Can People of Other Faiths Be Saved?

[Marcia]

I didn't answer the 2nd part of bukster's question.

I am not sure if the last several posts contributed or not -- they are a little off topic, but there are a few issues that have been raised and repeated several times in the thread and because of that, I feel I must address them.

1. No one knows for sure the time Zoroaster lived, so it is impossible to say that he studied under Daniel. There are many theories about when he lived and no one agrees. There are even a lot of mythlike stories about him, so it's hard to know that much about him. Even if he did study under Daniel, we still do not know if this was the connection with the Magi and their search or notice of the star. God simply does not give us that information and speculation on this should not become the assumed story or doctrine.
2. Personally, I believe the star leading the Magi was the supernatural Shekinah. A star (or planet) cannot stand or rest over one particular specific dwelling as Matthew indicates is done in Matthew 2.
3. The names for the stars are NOT the same in all languages and there is no evidence that they ever were all the same. Nor is there or has there been a uniform number of zodiac constellations. As I said earlier, much of the information used by Seiss and Bullinger for their gospel in the stars has been shown to have been erroneous. Another former astrologer, Charles Strohmer, agrees also that the GIS is not biblical nor based on facts and has written on it. If anyone wants to post on this topic, please start another thread on it. Thank you.

 

[Paul33]

Originally posted by Helen:
I know God knew me before I was, but I also know I didn't choose anything before I was!

One picture that I have used before may help explain this. I raised six children. About the time each was four, and ready to start giving up naps, I would offer that child a choice:

"Do you want to take a nap and then be able to stay up later with daddy and mommy tonight, or would you rather skip your nap and go to bed at your regular time?"

It didn't matter to me and there was no pressure or influence put on the child. The choice was absolutely free. And yet I knew each of my children well enough to know who would choose what. I didn't determine it, but I knew it. And I knew who would react in what way when the consequences of the choice were delivered.

God knows us and has always known us. Nevertheless, not wanting any of us to perish, He has given each of us life and the opportunity to choose Him. That opportunity is a real opportunity and not something just for show.

His foreknowledge does not negate our opportunity to choose in this life here, after we are born and grow up a bit!

You are trying to stuff God into a box you can understand. That doesn't work. But He has given us enough in creation, such as our own children, to help us understand Him a little bit.

Helen, the difference is God knew you in his mind before he created you. You can only know your children after they are born.

The distinction you fail to make is between God's eternal knowledge and what takes place in real time and space after he creates what he eternally knew.

 

[Paul33]

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Helen and Larry, just so you know that the debate wasn't totally futile, I enjoyed reading it. It was a hardnosed debate but not mean spirited like so many lately have been.

It certainly wan't meanspirited from my end, and I am glad someone profited to some degree or other. Helen and I have been around before, and there is certainly nothing personal in it. I appreciate very much Helen's comments in the creation field. </font>[/QUOTE]That's where I think she is wrong!

Larry,

By unbiblical, you mean that there is no explicit reference in Scripture to the "gospel in the stars."

But you are not saying that the gospel couldn't be in the names of the stars, are you?

 

[Jeff Weaver]

I am surprised that no Primitive Baptist has participated in this thread or at least explained their position.

Thanks for including we Primitive Baptist in this, but not sure I want to respond. Last time I responded to a theological question with the Primitive Baptist point of view, I was told I was going straight to perdition, would not pass go, and would not collect $200.

Most (if not all) Primitive Baptists do not support the traditional missionary effort.

At any rate, your understanding of our faith is pretty well correct.

Primitivies believe more or less that the gospel is spread in a creeping manner, like a vine, and that the traditional missionary system is corrupt. Whether it is or not, I am not willing to say, but my experience with missionaries has not been good.

One of their core beliefs is that God alone saves and He saves His children with or without them hearing the Gospel in this life.

I absolutely embrace that statement. There are probably hundreds of threads in the Cal/Arminian forum on why we believe that. I can elaborate if anyone cares, but I suspect that most here could care less what we believe. We believe preaching of the gospel is to bring life and immortality to light. It all goes to the order of salvation, which comes first regeneration or faith. We believe regeneration comes first and faith is a gift of God, given to those regenerated.

In fact there are even universalists under the Primitive umbrella called "no-hellers" a title they abhor but accept because they believe in hell but reject that it is an eternal state.

To them hell is not punitive but remedial where the "lost" hear the gospel and are ultimately saved.

So, in either case they would agree that Christ is the only way to salvation but disagree that those who receive His salvation need to receive it in this life.

They would answer with a qualified "yes" to the question asked in this thread.

Yes, I am one who voted that people of other folks of other faiths can be saved. Whether or not they will, I will leave to God, but I certainly believe it is possible, and yet, I believe all are saved through faith in Christ. It is is manner of how people express that faith, or even comprehend that faith that is debatable. Check out Ephesians, 2:8, "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do."

Not the tense of the verbs--all past tense. There is no condition on salvation, as most here would think, --the condtion of acceptance of grace. Grace is free, and so is faith, it is from God, not an intellectual exercise as most here seem to believe.

