Christians: How to Save More Souls (Jesus Christ, reject, gospel, salvation)

[Master Vigil]

I enjoyed your post No's, but I just hope you realize one thing. That is indeed your opinion. I definitely do not believe that the church of christ is the biggest ship in the water, nor the only one. Sure, I don't believe that they are all the same size, but I don't think its the biggest. For one, it can't be, because the people on that ship don't accept everybody. They would rather let the person float in the cold water unless they chose to STAY on the ship. While a buddhist, or a taoist, or even a pagan would not care. They wouldn't have strict guidelines of whom is allowed to get into the boat. They would realize that it isn't the ship that matters, it's the person in the water.

[linwood]

If these things are true, then all Christians who truly want to save peoples' souls should keep Jesus' divinity, etc. a secret. Every person who goes through life without hearing the Gospel is another soul saved, and every time you tell a person about Jesus you are endangering their soul. By preaching and doing missionary work, you are in fact being counter productive to your objective of saving more souls!

This was actually stated by an early Church official somewhere.
I`ll try and remember who and when.

It makes sense.

[No*s]

Originally Posted by Master Vigil

I enjoyed your post No's, but I just hope you realize one thing. That is indeed your opinion.

Oh, I realize that MV. It is what I believe, and it is what my Church has taught for a long time. It is my opinion, just as your beliefs are your opinion. Neither of them are provable.

Originally Posted by Master Vigil

I definitely do not believe that the church of christ is the biggest ship in the water, nor the only one. Sure, I don't believe that they are all the same size, but I don't think its the biggest. For one, it can't be, because the people on that ship don't accept everybody. They would rather let the person float in the cold water unless they chose to STAY on the ship. While a buddhist, or a taoist, or even a pagan would not care. They wouldn't have strict guidelines of whom is allowed to get into the boat. They would realize that it isn't the ship that matters, it's the person in the water.

If one accepts what I believe about Christ, then this is the result.

It's also an analogy. You can't take everything in it in order to show a problem. It's a metaphor designed to make a point. I didn't see you comment on the "disease" analogy, but it holds the rebuttal to your points. If these sins are part of our disease, and the moral guidelines are some of the medicines, what then? Those strict guidelines are no longer designed to keep people out, but to get people well. It is, then, an act of mercy and love. If someone wants into the hospital, then they take the medicine the doctor prescribes. There is no need to believe that we would rather see someone out in the water than in the Church; that imputes malevolence to us.

One last point to note: when you write "they would rather let the person float in the cold water unless they chose to STAY on the ship." What do you suppose the options are. 1). You can stay on the ship and let it take you to land. 2). You can stay in the water or jump back in. Do you seriously propose that the Church should compel people into it? Remember, you may see other ships, but I don't. This criticism is a little unfair in that way, because if we advocated forcibly putting people into the ship, you could raise worse objections. When we say that people don't have to come to the ship, you respond just as you have. The only way to escape this criticism, as I perceive it, is to simply say that there are other "bigger" ships in the water. In order to do that, you are requiring we give up our core beliefs to acheive that. If we take either of the former options, we fall under criticism similar, or possibly worse, than that already given. In other words, in order to be acceptable, we must change to a more acceptable opinion.

[Master Vigil]

I understand your disease analogy. But I would also comment that one medical prescription doesn't work for everything. There are countless ways to "get well." Along the same lines, Christianity is not the only religion that works. Nor is it the best religion. It may be best for some, just like an antibiotic may be the best for someone who needs that, but it doesn't work well when someone has dyptheria. There is not better drug, and there is no better religion.

My point is, the fact that you don't see other ships makes me believe that either A. If they do not wish to be christian, they will stay in the water, since you wouldn't take them on the ship if they were pagan. or B. You would let them on, but when you found out they were lying about whether they were christian or not, you wouldn't keep them in the boat. Everybody is different, this is the key part of my argument. The ship is not what matters, the people in the water are what matters.

So if someone doesn't accept what you believe about christ this is the result. There are many ships, and you can choose which ever one you want. You don't have to stay in the water if you don't want to, but you also don't have to get on a ship with people whom you don't agree with. Now the basis of religion is goodness and love. Jesus taught this yes? Which analogy shows more love, yours where if they don't believe what you believe, they suffer hypothermia and die. Or mine, everyone can be saved, because the person matters more than the ship?

[No*s]

Originally Posted by Master Vigil

I understand your disease analogy. But I would also comment that one medical prescription doesn't work for everything. There are countless ways to "get well." Along the same lines, Christianity is not the only religion that works. Nor is it the best religion. It may be best for some, just like an antibiotic may be the best for someone who needs that, but it doesn't work well when someone has dyptheria. There is not better drug, and there is no better religion.

And to that, Orthodoxy treats almost everything as "ask your priest," because everybody is different. It simply doesn't follow to us that that one fact requires us to believe all faiths are equal. One person may enter the Church, and his spiritual father (maybe his priest, maybe not) could assign him a strict lifestyle of asceticism simply because of who he is. The next fellow enters the Church, and the same priest may help him along an entirely different way without as much asceticism.

