We all have a testimony to bear in our faith we should be proud of it. I am a Christian because it is the religion I grew up with. I also believe in a God in the same way I believe santa clause. (please don't take this out of context as I will explain later) Other religions and belief systems are just as good for human kind.

Christianity was the simplest path for me to take on my spiritual journey as it was easily available in my language. My parents are baptists. My friends are Christians. So why work really hard to convert myself to another belief system? I do think it is best to work hard to find the truth.

I grew up with santa clause. I don't believe in Santa Clause anymore but I do believe in the christmas spirit. The spirit of giving to people in need. The idea of the santa clause just helped to embed my faith in the spirit of giving. You can't touch or prove that the giving spirit exists but when enough people act upon it, it manifests itself. This is pretty much how my faith in a God is. He isn't here to prove himself but if enough people act upon the belief it helps to instill "faith".

Christianity is not the only religion that people grow up with. A person's family and friends are way more important to a person's spirituality and "faith" than having a religion. If a person has no companions that act upon their spiritual values, then wouldn't it be harder to conceive faith in anything? I feel I am biting off more than I can chew in writing this but I would like to think that all religions in the world should share a common truth. We should look back on all things we have done and ask our self "is it good?"

I thought it would be a good place to share our testimonies maybe I am wrong for opening a can of worms. I don't want it to be evangelical thread as there is a place for that. We have a responsibility in being humans with the knowledge of good and evil. God was right when trying to protect us from eating that forbidden fruit, but now the deed is done.

I was enjoying this thread, up until this paragraph. Does this mean that all the faithful of other religions, and everyone who is not religious, is condemned to eternal damnation? And doesn't this mean that God has created an enormous number of souls who will just go straight to hell for eternity? This is where I have to part company with Christians. I don't believe that Jesus is the only way; truth is the only way. Truth is the only Christ, but Jesus is in not the only truth. This has been a license for a considerable amount of persecution. Those claiming to defend Christ have been responsible for bloodshed as well as good, the Inquisition and the 30 Years War. So you can all sit around in a circle and congratulate yourselves as long as you like, but I will take my chance elsewhere.

Yeah, it is not always the most appreciated part, that is to hear Jesus is the only way. The reality is that it does not license a Christian to persecute unbelievers and, as long as there are people like me, it will not continue perpetually. As for the countless people who would be condemned, I can do nothing but pass to one what has been given to me.

I liken this to Spain. Consider: you want to travel to Spain and discover many different methods (car, bus, train, ship, plane) to arrive at your destination as allowed by the governing body. For many years, the travel remained fairly unrestricted, but, suddenly, for one reason or another, the governing body in Spain decides to only allow visitors by boat. Some prefer to ride the bus or train to travel and others prefer the plane, but preference is irrelevant to the matter, for it is the governing body which decided the manner in which one may enter the country. The choice is ultimately to decide whether to go to Spain or to not go to Spain. While there are intricacies which are not discussed in this example, it points out that the governing body is the one who controls the way by which one may arrive at the particular destination. The way of salvation is narrow and few find it, but the way to condemnation is wide and broad, filled with enticements.

UGH - this thread went south so fast. To anyone open-minded still reading this post--all Christians do not believe in this way. It doesn't even make sense. Even the analogy is silly. Who gives a damn, as long as you get to Spain.

This kind of thing kills me. :poke-eye:

All Christians do not believe what way? Here is the abridged content:

-Believing in Christ Jesus as the only way does not justify persecution.
-I can do nothing, but preach to others what has been given to me.
-Likened the "only way" statement to a trip to Spain.
-Claimed that the way to salvation is narrow and not wide.

Now, I did not overlook the fact that the example was not perfect and stated that there were many things that it did not address, but the rest is quite biblical and I challenge you to reveal to me the error.

I apologize--I should have been more clear. All Christians do not believe that Jesus is the "only way" to God.

You can build on what others have given you, using the knowledge and wisdom of those around you, to more keenly develop your sense of God and man.

The path to God is narrow - as is said in the gospels, though, it is not always those who assume they are on the narrow path that are actually there.

"Quite biblical" to me is not convincing. What does "biblical" mean to you? Biblical to the KKK is implementing slavery. Biblical to Hitler was eradication of the Jews. Biblical to early 20th century Americans was suppression of women. Biblical to Baptists in the 1960s-1970s was the persecution of divorced people. Biblical to the fundamentalist church today is the prejudicial and hateful treatment of homosexuals. The bible is not waiting for your literal interpretation--if you think it is you should get your head coverings out for women at your church and make sure to treat your slaves with respect.

Yeah, it is not always the most appreciated part, that is to hear Jesus is the only way. The reality is that it does not license a Christian to persecute unbelievers and, as long as there are people like me, it will not continue perpetually. As for the countless people who would be condemned, I can do nothing but pass to one what has been given to me.

