Is Jesus necessary?

[Napoleon Ier]

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.

Well that's nice dear. Did you also know that many Christians now no longer believe that the sun revolves around the earth?

[mpjh]

Yes.

[Napoleon Ier]

Yes, and did you know that irony is a rare metal alloy and rhetorical means a kind of herbal tea?

[luns101]

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?

I'm wondering what their definition of "belief in Jesus" was, but yes...I think that poll reflects a change of attitude on the requirements of being redeemed from one's sins. Obviously, I disagree with those who say He's not necessary.

[Napoleon Ier]

Well, no one is actually saying He isn't necessary I don't think, only the poll is so bizarrely simplistic and skewed as to lead people to believe that answering in the affirmative means that you think it is necessary to literally believe and have heard of the man Jesus of Nazareth, rather than slightly more abstractly believe that it is Jesus who opens the way for Salvation.

Hence my derision of the cretins responsible for this joke of a poll.

[got tonkaed]

Im not sure if the OP posted the link but im going to try to do some cleaning up for the good people at PEW.

http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=380

relevant questions seemingly are listed in the article as:

Who Achieves Eternal Life? - broken down into belief about one particular religion (the respondents), many possible solutions, or not certain

What determines Eternal Life? -belief, action, combination, dont believe in, or not certain

The responses are then displayed by this typical break down.

First main question:

Subset provided for individuals who chose many possible solutions (done by those who self-affiliated themselves with a particular religion) listing possible options (does this particular religion get you to heaven)

Also a question about how many religions can lead you to heaven (one, two, three, four, many) and the total proportion of those who cite at least one non-christian religion as a way to heaven (christians only)

Second main question:

responses are coded from the individuals response to an open ended question about how eternal life is achieved. Again the chart provided in the article is specifically related to christian responses. Included are belief, action, combination, and some others (the first three all have qualifications).

Also is a coding about how many christians believe their religion is exclusive (which i believe is gathered from previously responded to questions)

They also chart the changes in responses from their 2002, 2007, 2008 surveys by the subsets provided in the article (all which come from their general survey on religion)

In short i think its much better than its being given credit for, in what its trying to do (chart simple public opinion).

Also luns, i am looking for how they operationalized the belief in Jesus Christ. Currently im trying to use the 2007 general survey ( i cant find the full 2008 one yet, i dont think its out) but im only part way through the report.

[mpjh]

Do you have a poll?

[got tonkaed]

In terms of answering Luns question about belief in Jesus allow me to pass on what i can from the 2007 report.

http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/repor ... opline.pdf

http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/repor ... pter-1.pdf

First link is the survey with directions to the interviewer, 2nd is the report on the findings (much cleaner) both i believe from 2007.

In terms of how they operationalize things, i believe they do not in terms of affilated believers. Around question 16 or so they essentially ask for your particular denomonation. They more or less have every single one i am aware of in the US covered. I believe from their they are able to code particular beliefs about religion from their. So in essence they are relying more or less on self-reporting.

They also drive at the question by asking about frequency of religious experiences, types of experiences, scripture related questions, exclusivity (already discussed), religious history and more broad questions about belief in God. None of these questions are incredibly specific as to offer a particular operational defintion, they are more done in terms of certainty.

An example....

Question 20 i believe asks how frequently you worship. If you were to answer more than seldom on question 28 the interviewer will ask you again about the frequency. Responses include at least once a week, once or twice a month, several times a year, seldom, never, dont know, or refused to answer the question.

A lot of questions are done in this style, essentially to gauge how certain or uncertain the respondent is in regards to the question.

The most direct answer i can give you to the question about relationship with Jesus seems to be from the exclusivity article (the original study the op posted).

17 percent of all Christians stated that a belief in Jesus, relationship with Jesus, born again satisifed the question What determines who obtains eternal life.

Out of this 17 percent of all: 45 percent of white evanglists said this, 9 percent white mainline, 26 percent black protestant, and 3 percent white catholics. This was out of a subset of a few responses regarding belief. Its also worth mentioning belief and action are combined in another possible answer, so its possible these numbers are slightly under reporting.

