What happens to non-christians after death?

Sam Vimes

Hi, I have a question about who believes what about what's going to happen to non-christians. I won't be posting in the thread except possibly to ask clarifying questions, just want to get an idea of what people actually believe. If you pick an option I'd appreciate it if you could say what option you picked and what it is that makes you think that's what's going to happen, preferably with a biblical reference where it said that's what's going to happen.

Ta

(poll to follow)

edit:added. If you think I've left important options off let me know and I'll add them

edit2: and if you don't believe in "hell" per se, think of it as whatever you think the equivalent of hell is.

Yawlboy

they rot (like the rest of us)

casey junior

Hindus are usually burned on a pyre, most others are buried.

Sam Vimes

Yawlboy wrote: »

they rot (like the rest of us)

casey junior wrote: »

Hindus are usually burned on a pyre, most others are buried.

Well we're off to a bad start

I'd tend to agree but I was more hoping for christian responses

viclemronny

Being an atheist, I believe that there is no afterlife.

However, I gather from your thread title that you'd like a religious perspective. In that vein, to the best of my memory the Catholic Church preaches one of the two following doctrines, not sure which it is though.

1) If one does not hold catholic beliefs but lives a good and moral life then after a certain amount of time in purgatory one goes to heaven.

2) Virtuos pagans go to limbo, which I'm not sure if the RCC holds to be the first circle of hell. It is the first circle of hell in Dante's Inferno but not sure if this is a view held Catholic Theologians.

Personally, as stated above, I reckon nothing happens. We get our one shot at it and that's it.

antiskeptic

By non-Christian (who all go to Hell) I mean those who haven't the status "in Christ". That might include some who identify as Christians but who are not actually.

Conversely, by Christian (all of whom go to Heaven) I mean those who have the status "in Christ". That might include some who don't identify as Christian but who are actually.

janeeen

everyone goes into the ground and has no conscience until judgment day.

wolfsbane

janeeen wrote: »

everyone goes into the ground and has no conscience until judgment day.

Who are these then?
Revelation 6:9 When He opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the testimony which they held. 10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, “How long, O Lord, holy and true, until You judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” 11 Then a white robe was given to each of them; and it was said to them that they should rest a little while longer, until both the number of their fellow servants and their brethren, who would be killed as they were, was completed.

1 John 3:1 Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called children of God! Therefore the world does not know us, because it did not know Him.

Fanny Cradock

I'm confused by the options given on the poll. It seems to be a mish-mash between Christians opinions on the afterlife (options one and two) and Christians opinions on morality.

dermothickey

God Loves Everyone

janeeen

Ecclesiastes 9:5 For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no further reward, and even the memory of them is forgotten.
Ecclesiastes 9:10
Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the grave, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.

Sam Vimes

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I'm confused by the options given on the poll. It seems to be a mish-mash between Christians opinions on the afterlife (options one and two) and Christians opinions on morality.

I'm confused too, that's why I started the thread

I often hear people talk as if certain moral actions or overall poor morality result in hell but then I hear that all who accept Jesus will be saved. Then I hear that god saves good people regardless of their religion. Would I be right in saying that you believe morality and salvation are separate issues, making you a 1 on the list?

Or would you be a variant of option 2, where the actions that Christians can do to lose salvation are something other than poor morality?

Or option 6,other [fill in as required]

casey junior

janeeen wrote: »

Ecclesiastes 9:5 For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no further reward, and even the memory of them is forgotten.
Ecclesiastes 9:10
Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the grave, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.

Here boy, I never knew that, thats a good one that is.

Stephentlig

God is there only judge for scripture says who can know the mind of the Lord?

Tail Wagger

We all become maggot food,, then who'll take you in?

Fanny Cradock

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I'm confused too, that's why I started the thread

I often hear people talk as if certain moral actions or overall poor morality result in hell but then I hear that all who accept Jesus will be saved. Then I hear that god saves good people regardless of their religion. Would I be right in saying that you believe morality and salvation are separate issues, making you a 1 on the list?

