What Must I Do To Be Saved?

[tinydancer]

See what I mean, everybody says something different while all claim to be quoting the same ONE and only God.

hehehehe

you are missing the point. I think HE can handle it all.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

If all you gotta do is accept some guy, ya don't need a Bible dya. All the commandments which say they remain in effect forever, don't mind that stuff. God was only kidding.

I have to ask, how do you come to your assertion that none of the Commandments come into effect? Not getting where you are coming to on that.

Christ came to fulfill the law. That's 101 baby.

Why do you waste time with this hater? he has no intention of being honest or forthcoming. He hates religion.

When we post as Christians and yes I know very well I am highly unorthodox being a kind of ted nugent hands on Jesus turn the tables over Christian, one day one person looking at the posts may try to discover the Word and set themselves on the journey to Christ.

I think with our hearts true we always have to have our faith open because sometimes just one crack in the door someone might go can I please come in.

People with genuine faith in their religion shouldn't have any problems with little ol' me.

"Socrates said, "The unexamined life is not worth living." But I say, "The unchallenged faith is not worth sharing. For just as vigorous exercise causes microscopic tears in muscle, and fractures in bones which then grow back stronger than before, so does having our faith in things challenged, struck, shaken, and scutinized, after which, it reforms stronger precisely because it was attacked.""
- Me

I have no problems with you whatsoever. I find your questions bang on the money and many that I have had myself on a journey to faith.

For me in the search of faith not necessarily to fit in. Good grief in the 60's that would be unheard of from me or anyone else at the time that was liberal I loved the journey of it all.

In the end it was Don Juan for me. Journey to Ixtlan. I have no issues whatsoever understanding my other journeys to being a believer in Christ now.

Had more faith before I began studying it. Wanted to become a rabbi there for a while. Often encouraged to become one anyway, but to me it's like I can't serve other people of faith if I have none myself. Enough charlatans in the religious community as it is.

 

[The Irish Ram]

If all you gotta do is accept some guy, ya don't need a Bible dya. All the commandments which say they remain in effect forever, don't mind that stuff. God was only kidding.

If it had merit, then it would say to baptize them. It doesn't. Biblical baptism comes after one commits to Christ.

Using your logic, basic modern hygiene has no merit because it isn't in the bible. Perhaps you should think your argument through more completely.

Not only is hygiene addressed in the Bible but so is diet. The merit was a warding off of disease and poor health. In fact better hygiene may have been responsible for the Jews being less affected by the Black Plague than other groups. Because of it, the Jews were accused of causing the sickness in others, and were killed en masse.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

If all you gotta do is accept some guy, ya don't need a Bible dya. All the commandments which say they remain in effect forever, don't mind that stuff. God was only kidding.

If it had merit, then it would say to baptize them. It doesn't. Biblical baptism comes after one commits to Christ.

Using your logic, basic modern hygiene has no merit because it isn't in the bible. Perhaps you should think your argument through more completely.

Not only is hygiene addressed in the Bible but so is diet. The merit was to ward off disease and poor health. In fact better hygiene may have been responsible for the Jews being less affected by the Black Plague than other groups. Because of it, the Jews were accused of causing the sickness in others, and were killed en masse.

Maybe. Are prohibitions about touching dead bodies for one, and others about how to handle them so could be something to it. But those commandments would have been in every Bible as well.

 

[The Irish Ram]

edthecynic said: ↑
See what I mean, everybody says something different while all claim to be quoting the same ONE and only God.

That is the result of dogma. And it isn't nearly as important as we make it. God isn't going to let a child go because they carry a rosary, as opposed to a Jewish prayer shawl, or turn a child of His away because they prayed for the dead, or didn't not.

If you do something for Christ's sake, and I do something completely different for Christ's sake, it is counted as righteousness by God. For Christ's sake.
Do you love God? Do you love His Son? Do you love each other? There is your doctrine. It is all you need.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Not so Delta, in fact Catholics weren't allowed to own Bibles, and had to rely on a priest who spoke in a language they didn't understand.
Pagans played in blood and colored eggs with it. Not a healthy practice at all.

 

[The Irish Ram]

To be saved. Just as I am comes to mind. To come to Jehovah thru Christ. To understand the Father as well as the Son. To love it all. To embrace a higher level of existence. To aspire to purity while knowing one's failures but still loved by a kind and wonderous Jehovah.