Frustratingly a few questions are withheld from teh surveys which im sure are released in other reports that i cant find really quickly, so thats the most i can do to clear it up now.

[mpjh]

Seems from all reports that the poll I cited is pretty rigorous and reliable.

[got tonkaed]

Seems from all reports that the poll I cited is pretty rigorous and reliable.

Pew reports are incredibly legit in most academic publications on a variety of issues.

[luns101]

Thanks for clearing that up, Tonka. I would say both your source and mpjh's would both indicate a general trend that the traditional Biblical Christian worldview is not being adhered to on the subject. This is one reason I've been hosting The Truth Project at my home with a combination of believers and skeptics alike. It's a pretty interesting discussion after each lesson.

[CrazyAnglican]

Yeah, it seems that way. It's not the poll itself that is a problem though, it's the interpretation of it. At no point was anyone asked "Do you think that Jesus is unnecessary to salvation". On the poll, according to the questions asked, I'd be in the 52% that agree that it's probably possible for a non-Christian to go to heaven. The Old Testament has stories of people who went to Heaven, so that in and of itself should push the percentage up quite a bit.

Look at it like this. You are in a burning building and somebody reaches a hand in to pull you out. Do you need to know the person's name? No. Is the person necessary to you salvation? Yes. Likewise if Christ works through other religions to save their adherents, it's in no way contrary to the scripture "No one gets to the Father, but through me".

Basically, while I'd be in the 52% for the sake of the poll, If you supposed that to mean that I think Christ's efforts and sacrifice of himself to be unnecessary to my (or anyone's) salvation, then you'd be 180 degrees away from my actual opinion. He is vital to salvation, whether you are aware of his presence or not.

[got tonkaed]

I think you are correct in that more traditional Biblical interpretation is not being represented by a lot of US christians. I do think there are some potential issues in the way its done, so its possible there is some overlap. I think also its possible that for many individuals the language they might use to describe relationships with God may affect the answer.

For instance if you ask me is a personal relationship with Jesus Christ the way to eternal salvation, i can safely say there are denominations in which it wont necessarily be how the question is phrased. We can differ on how the question has to be posed, but i do think its a bit more murky in most peoples mind than the traditional Gospel driven interpretation.

[luns101]

i do think its a bit more murky in most peoples mind than the traditional Gospel driven interpretation.

That assumes that most people even know what the traditional Biblical position is in the first place. I would say that a majority of people I talk to don't even understand it. Interesting enough, those who reject it often understand it even better than some who accept it.

[got tonkaed]

An old friend once told me, "when i left seminary i was ready to answer all types of doctrinal or theological questions to help my congregation. Of course the first thing they asked me to do was help them run through a session docket."

I think in many mainline churches and for many people who are more sporadic in their frequency there just isnt the consistent reapplication of education to allow them to be aware of more traditional interpretations. Of course its also true that many churches more mainline and left of mainline have adapted their understanding of theology that might affect how they answer some of these questions as well.

[mpjh]

Could is simply be that people's true beliefs are more common sense that you are willing to accept. Couldn't people look to the world around them and conclude that there are good people from all religions, and anything in their religion that puts a crimp on that is simply ignored?

[got tonkaed]

Could is simply be that people's true beliefs are more common sense that you are willing to accept. Couldn't people look to the world around them and conclude that there are good people from all religions, and anything in their religion that puts a crimp on that is simply ignored?

i think you and luns would disagree about the common sense of it. I do believe personally that majority of religious practioners take a more patchwork approach, which could probably be reflect in less exclusive stances. People define themselves in pretty complex ways at times, and often involves a lot of different bits here and there. I dont think people who even adhere to more consistent worldviews avoid picking and choosing entirely.

[CrazyAnglican]

Edit-- More of a rant than an actual diatribe. My apologies; carry on gentlemen.

[luns101]

Could is simply be that people's true beliefs are more common sense that you are willing to accept. Couldn't people look to the world around them and conclude that there are good people from all religions, and anything in their religion that puts a crimp on that is simply ignored?

You're choosing to define common sense through your own worldview though. The Bible says there are no "good" people. That's not to say that people from different religions are worthless or that there is no worth in their various belief systems...it's just to show that all of mankind is in need of redemption. Tonka beat me to the punch it seems in partially explaining it.

