varikoot@gondor.UUCP (kill) (12/03/85)
Recently I had met people of the Presbyterian church and of the Marantha
Christian fellowship. I understood the following from what they said -
If we accept Christ as our saviour we will be forgiven for our sins because
he has already suffered and paid for our sins. This will entitle us to go to
heaven.
Qs. 1
Is my above understanding of the basic tenet of Christianity right ?
Qs. 2
If it is right then there may be something wrong here. Hitler may
have decided to accept Christ during his last few days but does that mean he
is forgiven for his sins ?
*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***credmond@watmath.UUCP (Chris Redmond) (12/06/85)
> >Qs. 2 > If it is right then there may be something wrong here. Hitler may >have decided to accept Christ during his last few days but does that mean he >is forgiven for his sins ? Presumably, yes. However . . . this belief does not mean that a person says "I'm sorry," God says "Well, that's okay then," and there is the end of it. God is likely then to tell the person to get busy and make things right with other human beings -- asking their forgiveness too, reconciling quarrels, and (to take a very prosaic case) returning stolen money or making it known that slanderous words were not true. I admit that it boggles my imagination just what God might have told Hitler to do, had Hitler in fact repented during the final days of the Second World War, but I do not put it past God's ability to have come up with something. Presumably the world would have known about it, and so I infer (subject to correction some day!) that Hitler did not thus repent. It is worth adding that there are Bible texts which shed a little light on God's normal procedure in such a case; it seems to amount to telling a sinner "Go and make things right with other human beings, and then will be time enough to make things right with me."
thiel@ut-ngp.UUCP (Stephen W. Thiel) (12/08/85)
Chris Redmond has given an excellent answer to the question: > If it is right then there may be something wrong here. Hitler may >have decided to accept Christ during his last few days but does that mean he >is forgiven for his sins ? At the risk of emphasizing the obvious, the acceptance of Christ as Lord and Savior is a radical step in one's life. It is a costly step, although well worth the benefit of returning to fellowship with God. It requires one to renounce one's previously sinful life (repentance) and to try to undo the damage one's sins have done to others (atonement). I would expect that had Hitler become Christian, he would have done his best to 1) sue for peace and 2) dismantle the concentration camps. Give the nature of the Nazi regime, I think it's probable he would have died a martyr's death. For those interested in an excellent book on just how radical the acceptance of Christ can be, I suggest you read Dietrich Bonhoeffer's book, "The Cost of Discipleship". It's not easy reading, but worth the effort. -- Steve Thiel ...ihnp4!ut-ngp!thiel ... the OFF-WORLD Colonies! A golden opportunity for a new beginning! ...
stim@fluke.UUCP (Randy Stimpson) (12/10/85)
In article <1929@gondor.UUCP> varikoot@gondor.UUCP (kill) writes: >Recently I had met people of the Presbyterian church and of the Marantha >Christian fellowship. I understood the following from what they said - >If we accept Christ as our saviour we will be forgiven for our sins because >he has already suffered and paid for our sins. This will entitle us to go to >heaven. > >Qs. 1 > Is my above understanding of the basic tenet of Christianity right ? > What you have said definitely reflects christian thought in the U.S. But I don't think it is right. Actually I don't disagree with anything you have said. But I do disagree with some implied assumptions (which I may be reading into your text). If they are not your assumptions they are more than likely somebody elses. First of all I reject the concept of salvation as fire insurance, that is, going to heaven. In my perspective salvation is people being reconciled to God, people being reconciled to one another, and healing from the consequences of separation from God and one another. A consequence of salvation is going to heaven. The requirements for salvation is believing God (not belief in God) and repentence, which I consider to be inseperable. To put it another way, in order to be saved you must truley want God to save you, that is, you want God to change your life. If all you want is fire insurance and forgiveness of sins then you don't want salvation. How do we know that we are saved (being saved). The evidence of salvation is salvation itself -- a changed (changing) life. While we are not saved by works of righteousness, they are the outward display of our salvation. The righteousness that God imputes to us is both objective (forgiveness of sins) and subjective (a transformed life). Randy Stimpson
credmond@watmath.UUCP (Chris Redmond) (12/11/85)
> >First of all I reject the concept of salvation as fire insurance, that is, >going to heaven. In my perspective salvation is people being reconciled to >God, people being reconciled to one another, and healing from the >consequences of separation from God and one another. A consequence of >salvation is going to heaven. > >The requirements for salvation is believing God (not belief in God) and >repentence, which I consider to be inseperable. To put it another way, in >order to be saved you must truley want God to save you, that is, you want God >to change your life. If all you want is fire insurance and forgiveness of >sins then you don't want salvation. > >How do we know that we are saved (being saved). The evidence of salvation >is salvation itself -- a changed (changing) life. > I am very glad this was said, and wish I had said it myself in my original comments on the "salvation" question that was raised. Too many people, possibly including some Christians, see "salvation" as being the winning square in a cosmic game of snakes-and-ladders, instead of being a continuing state of relationships and thoughts. Chris