Obviously thay have no Scripture to support their view, but I thought perhaps they should be represented here being Baptists.

I dont know if you are referring here to universalists PBs or regular PBs. But baloney, we have lots of scripture to support our point of view. You may disagree with our interpretation of it, just as we may disagree with yours, but our faith is well reasoned and logical. I have heard us criticized for being too logical.

BTW, I am not PB, but a member of a GARBC associated Church.

Perhaps a PB could respond?

HankD

And that is probably all I have to say about the subject.

Regards to all.

Jeff Weaver

 

[Gold Dragon]

Thanks Jeff. I appreciated your sharing on this controversial topic. To be honest, I am not very familiar with Primitive Baptist theology and would love for you to recommend some reading. Thanks.

 

[KJV_BIBLE_MAN]

Hi there, I'm very new at this. In fact this is my very first reply to someone's question. So, if I messed it up, Please forgive me...!!
I'm so glad that the Bible is very plain on who can be saved. "Who-so-ever" shall call on the name of the LOrd shall be saved.... Amen?
Now i will try to send this and see if i did it right.....God bless

 

[Helen]

Yup, you got it right. Welcome to the Zoo!

and, oh yeah, AMEN!

 

[Pastor Larry]

By unbiblical, you mean that there is no explicit reference in Scripture to the "gospel in the stars."

But you are not saying that the gospel couldn't be in the names of the stars, are you?

I would say both. There is no biblical reference, and stars by themselves say nothing. There must be propositions attached to it. It becomes an existential theology ... what it means to me. How many people see different truths in the stars? The gospel requires propositional communication: 1) God is holy; 2) Man is a sinner; 3) Christ died for sin; 4) You must repent and believe. That cannot be communicated by propositionless stars until someone attaches a meaning to them by the use of propositions, in which case we no longer need the stars.

I'm so glad that the Bible is very plain on who can be saved. "Who-so-ever" shall call on the name of the LOrd shall be saved.... Amen?

Exactly right. This is the glorious message of hte gospel of Jesus Christ. Whoever believes shall be saved. God will not refuse to save anyone one who believes. We can all rejoice in that.

 

[HankD]

Thank you Jeff for your contribution.

Let me correct my balogna statement that Primitive Baptists have no Scripture to support their doctrine to: Primitive Baptist (especially "no-hellers") have a significantly different interpretation of certain Scriptures which support their doctrine than most other Baptists.

I am sorry for my misrepresentation.

HankD

 

[buckster75]

Originally posted by buckster75:
I read this from the other post:

"I have also noticed that it is not real popular now to say that Jesus is the only way"

Yes the preachers will always trend to what is "popular". They call it "mainstream" where the people are allowing their thinking and their wisdom to take them. But the Bible tells that the wisdom of man is foolishness. There is an absolute Truth and His name is Jesus Christ.

did I miss any response to this? Was wondering if anyone else has heard of this?

Just my 2 cents.

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Originally posted by Jeff Weaver:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />One of their core beliefs is that God alone saves and He saves His children with or without them hearing the Gospel in this life.

I absolutely embrace that statement. There are probably hundreds of threads in the Cal/Arminian forum on why we believe that. I can elaborate if anyone cares, but I suspect that most here could care less what we believe. We believe preaching of the gospel is to bring life and immortality to light. It all goes to the order of salvation, which comes first regeneration or faith. We believe regeneration comes first and faith is a gift of God, given to those regenerated.

HankD And that is probably all I have to say about the subject.</font>[/QUOTE]IMHO this belief is directly refuted in Romans 10.

Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
Rom 10:15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
Rom 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
Rom 10:17 So then faith [cometh] by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

 

[Mercury]

Why did you stop short of quoting verse 18, in which Paul states that all have heard, because the testimony from the heavens (Psalm 19:1-4) has reached everyone?

 

[Paul33]

All have heard, so no one is without excuse!

But it still takes hearing to come to faith in Christ!

The hypothetical question, "What about those who have never heard?" is irrelevant! Everyone HAS heard!

Those who hear and believe are saved.Those who hear and disbelieve are lost. Not that complicated after all.

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Originally posted by Mercury:
Why did you stop short of quoting verse 18, in which Paul states that all have heard, because the testimony from the heavens (Psalm 19:1-4) has reached everyone?

You're correct in that verse 18 is pertinent to the discussion. However, if you look at that verse and at Psa 19:1-4, I think you'll agree that the quality of the knowledge concerning salvation obtained through nature alone is much less specific and not as useful for salvation.

Certainly, looking up at a beautiful night sky makes a lost person feel as if there's a greater power out there somewhere but the connection isn't made until they hear and accept the gospel message.

If that weren't the case, why would Jesus make this final command to His deciples?

Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

 

[Paul33]

Good point.

It seems to me that those who recognize and understand God as creator will "hear" the gospel message.

Those who reject the God as creator may not hear the gospel.

But we must still hear the gospel message and repent in order to be saved. And the content of that gospel is Jesus Christ.

 

[Plain Old Bill]

Again. Jn14:6