I understand the whole "I don't need to be a Christian to do good deeds" thing. I've stated before that there is no morality scoreboard. We're all equally hypocrites regardless.

[The Neon Peon]

I have switched religions several times because of this stuff.

Here are my two problems with religion in general:
1. A changing religion.

If you look at the history of some of these (well, pretty much any of these old and major religions), you will find that things like "do not eat pork" (for Jewish people) were developed long after the religion was founded. Almost all major religions have had all of these ceremonial stuff and other rules like this develop over time and be regional.

If it was not said by god in the first place, why do we need to add it on?
If this was added on to the religion by some people going off vague interpretations, why could not have some of the majors stuff the religion believes in have had the same past?
If this religion changes like this, then why do I have to follow by one set of rules to get to heaven now, but that rule set would not have worked at other times for me?

2. You must believe in ___ or follow these obscure rules: ___ to get to heaven.

No. If I threw you into some tribe in Africa (no offense or racial stuff intended, might as well be any other undeveloped region) when you were a child, and had you live there all your life with no knowledge or even rumors heard of Jesus, the Bible, Christianity, and any religion other than the one the tribe you lived in had... I don't care what your soul is made of, you are not going to become a Christian or whatever other religion.

So, in effect, any religion that says this either says that a great deal of souls are doomed for eternal suffering because of conditions on Earth, or you are saying that god meant for those souls to be cast out because he knew they were bad anyways. If it was the first case, I do not want to be part of your religion. If it was the second, then I do not want to worship that god.

[luns101]

My apologies; carry on gentlemen.

HEY! We didn't call you names

[jesterhawk]

Seems from all reports that the poll I cited is pretty rigorous and reliable.

I have little doubts that your polls are accurate, but that does not change the truth. Society has this view that truth is subjective and relative to their viewpoint, but that is not the case.

For example, Einstein stated that if I jump out of a plane and I am the observer, I am not moving, but everything is moving around me. Well, you know what, I will still hit the ground because of gravity and if I did not take precautions (parachute, balloon bag, etc), and the fall was big enough then I will be meeting my maker. He can speak of relativity on this all he wants and change viewpoints and observers and everything, but in the end, gravity is still at work and I would still hit the ground and go splat. The reason is that the truth of the law of gravity applies regardless of my point of view.

The same is with God. I can change my viewpoint and observer and whatever, but the truth will still be the truth. We can argue all we want about what is the truth, but the truth will still be the truth. The key is finding the truth. Now, I know the old saying about taking a hundred people and ask them about religion and you will get a hundred different answers and this is somewhat reflected within this poll. But that does not change the truth. So, the question is how do we discover the truth? The Bible tells us that we find the truth by the blood of the lamb, Jesus, and the word of our testimony, or sharing about the amazing things God has done for us. In other words, demonstrating that God is real and alive and actively working in this world today in his followers as the Bible says he does at least to some degree validates what the Bible says. Now, I will grant you that at the end of the day that it will require faith to believe, but then that is what religion is all about.

So, I said all of that to say this. You could poll a million people and all million could tell you that Jesus was a myth and that would not change the truth. This is why Jesus said, "and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." (John 8:32) And he also said, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me." (John 14:6b) Truth is so important to know and sought after that even "Pilate said to Him, 'What is truth?'" (John 18:38a). And truth is really what everyone needs here and in America and around the world.

JH

[mpjh]

No doubt about it, the general populace doesn't see it your way. Glad to see that you have the black and white for yourself, but most of the rest of the world see things in bright varying shades of color.

[Napoleon Ier]

No doubt about it, the general populace doesn't see it your way. Glad to see that you have the black and white for yourself, but most of the rest of the world see things in bright varying shades of color.

Actually all he was saying is that any given proposition is either a. true or b. false.

That's a pretty fundamental axiom, and I really don't think you'll find many people contesting it short of nihilists. And most people aren't nihilists.

[mpjh]

Another "its either black or white" analyst comes forward. The poll shows that people don't think that way. They appear to be much more complex, tolerant, and flexible in their views on this issue. That is the truth here.