Satyam Meva Jayate wrote:1. On reading the various messages posted in the past on this forum I came across the interesting and quite perplexing (and apparently over-uttered) argument for Christianity vs other faiths. Specifically, "if you're right, and faith in Jesus is not necessary, then both you (a non-Christian) and I (a Christian) would be on equal footing; if, however, I (a Christian) am right that Jesus is the only path to salvation and the avoidance of damnation and you (a non-Christian) are wrong, then you will be damned and I will go to heaven. So doesn't it just make sense to believe in the Christian gospel??"
You see, this argument is quite amusing to me, because it completely minimizes (if not invalidates) one of the most central concepts in Christianity--faith. This argument states that one should accept Christ as their savior, NOT because they have faith that he is the son of God, but because it is the safest thing to do--that is it's a better bet than following a religion that doesn't accept Christ as the savior (as if they're betting on a horse race or something). It's a sad argument that any true faithful Christian should denounce. I know that if a follower of my faith used that argument, I would be thoroughly embarrassed.
There is nothing wrong with a person having this kind of faith. The Bible says "the fear of God is the beginning of all wisdom." All Christians have some kind of fear in God. But not all Christians believe in God ONLY because they fear Him. Their are different reasons why we believe in God. One should not focus on the "fear factor" and ignore the rest of the reasons.
Satyam Meva Jayate wrote:2. I read this quote on this forum: "I believe there is a God and His name is Jesus Christ... I believe that He offers everybody forgiveness of their sins... the free gift of salvation... but only if a person accepts Him as Lord and Saviour... " If Christ is truly, and by definition and nature a "Savior" then why does he put clauses into his "free gift of salvation"?? (making it a not-so-free gift--much like an attorney would). If his nature is to save, then why does he not save all of mankind? Why only the ones that "believe in him"? Afterall, the definition of true compassion is empathy and willingness to aide all that require assistance, regardless of their 'sins.' So if he can forgive all the sins of his believers and carry them to salvation, why doesn't he forgive the sin of not believing in him?? (Is it an ego thing, much like the Old testament concept of the jelous, vengeful God??)
In order for you to accept a free gift from a store, you have to enter the store. It is ludicrous to think that Christ would save someone who will not accept Him as Saviour. Someone who accepts Him as Saviour doesn't even deserve to be saved, yet someone who does not accept Him has the right to be saved? Believe in Christ and be born again, and you will be saved.