For this week, a discussion on the bases for salvation. (Yes, I just wanted to say "bases".)

Faith and Good Works

Your so funny....

"bases" lol

Why are you asking about salvation in the Atheist forum?

You such a fascinating writer. You ask some really challenging questions to which platitudes a "pat" answers aren't good enough. I iwll try to give some good points:

1. The Bible tells believrs that there is no faith without good works. Giving to others is a way to demonstrate God's love for everyone in the world. Jesus asked the question; "Who among you (unbelievers at the time) would give to your children rocks or snakes instead of bread?". He was making the point that all of us give love. He wanted us to realize that the act of loving another human being came from God. He wanted to broaden our thinking into understanding that we have the capacity to love BECAUSE God loved us first "when He formed us in our mother's womb, He KNEW us".

2. I love what you wrote in your article about intentions. At one point Jesus says to the Pharisees (the religious leaders of HIs day) that they were fake. He compared them to empty tombs that are clean on the outside and inside full of every vile thing. He pointed out that they stood on the street corners bowing and putting up a front for everyone to see how Great they were. He wanted us to live REAL Faith. He wanted us to SHOW the Father. One time, Peter asked HIm to just show us the Father and he'd be satisfied (Peter was a real brainiac! :)). Jesus reprimanded him by saying that if the disciples have seen Him, they have seen the Father. Because where Jesus went and worked, there the Father was also working. Meaning that when we do something that the world can see is a "Christian" thing, we should not only do it with our whole hearts, but with added humility giving all the kudos to the Father alone and taking none of the credit for any of our abilities for ourselves. This way we are demonstrating that God and only God gives us the strength we need to live in a world that doesn't really like us too much.

3.
I love this so much that I jsut had to quote you here!!! This is so true!!! Of us. But of the Father or Jesus, not so much. They continue to be part of all peoples lives invited or not. Because He loves us FIRST. Anyone who gets a puppy doesn't leave the puppy to starve when the dog just won't like us. We may want to give the dog away, but we won't if someone WE love loves the dog. So we continue to look after the dogs needs even when we risk getting our hands bitten. So it is with the Father, everytime He blesses us with something great, i.e. a new job that pays the bills just when we need it, a new car when the old one is on it's last legs, a smile or good laugh when we feel kind of blue, a child, a spouse (or significant other because all love originates with the Father), a reuinion for a torn relationship or recovery from brain (breast, prostate, lung) cancer.

4.
The whole idea of "good works" from a Christian stand point is that we can't be good enough. There's never going to be a perfect person. That's why there had (has, for the Jewish believers) to be a Messiah. Because none of us are ever going to be good enough to go to heaven without an advocate. We are so screwed up and morally flawed at the most basic level of our human existance, that we couldn't save ourselves if collectivly the world joined forces and stood side by side trying to. We're screwed, in a nutshell.

Why are are we screwed and what are we screwed out of, you ask? I'll answer the second question first. A life filled with love and joy and fullness beyond anything we could cook up in our little brain. I hear you scoffing, fantasy, right? WRONG! We weren't created (yes creationism) to live with pain. Our world wasn't designed to be shoveled or plowed or flooded. We were put here initially to be God's friends. This is what made Lucifer so mad in the first place. Which is why old Luce decided to mess it up by lying and manipulating. Which is what he is known for. So because he's the king of liars, we're screwed! He can make seem so great and can plant the seeds of doubt so deep that some of us will NEVER believe in God. *And when those of us who decide they know more than the One who brought them into existance die, they die into nothingness. It's the eternal void. Our spirit goes on, no matter what. Your spirit goes on... how do YOU want to spend FOREVER!

Just a few thoguhts. I really do love the way you write. Your incredible! BY the way, the comment with this "*" is not meant to offend anyone.

