Rev. Erudite Redneck, B.S., B.S., M.A., M.Div.

Official answer:
The world was already condemned by original sin. An individual's faith in Jesus transfers that individuals sin to Christ, and he/she is there by "saved" from said sin. Christ then becomes the substitute sacrifice for the animal sacrifice that was once required for the expiation of an individual's sin.
It is all Eve's fault for disobeying God and eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge. That act of disobediance is the source of original sin. Thus it is "woman kind" who has condemned the world, and it takes the sacrifice of a "son of man and of the male God" to save it.
 

Official answers don't do much for me. ... Hmm. I think that's way too much detail for a trumpeter.

I think the Good News is closer to:

YOU ARE SAVED. (Details to come). Now, repent (which means, basically: "Change your mind.")

The old hymn has it just about right:


We have heard the joyful sound: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Spread the tidings all around: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Bear the news to every land, climb the mountains, cross the waves;

Onward! ’tis our Lord’s command; Jesus saves! Jesus saves!


Waft it on the rolling tide: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Tell to sinners far and wide: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Sing, you islands of the sea; echo back, you ocean caves;

Earth shall keep her jubilee: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!


Sing above the battle strife: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

By His death and endless life Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Shout it brightly through the gloom, when the heart for mercy craves;

Sing in triumph o’er the tomb: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!


Give the winds a mighty voice: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Let the nations now rejoice: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!

Shout salvation full and free; highest hills and deepest caves;

This our song of victory: Jesus saves! Jesus saves!


SHOUT SALVATION, FULL AND FREE!
 

Were they servin' doobies at your church this mornin'?
 

Nope. But -- no lie -- the lay worship leader set a boom box on the lectern and played Depeche Mode's "Personal Jesus" as the lead-in to taking the collection.
 

Nick,

If one believes in a higher power and has a love for what God offers, who are we to judge?

Here's my take, so take it for what you wish: I'm not at all Catholic, don't believe in many of the thoughts of Catholicism, don't care to learn why they pray to Mary, don't appreciate the constant overwhelming nature of ritual, believe the Rosary is a sin, etc.

But my bride was raised Catholic, and her parents are beyond the norm in their involvement in the church. Her father has condemned relatives who left the Catholic faith to find comfort in their Christianity.

For my wife, the rituals help her find comfort in her Christianity, and I firmly believe she's one Catholic who is a Christian. Most, in my opinion, are Catholics and don't care to be Christian. Just give 'em Mass and a Hail Mary or two, and they're good a gold.

Anyway, because my wife finds comfort in the Catholic Church and because she wants to maintain a good relationship with her folks and, with that, wants to raise our children Catholic, I have agreed to go along with it, given that I will also help raise the children to be more Christian.

With that, I must find another way to develop my spirituality, and I've asked my beautiful wife to comprimise some. I've asked that we attend a Catholic Church where the priest actually says something that lifts me spiritually and doesn't just recite Mass week after week.

So, Nick, my point is, if one can find comfort in God through a piece of dung -- as I'm still finding comfort in God despite cult-like mumbles and prayers to Mary -- who are we to criticize?

My love for Christ Jesus does not change. My growth as a Christian is taking an alternate route, but that doesn't mean it's the wrong path.
 

Just because they are our enemies, doesn't mean they are God's enemies.

Who am I to condemn someone because I don't like em? I am as much a sinner as they are.

Incedently, the world wasn't condemned by orignal sin. Humans were.

I don''t know how God works, I just hope I meet him when I die.
 

ER you didn't tell me about the doobies. I might have shown up if I'd know about that kind of participatory communion.

Love the hymn.

Jim r has a point, "Incedently, the world wasn't condemned by orignal sin. Humans were."
As the Jewish Messiah, Jesus would have been here to save "the world" not provided salvation to individuals. It is a complex theological story, but the early Christian Church at Jerusalem was not based on the same concept of "salvation" that the First Baptist Church in Century 21st of Any How Town does. (nor the local Catholic church either). Now in the mixed bag of the Paulian religion, the Jewishness of Jesus is simply dismissed and over-ridden by a new theology, one more akin to the older Mystery Religions of the Middle East that provide for a personal savior and freedom to follow him.

I have always been partial to John 3:14-15

"Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life."

In the wilderness the people of Israel were bitchin so loud that God sent snakes to bite and kill them as retribution for their lack of faith that He, God, could take care of them. Moses interceeded for them with God in prayer. God relented and said raise up a brass serpent (some version use a plural) on a rod and those that look up on it will be healed and not die of the bites from the snakes I have sent to plague and kill them because they are behaving badly.

So doesn't John 3: 14-15 kinda negate what is claimed in John 3:17?

