Christian Salvation?

[POI]

According to the Bible, what minimum qualifications are required for Christian Heavenly salvation?

- Does a stillborn baby receive a free pass?
- Do all deceased children receive a free pass, prior to the age of enlightenment?
- Is it mandatory to believe, worship, and also attempt to follow Hm; while still knowing you will fall short of perfection in your attempts?
- Is some sort of baptism a requirement for salvation?
- Can you lack conviction that God even exists, but still be selected by your judged upon works?
- Must you keep specific Commandments all the time?
- Does blasphemy of the Holy Spirit guarantee damnation, regardless of later repentance of this prior deemed offense (i.e.) the born again Christians might be screwed?
- Are earnest deathbed conversions, by way of belief and repent to the Christian God, enough?
- Must you love God more than you love anyone on earth?
- Can you be a devout believer/follower, but choose not to give away the majority of your wealth to ones more in need than you?
- Can you be saved if you practice monogamous homosexuality until death?

[myth-one.com]

This is about the forth circle now....

Seems like more, but OK.

Yet again, you can re-raise babies hundreds of times. But unless when you re-raise them, and fast-forward their mental capabilities; and unless you undo the ones who are mentally incapable, and re-raising them, the re-raising means nothing. Infants and the mentally challenged are not capable of having a change in heart.

It doesn't have to be as you state. Actually, neither you nor I know how it will be accomplished.

As I stated in post #75; that which can be asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence. Your hopes/wishes/assumptions do not facilitate an answer. If the Bible does not say, then just admit that...

One can use some logic and reasoning.

I gave you no push-back, that "you must believe". This assertion is supported in the Bible. My push-back stems from the fact that this requirement excludes babies and the mentally incapable.

You can argue the case that they are excluded under their conditions at death.

You cannot show that their conditions will not change. If the infants are resurrected at the age at which they died, they will age as humans do now. So what if it takes several years.

The mentally incapable can have access to the greatest healer in the universe.

Whatever it takes.

Looks as though no Verses cover these situations? If you should find any, please let me know? My objective is to explore the minimum requirements for heaven. Thus far, for your interpretation, it's belief; and some are not capable. Therefore, what happens to them?

The Bible states that whosoever believeth shall inherit everlasting life. Whosoever includes infants and the mentally incapable of making decisions.

And it states that the gospel will be preached to every one, and everyone will make their choice.

It is also written that God is just and true.

Logically, is it just and true that some subset of humans are excluded through no fault of their own?

If it is not just and true, then it will not happen.

They will be resurrected, preached the gospel message, and make their decision, whether or not you or I know how that will be accomplished.

What is important is that it will happen, because to exclude anyone is not just and true! How it will happen is not important.

Infants and mentally incompetent are simply a small subset of billions of deceased humans who never even heard the name Jesus. They never stood a chance in this world either.

They too will make their choice after their resurrection.

[POI]

This is about the forth circle now....

Seems like more, but OK.

Yet again, you can re-raise babies hundreds of times. But unless when you re-raise them, and fast-forward their mental capabilities; and unless you undo the ones who are mentally incapable, and re-raising them, the re-raising means nothing. Infants and the mentally challenged are not capable of having a change in heart.

It doesn't have to be as you state. Actually, neither you nor I know how it will be accomplished.

As I stated in post #75; that which can be asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence. Your hopes/wishes/assumptions do not facilitate an answer. If the Bible does not say, then just admit that...

One can use some logic and reasoning.

I gave you no push-back, that "you must believe". This assertion is supported in the Bible. My push-back stems from the fact that this requirement excludes babies and the mentally incapable.

You can argue the case that they are excluded under their conditions at death.

You cannot show that their conditions will not change. If the infants are resurrected at the age at which they died, they will age as humans do now. So what if it takes several years.

The mentally incapable can have access to the greatest healer in the universe.

Whatever it takes.

Looks as though no Verses cover these situations? If you should find any, please let me know? My objective is to explore the minimum requirements for heaven. Thus far, for your interpretation, it's belief; and some are not capable. Therefore, what happens to them?

The Bible states that whosoever believeth shall inherit everlasting life. Whosoever includes infants and the mentally incapable of making decisions.

And it states that the gospel will be preached to every one, and everyone will make their choice.

It is also written that God is just and true.

Logically, is it just and true that some subset of humans are excluded through no fault of their own?

If it is not just and true, then it will not happen.

They will be resurrected, preached the gospel message, and make their decision, whether or not you or I know how that will be accomplished.

What is important is that it will happen, because to exclude anyone is not just and true! How it will happen is not important.

Infants and mentally incompetent are simply a small subset of billions of deceased humans who never even heard the name Jesus. They never stood a chance in this world either.

They too will make their choice after their resurrection.

