Grace

[leftrightleftrightleft]

I have heard many Christians say that all sin is equal and we are all lost in this equality of sin and we need only accept Jesus' forgiveness in order to enter into eternal life and become spiritually alive.

So:

All sin is equal.
All sin is forgiven by believing in / accepting Jesus.

Correct?

Why is it that so many Christians quickly back up and back peddle when we begin to discuss really heinous crimes committed by Christians? The automatic default is that these people were't "real" Christians.

But if all sin is equal, why does it matter? We're all sinners and all sin is equal so why is a Christian mass-murderer accused of not being a "real" Christian? Could he not be a real Christian with a fully committed relationship to Jesus? After all, he just happens to sin but that sin is no better or worse than any other, right?

 

[ephraimanesti]

But if all sin is equal, why does it matter? We're all sinners and all sin is equal so why is a Christian mass-murderer accused of not being a "real" Christian? Could he not be a real Christian with a fully committed relationship to Jesus? After all, he just happens to sin but that sin is no better or worse than any other, right?

MY FRIEND,

Sin BEFORE being transformed into a Christian by God's Grace is much much different than willful sins perpetrated AFTER. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." But continuing to willfully sin after supposedly "coming to the Lord" is evidence that the transformation into "Christ-likeness" never occurred, the transformation into the image of Christ never took place, and thus the person in question could never have been a Christian by the only definition that matters--God's.

Our Lord stated, "If you Love me you will keep my commandments." Therefore, obviously, one who willfully sins after supposedly "entering in to a committed relationship to Jesus" never entered in, nor was committed, to his Lord and not worthy or eligible to be called by His Name.

ABBA'S SLAVE,
ephraim

 

[drich0150]

I have heard many Christians say that all sin is equal and we are all lost in this equality of sin and we need only accept Jesus' forgiveness in order to enter into eternal life and become spiritually alive.

So:

All sin is equal.
All sin is forgiven by believing in / accepting Jesus.

Correct?

Why is it that so many Christians quickly back up and back peddle when we begin to discuss really heinous crimes committed by Christians? The automatic default is that these people weren't "real" Christians.

But if all sin is equal, why does it matter?

On the sin side it does not matter. However on the forgiveness side only followers of Christ will find forgiveness for sin. Someone who professes Christ in one breath but does not live the life He has modeled is not a follower of Christ despite the religious dressing they put on their efforts.

We're all sinners and all sin is equal so why is a Christian mass-murderer accused of not being a "real" Christian?

Their actions (like any other habitual/malice sinner) is not consistent with their proclamation of Christianity.
This would be true with any liar gossip or any other 'minor sinner.'

Could he not be a real Christian with a fully committed relationship to Jesus?

Not according to Christ: "If you love me you will keep my Father's commandments"

After all, he just happens to sin but that sin is no better or worse than any other, right?

The sin in this instance is not what brings the brother condemnation. It is the condition of the sinners heart that has him revisit his sin of choice over and over and over again. as I have already pointed out this is true with any sin/ner.

Look How Paul Explains this percept in Gal 5:
16 I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. 17 For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery,[c] fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders,[d] drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Sin is not counted against you if you are walking in the Spirit. Meaning if you are doing everything you can to follow Christ then what sin you commit will find forgiveness. However if you walk in the flesh you will Not inherit the Kingdom of God.

The men who justify Mass Murder like the men who justify any other fleshly desire are "Christian" by personal proclamation only.

So why the need to point this out? Because some people do not understand the difference between a Member of the Church/Follower of Christ, and the name sake Christians who use religion for personal gain. The only way to make a legitimate discerning judgment is to inspect the fruit of the "Christian" in question. A bad tree will not bear good fruit, you can not get an apple from a thorn bush. So if a "Christian" is producing fruit like Mass Murder, then it is safe to say by his fruits this man is not a follower of Christ.

 

[file13]

I have heard many Christians say that all sin is equal and we are all lost in this equality of sin and we need only accept Jesus' forgiveness in order to enter into eternal life and become spiritually alive.

So:

All sin is equal.
All sin is forgiven by believing in / accepting Jesus.

Correct?

Sadly brother, this popular "Christian soundbyte" simply is not Scriptural and also not true. All sin earns damnation, but not all sin is equal.