Or would you be a variant of option 2, where the actions that Christians can do to lose salvation are something other than poor morality?

Or option 6,other [fill in as required]

Haven't we discussed this before?


Anyway, as an atheists belief about what happens after death is neither a surprise or in question, further off topic posts will be deleted.

Glenster

I dont think anyone knows who goes to hell and who goes to heaven.

It would be presumptuous of anyone here to say whether they are going to heaven, how are we supposed to know what happens to X?

Especially since the only thing we know about X is that he's non-christian.

Soul Winner

To everyone who believes that we will just be nothing after we die can you tell me how long this will last for? Forever? Does that mean you believe in eternity?

If God exists then He will have the final say on the matter. If He doesn't exist then there's nothing to worry about at all, just nothingness for eternity, if such a thing exists. It is not our place to judge who will or who will not get in. All we can say is that God has guaranteed entry to those who trust in Jesus His Son, who gave Himself for us, and who said that we should judge not lest we be judged. What should be of paramount importance to everyone is whether they believe God has spoken to their hearts at anytime in their lives or not. Have you hearkened unto His promptings or have you rebelled and gone your own way? This is the essence of sin, that all we like sheep have gone astray, we have turned, everyone, to our own way. Until this is recognized by the self and turned from in repentance toward God you cannot be saved. You must recognize your need of God and then ask Him with a heart of truth to deliver you from your dreadful condition, and when you do, He will, I guarantee it.

Ramza

I did some thinking about this a while back and I came to my own conclusion

I wouldn't be very religious but I do believe in a prime creator

I deny that when we die its nothingness for eternity, can I ask you ; what or who experiences this nothingness? I thought ; the part of me that thinks, feels and experiences emotion will never die aka my soul (imo). In my opinion there will be something else when we die, I think that death is only the beginning for human beings.

I believe that the body is a host for a soul (I know it might sound cliched but this is my honest opinion). One might argue the lengths and breadths of the human body, how we experience emotion, the brain, and how when we die all life is terminated within us, but tbh I respect this view but I also politely deny it in place of my own belief and opinion

All energy is borrowed we must give it back at some stage

Sam Vimes

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Haven't we discussed this before?

We have but it was never really made clear to me. My original post in that thread was to someone who was saying that bad moral behaviour sends you to hell so I said that it's a christian belief that believing in Jesus (or accepting the gift as you put it) is what earns salvation and not moral behaviour and people kept saying I was misrepresenting things but didn't say exactly how. Hence I started the thread to find out if moral behaviour effects salvation and if so, how.

Glenster wrote: »

I dont think anyone knows who goes to hell and who goes to heaven.

It would be presumptuous of anyone here to say whether they are going to heaven, how are we supposed to know what happens to X?

Especially since the only thing we know about X is that he's non-christian.

I thought that these would have been fairly clear no?

Jon 14:6: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"

John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life"

Ramza wrote: »

I deny that when we die its nothingness for eternity, can I ask you ; what or who experiences this nothingness?

who experienced the nothingness before you were born?

Blueboyd

Non Christians will go to Heaven but it will feel like Hell for them cos there are so many Christians there

Michaelrsh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfaQuk5tEKE

AtomicHorror

Soul Winner wrote: »

To everyone who believes that we will just be nothing after we die can you tell me how long this will last for? Forever? Does that mean you believe in eternity?

I imagine it'll feel about as long as the time before we were born. Nothing means nothing. If you talk about it in terms of how long it lasts, you're not getting what nothing means.

Glenster

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I thought that these would have been fairly clear no?

John 14:6: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"

John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life"

Yeah, clear, coz if there's one thing the bible isn't, it's cryptic.

If we're taking the bible literally, reading it like a child would, with no subtext (maybe we get confused by big ideas) the afterlife isnt really an issue coz, according to John 3:16, I'm going to live forever.

PDN

Glenster wrote: »

Yeah, clear, coz if there's one thing the bible isn't, it's cryptic.

