the right religion

[Astravalon]

I'm keeping this short and sweet. Rather than get into the trap of arguing line for line, I'll save time and bandwidth and cover the main points:

1robin, what you’re presenting here is the synergistic (Arminian) approach to soteriology, to which not all of Christianity subscribes. The synergistic (Armianian) approach says that the person must believe first before Christ’s sacrifice is applied to them.

However, we also have the monergistic (Calvinistic) approach, which says that God chooses who He will save apart from anything the individual does or believes beforehand. Once He saves them, then they become believers.

I lean more towards the monergistic side (again, assuming salvation is/was ever needed to begin with), only -- unlike Calvinism -- I believe everyone would be included in God’s saving act, not just a mere handful.

The following are on my blog and reflect where I stand on the issues we've been discussing:

“Faith / Belief / Repentance: Man’s Work for God, or God’s Gift to Man?” which lists parts of the bible that touch on where those three things actually come from.

For verses which support universal redemption, see "Bible Verses that Support the Redemption of All Things".

For a boatload of verses that show God’s sovereign will trumps human “free” will every time, check out Free Will: Who Really Has It?

 

[1robin]

I'm keeping this short and sweet. Rather than get into the trap of arguing line for line, I'll save time and bandwidth and cover the main points:

Thank goodness this was getting unmanageable.

1robin, what you’re presenting here is the synergistic (Arminian) approach to soteriology, to which not all of Christianity subscribes. The synergistic (Armianian) approach says that the person must believe first before Christ’s sacrifice is applied to them.

No I am not. I am apllying the teachings of Christ and the apostles. The fact that there are others who do not believe what I believe does not change what is in the Bible. I would say that at least 95% of Christianity believes Christ is the doorway by which Christianity is enetered. That is why Christ said this:

John 3
3 Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.”
3 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.[a]”
4 “How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!”
5 Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit[b] gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You[c] must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”[d]
9 “How can this be?” Nicodemus asked.
10 “You are Israel’s teacher,” said Jesus, “and do you not understand these things? 11 Very truly I tell you, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. 12 I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? 13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven —the Son of Man.[e] 14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,[f] 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”[g]
16For 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 they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.
John 3:1-21 NIV - Jesus Teaches Nicodemus - Now there was - Bible Gateway
Bolding mine.
This is probably the most exhaustive teaching in the Bible on this issue.
This man Nicodemus was a Pharisee, the class of high priests in Israel. He was even a good one, an expert in abedience to the law, and was not corrupt like the rest and he even recognised Jesus for who he was. After all that effort, Jesus said he was still not in what is called the spiritual kingdom of God. He said he must be born again before he would enter the kingdom. In other words if any man could get into the kingdom by effort it was Nicodemus but Jesus said he must be born again by faith not obedience and he would enter. He even expressed confusion as to how a priest could missunderstand this simple truth.

However, we also have the monergistic (Calvinistic) approach, which says that God chooses who He will save apart from anything the individual does or believes beforehand. Once He saves them, then they become believers.

This has nothing to do with the specific issue we are discussing and is wrong anyway. Since Christ said he died that all men might be saved then if Calvanism was true Christ was lieing.

I lean more towards the monergistic side (again, assuming salvation is/was ever needed to begin with), only -- unlike Calvinism -- I believe everyone would be included in God’s saving act, not just a mere handful.

The bible is very clear that this is not the case despite any preference on our part to the contrary.

The following are on my blog and reflect where I stand on the issues we've been discussing:

“Faith / Belief / Repentance: Man’s Work for God, or God’s Gift to Man?” which lists parts of the bible that touch on where those three things actually come from.

For verses which support universal redemption, see "Bible Verses that Support the Redemption of All Things".

For a boatload of verses that show God’s sovereign will trumps human “free” will every time, check out Free Will: Who Really Has It?

I will try and read these but it appears you are muddying very clear waters in order to complicate the obvious to the degree that what you prefer to be true can be maintained as truth. That is not intended as an insult. All people do this to some extent and even when known of and resisted it is a hard fight. I do not know what it is about you thet when responding I get on autopilot and say way more than I meant to. Maybe it's because you are reasonable and respectful and that is rare.


You will find that all major respected commentator's do not share either predestination, works based salvation, or universalism interpretations of the bible.
Those views are usually a very small minority and have been identified as heretical or gnostic for over a thousand years. I sympathise with you, as Christ's true teaching are very contentious and the bible states many times they were rejected as being too hard. The natural man is an enemy of God and so can never be an ally of his true message. The spiritual man is an ally of God and has no need to redefine clear teachings.

 

[waitasec]

and who determines heresy?

isn't it those that claim they have the right religion?


arrogance at it's best.

 

[Deut 13:1]

there r many religion in the world, but surly there r only one right religion, but how could we reach the right believe, the right path?