"but with added humility giving all the kudos to the Father alone and taking none of the credit for any of our abilities for ourselves. "
That's one of my biggest problems with it all. I find that absolutely horrible.
"but we won't if someone WE love loves the dog. So we continue to look after the dogs needs even when we risk getting our hands bitten."
I can't imagine someone I love wanting me to keep around a dog who tries to bite me all the time. People say quite often that sacrifice is the greatest part of love, but it must be at least partly clear that I don't believe that. I wouldn't ask, no matter how much I loved the dog, to keep it around if it tried to bite my husband (if I had a husband or a dog).
And attributing doubt and a sense of self-worth strong enough to be independent from God to Satan bothers me. If we couldn't earn a feeling of greatness, how would we know we had done anything good? And the doubt would have to be Satan doing us a favor. I don't believe in faith, of course, but I have to ask, to someone who does, what good is it without doubt? How could faith be strong without being questioned? If there is no doubt, then isn't it just brainwashing? But, then, maybe you meant that Satan is only responsible for the kind of doubt labelled as stubborness and the kind of inflated sense of self that isn't actually self-worth.
Those on opposing sides of the spectrum have given me different Bible sources, some saying it's faith alone, and some good works. So "the Bible tells us" seems to be an unreliable way of determining it.
Aside from this, thank you for your compliments. I appreciate them.

Good works come as the result of salvation. Salvation does not come as the result of good works. It is not the works that save. It is Christ. The good works are evidence of salvation. Christ is the cause.

So kill and rape all I want as long as I love Christ before I die?

....Or Love, be charitable, selfless, self-sacrificing and altruistic, but if you don't believe in God, it's still the alternative for you.....

Skeptic,
No, evidence of salvation is good works. It is from the inside out not the outside in. If you are a genuine follower of Christ good works will be a natural result of your new nature. Those who continue to practice lawlessness (sin) after they proclaim Christ are liars and Christ is not in them.

That's not what we were asking, Lovelove...
I believe (though I hesitate to put words in others' mouths) that the point Skeptic was trying to make was that: Presumably he can safely practise a life of lawlessness and sin, but providing he genuinely repents before he dies, that's ok....and I followed with the counter-argument of the good and gentle law-abiding, altruistic atheist who, inspite of having led a dedicated life, if he doesn't acknowledge or believe in God, is for the high-jump....?

Exactly, thank you Alexandra. Let me just correct your last sentence "if he doesn't acknowledge or believe in God" because lovelove does not state salvation is for those who beleive in God, for her only the Christians get in.

Heaven is for those who; repent of their sins, accept Jesus Christ's sacrifice on the cross as payment for their sins, and follow Christ into a new life. Can deathbed salvations occur? Yes, take the thief on the cross as an example. He was saved but he will get little or no reward because he did no work for God's kingdom. God rewards those who work for Him. What about the atheist who does good works? They are carnal and they will not last. They will be forgotten. Unless He leads someone to Christ it will not endure for eternity. Of course, if an atheist did lead someone to Christ he would not be an atheist.

Next you're going to say "God loves the sinner, not the sin".

That is exactly right. God loves the sinner but hates the sin. God knows the future so He knows the outcome of every decision. Why would He not hate something that harms the ones He loves? Sin harms us either as individuals or collectively.

With all do respect, and I know you mean well but I don't think anyone is here to be saved. Perhaps if you want to save people try try other religious forums. At least you will know the people already have a penchant for unsubstantiated beliefs. I think as you are no longer debating and now preaching that I am through my discussions with you. That is of course after I explain why your last comments were full of hate.

I fail to see the hate in LL's post. Maybe you could explain that or are you just doing a drive-by insult?

I am of course referring to the other thread.

Why don't you just respond in this thread to LL's posts in this thread instead of spreading insults all over the place? If LL wants to try and evangelize then she is free to do so. It's a free country and no one is being harmed by her efforts. You may not respond ( or you may) but no one is harming you. Yes, I'm a Christian too.

How can you say that you love Christ when you kill and rape? The question is whether your desire to change and accept your sins is truly sincere. Attaining salvation is not as simple as claiming that you love Christ after committing sinful acts. Only GOD can grant salvation and if you truly believe in Him and repent then you will be with Him in paradise just as in the case of the good thief.