If we're taking the bible literally, reading it like a child would, with no subtext (maybe we get confused by big ideas) the afterlife isnt really an issue coz, according to John 3:16, I'm going to live forever.

Some parts of the Bible are cryptic (eg apocalyptic literature such as Revelation) but I think John 3:16 is clear enough. You'd need to be deliberately obtuse, or have zero understanding of any context, to misunderstand it.

Sometimes I just get so tired of the games people want to play here.

Sam Vimes

PDN wrote: »

Some parts of the Bible are cryptic (eg apocalyptic literature such as Revelation) but I think John 3:16 is clear enough.

I'd have to agree with that tbh. Glenster, would I be right in saying that you have a personal view of god and the nature of god and that your reason for saying that these passages are cryptic and that we don't know who is saved and who isn't is that what those passages appear to be saying does not fit with your personal view of god?

dvpower

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Jon 14:6: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"

John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life"

I don't think John 14:6 is that clear at all (do you have to be a Christian or is he heaven's bouncer and sometimes lets non regulars in). John 3:16 seems clear enough about Christians, but doesn't mention non Christians at all.

Similar threads have failed to enlighten me in the past. There seems to be a range of opinion but with a reasonable body of consensus around the idea that only Christians can go to heaven (and perhaps those who didn't have the opportunity or the capacity to be Christians).

Expect a lot of metaphors and accusations of deliberately misunderstanding perfectly clear answers.

antiskeptic wrote: »

Conversely, by Christian (all of whom go to Heaven) I mean those who have the status "in Christ". That might include some who don't identify as Christian but who are actually.

@antiskeptic. I don't understand this (honestly). Can you elaborate please.

philologos

If you read John chapter 3 in its entirety one also notices:

John 3:18 wrote:

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

This might help to move the discussion along. This follows, John 3:17 which states the following:

John 3:17 wrote:

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

If you read all three together, from John 3:16, to John 3:18 while also giving individual notice to each verse, you will notice the importance of what Jesus is saying.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

If you read all three together, from John 3:16, to John 3:18 while also giving individual notice to each verse, you will notice the importance of what Jesus is saying.

Which is what exactly?

philologos

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Which is what exactly?

What do you think the point of John chapter 3 is?

Particularly the section from John 3:16 - 21

My viewpoint won't be remarkable to you, it is always best to think about it for yourself, and bring your own conclusions to the table.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

What do you think the point of John chapter 3 is?

Particularly the section from John 3:16 - 21

My viewpoint won't be remarkable to you, it is always best to think about it for yourself, and bring your own conclusions to the table.

When I read "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already" I take it to mean that whoever believes in Jesus will be saved and whoever doesn't believe in him will be condemned (or is already) but when I said this in a previous thread I was accused of misrepresenting people and I'm often told that this is not the case. Also only 26% of people have picked that option on my poll. I'm confused.......

It also seems to be saying that what keeps people away from christianity is a desire to do wicked things and that those who do good things will be drawn to it. Does that sound accurate to you?

marty1985

In my humble opinion, there are a couple of issues here.

If the question is whether or not athiests go to hell, I think to a large extent christians are responsible for athiesm, through carelessness in teaching the faith correctly or through their own hypocrisy of teaching morals and not living by them.

As for other religions. I'm speaking as a Catholic. The Catholic Church has a lot of ties with the Jewish religion. They were the first to hear the word of God, and the faith is based around a similar goal - expectation of the Messiah. The Catholic Church teaches that the plan of salvation includes those who acknowledge the Creator, and the first of these is the Muslims who hold the faith of Abraham and, like us, adore God who will be the judge.

Personally, I think it all boils down to one thing Jesus said, "When you did it to the least of my brothers, you did it to me." So I think that's what people will be judged on. When you were good to someone, you were good to him. When you pretended not to see that beggar, you pretended not to see him.

That's my 2 cents.

Sam Vimes

marty1985 wrote: »

Personally, I think it all boils down to one thing Jesus said, "When you did it to the least of my brothers, you did it to me." So I think that's what people will be judged on. When you were good to someone, you were good to him. When you pretended not to see that beggar, you pretended not to see him.