Didn't God send (like the snakes) the need for salvation in the first place?
Or do we travel the loop back to Eden the Tree of Knowledge He planted there and the Fall and original sin "for the world"?

By the way when is the last time you saw two snakes on a rod that delt with healing?
 

Oh my, how could I have forgotten the most important point. Please forgive me.

In the earliest hard copy versions of the Gospel of John that are known, the third chapter of John ends with verse 15. Some textual critics and translators see verses 16 through 21 as a latter addition to the book. Wouldn't that be a kicker?
 

drlobojo said: "It is all Eve's fault"

Not so. It is not ALL Eve's fault. Their eye's weren't opened to their nakedness until AFTER Adam ate. When God came to the garden He called out to Adam, not Eve. Adam was God's steward, not Eve. Eve sinned first, but it was Adam's sin that doomed all of mankind. After all, God made Eve from a rib bone taken from Adam's side... He could have easily done so again, had Adam not sinned as well... It is not Woman's fault, it is Man's.

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned..." Romans 5:12

"For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous." Romans 5:19

If Eve's sin had been THE sin that doomed all mankind, would not verse 19 read better if it were a woman whose obedience made many righteous? That's twisted logic, I agree, but the argument that 'man' in these verses is used as non-gender doesn't wash when we know it was one 'man' (Jesus) whose obedience made salvation possible (not assured) for the 'MANY'-- which IS non-gender, and not indicative of 'ALL'.

I further find it convenient that when it comes to portions of scripture deemed offensive, bible critics like to use the hackneyed argument that offending portions are probably additions to the original and therefore not to be trusted, or accepted. And how convenient that the very verses which state the conditional nature of salvation falls into the "probably additions to the original" category. Convenient indeed... Especially since the pivotal verse 16 is also included in the "PAttO" claim.

ER-- As to John 3:17, I think you discount the word 'might'. The world might be saved... if they "shalt confess with [their] mouth[s] the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in [their] heart[s] that God hath raised him from the dead, [they] shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." --Romans 10:9-10. That's one blatant condition.
 

I'm a big fan of Andy Griffith, too. My favorite Aunt Bee quote, "You can't put the milk back in the cow!"

But that aside, one caveat that I'd offer to what you're saying ER, which I think I mostly agree with, is that we are free to choose to NOT be with Jesus. God doesn't make anyone go to heaven.

So, some folk who believe in THEIR Jesus (a warmongering, hateful, greedy Jesus) may get to a heaven where there are no rich nor poor, where we love our neighbors (and enemies), where people "not like us" are, and decide, "THAT's not what heaven is!" and stomp off to their own personal Idaho.

And God will allow that.

With that caveat, I'm sorta okay with the notion of one God that wants everyone to come to his party and we're all invited and can come as long as we don't say, "No thanks."

There is a story in the Bible that Jesus tells of two brothers. They were given a direction by their father and one side, "Yes, Daddy!" and promptly did not follow the direction. The other said, "No, I won't do as you ask." but did, in fact, go do as he was asked.

Jesus asked his followers the rhetorical, "Which brother did as he was told?", the answer to which is obvious to most of us not brought up evangical or fundamentalist (or who've since recovered).
 

Evangelical.
 

E.A. said, "...I further find it convenient that when it comes to portions of scripture deemed offensive, bible critics like to use the hackneyed argument that offending portions are probably additions to the original and therefore not to be trusted, or accepted."

The trouble with that point is that these are not "critics" of the "Bible", in most instances they are Bibical Christian Scholars. They are "Textual Critics" which is a specific theological discipline within the the realm of the Roman Church as well as non-catholic denominations.
The specific critique I mentioned came from the foot notes in the New International Version of the Bible as shown at http://www.biblegateway.com/
hardly a radical anti-Bible source.

Of course if you worship a wood pulp idol carved on by a thousand scribes as the sole source of truth, then it won't matter.
 

D.A. Said:"So, some folk who believe in THEIR Jesus (a warmongering, hateful, greedy Jesus) may get to a heaven where there are no rich nor poor, where we love our neighbors (and enemies), where people "not like us" are, and decide, "THAT's not what heaven is!" and stomp off to their own personal Idaho.
And God will allow that.
With that caveat, I'm sorta okay with the notion of one God that wants everyone to come to his party and we're all invited and can come as long as we don't say, "No thanks."

Amen to the above.
We can have as much of Heaven as we can tolerate. The Kingdom of Heaven is here and now. Only "now" touches eternity, and only "now" ever will. What you make of Heaven "Now" is what you will make of Heaven forever, regardless of how much Heaven there may be that you can not access because of you own chice.

E.A. seems to beleive that women don't matter in the scheme of God's comos. Thir sins don't really matter. Actually that is very Old Testament and Paulian, but not hardly Christ like.

