{Christian Theology Question} Ascending into Heaven in Christianity

[SkA_DaRk_Che]

In the bible, it often maintains that to get into heaven you have to worship and revere Jesus. John 14:6 ESV / 4 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. Romans 10:9 ESV / 3 helpful votes Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. So now that it is established that according to Christian beliefs, one must worship Jesus to get into heaven, I ask why? The God of the bible is frequently characterized by its believers as being Omnipotent. According to the Encarta World English dictionary, Omnipotent is defined as - all-powerful: possessing complete, unlimited, or universal power and authority So, the position that Christians maintain is that for one to get into Heaven, one must worship Jesus and ask him for forgiveness. Christians acknowledge that a person can lead a moral life, but all people sin, and the penalty for sinning is to be shunned from entry into the "Kingdom of God". However, why would it be necessary to outright ask Jesus/God for forgiveness if God is by his very nature omnipotent? Consider that God is omnipotent, he does not need a direct plea for forgiveness. If a person is Moral and yet at the same time non Christian then it follows that if this person commits a wrong he will be regret his actions, be truly sorry for his actions, and most importantly he will try and make amends for his wrong doings in one way or another. So, if an Omnipotent God truly knows what lies in the hearts of his subjects (man kind), if he knows that they truly regret and make amends for their wrong doings; why does he demand to be worshiped and asked for forgiveness? Surely, if a person regrets and makes amends for their wrong doing they are as worthy as a believer who commits wrongs, yet makes no amends save for asking God for forgiveness? Therefore, he would not need a direct request for forgiveness because he can judge a person's character in whole. He doesn't need to be plead to. Consider these two extreme examples. A) This person is moral, he does his best not to slight others, he acknowledges and regrets that he has committed wrong doings in the past. Yet he does his best to be accountable and make amends for his past shortcomings. However, he is a non-Christian. B) This man is a serial rapist and killer. He has no regrets, however he is sentenced to die by lethal injection. Although, during his whole life of murder and rape he has no remorse, now that he is facing his own mortality he makes a bargain with God. He asks for forgiveness in return for ascension into heaven. According to accepted Christian theology, the man in example A would be denied entry into heaven, while the main in example B would be permitted entry based on him asking for forgiveness and repenting (to God) at the last minute. However, asking for forgiveness is not necessary simply because God already knows, by his omnipotent nature, what is in a person's heart. Why does he require a person to directly worship him and ask for forgiveness when he already knows whether a human being is truly repentant for their actions, and has taken steps to make amends and be accountable? Why is he so specific and so strict when he knows that such unrealistic terms will surely condemn millions of good people to hell?

[juroara]

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." FORGET EVERYTHING Christianity has told you. Let's just use our heads, and just look at the actual language being presented to us. How about we start simply by pointing out what phrases are NOT in this phrase? Here are some words that are not mentioned in Jesus ever famous phrase 1. HEAVEN! Wait a minute, heaven isn't even mentioned? That's right, heaven is not mentioned. 2. Enter or ascending into heaven. Jesus doesn't mention entering or ascending to anything. 3. Belief or faith. Jesus does not mention the necessity to believe in him. 4. The cross. Nor does Jesus mention the necessity to believe that he died on a cross for your sins so that you may "enter heaven" NONE OF THAT IS IN THERE!! NONE OF IT!!! So what is mentioned? Jesus says we can only come to the Father through him. First let's look at this action, "through" Jesus. What does "through" Jesus mean? Obviously Christianity has equated this to mean through Jesus sacrifice on the cross. In other words, unless you believe Jesus died for you, you're going to hell!! But is that what "through" Jesus really means? The answer is in the first part. Reread it! Everyone! "I am the way, and the truth, and the life" All you have to do now is just substitute Jesus with what he says he is. How do we come to the Father? 1. Through the WAY 2. Through the TRUTH and 3. Through the LIFE Think about that for a moment. It has NOTHING to do with worshiping a human being who died on cross. You don't even have to worship God! It's not in there! None of what Christianity stands for is in Jesus coded message. And btw, it's in the bible, Jesus admits to speaking in a coded language - an eastern practice. When we understand that the only way to the Father is through the Way, the Truth, and the Life, we start to realize this has nothing to do with a religious practice. No. It's a way of being, a way of living, a way of doing. Jesus did not give us a "free ride to heaven". No. He is saying we must be just like him!! Does this mean if we are "less than perfect" we go to hell? After all, Jesus was so brave and most agree he was very loving. Not many people feel they can measure up to Jesus. And if we don't live up to Jesus standard, does this mean we don't get to go to heaven? No no no you see it doesn't work that way. It's for this reason that Jesus does not even mention entering heaven. Because you can not enter heaven anyways. Why can't you enter heaven? It's very simple, heaven is not a magical place in the sky you can 'enter' into. As Jesus explains in his next famous quote: HEAVEN IS WITHIN YOU!! Take famous quote one and famous quote two - and what does heaven become??? Not a magical place in the sky - BUT A STATE OF BEING!!! This state of being has many names. Take for example the Tao has the same definition of Christ, the Tao is the way, the truth and the life. I call this state of being the Christ Consciousness. It's all there! In the bible! If you know where to look and can read through the distortion of the apostles who didn't get it! Jesus PRAYS that we become One with God. It's one of the last chapters of the Gospel, and there you'll find his prayer that we all become One with God. So he doesn't believe that he alone is meant to be One with God - that's a lie created by the Church. No no. Jesus believes EVERYONE and ANYONE can become One with God. To further illustrate this belief that heaven is a state of being where we are One with God, Jesus says more, a lot more. Another famous quote of his is where he explains that just as God is in him, and he is in God, so to is he (Jesus) within you. And if Jesus is within you, and God is within Jesus, where does this place God? And if God is in Heaven, and Heaven is WITHIN YOU, where does this place God? it's been what, 2000 years? Can't we for once accept what Jesus actually taught? Forget the lies of the Church. Jesus is more buddhist than the Church will ever accept. And what about his mission on the earth? You can say that Jesus true mission on the earth was to illustrate that death is an illusion.

[Darkmatters]

Juroara

[J.D.]

That was one awesome post, Juroara!

