Is Jesus necessary?

[mpjh]

In a recent Pew poll,

Pew asked people what they thought determined whether a person would achieve eternal life. Nearly as many Christians said you could achieve eternal life by just being a good person as said that you had to believe in Jesus.

Interesting. So it is a large crowd of Christians that say you don't need to believe in Jesus to get to heaven. What do you think?

[Napoleon Ier]

I think that whilst it may be nice to believe that the Faith-and-not-Works heretics are being stamped out to the profit of proper Catholic eschato-theology, this is sadly more a sign of the Protestant disease morphing into a more secular-society compatible virus.

[Backglass]

I think that whilst it may be nice to believe that the Faith-and-not-Works heretics are being stamped out to the profit of proper Catholic eschato-theology, this is sadly more a sign of the Protestant disease morphing into a more secular-society compatible virus.

I think that whilst it may be nice to believe that your religion is being attacked by virus like opponents, it is actually more a sign that the human species is maturing...slowly realizing that the concept of magical water-walking half-gods born of virgin earth women are simply fantastic bedtime stories.

[Napoleon Ier]

YEAH! lyke that stoopid n00b story bowt lyke a cave nd higher-planes of reality n' shit. Yeah.

[Backglass]

YEAH! lyke that stoopid n00b story bowt lyke a cave nd higher-planes of reality n' shit. Yeah.

Your ignorance is showing.

[mpjh]

Nappy, you seem to be regressing. Will you eventually devolve into a cockroach. That would be justice.

[Napoleon Ier]

YEAH! lyke that stoopid n00b story bowt lyke a cave nd higher-planes of reality n' shit. Yeah.

Your ignorance is showing.

Well, no, actually. Whist I posted a cutting rebuttal to your claim that Christianity is all about fairy tales by showing you a perfectly valid counter-example to the view that all metaphorical/symbolic stories are necessarily void of higher truth , you're response to it was essentially: "ur stoopid!". So... the ignorance showing here is not exactly mine.

[Napoleon Ier]

Nappy, you seem to be regressing. Will you eventually devolve into a cockroach. That would be justice.

See, it's funny, I read your post, then I read it again a couple of times, but I just couldn't seem to actually find any material that looked like it may have any relevance to a debate about metaphysics. Help me out here, would you?

[mpjh]

Who says fairy tales don't contain a higher truth; they do and that is why they persist. However, they are still fairy tales.

[Backglass]

YEAH! lyke that stoopid n00b story bowt lyke a cave nd higher-planes of reality n' shit. Yeah.

Your ignorance is showing.

Well, no, actually. Whist I posted a cutting rebuttal to your claim that Christianity is all about fairy tales by showing you a perfectly valid counter-example to the view that all metaphorical/symbolic stories are necessarily void of higher truth , you're response to it was essentially: "ur stoopid!". So... the ignorance showing here is not exactly mine.

Well, yes, actually. Your general air of pomposity speaks for itself. "Whilst" you wax poetic in your costume of superiority, your ignorance still oozes through the many cracks in the facade.

"Cutting" indeed. Funny, but I am not bleeding.

[jesterhawk]

In a recent Pew poll,

Pew asked people what they thought determined whether a person would achieve eternal life. Nearly as many Christians said you could achieve eternal life by just being a good person as said that you had to believe in Jesus.

Interesting. So it is a large crowd of Christians that say you don't need to believe in Jesus to get to heaven. What do you think?

You never said what you think. I know what I think. But I am curious as to what you think and why you bothered to post this. What is your motive? I mean are you really seeking to know more about God or just stir the pot of debate because we have many here who are willing to jump in on both sides of this. So, I am curious where you are.

JH

[muy_thaiguy]

YEAH! lyke that stoopid n00b story bowt lyke a cave nd higher-planes of reality n' shit. Yeah.

Your ignorance is showing.

Well, no, actually. Whist I posted a cutting rebuttal to your claim that Christianity is all about fairy tales by showing you a perfectly valid counter-example to the view that all metaphorical/symbolic stories are necessarily void of higher truth , you're response to it was essentially: "ur stoopid!". So... the ignorance showing here is not exactly mine.

Well, yes, actually. Your general air of pomposity speaks for itself. "Whilst" you wax poetic in your costume of superiority, your ignorance still oozes through the many cracks in the facade.

"Cutting" indeed. Funny, but I am not bleeding.

You may not be bleeding, but you are not even saying anything of actual worth. Every one of your posts has been the same thing over and over again. Kind of like what one can go see in Flame Wars on any given day. Actually, exactly like what anyone can go see in Flame Wars on any given day. A trough of pig slop mixed with something about fairy tales is all you actually post on the matter. So until you can actually provide something of worth, your posts on the matter won't have any.

