Well, if Heaven was the USA in your metaphor, and I was in a little dinghy off the coast of France, then salvation for us would be God pushing the boat all the way across, protecting it all the way. The ocean could throw multiple "perfect" storms at the dinghy and God would simply splash them all away while we were worshiping, rejoicing and singing in the boat. No one who is saved could possibly fail to safely make the trip. So, it is much more than a Visa. Things can go wrong with Visas, nothing can go wrong with salvation. There is no chance involved.
Reading Mat 20, one wonders if the sheep and goats were used in that context as well at the Final Judgment. The 'goats' could be all the people who reject Christ or only the demons, for the verses clearly state that the eternal lake of fire was created specifically for the devil and his angels. But it could also mean that 'goats' are also those (humans) who do not repent (since there is no repentance for the fallen angels).
I don't see how it could refer to only demons. The analogy would fall apart because it is so clear that sheep refers to people. We are told that the sheep and goats need to be divided, which means there must be some base thing in common, such as being four-legged animals. It would make no sense to divide the sheep from the trees. Therefore, if we already know that sheep are people in Christ, then goats must be people not in Christ.
If the Bible had a clear-cut meaning in it, we would all be on the same sheet of music, FK. It seems to me that God did not want us to 'understand' Him very well at all. It always leaves way too much room for 'personal' interpretation, cultural differences (i.e. 'brothers of Christ'), linguistic differences, numerology, historicity, and so on.
To the extent we are both Christians, we ARE on the same page of music. While the Bible is a very complex book, its message is relatively simple, such that a 5-year-old can understand it. It doesn't make any sense that God wouldn't want us to know Him. How could He love us and not want that?
The Jews do not believe man needs to be saved.
The Jews believed in Messiah. Many of them may have had the wrong idea of it, but I think the OT righteous did have it right. They had faith, which is all that is needed.
By following the Law, Jews make themselves 'acceptable' to God. In other words, they make themselves 'righteous' in the eyes of God who knows our intentions and recognizes those whose hearts are filled with love. The Law was the rule how one should act and think.
The Law is also the standard against which all men are proved unworthy. The early sacrifices literally "fixed" nothing. They were simulations of the one and only sacrifice that WAS worthy.
In Orthodoxy, we combine that with faith: God is inscribed in our hearts and the faith leads us to do 'proper' things we learn from God (Scripture) and the Church (doctrine).
Yes, faith leads us to do proper things, but those things are no more salvific now than they were in the OT, no matter what many Jews believed. To believe that works are salvific (i.e. that more is required than faith) is to diminish what Christ did for us. One response might be to say that your view is all God intended for Christ's death, but since we both agree that He died, under your view it was worth less (not worthless :).
The Protestants get a driving license and figure no matter how they drive and how many times they get a ticket, their license will never be taken away because Christ took all those violations on His shoulder and paid all our fines. That's not the way it works, FK. It may be very comforting and cozy, but that's not it. Again, +Paul had a lot to do with that attitude ...
Of course that's not how it works, and I'm surprised that you still think Protestants "figure" that way at all. For certain, Reformers do not figure this way. Not only do we say so, we live it. And Paul has nothing to do with the attitude you describe. How many times does he have to say "By NO means" for you to believe him?
The only reason God made a New Covenant was because the Jews went back and forth worshiping idols until the Babylonian captivity, not because animal sacrifices were something 'temporary' or 'foreshadowing' anything.
Was this God adjusting on the fly? :) God made a New Covenant because it was time for the Incarnation, planned from the beginning, and Christ was to bring it. If the OT animal sacrifices really WERE good enough to justify a man before God, then the cross was unnecessary.
No offense, FK, but that sounds very naïve to me.
I don't see how it could refer to only demons. The analogy would fall apart because it is so clear that sheep refers to people
Well, then the Bible is not telling us the truth; then the eternal lake of fire was not created for the devil and his angels, but for some 'goats' in addition to that. It is clear from another part of the NT that Christ considered some who are among us not to have been created by the Father, but by the devil. (cf John 8:44)
To the extent we are both Christians, we ARE on the same page of music
I must disagree, FK. A couple of years ago I would have been more inclined to agree, but after having learned more about what encompasses "Christian" since then, that notion evaporated.
The Apostolics and the Protestants, as well as the LDS, and all sorts of other groups, all call on Christ, but our theologies, soteriologies, Christologies, etc. are like night and day. Even our "core concepts" that we share (in name at least), such as the Holy Trinity are not the same. When Kolo said that we worship a different God, he pretty much spoke my mind.
The Jews believed in Messiah
The messiah of Judaism is not a savior of man's souls. He is a mortal human being, a real king, who will bring peace and rule the world (this is where many anti-semitic groups get their conspiracy theories), this world. The Hebrew expression 'the world to come' does not refer to the heavenly world we think of. These terms are of course found in the OT but they had a different meaning before the Christians re-defined them.
The Apostles clearly expected such a man when they asked Christ if he was ready to establish the kingdom of Israel in the Book of Acts.
I really do not believe that the Apostles thought of Him as God (all Gospel verse notwithstanding) before the Resurrection, and that even after that +Thomas still had to put his fingers in His wounds in order to believe.
Of course that's not how it works, and I'm surprised that you still think Protestants "figure" that way at all.
Okay, then tell me if the Protestants do not believe that Christ paid for all our sins, past, present and future. Are we not just a pile of dung covered with a white sheet (Luther's words)? There is no cleansing required; just put on some clean clothes on our dirty bodies! Shove that dirt under the rug.
Do Protestants no believe that those who are saved are saved because God 'saved' them before they were even created? That nothing can change that? That everything they do is what God wills? Our works are not salvific; but then they are not damning either, correct? No matter what we do, we cannot be 'snatched,' correct?
Do the Protestants not believe that all your future sins are already 'covered?' So, why worry; be happy, right? Cozy, easy. Just sing 'hallelujah' and let god 'splash away' those 'perfect storms.' Easy, cozy, 'feel good,' that requires absolutely nothing of an individual's own doing. Nothing.
Was this God adjusting on the fly? :) God made a New Covenant because it was time for the Incarnation, planned from the beginning, and Christ was to bring it
Actually, yes! Just the way He 'repented' in the Old Testament for having made man and decided to drown everything alive — "on the fly." Otherwise we have to assume He created man wicked in order to drown Him.
Your theory doesn't match the scripture, FK. In Hebrews, the scribe specifically states that the Old Covenant was made 'imperfect' by the unbelieving Jews (cf Heb 8:9), and that God decided to start from scratch, erasing the iniquities of the Jews and staring with a clean slate, once again (cf Heb 8:12).