Why must there only be one right religion?

 

[1robin]

“Faith / Belief / Repentance: Man’s Work for God, or God’s Gift to Man?” which lists parts of the bible that touch on where those three things actually come from.

It read the few verses there but I did not see a conclusion or a claim based on them. I did like the present box icon. Your religion at least has better color coordination than mine.

For verses which support universal redemption, see "Bible Verses that Support the Redemption of All Things".

I read a few of these starting at the top and could see very quickly that at least the ones I saw would have to be stripped of context to mean what the conclusion or premise was. Universalism is certainly not an accepted Christian teaching. It would make most of the Bible incoherent and contradictory to view those verses in that light. In biblical exegesis as I am sure you know context is everything. Did you say this was your site or one you agree with?

For a boatload of verses that show God’s sovereign will trumps human “free” will every time, check out Free Will: Who Really Has It?

Of course God's soverign will trumps ours. Thank goodness his will is to give me freewill. My take on this subject is my opinion but I do not think it contradicts the bible in any sence. This is a very contentious issue. I believe God grants us freewill for a certain amount of time he determines. I also believe that he can and will superceed that freewill when he deems it necessary (as in Pharoh's case as well as maybe Judus's and of course in any execution of miracles and issues dealing with prophecy) but that is by far the exception and not the rule. 99.9% of our decisions are our own IMO. Can you start a sentence with a number?

 

[1robin]

Why must there only be one right religion?

There are far better reasons to believe there is only one than that there are many. If you read the last few pages of this thread you can find many of them. They basically center on these two principles. 1. Two or more contradictory claims to absolute truth can not possibly be all true. Most religions make contradictory and mutually exclusive claims to truth. 2. It is contradictory to the purpose to hide bits of truth in mountains of garbage. There is no reason consistent with the intent to disperse truth so thinly that it is overwhelmed by the mess it is contained in. Form follows function, or should with an benevolent intentional being.

 

[kjw47]

Why must there only be one right religion?

God never used more than one single religion, why would he-- 1 Corinthians 1:10.

 

[1robin]

God never used more than one single religion, why would he-- 1 Corinthians 1:10.

Preach on it. I would add:
English Standard Version (©2001)
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Right or wrong Christianity and most other religions make exclusive claims. Any attempt to reconcile them all is a recipe for disaster and will wind up in defeat.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Why must there only be one right religion?

Scripture says at 1st Corinthians [14 vs 33,40] that God is not a God of confusion or disorder but of peace.....

More than one religion would Not be order but disorder because both [or more] would not be speaking in agreement.

- 1st Cor. 1 v 10; 2nd Cor. 13 v 11; Romans 16 v 17

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Preach on it. I would add:
English Standard Version (©2001)
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
Right or wrong Christianity and most other religions make exclusive claims. Any attempt to reconcile them all is a recipe for disaster and will wind up in defeat.

How did Jesus 'reconcile' his 1st-century teachings but through his logical reasoning on the Scriptures.
Jesus often taught by prefacing his statements with the words, "it is written". Written in the Hebrew OT Scriptures as the basis for his teachings.
So, exactly, any attempt to reconcile all religions would just not work because of their being different from Jesus 1st-century teachings.

There is no need to reconcile 'all' or 'any other' belief system because Jesus already forewarned that MANY would come 'in his name' but prove false.
The majority of those professing to follow Jesus are on the wide road leading to destruction.- Matthew chapter 7.

Luke also wrote false clergy would be fleecing the flock of God.- Acts 20 vs 29,30
So, any attempt to reconcile some or all is not going to work.

 

[1robin]

How did Jesus 'reconcile' his 1st-century teachings but through his logical reasoning on the Scriptures.
Jesus often taught by prefacing his statements with the words, "it is written". Written in the Hebrew OT Scriptures as the basis for his teachings.
So, exactly, any attempt to reconcile all religions would just not work because of their being different from Jesus 1st-century teachings.

There is no need to reconcile 'all' or 'any other' belief system because Jesus already forewarned that MANY would come 'in his name' but prove false.
The majority of those professing to follow Jesus are on the wide road leading to destruction.- Matthew chapter 7.

Luke also wrote false clergy would be fleecing the flock of God.- Acts 20 vs 29,30
So, any attempt to reconcile some or all is not going to work.

Well we are preaching to the quior here but I would also add that Jesus added something to his testimony that no other religion has. He performed miracles, lived a sinless life, was perfectly consistent with biblical theology, demonstrated divine knowledge, fulfilled hundreds or prophecies, and if that wasn't enough rose from the dead there by demonstrating that it was he and not the nay sayers that were truthfully representing God. The quality of the testimony is such that if someone does not believe the Gospel accounts then it is for some other reason than lack of evidence. There is no parallel in any other religion.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Yes, and that God resurrected Jesus out of the 'Bible's hell' [sheol] on the third day.