THis is an issue I face with the Moderator of the Bible Basics forum...Just as LL is free to evangelise, and it's a free country, (and I fully endorse and respect her right to do so, BTW....) I have 'had words' and been mildly admonished by said moderator for coming back with discursive arguments and counter-discussion on Bible and faith veracity, as final and definitive. it has been requested that on her forum, the Bible, the existence of God, nor the sanctity of Jesus Christ be challenged, questioned or debated....

But if, as you say, 'It's a free country'... why should Christians be permitted to enter any forum and proselytise and evnagelise, on this premise, but contrarily, discussions of the questioning kind are discouraged in Bible basics fora....Would you say that this is a bit two-faced?

I have had to commence a discursive thread in the Buddhist forum, on biblical content, in comparison to Buddhist teachings, and as yet, I don't think anyone has taken up the baton and run with it...

Alexandra,
You can challenge Christ all you want. I welcome it.

I haven't ever challenged Christ. (though many do...) I have said many times that his words echo the sentiments of the Buddha, who was born at least 580 years prior to him... I just challenge the 'Son of God' bit, and the 'God exists' bit as well.
And until you can arrange a sit-down meal and a face to face with the guy, you and i will just have to agree to differ.

That is challenging Christ. He claimed to be the Son of God, He claimed to be God, He claimed there was a God in heaven. He claimed there was a hell. He said all those things.

I'm sorry, but are you calling ME two faced? When you have your own forum within an organization such as Bella Online, you can decide what is safe and acceptable for your participants however you like. I have been extremely gracious and accepting of you in and out of my forum.

As for LL's comments in this forum, If the moderator here decides to set a boundary to protect her participants rights in this Atheist forum, then she is free to do so and everyone will respect that.

What bothers me the most is that in Bible Basics forum, you kiss up, but in other forums you deride me and my character. Which is it, Alex?



When have you done THIS??? Usually you ENTER a discussion and blatently tell everyone (Christian or otherwise) that they are wrong and not nearly as enlightened as you are. THIS is why I asked you to tone it down. Get your facts straight before you decide to try to tear me down publically.

Jenna,
Sorry about interrupting your debate, but I felt I needed to defend myself a little here...

No, I'm not calling you two-faced...not at all..I'm calling the practise of entering other fora and proselytising, but then my choice of not being confrontational which I have tried to be (but sadly failed - for which I have apologised) when i come onto the Christian Forum... two faced...
What I mean is, they can take it out of the Christian forum, and 'preach', but I can't bring it in, and argue. And that was our agreement. And i slipped up. And I'm sorry.
I wasn't calling you two-faced at all. You misunderstood the intention of the comment. or I didn't explain myself very well, more likely.



Agreed, yes you have...
And although I don't have moderator status here, I have tried getting a discussion going in the |Buddhist forum, but nobody want s to come and play over there.... *sulk* and i still don't fully know or understand why....



I have never sought to deride your character either here or anywhere else. as I tried to explain above, the comment wasn't aimed at you, it was the situation...





Where have I ever said that they are wrong, and they are not nearly as enlightened as I am? Really I promise, I have never done that...

I have issue with the existence of God?
Correct.
I have issue with the statement that Jesus is God?
Correct.
I have issued with faith being put forward as proof?
Correct.
But i have said before, and I will always say that I admire and respect those with whom I engage, for the depth and sincerity of their faith.
I would ask that they show the same courtesy for me.

is that too much to ask?

Let's not make this personal....on either side. IMHO.

Alexandra said, "I have had to commence a discursive thread in the Buddhist forum, on biblical content, in comparison to Buddhist teachings, and as yet, I don't think anyone has taken up the baton and run with it... "

Frankly, Alexandra, I don't think that many people are well-versed. Literacy has always been an issue and reading one book or having it read to you weekly is an easy out Reading the three or four Discourses of the Buddha takes a bit of time. I would be surprised if many of the debaters have even read additional books on their topic like The Unknown Sayings of Jesus or the Gnostic Bible.

I can't speak for others in the forum here, but I have read extensively many traditions. I would enjoy discussions on a variety of them, but every conversation seems to be invaded and hijacked by Christian extremists. Seeking or discussing is only allowed, it seems, if they are the center of the discussion.

