![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 14 of 14. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Forerunner on May 12, 2008, at 19:49:19
We have a strange illusion that mere time cancels sin. I have heard others and have heard myself, recounting cruelties and falsehoods committed in boyhood as if they were no concern of the present speaker's, and even with laughter. But mere time does nothing either to the fact or to the guilt of sin. The guilt is not washed out by time but by repentence and the blood of Jesus Christ.
-4'r
Posted by SLS on May 12, 2008, at 20:44:26
In reply to Sin, posted by Forerunner on May 12, 2008, at 19:49:19
> We have a strange illusion that mere time cancels sin. I have heard others and have heard myself, recounting cruelties and falsehoods committed in boyhood as if they were no concern of the present speaker's, and even with laughter. But mere time does nothing either to the fact or to the guilt of sin. The guilt is not washed out by time but by repentence and the blood of Jesus Christ.
Can you explain to me why one is saved through an act of Jesus 2100 years ago, but must also repent before the power of Jesus can be actualized? And what of those people of the world who have never heard of this man and the need to repent? Are they to be sentenced to perdition for not knowing that there was ever declared to have been a christ?
- Scott
Posted by Sigismund on May 12, 2008, at 21:34:12
In reply to Sin, posted by Forerunner on May 12, 2008, at 19:49:19
I understand the resonance of the idea of sacrifice, because sacrifice is inevitable in human life.
But I have never understood how the sacrifice is, so to speak, transferrable.
Why should God find it easier to forgive us because some people strung His Son up?
So I tell myself that it is all metaphor.
Posted by SLS on May 12, 2008, at 21:56:22
In reply to Re: Sin, posted by Sigismund on May 12, 2008, at 21:34:12
> But I have never understood how the sacrifice is, so to speak, transferrable.
Very interesting point. I never thought of it that way.
> Why should God find it easier to forgive us because some people strung His Son up?
Again, very interesting point. Like any good/bad religion, I'm sure there is an explanation to be given by Christianity. I think the Trinity operates here.
> So I tell myself that it is all metaphor.
It would have been interesting to sit in on a discussion regarding the Torah when all that it was, was passed on from generation to generation through an oral tradition. It is stunning to realize the the Dead Sea Scrolls, one of the earliest written Torahs, was produced just barely before the time of Jesus. Was there a time when the stories in the Old Testament were considered metaphors or allegories? Was it ever taught that way in the oral tradition I wonder?
- Scott
Posted by SLS on May 12, 2008, at 22:08:46
In reply to Sin, posted by Forerunner on May 12, 2008, at 19:49:19
> We have a strange illusion that mere time cancels sin.
I am sensitive to someone's use of the word "we" when it doesn't include me. I have no such illusion. Perhaps you could include yourself in the "we" next time without including me. You don't even include yourself.
- Scott
Posted by Forerunner on May 13, 2008, at 8:36:46
In reply to Re: Sin » Forerunner, posted by SLS on May 12, 2008, at 22:08:46
> > We have a strange illusion that mere time cancels sin.
>
> I am sensitive to someone's use of the word "we" when it doesn't include me. I have no such illusion. Perhaps you could include yourself in the "we" next time without including me. You don't even include yourself.
>
>
> - ScottI will try to be concious of this.
Posted by Forerunner on May 13, 2008, at 9:13:57
In reply to Re: Sin, posted by SLS on May 12, 2008, at 20:44:26
> > We have a strange illusion that mere time cancels sin. I have heard others and have heard myself, recounting cruelties and falsehoods committed in boyhood as if they were no concern of the present speaker's, and even with laughter. But mere time does nothing either to the fact or to the guilt of sin. The guilt is not washed out by time but by repentence and the blood of Jesus Christ.
>
> Can you explain to me why one is saved through an act of Jesus 2100 years ago, but must also repent before the power of Jesus can be actualized? And what of those people of the world who have never heard of this man and the need to repent? Are they to be sentenced to perdition for not knowing that there was ever declared to have been a christ?
>
>
> - ScottThe Bible says we are judged according to what we know. Do i believe a person who has never heard of Jesus and dies goes to hell? No. God is just, and will judge according to what and how much a person knows. 'To him who much is given, much will be expected'.