- Acts 2 vs 31, 32; Acts 13 v 30; Colossians 2 v 12 B

 

[Astravalon]

No I am not. I am apllying the teachings of Christ and the apostles. The fact that there are others who do not believe what I believe does not change what is in the Bible.

I'm just thinking of all the various sects within Christianity who say this while disagreeing with each other. I'm so glad to be out of that house of smoke and mirrors! :yes:

 

[1robin]

I'm just thinking of all the various sects within Christianity who say this while disagreeing with each other. I'm so glad to be out of that house of smoke and mirrors! :yes:

There is no religion on the face of the earth that has 100% agreement. For goodness sake Hinduism has over three hundred million Gods. Was two hundred million not enough? Christian's understandably dissagree 99% of the time on second and third tier issues or even single verses many times, but we all believe in the same Jesus, God, prophets, and apostles. I would not feel cheated to go into any one of the major protestant denominations and hear the word. I would only be slightly put out to attend a Catholic one. That is a far cry from 300 million Gods.

 

[Astravalon]

There is no religion on the face of the earth that has 100% agreement. For goodness sake Hinduism has over three hundred million Gods. Was two hundred million not enough? Christian's understandably dissagree 99% of the time on second and third tier issues or even single verses many times, but we all believe in the same Jesus, God, prophets, and apostles. I would not feel cheated to go into any one of the major protestant denominations and hear the word. I would only be slightly put out to attend a Catholic one. That is a far cry from 300 million Gods.

That’s religion for ya, and that's also one reason why I no longer bother with it.

 

[1robin]

That’s religion for ya, and that's also one reason why I no longer bother with it.

I guess I can somewhat agree with that sentament. The same would also explain many of the lesser issues in Christianity just as well. Just out of curiosity how do you know that Krishna is the right one out of the other 300 million.

 

[Astravalon]

I guess I can somewhat agree with that sentament. The same would also explain many of the lesser issues in Christianity just as well. Just out of curiosity how do you know that Krishna is the right one out of the other 300 million.

My take on it is that there is only one God.

What varies are the gazillion perspectives on that one God.

For me, the outer form that is Krishna best matches the inner substance of God as I have come to believe He is. Rather than the angry old man in the sky, I now see Him as the drop-dead gorgeous (inside and out) lover of the soul.

Ironically enough, this got its start on May 21, 2011, the day Harold Camping predicted a rapture. I sure felt like I was raptured, just not in the sense he probably envisioned.

So as not to derail the thread too much, my testimony (to borrow a Christian term ) about all that can be found in my Journal right here on RF: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2890104-post10.html

 

[kylixguru]

There is no rational basis for this interpretation. The bible where these verses are certainly does not teach this. In fact Jesus said he was the only way to the father. He said any one who tried to get in another way (a false religion) would be a robber and a thief and suffer as such. Christianity right or wrong as with most other religions are mutually exclusive and any claim that they are all valid is philisophically impossible. Unless you think God is malevolent enough to hide bits of contradictory truths in many different mountains of garbage then reason dictates that one religion would be true and all others false.

Whoa, slow down there for just a minute. You are implying I made an assumption that I did not make. Seems to me you are a bit too eager to poke holes in what I'm saying. Though, if what I say does actually have holes in it, I do hope you will point those out. Please just keep in mind I don't consider it helpful to invent holes that are not there.

Did I say that Jesus' involvement was excluded in my interpretation?

Did I say that being in a room in one of the Father's mansions means that someone would enjoy the personal presense and full glory of the Father?

 

[kylixguru]

Yes, and that God resurrected Jesus out of the 'Bible's hell' [sheol] on the third day.

- Acts 2 vs 31, 32; Acts 13 v 30; Colossians 2 v 12 B

Right, and I'll explain how.

The "greater light to rule the day" was created on Day 4 of the Creation account. This was God's way of saying when the Savior would be born during this cycle of Creation. And, we of course recognize that Jesus was born in the 4th millennium since the beginning of this Creation cycle. We also know that Christ is scheduled to return to rule and reign during the Millennium, which is Day 7 of the Creation account. That pretty much makes the arrival of the resurrected Christ imminent.

So, if my math serves me correctly, 4 + 3 = 7. So, when taken in the prophetic context that was intended, Jesus is a resurrected being of flesh and bone during the Millennium. And, the odd curiosity as to why it is only a little over 2,000 years is simply because Jesus came at the very end of Day 4 and he comes at the beginning of Day 7.

PS. I forgot to mention that I was taking Peter's advice to consider a day of the Lord as a thousand years unto man. See 2 Peter 3:8.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Why must there only be one right religion?

The morally destitute need to feel special.