Why must we believe *before* we die?

According to traditional Calvinism, which thought in terms of covenants, the Covenant of Works was broken by Adam and Eve. The covenant of Grace was a new covenant. You have to believe in Christ
as your savior. If you do this, you will receive grace, which will make you a better person.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 10-03-2005 11:57 AM

Those who love God and believe in Him rather than hate Him will be saved. Those who do not refuse His call are the good people. That's what it means to be good, to heed His call and love God. If these actions were not of paramount moral importance, then there would be no reason for Him to set those conditions for salvation--unless you think that God does not value goodness.

A "covenant" is an agreement between two parties. Each party fulfills their part of the covenant. Our part of the covenant is summed up in the demand for faith. That's a law if there ever was one. No faith, no salvation. This is traditional Christianity of the Calvinistic variety. But you are also supposed to have faith if you are a Catholic too--it's just that they don't de-emphasize "works." It's the essence of traditional Christianity.

You just named a condition--"he won't save you unless you want it."

Yes, very good.

Oh, I just meant "according to traditional theology."

"Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God that works within you."Who is doing the "work" here? Us or God?I've always wondered about this passage.

The structure of the whole sentence suggests that "work" means the same in both clauses: "Work out your own salvation"--you are working at your salvation--"it is God that works within you"--here "works" must mean the same thing. God is also working on the salvation. If the 2nd "work" meant something different, then it would be a sort of pun, which does not seem stylistically very Biblical.ABE: So I guess the answer to my orignal question is "both."This message has been edited by robinrohan, 10-06-2005 04:28 PM

What I don't understand--in regard to God's "logic"--is why it was necessary to sacrifice HIs only begotten Son in order to save mankind. If He was going to let us off, why didn't He just do so?

He craves our belief in Him in order to convince Himself of His own existence.

There's an ancient tradition, I believe, that the sacrifice of Jesus was a ransom paid to the Devil.

"Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister and to give his life a ransom for many." Matt 20:28The word "ransom" is used again in this context in I Tim.2:6This is out of K. James version.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 10-13-2005 01:09 PMThis message has been edited by robinrohan, 10-13-2005 01:10 PM

"The first suggestion was articulated by the second-century Irenaeus of Lyons. He argued that Jesus was paid as a ransom to the devil. Specifically, so the theory goes, Christ was paid as a ransom to the devil to free people's souls. This was a clever ruse on God's part, however, for unknown to the devil, Jesus was actually God Himself. Unable to constrain Jesus' divine soul, the devil was defeated and Christ emerged victorious. This view, known as the "Ransom" or "Classic" theory, was taught consistently by nearly all of the Church Fathers, including Augustine"I got this off a website entitled "The Meaning of the Atonement."

According to the ancient tradition, God paid the ransom to the Devil to free mankind.About a thousand years later (according to the website I mentioned) the concept begin to shift to the idea that God paid the ransom to Himself. According to this view, I guess it's kind of like what people say about the national debt: "We owe it to ourselves."--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think the idea in general has something to do with balance. In Shakespeare's tragedies, the world of the tragedy is said to be out of joint, unbalanced, and in order to get the equilibrium back, somebody has to pay, and so the tragic machinery proceeds along its inexorable course. Same thing here. In order to get the world back into equilibrium, somebody must pay the debt by way of suffering.