Salvation in Christianity

[muhammad_isa]

I meant over others, not oneself.

Having power over others is a test, and comes with big responsibility.
Those who hanker after power, at the expense of truth, have no abode with G-d.

 

[F1fan]

The idea that “I am saved” is different than “I will be saved”. Christians are to strongly identify with the Kingdom by identifying with the former.

Still, the question that should follow: If I am saved, then why am I not in the Kingdom of Heaven? Someone cannot be saved from a flood while they are still in the flood. Christians will respond to this by explaining that “I am saved” and “I will be saved” are actually the same, but that is a move which weakens identification with the Kingdom.

Christians, don’t soften on this - you are saved, but then confront the question: if you are saved, then why aren’t you in the Kingdom?

What is the Kingdom exactly? And how would an ordinary person know they are in it? Describe what “being in the Kingdom” is like, assuming you know.

 

[YoursTrue]

“If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed.” - Albert Einstein

smart comment there. Meantime, sorry or not, I'm pretty sure Herr Einstein believed in evolution and figured when he died it's over for him.

 

[F1fan]

smart comment there. Meantime, sorry or not, I'm pretty sure Herr Einstein believed in evolution and figured when he died it's over for him.

That is what smart people understand. It's because they follow facts, not dogma.

 

[Father Heathen]

smart comment there. Meantime, sorry or not, I'm pretty sure Herr Einstein believed in evolution and figured when he died it's over for him.

Belief in a god and acceptance of evolution aren't mutually exclusive. Belief in literal interpretations of scripture isn't a prerequisite for belief in god, either.

God isn't restricted by or beholden to books written by man.

 

[YoursTrue]

Belief in a god and acceptance of evolution aren't mutually exclusive. Belief in literal interpretations of scripture isn't a prerequisite for belief in god, either.

God isn't restricted by or beholden to books written by man.

I do not believe all scripture is to be literally taken.

 

[YoursTrue]

Belief in a god and acceptance of evolution aren't mutually exclusive. Belief in literal interpretations of scripture isn't a prerequisite for belief in god, either.

God isn't restricted by or beholden to books written by man.

That's actually not what I said about Dr. Einstein. He just wasn't sure and was big enough to admit that. On the other hand, the theory or concept of evolution does not allow for God having any part in the emergence of life and man. Since it is said to have all happened "naturally" and inherently needs no intervention of superior intelligence having influence. Because -- according to the theory -- it all happened by chemical reaction. And evolution leads to death, no matter what.

 

[Treasure Hunter]

That's actually not what I said about Dr. Einstein. He just wasn't sure and was big enough to admit that. On the other hand, the theory or concept of evolution does not allow for God having any part in the emergence of life and man. Since it is said to have all happened "naturally" and inherently needs no intervention of superior intelligence having influence. Because -- according to the theory -- it all happened by chemical reaction. And evolution leads to death, no matter what.

Theists can easily snatch evolutionary theory away and fulfill it by nesting natural selection within supernatural selection. Right now, evolutionary theorists don’t know how to explain why certain costly negative emotions such as guilt and shame have been selected and preserved when fear can serve the same purpose on its own. It’s because those emotions have been supernaturally selected for and preserved, but that is a no-go within current evolutionary theorizing.

I mean, they try to come up with group based explanations, but they are completely convoluted and reaching.

 

[idea]

Religion is affirmation of the soul. Organized religion has those corruptions, but that is why there is un-organized religion, like what we are doing on this forum.

Unorganized religion - haha, I prefer the term "not affiliated", personal - no borrowed light.

 

[YoursTrue]

Theists can easily snatch evolutionary theory away and fulfill it by nesting natural selection within supernatural selection. Right now, evolutionary theorists don’t know how to explain why certain costly negative emotions such as guilt and shame have been selected and preserved when fear can serve the same purpose on its own. It’s because those emotions have been supernaturally selected for and preserved, but that is a no-go within current evolutionary theorizing.