[Speesh]

Agreed. Those who are anti-Christianity tend to overlook the fact that there's just as many profoundly good messages in there as bad ones. The gospels are indeed full of valuable wisdom. Its amazing how the church has come to embody such awful conservative values. They've perverted Jesus' message into something that can be at times truly grotesque. I guess these bad things tend to happen when people take a book too seriously.

[SkA_DaRk_Che]

Forget the lies of the Church. Jesus is more buddhist than the Church will ever accept. . Great post. I have heard this theory in the past but never have I read such a well thought out post illustrating this POV until now. I never thought of it that way, but it makes sense when you look at it. I might even read the parts of the new testament that detail Jesus's life now.

[spockman]

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." FORGET EVERYTHING Christianity has told you. Let's just use our heads, and just look at the actual language being presented to us. How about we start simply by pointing out what phrases are NOT in this phrase? Here are some words that are not mentioned in Jesus ever famous phrase 1. HEAVEN! Wait a minute, heaven isn't even mentioned? That's right, heaven is not mentioned. 2. Enter or ascending into heaven. Jesus doesn't mention entering or ascending to anything. 3. Belief or faith. Jesus does not mention the necessity to believe in him. 4. The cross. Nor does Jesus mention the necessity to believe that he died on a cross for your sins so that you may "enter heaven" NONE OF THAT IS IN THERE!! NONE OF IT!!! So what is mentioned? Jesus says we can only come to the Father through him. First let's look at this action, "through" Jesus. What does "through" Jesus mean? Obviously Christianity has equated this to mean through Jesus sacrifice on the cross. In other words, unless you believe Jesus died for you, you're going to hell!! But is that what "through" Jesus really means? The answer is in the first part. Reread it! Everyone! "I am the way, and the truth, and the life" All you have to do now is just substitute Jesus with what he says he is. How do we come to the Father? 1. Through the WAY 2. Through the TRUTH and 3. Through the LIFE Think about that for a moment. It has NOTHING to do with worshiping a human being who died on cross. You don't even have to worship God! It's not in there! None of what Christianity stands for is in Jesus coded message. And btw, it's in the bible, Jesus admits to speaking in a coded language - an eastern practice. When we understand that the only way to the Father is through the Way, the Truth, and the Life, we start to realize this has nothing to do with a religious practice. No. It's a way of being, a way of living, a way of doing. Jesus did not give us a "free ride to heaven". No. He is saying we must be just like him!! Does this mean if we are "less than perfect" we go to hell? After all, Jesus was so brave and most agree he was very loving. Not many people feel they can measure up to Jesus. And if we don't live up to Jesus standard, does this mean we don't get to go to heaven? No no no you see it doesn't work that way. It's for this reason that Jesus does not even mention entering heaven. Because you can not enter heaven anyways. Why can't you enter heaven? It's very simple, heaven is not a magical place in the sky you can 'enter' into. As Jesus explains in his next famous quote: HEAVEN IS WITHIN YOU!! Take famous quote one and famous quote two - and what does heaven become??? Not a magical place in the sky - BUT A STATE OF BEING!!! This state of being has many names. Take for example the Tao has the same definition of Christ, the Tao is the way, the truth and the life. I call this state of being the Christ Consciousness. It's all there! In the bible! If you know where to look and can read through the distortion of the apostles who didn't get it! Jesus PRAYS that we become One with God. It's one of the last chapters of the Gospel, and there you'll find his prayer that we all become One with God. So he doesn't believe that he alone is meant to be One with God - that's a lie created by the Church. No no. Jesus believes EVERYONE and ANYONE can become One with God. To further illustrate this belief that heaven is a state of being where we are One with God, Jesus says more, a lot more. Another famous quote of his is where he explains that just as God is in him, and he is in God, so to is he (Jesus) within you. And if Jesus is within you, and God is within Jesus, where does this place God? And if God is in Heaven, and Heaven is WITHIN YOU, where does this place God? it's been what, 2000 years? Can't we for once accept what Jesus actually taught? Forget the lies of the Church. Jesus is more buddhist than the Church will ever accept. And what about his mission on the earth? You can say that Jesus true mission on the earth was to illustrate that death is an illusion. Interesting post, j. But when you say 'It's not in there' do you mean in the Bible or in the verses you qouted? Because the idea that Christianity is the onyl way into heaven is all throughout the Bible. If you want examples I can give you a bundle. As far as the 'would the rapist go to heaven?' well... I am in no condition to say he's damned. But faith without works is dead. and Not all who sya to me Lord, Lord will enter paradise and Many will be surprised on that day (the day of judgment.) There's more like those as well. On the other hand, salvation is subjective. It is written I will save whomever I will save (in the context of allowing gentiles not just Jews into paradise.) Also, To whom much is given, much will be expected. to whom little is given, little will be expected. I actually agree that heaven is a state of being. After all, outside of the temporal realm, we wouldn't have heavenly experiences but simply be in God's glory. And if hell is the absence of God, it would likely be ceasing to exist. But that last part is speculation.

[Olysseus]

