Your saved as soon as you accept jesus.

[Yes]

This is interesting. You are saying someone is saved by accepting Jesus, then immediately say, well, not really. It either is, or isn't meaningful to accept' Jesus. If it's just a figure of speech, then it has no real menaing. I'm not big on '''''metaphor magic''''''

We HAVE TO obey Jesus.

Read John 15:9.

 

[Yes]

Although I agree the church is in error, i'm a staunch anti-Baptist. Don't think being dunked in water 'does' anything. In fact, 'magic ritual' there comes darn close.

In the Bible, we can see that a person can receive the Holy Spirit before water baptism, during water baptism, and after water baptism.

Jesus saves us after he accepts us. Jesus accepts those who fear God and does what is right. That is to whom Jesus gives his Holy Spirit.

See Acts 15:8, Acts 10:35, and Acts 5:32.

 

[Yes]

Water baptism is an external ceremony, a symbol of what is going on in the heart.

1 Peter 3:20 to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21 and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God.

 

[Yes]

More obfuscation. One wonders why you seem to assume a negative connotation to 'accepting Jesus', immediately.

How could you ever think that obeying Jesus' beautiful, powerful words is negative in any way?

Jesus' words are life. You will have Jesus revealed to you, you will have understanding, you will have been reconciled to God, you will have been saved---if you obey Jesus' beautiful powerful words.

If you want scripture references to anything I say, just ask.

 

[AllanV]

Although I agree the church is in error, i'm a staunch anti-Baptist. Don't think being dunked in water 'does' anything. In fact, 'magic ritual' there comes darn close.

Water baptism is between the participant and God. It does seem foolish and it is explained this way in scriptures. Rather than magic there is something going on that is supernatural.
We have our being and presence in God whether this is believed or not. God is an observer a little beyond and deeper than the mind that is thought from. The natural mind is something of a barrier to knowing God as He requests. The natural mind is encumbered with aspects in the personality that are driven from self belief developed from genetic biological input and life experience.
Every church seems to have limitations and most need to be kept away from. The Bible is a good reference but only with an over view and some enlightenment.

In reference to mankind It begins with a loss of immortality because of a consciousness and mind change under the influence of deceptive thought processes. The resulting rebellious nature gives some mind power to influence others in their mind and is called witchcraft in the scriptures. One person is able to lodge memories and reactions deep in the subconscious to the point that it can determine behavior and speech. Own mind power is required to resist being overtaken by another self belief. This corrupts a pure life force as a certain impurity is then held within the mind and heart. Speech then confirms what is held on the heart.
In a sense something pure is corrupted by self belief and this effects the whole body and we age and die in a sympathetic tuning to the forces of oxidizing , decay, entropy and predatory instincts acting on the earth.
The kingdom of God as announced by Jesus is where individuals are enabled to take up His nature then being extracted from and given protection to escape the encumbered mind of self belief. The hope is that this will lead to immortality in a future world that is free from all the worst that is occurring right now.

 

[kjw47]

Bad people in general, then?

no--mislead people--99%

 

[Jumi]

People think there is some process to go through, but it isn't the case. All one has to do is accept Jesus, and their saved. No magic ceremonies required.

Saved from what?

 

[Desert Snake]

Saved from what?

I take it you haven't been reading the thread?
But my answer is that, 'saved' here doesn't mean saved 'from' something necessarily, because no where does it say there is one method of righteousness, in the Bible. So, therefore, rather it is a completely positive meaning of the word, actionary as opposed to reactionary.

 

[AllanV]

Who is 'satan' then, an entity?

Satan is more of a spirit and hidden in a so called normal personality. Satan determines response and behavior in any situation and conversation.
As scriptures say Satan deceives the whole world.

 

[Jumi]

I take it you haven't been reading the thread?

I asked because I didn't see it discussed.

But my answer is that, 'saved' here doesn't mean saved 'from' something necessarily, because no where does it say there is one method of righteousness, in the Bible. So, therefore, rather it is a completely positive meaning of the word, actionary as opposed to reactionary.