That's my 2 cents.

Just to be clear, your position is that those who treat others well will be saved regardless of their religion (or lack of)? Is that correct?

Glenster

PDN wrote: »

You'd need to be deliberately obtuse, or have zero understanding of any context, to misunderstand it.

Sometimes I just get so tired of the games people want to play here.

It must be great to be so sure about things.

Now me, when I read a book that proclaims Jesus to be son of God, I have difficulty understanding if this is literal, meaning he is of one being with the father, or metaphorical as in Wisdom 2:13 identifying him as a saintly person.

It must be great to know that when Jesus says to the disciples "cast your net upon the waters" that it means 'go and convert people after I'm dead' and not just 'try there for some fish'.

That's not even to get into the fact that the greek for 'perish' in john 3:16 is more propperly translated as marred or damaged, is never used for as a synonym for death in the new testament and is used as in contemporary Jewish teaching to refer to the condition of unbelievers.

I find it very frustrating when people tell me that there is only one interpretation of the Bible. Or that anything in John is clear.

marty1985

Yes, i hesitated for a while here, but yeah. Basically.

Fanny Cradock

You might learn more if you investigate denominational beliefs regarding soteriology/ damnation rather than what "some guy" on the internet thinks.

Wiki is the one stop shop for overviews. (Warning: heretical beliefs included!)

antiskeptic

antiskeptic wrote:

Conversely, by Christian (all of whom go to Heaven) I mean those who have the status "in Christ". That might include some who don't identify as Christian but who are actually.

dvpower wrote: »

@antiskeptic. I don't understand this (honestly). Can you elaborate please.

Sure..

There are all kinds of definitions of what it is to be a Christian. Some would suggest that if you have water poured on your head as an infant by a priest then that makes you a Christian. Others would say that if you follow the teachings of Jesus then you are a Christian. Still others would say that if you "accept Jesus into your heart" then you are a Christian. What all should agree though, is that the only true definition of what constitutes a Christian is God's definition. And his defintion (I suggest) is that a Christian is one who He (God) has performed a certain action on. That action is called variously: regeneration, caused to be born again, saved, redeemed.

If God has done this then you are a Christian, if he has not then you are not. It should be clear from this (by logical necessity) that there is no specific need that a person identify with Christianity in order that they be a Christian - all that need have occurred for them to be a Christian is that God perform this action upon them. And so, it is reasonable to suppose (and scripture suggests) there will be those who are Christians/saved/regenerated/redeemed without identifying themselves as Christians per se.

Old Testament types are a clear case in point. They didn't identify as Christians nor had they heard of Christ - yet God performed his saving action on them, making them Christians*

(*which is just another way of saying they were saved through what Christ did on their behalf).

It follows that God can access everyone with his salvation and that no one will be lost merely because they have never heard of Christ or the Bible or the God of the Bible.

marty1985

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

You might learn more if you investigate denominational beliefs regarding soteriology/ damnation rather than what "some guy" on the internet thinks.

It was the first time anyone ever asked for my opinion.

Fanny Cradock

marty1985 wrote: »

It was the first time anyone ever asked for my opinion.

Bless! Here's another one - Barca or Inter to win?

Seriously, though, the "some guy" remark wasn't aimed at you or anyone in general. I was attempting to steer Sam in the direction of formulated doctrinal beliefs that should (at least on paper) speak for many, many more Christians than a poll on this forums ever could.

PDN

Glenster wrote: »

That's not even to get into the fact that the greek for 'perish' in john 3:16 is more propperly translated as marred or damaged, is never used for as a synonym for death in the new testament and is used as in contemporary Jewish teaching to refer to the condition of unbelievers.

I find it very frustrating when people tell me that there is only one interpretation of the Bible. Or that anything in John is clear.

You want to discuss Greek? That's fine by me.

The Greek word for 'perish' (apollumi) is the same word used in Matt 2:13 where it says: "Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him".