If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask, and God will give him life—to those who commit sins that do not lead to death. There is sin that leads to death; I do not say that one should pray for that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that does not lead to death.
(1 John 5:16-17 ESV)
​

Clearly, some sins are more heinous than others.

Now of course, John says earlier in this same Epistle that we're all sinners, and we know from Paul that the cost (wages) of sin is death. This means that unless we have someone to atone for our sins, all of us are hell bound by willing default. So in the end, unless we repent and put our trust in Christ, who will then account His righteousness to our filthiness, we will be judged by our own works during judgement day. Let's face it brother, none of us want to do this because if we start to look within honestly, things quickly fall apart. If we look at the Law, we see how much we suck (as this video quickly demonstrates):

Are You a Good Person? - YouTube

So only by the grace of God will we be saved ultimately and even a lifetime of "little sins" earns us hell without Christ. However, there are indeed different degrees of sin. Raping and murdering, however, have not only an effect on other people, but a much more drastic one on one's own consciousness, which would indicate a huge degree of spiritual hardening.

So in short, without Christ, we're all sinners and all deserve death, but some sins are still more heinous then others. This applies to the elect as it does to the reprobate.

Why is it that so many Christians quickly back up and back peddle when we begin to discuss really heinous crimes committed by Christians? The automatic default is that these people were't "real" Christians.

Well, obviously the reason they back peddle is because they're inconsistent. But the idea of someone not being a "real Christian" is a slightly different notion. For folks who believe that once you've had a true conversion, repented and put your trust in Christ, Christ's blood justifies you and you cannot be "un-justified," aka, the "Preservation/Perseverance of the Saints" or sometimes (but perhaps inappropriately called) "once saved, always saved," then what they likely also mean here is that this person had a false conversion. I.e. they were never "saved" to begin with. Again, as John says in the same letter:

They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.
(1 John 2:19 ESV)
​

So yes, some folks who say "all sin is equal" may back peddle here, but it is possible to follow Scripture where some sins are sins "unto death" and yet also accept the notion that someone may have had a false conversion and thus, may have never been saved to begin with.

As a side note, we're never to speculate on this when it comes to whether someone is elect or not. Yes, there are fruits, but we cannot know what God has in store for the person, perhaps after this hideous fall into sin they may have suffered. We can have personal assurance, but that only applies to us personally.

But if all sin is equal, why does it matter? We're all sinners and all sin is equal so why is a Christian mass-murderer accused of not being a "real" Christian? Could he not be a real Christian with a fully committed relationship to Jesus? After all, he just happens to sin but that sin is no better or worse than any other, right?

Here you're getting into what's called in theology speak, "antinomianism." It means to be "against the law." The notion is that since one has been saved, one can get hammered drunk at the strip club every night and still be good to go because you've got you a "Get Out of Hell Free Card." This is an ancient heresy that has sadly reappeared quite a bit in some "Free Grace" circles. But as we also see (1st John is really applicable to everything your saying here) in John, someone who has a true conversion, someone who has experienced the regeneration of the Holy Spirit, will strive to try to overcome sin, not because they are scared of damnation, but because it pains them to hurt their Father who died for the sins they continue to commit. In other words, a true conversion will produce fruit, even if that fruit is a constant up and down falling and getting back up until they die. The elect are still sinners, still suck, and will still sin. But their heart has been changed by the Spirit, and their reaction to sin is different. Oh yes, they might even fall into awful sin, but if they have been truly called, Christ will raise them back up in His own time.

In any case, you bring up great points brother and hope this helps!

 

[bling]

Sin is equal. If you lookk at peter denying Christ it built from other previous sins. Paul did not start out wanting to be a murder of God's people.

People just keep sinning more and in increasingly selfish ways until they repent, that is the way it is designed to work. The repenting is what God is after.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

MY FRIEND,

Sin BEFORE being transformed into a Christian by God's Grace is much much different than willful sins perpetrated AFTER. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." But continuing to willfully sin after supposedly "coming to the Lord" is evidence that the transformation into "Christ-likeness" never occurred, the transformation into the image of Christ never took place, and thus the person in question could never have been a Christian by the only definition that matters--God's.

Our Lord stated, "If you Love me you will keep my commandments." Therefore, obviously, one who willfully sins after supposedly "entering in to a committed relationship to Jesus" never entered in, nor was committed, to his Lord and not worthy or eligible to be called by His Name.

