Pathway to Salvation

[Autodidact]

Third question: Did you ever eat carrots?

Is there an established correlation between vegetable consumption and religious belief?

 

[Autodidact]

Why are these two scenarios related?

I have no idea, it's the OP's religion, not mine.

 

[Autodidact]

Let's put this in another way. You are what you are yet being what you are will not allow you to get where you want to go. The person who can help you get where you want to go wishes for you to choose to allow them to help you. Is there a problem in this scenario?

Yeah, the person in question is imaginary.
And actually, I'm getting where I want to go, thanks, don't need help. Especially from mythological beings.

 

[Autodidact]

Faith. It is the evidence of things not seen.

I have some money in a bank account in Nigeria...

 

[keeperoftheprison]

Ha! I reckon if there is any way to avoid oblivion after death, it's got to start with improving yourself rather than worshipping a deity. Just my take on things.

Taxes can be avoided... but it's not worth the risk in my opinion

Did you ever think that worshiping God and doing the things he said to do actually helps you improve yourself?

 

[keeperoftheprison]

What's the best way to do that, in your opinion?

The best way is to find the meanings of the actual words written in the original language. I find the meanings of the words baptism is a great place to start. I cant remember the original word off hand, but if you look the greek and hebrew word that was used means "to dip". This is an example of how man has changed the words to allow for sprinkling etc.

 

[keeperoftheprison]

Did that. Beautifully written creation myth. Are you telling me you think that's what really happened? Also nothing about Jesus or the Holy Ghost in here. You have some very odd beliefs. Let me get this. Your God had a baby, and then He arranged to have him killed, and if you agree with all this, then God won't hurt you after you die? Is that right?

Check again and look at the pronouns.

 

[keeperoftheprison]

My mind and heart are totally open to anything for which there is evidence. Got any? Did that years ago. Found out there isn't any evidence. Done.

btw, is your mind equally open? If the evidence indicates your story isn't true, will you stop believing it? Or are you too scared that you will be condemned to Hell?

Someone believes that? Wow, that's as weird as your story. I looked all around and didn't see God anywhere. Is He invisible?

Take a look at nature or your own body, or the birth of a child. Man can not cause anything to be created. You haven't given any proof of anything. You just doubt and that's o.k. but dont try to pass it off as having proof of anything. Prove to me anything that you believe.

 

[waitasec]

Are you assuming that God can't love and condemn at the same time?

is god your heavenly father?

 

[keeperoftheprison]

I don't think it started. I think the universe was always here, and will always be here.
As for the details, I rely on science for that. What do you rely on?

How is something always here. Name one thing that didn't have a start. always here isn't a belief or logical. That isn't very scientific. Cause and effect is a scientific principle. Always here isn't. I have never heard any educated person argue that the universe was "always here".

 

[keeperoftheprison]

is god your heavenly father?

Yes he is.

 

[keeperoftheprison]

i am sorry, but don't you think if the bible was the WORD of god why would you even mention the different translations...isn't god, the creator of the universe supposed to be bigger than a book? or has this bible become bigger than god?

this seems pretty silly to me...

God inspired the Bible yes. But he isn't on the earth guarding and explaining. He doesn't keep man from defiling it. It is your job to get to heaven and find truth. It is easy enough to do.

 

[keeperoftheprison]

Uh, thanks for sharing your personal myth-system, which is always of anthropological interest. I guess my first question would be: what religion is your family of origin? My second question: Where did you grow up?

You put your belief system on here. Send it to me privately. You are just not interested in figuring anything out. That's ok, but dont think your scarcasm doesn't come through and keep people from taking you seriously. You dont take me seriously so why are you posting. If you want to have a real discussion instead of popping off with scarcastic comments without having any proof of anything besides"always here" then let me know.

 

[waitasec]

Yes he is.

do you think the word
"father" means the same now as it did then?

 

[Autodidact]

Did you ever think that worshiping God and doing the things he said to do actually helps you improve yourself?

I prefer to go directly to improving myself, rather than try to decipher an attempted translation of an ancient book of myths and secrets.

Also, I don't think that owning slaves, stoning children or refraining from eating oysters is going to do much to improve me.

 

[Autodidact]

Check again and look at the pronouns.

Could you clarify? Thanks.

 

[Autodidact]

Take a look at nature or your own body, or the birth of a child.

Did that.

Man can not cause anything to be created.

Didn't you create your own post?

You haven't given any proof of anything. You just doubt and that's o.k. but dont try to pass it off as having proof of anything. Prove to me anything that you believe.

I never claimed to. In fact, I never claimed to believe anything, you did. So by your own request, it's on you to prove what you believe. You may start any time.

 

[Eliot Wild]

I believe that there is a pathway to salvation that was given to us by Jesus. It is found constantly all throughout the New Testament. I would just like to see thoughts on this pathway. Also I believe that all of these steps must be followed to achieve salvation.

1. Believe
2. Repent
3. Confess
4. Be Baptised
5. Obey the Gospel​

1. What does one need to believe?

2. What does one need to repent? I would guess sin, but perhaps it is not so simple as that. Does one have to repent all their former sins, one by one? Does one repent their former lifestyle that was void of God or Christ?

3. What does one need to confess? Again, I am thinking they must confess their sins. But I certainly would not want to assume anything. If it is a confession of sin that must be made, does one have to confess their sins to anyone in particular? Does one need to confess their sins publically? Does one have to list their sins, all of them? I've done a lot of sinning in my lifetime. I am not sure I can remember 'em all.