So, help me here. If this word never means 'perish', then what do you think Herod wanted to do to the Baby Jesus? Just 'damage him'? Rough him up a wee bit?

Lots of things in John's Gospel are clear, and then other things need a bit more study to understand the context.

wolfsbane

antiskeptic wrote: »

Sure..

There are all kinds of definitions of what it is to be a Christian. Some would suggest that if you have water poured on your head as an infant by a priest then that makes you a Christian. Others would say that if you follow the teachings of Jesus then you are a Christian. Still others would say that if you "accept Jesus into your heart" then you are a Christian. What all should agree though, is that the only true definition of what constitutes a Christian is God's definition. And his defintion (I suggest) is that a Christian is one who He (God) has performed a certain action on. That action is called variously: regeneration, caused to be born again, saved, redeemed.

If God has done this then you are a Christian, if he has not then you are not. It should be clear from this (by logical necessity) that there is no specific need that a person identify with Christianity in order that they be a Christian - all that need have occurred for them to be a Christian is that God perform this action upon them. And so, it is reasonable to suppose (and scripture suggests) there will be those who are Christians/saved/regenerated/redeemed without identifying themselves as Christians per se.

Old Testament types are a clear case in point. They didn't identify as Christians nor had they heard of Christ - yet God performed his saving action on them, making them Christians*

(*which is just another way of saying they were saved through what Christ did on their behalf).

It follows that God can access everyone with his salvation and that no one will be lost merely because they have never heard of Christ or the Bible or the God of the Bible.

All the OT saints believed in God, believed His promises, looked for the Christ who would redeem them. Same beliefs required in NT saints. When God changes a man's heart/nature, the man knows God.

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

antiskeptic

wolfsbane wrote: »

All the OT saints believed in God, believed His promises, looked for the Christ who would redeem them.

One of the more illuminating saints, Abraham, is described not so much as believing in God as plain believing God - whereby he was justified. Even the demons believe in God

I'm not so sure with what clarity people looked to Christ-as-redeemer specifically. If Abrahams way of salvation is chosen by Paul as illustrative, then it's believing God which proves a hinging point into salvation

Which is something anyone can do - aside from hearing of Christ.

Same beliefs required in NT saints.

My own suspicion is that there is a certain amount of jumping to conclusion regarding such passages. The consequences of a man being saved would be that he recognises Christ as Lord (assuming he is exposed to such information). This is not to say that his believing Christ is Lord is the cause of his being saved. In which case what you say is true - but the beliefs aren't so much a requirement as they are a marker of the saved. A consequence, not a cause.

For example:

All who call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. I, antiskeptic, by virtue of being in Christ and having been exposed to teaching about Christ, recognise my sin and that my salvation is to be found in Christ. Therefore I will be one who calls on the name of the Lord. As a consequence of my being saved..

When God changes a man's heart/nature, the man knows God.

Indeed. I'm not suggesting that nothing happens in a sheepherder up the side of a mountain in Tibet on being placed in Christ (yet never having heard of Christ). He will have the life of God within and God will begin his work in that man just as he does everyone else. But that man will not confess Christ as I confess Christ. He hasn't heard of him to be in a position to do so.

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

I'm not sure how this verse can be demonstrated as having something to do with a person translating from lost to found (indeed, the very mention of reward reinforces the notion that it speaks to believers who are called greater and lesser in the kingdom of God on account of, it would seem, their actions).

Would you agree that the "Jew" in the early section of Romans highlights the case of the Religious self-righteous: those who 'believe in God' but are as lost as lost can be. And that the "Gentile" in that same section highlights the case of the unbeliever - who is lost as lost can be. About whom Paul concludes the same thing: they are all lost and can only be saved by the gospel. Not by their believing in God.

Sam Vimes

On a side note, wolfsbane I see your sig from 1 Timothy was removed for being offensive. Can't help but laugh tbh

It was the sig about women learning in silence and submission and not having authority over men right?

antiskeptic

Sam Vimes wrote: »

On a side note, wolfsbane I see your sig from 1 Timothy was removed for being offensive. Can't help but laugh tbh

It's and odd world alright...