There sings my soul.

^
That is an excellent post worthy or repeating.
Just as we are, without one plea but that His blood was shed for me.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Delta, Christianity doesn't co-opt the Torah, it continues it. It doesn't end with Moses. Nor with the death of Christ on the cross. Your Messiah is coming to sit on the Throne of your King David. He just happens to be my Messiah too.

 

[edthecynic]

How come then Christians say you have to be baptized too? Maybe that was a different author than the particular bible you read.

And how come Born Agains say it isn't enough that us other Christians were baptized when we were babies. They say that doesn't count and you NEED to be saved or born again as an adult.

Sealy, no where in the Bible does Christ say to baptize babies...

Nowhere in the Bible does it say NOT to baptize babies, either.

what sin has a baby committed?

Haven't you heard? Somehow they ate the forbidden fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil before they were born, "Original Sin," and yet it was claimed in this thread that they do not have knowledge of good and evil so they can't be baptized as babies.

Further to be baptized one must be immersed in the water, sprinkling a little water on the head does not count. Nor does getting baptized as a baby. One must know right from wrong.

It seems one Christianity contradicts another Christianity, so how does one know which Christianity to believe if none of them seem to make any sense???

I don't know if you've heard, but we are responsible for our own sins and not Adams transgression.

Not if you are "saved!" When you are saved you are saved from the punishment you would have earned if you WERE responsible for your own sins. When you are saved you pass your responsibility and therefore punishment off onto an INNOCENT third party who accepts responsibility and punishment for your transgressions.

Everything in this Christianity is a senseless contradiction.

 

[ninja007]

Acts 16: 29-31-


…29And he called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas, 30and after he brought them out, he said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31They said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household."…

How come then Christians say you have to be baptized too? Maybe that was a different author than the particular bible you read.

And how come Born Agains say it isn't enough that us other Christians were baptized when we were babies. They say that doesn't count and you NEED to be saved or born again as an adult.

Sealy, no where in the Bible does Christ say to baptize babies...

Nowhere in the Bible does it say NOT to baptize babies, either.

why would you baptize a baby? Its pointless.

 

[ninja007]

Acts 16: 29-31-


…29And he called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas, 30and after he brought them out, he said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31They said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household."…

How come then Christians say you have to be baptized too? Maybe that was a different author than the particular bible you read.

And how come Born Agains say it isn't enough that us other Christians were baptized when we were babies. They say that doesn't count and you NEED to be saved or born again as an adult.

Sealy, no where in the Bible does Christ say to baptize babies...

Nowhere in the Bible does it say NOT to baptize babies, either.

what sin has a baby committed?

Psalms 51:5

Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me

 

[ninja007]

For the record, I'm an atheist and so the entire Christian salvation argument is a load of crap to me. Just sayin...

why?

 

[The Irish Ram]

Not if you are "saved!" When you are saved you are saved from the punishment you would have earned if you WERE responsible for your own sins. When you are saved you pass your responsibility and therefore punishment off onto an INNOCENT third party who accepts responsibility and punishment for your transgressions.

Everything in this Christianity is a senseless contradiction.

You are certainly allowed to ask for what you deserve. You merely have to not accept the undeserved favor your parent and brother have for you.
He wants to give us love and forgiveness even if we don't deserve it. He is in our corner and wants to be as protective as a mother hen. He'd rather forgive us, (while we are in the very act of sinning), than judge us according to what we deserve. He is a Father. He prefers that to the role of Judge. He doesn't like or want to judge us.

So, the solution for Christ and God, was for Christ to draw all judgment unto Himself. All. With that, God, as Judge, was able to legally dismiss our cases, and resume with all of the mercy and forgiveness our Father has to offer. And the truth is, you can not out sin God's mercy. He will forgive you the moment you ask Him to.

It is not that we try to shirk responsibility, it's that we acknowledge what He did for us and thank Him for accepting responsibility for our mistakes. He planned to redeem us before the foundation the the earth was formed. And we give our lives to Him in return. The one who saves. It is a gift. He loved us enough to do that, and still does.
He poured His pure blood out to offer you eternal life with your Father. To not accept His gift is irresponsible, considering what He went through to pave your way to your Father. Our salvation was purchased at a very, very high price.