4. I am pretty clear on baptism, at least the basic concept of it. However, is there any particular baptism that is better than others? Does one need to be completely submerged under water, or will a light dabbing and/or sprinkling be sufficient? Who is authorized to perform baptisms? Does it require an ordained minister or priest of God? Can any ol' Christian do it? Will it be functional if a nonbeliever does it? For example, can I perform a baptism in a pinch if no one else is available?

5. Like #4, this one seems pretty clear, at least to me. And that's because I don't find a lot of differences in the various translations of the Bible. However, is there one specific gospel that needs to be obeyed? Are there versions of the Bible that contradict one another and if so, which one must be obeyed? What must one do when the Bible is inconsistent? For example, the Old Testament gives instructions on the proper treatment of slaves. However, the New Testament indicates men should treat others the way they'd want to be treated, which seems to imply that men should not own slaves, as I can't really imagine anyone wanting to be treated like a slave.

Just curious.

 

[Autodidact]

How is something always here.

Current scientific thinking is that the universe is probably eternal, and only changes form.

Name one thing that didn't have a start.

The universe.

always here isn't a belief or logical.

Sure it is.

That isn't very scientific.

Actually, it's the most up-to-date thinking in contemporary physics.

Cause and effect is a scientific principle.

Yup.

Always here isn't.

Says who?

I have never heard any educated person argue that the universe was "always here".

You need to get out more.

The Big Crunch theory is a symmetric view of the ultimate fate of the Universe . Just as the Big Bang started a cosmological expansion, this theory postulates that the average density of the universe is enough to stop its expansion and begin contracting. The end result is unknown; a simple extrapolation would have all the matter and space-time in the universe collapse into a dimensionless singularity, but at these scales unknown quantum effects need to be considered (See Quantum gravity).
This scenario allows the Big Bang to have been immediately preceded by the Big Crunch of a preceding universe. If this occurs repeatedly, we have an oscillatory universe. The universe could then consist of an infinite sequence of finite universes, each finite universe ending with a Big Crunch that is also the Big Bang of the next universe. Theoretically, the oscillating universe could not be reconciled with the second law of thermodynamics: entropy would build up from oscillation to oscillation and cause heat death. Other measurements suggested the universe is not closed. These arguments caused cosmologists to abandon the oscillating universe model. A somewhat similar idea is embraced by the cyclic model, but this idea evades heat death, because of an expansion of the branes that dilutes entropy accumulated in the previous cycle.


The Big Bounce is a theorized scientific model related to the beginning of the known Universe. It derives from the oscillatory universe or cyclic repetition interpretation of the Big Bang where the first cosmological event was the result of the collapse of a previous universe.
According to one version of the Big Bang theory of cosmology, in the beginning the universe had infinite density. Such a description seems to be at odds with everything else in physics, and especially quantum mechanics and its uncertainty principle.[citation needed] It is not surprising, therefore, that quantum mechanics has given rise to an alternative version of the Big Bang theory. Also, if the universe is closed, this theory would predict that once this universe collapses it will spawn another universe in an event similar to the Big Bang after a universal singularity is reached or a repulsive quantum force causes re-expansion.


One multiverse hypothesis states that our uni-"verse" is merely one Big Bang among an infinite number of simultaneously expanding Big Bangs that are spread out over endless distances (open space).
Each "verse" may be either matter or antimatter, with an equal number in existence at any given time. As the "verses" expand they collide and matter and antimatter annihilate, releasing energy. Heat death of a finite universe would be predicted as entropy increases, however, the infinite size of the multiverse and the infinite number of "verses" could mean that new "verses" would be formed as old "verses" were annihilated.
A chain reaction multiverse would be analogous to a fireworks display (each explosion representing a Big Bang) that starts in one neighborhood and is followed by fireworks displays in surrounding neighborhoods and then in neighborhoods further out. The chain reaction of Big Bangs would continue to expand as Big Bang fuel is consumed. If the multiverse is open and the fuel is infinite then the chain reaction would expand forever. Of course, it is not known what the "fuel" is, but it is logical to assume that matter and energy are the product of a transformation from a real reactant, possibly the Higgs boson.
The multiverse as a whole may never end completely.
[WIKI]

btw, isn't your God eternal?

 

[Eliot Wild]

How is something always here. Name one thing that didn't have a start. always here isn't a belief or logical. That isn't very scientific. Cause and effect is a scientific principle. Always here isn't. I have never heard any educated person argue that the universe was "always here".

With all due respect, I really don't understand your post. It is riddled with inconsistencies, or at least it seems so to me.

You claim that an infinite universe theory isn't logical because all things must have a starting point, a cause. But aren't you arguing the same thing when you claim that God has alwasy existed, or did God have a cause. And if God had a cause, then what caused God's cause?

Secondly, I certainly mean no offense, but your assertion that a steady-state or infinite universe theory is not scientific would be surprising news to the three men who devised the theory, two of which are award-winning astronomers and the third is a mathmatician and cosmologist.

Steady State theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is also a theory that I have heard that, for the life of me, I can't remember the name of right now. However, it is essentially an infinite universe theory that suggests our universe goes through periods of expansion and contraction, endlessly. Essentially it goes like this: All universal material is compacted into a point of maximum density at one time. The enormous cosmic pressure causes the material to explode with great force (Big Bang) that causes universal expansion from a central point. At some time, the universe will cease its expansion and begin to contract back inward, eventually imploding to a point of maximum density and pressure once again. This is theorized to be an infinite cycle. I am certainly no astrophysicist, and that was most likely the worst explanation of the theory you will ever find. But I just thought I'd point it out. Currently, this theory is viewed as unlikely, if not completely impossible, because universal expasion is actually getting faster. So it goes.