The problem with discussing Christianity with both adherents and opponents is that the modern churches are teaching a degenerate shadow of the original teaching. The adherents are promoting this degenerate view and the opponents are ridiculing it (successfully I might add), but neither side gets us any closer to understanding the mysterious language of the source texts of early Christianity. Like most television-viewing Americans, few Christians even read their bibles anymore (Yes, I know this is a generalization and I know there are exceptions, but the point is that trends happening in society as a whole affect the church as well.) The ones that do read, read modernized versions that are less objective than even the King James Version. Modern evangelicals also expressly teach that Christ's teachings were not important compared to his death and resurrection, so there is not a deep interest in actually looking at what he preached, so much as the historical trivia surrounding his life. I know someone will disagree with me about this, but very few preachers will really talk about Christ's actual teachings and the higher law Christ proposes from the pulpit. The point being that there is very little inquiry into the meaning of Christ's actual teachings. I grew up in the church and began reading the bible at about age 11. I have stopped too many churchfolk in mid-conversation by showing them verses they never knew existed. Their inevitable response is to claim you cannot use one verse to decide what is true, but they will say this even about ideas that are repeated multiple times. I always offer to show them more verses but they decline and go away telling me I need to believe what their pastor or their bible study leader tells them. Anyhow I began reading the bible aloud a few years ago and I began to notice how many new ideas popped out at me. I realized that the bible was actually meant to be read this way (out loud). There are a number of verses that really turn mainstream orthodoxy on its head. For example Isaiah 45:7 claims God creates both good and evil. Quite frankly, I like a God that takes responsibility like that, but most folk just ignore this verse. There are also a number of similarities between Christ and Buddha. For example, both fasted and meditated 40 days and were tempted three times before starting their ministry. John's gospel does not leave time for this event to happen at all, suggesting it was not a literal occurance but rather a symbol. Why would early Christians use Buddhist symbology to represent Christ's development? Each person may have a different answer but my point is that Christianity (and Judaism as well for that matter) did not develop in a vacuum - there are numerous examples in the scriptures of symbols taken from other traditions. So I think it is safe to conclude that those who wrote the Bible were validating those traditions. Early Christians were not afraid of other paths. This alone signals that the outer form of Christianity is not the only way. Christ said that he did not come to close any doors but only to open a new one. The idea of heaven is tricky. It is clear that Christ did not merely view it as a location, because he said that the kingdom of heaven is within you (some translations read among you.) It is also not true that the Bible teaches you must pray and accept Jesus into your heart to experience heaven. The bible does teach that following laws and rules cannot get one into heaven because following laws without a higher understanding of their purpose is mere automation. In Mathew's gospel Christ postulated in the sermon on the mount (which I believe can be taken as representing the essence of Christianity in a nutshell) that one needed to be perfect to enter heaven. He says this at the beginning and the end of his sermon, showing a well-thought out and coherent thesis. He does not say that if you pray to him, God will treat you as if you were perfect. Rather he says that perfection does not come through outer deeds (otherwise there would be no hope at all) but through an inner attitude that is beyond our ordinary awareness. The laws of earlier times were given so that humanity would be aware that it was missing this inner attitude. Christ gives numerous examples of how the law is less important than the inner attitude and then concludes by saying that his followers will in fact become perfect (which is translated as being merciful in Mark's gospel.) If you want to come to grips with Christianity, forget everything the churches tell you and meditate on the sermon on the mount. Christ's idea is developed throughout the New Testament as the concept of the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law. Following the outer rite is only important if one does it for the right purpose (e.g kindness, compassion, desire to become godly.) The ultimate consequence of this is that once one has the inner attitude of Christ, one naturally begins to conduct oneself so purely that one's good works are noticeable and one naturally fullfills the law. This idea is the one Churchgoers always disagree with because they are uncomfortable with it. However the new testament is virtually saturated with the idea that Christ's true followers are in fact perfect. Nowhere does it claim they are viewed by God as if they were perfect (although I am aware that there are verses that can be twisted to mean this). Once you understand Christ's teaching that this is an inner perfection rather than an outer one then you can understand that being perfect does not mean someone never makes a mistake. Rather it means their inner spirit is perfect because it is fulfilling its divine purpose. So now this post has gone on too long. I had some extra time on my hands and the topic interests me. Thanks for reading and I'll put in another post that has some of those bible citations that refute the idea that Christians are merely viewed by God as if they were perfect.

[Darkmatters]

A perfect post. And perhaps ironically (Or maybe not) while reading what you wrote I kept thinking about Castaneda's ideas (don Juan's ideas... ) about Impeccability... very similar to Christ's views on perfection. Veeery interesting....

[Olysseus]

. And perhaps ironically (Or maybe not) while reading what you wrote I kept thinking about Castaneda's ideas (don Juan's ideas... ) about Impeccability... very similar to Christ's views on perfection. Veeery interesting.... Yes.. very astute to compare Castaneda's ideas about impeccability to Christ's idea of perfection. I read Castaneda in my late teens/early twenties. For a while I thought it totally negated my Christian background. But once I began to drop my belief that the bible was a historical document and just look at it mythologically, I found-to my surprise-that the bible was illustrating some pretty enlightened concepts. Like the myth of Jesus chasing the moneychangers out of the temple. Whether it actually happened historically is not relevant to me. It really means that one has to get the greedy impulses out of one's mind before one can experience the sacred. The idea is that one cannot approach spirituality like a moneychanger, one can't say: "If I do x, I will receive y as a reward." I think this is exactly the point Castaneda was making as well.

[Darkmatters]

Ironically, Im currently reading Castaneda's Second Ring of Power, and just two nights ago I read a part where one of don Juan's acolytes apprentices said that a priest or nun is essentially exactly the same as a sorcerer... learning to see through the ordinary world of surface appearances to see the more mysterious world underneath where miracles happen.

[spockman]

