Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jesus didn't write the Gospel of John or the Gospel of Mark.
Lots of things are necessary to a person's salvation. Belief is only the most basic, fundamental first step. If you don't even believe Jesus is who He said He is, then why would you give your entire life to Him?
This points to how chaotic the evolution of Christian theology was. In the beginning when Mark started writing in 70 CE or so Jesus had already stated 40 years earlier, "You must believe in me in order to be saved", right? So if Jesus had already said that and the Holy Spirit was inspiring Mark to write the correct story, then why didn't the Holy Spirit inspire Mark to write in his gospel Jesus saying, "You must believe in me in order to be saved"?
The simple answer to me is that at the time the writers of Mark were doing their writing, the idea that you had believe in Jesus to be saved hadn't occurred to anybody yet. That belief only came along much later when the writers of John were around. So that's when it goes into the gospel, not before.
Which again points to me that the Christian god had nothing to do with the formation of the Christian theology. It was an organic thing that evolved over time as do all living organisms. In short, the Christian religion is a purely man-made religion just like Mithraism, Krishnaism, Hinduism, etc.
The bottom line is that what we have is an unreliable document. And here's why I say that:
It seems to me you are saying that some things in the bible are historically accurate. Okay. I believe that.
But you also seem to be saying that somethings in the bible are not historically accurate. I certainly believe that.
No, I'm not saying the latter. I would say that if something is presented in Scripture as being historical narrative, then we must accept it as such.
And how do we worship God? By offering ourselves as a sacrifice. Dying to self.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
You do. You have done that? Then how are you posting?
It's not a one-time event; but an every day, lifelong process. Every morning I wake up is another day that God has given me to take up my cross and die.
This points to how chaotic the evolution of Christian theology was. In the beginning when Mark started writing in 70 CE or so Jesus had already stated 40 years earlier, "You must believe in me in order to be saved", right? So if Jesus had already said that and the Holy Spirit was inspiring Mark to write the correct story, then why didn't the Holy Spirit inspire Mark to write in his gospel Jesus saying, "You must believe in me in order to be saved"?
The simple answer to me is that at the time the writers of Mark were doing their writing, the idea that you had believe in Jesus to be saved hadn't occurred to anybody yet. That belief only came along much later when the writers of John were around. So that's when it goes into the gospel, not before.
Which again points to me that the Christian god had nothing to do with the formation of the Christian theology. It was an organic thing that evolved over time as do all living organisms. In short, the Christian religion is a purely man-made religion just like Mithraism, Krishnaism, Hinduism, etc.
What is required for salvation is a total and perfect conformity of the intellect and will to that of God's. Since we believe that Jesus is God, it would not be possible to conform your intellect and will to God's if you did not believe that Jesus was God.
Salvation is not a checking off of a box. It's a rigorous process.
What is required for salvation is a total and perfect conformity of the intellect and will to that of God's. Since we believe that Jesus is God, it would not be possible to conform your intellect and will to God's if you did not believe that Jesus was God.
Salvation is not a checking off of a box. It's a rigorous process.
Okay, so at the time Mark was written it wasn't necessary to believe in Jesus for salvation, right?
Okay, so at the time Mark was written it wasn't necessary to believe in Jesus for salvation, right?
It has always and everywhere been necessary to believe in Jesus for salvation. It's not possible to conform to the will of God if you won't even assent/submit to who God is. It would be a contradiction.
It has always and everywhere been necessary to believe in Jesus for salvation. It's not possible to conform to the will of God if you won't even assent/submit to who God is. It would be a contradiction.
So then why didn't Mark tell us it was necessary to believe in Jesus to be saved?
It has always and everywhere been necessary to believe in Jesus for salvation. It's not possible to conform to the will of God if you won't even assent/submit to who God is. It would be a contradiction.
Someday you may realize there's a whole world out that the doesn't believe this stuff.
So then why didn't Mark tell us it was necessary to believe in Jesus to be saved?
The very first verse of Mark calls Jesus the Son of God, so I don't know what you're talking about.
In any case, Mark is not a theological treatise but a biography. Mark's intended audience was Christians who already believed in Jesus.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