 

[Avatar4321]

See what I mean, everybody says something different while all claim to be quoting the same ONE and only God.

all the more reason to study and find out for yourself

 

[Avatar4321]

I have to ask, how do you come to your assertion that none of the Commandments come into effect? Not getting where you are coming to on that.

Christ came to fulfill the law. That's 101 baby.

Why do you waste time with this hater? he has no intention of being honest or forthcoming. He hates religion.

When we post as Christians and yes I know very well I am highly unorthodox being a kind of ted nugent hands on Jesus turn the tables over Christian, one day one person looking at the posts may try to discover the Word and set themselves on the journey to Christ.

I think with our hearts true we always have to have our faith open because sometimes just one crack in the door someone might go can I please come in.

People with genuine faith in their religion shouldn't have any problems with little ol' me.

"Socrates said, "The unexamined life is not worth living." But I say, "The unchallenged faith is not worth sharing. For just as vigorous exercise causes microscopic tears in muscle, and fractures in bones which then grow back stronger than before, so does having our faith in things challenged, struck, shaken, and scutinized, after which, it reforms stronger precisely because it was attacked.""
- Me

I have no problems with you whatsoever. I find your questions bang on the money and many that I have had myself on a journey to faith.

For me in the search of faith not necessarily to fit in. Good grief in the 60's that would be unheard of from me or anyone else at the time that was liberal I loved the journey of it all.

In the end it was Don Juan for me. Journey to Ixtlan. I have no issues whatsoever understanding my other journeys to being a believer in Christ now.

Had more faith before I began studying it. Wanted to become a rabbi there for a while. Often encouraged to become one anyway, but to me it's like I can't serve other people of faith if I have none myself. Enough charlatans in the religious community as it is.

again, that's more reason to seek out the Lord for personal communications and genuine Divine experiences rather than merely studying what others have written thought or experienced. They might be able to point the way but unless you actually experienced the hand of divine providence all the studying in the world is useless

 

[Avatar4321]

I don't see how psalms 51 negates the power of the atonement

 

[edthecynic]

Not if you are "saved!" When you are saved you are saved from the punishment you would have earned if you WERE responsible for your own sins. When you are saved you pass your responsibility and therefore punishment off onto an INNOCENT third party who accepts responsibility and punishment for your transgressions.

Everything in this Christianity is a senseless contradiction.

You are certainly allowed to ask for what you deserve. You merely have to not accept the undeserved favor your parent and brother have for you.
He wants to give us love and forgiveness even if we don't deserve it. He is in our corner and wants to be as protective as a mother hen. He'd rather forgive us, (while we are in the very act of sinning), than judge us according to what we deserve. He is a Father. He prefers that to the role of Judge. He doesn't like or want to judge us.

So, the solution for Christ and God, was for Christ to draw all judgment unto Himself. All. With that, God, as Judge, was able to legally dismiss our cases, and resume with all of the mercy and forgiveness our Father has to offer. And the truth is, you can not out sin God's mercy. He will forgive you the moment you ask Him to.

It is not that we try to shirk responsibility, it's that we acknowledge what He did for us and thank Him for accepting responsibility for our mistakes. He planned to redeem us before the foundation the the earth was formed. And we give our lives to Him in return. The one who saves. It is a gift. He loved us enough to do that, and still does.
He poured His pure blood out to offer you eternal life with your Father. To not accept His gift is irresponsible, considering what He went through to pave your way to your Father. Our salvation was purchased at a very, very high price.

Which also means he planned to have Adam fall before the foundation of the Earth was formed!!!!! Adam and Eve were just pawns he used to rationalize all the suffering in the world. He planned for them to disobey so he could rationalize all the abuse he had planned for his creations.

 

[The Irish Ram]

ed, He didn't plan Adam's fall, but He knew that Adam, having free will to make decisions, would fall. And God had to decide if having children was worth it. They, God and Christ, decided we were worth the trouble, free will and all.
And they knew what it will entail. They knew the damage Satan would inflict, and that it would require pure, sin free blood to repair the damage. And they still felt we were worth it. How sad it must make them when we could care less...

 

[orogenicman]

If all you gotta do is accept some guy, ya don't need a Bible dya. All the commandments which say they remain in effect forever, don't mind that stuff. God was only kidding.

If it had merit, then it would say to baptize them. It doesn't. Biblical baptism comes after one commits to Christ.