I liken this to Spain. Consider: you want to travel to Spain and discover many different methods (car, bus, train, ship, plane) to arrive at your destination as allowed by the governing body. For many years, the travel remained fairly unrestricted, but, suddenly, for one reason or another, the governing body in Spain decides to only allow visitors by boat. Some prefer to ride the bus or train to travel and others prefer the plane, but preference is irrelevant to the matter, for it is the governing body which decided the manner in which one may enter the country. The choice is ultimately to decide whether to go to Spain or to not go to Spain. While there are intricacies which are not discussed in this example, it points out that the governing body is the one who controls the way by which one may arrive at the particular destination. The way of salvation is narrow and few find it, but the way to condemnation is wide and broad, filled with enticements.

i found christianity quite hard to follow as a rational idea but found buddhism very logical and a good instruction manual for life.

By "quite biblical," I mean that it is supported by scripture as truthful. Perceived interpretation and contextual interpretation are quite different and the former results in many problems. When we remove the validity of what is biblical, based on perceived interpretation, we throw away any value of the scripture and the whole begins to crumble.

There are two aspects of the church: the visible and the invisible. The "invisible church" contains the body of believers and, while the visible church contains the body of believers, it also contains those who do not truly believe - the wheat and chaff, so to speak. All Christians believe that Jesus is the only way, but there are certainly those who profess to be Christian and believe all sorts of nonsense. Those who profess themselves to be Christians, however, are not necessarily part of the invisible church.

You did say it right, though. Not everyone who believes that they are on the narrow path are actually on the narrow path at all.

Regrettably, I don't understand this answer at all.

Do you think that Christ being the only way to salvation means that all who don't call themselves Christian are condemned?

I am asking this because I am a religious pluralist. And it seems completely impossible to reconcile this with pluralism.

I also believe that humans are generally responsible for their destiny. If they do good, are compassionate, help others, and so on, whether they call themselves religious or not is secondary to what they actually do.

The problem is you cannot remove your interpretation from the mix. There is no bible without interpretation.


Couldn't disagree more. This is a very fundamentalist view and is not shared by all Christians.



Those condemning others should check their 6.

It is also instructive that while 'all Christians believe Jesus is the only way' they also have vehement disagreements over the nature of Christ, the meaning of Scripture, and many other things which any single Christian will assure you are perfectly self-evident. Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox all think each other heretical in some respects. So if the Christians disagree amongst themselves about their own fundamental doctrine, it is hard to argue that it is self-evident.

Right, you cannot remove interpretation from a text; that is not being disputed. What is being argued is that there are both good and bad interpretations.

The disagreement is irrelevant on the basis of scriptural consistency. Paul wrote that (2 Timothy 3:16-17), "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." One who professes faith in Christ must also submit to scriptural authority.

As for my "6," I have no concern for my own salvation, for I know through whom I may appropriately possess hope...

you know, thinking about it, the issue I have is that I don't believe in believing. I see a lot of people who say they believe and who don't demonstrate any particular virtue or sagacity as a result. It might meet some psychological need and provide them with a coherent explanation of their existential situation. But I just can't go along with that. I think ultimately people are responsible for themselves and what becomes of them. This does not mean that the ego is in charge. Part of self-mastery is surpassing egotism. This is one of the things that Christ calls you to do. But one is obliged to respond. I think people who just coast along, feeling as though they 'are not perfect but forgiven' as a bumper sticker has it, must be kidding themselves. I understand the issue with 'Pelagianism' and how any effort on the part of ego will always lead to further entanglement (or 'man can do nothing to save himself in his fallen state'). But nevertheless Jesus calls you to action, and renunciation, it seems to me.

CP, first, thank you for an interesting discussion. On the points mentioned here --

Regarding interpretation, certainly any interpretation is flawed in some way. Do you think that if Calvin and Arminius couldn't figure it out that you or I have a shot at some kind of perfect interpretation? And history has shown that people have been as adamant about their interpretations as you are about yours and been dead wrong (e.g. Galileo, KKK, Hitler, etc.).

Several problems with the 2 Tim 3:16 argument regarding scripture. First, it's circular logic - the bible is true because the bible says it's true. No dice. Second, the books that you recognize as scripture were not close to being written, compiled, or in active circulation in their entirety when that was written. Thirdly, the book of 2 Tim is widely known to be authored by someone other than Paul, likely long after his death, potentially pseudonymous, which brings doubt to authenticity as an ancient source anyway. I think the "2 Tim 3:16" argument is the weakest possible argument for literal interpretation of the bible.

Also, I hope you weren't thinking that I was directing the comment about checking your 6 at you; that was more of a general statement not meant at all to apply to you. I am sorry that you seem to have taken that way. I hope you continue strong in faith and are blessed by God!

you know, thinking about it, the issue I have is that I don't believe in believing. I see a lot of people who say they believe and who don't demonstrate any particular virtue or sagacity as a result. It might meet some psychological need and provide them with a coherent explanation of their existential situation. But I just can't go along with that. I think ultimately people are responsible for themselves and what becomes of them. This does not mean that the ego is in charge. Part of self-mastery is surpassing egotism. This is one of the things that Christ calls you to do. But one is obliged to respond. I think people who just coast along, feeling as though they 'are not perfect but forgiven' as a bumper sticker has it, must be kidding themselves. I understand the issue with 'Pelagianism' and how any effort on the part of ego will always lead to further entanglement (or 'man can do nothing to save himself in his fallen state'). But nevertheless Jesus calls you to action, and renunciation, it seems to me.