The problem with discussing Christianity with both adherents and opponents is that the modern churches are teaching a degenerate shadow of the original teaching. The adherents are promoting this degenerate view and the opponents are ridiculing it (successfully I might add), but neither side gets us any closer to understanding the mysterious language of the source texts of early Christianity. Like most television-viewing Americans, few Christians even read their bibles anymore (Yes, I know this is a generalization and I know there are exceptions, but the point is that trends happening in society as a whole affect the church as well.) 1 The ones that do read, read modernized versions that are less objective than even the King James Version. Modern evangelicals also expressly teach that Christ's teachings were not important compared to his death and resurrection, so there is not a deep interest in actually looking at what he preached, so much as the historical trivia surrounding his life. I know someone will disagree with me about this, but very few preachers will really talk about Christ's actual teachings and the higher law Christ proposes from the pulpit. The point being that there is very little inquiry into the meaning of Christ's actual teachings. I grew up in the church and began reading the bible at about age 11. I have stopped too many churchfolk in mid-conversation by showing them verses they never knew existed. Their inevitable response is to claim you cannot use one verse to decide what is true, but they will say this even about ideas that are repeated multiple times. I always offer to show them more verses but they decline and go away telling me 2 I need to believe what their pastor or their bible study leader tells them. Anyhow I began reading the bible aloud a few years ago and I began to notice how many new ideas popped out at me. I realized that the bible was actually meant to be read this way (out loud). There are a number of verses that really turn mainstream orthodoxy on its head. For example 3 Isaiah 45:7 claims God creates both good and evil. Quite frankly, I like a God that takes responsibility like that, but most folk just ignore this verse. There are also a number of similarities between Christ and Buddha. For example, both fasted and meditated 40 days and were tempted three times before starting their ministry. John's gospel does not leave time for this event to happen at all, suggesting it was not a literal occurance but rather a symbol. Why would early Christians use Buddhist symbology to represent Christ's development? Each person may have a different answer but my point is that Christianity (and Judaism as well for that matter) did not develop in a vacuum - there are numerous examples in the scriptures of symbols taken from other traditions. 4 So I think it is safe to conclude that those who wrote the Bible were validating those traditions. Early Christians were not afraid of other paths. This alone signals that the outer form of Christianity is not the only way. Christ said that he did not come to close any doors but only to open a new one. The idea of heaven is tricky. It is clear that Christ did not merely view it as a location, because he said that the kingdom of heaven is within you (some translations read among you.) 5 It is also not true that the Bible teaches you must pray and accept Jesus into your heart to experience heaven. The bible does teach that following laws and rules cannot get one into heaven because following laws without a higher understanding of their purpose is mere automation. In Mathew's gospel Christ postulated in the sermon on the mount (which I believe can be taken as representing the essence of Christianity in a nutshell) that one needed to be perfect to enter heaven. He says this at the beginning and the end of his sermon, showing a well-thought out and coherent thesis. He does not say that if you pray to him, God will treat you as if you were perfect. Rather he says that perfection does not come through outer deeds (otherwise there would be no hope at all) but through an inner attitude that is beyond our ordinary awareness. The laws of earlier times were given so that humanity would be aware that it was missing this inner attitude. Christ gives numerous examples of how the law is less important than the inner attitude and then concludes by saying that his followers will in fact become perfect (which is translated as being merciful in Mark's gospel.) If you want to come to grips with Christianity, forget everything the churches tell you and meditate on the sermon on the mount. Christ's idea is developed throughout the New Testament as the concept of the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law. Following the outer rite is only important if one does it for the right purpose (e.g kindness, compassion, desire to become godly.) 6 The ultimate consequence of this is that once one has the inner attitude of Christ, one naturally begins to conduct oneself so purely that one's good works are noticeable and one naturally fullfills the law. This idea is the one Churchgoers always disagree with because they are uncomfortable with it. However the new testament is virtually saturated with the idea that Christ's true followers are in fact perfect. 7 Nowhere does it claim they are viewed by God as if they were perfect (although I am aware that there are verses that can be twisted to mean this). Once you understand Christ's teaching that this is an inner perfection rather than an outer one then you can understand that being perfect does not mean someone never makes a mistake. Rather it means their inner spirit is perfect because it is fulfilling its divine purpose. So now this post has gone on too long. I had some extra time on my hands and the topic interests me. Thanks for reading and I'll put in another post that has some of those bible citations that refute the idea that Christians are merely viewed by God as if they were perfect. 1. I actually trust the NIV more than King James, personally. 2.Agh! I hate that. What about 'seek out your own salvation with fear and trembling' or Pauls writings on the Division of the church in Corinthians? 3. Or in Exodus 9, where Pharoah was raised up by God for a purpose. Or in Romans 9. God has the right to raise some for noble and others for ignoble uses. 4. Eh, I highly disagree with that interpretation. You mentioned the sermon on the mount. This is where Christ states that narrow is the gate leading to righteousness and wide the gate to destruction. Also, in Matthew 7, 'Only he who does the will of my father in heaven' reaches paradise. And the Bible, especially the pentatude is extremely clear that only one religion has the whole truth. Analogies to other faiths is not the same as confirming them as truth. There is only one truth. If you disagree I would be very interested in seeing the scripture to back it up. 5. You are right that salvation criterion is not a solid doctorine. Most assuredly salvation is subjective for each person. 'To whom much has been given much will be expected, to whom little has been given little will be expected,' yeah? However, criterion for being a brother or sister in Christ while on this Earth is spelled out for us. If I may, what is the root of the gospel of the second covenant? What does it begin with? 6. That's interesting. I'll have to research that. 7. But the Lord does forget our sins. That's all throughout Hebrews.

[juroara]

4. Eh, I highly disagree with that interpretation. You mentioned the sermon on the mount. This is where Christ states that narrow is the gate leading to righteousness and wide the gate to destruction. Also, in Matthew 7, 'Only he who does the will of my father in heaven' reaches paradise. And the Bible, especially the pentatude is extremely clear that only one religion has the whole truth. Analogies to other faiths is not the same as confirming them as truth. There is only one truth. If you disagree I would be very interested in seeing the scripture to back it up. Hello! I'm back to ramble! There are two questions you need to ask yourself 1. What is the will of thy Father? And the reason why I am asking this of you is because you are some how inferring that the Fathers will is to somehow join an outer religion. To join Christianity. When Christianity in the form it is today didn't even exist when Jesus walked the earth. Its also very interesting that Jesus would say that his will is his Fathers will. And you can read this statement in two ways. That Jesus has some how given up free will, and asks you to do the same, in essence be the mindless sheep who attend sunday mass. Or, that by knowing your true self, that by knowing your true will, you know the Fathers will - because they are one and the same. I believe its the latter, because Jesus shows a lot of personality in his teachings. Like showing his own personal anger. Or showing his preference to pray and worship in nature rather than in a man made building. His actions make me believe that Jesus was following his own conviction, and NOT preconceived ideas of what the Fathers will is or isn't 2. Exactly which religion does Jesus testify contains the only truth? I ask which religion does Jesus testify to contain the only truth, because I make a clear distinction between the words of Jesus and the words of his followers. Why? Don't forget the founder of the Christian religion denied Christ three times. That's why. If you want to know what Jesus true message is all about, you need to ignore the interpretations of his followers that didn't get him. I agree with Olysseus. Christianity DID NOT EXIST in the form it does today when Jesus walked the earth. And early Christianity was so vastly different it would be unrecognizable. Early Christians did not believe in a centralized religious power. No early christian would have ever allowed for there to be a Pope, let alone a hierarchy of priests. Several early christians adopted the philosophy that they can be JUST LIKE JESUS, that is, that Jesus is NOT special, but rather an example of what all humans can become. One day Rome decided it would use Christianity to instill power. For this it needed a Pope. It needed a hierarchy, and it needed people to believe that the Church was the only key and entry way into heaven. The new centralized Roman Catholic Church created the belief that Church is the only way into heaven by editing what should and what should not be a part of the bible. And by naming those who did not believe in the need for an OUTER church HERETICS. These heretics were murdered. Their own holy texts concerning the life and teachings of Jesus were almost entirely destroyed. Except for a few texts that laid secret for hundreds of years. When we rediscovered these holy texts about the teachings of Jesus, they were a bombshell!!! They showed a Jesus speaking in Koans. Now Koans are a zen buddhist practice. Because Koans are so specifically a buddhist practice at this time in history, it has led many historians to believe that Jesus came in contact with buddhists. And many historians believe this took place in that strange missing gap of Jesus life in the bible. And it was only AFTER Jesus returns from this missing time period does he profess to be One with God. Before that, he just obviously frustrated with religious dogma. Koans can not be taken literally, it is a way of speaking that is meant to confuse the logical mind, so that you go past the logical mind and dig deeper. Given that these other holy texts not in the bible illustrate Jesus speaking in Koans, and Jesus in the bible admitting to speaking in rhymes - the true Jesus is begging you to read between the lines!! And to NOT take him so literally. It is intentional that it is hard to find the true messages of Jesus life and teachings. The bible was manipulated to be used as a tool of power by the Roman empire. Manipulation required that truth of Jesus needed to be withhold. Right now the vatican is withholding from the world historical, cultural and religious documents within their archives, that not even the average catholic is allowed to read or know about. Why? Why does a church need to withhold holy text from its own followers? Unless these holy texts would make the followers question the validity of the church. I for one think its a crime for the vatican to do this. These texts would still be a part of our human history and culture, and the lies need to end.