Okay, it looks to be quite clear you have no Verse(s) which elaborate the fate of babies and the mentally incapable. Your argument, now, seems to be that "God is just". Okay, great. What is just to God may not be just for you or me. Since God does not say, and God is not ever telling us, what IS God's plan for the dead babies and mentally incapable? You seem to think they will be given a fair shake. Okay, again, this is nothing more than assumption, wishful thinking, or hope. Please carefully read the response I posed to JW, via (post #107).

[myth-one.com]

Okay, it looks to be quite clear you have no Verse(s) which elaborate the fate of babies and the mentally incapable.

The New Testament Covenant is between God and Mankind.

Babies and the mentally incapable are humans and will be treated like everyone else under that covenant.

If they are not believers, they will make their decisions to accept Jesus as their Savior sometime after their resurrection.

[POI]

Okay, it looks to be quite clear you have no Verse(s) which elaborate the fate of babies and the mentally incapable.

The New Testament Covenant is between God and Mankind.

Babies and the mentally incapable are humans and will be treated like everyone else under that covenant.

If they are not believers, they will make their decisions to accept Jesus as their Savior sometime after their resurrection.

You have produced no Verse(s) from the Bible which support this assertion. Hence, wishful thinking at best.

You produced Verse(s) which mandate belief. We know dead babies and the severely brain damaged are unable to invoke such a belief. Yet again, if you can produce no Bible Verse, which tells readers what is to become of these folks, then it's quite possible God feels His message to His readers is complete. Meaning, if you do not actively believe, you are not chosen; period. Welp, dead babies and the severely brain damaged cannot muster up such a belief. It's quite possible they are not selected; and the ones who mourn their passing, are completely justified in doing so because they are now rotting in hell...

[myth-one.com]

Okay, it looks to be quite clear you have no Verse(s) which elaborate the fate of babies and the mentally incapable.

The New Testament Covenant is between God and Mankind.

Babies and the mentally incapable are humans and will be treated like everyone else under that covenant.

If they are not believers, they will make their decisions to accept Jesus as their Savior sometime after their resurrection.

You have produced no Verse(s) from the Bible which support this assertion. Hence, wishful thinking at best.

You produced Verse(s) which mandate belief. We know dead babies and the severely brain damaged are unable to invoke such a belief. Yet again, if you can produce no Bible Verse, which tells readers what is to become of these folks, . . .

Yes I did provide those Bible verses.

It's quite possible they are not selected;

Ever believer is selected. Someone cannot choose to be selected or not selected. Someone chooses to believe or not believe.

. . . and the ones who mourn their passing, are completely justified in doing so because they are now rotting in hell...

Every human who has ever died is now rotting, or has rotted, in their graves.

[POI]

Okay, it looks to be quite clear you have no Verse(s) which elaborate the fate of babies and the mentally incapable.

The New Testament Covenant is between God and Mankind.

Babies and the mentally incapable are humans and will be treated like everyone else under that covenant.

If they are not believers, they will make their decisions to accept Jesus as their Savior sometime after their resurrection.

You have produced no Verse(s) from the Bible which support this assertion. Hence, wishful thinking at best.

You produced Verse(s) which mandate belief. We know dead babies and the severely brain damaged are unable to invoke such a belief. Yet again, if you can produce no Bible Verse, which tells readers what is to become of these folks, . . .

Yes I did provide those Bible verses.

It's quite possible they are not selected;

Ever believer is selected. Someone cannot choose to be selected or not selected. Someone chooses to believe or not believe.

. . . and the ones who mourn their passing, are completely justified in doing so because they are now rotting in hell...

Every human who has ever died is now rotting, or has rotted, in their graves.

It's as if you are not reading my responses. I already acknowledged your assertion, without protest, that these individuals are re-raised later. You have no Verses which states these folks are instead brought to maturity/enlightenment for decision time. You admitted this is a guess.

[PinSeeker]

But you said the elect are inexorably drawn to Him. 1). Do humans freely choose (or) 2). are the elect inexorably drawn to Him? Pick one. These two options are contradictory statements.

Both are true. They are not contradictory statements. To say humans are "inexorably drawn" is itself a statement of free will. We are all inexorably drawn to many things, and that leads us to make choices.

Regarding salvation, our choice to repent of our sin and believe in Christ is in the context of God's gracious choice. If one is a member of God's elect, then He will, at the appointed time and by the working of His Spirit within the person, change the person's heart/nature. If and when this happens, the person, by his/her free will ~ which follows the heart/nature ~ will not fail to choose to repent of his/her sin and believe. It's not that we don't have a choice to make, or that we do or do not make that choice of our own free will, but it is God's choice before it can be ours.

A lot of people have trouble accepting this, even many Christians. Read Romans 9 and tell me your interpretation if you want.

If sin is sin, then you cannot repent of sin. If you cannot repent of sin, and you admit repentance is a requirement, then no one is saved. And yet, you probably think you are saved. You do not find this confusing?

I see how it can be confusing for you.

You must, at some point, no longer willfully engage the remorseful/regretful act. Otherwise, your are not truly repenting.