It was the sig about women learning in silence and submission and not having authority over men right?

Perhaps a woman admin figured otherwise. Or a male admin who figured to "fight" on behalf of downtrodden women everywhere.

Glenster

PDN wrote: »

The Greek word for 'perish' (apollumi) is the same word used in Matt 2:13 where it says: "Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him".

So, help me here. If this word never means 'perish', then what do you think Herod wanted to do to the Baby Jesus? Just 'damage him'? Rough him up a wee bit?

Do you honestly maintain that there is no controversy over the word apollumi? Ever since Scotfield and Thompson it's been debated. Gramatically speaking it can't mean removal of life, it wouldn't make sense that way.

This is my point though, it's arrogance to go around saying this or that is what the Bible definitively means. I'm not sure if any two people agree. It's what it means to you.

philologos

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Also only 26% of people have picked that option on my poll. I'm confused.......

Your poll itself is confusing. It conflates morality and salvation into one. Salvation (as far as I know) is different from morality or moral action if we are to consider that we don't earn our way to heaven through our own standing, as we are guilty of sin, but we are justified by Christ's behalf.

It's a major point that is so often missed. There isn't a checklist of things you can do to get into heaven as far as I'm concerned, it is a gift which you can freely accept or reject.

wolfsbane

Sam Vimes wrote: »

On a side note, wolfsbane I see your sig from 1 Timothy was removed for being offensive. Can't help but laugh tbh

It was the sig about women learning in silence and submission and not having authority over men right?

I too got a laugh out of it - censorship of the Bible in a Christian forum shows how risible the PC thought-police are. :pac:

But it's not so humorous where it deprives people of their education or employment. Give people like that real power and we'll be reciting peons to Big Brother in the works canteen.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

Your poll itself is confusing. It conflates morality and salvation into one. Salvation (as far as I know) is different from morality or moral action if we are to consider that we don't earn our way to heaven through our own standing, as we are guilty of sin, but we are justified by Christ's behalf.

It's a major point that is so often missed. There isn't a checklist of things you can do to get into heaven as far as I'm concerned, it is a gift which you can freely accept or reject.

I am also confused because I often hear christians conflate morality and salvation and 28% have picked such options on my poll. Also when I suggested that morality is irrelevant to salvation I was accused of misrepresenting christianity (although that may have been be because I said "believe an old story" rather than "accept a gift")

One thing I often hear is that atheists theoretically should behave immorally because we have no ultimate consequences and the fact that we generally behave morally is used to argue for a conscience which some theists for some reason equate with the existence of a god. But since morality is irrelevant to salvation, theists have no consequences for their actions either. Again, very confusing.

Also, you say that I can freely accept or reject this gift but there is a problem with that. The problem is that there are thousands of groups all claiming to offer me gifts and even if I decide to accept one, until I die I have no way of knowing if the gift I have chosen to accept is real or one of the many false ones on offer. How can it be said that I can freely choose to accept or reject the offer when I have no way of knowing if the offer is real and no way of ever finding out? If I decide to accept this offer surely I'm running the risk that one of the other offers is the real one? I can say with absolute certainty that if I found out tomorrow that the gift being offered by christianity was real I would accept it in a heartbeat but........

philologos

The poll questions aren't very clear.

I and many other Christians I would know of hold the position, that humans can be moral without believing in God (not without God existing, that's a different question altogether particularly when it could be questioned if there would be anything in existence without God existing).

The question of whether or not one can be saved, is different in my understanding of the passage. Salvation isn't earned by us if we look particularly to Ephesians chapter 2, Romans chapter 3, Mark chapter 10.

Indeed, many Scriptures, including Romans chapter 3 which I have already cited, Psalm 14, and 53 back up the view that no human is good on their own merit.

Salvation is based on accepting Christ's salvation, and becoming justified on His behalf, rather than your own because you are in essence guilty before God. The Jewish Scriptures mention that the Messiah would be wounded for the transgressions of humanity in Isaiah 53.