ABBA'S SLAVE,
ephraim

Just to point out a harsh bit of reality: every Christian still sins.

What you say implies that NO ONE is a Christian. If to be called a Christian and a disciple of the Lord you must keep all the Lord's commands and never willfully commit a sin, then no one is a Christian.

Even the most devout and loving Christians I know still have faults and failures and make mistakes and commit sins and lie and are selfish, if only on occasion.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

On the sin side it does not matter. However on the forgiveness side only followers of Christ will find forgiveness for sin. Someone who professes Christ in one breath but does not live the life He has modeled is not a follower of Christ despite the religious dressing they put on their efforts.

Just to point out a harsh piece of reality: according to this definition, no one is a Christian. In one breath, all the Christians I know profess the truth of Christ and then sin in another. Even my pastor professes his love for Jesus but still sins, lies, is prone to selfishness and all the other foibles that make humans morally imperfect.

No one can live out the life Jesus prescribes fully and wholly in every moment. I don't believe that God demands perfection of us.

Their actions (like any other habitual/malice sinner) is not consistent with their proclamation of Christianity.
This would be true with any liar gossip or any other 'minor sinner.'

Not according to Christ: "If you love me you will keep my Father's commandments"

But NO ONE can do this!

The sin in this instance is not what brings the brother condemnation. It is the condition of the sinners heart that has him revisit his sin of choice over and over and over again. as I have already pointed out this is true with any sin/ner.

Look How Paul Explains this percept in Gal 5:
16 I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. 17 For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery,[c] fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders,[d] drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Sin is not counted against you if you are walking in the Spirit. Meaning if you are doing everything you can to follow Christ then what sin you commit will find forgiveness. However if you walk in the flesh you will Not inherit the Kingdom of God.

Do you believe that, after Paul's conversion, he never sinned and kept every command of Jesus? Do you believe that, after his conversion, he walked in the Spirit in every living moment of his life.

I feel like living in the Spirit is a challenge and a worthy challenge but it is/was never meant to be perfected for this perfection is an impossibility for our feeble mind and will.

The men who justify Mass Murder like the men who justify any other fleshly desire are "Christian" by personal proclamation only.

So if I stub my toe and exclaim "Goddamit!", I am no longer a Christian and lumped into the same category as a mass murderer? If I cut someone off in traffic because I am selfishly motivated in that moment, I am lumped into the same category as a mass murderer? All sin is equal according to you, right?

And you have a Christian icon. Meaning that, since your conversion, you are claiming to never have sinned otherwise your Christian icon is a false personal proclamation. I feel that to claim moral perfection is about as far from Godly humility as you can get

 

[a pilgrim]

Just to point out a harsh bit of reality: every Christian still sins.

What you say implies that NO ONE is a Christian. If to be called a Christian and a disciple of the Lord you must keep all the Lord's commands and never willfully commit a sin, then no one is a Christian.

Even the most devout and loving Christians I know still have faults and failures and make mistakes and commit sins and lie and are selfish, if only on occasion.

Leftrightleftrightleft,

I heard it put this way, "Christians are not sinLESS, they just sin LESS."

Does that make sense? We have the Spirit of God working in and through us once we've been saved. This helps to thwart our sometimes erring human nature.

 

[Zbigge1031]

I have heard many Christians say that all sin is equal and we are all lost in this equality of sin and we need only accept Jesus' forgiveness in order to enter into eternal life and become spiritually alive.

So:

All sin is equal.
All sin is forgiven by believing in / accepting Jesus.

Correct?

Why is it that so many Christians quickly back up and back peddle when we begin to discuss really heinous crimes committed by Christians? The automatic default is that these people were't "real" Christians.

But if all sin is equal, why does it matter? We're all sinners and all sin is equal so why is a Christian mass-murderer accused of not being a "real" Christian? Could he not be a real Christian with a fully committed relationship to Jesus? After all, he just happens to sin but that sin is no better or worse than any other, right?

All sin is equal in the eyes of God, but not necessarily equal in the eyes of man. We are mortal, and we judge sin based upon how bad it appears to us. This is how we establish our laws as well. To God, however, who is eternal, all sin is evil, and imperfection cannot reside within the perfect presence of God. Repentance and faith in Christ does mean our sins our forgiven.

I can think of several reasons why people are quick to backpeddle on this. First, people tend to rate themselves and compare themselves to others, even though this is wrong in God's eyes (think the pharisee and the tax collector). They don't want to be categorized with others they think are undeserving. There may also be some who think that it may turn people away from Christianity to express forgiveness for those who commit heinous crimes.

Another possibility is that the culprit may not genuinely be a Christian. There are many people who call themselves Christian but have no relationship with Jesus. I once dated a girl who claimed to be Catholic but thought it wrong to witness because she didn't believe Christ was the key to salvation. Everyone does sin, and doing so does not mean a person isn't a Christian. What's important is that person's response to their sin. A person who shrugs it off and feels no regret or shame for the things they do is not a Christian. Not all mass murderers are psychos. Some people are just pushed to the breaking point. I'm sure some people go along with others or never really stop do think about what they do. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the German leaders during the Holocaust were genuine Christians that just got caught up in it all and got a little carried away. I didn't live in that era, but given the hype of the Nazi party in Germany, it could have been pretty scarry even for an officer to stand up and denounce the actions the country was taking. If they repented, however, and sought the Lord's forgiveness, then their faith is just as real as anyone else's.

 

[GrayAngel]

I have heard many Christians say that all sin is equal and we are all lost in this equality of sin and we need only accept Jesus' forgiveness in order to enter into eternal life and become spiritually alive.

So:

All sin is equal.
All sin is forgiven by believing in / accepting Jesus.

Correct?

Why is it that so many Christians quickly back up and back peddle when we begin to discuss really heinous crimes committed by Christians? The automatic default is that these people were't "real" Christians.

But if all sin is equal, why does it matter? We're all sinners and all sin is equal so why is a Christian mass-murderer accused of not being a "real" Christian? Could he not be a real Christian with a fully committed relationship to Jesus? After all, he just happens to sin but that sin is no better or worse than any other, right?

All sins are not equal. Scripture doesn't teach that. What it does teach is that all have sinned and fallen short. It's not that all sins equal, but that we are all guilty of something. In the end, God will judge us all based on our actions, whether saved or not.

Revelation 20:11-15 - Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

 

[razeontherock]

I have heard many Christians say that all sin is equal and we are all lost in this equality of sin and we need only accept Jesus' forgiveness in order to enter into eternal life and become spiritually alive.

So:

All sin is equal.
All sin is forgiven by believing in / accepting Jesus.

Correct?

Why is it that so many Christians quickly back up and back peddle when we begin to discuss really heinous crimes committed by Christians? The automatic default is that these people were't "real" Christians.

But if all sin is equal, why does it matter? We're all sinners and all sin is equal so why is a Christian mass-murderer accused of not being a "real" Christian? Could he not be a real Christian with a fully committed relationship to Jesus? After all, he just happens to sin but that sin is no better or worse than any other, right?

Tough question. Trying to sort through the semantic issues and get right to the substance, I think that all sin separates us from G-d, even the "presumptuous sins" that we so often either don't know about, or think 'aren't so bad.' Which is NOT to say that all sins are equal in gravity, or effect on the world we live in!

I mean it's one thing for me to allow a certain thought pattern to continue unchecked for a bit, which never has any bearing on anyone else. If this is something the Lord has convicted me about, for me it is sin. It's quite far removed from behavior though! Esp behavior that's repeated, such as mass murder.

I think the phrase "not real Christians" is weak at best. We can speak to behavior that isn't Christian.

 

[drich0150]

Just to point out a harsh piece of reality: according to this definition, no one is a Christian. In one breath, all the Christians I know profess the truth of Christ and then sin in another. Even my pastor professes his love for Jesus but still sins, lies, is prone to selfishness and all the other foibles that make humans morally imperfect.

No one can live out the life Jesus prescribes fully and wholly in every moment. I don't believe that God demands perfection of us.

Actually He does, but knows that you will never meet this standard. So He has provided atonement rather than demanded true righteousness.

But NO ONE can do this!

Your right but your about 2000 years late with your revelation. Paul beat you to this discovery When recorded what was written in Romans 7.

So where is the balance between Law and grace? read romans 7

Do you believe that, after Paul's conversion, he never sinned and kept every command of Jesus? Do you believe that, after his conversion, he walked in the Spirit in every living moment of his life.