-4'r
Posted by SLS on May 13, 2008, at 10:16:12
In reply to Re: Sin » SLS, posted by Forerunner on May 13, 2008, at 9:13:57
> > > We have a strange illusion that mere time cancels sin. I have heard others and have heard myself, recounting cruelties and falsehoods committed in boyhood as if they were no concern of the present speaker's, and even with laughter. But mere time does nothing either to the fact or to the guilt of sin. The guilt is not washed out by time but by repentence and the blood of Jesus Christ.
> >
> > Can you explain to me why one is saved through an act of Jesus 2100 years ago, but must also repent before the power of Jesus can be actualized? And what of those people of the world who have never heard of this man and the need to repent? Are they to be sentenced to perdition for not knowing that there was ever declared to have been a christ?
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> The Bible says we are judged according to what we know. Do i believe a person who has never heard of Jesus and dies goes to hell? No. God is just, and will judge according to what and how much a person knows. 'To him who much is given, much will be expected'.
>
> -4'r
That makes a difference.This is the point at which I become frustrated by my ignorance. I would really like to see a citation in the Bible. I'll see what I can find online. Your quote is far from being specific as it relates to salvation. It would be nice to see it in context.
- Scott
Posted by Forerunner on May 13, 2008, at 10:34:53
In reply to Re: Sin, posted by SLS on May 13, 2008, at 10:16:12
It would, no doubt, have been possible for God to remove by miricle the results of the first sin ever committed by a human being; but this would not have been much good unless He was prepared to remove the results of the second sin, and of the third, and so on forever.
It is not enough to want to get rid of one's sins. We (I) also need to believe in the One who saves us from our sins...Because i know that i am a sinner, it does not follow that i am saved.
-4'r
Posted by SLS on May 13, 2008, at 11:03:49
In reply to Re: Sin, posted by SLS on May 13, 2008, at 10:16:12
A cursory review of the first 20 or so results on Google make it quite clear that there is no consensus among Christian theologians as to whether or not ignorance of the passage of Jesus precludes salvation. I was going to list 5 citations from the bible to address this issue, but my biases might have skewed their presentation. What I could not find, however, was a citation from the bible depicting the salvation of non-believers who have never heard of Jesus.
- Scott
Posted by Forerunner on May 13, 2008, at 11:06:56
In reply to Re: Sin, posted by SLS on May 13, 2008, at 11:03:49
> A cursory review of the first 20 or so results on Google make it quite clear that there is no consensus among Christian theologians as to whether or not ignorance of the passage of Jesus precludes salvation. I was going to list 5 citations from the bible to address this issue, but my biases might have skewed their presentation. What I could not find, however, was a citation from the bible depicting the salvation of non-believers who have never heard of Jesus.
>
>
> - ScottYeah, the one thing i know is God is Just, and therefore i can rest in knowing that.
-4'r
Posted by SLS on May 13, 2008, at 11:43:33
In reply to Re: Sin » SLS, posted by Forerunner on May 13, 2008, at 11:06:56
> > A cursory review of the first 20 or so results on Google make it quite clear that there is no consensus among Christian theologians as to whether or not ignorance of the passage of Jesus precludes salvation. I was going to list 5 citations from the bible to address this issue, but my biases might have skewed their presentation. What I could not find, however, was a citation from the bible depicting the salvation of non-believers who have never heard of Jesus.
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> Yeah, the one thing i know is God is Just, and therefore i can rest in knowing that.
>
> -4'r
God is not just. God is God, whether we consider him to be just or not. Justice is judgment. To know judgment, you must know the mind of the juror. I think that God is incomprehensible. In that belief lies my humility. It is not within my power to adjudicate the fairness of a still-birth or the killing of millions of innocents in the Nazi gas chambers.No. I cannot rest on the notion that God is just. I must act.
- Scott
Posted by Forerunner on May 13, 2008, at 11:53:05
In reply to Re: Sin, posted by SLS on May 13, 2008, at 11:43:33
I disagree, not to be disrespectful of your opinion, i just disagree..plain and simple.
-4'r
Posted by SLS on May 13, 2008, at 12:05:25
In reply to Re: Sin » SLS, posted by Forerunner on May 13, 2008, at 11:53:05
> I disagree, not to be disrespectful of your opinion, i just disagree..plain and simple.
>
> -4'r
That's the most respectful thing you could have said. Thanks.
- Scott
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Faith | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.