WIll God save us if we don't believe in the Resurrection?

I'm willing to give it a try.First, I think that everyone will be saved, Christian and Non-Christian unless they really screw up.I also disagree with the assement that GOD is cruel.So, what order would you like to proceed?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Let's start with screwing up. I believe that the idea of original sin is not something that is the result of the Garden of Eden and some Fall. Rather the story of the Garden of Eden and the Fall are simply the recognition that all mankind is capable of doing both good and bad.I believe we all screw up regularly and GOD well knows we will. Most screw ups are minor and IMHO will be forgiven. The ones that will be a problem will be those that we persist in committing.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Except that is not at all what happened.Let me ask you a question.Can animals, cows, dogs, sheep, sin?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I don't think that's exactly what the Bible says.The story in the Bible of the Fall is an attempt to explain the origin of morality and rules. It must be seen in the same way that we view the Creation Myth. This is an attempt to explain the origin of rules and strictures that were essential to the nomadic way of life.It's the story of why humans must behave differently than animals.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Let's see if I can answer any of them. LOL I believe the Fall never happened. That part is correct. But the second part of your question "... and is simply a myth to explain why the world is such a bad place?" is one I have problems with.I don't think it has anything to do with the world being a bad place and I don't think the authors saw it that way either. We'll get into that with one of your next questions. I'm not sure that most is accurate but I'd certainly say "many" is correct. I wonder just how many actually believe in a literal Adam and Eve today and of those that do believe it, how many have actually studied the evidence? It seems that a lieral Adam and Eve is not accepted by most churches these days (speaking of official church policy). A very important point. Glad you brought it up. IMHO this goes to the heart of the matter so please excuse me if I get a little wordy. I'm old and slow and so sometimes repeat myself.I believe GOD created the universe and all that's in it. The issue is whether or not humankind was some special creation or something GOD loves more than say, a rock. I do not believe that humans were some special creation. I don't think they were a goal or desired result, but rather simply one outcome from the system.Now, do we stand in some special place in GOD's eyes? Perhaps, but if so, it more like the precocious child, the prodegy, that shows surprising talent. No one sets out to have a precocious child but when it happens (if, in many cases it's only in the eyes of the parent), such things are appreciated. So perhaps, GOD is pleased with what happened.But, like the precocious child, there may well be facets the parents are not happy with. For example, the child may also be strong willed or demanding, prone to temper tantrums or unable to join in with the other kids in certain endeavors. Returning to the Genesis account. See, I told you we'd get back to that before we were through.Remember, IMHO the authors were speaking about their perceptions of society. They saw vast differences between the way people lived and the way animals lived. It was a very human centric point of view. They were trying to define a specific code of behavior, setting a basis for external laws that must be obeyed.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well, if there were no literal Adam and Eve, and you seemed to agree that most Christian Churches today would say there was no literal Adam and Eve, then there was no literal temptation or Fall. The tale is then a metaphor for something else. How do you know that he did not do similar acts for the dinosaurs or for house cats or for birds? You say "He just wouldn't do that if we weren't special". From our point of view that sems reasonable, but how do you know he does not do the same for everything?We'll get to Paul eventually, but he's not that far from my position on this issue (he was a pure nutcase though on some). Hopefully I'll be able to show you that I ignore less of the Bible than you might think.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I don't believe that GOD had much to do with writing the Bible. Not the OT and certainly not the NT. The Bible is an anthology of anthologies. It was written by men, perhaps insired men, but still limited by the knowledge, understanding, culture, biases and limitations of their day. That's a really important point IMHO. I think that pretty much sums up much of the differences between many Christians. If you accept the stories in Genesis as literal truth, then you cannot reconcile the world we see around us. You must reject the TOE as an example. If you accept a literal GOE and A&E, then you reject common descent.But if you do not accept the literal interpretations a whole different world opens up. If you see the tales as stories, as metaphor, then you have to look at GOD. Is GOD reasonable and logical? Sidelined and I had a discussion on this not too long ago. If GOD is reasonable and logical, not Loki but GOD, He is not playing tricks. The record we see is true, there was a long age, old earth, billions of critters.A GOD that creates billions of critters but only loves a very, very small percentage of them seems to me to be illogical. I cannot resolve the image of a GOD that only loves humans, and not even all humans but only a small percentage of those humans, those who worship him, and has no concern for the billions that came before or after some event and the image of a logical, reasonable god.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Personally? I believe the accounts of Jesus performing miracles are probably true. But I also understand that it doesn't much matter if they are true or not. In each case, the tale, true or not, is of Jesus helping someone (with the ever present pig exception). The tales of miracles are simply restatementts of the basic messages, "Love GOD and love others as you love yourself" and that you will be known by your actions.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This may take a little longer so let me begin with a few understandings.First, I have a hard time separating Jesus death from his life and teachings. I see them all as a single, entangled unit. To really answer your question I need to ask you a few.Are you asking "Why did Jesus have to die instead of living to a ripe old age as some others (Buddha, Confucius, Mencius) did?"

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I don't think there's a theological reason Jesus had to die as he did. But there were strong cultural reasons that led inevitably to the event.Jesus was challenging the status quo and was perceived as a threat by two powerful parties. The first group were the Jewish religious hierachy who saw Jesus message of direct communication between GOD and man as a threat to their beliefs, and income. The second group was the political hierachy who saw Jesus as a distrupting influence and perhaps, only perhaps, as a threat to the power structure. They had to ask themselves, "Was he really a messianic figure? Does he really plan on a rebellion against Rome?" Their conclusion seems to have been,"Probably not but why take a chance?"

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Personally, yes.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

No, not exactly. I was speaking of the method of Jesus death, the trial and crucificion.Let me try to make my position slightly clearer. I don't think there is any theological reason that Jesus had to be crucified. I'm not even sure that there is a theological reason that Jesus had to die young as opposed to living a long life and dying in bed beside a good woman half his age.Jesus life itself was a sacrifice, for GOD to become man, to be subject to hot and cold, hunger fear and doubt, is an immense sacrifice. For GOD to become subject to pain, death and dying is an immense sacrifice.Jesus, by his very existence is a sacrifice for us, but IMHO for all mankind. How much easier it would be to simply brush off humanity. Instead, GOD chose to become man, to walk with us, live with us, reason with us.My opinions on the reason for the crucifiction is not that Jesus had to be sacrificed like an animal but that politically he was dangerous. I base that on the evidence that he was charged and tried. The crucificion was the result of us, people, humans being threatened by his message.Does that make any sense to you?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Let me try to give you an example.IMHO, those preachers who are supporting the "Defence of Marriage Act" and similar legislation would be blaspheming the holy spirit, doing evil in GOD's name. Similarly, those preachers who try to force children into ignorance by pushing Classic YEC Creationism would also be blaspheming the holy spirit.When you use GOD as an excuse for evil acts, that is, IMHO, unforgivable.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

No way to tell about the warriors, but the instigators are another matter. None of use are likely to find out soon enough to post the answer here but IMHO using "I thought I was doing right" as an excuse for causing serious harm to others is not likely to get far. I bet Pope Urban II got some 'splainin to do.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Thank GOD I won't have to make that decision. IMHO, yes, he is going to far and I would say that his actions are very similar to that of the Christians promoting ignorance. And yes, there are a lot of religiously fueled movements that cause harm.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion