The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
temonosso
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

required threshhold of faith required for Christians to be saved is not clear

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
dairygirl4u2c
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/17/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 318 times Debate No: 56741
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

the requirements are either too vague, or too listy/dogmatic.

the bible says if you confess with your mouth jesus is lord, and beleive in your heart that he was raised from the dead you will be saved. it also say if you believe in the lord you will be saved. it also has all kinds of other statements.
i'm sure if you do these, that is sufficient. but what about various other scenarios, like the content of 'sinner's prayers' that dont include those things?

what or where exactly is the threshhold?

if you believe he existed or is God is that enough? probably not cause the bible says demons do likewise.

what about a list of of common beleifs? that you rely on him generally, that he is your savior, that you are a sinner, that he is lord, tha he rose from the dead, that he was incarnated, that he is God, that he is the son of God, that you believe you are saved (plenty of christians say you must believe you are saved, or you aren't saved), substitutionary atonement v 'christus victor' etc etc.

ask different christians, get a different answer, almost every time. they just have 'gut feelings' but dont have firm answers. see past debates from me on this topic, and you'll note a different answer pretty much every time.

some say you have to admit you're a sinner and that he is your savior. what if you believed all the other things and not these? or what if you believe you're a sinner, and that he's a savior, but not that he's God, or a various type of atonement belief. eg, chrsitaus victor v substitutionary.
some say that he is God is required, some say legal substitution is mandatory.

and how do you demarcate the requirements for those who are new to the faith, and those who are really knowledgeable? it might be seen a okay for a newbie to miss a thing or two, but less understandable for the expreinced etc. does this come into play?

so what's the magical formula?
temonosso

Con

As a Christians, salvation is hinged based on the Bible. Not what one man says, not a personal interpretation. One can not simply take one verse and assume that is the requirement. One must read the entire Bible and understand the requirements as a whole, not a snap shot. Must one recognize that Christ is the only living God, Yes. But is that where you stop? Not according to the Bible. The bible also mentions that one must repent, be born of the water (i.e. baptism) and the Spirit (the holy ghost). In fact the bible says that unless you have been born of the water and the spirit you can't enter into the kingdom of God. In the book of Acts, chapter two, verse 38, Peter tells the crowd that they must repent, be baptized in Jesus name and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. A mans opinion on whether or not that seems like to much or not is irrelevant because that is what the Bible says and there fore should be followed. Just because human nature says "well that's to much of a sacrifice" that doesn't change what is in the word.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

con seems to be going with what i said. he's taking it all holistically. that approach by its very nature is vague.

he focuses on the bible. that is fair. but what it means to follow Jesus based on the bible is not clear, necessarily. nor the threshhold therein. surely it cannot be said that all who try to follow the bible will be saved. there's more to it than that. in fact, it could surely be said that not just those who proactively follow the bible will be saved, cause there's some christians who do not have bibles, or those who were christian before the bible became official.
so again, it seems con is basically agreeing with me. does he see it that way that he agrees with me?
temonosso

Con

temonosso forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

reiterate
temonosso

Con

temonosso forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Sagey 2 years ago
Sagey
Definitely a hotly debated issue among theists, but most rational people know that Christians truly have no clue. Just belief in Jesus is knocked as insufficient by many and extreme subservience to the Old and New Testaments is considered as overzealous and idiotic by many.
Those severely Indoctrinated (Operational Intelligence reduced to Zero) such as Jehovah Witnesses and many indoctrinated as children, all think their answer is the right one.
When clearly the are arguing from severely damaged minds.

So it should be a very interesting debate, to which I'm Neutral, as I don't care either way.

Because truly Christians should be following Confucius or Buddha, as the teachings of Jesus originated with those two much earlier (like 400 to 500 years earlier) Teachers.
Jesus was only teaching Jews a mix of Buddhist and Confucian philosophies.
Posted by T_parkour 2 years ago
T_parkour
Commenting to come back. I was debating the same thing, and I want to see how others respond to this question.
Posted by LifeMeansGodIsGood 2 years ago
LifeMeansGodIsGood
The required threshold of faith is not clear only to those who are not born again.
Posted by LifeMeansGodIsGood 2 years ago
LifeMeansGodIsGood
To be saved is an act of God. It is not a magic formula that you can put together.
Jesus said " Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother"s womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

To be saved, you must be born again. To be born again is an act of God by His Holy Spirit. You cannot make this happen by any magic formula and no mortal man can make this happen for you. Nothing you can do can make this happen. Only God can make this happen........He will not make this happen if you will not repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. If you are trusting in any formula or dogma to make this happen, it's not happening. God is not a formula or a dogna. Following a religion cannot make you born again no matter what you do in that religion, and no matter what the leaders of the religion tell you.

The Bibles explains it in many different ways because it is not easy to explain an act of God in human words
Posted by temonosso 2 years ago
temonosso
As a Christians, salvation is hinged based on the Bible. Not what one man says, not a personal interpretation. One can not simply take one verse and assume that is the requirement. One must read the entire Bible and understand the requirements as a whole, not a snap shot. Must one recognize that Christ is the only living God, Yes. But is that where you stop? Not according to the Bible. The bible also mentions that one must repent, be born of the water (i.e. baptism) and the Spirit (the holy ghost). In fact the bible says that unless you have been born of the water and the spirit you can't enter into the kingdom of God. In the book of Acts, chapter two, verse 38, Peter tells the crowd that they must repent, be baptized in Jesus name and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. A mans opinion on wether or not that seems like to much or not is irrelevant because that is what the Bible says and there fore should be followed. Just because human nature says "well thats to much of a sacrifice" that doesn't change what is in the word.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Sagey 2 years ago
Sagey
dairygirl4u2ctemonossoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con essentially agreed with Pro, so there is no argument for Con, though I suppose since there was no argument forfeiting still gives a Conduct point for Pro. I think Con was the wrong person for the debate.