Morality, on the other hand, is doing what is right, from what is wrong. These standards of right and wrong are absolute even if humans have difficulty agreeing with them. Ultimately they are set by God. So from my perspective, moral living, is living as God intended in His creation. Non-believers in many cases can do a better job than Christians can. Indeed the opposite is also true.

You could be the most moral person in the world, but you would still fall short of God's standard. Likewise, the most immoral person in existence, if they accept genuinely the free grace of God through the Crucifixion, can be saved.

If I am mistaken, I hope that others will challenge this opinion and provide their reasoning so I can learn. Or even a fuller understanding.

wolfsbane

antiskeptic

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfsbane
All the OT saints believed in God, believed His promises, looked for the Christ who would redeem them.
One of the more illuminating saints, Abraham, is described not so much as believing in God as plain believing God - whereby he was justified. Even the demons believe in God

Both believing God and believing in God are true of demons. They have no doubt about what He says - they just hate it. They have no doubt that He exists - they just hate Him. When Abraham believed God, he also of necessity had to believe in Him - if He didn't exist, how could one believe what He said? But the belief that saves is more than accepting the facts; it is gladly embracing them, embracing the God so revealed.

I'm not so sure with what clarity people looked to Christ-as-redeemer specifically. If Abrahams way of salvation is chosen by Paul as illustrative, then it's believing God which proves a hinging point into salvation

Which is something anyone can do - aside from hearing of Christ.

The believer has to believe God exists, not just any god. He has to believe all He says. He has to trust Him, and entrust himself to Him. Just as Abraham was prepared to offer up Isaac at God's command.

Christ said that Abraham rejoiced to see His (Christ's) day, that he saw it and was glad. The OT saints knew something of the coming Redeemer. Moses and all the prophets spoke of Him. Job looked for Him.

Quote:
Same beliefs required in NT saints.
My own suspicion is that there is a certain amount of jumping to conclusion regarding such passages. The consequences of a man being saved would be that he recognises Christ as Lord (assuming he is exposed to such information). This is not to say that his believing Christ is Lord is the cause of his being saved. In which case what you say is true - but the beliefs aren't so much a requirement as they are a marker of the saved. A consequence, not a cause.

For example:

All who call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. I, antiskeptic, by virtue of being in Christ and having been exposed to teaching about Christ, recognise my sin and that my salvation is to be found in Christ. Therefore I will be one who calls on the name of the Lord. As a consequence of my being saved..

Is belief in Christ a consequence or a cause of being saved? Here's a clear word on it:
Acts 16:9 Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

Quote:
When God changes a man's heart/nature, the man knows God.
Indeed. I'm not suggesting that nothing happens in a sheepherder up the side of a mountain in Tibet on being placed in Christ (yet never having heard of Christ). He will have the life of God within and God will begin his work in that man just as he does everyone else. But that man will not confess Christ as I confess Christ. He hasn't heard of him to be in a position to do so.

You have no grounds to think that any man who is ignorant of Christ will be saved. When God is going to save any man, He brings the gospel to him. He sends missionaries with the gospel, He puts Christians in the man's way.

Quote:
Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.
I'm not sure how this verse can be demonstrated as having something to do with a person translating from lost to found (indeed, the very mention of reward reinforces the notion that it speaks to believers who are called greater and lesser in the kingdom of God on account of, it would seem, their actions).

Eternal life is spoken of as the reward for the believer of the gospel:
John 6:27 Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set His seal on Him.”
28 Then they said to Him, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?”
29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.”

Would you agree that the "Jew" in the early section of Romans highlights the case of the Religious self-righteous: those who 'believe in God' but are as lost as lost can be. And that the "Gentile" in that same section highlights the case of the unbeliever - who is lost as lost can be. About whom Paul concludes the same thing: they are all lost and can only be saved by the gospel. Not by their believing in God.

But the gospel is 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.'

_________________________________________________________________
John 6:40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”

Fanny Cradock

With all due respect, Sam, I think your poll options reflect your confusion.