s/o of my other Christian content thread - salvation ??s

[eternalsummer]

I don't believe this salvation framework, and I understand what you are getting at about choosing to believe as well.

 

That being said, if I think about other aspects of life, it seems that people very often do, in a sense, choose what to believe, and it can be a very difficult thing to root out in oneself because it is generally something that is indirect or we hide from ourselves.  People who are conspiracy theory nuts are an extreme example, but its pretty everyday to see people who choose their basic premises for reasoning because they seem to make sense based on the things that seem real to them.  I suspect its actually more natural for us than doing it on a solid rational basis.

 

I think you are talking here about people choosing to believe live hypotheses (and the set of hypotheses that are live to them will differ based on personality and environment - certainly Thor was a lot more live a hypothesis for a swede however many years ago than for a Chinese person today, for instance).

 

For live hypotheses, I agree that you can choose belief or unbelief.  I just don't think all hypotheses are live, or that Christianity is live to everyone.

[Bluegoat]

The question about consent came in response to bolt.'s post (#22). With regard to the bold, I'm not sure I understand where you're going with it. Why would people be consulted about the laws of physics? They are what we are, and we exist within them.

 

Yes, I think maybe you were taking the word consent, as she used it, to a level it can't really sustain.  But bolt might disagree.

 

In theology, the laws of moral behavior operate on the same kind of level as the laws of physics, so the idea that we would be consulted about, for example, adultery being wrong is analogous to being consulted about the laws of gravity.  Both are consequences of the nature of reality, and the nature if the First Cause, rather than something laid over top or added on. 

[Bluegoat]

I think you are talking here about people choosing to believe live hypotheses (and the set of hypotheses that are live to them will differ based on personality and environment - certainly Thor was a lot more live a hypothesis for a swede however many years ago than for a Chinese person today, for instance).

 

For live hypotheses, I agree that you can choose belief or unbelief.  I just don't think all hypotheses are live, or that Christianity is live to everyone.

 

That's an interesting way of putting it.  I think that is true, however a part of what I was getting at is that we often don't make these choices in a very concious way, and we can be self-serving when we do that as well.  I like the image of the live hypothesis, but I don't think that what makes it live is always a fundamentally rational basis, even when we think we are. 

 

Charlotte Mason talkes at one point about the idea that you can argue logically to any conclusion if you start with the correct premises, and so choosing those needs to be done with care.  In practice, I think that is actually very tricky.

[gardenmom5]

I think I am a little unclear because I was raised without religion so I don't fully understand some of the vocab.  But what I think you are saying is that your denomination believes that humans can't choose or not choose to believe in god (this makes sense to me to a point - you probably couldn't just choose to believe in Zeus, however much you wanted to) and that the only way someone believes in god is by hearing preaching and reading the bible.  

 

But clearly not all people who hear preaching and read the bible are believers, so there are some people whom god just says, "not you, not you, not you," right?  

 

And then are those people condemned to eternal torture/hell or is there no hell in your tradition or is it ambiguous?

 

different christian denominations will have different interpretations.

 

[eternalsummer]

That's an interesting way of putting it.  I think that is true, however a part of what I was getting at is that we often don't make these choices in a very concious way, and we can be self-serving when we do that as well.  I like the image of the live hypothesis, but I don't think that what makes it live is always a fundamentally rational basis, even when we think we are. 

 

Charlotte Mason talkes at one point about the idea that you can argue logically to any conclusion if you start with the correct premises, and so choosing those needs to be done with care.  In practice, I think that is actually very tricky.

Yes, I agree that what is live is largely an unconscious process.  It is what one decides to do about things that are live that is the window of free will, or least what we perceive as free will.

 

William James used the example of a bunch of people on a train.  A train robber enters.  Now, if everyone (or a significant portion of the people) choose to believe the live hypothesis that they can work together and defeat him, it is likely the robber will be defeated (facing dozens of opponents).  However, if everyone chooses to deny that hypothesis and work under the assumption that they cannot or will not succeed, then the train robber is not defeated.

 

However, I don't see how anyone could ever choose to believe a dead hypothesis.  I can see acting as if you chose a dead hypothesis (like if I were suddenly transplanted to Saudi Arabia, I'd try to fit in), but actually believing in say the literal assertions of most religious texts is impossible for me.

[FaithManor]

FaithManor, please accept my apology. I didn't mean to argue with you. I was confused and thought an illustration would explain why. I didn't mean to put you on the spot to defend anything. I appreciated your answer, by the way, so thank you for that.

Thanks Charlie! I appreciate that. I try not to get too deeply personal about my religious beliefs and worldview philosophy on this board because it just doesn't end well. Sorry for being defensive. I have had some not so great experiences with the Hive in this regard. Sigh...

 

 

I very much appreciate your insights!

[PeachyDoodle]

I don't understand how you can't choose to believe, but you can choose to not believe.  Is there a third option besides belief and unbelief?  What is that option?  What would choosing that option mean in terms of eternity?

 

No, no third option.