To be repentant and to be perfect/sinless are two different things. What you're really talking about is perfection with regard to sinlessness, which is not possible in this life. In this life, we are not perfect at anything (far from it actually), and this includes our repentance. But we can be forgiven, of course, by confess our sins and asking God to forgive us (in addition to asking Him to grant us, by His Spirit, a deep and lasting repentance). One day we will be glorified and no longer able to sin because we will be wholly inclined against all sinful behavior.

You look to be trying to back out of your prior assertions.

Nope.

Grace and peace to you.

[myth-one.com]

It's as if you are not reading my responses. I already acknowledged your assertion, without protest, that these individuals are re-raised later. You have no Verses which states these folks are instead brought to maturity/enlightenment for decision time. You admitted this is a guess.

The above is nothing I would have written.

[POI]

But you said the elect are inexorably drawn to Him. 1). Do humans freely choose (or) 2). are the elect inexorably drawn to Him? Pick one. These two options are contradictory statements.

Both are true. They are not contradictory statements. To say humans are "inexorably drawn" is itself a statement of free will. We are all inexorably drawn to many things, and that leads us to make choices.

Um, yes they are contradictory statements. Inexorable means "impossible to stop or prevent." The only choice, in this matter, is God's; not the intended recipient. If God should decide to elect you, He made a choice for you to be inexorably drawn to Him. And if God makes this choice, then we may need to re-evaluate your given terms for necessary salvation... (i.e.) A: belief/faith and B: repent

The term freewill can mean more than one thing. However, if you are caused to be inexorably drawn to (something), you will have no choice but to pick that (something). If choice means "an act of selecting or making a decision when faced with two or more possibilities", then choice means you might also pick the other possibility. To try and slip in the term 'free will' here, would require that you re-define terms.

Regarding salvation, our choice to repent of our sin and believe in Christ is in the context of God's gracious choice. If one is a member of God's elect, then He will, at the appointed time and by the working of His Spirit within the person, change the person's heart/nature. If and when this happens, the person, by his/her free will ~ which follows the heart/nature ~ will not fail to choose to repent of his/her sin and believe. It's not that we don't have a choice to make, or that we do or do not make that choice of our own free will, but it is God's choice before it can be ours.

Yes. So it is not the elected person's choice at all. It's God and God's alone... We have no choice in the matter. Now, the final follow up question.

If God should decide to choose to change one's heart, this means their heart needs to be inexorably changed ---> to follow Him. Then why not just elect EVERYONE?

If sin is sin, then you cannot repent of sin. If you cannot repent of sin, and you admit repentance is a requirement, then no one is saved. And yet, you probably think you are saved. You do not find this confusing?

I see how it can be confusing for you.

It's confusing because (1) you look to be committing special pleading. It's confusing because (2) even if one is inexorably drawn, the elect cannot repent of 'sin'.

We've already unpacked this entire topic. Need I remind you? Please remember you stated "sin is sin." This means all sin carries the same weight. You stated you must repent of sin. We also established (i.e.):

If at some point in one's life, a married homosexual does not remove themselves from such acts, then they are not really repenting.
If at some point in one's life, a prostitute does not remove themselves from such acts, then they are not really repenting.

Do "lies' have their own special set of circumstances?

You cannot have your cake, and eat it too.

You must either redact your prior statement, that 'sin is sin' (or) admit to special pleading for some 'sin' (i.e.) lies, theft, trespassing.

-- This is exactly why I went into depth about homosexuality, and asked if an active homosexual can go to heaven....

-- This is why I also asked if there exist any such thing as a "good sin"?

You must, at some point, no longer willfully engage the remorseful/regretful act. Otherwise, your are not truly repenting.

To be repentant and to be perfect/sinless are two different things. What you're really talking about is perfection with regard to sinlessness, which is not possible in this life. In this life, we are not perfect at anything (far from it actually), and this includes our repentance. But we can be forgiven, of course, by confess our sins and asking God to forgive us (in addition to asking Him to grant us, by His Spirit, a deep and lasting repentance). One day we will be glorified and no longer able to sin because we will be wholly inclined against all sinful behavior.

We have already vetted out what 'repent' means. To simply be remorseful/regretful, or to even admit you are a sinner, does not mean you have repented of a sin. Again, please look at the active homosexual or the active prostitute examples.

If sin is sin, then to actively and willfully engage homosexual practices is no different than actively and willfully engaging in a lie, theft, or trespassing. Please remember what I have stated prior... The best you can argue, is that you willfully commit one sin to protect against a perceived greater 'sin'. But if you continue to admit that sin is sin, than this becomes fallacious reasoning, doesn't it?

[POI]

It's as if you are not reading my responses. I already acknowledged your assertion, without protest, that these individuals are re-raised later. You have no Verses which states these folks are instead brought to maturity/enlightenment for decision time. You admitted this is a guess.

The above is nothing I would have written.

myth-one.com wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 6:44 pm
I imagine resurrected human infants will be allowed to grow to maturity before making their decision. That's just my guess.