Actually he did walk in the Spirit everyday after his conversion. It just that walking in the Spirit as he describes was not about strict adherence to the Law.

I feel like living in the Spirit is a challenge and a worthy challenge but it is/was never meant to be perfected for this perfection is an impossibility for our feeble mind and will.

Perfection is obtainable but not through our efforts.

So if I stub my toe and exclaim "Goddamit!", I am no longer a Christian and lumped into the same category as a mass murderer?

If by category you mean sin, It depends on whether or not you know Christ

If I cut someone off in traffic because I am selfishly motivated in that moment, I am lumped into the same category as a mass murderer? All sin is equal according to you, right?

If you believe you have sinned then know that you have.

And you have a Christian icon. Meaning that, since your conversion, you are claiming to never have sinned otherwise your Christian icon is a false personal proclamation.

Or Perhaps you do not understand what walking in the Spirit means.

I feel that to claim moral perfection is about as far from Godly humility as you can get

Moral perfection has nothing to do with walking in the Spirit. Take the time to read Romans.
-or- Know that in my first post I wrote an abridged version, perhaps you could go back and reread it.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Leftrightleftrightleft,

I heard it put this way, "Christians are not sinLESS, they just sin LESS."

Does that make sense? We have the Spirit of God working in and through us once we've been saved. This helps to thwart our sometimes erring human nature.

There are many Christians I know or have known that sin (as per Biblical instruction) far more frequently than some very devout Buddhists, Taoists, Muslims and many irreligious people.

One of the nicest, most loving and selfless friends I have is a devout Muslim. She constantly goes out of her way to help and love others. I'm not saying she is sinLESS but I am saying that she sins LESS than many Christians I have known.

There are 7 billion people in this world. Many bad Christians. Many good Christians. Many bad non-Christians. Many good non-Christians. Our devoutness or religiosity doesn't seem a very good determinant of who sins LESS.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Tough question. Trying to sort through the semantic issues and get right to the substance, I think that all sin separates us from G-d, even the "presumptuous sins" that we so often either don't know about, or think 'aren't so bad.' Which is NOT to say that all sins are equal in gravity, or effect on the world we live in!

This is the best answer I have seen yet mainly because you've mentioned "the world". The gravity of the sin effects the world we live in! True statement. Reminds me of the monastic quote: "Monks live in the world but they are not of the world."

I like your answer because it indicates that reality is that we live in the world and our actions have consequences whether we like it or not.

I mean it's one thing for me to allow a certain thought pattern to continue unchecked for a bit, which never has any bearing on anyone else. If this is something the Lord has convicted me about, for me it is sin. It's quite far removed from behavior though! Esp behavior that's repeated, such as mass murder.

Good point.

I think the phrase "not real Christians" is weak at best. We can speak to behavior that isn't Christian.

Another good point. However, is someone who does not always behave like a Christian automatically removed from the category of "Christian"? Or do you view it more like a spectrum whereby some people have more or less Christian behaviour regardless of their theological motivations or orthodoxy?

 

[razeontherock]

However, is someone who does not always behave like a Christian automatically removed from the category of "Christian"? Or do you view it more like a spectrum whereby some people have more or less Christian behaviour regardless of their theological motivations or orthodoxy?

Well I think this just might slice through, and get right to the heart of it. Bottom line in Christianity is that "all Judgment is given to the Son." I fully expect we'll all be greatly surprised come Judgment Day! Far too much of Christendom has been devoted to ... essentially attempting to usurp that role. One thing I can commend RC for, is at least in word they accept that those outside of the Church can be saved. I'm not sure of all the details on that but I think they have it much like you just stated.

The most relevant Scripture that comes to mind is (1 Cor 4:20) For the kingdom of God [is] not in word, but in power."

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Actually He does, but knows that you will never meet this standard. So He has provided atonement rather than demanded true righteousness.

I feel like we're just getting into semantics here. But I view it as God not demanding us to be morally perfect as in, I do not have to live a morally perfect life because God has this whole atonement/forgiveness thing worked out.

God does not demand that we live a perfect life. I will not live a perfect life. God doesn't expect me too because its impossible, hence forgiveness.

Its just semantics because of our definitions of "demand" and the way we view the causation but I don't think its important.