So what's it for?

 

[AllanV]

Saved from what?

Saved from the kingdom of Satan. Satan is a ruler and sets out to destroy this planet and all life by the actions of his subjects. Satan deceives the whole world.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaran Luis ji

excuse my break , .but to continue where I left of .....

I take it that you have already chanced upon some of my explanations of how, if God exists, he must have no problem with the existence of atheists and anti-theists?

sorry luis but appart from your breif explanation above I have not read all your posts , .....personaly I do not see how someone who does not beleive in the existance of God , could then speculate upon whether or not that entity in which he does not belive , would or would not have a problem with atheism ???

and how many Christans also stand up for a just and equal world ?

I do not know, of course.

If I had to guess, I would assume that a considerably lesser percentage as compared to atheists, and an even lesser one when compared to anti-theists.[/quote]

if you do not know , what is the point of hazarding a guess , or making assumptions , this is rather a dangerous persuit .

We are, quite simply, better selected and better motivated overall. It is a circunstantial yet IMO significant advantage.

after the last coment which was based upon suposition , ....one (being my self) must question the motivation of any one who is illinformed enough to say ''I dont know then to follow that remark by the assumption that a considerably higher proportion of atheists stand up for a just and equal world compared to christians ???

However, I fail to see why the comparison is even relevant. Do you feel a need to choose sides?

I am neither Christian nor Atheist therefore I am in a perfect position to be un biased .

to my mind each should be equaly responcible regardless of his or her position , and we should be self scrutinising that is our duty as human beings .

Of course. But you, who so often claim to care about Buddhism, has certainly considered the consequences of Interdependent Origination.

I do not claim anything , I simply state that I have practiced Buddhism for a considerable length of time , how ever from previous conversations I have noted that your Idea of Buddhism and mine are some what different , ...what I am concerned about here is that we take responcibility for our actions , ...I am not suggesting that we let others behave in an unruly manner , but in responce to your reasoning I am simply stating that all people in a position of authority should behave responcibly regardles of their beleif or lack of , ....

We can not in good faith wash our hands off the mistakes of others. Even when we are not among those affected by them, which is often the case anyway.

we canot turn our backs it is true , but it is a case of how such mistakes are efectively rectified ?

Unchecked theism is dangerous and harmful, and the bottom line is that this single fact is all the justification that anti-theism needs to exist.

you are making a rather large sweeping assumption again that all theists are bad theists , ...

Unfortunatly canot help but feel that this attitude embodies a high degree of fundamantalism , if this attitude were observed in a religion I think we would all agree that it is dangerous , ...therefore in my mind anti theism runs the risk of being as equaly dangerous as the worst aspects of religion ? ......

There are subtler benefits as well. Most obvious of all, in providing a challenge to theistic beliefs we encourage theists to reconsider and provide solidity to their theism - or sometimes even to realize that they are not truly theists after all, but rather just inherited expectations of theistic behavior. Self-acceptance is a good thing.

luis you have a habit of chalenging my beleifs (and I hate to say you have not done so in a subtle way) , you appear to have done so on the assumption that they are blind , which is at the least unskillfull behavior , ...I have lived my life examining belief , therefore it is now what Buddha himself defined as unshakable beleif , I didnt just get to that stage without some serious work and reflection on my part , ...I too am worried about some of the injustices of this world , but I do not see the point of making assumptions as to which section of society the magority of the guilty come from .

Atheism, by its turn, needs no justification at all. It is as solid and self-justified stance as they come.

luis there are good and bad Atheists in this world in just the same proportions as good and bad Theist , ...this is due to human ignorance .
I think it is now time to return to the OP and to consider the benifits of folowing the teachings of Christ .

 

[AllanV]

I take it you haven't been reading the thread?
But my answer is that, 'saved' here doesn't mean saved 'from' something necessarily, because no where does it say there is one method of righteousness, in the Bible. So, therefore, rather it is a completely positive meaning of the word, actionary as opposed to reactionary.

