Is salvation primarily based upon luck?

[Boris]

This could apply to the doctrines of Christianity or really any exclusive religion.

Assume that the following are necessary for salvation:

1. Belief in a certain God (such as Jesus Christ)
2. Good works (i.e. engaging in morally correct behavior as defined by religious texts such as the bible)

The first tenet is what perplexes me. Said belief in a particular God is primarily based upon where one is born and geographically resides as well as the nature of one's family members. Since one does not control those factors, it's nothing short of luck as to whether or not the first tenet is satisfied. Assuming Christianity is the "correct" path to God, someone such as me, born into a non-Christian family, has been blessed with luck that virtually everyone around me is a Christian and therefore have been influenced by its beliefs. Had I been residing in India instead of the United States, I wouldn't have had that opportunity.

Basing salvation on factors that one cannot directly control seems rather irrational for a being that is allegedly all-knowing. So therefore, I draw into question that veracity of tenets necessary for salvation. Although I'm sure they're probably leaps and bounds in my logic so someone please tell me I'm a moron.

[afleitch]

It's a good question and some faiths and denominations answer it better than others. Though this is always worth consideration at the first instance.

When Gentiles who do not have the law keep it as by instinct, these men although without the law serve as a law for themselves. They show that the demands of the law are written in their hearts. Their conscience bears witness together with the law, and their thoughts will accuse or defend them on the day when, in accordance with the gospel I preach, God will pass judgment on the secrets of men through Jesus Christ Paul 2:14-16

[12th Doctor]

It's a good question and some faiths and denominations answer it better than others. Though this is always worth consideration at the first instance.

When Gentiles who do not have the law keep it as by instinct, these men although without the law serve as a law for themselves. They show that the demands of the law are written in their hearts. Their conscience bears witness together with the law, and their thoughts will accuse or defend them on the day when, in accordance with the gospel I preach, God will pass judgment on the secrets of men through Jesus Christ Paul 2:14-16

The book of Paul?

[Franzl]

It'd interesting what churches say about that.

Most American Christians are probably convinced that Christianity is the only way to salvation, but you will here different opinions elsewhere.

My German catholic priest (who I had in religion in school), for example, said that anybody could be saved, regardless of their personal convictions, as long as they were doing what they believe to be morally correct.

[12th Doctor]

It'd interesting what churches say about that.

Most American Christians are probably convinced that Christianity is the only way to salvation, but you will here different opinions elsewhere.

My German catholic priest (who I had in religion in school), for example, said that anybody could be saved, regardless of their personal convictions, as long as they were doing what they believe to be morally correct.

The Catholic Church believes that anyone can be "saved," but in order to do so they must accept Christ.  For those who died following other faiths, this happens at an unspecified time following their death when Christ presents himself to the deceased in all his glory.

[Boris]

The Catholic Church believes that anyone can be "saved," but in order to do so they must accept Christ.  For those who died following other faiths, this happens at an unspecified time following their death when Christ presents himself to the deceased in all his glory.

So then what rational basis is there for adhering to Catholic doctrines throughout one's lifetime? With nothing tangible to prove or disprove the validity of Catholic thought, one might as well wait until they have died to learn the truth. What benefits other than possible intrinsic satisfaction (which is most likely entirely dependent upon the person rather than the religion itself) come from being a Catholic?

Or am I looking at it the wrong way?

[afleitch]

It's a good question and some faiths and denominations answer it better than others. Though this is always worth consideration at the first instance.

When Gentiles who do not have the law keep it as by instinct, these men although without the law serve as a law for themselves. They show that the demands of the law are written in their hearts. Their conscience bears witness together with the law, and their thoughts will accuse or defend them on the day when, in accordance with the gospel I preach, God will pass judgment on the secrets of men through Jesus Christ Paul 2:14-16

The book of Paul?

Sorry. Romans.

[afleitch]

Catholicism and salvation is often the subject of misunderstanding; i.e some take the view that Catholics apparently do everything but accept Jesus as the only path to salvation. Unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God John 3:3. Now as I've said before, a fair point can be made regarding the vailidity of infant baptism etc, but the sacrament of confirmation (a 'more perfect bond') which, while not intended to be a run-through of the gifts and grace granted in baptism pretty much covers that if that is what is required. We also place an emphasis on works. There is no assurance of salvation just because you believe but you live the life of a bastard, nor are you cast aside because you err (and if you do you can confess your sins)

It's quite difficult actually, as a Catholic to be cast aside and actually loose the chance of salvation. Even after death you get a chance. There is no point in going from crime to punishment without 'arbitration' in between. But you do have to work for it and you do have to want it.

