Christians--Do Evangelicals Believe Everyone Else Going to Hell? (Jesus Christ, gospel)

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by Ratiocinative

You must have a bad memory then. I said people do not have to know the actual name of Jesus, they just need to know about him. What is important to understand is that God incarnated himself as a man and died on a cross to redeem his people from their sin. It doesn't matter whether you refer to him as Jesus, Joshua, Isa, Christ, or whatever, as long as you understand what he did.

You're still missing my point. People can't know about Him if they've never been told.

I also said that just because someone has never heard about Christ doesn't mean they never had a chance to hear about him. The Bible says that creation testifies about God and his power and that no one has an excuse for not knowing God.

Which God? The Christian God specifically? Or just the Abrahamic God? How about one of the Hindu gods? I would agree that creation testifies as to the existance of God. I know I can't look around me and not believe in Him. Creation does not, however, testify that Jesus Christ (by that or any other name) died on a cross to redeem mankind, and there are millions of people in the world who don't know that because they've never been told. There are millions more who died before He was born and who may have believed in God, but who know absolutely nothing about the Atonement.

If you refuse to seek and learn about God then you have no one to blame but yourself. You can't ignore God all your life and then expect some kind of freebie because of it.

I agree.

[Starfish]

Originally Posted by Ratiocinative

You must have a bad memory then. I said people do not have to know the actual name of Jesus, they just need to know about him. What is important to understand is that God incarnated himself as a man and died on a cross to redeem his people from their sin. It doesn't matter whether you refer to him as Jesus, Joshua, Isa, Christ, or whatever, as long as you understand what he did. I also said that just because someone has never heard about Christ doesn't mean they never had a chance to hear about him. The Bible says that creation testifies about God and his power and that no one has an excuse for not knowing God. If you refuse to seek and learn about God then you have no one to blame but yourself. You can't ignore God all your life and then expect some kind of freebie because of it.

So no, I never said anyone can be saved without knowing Christ.

Yet, some Evangelicals believe that Mormons are going to hell because we don't worship the CORRECT Christ. (This is their reason for saying that we aren't Christians.) So if we don't have the correct version of Christ, then how can any of the other religions who might refer to him as Joshus or Isa, as you said, be saved? Aren't their versions different/incorrect also?

[Ratiocinative]

Originally Posted by Starfish

Yet, some Evangelicals believe that Mormons are going to hell because we don't worship the CORRECT Christ. (This is their reason for saying that we aren't Christians.) So if we don't have the correct version of Christ, then how can any of the other religions who might refer to him as Joshus or Isa, as you said, be saved? Aren't their versions different/incorrect also?

Read what I said. The name isn't important, understanding who Christ is and what he did is. If a Muslim converts to Christianity, but out of habit still refers to Christ as Isa, then he will still be saved because he/she has faith that Christ bore the punishment of his/her sins. Now most people who refer to Christ as Isa are Muslims, so they aren't saved, but it isn't because they call him Isa, it's because they don't trust him for their salvation.

It's also quite a predicament that Mormons are in right now. You say that you believe in the same Christ as Biblical Christians, but yet Joseph Smith's testimony about his vision stats that he was told that all current religions were wrong, that "they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof." (http://www.lds.org/library/display/0...-1-3-4,00.html). Gordon B. Hinckley, your "prophet", also said these things:

“Many outside the church say we do not believe in the traditional Christ. No I don’t. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak.” (Church News. June 20,1998 Pg 7)

As a Church we have critics, many of them. They say we do not believe in the traditional Christ of Christianity. There is some substance to what they say. Our faith, our knowledge is not based on ancient tradition, the creeds which came of a finite understanding and out of the almost infinite discussions of men trying to arrive at a definition of the risen Christ. Our faith, our knowledge comes of the witness of a prophet in this dispensation who saw before him the great God of the universe and His Beloved Son, the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ. (http://www.lds.org/conference/talk/d...266-36,00.html)

Your religion's own prophets have said that they do not believe in the same Christ, and your religion is founded upon the idea that all other Christs are wrong. So to say you believe in the same Christ would be tantamount to condemning yourself as an apostate. Joseph Smith testified that in his vision that God told him that all current religions were wrong, which is the reason he used to found Mormonism. So if you believe that he actually had this vision, how can you now say that you believe in the same Christ as Biblical Christians, even excluding the vast number of contradictions between the Bible and the D&C?