I think that whilst it may be nice to believe that the Faith-and-not-Works heretics are being stamped out to the profit of proper Catholic eschato-theology, this is sadly more a sign of the Protestant disease morphing into a more secular-society compatible virus.

Something along the lines of this is what I am seeing. More of a "can't be too harsh on myself, or else I'll start to feel a little guilty over cheating on my spouse, so I'll use some mundane thing like finding a $1 on the sidewalk and call it an act of God." Doesn't make much sense but it happens way too often.

[pmchugh]

To those of you who say you must believe, what about someone who is in some sort of tribe in a foriegn country and they never encounter christianity in their entire life (so they obviously don't believe) but they are a decent human being? Should they be condemmed to an eternity of pain because of where they were born?

[radiojake]

To those of you who say you must believe, what about someone who is in some sort of tribe in a foriegn country and they never encounter christianity in their entire life (so they obviously don't believe) but they are a decent human being? Should they be condemmed to an eternity of pain because of where they were born?

It's a convienient spin in the book some men wrote to state that all humans sin and only confessing and accepting Jesus is the only way into 'heaven' - I remember asking one of my Chrisitian friends years ago whether he thinks in his own opinion whether or not myself and my other friends will go to 'hell' even though he knows we are good people. He didn't wan't to answer the question and just said something like "the scripture is pretty clear with who does and doesn't reach heaven" - It's a whole lot of baloney and another carefully worded social control mechanism ( though, only if you actually think heaven exists - otherwise, i will be good to my fellow human and non-human friends, and the environment, not because i fear the wrath of god or satan, but because that's what i feel like doing anyway)

[Napoleon Ier]

I suppose the Evangelists were in conspiracy with the Empire, yes?

[mpjh]

In a recent Pew poll,

Pew asked people what they thought determined whether a person would achieve eternal life. Nearly as many Christians said you could achieve eternal life by just being a good person as said that you had to believe in Jesus.

Interesting. So it is a large crowd of Christians that say you don't need to believe in Jesus to get to heaven. What do you think?

You never said what you think. I know what I think. But I am curious as to what you think and why you bothered to post this. What is your motive? I mean are you really seeking to know more about God or just stir the pot of debate because we have many here who are willing to jump in on both sides of this. So, I am curious where you are.

JH

I think the poll is interesting. It indicates that religious people in the United States are a lot more tolerant of other religions than many so-called theologians and dogmatists would have us believe. I am uplifted by this tolerance, as an atheist and as an American.

[Napoleon Ier]

So-called theologians, like the Catholic ones that have universally rejected sola fidei since 325AD?

Do some fucking research, please, it's just pitiful otherwise.

[mpjh]

Hey nappy, read the OP. It is a poll. A measure of beliefs as reported by those being polled. It is not the work of theologians or dogmatists is my point.

[jesterhawk]

To those of you who say you must believe, what about someone who is in some sort of tribe in a foriegn country and they never encounter christianity in their entire life (so they obviously don't believe) but they are a decent human being? Should they be condemmed to an eternity of pain because of where they were born?

It's a convienient spin in the book some men wrote to state that all humans sin and only confessing and accepting Jesus is the only way into 'heaven' - I remember asking one of my Chrisitian friends years ago whether he thinks in his own opinion whether or not myself and my other friends will go to 'hell' even though he knows we are good people. He didn't wan't to answer the question and just said something like "the scripture is pretty clear with who does and doesn't reach heaven" - It's a whole lot of baloney and another carefully worded social control mechanism ( though, only if you actually think heaven exists - otherwise, i will be good to my fellow human and non-human friends, and the environment, not because i fear the wrath of god or satan, but because that's what i feel like doing anyway)

I simple answer for those in a tribe who have never had a chance to hear about Jesus, they would be judged based on God's set of what is right and wrong and whether or not they upheld his righteousness. Basically whether or not they were good according to the Old Testament moral compass as a rule (which God says our righteousness is like filthy rags Isaiah 64:6, so I would rather know about option number 2, Jesus). However, everyone here does not fall into that category because they have heard about Jesus and therefore have had the opportunity to choose him or deny him (or not make a choice which is reality is denying him because it is defaulting to not choose him). So, for those people who have heard, the simple question is going to be have you made Jesus Lord of your life and become born again? If the answer is no, then YES you will go to hell of your own choosing. You can hem and haw all you want but God has placed the choice in your hands and you have only you to blame in the end because God did all the work to make the way for you. If you accept Jesus and become born again, then you will receive heaven as your eternal reward. You can call it baloney all you want but it does not change the truth. You can even claim there is no truth or that you can somehow argue with God and be a lawyer and weasel your way in, but in the end this is the way it is and that is the truth. It is God's truth, which had been established before Adam and Eve were created and he has not changed his mind about it. But then why would he since the plan included God's son coming and paying the penalty for your mistakes, disobedience and sin so that a way could be made to heaven and all he asks is that you accept Jesus and become born again and listen to him when he asks you to do something. But if you all only knew the things he would ask you to do are only to make your life better and prosper you and keep you in good health. And in all honesty, if everyone really knew (and Christians included) that God was only after our best interest, we would stop fighting him along the way and listen to what he says. But I got off topic a bit.