Your right but your about 2000 years late with your revelation. Paul beat you to this discovery When recorded what was written in Romans 7.

So where is the balance between Law and grace? read romans 7

That is quite a brilliant chapter and clarifies many things.

Actually he did walk in the Spirit everyday after his conversion. It just that walking in the Spirit as he describes was not about strict adherence to the Law.

Yes, I re-read your post and I understand this. From what I gather you mean to say that "walking in the Spirit" does not equate to "living a sinless life". Rather, "walking in the Spirit" is equated with "having whatever sins you do commit be forgiven." Am I correct in your understanding?

Perfection is obtainable but not through our efforts.

What do you mean by "perfection"? Do you mean it in some abstract, ontological way?

I have yet to see a perfect human, Christian or non-Christian, where I define "perfection" as being morally upright in every thought or deed.

I can understand your statement if you mean that man can be "perfected" via the Spirit in some sort of abstract, ontological sense but I disagree with you that man can be "perfected" in a practical or functional sense.

If by category you mean sin, It depends on whether or not you know Christ

Let me elaborate a little. If I stub my toe and yell happen to take God's name in vain in my frustration and pain then that means I have sinned, correct? If all sin is equal, then my sin is equal to that of a mass murderer who slaughters several innocent people.

You said earlier that a Christian cannot adequately be labelled a Christian if their "action (like any other habitual/malice sinner) is not consistent with their proclamation of Christianity.
This would be true with any liar, gossip or any other 'minor sinner.'"

So, what I get from this is that, according to you, since me taking God's name in vain is an action that is not consistent with my proclamation of Christianity (or Jesus' moral value system), I therefore cannot adequately be labelled a Christian based on this on "minor" sin and do not "know" Christ fully.

I hold to the fact that by this strange definition, no one is a Christian because everyone screws up.

And from this there seems to be an inherent inconsistency in that most Christians quickly label the mass murderer as not a "real" Christian but, taking it to its logical conclusion as your definition does, it becomes absurd.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Well I think this just might slice through, and get right to the heart of it. Bottom line in Christianity is that "all Judgment is given to the Son." I fully expect we'll all be greatly surprised come Judgment Day! Far too much of Christendom has been devoted to ... essentially attempting to usurp that role. One thing I can commend RC for, is at least in word they accept that those outside of the Church can be saved. I'm not sure of all the details on that but I think they have it much like you just stated.

The most relevant Scripture that comes to mind is (1 Cor 4:20) For the kingdom of God [is] not in word, but in power."

Raze, I'm surprised by your answer! In most of the posts I have read of yours, I didn't think you would adhere to this viewpoint.

I feel like, as a Christian, you are treading a slippery slope whereby it no longer becomes necessary for non-Christians to convert because you're essentially claiming agnosticism with regard to salvation and the afterlife. If you claim that those who are "the saved" is unknowable and that both Christian and non-Christians could be "saved" then why is Jesus' resurrection necessary?

To me, the only reason in Christian thought that Jesus' deity must be orthodoxy is because of salvation. If salvation is up for grabs for anyone, then Jesus' deity is ultimately no longer necessary.

Just for interest's sake, this is the primary reason I'm not a full-fledged Christian. I cannot justify that Jesus is the only path to salvation, and if he's not then his deity and resurrection are irrelevant and pursuing right relationship with God (living in the Spirit) while following some form of Jesuism is all that I find necessary, fulfilling and/or practical.

Kind of a derail...

 

[razeontherock]

If you claim that those who are "the saved" is unknowable and that both Christian and non-Christians could be "saved" then why is Jesus' resurrection necessary?

Excellent question! Let me begin addressing this by saying that, w/o Jesus' bodily resurrection, none of us would have any Hope. The Truths conveyed by the Incarnation and Jesus' sinless life don't become applicable to anyone today w/o going through the gruesome horror of His suffering and death. It is more than just 'atonement,' it is actual reconciliation of G-d and man: Emmanuel!

And yet we're not talking about some dumb livestock. Our Passover Lamb was not only made Christ, but Lord. He also serves as our Great High Priest, intercedes for us, and is our Advocate with the Father. While that may all sound very church-like, this is just getting started with the portion of the Good News that seems to be forgotten in our times. If Jesus is willing to do these things for Church-going sinners, what makes any of us think He won't also act as Advocate for those who have never heard the Gospel?