[dawny0826]

Originally Posted by Starfish

Anyone who has not accepted Christ--the Christ that fits the traditional Nicene definition--is doomed to hell. Is this your belief? Really?

Nicene defnitions aside, it's explained clearly in John 3:16-18, what the "deal" is on eternal life and condemnation.

"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."

"For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved."

"He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

NKJV

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by Ratiocinative

Joseph Smith testified that in his vision that God told him that all current religions were wrong, which is the reason he used to found Mormonism. So if you believe that he actually had this vision, how can you now say that you believe in the same Christ as Biblical Christians, even excluding the vast number of contradictions between the Bible and the D&C?

Okay, well since you are determined to pursue this, we don't believe that the "traditional" understanding of Christ is the same as the "biblical" understanding of Christ. We believe in the Christ of the Bible, but not the Christ of the Creeds. One other thing... Please cite the sections and verses in the D&C which you believe contradict the Bible.

[Starfish]

Originally Posted by Ratiocinative

Read what I said. The name isn't important, understanding who Christ is and what he did is. If a Muslim converts to Christianity, but out of habit still refers to Christ as Isa, then he will still be saved because he/she has faith that Christ bore the punishment of his/her sins. Now most people who refer to Christ as Isa are Muslims, so they aren't saved, but it isn't because they call him Isa, it's because they don't trust him for their salvation.

It's also quite a predicament that Mormons are in right now. You say that you believe in the same Christ as Biblical Christians, but yet Joseph Smith's testimony about his vision stats that he was told that all current religions were wrong, that "they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof." (The Testimony of the Prophet Joseph Smith). Gordon B. Hinckley, your "prophet", also said these things:
Your religion's own prophets have said that they do not believe in the same Christ, and your religion is founded upon the idea that all other Christs are wrong. So to say you believe in the same Christ would be tantamount to condemning yourself as an apostate. Joseph Smith testified that in his vision that God told him that all current religions were wrong, which is the reason he used to found Mormonism. So if you believe that he actually had this vision, how can you now say that you believe in the same Christ as Biblical Christians, even excluding the vast number of contradictions between the Bible and the D&C?

Nor did I ever say we believe in the same Christ as traditional Christians. Not in the least. The Christ of that definition totally confuses me, and makes no sense at all.

Some traditional Christians say we are damned; some say we aren't. Who is right? It seems you are allowed to vary in your beliefs between yourselves, but we are not. We do not claim to be one of you; we never have. But Christianity is very diversified, between the Baptists, Methodists, Catholics, Lutherans, etc., etc., till you come to Mormon theology and the variation comes to a screeching halt. Again, we do not claim to be part of traditional Christianity.

But some traditional Christians seem willing to include anyone who recognizes Christ in any vague way, by exposure to him "through creation", will be saved. This is how they explain that God is fair to all people. How can this be? Millions of people throughout history simply had no explosure to the Nicene Christ, and apparently it must be the Nicene Christ exactly, because even our version is not allowed.

So what is their fate?

[Dunemeister]

I still say "no."

[Izdaari]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

The Emerging Church Movement is an evangelical movement that has a much gentler understanding about Jesus' statements about hell. They also tend to focus on things like social justice and environmental stweardship, rather than fire and brimstone. A refreshing change that tempts me to label myself an Emerging Evangelical Episcopalian.

Emerging Pentecostal here.

I don't think hell is a literal place, but still it's something best avoided. I know that believers won't go there, but as for the fate of others? That's up to Jesus Christ, well above my pay grade. I won't try to second-guess Him.