Rom 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

The problem is how deeply a person is able to believe and believe what. Satan rules his subjects and must be overcome. This is where it is necessary to purify the self and believe in God. But that is done in the nature of Jesus rather than the rebellious Human.

It is a process of going deeper progressively and the way in is shown from the position that has been already attained.

 

[LuisDantas]

namaskaran Luis ji

Namaskaran, Ratikala Ji.

excuse my break , .but to continue where I left of .....

I take it that you have already chanced upon some of my explanations of how, if God exists, he must have no problem with the existence of atheists and anti-theists?

sorry luis but appart from your breif explanation above I have not read all your posts , .....personaly I do not see how someone who does not beleive in the existance of God , could then speculate upon whether or not that entity in which he does not belive , would or would not have a problem with atheism ???

For one thing, it is helpful when I am threatened with eternal hellfire.

and how many Christans also stand up for a just and equal world ?

I do not know, of course.

If I had to guess, I would assume that a considerably lesser percentage as compared to atheists, and an even lesser one when compared to anti-theists.

if you do not know , what is the point of hazarding a guess , or making assumptions , this is rather a dangerous persuit .

Uh, why? Why does the percentage matter at all? This is not an election or a contest.

We are, quite simply, better selected and better motivated overall. It is a circunstantial yet IMO significant advantage.

after the last coment which was based upon suposition , ....one (being my self) must question the motivation of any one who is ill informed enough to say ''I dont know then to follow that remark by the assumption that a considerably higher proportion of atheists stand up for a just and equal world compared to christians ???

So to you it is in some sense a contest? I don't think that is a good stance to take, personally.

However, I fail to see why the comparison is even relevant. Do you feel a need to choose sides?

I am neither Christian nor Atheist therefore I am in a perfect position to be un biased .

And yet you are not. However, that does not have to be important. You will learn. We all will.

to my mind each should be equaly responcible regardless of his or her position , and we should be self scrutinising that is our duty as human beings .

Of course. But you, who so often claim to care about Buddhism, has certainly considered the consequences of Interdependent Origination.

I do not claim anything , I simply state that I have practiced Buddhism for a considerable length of time , how ever from previous conversations I have noted that your Idea of Buddhism and mine are some what different ,

True that!

...what I am concerned about here is that we take responcibility for our actions , ...I am not suggesting that we let others behave in an unruly manner , but in responce to your reasoning I am simply stating that all people in a position of authority should behave responcibly regardles of their beleif or lack of , ....

Sure, I have no argument with that.

We can not in good faith wash our hands off the mistakes of others. Even when we are not among those affected by them, which is often the case anyway.

we canot turn our backs it is true , but it is a case of how such mistakes are efectively rectified ?

Are you asking whether there is any actual benefit to point out the excesses of theism? It seems very clear to me that there is indeed, very much so.

Unchecked theism is dangerous and harmful, and the bottom line is that this single fact is all the justification that anti-theism needs to exist.

you are making a rather large sweeping assumption again that all theists are bad theists , ...

No, I said no such thing, nor do I believe in anything remotely resembling it. It is odd that you misread me to such an extent.

Unfortunatly canot help but feel that this attitude embodies a high degree of fundamantalism , if this attitude were observed in a religion I think we would all agree that it is dangerous , ...therefore in my mind anti theism runs the risk of being as equaly dangerous as the worst aspects of religion ? ......

I suppose I will just have to accept that you are misjudging me and my understanding of anti-theism. But then again, you have an habit of misjudging me. I can't very well allow myself to be troubled by that.

Even so, it sure surprises me that you reach such a conclusion, so strongly at odds with what is actually said and with what actually happens.

I get the sense that you may not even be reading what I write, but instead chose to simply pour out your preconceptions and prejudices.

