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

Okay, I'm going to once again bring up general semantics and the Buddha's teachings on interdependent causation. These billions of creatures are billions of processes that are identified as creatures being created or being destroyed but the process goes on.Buddhism advocates compassion for all sentient creatures. I'm not sure where the line is drawn. I don't think it's neccesary to specify. In Mahayana Buddhism the Bodhisatva vow involves pledging to remain in samsara until all sentient beings are saved; this would of course include great sinners such as Hitler or Ted Bundy.This vow seems impossible to fulfill in it's stated terms. The thing is that with awakening the Bodhisatva sees that "from the beginning not a single sentient being has ever existed." There are no beings to save. There is Being but no beings.The question is if there is anything compatible to this Buddhist formulation in Christianity. I think there might be in the understanding of Meister Eckert and Bernadette Roberts. The clue may well lie in St. Paul's sayings about his life being replaced by Christ, I live, now not I, but Christ lives in me,. This could be a recognition by Paul that it is being itself, referenced as Christ, that is real and not the person.lfen

You being a Christian (from what I have read), does that mean you believe the accounts concerning Jesus, including the supposed observations of His miracles, are accurate in the Bible?That's interesting with your above statement. I'd like to learn more, if possible.

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 think it is the death and resurrection of Christ himself that opens the door to heaven's potential for all people -- Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, etc. In other words, even though I as a Christian believe in Christ, if Christ never actually died nor was resurrected, then my faith in him would not earn my way into heaven.His death and resurrection is what tore open the infinite gulfs of chaos between God and man -- and my faith in him has nothing to do with Christ's ability to accomplish this connection to the Father in heaven. In other words, Christ can do it on his own whether I believe in him or not.

Brian,I think you've pointed out something very crucial with your comment about "cerebral controtions". I think your observation that the world many people live in is better reconciled for them with Genesis than science is spot on. But then for them the "cerebral contortions" are less contorted when reconciling their experiences to the Bible than when reconciling their experiences with science. In short science requires more of them than the Bible so they go with the Bible. It just makes better sense to the way they model reality for themselves.lfen

?This message has been edited by Brian, 10-14-2005 06:23 AM

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

.This message has been edited by Brian, 10-14-2005 06:23 AM

Personally, yes.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Psalm 51:7 (different verse numbers, corresponds to 5 above)

​

Indeed I was born with iniquity;
   with sin my mother conceived me.

---

the psalmist is essentially saying that sin is part of his condition, personally. his own conception was in sin. this sort of self condemnation and guilt is different than god condemning us. and can an infant intentionally carry out an action against god? can a fetus? can a sperm cell?

---

אָרַח

Jesus didn't suffer nearly enough to make up for all the bad things that people do. Many people have suffered far more than Jesus ever did. Anyway, why should he have to suffer at all for the things other people do? Does his death absolve us of ALL sins when we repent and become Christian? Because Jesus died on the cross it means Hitler can kill as many Jews as he wants as long as he feels real bad about it and asks Jesus for forgiveness?

.This message has been edited by Brian, 10-14-2005 06:23 AM

.This message has been edited by Brian, 10-14-2005 06:24 AM