At one point in my life I was very interested in reading up on all of these different ideas - all this was "on my list", (including the Koran, the Kabbalah, the Gnostics) unfortunately as far as I got with Buddhism was chatting in a pub with my Buddhist friend. I got tired. I decided no more religion/philosophy/conspiracy theory for a while. So, Alexandra, if you'd got me seven or eight years ago, you would have had a much more energetic discussion, and perhaps even an educated one, rather than you having to go over the theory each time. Maybe later.

What made you turn into a believer?

This is great, TD! I am thrilled....
So, apart from the God question, (and goodness knows we've discussed this point) what specific teachings of Buddhism did you reject because you felt they were 'false'?

What is to decide if some beliefs are false? If we say that your religion is false and mine is true, does that have any understanding behind it, or only a position? Who are we to call a religion false unless we are totally acquainted with it? that may take ages. It is not that easy.

I believe that we can not call Christianity a false religion and same for Buddhism. All the religions need tremendous understanding.
why spread hatred and develop more fissures by calling each other false?

In terms of Christianity and where God is concerned, if you are not worshipping Him and praising Him in your religion, then your religion is a false religion.

If you follow teachings of Buddha or Mohammed or the Dahli Lama in stead of following the teachings of Jesus Christ, then your religion is a false religion according to the Word of God.

If your religion thinks that we evolved from monkeys, a primordial ooze in the ocean or from dinosaur dung, then your religion is a false religion according to the Word of God.

If your religion does not believe that Jesus was sent here by God to die for us, to buy our souls with His Blood, and that He rose from the dead and ascended to Heaven, then your religion is a false religion according to God.

If your religion believes in reincarnation or some other juxtaposition of eternal life other than what God says eternal life is, then your religion is a false religion.

There is no middle ground or gray area here.

if you are not worshipping Him and praising Him in your religion, then your religion is a false religion.

I do this with total commitment.

Because Amadeus seems to me to be a fanatical fundamentalist, who does not truly understand God's message. I truly, truly feel so sad that he is so fixated on one viewpoint, that he dismisses all the rest of the Good around him, out of hand.

I do not understand his Logic in stating that when Jesus comes, he will be one of the chosen...Does he expect Jesus to arrive in his lifetime?
If not, and he dies, does he expect to go straight to Heaven?

If he doesn't, where will he stay in the meantime?
What if he dies suddently and has no time to 'repent his sins'?
Then surely, he should be repenting every second of the day, "just in case"...which would mean that he actually wouldn't be sinning at all... but he does...

It's all a bit too scare-mongering for me to ever take it seriously.

This is why I can't be bothered to respond to him.
I ignore him.
Sure, I read his posts, because I can. But if he attacks me personally, or tells lies about me (as he has done)Then I will respond, as is my right. On the whole though, I would rather engage with people who don't sound like a stuck record, and have a better variety of things to offer by way of discussion.

I feel sad for him, also because he seems to think his methods could win people over, but in fact, they alienate people from Christianity, because fanaticism - in any guise - is extremely detrimental to the faith in question; it gives it a bad reputation, and is very off-putting.

shame.

I feel sad for him, also because he seems to think his methods could win people over, but in fact, they alienate people from Christianity, because fanaticism - in any guise - is extremely detrimental to the faith in question; it gives it a bad reputation, and is very off-putting.
--------------------------------------------------------

He has promised not to do this.

God exists.
Jesus exists.
Jesus is God.
No arguments.

Whatever, Alexandra,

You have a unique way of twisting everything I say.

My message is simply that the Bible is the word of God, Jesus died for our sins.

I know where I am going after the Holy Spirit gets called up.

I do repent and rebuke of any sins that I may have committed in a day. I repent and rebuke anyway that I do not glorify or edify God everyday. It is what you are supposed to do as a Christian.

That too is in the Bible but you won't believe anything written in there.

Here's a simpler message for you.

Know Jesus, Know Heaven

No Jesus, No Heaven.

Is that more succinct for you?