[Darkmatters]

Joroara for Pope!!! Except for a few texts that laid secret for hundreds of years What texts are those? Dead Sea scrolls?

[acatalephobic]

His actions make me believe that Jesus was following his own conviction, and NOT preconceived ideas of what the Fathers will is or isn't. It is intentional that it is hard to find the true messages of Jesus life and teachings. The bible was manipulated to be used as a tool of power by the Roman empire. Manipulation required that truth of Jesus needed to be withhold. Why does a church need to withhold holy text from its own followers? Unless these holy texts would make the followers question the validity of the church. I for one think its a crime for the vatican to do this. These texts would still be a part of our human history and culture, and the lies need to end. Personally, I think that the vatican is looking at this extremely backasswardly. It seems like they assume that witholding archival information is what will preserve their position of power, but in reality the simple act in and of itself is what is causing so many to deny them said position. In a way I look at is as a crime against humanity, but I also feel like it is evidence to those seeking truth that what they may feel instinctually about the church is in fact a reality. Jesus the man was important for exactly the reasons you mentioned and more, in my humble opinion. And there was a reason he positioned himself in a way that opposed the religious authority of his own place and time. The way the vatican treats uncannonized text is proof point blank to those seeking to understand his true importance [and therefore potentially their own]: the way is not through the church, or some external physical heaven, but through themselves and through seeking truth. ...That just doesn't happen to make a good marketing strategy for those looking to extend a centuries-old moral and political position of international authority. p.s. - your posts are so wonderfully insightful. they warm my heart and give me goosiebumps.

[Dannon Oneironaut]

I heard that the true translation would be closer to "I am all ways. All ways are mine. Nobody arrives at the Kingdom of God except through me." Rome never fell. It is the Vatican today. The same Pagan Roman empire that occupied Jerusalem is now in the same business as the Vatican. Just because a book says that it is true doesn't mean that it is true. Especially when it was edited and fabricated by politicians. The Church is full of politicians. Jesus in fact did go to India. It is recorded in India that he came, studied with the Hindu Brahmans and mastered all their teachings and techniques and then he preached to them the shortcomings of their way. It is recorded that he studied with the Buddhists and he mastered their teachings. But he didn't preach to them, I think he agreed with them. It is then recorded that he left. This is when he returned to Greece. He studied and taught in Greece and then he studied in Alexandria in Egypt, which was the center of enlightened intellectual thought. All the best greek philosophers studied in Alexandria. Then Jesus went to the Pyramids and mastered the mystical teachings there and passed the tests. It was the Egyptians who annointed him and named him the Christ. But he was not the only Christ according to the Egyptians. It is an Egyptian term. Christ also studied with the Essenes and the Gnostics. The original Christians were Gnostic. They believed that Jesus was a Man who came to liberate us from JHVH who was a demiurge. The gnostics believed that YHVH and Satan were the same and that Christ came to liberate Sophia (the Goddess of Wisdom) who was locked up by JHVH and to enlighten Satan. Lucifer is Satan's enlightened aspect. Anyway, the early Gnostics had no organized belief system but it was open to individual interpretation. Myself, i think that Jesus was just a Master who was pretty sympathetic to the Buddhist worldview. His sayings like : "Resist not Evil" "Love your enemy as you love yourself" "When someone strikes you turn the other cheek" "If someone asks you for your shirt off your back give it to him" "consider the lillies and the birds, they have no thoughts for tomorrow" "Instead of seeing the beam in an other's eye, get rid of the moat in thine own eye." "If thine eye is single, thy body will be filled with light" "Unless you become like little children, thou will not enter the Kingdom of God" (In the Gospel of thomas which is considered the closest words to the historical Jesus he says "Unless you take off all your clothes and throw them on the ground and dance on them like little children, thou will not enter the kingdom of God") These are sayings are so different than the Hebrew teachings. there is a discontinuity. It is like Jesus brought Buddhism. Which is not so hard to concieve. All the Greek philosophers were influenced by Buddhism at that time. as far as one religion having the whole truth, that religion is not Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Taoism, Zorostrianism, Sihkism, Jainism, Muslim, but the true religion that inspired all the Buddhas, prophets, and founders of these little religions. These people actually didn't start these religions but their followers started the religion after them. The one true religion is hidden behind all these religions. these religions are curtains over the one window of the true religion. Look at the window and you will see the curtain but look behind the curtain and look out the window to know the truth.