[Хahar 🤔]

No, it is not. In Islam, it is quite possible to go to heaven (immediately) without being a Muslim.

[John Dibble]

Frankly I would hope that if such a thing occurs that it is not.

[12th Doctor]

The Catholic Church believes that anyone can be "saved," but in order to do so they must accept Christ.  For those who died following other faiths, this happens at an unspecified time following their death when Christ presents himself to the deceased in all his glory.

So then what rational basis is there for adhering to Catholic doctrines throughout one's lifetime? With nothing tangible to prove or disprove the validity of Catholic thought, one might as well wait until they have died to learn the truth. What benefits other than possible intrinsic satisfaction (which is most likely entirely dependent upon the person rather than the religion itself) come from being a Catholic?

Or am I looking at it the wrong way?

Well, Catholicism naturally believes that it is the best "path" to salvation, if you will.  Afleitch actually puts it very well.

Salvation in Catholicism is a fairly complex thing.  But to put it in very simple, almost vulgar terms.  Will we think no one is guaranteed salvation, ever, period... we also believe that no one is left out, for any reason, period... and that everyone has the hope of obtaining eternal life.  All salvation comes through the grace of God, ultimately.  Grace comes through the sacraments... not because the Church says so, or "filling up" on sacraments means you are holier (in fact, the Church discourages this... each person is only allowed communion twice per day, unless there is some extraordinary circumstance), but because Jesus instituted these as "signs" if you will, for the faithful... so that in a way, the faith of that person in Christ is still more important than the act itself, because they believe in the sacrament, because they believe in the words of Christ and his power to save.  That being said, grace doesn't come only through the sacraments, and an individual who does good, but does not have "faith", can have a hope at attaining salvation, again, not as something "earned", but as something granted through the mercy of Jesus.

As I said, this doesn't lack for complexity and nuance.

[Хahar 🤔]

The Catholic Church believes that anyone can be "saved," but in order to do so they must accept Christ.  For those who died following other faiths, this happens at an unspecified time following their death when Christ presents himself to the deceased in all his glory.

So then what rational basis is there for adhering to Catholic doctrines throughout one's lifetime? With nothing tangible to prove or disprove the validity of Catholic thought, one might as well wait until they have died to learn the truth. What benefits other than possible intrinsic satisfaction (which is most likely entirely dependent upon the person rather than the religion itself) come from being a Catholic?

Or am I looking at it the wrong way?

Well, Catholicism naturally believes that it is the best "path" to salvation, if you will.  Afleitch actually puts it very well.

Salvation in Catholicism is a fairly complex thing.  But to put it in very simple, almost vulgar terms.  Will we think no one is guaranteed salvation, ever, period... we also believe that no one is left out, for any reason, period... and that everyone has the hope of obtaining eternal life.  All salvation comes through the grace of God, ultimately.  Grace comes through the sacraments... not because the Church says so, or "filling up" on sacraments means you are holier (in fact, the Church discourages this... each person is only allowed communion twice per day, unless there is some extraordinary circumstance), but because Jesus instituted these as "signs" if you will, for the faithful... so that in a way, the faith of that person in Christ is still more important than the act itself, because they believe in the sacrament, because they believe in the words of Christ and his power to save.  That being said, grace doesn't come only through the sacraments, and an individual who does good, but does not have "faith", can have a hope at attaining salvation, again, not as something "earned", but as something granted through the mercy of Jesus.

As I said, this doesn't lack for complexity and nuance.

Hmm. So the sacraments are to you what ritual prayer is to us?

[12th Doctor]

The Catholic Church believes that anyone can be "saved," but in order to do so they must accept Christ.  For those who died following other faiths, this happens at an unspecified time following their death when Christ presents himself to the deceased in all his glory.

So then what rational basis is there for adhering to Catholic doctrines throughout one's lifetime? With nothing tangible to prove or disprove the validity of Catholic thought, one might as well wait until they have died to learn the truth. What benefits other than possible intrinsic satisfaction (which is most likely entirely dependent upon the person rather than the religion itself) come from being a Catholic?