BTW, Alexandra, what lies have I told about you?

For God to exist, it is necessary for us to believe in him. If we didn't, then he wouldn't exist.
God is therefore a man-made deity, dependent on faith.
Buddhism requires no such construct.
The fact that Jesus may very well have existed is another matter. I'm open to this opinion, and in fact, I find his teachings both profound and instructive.

Either Texas dave IS amadeus or they are neighbors...

Their arguements seem very similar. Even the tone of their posts are the same...

From what I can tell, they are different posters...
But:
They are both male...
They're both extremely set in their ways and deeply convinced of their being Right and representatives of the only and indisputable Truth.
They both refuse to explore, discuss or engage in any discussion of any creed other than their Christian one...
And they've both been banned before.

Other than that, there's no similarity at all, really!

At least amadeus apologized. Let us appreciate that. I do not expect any apology or change in Texas dave.

Well, I think it's good that he apologised, for whatever reason, and it takes courage to do so, if an apology is warranted.
but an apology only holds as good, if the "offender" then desists from repeating the 'offence' and decides to change their ways.
I live in hope.

Not that I want him to change his faith, belief or stance. Not at all.
"A man convinced against his Will, is of the same opinion still."
I'd just like him to be a bit more receptive to those of others, that's all.
I'm not asking that others change course, but that they understand that the opinions of others may take them down different paths, that those paths should be respected as valid for those people, and that they are worth exploring, eeven if only for a quiet afternoon stroll off the beaten track - !

And nobody has responded to this little conundrum, either....

So basically, "I give you free will, but it's my way or the highway..."
is that it?

"I give you free will, but if you don't come on my side, you're out of the ball game."
What kind of a choice is that?
That's no choice at all, and makes a mockery of free will, and if I may say so, the bountiful, unconditional God of Love.

You can't give people a free choice, but then prejudice it by applying the thumb to the scale.
That's a human interpretation, not a Godly one.

I'll take my chances, thanks.

Did he ever speak of free will?

well, my Christian friends here on forum keep telling me he did....

I find no evidence that he ever spoke about free will. He says - either this or that.

Well in that case, that's even more unfair.

That is his way of thinking.

Hey texasdave, what doe that mean "Roe v Wade lied"? What was the lie? Or did you just need a rhyme?

Witness not bully.



We shall see...

You have "both" been banned from these forum before and probably soon shall be again... we shall see...

Are you spreading love?
are you sure?

Jesus is love.

Dave....

Uh-oh...The dog is licking his vomit up again!

Ummm...I have never been banned from here before.

I am actually relatively new to this forum and I haven't been bullying anyone.

I have been trying to spread the Good News about Jesus and anything that I remotely said as offensive, I have apologized for.

I have been called names and told to take my meds but I do not take those things personally.

If I do not try and spread the message about God and what He has offered to us, then I am failing as a Christian.

I am just trying to "make them without excuse" when they appear before the Lord

Also Jenna, I am not sure what your signature means but the Lord certainly DOES hold up a standard.

Isaiah 59:19 - So shall they fear the name of the Lord from the west, And His glory from the rising sun; When the enemy comes in like a flood, the SPIRIT OF THE LORD WILL LIFT UP A STANDARD AGAINST HIM.

If the Lord moves you to ban me, for the first time, then so be it. But please do not condemn me for trying to speak the truth here and spread the love of Jesus, otherwise you are no different from the others who persecute Christians.

I have been told several times by people like Alexandra that the Bible is NOT the truth and is a fairy tale and it is spelled out in your code of conduct not to do that. Why aren't you threatening them with banishment?

You threaten me and Dave because we speak the truth. I don't need scare tactics to get people to turn to God nor have I used any. There is a whole book in the Bible that does that for me.

It's called the Book of Revelations.

Stop worrying about your reputation on here and start sticking beside the Bible and Jesus and your fellow Christians.

You are a moderator you can easily check ISP addresses to see that Dave and I are different people.

Ban me, yes Quiet me, no.

How about I start a bickering Christians forum where the lot of you can have it out. Do none of you see the ridiculousness of the last week or so of postings. You are no longer even trying to save me. It has devolved into a argument over who is the better Christian and my immortal soul is at stake.

