Methinks Mooslim morals and Christian morals might be just a tad bit different Barack ol'buddy ol' pal.........
Posted on 03/27/2008 4:40:22 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama suggested Wednesday that Jesus Christ is not the only way to heaven during a campaign event in North Carolina.
While answering a question about his Christian faith, Obama said he believes that Jesus Christ died for his sins and through God’s grace and mercy he could have “everlasting life,” according to the Los Angeles Times.
But he also believes Jews and Muslims and non-believers who live moral lives are as much “children of God” as he is, according to The Associated Press.
As an example, he spoke about his late mother who was “not a believer.”
"[S]he was the kindest, most decent, generous person that I have ever known," Obama said, according to the Times. "I'm sure she is in heaven, even though she may not have subscribed to everything that I subscribe to."
Obama’s response amid the recent controversy surrounding his former Chicago pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who made inflammatory remarks about race and America in sermons he delivered many years ago.
The Illinois senator, who has made religion a cornerstone of his campaign, has denounced the comments – which included “God damn America” for its racism – but refuses to distance himself from the pastor, whom he compares to an uncle.
During his response on Wednesday, Obama praised his church, Trinity United Church of Christ, especially its choir, and said it was very warm and welcoming and is like any other church in America in that it exists to praise God.
(Excerpt) Read more at christianpost.com ...
Absolutely agree with you on this point, although salvation is by faith, not by having read scripture.
So you can't test their faith on something they never had a chance to believe.
Nope, no way I can test their faith, but I believe that is within God's abilities...and it's within His authority as well.
You can take a tough approach and say they all go to hell.
I've seen that tack taken, but I disagree with it...it's God's job to know where everyone will go, not mine. We do have the mandate to go into all the world and make disciples, so we have our marching orders, but ultimately, it's God who is the judge.
Or you can say that some were really good people who never even had the opportunity to have faith in the messiah or Jesus. But that really opens the door theologically. If you can achieve salvation without ever even hearing of the concept of the plan of salvation, what's the point of the plan?
Salvation isn't based upon one's goodness...none of us are "good" in God's eyes. More in a sec...
I can't answer these questions, and so far, nobody else has answered them to my satisfaction, either.
I believe it's a very complex topic and a message board isn't an easy format to discuss it, but I'll give my best shot and try to keep it fairly short (brevity not being one of my strong suits in any case).
1 What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness." Romans 4:1-3
9 Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. 10 How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. Romans 4:9-10
Prior to Jesus, even prior to the law God counted Abraham righteous by faith...and again, this is prior to the cross. Of course the real sticking point is what about those people who never hear of Jesus? Well, Abraham never heard of Jesus, but he trusted God. And scripture has more to say as well...
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Romans 1:18-21
Scripture says God has revealed himself adequately for man to respond. So although one hasn't heard the gospel God has provided a witness of Himself through His creation. More detail can be found in the next chapter...
12 For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. 14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. Romans 2:12-16
This passage seems to pretty clearly indicate God will judge one's response to God by Christ Jesus, and through Abraham we have learned that is by faith. Here's one more passage on the same topic...
4 By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks. Hebrews 11:4
8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. 9 By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. 10 For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. Hebrews 11:8-10
We're told Able was justified by faith and the same with Abraham.
As to your question of why the crucifixion...the law demanded a price and Jesus paid it. Without that we would not be saved...so the faith Abraham placed in God for salvation was made possible and fulfilled in Jesus.
In the overall picture, it probably shouldn't matter to me. I know what I know. I believe what I believe. God can figure the rest of the stuff out.
There are many areas that I approach in the same manner. On this topic, I think I have a general handle on it. I hope I have presented it adequately to convey my thoughts, and I apologize for the length. Blessings.
I refer to the liberal tendency to allegorize the New Testament, and explain away the literal reading of a passage in exchange for a "deeper meaning" that the writer was attempting to communicate. For example, the passage I previously quoted (and will expand) regarding the plain reading of Rev 20:13-15
"And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire."
Unless one has a pretext that ALL will be saved, the plain reading of this passage indicates that someone (those whose names are not written) will be cast into the lake of fire. However, Origen would suggest this is merely an allegory for the removal of the sinful nature, or some such other, since it is "known" that all will be saved. Thus, the reading is not literal.
Sensus Plenior
We are permitted to sin. We are permitted to recognize these sins, we are to pray for the Lord's help in changing our habits from the tendency to commit these sins. Note that we are not to pray for forgiveness! We take Holy Communion at this point as a covenant and strive to lead a good life. This regeneration process continues through eternity as we are never 'perfect'.
We look at the spiritual counterparts of The Holy Supper as 'blood'/wine = truth and 'body'/bread = good. Taking these by eating is making these virtues our own. The Lord wants to draw us closer to Himself, always. He Himself said that wine was symbolic for His blood. Not sure where you are getting the barbaric 'blood must be shed' argument.
We are responsible for our own actions and deeds. We cannot 'blame God' for our sins anymore than we can take credit for Christ's merit on the cross. The Lord and His angels are always with us and we have free will because of it.
Of course we believe that the Lord was crucified and rose 3 days later. We also believe that he only appeared to those that believed in Him after he rose.
Death of the body is just an event. We all wake in the Spiritual World a few days later and continue (or start for some) our spiritual development. Many, like the Samaritans in the Lord's time, find it very easy to accept Jesus Christ as their God and Savior. The only question then is 'How did you live your life?'