Using your logic, basic modern hygiene has no merit because it isn't in the bible. Perhaps you should think your argument through more completely.

Not only is hygiene addressed in the Bible but so is diet. The merit was a warding off of disease and poor health. In fact better hygiene may have been responsible for the Jews being less affected by the Black Plague than other groups. Because of it, the Jews were accused of causing the sickness in others, and were killed en masse.

If you are suggesting that archaic Jewish food laws are a part of basic modern hygiene, perhaps you've missed a few health classes.

 

[orogenicman]

For the record, I'm an atheist and so the entire Christian salvation argument is a load of crap to me. Just sayin...

why?

Because it assumes that one is in need of saving in the first place, and secondly, it assumes that an imaginary sky daddy has power over our lives, when the fact of the matter is that we live and die by the choices we make.

"In the great classic, near eastern religions, man's life on earth is conceived as pain and suffering, and an inheritance of man's fall from grace (or Paradise Lost). According to these traditions, after man's expulsion from paradise, because of his disobedience to his "God", man alone could not recover his erstwhile innocence, even by striving to become
a superhuman of humility, submission, and kindness, etc., but only by an intercession of a god, or God-man sacrifice, could man ever hope to regain paradise, in another world, a spirit world. This "New Jerusalem" is a concept which it contrary to the universal order of things which man's science has inductively gleaned from the study of nature, and as such, man's concept of morality is a product of his vision of the world and his hope to regain lost innocence.

Man's concept of morality has most recently been connected with what he conceived to be good (moral) and to be bad (immoral). Man's immorality has been equated with "sin" in his apriori understanding: this idea of morality has changed tremendously during his short tenure on earth. But contrarily, what is moral in Nature? And has this natural morality altered through time? "Truth" and "falsehood" are important ingredients in man's consideration of morality, but truth may be defined, in the sense of subjective truth with its definitions and criteria, differing from person to person, institution to institution, place to place, and time to time.

Man is essentially incapable of committing "sin" beyond the magnitude of the individual and collective sins, for the universe is independent of mankind's hopes, fears, aspirations, and indeed, complete understanding, past, present, and future. We may, however, admit a possible transient misdemeanor in that man's efforts have had some deleterious effects on the earth, and even possibly on parts of the solar system, but certainly this can have little or no effect on the galaxy or the universe at large. Further, the earth and sister planets and their satellites are almost insignificant parts of our almost insignificant star system in an almost insignificant galaxy, and in an almost infinitesimal speck in our universe (be it cosmos or chaos matters not).

Man's paradigm of morality is religion based on axiomatic reasoning, not subject to objective proof, personified as God, omnipotent throughout time and space. According to this paradigm, Man need not strive to obtain knowledge from any source other than religion for all is given by God; submission to his God will make all known which man needs in his life, and the rest on a "need to know basis" will be revealed to him in the after world. This is a lazy system for man need not strive to find truth (need not accept responsibility for striving for truth), but it is handed down from above: All things are known to God and all man needs to do is apply and follow these laws which are made known by individual revelation from God to man.

Man's concept, and Nature's concept of reality and harmony differ in the highest order. Man has accused his a priori deities of duplicity, for men have always asked the question, "Why should good men suffer", and very often the misery of good men is far greater than that of those who do not conform to the highest criteria for goodness as defined by man's totomic customs and religions. This question has been asked and answers have been attempted ever since man realized his "selfness" and became an introspective creature.

In the last analysis of the morality of Nature, we see no evidence of mercy in the cosmos; its indifference extends to the lowest forms of life to that of man. The cries of humanity, whether the suffering is imposed by man upon himself or upon other men, or by natural laws operating independently of man, echo down the corridors of time and space and evoke no response from indifferent Nature.

These anguished cries and pitiful prayers for help are merely cosmic background "noise" to which Nature must (not out of evil intent, spite, revenge, or punishment, but by necessity) turn a "deaf ear"; for were it not so, Nature itself would be destroyed by these same laws which Nature had ordained "in the beginning" (if there was one) and must continue to
operate in perpetuity (if time and the universe are truly eternal), or there would be and ending to the cosmic laws: a true "twilight of the gods", and of cosmic harmony, Chaos never returning to Cosmos."

- James E. Conkin, Professor Emeritus of Geology, University of Louisville, 2002