All kidding aside it is time we give the same level of credence to those who hold these in types of irrational beliefs as we give to those who believe in all other ridiculous ideas (ie. Loch Ness monster, UFO's, Bigfoot, Elvis is alive, etc...) It is imperative that we begin speaking plainly about the absurdity of most of our religious beliefs. Whatever their imagined source, the doctrines of modern religions are no more tenable than those which, for lack of adherents, were cast upon the scrap heap of mythology millennia ago. Ignorance in this degree, concentrated in both the head and belly of a lumbering superpower, is now a problem for the entire world. We must find our way to a time when faith, without evidence, disgraces anyone who would claim it.
I give credit to Sam Harris for most of the words in the previous paragraph.

There a lot of nonsensical religious beliefs and rituals and those who perform them will stand at the Throne of Judgment.

In no way were the previous posts about who is the best Christian. They were in response to people saying that we, I, are lying about God and the Bible as His Word.

Everyone keeps saying that there is no evidence of God when in reality there are 66 books written by Him and about Him and His love.

Yes, your immortal soul is at stake, there is no question about that and it will always be at stake until you open your heart and let Jesus in there.

Know Jesus Know Heaven
No Jesus No Heaven

Yes, It is that simple.

Very powerful.
Interesting quotation.

No matter what we try to say to those who put the bible forward as proof, it is difficult to even make them stop and consider the contradiction of their words. How can a man-written document, be proof of a Godly existence, when God only exists as long as the Mind fixes on him? Nothing exists without it first being thought about. Nothing.

Thanks Alexandra, I will save my argument against the non-existence of a physical world without my mind for another time.

Oh Skeptic, please don't expect me to sound entirely logical in this...I'm trying to wrap my head around this issue myself...it is one of the Buddha's most profound teachings, and it is quite a topic of discussion....I understand it, but expounding it may be more difficult, because words and language, sometimes, are insufficient to explain a subject such as this in a way that cuts through the confusion....!

I'm not here to duel or dispute with you, you understand... but I would love to discuss it, if you'd like the same thing....

*Bows with the deepest Respect*

texasdave, why don't you go back and answer all the questions I have posed to you over the last few weeks which you have chosen to ingnore and just move on to another thread only to return after several more posts have occurred and act as if you didn't notice. I am not a moron Dave.

Answer my previous questions posed to you. Lets start with the one about who you would vote for. Remember ignoring that one?

Alexandra, I understand the philosophy, and I agree with much of what Buddha taught. However I believe the physical world exists and is not in my mind. I may perceive it differently than you, for example who is to say my red is not your blue. But after I die the physical world will continue. I just won't be aware of it anymore.

WE all perceive the world differently, but it is not existent, because it is in a constant state of flux and re-flux, waxing and waning, coming and going...
If you take a chair, and remove its legs, back and armrests, is it still a chair? No. It is in its component parts, but it's no longer a chair.... if you take a mountain, and smite it into dust, it is no longer a mountain... that which we perceive as existent was once something, and will one day be something else. Hence, that which exists, does not exist, without our mind telling us it exists in a specific state. But it is merely our current perception.... a mayfly exists for one day, a sequoia for thousands of years....but a mayfly will cease to exist and function as this creature, just as the sequoia might be transformed into thousands of chairs, or ultimately, sawdust....
The 'physical' world exists, only if we perceive it in its present state, and refuse to believe it has changed, or will change. If we accept the constant changeability of everything, from one moment to the next, then the world as we know it, does not exist....

This was my question from another thread


I'd be interested in you opinion if I were to add to the list;
Muslim
Hindu
Sikh
Bahai
Scientology

It doesn't really matter what their race, color, creed or religion is. You should not vote based on that stuff. You should vote because the candidate is interested in the same problems that you are and the electee seems like a good, qualified choice for government.

If they happen to be a Christian then that is a bonus.

Please don't lead my witness amadeus.

Sorry Skeptic. "Your Honor, I retract my last statement for now."