 

If the only options are belief and unbelief, and you can choose unbelief but can't choose belief, does that mean that you don't have free will with regards to belief?  So it is somehow decided beforehand that you will believe or not?

 

Correct. The human will is bound and unable to choose to believe on its own. However, don't misunderstand that God chooses who will reject belief just because God chooses who will believe.

 

Ugh, I am not understanding the logic of it, I'm sorry.

 

That's because it's not a logical proposition. I know, it's weird. I've fought it for a long time. But I'm convinced that scripture teaches that both these things are simultaneously true, even if I can't understand how they could both be simultaneously true. For me, it's actually been quite a relief not to have to reconcile everything logically.

 

With regards to not choosing hell - if it is something you have the free will to do (to reject god) and that rejection means hell, and you know it means hell, then again I suggest only insane people could possibly make that choice.

 

I understand what you're saying. But the rejection of faith is a rejection of the truth of the gospel. If I don't believe that it is true that I am in need of salvation, that God has provided for that salvation in Christ, and that the alternative to that salvation is eternity in hell, how can I, according to my own logic, be choosing something that I believe to be false? Suppose I tell you that eating bacon will result in your sprouting a pig snout. If you believe my statement to be objectively false, are you actively choosing to sport a pig snout when you order bacon for breakfast?

 

Now on the other hand if it is *not* a choice (which I suggest belief basically is not, at heart) then that's something else entirely.  

 

For me, at least, The Will to Believe makes a lot of sense - within a set of live hypotheses, you can choose belief or unbelief.  For me, though, the literal story of Christianity is as dead a hypothesis as say a literal belief in Zeus and Hera (and I suspect Zeus and Hera are dead hypotheses for you too).  Do you see yourself as consciously rejecting belief in Zeus and Hera, or do you see it as something that is impossible for you to believe?

 

Interesting question. I suppose I would say that I consciously reject Zeus and Hera because of the lack of objective evidence that they do/did exist and are active in the world. As opposed to Christianity, in which both the integral persons and events are able to be shown as factual and taking place in a verifiable and specific point in history. (I realize you and I disagree on that point, but to me, the evidence stacks up.) Faith as a gift does not automatically imply that faith precludes reason. There is certainly an active participation on the the part of the will in faith, it's just that the will has to be regenerated (made alive or, perhaps, activated) before it is able to participate. I do find your points about live and dead hypotheses fascinating, though. I suspect that we may be closer in agreement than we know. I wish I was able to articulate my perspective more clearly, but this is the best I can do at the moment.

 

[HS Mom in NC]

Based on my understanding of Scripture, I have rejected the idea that a one-time recitation of a "Sinner's Prayer" or a mere intellectual assent to the truths of Scripture is sufficient for salvation. Instead, I believe:

 

Salvation is only through Christ:

 

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.†John 14:6

 

Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved. Acts 4:12

 

Salvation comes through faith in Christ and His sacrifice:

 

But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith... Romans 3:21-25A

 

Repentance and new birth are necessary:

 

And Jesus answered and said to them, “Do you suppose that these Galileans were worse sinners than all other Galileans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them, do you think that they were worse sinners than all other men who dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.†Luke 13:2-5

 

Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.†John 3:3

 

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new. 2 Corinthians 5:17

 

Faith without works is dead and shows itself to be false:

 

You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? James 2:19-20

 

Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, “I know Him,†and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.†1 John 2:3-4

 

Only those who persevere in faith will be saved:

 

For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,†says the Lord. And again, “The Lord will judge His people.†It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.†Hebrews 10:26-30

 

For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them. 2 Peter 2:20-21

 

There is hope for people like me, who struggled with my faith and with sin: 

 

Jesus said to him, â€œIf you can believe, all things are possible to him who believes.†Immediately the father of the child cried out and said with tears, “Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!†Mark 9:23-24

 

...If we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:7-9

 

All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. John 6:37

 

This sums it up for me too. 

 

 

[Guest]

That's how it looks to me, yeah. But your post makes me wonder, if there's no concept of hell what is a Christians "saved" from?

 

I haven't read all the responses; I just happened on this post, and thought I would pipe up.  I think Milovany posted something similar to what I am going to say in this or another thread  but I've lost track of where, so please forgive me.  Her answer is more thorough than my minimal (for me) post here.  

 

Orthodox Christians do have a concept of hell, but it is focused on punishment.  It is separation from God.  So when I seek salvation in Christ, I am seeking to be united with God forever, something I start and continue to do in this life.  A prayer we say frequently might illumine the reasons we want to be with God forever...

 

O heavenly King, the Comforter, the Spirit of Truth, Who art everywhere present and fillest all things; treasury of blessings and giver of life, come and abide in us, and cleanse us from every impurity, and save our souls, O Good One.  

 

When we know Who God is, as we state in a teeny part in this prayer, then we want to be with Him forever, and that will mean we are saved from separating ourselves from God.  

 

(It gets a little complex after I type more than this, so I'm going to stop there for now.)