Or am I looking at it the wrong way?

Well, Catholicism naturally believes that it is the best "path" to salvation, if you will.  Afleitch actually puts it very well.

Salvation in Catholicism is a fairly complex thing.  But to put it in very simple, almost vulgar terms.  Will we think no one is guaranteed salvation, ever, period... we also believe that no one is left out, for any reason, period... and that everyone has the hope of obtaining eternal life.  All salvation comes through the grace of God, ultimately.  Grace comes through the sacraments... not because the Church says so, or "filling up" on sacraments means you are holier (in fact, the Church discourages this... each person is only allowed communion twice per day, unless there is some extraordinary circumstance), but because Jesus instituted these as "signs" if you will, for the faithful... so that in a way, the faith of that person in Christ is still more important than the act itself, because they believe in the sacrament, because they believe in the words of Christ and his power to save.  That being said, grace doesn't come only through the sacraments, and an individual who does good, but does not have "faith", can have a hope at attaining salvation, again, not as something "earned", but as something granted through the mercy of Jesus.

As I said, this doesn't lack for complexity and nuance.

Hmm. So the sacraments are to you what ritual prayer is to us?

I suppose you could say that.  We pray too, of course. 

[JSojourner]

I believe those who have never heard the saving message of Jesus -- and those who have heard, but have not understood it for whatever reason -- are judged eternally on the basis of what they do know and understand.  The Father of Jesus is a Father of mercy.

Now those who have heard the message of Jesus, understood it and rejected it?  I have to leave that matter in God's more capable hands.  But I would prefer that they surrendered on this issue and entered the Savior's embrace.

One thing is sure.  Christians enjoy the sport of separating the Saints from the Ain'ts far too much. 

[Хahar 🤔]

The Catholic Church believes that anyone can be "saved," but in order to do so they must accept Christ.  For those who died following other faiths, this happens at an unspecified time following their death when Christ presents himself to the deceased in all his glory.

So then what rational basis is there for adhering to Catholic doctrines throughout one's lifetime? With nothing tangible to prove or disprove the validity of Catholic thought, one might as well wait until they have died to learn the truth. What benefits other than possible intrinsic satisfaction (which is most likely entirely dependent upon the person rather than the religion itself) come from being a Catholic?

Or am I looking at it the wrong way?

Well, Catholicism naturally believes that it is the best "path" to salvation, if you will.  Afleitch actually puts it very well.

Salvation in Catholicism is a fairly complex thing.  But to put it in very simple, almost vulgar terms.  Will we think no one is guaranteed salvation, ever, period... we also believe that no one is left out, for any reason, period... and that everyone has the hope of obtaining eternal life.  All salvation comes through the grace of God, ultimately.  Grace comes through the sacraments... not because the Church says so, or "filling up" on sacraments means you are holier (in fact, the Church discourages this... each person is only allowed communion twice per day, unless there is some extraordinary circumstance), but because Jesus instituted these as "signs" if you will, for the faithful... so that in a way, the faith of that person in Christ is still more important than the act itself, because they believe in the sacrament, because they believe in the words of Christ and his power to save.  That being said, grace doesn't come only through the sacraments, and an individual who does good, but does not have "faith", can have a hope at attaining salvation, again, not as something "earned", but as something granted through the mercy of Jesus.

As I said, this doesn't lack for complexity and nuance.

Hmm. So the sacraments are to you what ritual prayer is to us?

I suppose you could say that.  We pray too, of course. 

Of course, but not nearly as often. Right?

[afleitch]

I believe those who have never heard the saving message of Jesus -- and those who have heard, but have not understood it for whatever reason -- are judged eternally on the basis of what they do know and understand.  The Father of Jesus is a Father of mercy.

Now those who have heard the message of Jesus, understood it and rejected it?  I have to leave that matter in God's more capable hands.  But I would prefer that they surrendered on this issue and entered the Savior's embrace.

One thing is sure.  Christians enjoy the sport of separating the Saints from the Ain'ts far too much. 

I agree with yourself and Soulty here. Salvation should not be an epic 'herculean' task, it is about knowing and acting not just believing and it should never be exclusive, it should never be yours just to 'have' or presume to 'have' (or to start dictating to others how you get it!)