[juroara]

Joroara for Pope!!! I do like funny hats What texts are those? Dead Sea scrolls? Yes! Its too bad so many pages are missing or damaged. Ive wanted to read all of Magdalenes gospel p.s. - your posts are so wonderfully insightful. they warm my heart and give me goosiebumps I'm just glad you agree about the Vatican. Sometimes I wonder what would happen if people did demand in massive numbers for the Vatican to open up its archives. . . . . . . would they just burn everything instead? I heard that the true translation would be closer to "I am all ways. All ways are mine Ohh interesting. I remember reading certain quotes in middle school that made me rethink Jesus. But this new bible my parents just randomly got from some stranger, seems to be missing things I remembered reading. Kind of. . . important things. It was a bit disturbing actually.

[Olysseus]

Thanks for your considerate reply. There are some people that would be uncomfortable with what I said and you expressed your disagreement respectfully. Props to you. That said, we will simply have to agree to disagree on some things for the time being. 1. I actually trust the NIV more than King James, personally. Glad you found a version you liked. I am partial to the KJV simply because I am a little weird and like Shakespearian English. But I did not mean to imply that KJV is the best translation or even a great translation, only that all translations are the work of humans. There is no need to convince everyone that any English translation is all good. There is no need to believe that all the details of the bible have been innerrantly handed down because when you read the bible you can still see a common thread running from Genesis to Revelation. All you need to do is understand what that common thread is. My larger point is that people should not rely on hearsay to determine what Christianity consists of. They should look at the source texts themselves (not the details, but the common threads). Otherwise we all wind up running in circles, trying to explain the words of everyone who ever claimed to be a Christian. This applies to me as well of course. I don't intend to convert anyone to my way of experience. 4. Eh, I highly disagree with that interpretation. You mentioned the sermon on the mount. This is where Christ states that narrow is the gate leading to righteousness and wide the gate to destruction. Also, in Matthew 7, 'Only he who does the will of my father in heaven' reaches paradise. And the Bible, especially the pentatude is extremely clear that only one religion has the whole truth. Analogies to other faiths is not the same as confirming them as truth. There is only one truth. If you disagree I would be very interested in seeing the scripture to back it up. Yes, the gate is narrow, it requires nothing less than a complete change of thinking, which by the way, is the correct translation of the word metanoia, incorrectly translated (even in the NIV) as repentance. The pentateuch teaches that one should have no other God before the highest. It does not matter what name you call God; if you worship the Jehovah of the Pentateuch and give more thought to your own sense of self- worth than to the absolute, than you are putting another god in place of the absolute. Actually I think Christ's position would be that no religion has the whole truth. All religious beliefs and actions are futile until one has found the inner spirit that believes and acts without expectation of future material reward. This is part of what got Christ crucified; people couldn't handle that level of "metanoia" . 5. You are right that salvation criterion is not a solid doctorine. Most assuredly salvation is subjective for each person. 'To whom much has been given much will be expected, to whom little has been given little will be expected,' yeah? However, criterion for being a brother or sister in Christ while on this Earth is spelled out for us. If I may, what is the root of the gospel of the second covenant? What does it begin with? I also find the verse you referenced very interesting; I would think it backs my position. The criterion for being a Christian is literally to be Christ-like. I would not call myself a Christian for this reason. I am a student of Christ. As to your second question, what is your motive is for asking it? Is it a genuine inquiry coming from a heartfelt search? Or is it an insincere question because you wish to give me your answer? Answers to such big ideas can only be understood when there is a genuine heartfelt search. That's why Christ said "seek and you shall find"; the spirit of genuine inquiry is always necessary for growth. The gospel of the second covenant can be understood from Psalms 40:8-10 - "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire; my ears you have opened: burnt offering and sin offering you did not require. Then I said, Behold I come: in the scroll of the book it is written of me. I delight to do your will, O my God, your law is within my heart." 6. That's interesting. I'll have to research that. I'll post my research so you have a reason to see what verses I'm looking at. Again, unless someone is genuinely interested it won't be useful to them 7. But the Lord does forget our sins. That's all throughout Hebrews. Yes, We have to understand that we have sinned (Literally meaning we have missed the mark) and that there is a way to be free from sin. This does not mean that we are free from the consequences of sin, but are refined gradually, with the end that we will be perfected in an objective sense. The Eastern Orthodox church still emphasizes this. Hebrews also emphasizes that once we have begun to awake to the inner spirit, we must move on towards perfection. Hebrews 6:1, 11:40, 13:21 and others hint at this.

[Olysseus]