The thing is, in an Orthodox Christian view (and here, I must differentiate myself from the gusy adhering to Pen-Sub), everybody has the same basic disease that takes on a variety of symptoms. You don't treat pneumonia with a cast, nor do you treat leukemia with pennicillin. In our view, all humanity suffers from the same basic diseases: sin, death, and corruption. All the rest are symptoms that have to be treated individually. From this belief, we really do believe that there is one basic cure, and multiple treatments for multiple diseases.

Originally Posted by Master Vigil

My point is, the fact that you don't see other ships makes me believe that either A. If they do not wish to be christian, they will stay in the water, since you wouldn't take them on the ship if they were pagan. or B. You would let them on, but when you found out they were lying about whether they were christian or not, you wouldn't keep them in the boat. Everybody is different, this is the key part of my argument. The ship is not what matters, the people in the water are what matters.

So if someone doesn't accept what you believe about christ this is the result. There are many ships, and you can choose which ever one you want. You don't have to stay in the water if you don't want to, but you also don't have to get on a ship with people whom you don't agree with. Now the basis of religion is goodness and love. Jesus taught this yes? Which analogy shows more love, yours where if they don't believe what you believe, they suffer hypothermia and die. Or mine, everyone can be saved, because the person matters more than the ship?

Actually, no . Jesus was pretty exclusivist. He asserted that if someone doesn't hate their father and mother they were unworthy (a comparison to their devotion to Him), that He is "the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and that No man comes to the Father except through him," that if a man "does not eat" His flesh and His blood there is no eternal life, and so on. Jesus was extremely exclusivist. His teachings denied all other boats, and He was very explicit.

Now, if someone wants to believe there are other ships, then they can go try and find one. I'm not stopping them. I'm only responsible for myself, and I can't work out anyone else's salvation. Frankly, I couldn't stop them. If the person believes Islam is his ship, he can jump on board, and when we die, we all test and see how rickity the vessel is.

It is true in my analogy that if someone doesn't jump on board the ship, they are quite likely to get hypothermia and die, and in yours, there's one for everyone. The problem is is that this isn't a question of love; it's a metaphysical question. I could always portray the difference between us this way: A woman lies dying of fever on the couch. The physician gives a medicine he says can cure her, but her brother comes along with a sugar pill, her neighbor with a loaf of bread, another man with a video game, and lastly a crook with arsenic, and they insist that all their cures are equal and have the same effect. In that case, which is more loving? Whose advise to the woman is more loving, considering only one cure will work?

In that analogy, our approach is far more loving. Which is loving really depends on how you view it. If I approach it from your perspective, that they all cure equally well, then in the end, your approach is more loving. If, however, I approach it with the beliefs I have, then my approach is more loving. It really does depend on the number of cures.

[No*s]

MV...my brain is well-nigh mush. I hope that made sense. I should probably hit the sack soon before I post much more .

[may]

Originally Posted by Mr_Spinkles

I have heard many Christians express their opinion that:

1. All those who accept Jesus are saved
2. All those who reject Jesus are not saved
and
3. All those who never hear 1. and 2. are saved (so for example, some tribesman in Africa who hasn't even heard of Christianity, much less the divinity of Christ).

If these things are true, then all Christians who truly want to save peoples' souls should keep Jesus' divinity, etc. a secret. Every person who goes through life without hearing the Gospel is another soul saved, and every time you tell a person about Jesus you are endangering their soul. By preaching and doing missionary work, you are in fact being counter productive to your objective of saving more souls!

P.S. -- I confine my post to Christians, but I'm sure it applies to some Muslims and people of other faiths as well.

For "everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved." However, how will they call on him in whom they have not put faith? How, in turn, will they put faith in him of whom they have not heard? How, in turn, will they hear without someone to preach? How, in turn, will they preach unless they have been sent forth? Just as it is written: "How comely are the feet of those who declare good news of good things!( ROMANS 10;13 -15)

[t3gah]

Originally Posted by may

For "everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved." However, how will they call on him in whom they have not put faith? How, in turn, will they put faith in him of whom they have not heard? How, in turn, will they hear without someone to preach? How, in turn, will they preach unless they have been sent forth? Just as it is written: "How comely are the feet of those who declare good news of good things!(acts 10;13 -15)

This scripture reminded me of a thread I was going to start but in my elder years here I keep forgetting to do.

The account that is relevant as a quandry to the scripture cited by you, may, is in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and some others. Jesus, the apostles and the disciples expel demons from demon possessed people.

Question 1: Why didn't the "calling on the name of Jehovah" save those people from being demon possessed in bible times and afterwards?

Question 2: There's a scripture that states that the demons shudder at the name of Jehovah, so why did people back then who got harassed by demons if all they had to do was say the 'magic' word for relief?

[may]

Originally Posted by t3gah

This scripture reminded me of a thread I was going to start but in my elder years here I keep forgetting to do.

The account that is relevant as a quandry to the scripture cited by you, may, is in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and some others. Jesus, the apostles and the disciples expel demons from demon possessed people.

Question 1: Why didn't the "calling on the name of Jehovah" save those people from being demon possessed in bible times and afterwards?

Question 2: There's a scripture that states that the demons shudder at the name of Jehovah, so why did people back then who got harassed by demons if all they had to do was say the 'magic' word for relief?

Sorry the scripture should have said ROMANS 10;13-15 not acts 10;13-15 must be my age lol