There are subtler benefits as well. Most obvious of all, in providing a challenge to theistic beliefs we encourage theists to reconsider and provide solidity to their theism - or sometimes even to realize that they are not truly theists after all, but rather just inherited expectations of theistic behavior. Self-acceptance is a good thing.

luis you have a habit of chalenging my beleifs (and I hate to say you have not done so in a subtle way) ,

It is true. I rarely attempt to use subtlety with you. Our specific rapport is blunt, not subtle. You have an affinity for disrespecting me and I decided to call you on those situations whenever possible, the better to make you understand how wrong you can be.

I suppose that can be very unpleasant to you. But I rarely find myself with much of an alternative. Your manner of discourse often leaves little room for middle ground between open challenge and complete submission.

To your credit, it is obvious that you have made an impressive effort to overcome that trait.

you appear to have done so on the assumption that they are blind , which is at the least unskillfull behavior , ...I have lived my life examining belief , therefore it is now what Buddha himself defined as unshakable beleif , I didnt just get to that stage without some serious work and reflection on my part , ...I too am worried about some of the injustices of this world , but I do not see the point of making assumptions as to which section of society the magority of the guilty come from .

I'm not sure what you are talking about, truth be told. It seems to be a fairly generic prejudiced judgement against me, so I will comment no further.

Atheism, by its turn, needs no justification at all. It is as solid and self-justified stance as they come.

luis there are good and bad Atheists in this world in just the same proportions as good and bad Theist ,

If that is so, then theism is not very useful. But I doubt that.

...this is due to human ignorance .
I think it is now time to return to the OP and to consider the benifits of folowing the teachings of Christ .

As you wish.

I have just explained, but let me try again in a slightly different wording.

Why single out war, hunger, poverty or disease? Perhaps some people simply feel like it. Perhaps the circunstances make efforts in that direction more worthwhile. There is no single reason, and the reasons will definitely vary from one person to the next.

I too wish a solution to war , hunger , poverty and disease could be found but I do not feel that in all truth that theism a beleif in god can be blamed for all war , hunger , poverty or disease ,

Neither do I. Not for all of that. It is mostly an enabler, and something of a misguided justification. And certainly, it is not always misused, either.

....it is the ignorance of mankind that is responcible if we are to reduce these terrible human sufferings we our selves need to become better human beings and as we are here in this thread discussing Jesus we are discussing Christian beleifs , ....you are against theistic beleif , ...and I am against ignorance, ..therefore to my mind to rid the world of Igniorance we need to allow theists to hold their beleifin God , to practice that faith and become better theist ,....in just the same way an agnostic should concentrate on ethics without the need for beleif , but neither should try to disturb the other . it is this sence of seperation , this sence of us and them which is the cause so much suffering .

This comes from a previous post, IIRC.

Also, we do not oppose theists. Anti-theism opposes theism, much in the same way as advaita opposes dvaita or capitalism opposes communism.

either way same thing , ....what conserns me is the idea of being in opposition , blaming another for all the ills of the world , ..whereas in truth so many of these ills are cased by opposition it self , ...so remove the ideal of opposition ! let theist peacefully beleive .

I have neither the means nor the inclination or desire to not let theists peacefully believe.

after all the whole point of this thread is to get people to explore beleif , and many times it has been said that one must not just beleive and surrender to jesus but that one must live by his word . ...and his word was peacfull , he did not advocate war or the selfishness that is the cause of poverty , he advocated love , tollerance and sharing .

This thread is in General Religious Debates, so challenging usual preconceptions is to be expected.

I don't actually know what Jesus preached, or if he did exist at all. Opinions run all over the spectrum.

I'm not sure that matters, though. Actions and attitudes can and should stand on their own merits.


(Most of the text following I answered in a previous post)

(...)

Do you perhaps expect theism to be a privileged belief for some reason?

there is no privilage , but there should be freedom to peacefilly beleive and discuss .

Most certainly!

I ask because your attitude suggests that you expect me to provide justification, and I sure do not see why any would be needed here. People can and should seek to do what they believe to be best. Justification is optional.

you are free to choose to practice what you beleive is good for you ,providing that you harm no other in the process , ..but how can you choose to decide what is good for others .

As a matter of fact, I can and I must decide constantly whether taking certain actions or refusing to is good for others.