A few years ago I compiled some bible verses that I think diverge from the mainstream teachings of the church. I debated whether to post those here, because I think they stray from the OP a little, but decided someone might be interested. Again, if you quote any of these to someone determined to believe differently, they will just tell you that you can't take any one verse alone to decide what is true. The point is, don't use these to start arguments. Usually it isn't worth it, I know from experience. People have to understand things in their own time. Anyhow the OP asked how it is possible that someone who lives terribly to just pray to Jesus and be "saved." It is a good question to ask when you encounter someone who believes this. But there are other ways to look at the whole question. First, the bible does say that true Christians are in fact perfect (not merely perfect in God's sight, but objectively perfect in a way that their good works shine to outside observers.) The good works do not earn them a place in heaven but are done as a result of their inner desire to live in connection with a higher spiritual law. Obviously, there are very few people who can live this way, just as there are very few Buddhists who become a Buddha. I posted some of these as excerpts, but I am confident that if you look them up, you will find that I haven't taken anything out of context. None of these alone prove anything, it is only when taken together that they have meaning. (my comments are in parenthesis) Mathew 5:15 - I say unto you, that except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the scribes and the pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. (Yes the church teaches that this should be interpreted to mean that we can become righteous by belief in Jesus. However if you continue reading the sermon, Jesus not only says nothing of the sort, but gives numerous examples to show that righteousness comes from one's inner state and not one's outer adherance to a belief.) Mathew 5:48 - Therefore you shall be perfect as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. (The end of the sermon above - the word perfect is recorded as merciful in Luke's gospel (Luke 6:36), which gives a shorter version of the same sermon. This suggests that this was not an impossible demand but a practical experience.) John 5:29 - All that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth, they that have done good unto the resurrection of life and they that have done evil into the resurrection of damnation. (No loopholes made for people who pray for forgiveness here) Romans 2:6 (God) - who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: But unto them that are contentious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish. Mathew 16:27 - The son of man shall come in the glory of his father with his angels and then he shall reward every man according to his works. 2 Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. (Note Paul is talking directly to Christians here) Col 3:25 - But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect towards persons. Gal 6:7 - Be not decieved, God is not mocked for whatsoever a man sows, that shall he reap. (Again there is no loophole here.) 1 Cor 3:13 - Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire and the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he built upon he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. (this verse is a radical departure from the traditional understanding of hell. The "fires" of hell are here pictured as a purifying factor, not an eternal punishment.) Just in case someone uses the "one verse" argument to the above: Isaiah 33:14(2nd half)-15 - ...Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? Who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings? He that walketh Righteously and speaketh uprightly; he that depiseth the gain of oppression, that shakes his hands from holding of bribes... So we can see that the bible holds everyone accountable for their actions. So what does it mean to be a Christian? The bible speaks openly about an inner perfection. I will be the first to admit I don't fully understand it but I think anyone can experience it if they are open to such an idea. 2 Cor 3:18 - But we all with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the lord are changed into the same image from glory to glory... 2 Cor 13:11 - Finally brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace, and the God of love and peace shall be with you. 1 Cor 15:34 - Awake to righteousness and sin not. For some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame. (Again he is speaking directly to Christians here. Not unbelievers.) Gal 3:3 - Are you so foolish having begun in the spirit are you now made perfect in the flesh? (This verse is very important because it sets the whole tone for the book of Galations which is often used by pastors to prove that faith is all that matters and not actions. However if you read closer between the lines the author is saying that through faith one's inner being becomes perfect. Gal 5:5 - For we through the spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. (See above - Of course this verse is interpreted radically different by the church. They say faith makes Christians as if they were righteous. I believe inner faith brings us into direct experience with a pre-existing spiritual perfection that does not belong to any one individual.) Eph 2:10 - For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. (Again an important verse, simply because churchgoers love to quote the preceding verses 2:8-9 which says that grace cannot be obtained by good works but only by faith. However, this verse expands on that to show that the result of true faith is good works. Complicated I know ) Eph 4:11-12 (excerpt) ...some evangelists, and some pastors, and teachers. For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ. Col 1:22 -Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus. 1 thes 3:10 (excerpt) ...that we might see your face and might perfect that which is lacking in your faith? 1 Thes 3 :13 (excerpt)- ...To the end that he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God... 1 Tim 2:19 (excerpt) - The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. (If one has not departed from iniquity we can conclude that one does not know God better than anyone else. See John 2:3 below.) 1 Tim 3:16-17 - But all scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. (It is hard to believe but churchgoers will only quote the first half of this and never the second half. Talk about ignoring context. Also a very important verse that is constantly quoted by the church. On this verse they claim that the bible must be interpreted literally, which is more than what is being said.) Titus - This short book is saturated with the idea that Christ's followers attain good works and live godly in this present world (verse 2:12). Other verses backing this up are 1:15-16, 2:14, 3:1, 3:8, 3:14 (Verses 3:5-6 on the other hand are the only ones the mainstream church uses from Titus. Those particular verses assert that Christ did not appear because of any good works done by Christians. However, the larger context is that once one truly knows Christ, one's actions will be Christlike.) Hebrews 6:1 (excerpt)- Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection... Hebrews 7:19 - For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing of a better hope did, by the which we draw night unto God. (Why was the first covenant replaced? - Answer: It did not make its followers perfect.) (Hebrews 10:1 -5 also expand on the above) (See my previous post for more from Hebrews.) James 2:17 - Even so faith, if it hath not works is dead, being alone. & James 2 :22 - Seest though how faith wrought with with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? (James is a brilliant masterpiece and a good starting point for those interested in learning about the New Testament letters. However, almost every Churchgoer is familiar with the above two verses and will have some, often convoluted, explanation about how to interpret them according to church doctrine.) 1 Peter 5:10 (excerpt) But the God of all grace who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that you have suffered for a while, make you perfect, stablish strengthen and settle you. 2 Peter 1 :4 (excerpt) Whereby are given to us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these you might be partakers of the divine nature... The Book of John (John 1: 8 -10 Seems to back up the mainstream view but it is asserting that all of us have sinned in the past and must confess our incompleteness in order to ever become whole again. Once we are whole, John expands on the idea in verse2:1 and the other verses below) John 2:1 My little Children, these things I write to you that you sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. John 2:3 And hereby do we know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. John 3:6 Whosoever abides in him sins not: Whosoever sins hath not seen him neither known him. (So much for the idea that Christians know God better merely because they believe in him.) John 3:9 Whosoever is born of God does not commit sin, for his seed remains in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. (See also John 4:17-21(as God is so are Christians in the present world) see also John 5:18 and 3John verse 11) A couple other relevant verses are: Mark 9:40 - For he that is not against us is on our part. (Important because the church loves to quote the verse in Mathew where Christ says that anyone who is not for him is against him. But in Mark, we see Christ is saying the reverse as well. So Mathew's verse cannot be interpreted as damning anyone who doesn't actively practice Christianity.) Matthew Chapter 25 contains Christ's parables about who will enter the kingdom of God and who will not. There is no mention of mainstream church doctrines but only illustrations about actions that come from an inner attitude adjustment. Of course Christ also tells his disciples to just believe and be saved, but he continually expands on what it means to actually believe in terms of objective, observable effects. Finally Matthew 7:21 - Not every one that says unto me, Lord, Lord shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. So the mainstream church's doctrine does not add up, either logically or from biblical scholarship. This may seem like a lot for one post, but I have been compiling this list for a few years because I have many relatives that pressure me to go to their church. I have found that the only way out is through - I worked to understand what is behind their beliefs and how to understand it at a higher level. Only after seriously considering the question for years have I learned to disarm those contentious evangelicals in a polite and respectful way. They still go away saying they'll pray for me, and I smile and say thanks, because I can use all the prayer I can get. But again, I wouldn't recommend trying to use any of this to change someone else's mind, you'll just get bogged down into an argument and it's not worth it. I hope I haven't come across as saying everyone needs to understand these verse the way I do. I just hope to show that even the standard, church-sanctioned bible contains enough paradoxical verses to show that Christ and his ideas are too big to be contained by any one organization. What is it to be perfect? That's the question that Christ refused to answer except in parables and symbols. He know that any direct answer would cause people to just follow a set of rules without questioning (well actually that happened anyway, but that's another issue.) Only when the question is approached with a genuine spirit of inquiry, will an answer come. Seek and you shall find.