And then, perhaps more to your question, doesn't it become even more critical for us to send missionaries as the Spirit leads? I mean we do see in Acts that people have their heart prepared by the Lord, and their Faith is put together via someone bringing them the Word.

To me, the only reason in Christian thought that Jesus' deity must be orthodoxy is because of salvation. If salvation is up for grabs for anyone, then Jesus' deity is ultimately no longer necessary.

I realize that what I have put forth is not normally considered within modern churchianity, but I believe that is a modern mistake. I'm saying that Jesus' finished work is far greater than we give Him credit for! And Jesus' Deity is central.

Just for interest's sake, this is the primary reason I'm not a full-fledged Christian. I cannot justify that Jesus is the only path to salvation

Just for clarity's sake let me point out that what I'm espousing is ancient. Who Jesus is, as well as what it means to "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ," is far more than is considered within modern churchianity. (For the most part) It's not just saying some words, repeat after me, step 1,2,3 that's it. (Not all who say Lord Lord) And yet what I'm espousing is not exclusive, but inclusive. When the Gospel says He would not that any should perish - God MEANS it!

There is Hope for all.

I suggest that your understanding of Jesus as "the way, the truth and the life" can be expanded so that you see what He meant by no man coming to the Father but by Him. I think this is available to all. Hearing the Gospel story does make it easier to follow Him - eventually.

 

[ephraimanesti]

Just to point out a harsh bit of reality: every Christian still sins.

What you say implies that NO ONE is a Christian. If to be called a Christian and a disciple of the Lord you must keep all the Lord's commands and never willfully commit a sin, then no one is a Christian.

Even the most devout and loving Christians I know still have faults and failures and make mistakes and commit sins and lie and are selfish, if only on occasion.

MY FRIEND,

You comments contradict Scripture, and they contradict my personal experience and that of my brothers and sisters in Christ with whom i have discussed this issue.

There is no point getting into an argument over something you obviously have no personal experience with, but let me just give you a couple of Scriptures to ponder and let it go at that:

"Everyone who remains in Him does not sin; everyone who sins has not seen Him or known Him. . . . Everyone who has been born of God does not sin, because His seed remains in him; he is not able to sin, because he has been born of God." (I John 3:6;9)

"We have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?" (Romans 6:1-2)

"For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace." (Romans 6:14)

i would strongly suggest that you keep in mind that you are totally and completely unable to see into the hearts of those you are judging as sinful people in your initial post and those following, and you thus have no clue as to what is going on in and with their hearts as God's Holy Spirit does His thing and, room by room, cleanses the Temple of God set up in their hearts. Leave the judging to God; get to work on yourself.

ABBA'S SLAVE,
ephraim

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

MY FRIEND,

You comments contradict Scripture, and they contradict my personal experience and that of my brothers and sisters in Christ with whom i have discussed this issue.

There is no point getting into an argument over something you obviously have no personal experience with, but let me just give you a couple of Scriptures to ponder and let it go at that:

"Everyone who remains in Him does not sin; everyone who sins has not seen Him or known Him. . . . Everyone who has been born of God does not sin, because His seed remains in him; he is not able to sin, because he has been born of God." (I John 3:6;9)

"We have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?" (Romans 6:1-2)

"For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace." (Romans 6:14)

i would strongly suggest that you keep in mind that you are totally and completely unable to see into the hearts of those you are judging as sinful people in your initial post and those following, and you thus have no clue as to what is going on in and with their hearts as God's Holy Spirit does His thing and, room by room, cleanses the Temple of God set up in their hearts. Leave the judging to God; get to work on yourself.

ABBA'S SLAVE,
ephraim

I will write the same thing I wrote to drich:

What do you mean by "sinless"? Do you mean it in some abstract, ontological way?

I have yet to see a sinless human in practice, Christian or non-Christian, where I define "sinless" as being morally upright in every thought or deed.

I can understand your statement if you mean that man can be "sinless" via the Spirit in some sort of abstract, ontological sense but I disagree with you that man can be "sinless" in a practical or functional sense.

People still commit acts whether they are forgiven or not. Christians lie, act selfishly, become impatient, cheat, steal, etc. All of them. None of them are perfect in practice. Perhaps they are sinless in some ontological sense, but I can't agree with you that they are perfect in a practical, observable way.