So do you.

So does everyone else.


You seem to be editing your post, so I will return in a few minutes to complete my answer.

 

[Yes]

Rom 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

If we confess that Jesus is Lord, we had better be obeying Him.


Luke 6:46 "Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?

 

[Lyndon]

One of the most important teachings of the Buddha is to practice compassion, to be non hateful, and kind, caring for people, the highest teaching is to not only perceive the emptiness(Which is called Tao or God) but here the emptiness speak to you, revealing the true nature of reality. It involves developing mindfulness being fully aware of your actions and how they are effecting you and those around you. Buddhist monks are peaceful, very quiet, pillars of morality to their community, celibate, following over 200 rules for better conduct, at least the stricter ones.

Buddhism is a strongly Theistic religion, but it believes in Polytheism too, The Buddha said that all those gods that Indians pray to are not worth listening to, Brahma he says is not the creator, not important to listen to, same for Krishna, Ganesh,all the Hindu deities, not a one did he claim was worthy of worship. The's god's or deities are real spiritual entities, actually have the power to address you and influence your life, but Buddhas said these false gods were useless, of no benefit, he taught his monks to only meditate on the true source of all wisdom, the emptiness.

Most Buddhists today, especially the western ones on internet forums, will tell you that the Buddha is not God, there is no God in buddhism, why, because they do not understand, they are beginning meditators, that have never realized the emptiness, have no idea what the emptiness is, and do not realize by slandering God, they are slandering the emptiness, the source of all the Buddha's truths. These ignorant Buddhists will tell you emptiness means empty, nothing, ABSOLUTELY WRONG:

Emptiness means empty of Physical form, invisible, just as the Jewish and Muslim religion teach us about God, God is invisible, its clearly started in their scriptures, God-the emptiness is not a being like the man Jesus, his embodiment, God the emptiness is a spiritual force,without physical form: You can never see God, but through years of prayers and meditations you can hear God, and that is where you begin to approach a perfect state of nibbana, where your suffering is gone because the emptiness has saved you from it.......

 

[Jumi]

I see no evidence of Satan existing either as enemy of the Christian God or the older version.

 

[AllanV]

One of the most important teachings of the Buddha is to practice compassion, to be non hateful, and kind, caring for people, the highest teaching is to not only perceive the emptiness(Which is called Tao or God) but here the emptiness speak to you, revealing the true nature of reality. It involves developing mindfulness being fully aware of your actions and how they are effecting you and those around you. Buddhist monks are peaceful, very quiet, pillars of morality to their community, celibate, following over 200 rules for better conduct, at least the stricter ones.

Buddhism is a strongly Theistic religion, but it believes in Polytheism too, The Buddha said that all those gods that Indians pray to are not worth listening to, Brahma he says is not the creator, not important to listen to, same for Krishna, Ganesh,all the Hindu deities, not a one did he claim was worthy of worship. The's god's or deities are real spiritual entities, actually have the power to address you and influence your life, but Buddhas said these false gods were useless, of no benefit, he taught his monks to only meditate on the true source of all wisdom, the emptiness.

Most Buddhists today, especially the western ones on internet forums, will tell you that the Buddha is not God, there is no God in buddhism, why, because they do not understand, they are beginning meditators, that have never realized the emptiness, have no idea what the emptiness is, and do not realize by slandering God, they are slandering the emptiness, the source of all the Buddha's truths. These ignorant Buddhists will tell you emptiness means empty, nothing, ABSOLUTELY WRONG:

Emptiness means empty of Physical form, invisible, just as the Jewish and Muslim religion teach us about God, God is invisible, its clearly started in their scriptures, God-the emptiness is not a being like the man Jesus, his embodiment, God the emptiness is a spiritual force,without physical form: You can never see God, but through years of prayers and meditations you can hear God, and that is where you begin to approach a perfect state of nibbana, where your suffering is gone because the emptiness has saved you from it.......