[spockman]

Thanks for your considerate reply. There are some people that would be uncomfortable with what I said and you expressed your disagreement respectfully. Props to you. That said, we will simply have to agree to disagree on some things for the time being. Glad you found a version you liked. I am partial to the KJV simply because I am a little weird and like Shakespearian English. But I did not mean to imply that KJV is the best translation or even a great translation, only that all translations are the work of humans. There is no need to convince everyone that any English translation is all good. 1.) There is no need to believe that all the details of the bible have been innerrantly handed down because when you read the bible you can still see a common thread running from Genesis to Revelation. All you need to do is understand what that common thread is. My larger point is that people should not rely on hearsay to determine what Christianity consists of. 2.) They should look at the source texts themselves (not the details, but the common threads). Otherwise we all wind up running in circles, trying to explain the words of everyone who ever claimed to be a Christian. This applies to me as well of course. I don't intend to convert anyone to my way of experience. Yes, the gate is narrow, it requires nothing less than a complete change of thinking, which by the way, is the correct translation of the word metanoia, incorrectly translated (even in the NIV) as repentance. The pentateuch teaches that one should have no other God before the highest. It does not matter what name you call God; if you worship the Jehovah of the Pentateuch and give more thought to your own sense of self- worth than to the absolute, than you are putting another god in place of the absolute. Actually I think Christ's position would be that no religion has the whole truth. All religious beliefs and actions are futile until one has found the inner spirit that believes and acts without expectation of future material reward. This is part of what got Christ crucified; people couldn't handle that level of "metanoia" . 3.) I also find the verse you referenced very interesting; I would think it backs my position. The criterion for being a Christian is literally to be Christ-like. I would not call myself a Christian for this reason. I am a student of Christ. 4.) As to your second question, what is your motive is for asking it? Is it a genuine inquiry coming from a heartfelt search? Or is it an insincere question because you wish to give me your answer? Answers to such big ideas can only be understood when there is a genuine heartfelt search. That's why Christ said "seek and you shall find"; the spirit of genuine inquiry is always necessary for growth. 5.) The gospel of the second covenant can be understood from Psalms 40:8-10 - "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire; my ears you have opened: burnt offering and sin offering you did not require. Then I said, Behold I come: in the scroll of the book it is written of me. I delight to do your will, O my God, your law is within my heart." 6.) I'll post my research so you have a reason to see what verses I'm looking at. Again, unless someone is genuinely interested it won't be useful to them Yes, We have to understand that we have sinned (Literally meaning we have missed the mark) and that there is a way to be free from sin. This does not mean that we are free from the consequences of sin, but are refined gradually, with the end that we will be perfected in an objective sense. The Eastern Orthodox church still emphasizes this. Hebrews also emphasizes that once we have begun to awake to the inner spirit, we must move on towards perfection. Hebrews 6:1, 11:40, 13:21 and others hint at this. 1.) I have seen too many of the smallest details in the Torah turn out to be allegories to the Gospels to discount even the small details as being divine. However, the idea of common threads is one of those concepts which is at the heart of how I study the Bible. So I can agree with you there. 2.) While I do find great value in the individual ideas and details in the Bible, I agree with at least the general sentiment of this thread. 3.) I intended for it to show why I support part of your point. In that salvation is subjective, I more than agree with you. 4.) Different schools of Christian based thought give different answers. Peter, Christ, and John the Baptist are the most common answers. I believe it to be John, based on the writings of Mark, however knowing where you think the root of the Gospel, (or Christ's teachings,) comes from will help me understand where you are coming from. I am a scriptoral Christian/Messianich Jew. That's where I'm coming from. 5.) I find this Psalm to have a similar message to Matthew 23. The spirit of the law is more important than the letter. 6.) I look forward to it. To J and to your second post Olysseus, I look forward to responding to when I can devote some time to it.

[Idolfan]

These verses are compatable with Christianity. The worshippers of the skygods just need to use a bit of common sense, which they have never been too good at. Obviously, John and Paul are just EMPHASISING that Jesus' way is CORRECT. I really don't think if I was a Christian that it would be anything to do with Jesus HIMSELF, it is his WAY that is important. I know this does not apply if the scriptures are taken literally, my point is that the people who wrote the bible were fallable human beings, so what they have written might not be true even if the Christian God is real.

[davej]

B) This man is a serial rapist and killer. He has no regrets, however he is sentenced to die by lethal injection. Although, during his whole life of murder and rape he has no remorse, now that he is facing his own mortality he makes a bargain with God. He asks for forgiveness in return for ascension into heaven. I have not read through all the posts so if this was mentioned, please forgive me. Man B would not get into Heaven because it sounds as if he was not sincere. God does not bargain or make deals either. The only reason the man repented was to save himself from Hell, not because he loves God and wants to turn from his sins and wants a stronger relationship with God. Becoming a Christians is not a simple forgive me God now I have a get out of Hell free card. You must have a desire to grow closer to him.

[really]

Haha, exactly Davej! Serial killing and rape has nothing to do with Jesus - The Way, The Truth and The Life. If anything, these deeds take one away from Heaven. A) This person is moral, he does his best not to slight others, he acknowledges and regrets that he has committed wrong doings in the past. Yet he does his best to be accountable and make amends for his past shortcomings. However, he is a non-Christian. Whether he is a Christian or not says nothing more than his religious preference. Like the power of Love: "The Way, The Truth and The Life" is not restricted to religion.