Besides, think on the possibility that the "Male" concept of "Original Sin" might be simply an attack on the Female Diety that had ruled for over 25,000 years on earth by that time.

OH yes, and as some of you may already know, I don't buy into the "official answer" that I gave in the first post.
 

AOL just ate a lengthy comment I wrote in respjnse to y'allses' above. I can't stand it.

Good discussion. Important one. Maybe later I'll try to reconstruct my thoughts. In the meantime: %)&%%$)!
 

Shew fly....he's dead
 

Who? Moi?

I have dedicated the afternoon to cleaning my home office. It's a kind of archeological dig. I can now see parts of the floor and I can tell there is a couch in here.

Onward and upward ...

When I get it to where I can actually touch all four walls, I'll take a break.

In the meantime, anyone interested can go read a review of the book, "Eternity in Their Hearts." I read it when it was new in 1981, when I was a junior-senior in high school, and I confess it has shaped my thinking ever since:

http://christdot.org/
modules.php?name=News&file=
article&sid=1715
 

How about a still life of your clean office? ;)
 

Wish I could be an universalist, but I am not for the same reason I can not be a Calvanist.

Both force people to believe against their "will." (And for the Calvins out there I know the response, but je ne le souscrit.)
 

Free will does appear to negate the possibility of universal salvation.

But: Every knee shall bow, and eveyr tongue confess, that Jesus Christ is Lord. Right?

How's that, then? Either some knees will be coerced, which would violate free will, or all will be saved, either through enlightnment or from being overwhelemed by the Godness of God?

Or what? And I'm really asking. Coercion or overwhelmingness of God? Or something else?

Oh and quite that cussing. ;-) Translate yerself, bubba!
 

ER said : "But: Every knee shall bow, and eveyr tongue confess, that Jesus Christ is Lord. Right?"

Snake bites will do'er. Is that coercion?

I mean, if you show everybody some miracle. Some will think it's a trick. If you show everybody the glory of heaven, some will think, "but I can't be in charge of anything there". Some won't bow out of cussedness. Some won't bow out of selfisness. But snake bites worked on everyone in the wilderness, and Jesus himself says he will have to be lifted up like the brass serpent. Why? Snake bites brother!
 

The quiz no one took:
"By the way when is the last time you saw two snakes on a rod that delt with healing?"

Answer: Probably within the last week or so, if you went to a hospital, a doctor,or a pharmasist.

It was a Caduceus.
 

In answer to your last question (What is the Good News), I'll stick with Jesus' definition:

"I've come to bring

Good news to the poor
Liberty to the captive
Healing for the sick
The Year of Jubilee!"

[roughly quoted]
 

And now the rest of the story:
Luke 14-30 "....in order to throw him down..."

"Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. 15He taught in their synagogues, and everyone praised him.
16He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. And he stood up to read. 17The scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:
18"The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to release the oppressed,
19to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."[e]

20Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him, 21and he began by saying to them, "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing."

22All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips. "Isn't this Joseph's son?" they asked.

23Jesus said to them, "Surely you will quote this proverb to me: 'Physician, heal yourself! Do here in your hometown what we have heard that you did in Capernaum.' "

24"I tell you the truth," he continued, "no prophet is accepted in his hometown. 25I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah's time, when the sky was shut for three and a half years and there was a severe famine throughout the land. 26Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them, but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon. 27And there were many in Israel with leprosy[f] in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed—only Naaman the Syrian."

28All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this.

29They got up, drove him out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him down the cliff. 30But he walked right through the crowd and went on his way."
 

Did they want to kill him because he brought a pardon to others?
In Mosiac law, each fiftieth year was to be celebrated as a jubilee year, and that at this season every household should recover its absent members, the land return to its former owners, the Hebrew slaves be set free, and debts be remitted. I was a year of remission, a year of pardon....Was the good news that it was for others? as well as them? Was it for everybody?
Pleased at first the Nazareens, marveled at Jesus. When they found out that he didn't mean them or just them, then they wanted to throw him off a cliff.
They hadn't been snake bit yet.
 

ER,

Good questions.
Now the possibility of all coming around, that MAY be a little different.

If every knee bows and every tongue confesses, it could be by either coercision or overwhelmingness. The means I do not know. If by force, free will will not necessarily have been breeched. They chose not to follow God, but they at some point recognize they should have. They will bow the knee (of their own free will possibly) at what they should have chosen.

Hey, if I can't cuss in French, how am I going to do it? Then, I can't say, "Pardon my French." Hahaha

Translation of previous written text: "I am not buying it".

Going to be away for a few, so if you don't hear from me, you'll know why