I understand that. But what about someone who already has accepted Jesus, such as President Bush, and then goes on to deliberately lie about Scripture - nothing to worry about?
Thinking of him burning in Hell with Hitler and Stalin (assuming they shared his views about Jesus) may seem unfair to you, but that's just the way things are. He does have a choice so it's not really unfair.
In your own personal opinion, is it right that Medved should suffer forever? I know what your Mythology says, I want to know your personal opinion.
John 3:3 "Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."
and 1 John 1:9 "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
2 Cor 5:21 "For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him."
We can debate transubstatiation at another time
“John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”
I didn’t know Jesus spoke English.
Methinks Mooslim morals and Christian morals might be just a tad bit different Barack ol'buddy ol' pal.........
In my years, I've seen 'Christians' use and try to manipulate others with matters of faith. Many times parents with children where the result is an atheist child. What is this abuse called?
On the particular belief that is the subject of this thread, I don't believe Rev Wright enters into it -- this seems Obama's belief, not necessarily Wright's.
Second, to invoke Sensus Plenior to impugn a reading of the scripture is to impugn a method of interpretation that Paul was well schooled in himself, being a scriptural scholar.
It has always been understood that the scripture as a whole, and the Torah in particular, is written on four levels, Pshat, Remez, Drush and Sod, ranging from the literal to the esoteric. Sod, in fact, refers to the “mystery” of scripture, that being personal and meditative revelation.
Your concept of and the word for “Paradise” is, in fact, based on an understanding of these four levels. (PRDS = “Pardes” = “orchard” = Gan Aiden)
You are instead limiting yourself to understanding only the first and most superficial level, the literal story, told through the dark glass of multiple translations and composition by committee.
And you are limiting yourself from seeing the plain meaning by trying to determine the author's intentions, instead of what he recorded. In addition, I reject the "PRDS" school of thought just as I reject the "JEDP" theory on torah authorship.
To suggest that the New Testament is the result of "multiple translations" and "Composition by commitee" suggests a lack of research into historical manuscript evidence for the Greek text we have today. I would also suggest that if we can't follow Sensus Plenior, then no one can arrive at an understanding of truth, for the sords don't mean what they say, and our most basic forms of communication - from thoughts to words to sentences to thoughts - is meaningless.
I also follow the motto "A Text taken out of Context is a Pretext". A simple, clean, literal hermeneutic requires literal reading within the context of the immediate text, a s well as the entirety of the book. This then has to be compared to other passeges on the same topic, to arrive at a sound doctrine. However, if we each allegorize and spiritualize by our own standards and imaginations, truth cannot exist in a knowable context. Your line of thinking leads to gnosticism (secret knowledge), a heresy fought ferociously by John in his 1st epistle, chapter 4, as well as by Paul in Galatians 1.
I find it telling that you first accuse me of being an Origenist and now a Gnostic.
Origen was perhaps the greatest foe of the Gnostics, and his refutation of them was complete, as is my admiration for his reasoning in that refutation.
(Actually, my REAL hero is William Blake.)
My apologies. I try to go to great lengths not to offend in what I write and say, and labeling people can be the greatest expression of prejudice and narrow-minded intolerance. Again, if I came across in that way, I retract.
The alegorization and spiritualization of scripture, especially in terms of PRDS-like processes, can lead to gnosticism in that the PRD are diminished in favor of the Sod, as in the case of the spies report on the promised land as "flowing with milk and honey".
"Rabbi Rochelle Robbins argues convincingly that milk and honey are both feminine and sexual symbols, as is the word 'zavat' which might be better translated as 'oozing,' and usually appears in the context of sexual and body emissions and the like. It is certainly true that the words city and country, are both feminine, even though the rules of Hebrew grammar would suggest the contrary. I can't present her entire argument here, but she presents a strong case for what it means that the land is 'feminized.' (Note our use of phrases such as 'virgin territory, Mother nature'). Robbins' analysis asks us to reconsider what conquering the land represents. Suffice it say, her feminist analysis adds a new layer to the phrase's meaning. http://www.kolel.org/pages/5764/ekev.html
What can one say but WOW, I never saw that in the Torah!
I regard any analysis of scripture that espouses a political or social agenda to be inherently flawed, and that was what the gist of this thread started out to be.
Whether it's a feminist rabbi or Obamarama’s Black Liberation Theology, I think you and I can agree on one thing - ALL of that kind of stuff is demagoguery.
Yeah, and it's, like, political propoganda, too! :-)
Jesus said;
""I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me."
The Apostle Paul wrote under divine inspiration;
"That is, the word of faith which we preach: that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation."
That divinely inspired scripture settles the matter. No other religion or creed can offer a sinner a pardon for his or her sin, and only a perfect, sinless man or woman can enter into Heaven. On the cross every sin of the believer was placed on Jesus and the death penalty for the believer's sin was paid by Him in His death. To complete the transaction His perfect righteousness was reckoned to the believers account at the moment he or she came to belief in and acceptance of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and placed his or her faith in Him and Him alone for salvation.
Only the divine, sinless Son of God's infinite sacrifice could pay the penalty of eternal death for a believer's sin, and only by having His perfect, sinless, righteousness applied to the believer's account can he or she appear before God the Father's judgment seat as pure and sinless as Jesus Himself.
I don't want Obama to be our president but I do want him to become a true believer in the Lord Jesus Christ and trust in Him and Him alone for his salvation, and I pray that he will become a believer at some point before he leaves this earthly phase of his life.
Excellent!
This is Oprah’s stand, as well. She is influencing millions of people in her religious views.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.