With Christianity it is not regarded as a work from the outside in the sense of stopping this or stopping that and doing this to improve your self, it is from the inside. It is better to do good, obviously, and it may help with the conscience.
Jesus resisted and overcame at every level and his nature was set and came from another consciousness.

The way now is to experience His nature from the new consciousness that the Eternal God has found acceptable. The body is a temple and the whole body is to be presented as a living sacrifice.
There is a way into the sanctuary of God , the Holy Place. And God will indwell powerfully. God is an energizing Spirit. God is Love.
This is all written in scriptures and is reasonably plain but is not regarded or understood by the Christianity I know. There is a way of cleaning the heart entirely but Christians attempt to take their rebellious nature into God's sanctuary in their worship and this will never work. In the world people get sick and die and in the churches this energy is stirred up to a higher level.
In the spontaneous experience of God there was no emptiness but a powerful Love and a mind opening that showed the size of the universe and the pattern of its manifestation. And this was seen from the mind of an immortal. The differences between that mind and mine were seen. A lot of knowledge came into the mind and for several years whole concepts came into my thoughts with no effort.
This left me in some shock. I was a better person then than I am now as a starting point.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram

Namaskaran, Ratikala Ji

It is true. I rarely attempt to use subtlety with you. Our specific rapport is blunt, not subtle. You have an affinity for disrespecting me and I decided to call you on those situations whenever possible, the better to make you understand how wrong you can be.

I do not dissrespect any one , ..I am chalenging you just as you choose to chalenge theists , by your measure it is a good and right thing to do , ...

I suppose that can be very unpleasant to you. But I rarely find myself with much of an alternative. Your manner of discourse often leaves little room for middle ground between open challenge and complete submission.

I have tried to find a middle ground with you , but repeatedly you have told me that you will not budge

To your credit, it is obvious that you have made an impressive effort to overcome that trait.

what trait , ....my stuborn and un shakable faith ?

I'm not sure what you are talking about, truth be told. It seems to be a fairly generic prejudiced judgement against me, so I will comment no further.

not against you in the least just against the sweeping generalisations that theism is bad for prople , and the sometimes apparent attitude that the anti theist will wake us from our sleep of delusion !

This thread is in General Religious Debates, so challenging usual preconceptions is to be expected.[/quot]

then you shouldnt mind me chalenging you

I don't actually know what Jesus preached, or if he did exist at all. Opinions run all over the spectrum.

then go find out , ....surely it is better to be informrd about something before telling people that that something is bad for them !

As a matter of fact, I can and I must decide constantly whether taking certain actions or refusing to is good for others.

So do you.

So does everyone else.

You seem to be editing your post, so I will return in a few minutes to complete my answer.

I am sorry I do not see how dependant origination gives you the mandate to decide what is good for others , ....dependant orrigination describes how our desires and actions cause our own future births ....and if the general principal is that everything is inherently empty , ...then why fuss about anything none of this exists , it is all an illusion , ...all life is suffering , but it is temporary , ..so rather that telling others how to behave just trancend the self .....

the difference between you and I is that I am mahayana Buddhist not a No self Buddhist .

personaly I see a lot that runs concurrent between the teachings of mahayana Buddhism and the teachings of Christ .

and no I was not editing my post ...I'd just gone for a little quiet snooze ....
and please dont take what I say as an attack on you , Just an attack on Anti Theism , ...as it appears to be an infringment of our temporary human rights , ....if we are wrong then we will just have to find out the hard way , ....

 

[AllanV]

I see no evidence of Satan existing either as enemy of the Christian God or the older version.

He is hidden in the personality. Everything that is taken for granted and learned to be comfortable with in the mind, behavior and even the energy that is placed with words as they are spoken has been developed from a child. There are different ways of communicating, there are pointed remarks, irritable comments superior tone etc., etc.
There is an influence in the deeper mind that determines how a person will respond in any situation. Satan rules in all communication, interaction, behavior and speech.
It is all attached to the self and in the personality.
All this represents one consciousness and mind that is unacceptable to God and immortality is hidden.