I mean, they try to come up with group based explanations, but they are completely convoluted and reaching.

I began to question the theory of evolution based on the theory itself. I do agree with your statement above.

 

[Father Heathen]

That's actually not what I said about Dr. Einstein. He just wasn't sure and was big enough to admit that. On the other hand, the theory or concept of evolution does not allow for God having any part in the emergence of life and man. Since it is said to have all happened "naturally" and inherently needs no intervention of superior intelligence having influence. Because -- according to the theory -- it all happened by chemical reaction. And evolution leads to death, no matter what.

Theistic evolution - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Father Heathen]

Theists can easily snatch evolutionary theory away and fulfill it by nesting natural selection within supernatural selection. Right now, evolutionary theorists don’t know how to explain why certain costly negative emotions such as guilt and shame have been selected and preserved when fear can serve the same purpose on its own. It’s because those emotions have been supernaturally selected for and preserved, but that is a no-go within current evolutionary theorizing.

I mean, they try to come up with group based explanations, but they are completely convoluted and reaching.

"I don't understand, therefore magic."

 

[cataway]

to be saved from the grave . all are going there only one can get you out alive

 

[Treasure Hunter]

"I don't understand, therefore magic."

The blind man who thinks he can see is utterly blind.
The blind man who acknowledges his blindness can see.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Still, the question that should follow: If I am saved, then why am I not in the Kingdom of Heaven?

Here is what Meister Eckhart said in one of his sermons:

Our Lord says, "Know that the kingdom of God is close to you." Indeed, the kingdom of God is within us/ and St. Paul says that our salvation is nearer to us than we think. Firstly we should know in what way the kingdom of God is close to us, and secondly, when the kingdom of God is close to us. Accordingly we should know the sense of this. If I were a king and did not know it, I should be no king. But if I had the firm conviction that I was king, and if everybody believed it with me, and if I knew for certain that that was everybody's belief, then I would be king and all the king's treasure would be mine, and I should lack none of it. These things are necessary conditions for my being a king. Failing any one of these three things, I could not be a king. A master declares - and the best of our masters with him that blessedness depends on our understanding and knowing, and we have a compulsive urge to know the truth. I have a power in my soul which is ever receptive to God. I am as certain as that I am a man, that nothing is so close to me as God. God is closer to me than I am to myself: my being depends on God's being near me and present to me. So He is also in a stone or a log of wood, only they do not know it. If the wood knew God and realized how close He is to it as the highest angel does, it would be as blessed as the highest angel. And so man is more blessed than a stone or a piece of wood because he is aware of God and knows how close God is to him. And I am the more blessed, the more I realize this, and I am the less blessed, the less I know this. I am not blessed because God is in me and is near me and because I possess Him, but because I am aware of how close He is to me, and that I know God /.../

 

[1213]

The idea that “I am saved” is different than “I will be saved”. Christians are to strongly identify with the Kingdom by identifying with the former.

Still, the question that should follow: If I am saved, then why am I not in the Kingdom of Heaven? Someone cannot be saved from a flood while they are still in the flood. Christians will respond to this by explaining that “I am saved” and “I will be saved” are actually the same, but that is a move which weakens identification with the Kingdom.

Christians, don’t soften on this - you are saved, but then confront the question: if you are saved, then why aren’t you in the Kingdom?

I think saved means, sins are forgiven and so you are saved from the judgment that would come because of the sin.

 

[Father Heathen]

The blind man who thinks he can see is utterly blind.
The blind man who acknowledges his blindness can see.

Sounds like you're almost there.

 

[cataway]

I think saved means, sins are forgiven and so you are saved from the judgment that would come because of the sin.

you are still going to die , its when you are saved from the grave , that's when you are saved . to then live again under kingdom rule.

 

[Treasure Hunter]

Sounds like you're almost there.

And what about you?

 

[Father Heathen]

And what about you?

I'm here to guide you to the light, my child.