Category Archives: Not that there’s anything wrong with that

What is Required for a Christian to get into Heaven?

Posted on by
147

There is an interesting debate taking place in the Mormon thread, regarding salvation and what it takes to get into heaven. In one comment, Antipas states:

However, permit me to offer a “Jewish” perspective. Much of Pauls writings (ie Romans are taken WAY out of context. Are we saved by grace – Of course. However, that means the “moral” law of the Torah is very much intact and in fact now much more strict ( ie look at a woman with lust = adultery as Jesus said).

The new covenant as stated in Heb 8 is the writing of Gods law on our hearts and mind vs. stone tablets. A disciple of Jesus is under the Torah – however it has transcended as seen in Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

A Christian that continues in known sin is not a Christian and will not inherit eternal life and the Kingdom of God

My take is that everyone, even Christians after they are saved, continue in “known sin”. Christians may stop the easily identifiable “sins” – Drugs, Sex and Rock & Roll. But the more abstract sins — pride, anger, lust, greed — are all still very much present.

A reader also pointed me to Acts 15, which discusses the different requirements between Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles.  I had not read this chapter in awhile, so I was a little surprised to see that apparently at one point, according to the Bible, the amount of skin on a man’s penis affected his Salvation.

…and Mormons have the crazy religion.

Let us have this debate again

Posted on by
188

A young Yale divinity student, Jonathan Dudley, recently wrote an article in CNN asking why Christians focus so much on the sin of homosexuality, when the Bible condemns so many other sins.  Jonathan points out some contradictions in how Evangelicals interpret the Bible.

I don’t doubt that the one New Testament author who wrote on the subject of male-male intercourse thought it a sin. In Romans 1, the only passage in the Bible where a reason is explicitly given for opposing same-sex relations, the Apostle Paul calls them “unnatural.”

Problem is, Paul’s only other moral argument from nature is the following: “Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair, it is degrading to him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory?” (1 Corinthians 11:14-15).

Few Christians would answer that question with a “yes.” 

He concludes:

…it’s not at all difficult for a community of Christian leaders, who are almost exclusively white, heterosexual men, to advocate interpretations that can be very impractical for a historically oppressed minority to which they do not belong – homosexuals.

Whether the topic is hair length, celibacy, when life begins, or divorce, time and again, the leaders most opposed to gay marriage have demonstrated an incredible willingness to consider nuances and complicating considerations when their own interests are at stake.

Since graduating from seminary, I no longer identify with the evangelical community of my youth. The community gave me many fond memories and sound values but it also taught me to take the very human perspectives of its leaders and attribute them to God.

I have pretty much come to the same conclusion.  The Evangelical community has adopted a very convenient interpretation of the Bible.  It is an interpretation that justifies all of their actions, and condemns the actions of those they consider sinners. It is not an honest reading of the Bible. It is taking the Bible and then making it fit their own beliefs. Which, you know, fine. Most religious people do this. But just do not expect me to jump on your anti-gay bandwagon. I choose an interpretation of the Bible that focuses on love and acceptance.  I find it makes for a better life.