God is mercy and a merciful God does not cast someone into damnation or salvation at the end of their days without 'due process.' And I always like the legal analogy here, if you commit a crime you are not punished without due process in which you are then answerable to the law. Why should we have a democracy in life but an authoritarian God in death? I believe that death is when God is revealed to you whether you believe in him in life or not. And if it takes you until that moment to accept him, then he will show you mercy. But if you accepted him in life, and his revelation is a confirmation of what you knew to be true but you did everything contrary to what he wished for you, then don't expect to stroll through the pearly gates just because you 'believed.' But even then, and I do believe in purgatory, you get the chance to make good and if you were loved in life then as a Catholic I pray for the souls of the dead so that they can be closer to God. They may already be there, but who are we to know?

For those who don;t know God or believe in God, he is the 'creator.' Now this doesn't mean he is a creationist and the process of evolution is entirely compatable with God's role, but he is the one who established nature, and love and emotion and kindness and every facet of the known universe. If you respect him through what he created, even if you do not know him then you still get the chance. In short, if you do what is expected of you without knowing God, you still get the chance to accept him when your time here is up.

So says me anyways

[12th Doctor]

The Catholic Church believes that anyone can be "saved," but in order to do so they must accept Christ.  For those who died following other faiths, this happens at an unspecified time following their death when Christ presents himself to the deceased in all his glory.

So then what rational basis is there for adhering to Catholic doctrines throughout one's lifetime? With nothing tangible to prove or disprove the validity of Catholic thought, one might as well wait until they have died to learn the truth. What benefits other than possible intrinsic satisfaction (which is most likely entirely dependent upon the person rather than the religion itself) come from being a Catholic?

Or am I looking at it the wrong way?

Well, Catholicism naturally believes that it is the best "path" to salvation, if you will.  Afleitch actually puts it very well.

Salvation in Catholicism is a fairly complex thing.  But to put it in very simple, almost vulgar terms.  Will we think no one is guaranteed salvation, ever, period... we also believe that no one is left out, for any reason, period... and that everyone has the hope of obtaining eternal life.  All salvation comes through the grace of God, ultimately.  Grace comes through the sacraments... not because the Church says so, or "filling up" on sacraments means you are holier (in fact, the Church discourages this... each person is only allowed communion twice per day, unless there is some extraordinary circumstance), but because Jesus instituted these as "signs" if you will, for the faithful... so that in a way, the faith of that person in Christ is still more important than the act itself, because they believe in the sacrament, because they believe in the words of Christ and his power to save.  That being said, grace doesn't come only through the sacraments, and an individual who does good, but does not have "faith", can have a hope at attaining salvation, again, not as something "earned", but as something granted through the mercy of Jesus.

As I said, this doesn't lack for complexity and nuance.

Hmm. So the sacraments are to you what ritual prayer is to us?

I suppose you could say that.  We pray too, of course. 

Of course, but not nearly as often. Right?

Well, not in a formulated and formalized 5 times a day, no... certainly, many Catholics don't pray, in any form, nearly as often as that.  I personally don't do a lot of formal prayer.  I mostly just talk and share my thoughts... not that God doesn't know them... basically, it s a glorified for of talking to myself... but I do it often.

[afleitch]

Just to let people know I am a tad 'up' on prescription drugs to combat bad hayfever so I am a lot more 'poetic' than usual. I'm finger tapping more than finger jabbing at the moment

I'll edit myself in the morning.

[Torie]

I'm a Baysian myself, not er, a poet. I'm also basically an atheist. But I follow the golden rule pretty well I think, at least I try to. So the unpoetic Baysian asks: in Catholic theology, do I have the same odds of getting into heaven as the devout Catholic who follows the golden rule precisely as much as I do?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I believe those who have never heard the saving message of Jesus -- and those who have heard, but have not understood it for whatever reason -- are judged eternally on the basis of what they do know and understand.  The Father of Jesus is a Father of mercy.

Now those who have heard the message of Jesus, understood it and rejected it?  I have to leave that matter in God's more capable hands.  But I would prefer that they surrendered on this issue and entered the Savior's embrace.

One thing is sure.  Christians enjoy the sport of separating the Saints from the Ain'ts far too much. 

So, do you believe that Jews who never accept Jesus, but who live basically good lives, will enter into Heaven?  Or will they be condemned to hell along with the truly horrible people?  Or something in between?