JH

[Napoleon Ier]

Hey nappy, read the OP. It is a poll. A measure of beliefs as reported by those being polled. It is not the work of theologians or dogmatists is my point.

Hey muppetjh, read the Post. It is refuting the idea that any serious theologians disagree with the results of those being polled.

[jesterhawk]

In a recent Pew poll,

Pew asked people what they thought determined whether a person would achieve eternal life. Nearly as many Christians said you could achieve eternal life by just being a good person as said that you had to believe in Jesus.

Interesting. So it is a large crowd of Christians that say you don't need to believe in Jesus to get to heaven. What do you think?

You never said what you think. I know what I think. But I am curious as to what you think and why you bothered to post this. What is your motive? I mean are you really seeking to know more about God or just stir the pot of debate because we have many here who are willing to jump in on both sides of this. So, I am curious where you are.

JH

I think the poll is interesting. It indicates that religious people in the United States are a lot more tolerant of other religions than many so-called theologians and dogmatists would have us believe. I am uplifted by this tolerance, as an atheist and as an American.

I agree that the poll in interesting. And I am very tolerant of other beliefs. In fact, I know that everyone has a God given right to believe whatever they want to believe. That does not make their belief right. Where the problem comes in is that many people want me to not just accept that they have a right to believe what they believe (tolerance) but to accept what they believe as right (acceptance). Those are two completely difference things.

Let me give you an example. I have a guy I work with who is an Atheist. He has asked me some questions about God and I gave him answers. Then he went to my manager and told him that I am not tolerant of his beliefs. Now, first off, he started this by asking me and I was very respectful of his beliefs, which he had already stated to me. I just didn't agree with him. When my manager sat us both down and we finally got to the bottom of it, he said that tolerance means that I have to accept his beliefs as true. I explained that is not true and that I only need to respect that he has beliefs different from mine and in no way belittle him because of his different beliefs, but I do not have to accept his beliefs as being true. In the end, my manager agreed with me. The guy was not happy. And he is not the only one who I have met that has this same misunderstanding about the concept of tolerance.

JH

[mpjh]

Actually JH, according to the poll, you are in a distinct minority. Most are far more open to the concept that you can get to heaven with believing in Jesus, despite knowing about him.

[got tonkaed]

I would perhaps comment that there is a difference though between acting in terms of tolerance and thought. I agree entirely with your understanding of tolerance in terms of thought. I dont believe anyone has to think anyone else's views are correct or the truth especially in terms of religion. You can believe more or less whatever you would like, and certainly over the course of human history there have been a few different approaches. That doesnt mean anyone has to agree with you or believe that your case has any more merit than theirs. Certainly objectively we can discuss the issue about what arguments are better and if all cases are really of equal weight from different perspectives, but that doesnt mean anyone has to believe your case is the best.

However i will say in regards to where i come closest to agreeing with the person you work with is in terms of how individuals act. In general i dont think that it is appropriate in a variety of settings to actively deal with a person under the assertion that they are wrong. This is a bit of a slippery statement so allow me to qualify a bit. Outside of obvious exceptions (hiring for things like within the church and the like) i dont believe you should be denying anyone of a particular religious belief employment or the right to particular actions they deem necessary for their religious livelyhood. This also cuts both ways though, a religious person does not necessarily have the right to try to convert individuals in certain settings just because they believe someone else is wrong.

Its important to note the last paragraph is mostly talking about the workplace. what you folks do on your own time is more or less your business in my view regarding how you want to live out your religious life within the law of society or within the societally accepted provisions for your particular religion.

[mpjh]

I appreciate you comments got tonk. I am not trying to provoke conversion efforts, or convert. I am simply taking note of the apparent fact that many, many people in this country do no believe that Jesus is necessary to salvation.

[got tonkaed]

I appreciate you comments got tonk. I am not trying to provoke conversion efforts, or convert. I am simply taking note of the apparent fact that many, many people in this country do no believe that Jesus is necessary to salvation.

I was referring to JH's post primarily with the last one. Its an interesting thing to be noted actually, especially given a lot of sources in recent years coming from less apologetic people toward faiths, which suggested that US religion was more dogmatic in the center, which has historically been the tough section to study.

Everyone knows how fundamentalists feel about their faith, they let you know, its much harder to study the middle of the road crowd as they are often far less certain in their statements and less available to talk openly.