salvation"?
Although we are not supposed to judge anyone, I did want to jump in here. You made one statement in each description that is very damaging. In Joe's you say that he at times questioning whether there is a God, and he also sometimes questions Jesus' divinity.
And in Jane's you say, strongly doubts the divine claims about Jesus.
It says in the Bible that it is impossible to please God without faith. And if God isn't pleased with someone, they probably won't make the cut.
As far as John 3:16 goes, whoever believes in him should not perish, you can take the words faith and believe interchangeably.
You cannot doubt the divinity of Christ and be a child of God. You have to be born again, to become a child of God. You have to put your faith/belief and trust in the one and only Savior for you salvation. It is only His shed blood on the cross that can cleanse us.
ronandcarol

 

[wizanda]

As they are right now, do you think that it might be possible that God may grant them "salvation"? Why or why not?

Neither currently are worthy based upon belief, as they see division between the text...Yeshua is a Jewish fulfillment; not a Christian one.

What generated this discussion is how we may look at John 3:16

If we look at it as a made up account of hearsay evidence collected by the Sanhedrin; it makes far more sense of the rest of the Tanakh.

How about Jane?

Jane unfortunately may acknowledge Yeshua's teachings; yet Yeshua has already proven by the fulfillment of prophecy to be the Messiah; therefore she is in a mess for getting included on the wedding guest-list, if she doesn't like the bridegroom.

 

[metis]

I do think, though, that Christianity requires the belief that Jesus sacrificed himself for our sins, and our acceptance of that salvation. I think the Bible makes it pretty clear that faith and belief are critical. Good works are evidence of salvation, but not the cause of salvation itself.

And yet when you read Jesus' words, such as in the Sermon On the Mount and the Parable of the Sheep & Goats, what I pick up is a much greater emphasis on actions, not politically-correct beliefs. Matter of the fact, if it were the latter that he would have emphasized, then his position vis-a-vis the Law would not fit largely because p.c. would have it that the Law in its entirely, all 613 of them, must be continually followed. Seems that it's more Paul that insists on being p.c., much less so Jesus.

And Jesus' words "I came to serve, not to be served" also seems to more emphasize the role of actions and that he was not here for personal adulation. His demands of working with the poor and downtrodden are found throughout the gospels but I see no demand that he be worshiped.

Anyhow, the impression that I get as I read the gospels is that his main insistence is to have a belief in God and then acting towards all people out of compassion and justice & mercy. What I don't see is as much of is any insistence that a p.c. correct belief about his supposed deification is necessary for "salvation", and John 3:16 doesn't mention him at all in that context. And indeed, the early church struggled with exactly what was the nature of Jesus vis-a-vis the Father, so it wasn't even that clear to them exactly what was the relationship between Jesus and the Father.

 

[metis]

It says in the Bible that it is impossible to please God without faith. And if God isn't pleased with someone, they probably won't make the cut.

It is absolutely normal and common for people to at least at times question their beliefs, so exactly how much faith in necessary for "salvation"? How could one possibly tell how much it takes?

You cannot doubt the divinity of Christ and be a child of God.

I don't at all agree with that as, to me, it's "p.c. gone wild". The idea that God would condemn those who believe in Him but belong to another faith sounds more like a "god" that's hell-bent on genocide just because of their "wrong belief".

And what about those who lived before Jesus? And what about those who live in areas where they've never even heard of Jesus? And what about those who never get a good education about what's found in the gospels? God's going to condemn them as well?

But thanks for your response anyway.

 

[metis]

Jane unfortunately may acknowledge Yeshua's teachings; yet Yeshua has already proven by the fulfillment of prophecy to be the Messiah; therefore she is in a mess for getting included on the wedding guest-list, if she doesn't like the bridegroom.

But who said the Jane doesn't like the bridegroom? Jane didn't.

Jane just doesn't see the bridegroom in exactly the same way that Joe does.

 

[wizanda]

Jane just doesn't see the bridegroom in exactly the same way that Joe does.

That is a good thing, as the case is there to see who can discern the Law....God is looking for Lawyers.

But who said the Jane doesn't like the bridegroom? Jane didn't.

So Jane is willing to accept Yeshua as The Messiah; why hasn't she studied the Tanakh to substantiate it, and then teach Joe how it really works?

 

[metis]

So Jane is willing to accept Yeshua as The Messiah

undoubtedly not.

why hasn't she studied the Tanakh to substantiate it, and then teach Joe how it really works?

Well, you seemingly imply that the Tanakh actually does substantiate it, but maybe Jane has thoroughly read the Tanakh but doesn't think it does. So, iyo, does that mean she's likely not gonna be "saved"?