Christianity is false because it contradicts itself.

[RyanP]

"But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live." --Ezekiel 18:21-22

We are justified by our behavior.

"For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith." --Romans 3:28-30

We are justified by faith in Jesus Christ.

[Skyler]

You lost me with the analogy. Let me try to restate what you said without the circle and cone analogy.

Yes. Taken as a standalone statement, Ezekiel is wrong. Salvation because of works is not a salvation by faith.

However, taken in the larger context of Scripture as a whole, the truth of his perspective becomes clear: Salvation by faith does appear as salvation because of works, from one perspective; that's a fundamental part of salvation by faith. But, it doesn't mean the salvation by faith is salvation because of works. Neither does it mean that it is contradictory to say that one person sees salvation because of works, while the other sees it as salvation by faith. It's simply a different perspective.

That seems about right to me. Go on.

[onefaith]

"But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live." --Ezekiel 18:21-22

We are justified by our behavior.

"For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith." --Romans 3:28-30

We are justified by faith in Jesus Christ.

The first quote was from the OT

The second was from the NT.

OT - man was cleansed from sin by sacrificing a lamb or another animal in their place, and by turning from that sin and doing good instead. NT - Jesus died so that we could be saved without us having to slaughter an animal, and we are still saved even if we sin. In the first quote, yes, that is how people were justified. In the second quote, which is from the new testament after Jesus died, the 'rules' for justification were changed. Now, it's not good deeds that save a person; it's having faith in Jesus. The second one is easier too. Does that change between the OT and the NT mean that the bible contradicts itself? No.

[Goat]

One of my favorite analogies, from the Christian perspective, is the fruit of the Spirit. They aren't "requirements" to maintain the Christian life, because it's impossible for fallen man to conform to them at all times. Rather, they are the "fruits" that grow when one is walking with the Spirit. It's the same thing with works--they're "fruits" that grow from the state of having faith.

Then Ezekiel would be wrong to claim that salvation is Because of the righteous things he has done. Right? Ol' Zeke has it backwards. The righteous do what they do because they are saved.

Yes. Taken as a standalone statement, Ezekiel is wrong. A circle is not a cone.

However, taken in the larger context of Scripture as a whole, the truth of his perspective becomes clear: A cone does, in fact, appear circular, from beneath; that's a fundamental part of being a cone. But, it doesn't mean the cone is a circle. Neither does it mean that it is contradictory to say that one person sees it as a circle, while the other sees it as a triangle. It's simply a different perspective.

Or, it could be that Paul just didn't understand where God is coming from, and got messed up with Mithraism, not Judaism. Mithraism (the Persian form, not the Roman form) was the primary religion of Tarsus in the 1st Century.

[Skyler]

*snip*

Yes. Taken as a standalone statement, Ezekiel is wrong. A circle is not a cone.

However, taken in the larger context of Scripture as a whole, the truth of his perspective becomes clear: A cone does, in fact, appear circular, from beneath; that's a fundamental part of being a cone. But, it doesn't mean the cone is a circle. Neither does it mean that it is contradictory to say that one person sees it as a circle, while the other sees it as a triangle. It's simply a different perspective.

Or, it could be that Paul just didn't understand where God is coming from, and got messed up with Mithraism, not Judaism. Mithraism (the Persian form, not the Roman form) was the primary religion of Tarsus in the 1st Century.

Can you please describe for me how this pertains to Mithraism? I'm not familiar with the subject.

[Goat]

*snip*

Yes. Taken as a standalone statement, Ezekiel is wrong. A circle is not a cone.

However, taken in the larger context of Scripture as a whole, the truth of his perspective becomes clear: A cone does, in fact, appear circular, from beneath; that's a fundamental part of being a cone. But, it doesn't mean the cone is a circle. Neither does it mean that it is contradictory to say that one person sees it as a circle, while the other sees it as a triangle. It's simply a different perspective.

Or, it could be that Paul just didn't understand where God is coming from, and got messed up with Mithraism, not Judaism. Mithraism (the Persian form, not the Roman form) was the primary religion of Tarsus in the 1st Century.

Can you please describe for me how this pertains to Mithraism? I'm not familiar with the subject.

Much of the concepts that are different from Judaism in Christianity comes from other religions. One religion that has been compared for a variety of different reasons is Mithraism.

Paul came from Tarsus. During the 1st Century, there were very few Jews in Tarsus. However, it WAS a major hub for the Persian version of Mithraism.
Some of the concepts about 'salvation' are similar to Mithraism, and one of the concepts that diverge from Judaism. Paul's attitudes were shaped by where he grew up.

[Goose]

Paul came from Tarsus. During the 1st Century, there were very few Jews in Tarsus. However, it WAS a major hub for the Persian version of Mithraism.
Some of the concepts about 'salvation' are similar to Mithraism, and one of the concepts that diverge from Judaism. Paul's attitudes were shaped by where he grew up.

What are the pre-Christian sources for Mithraism that show there is a similarity in salvation?

[Goat]

Paul came from Tarsus. During the 1st Century, there were very few Jews in Tarsus. However, it WAS a major hub for the Persian version of Mithraism.
Some of the concepts about 'salvation' are similar to Mithraism, and one of the concepts that diverge from Judaism. Paul's attitudes were shaped by where he grew up.

What are the pre-Christian sources for Mithraism that show there is a similarity in salvation?

The Gathis, written between 600 and 300 bc.

However, I suspect that the Chrisitan Salvation was more influenced as a counter point to the Cult of Augustus, which used the exact same terminology in Latin, but dated from 30 bce.

[Goose]

Paul came from Tarsus. During the 1st Century, there were very few Jews in Tarsus. However, it WAS a major hub for the Persian version of Mithraism.
Some of the concepts about 'salvation' are similar to Mithraism, and one of the concepts that diverge from Judaism. Paul's attitudes were shaped by where he grew up.

What are the pre-Christian sources for Mithraism that show there is a similarity in salvation?

The Gathis, written between 600 and 300 bc.

Quote and reference the passage.

However, I suspect that the Chrisitan Salvation was more influenced as a counter point to the Cult of Augustus, which used the exact same terminology in Latin, but dated from 30 bce.

Quote and reference the passage. Your suspicians along with your feelings are not evidence.

[Goat]

Paul came from Tarsus. During the 1st Century, there were very few Jews in Tarsus. However, it WAS a major hub for the Persian version of Mithraism.
Some of the concepts about 'salvation' are similar to Mithraism, and one of the concepts that diverge from Judaism. Paul's attitudes were shaped by where he grew up.

What are the pre-Christian sources for Mithraism that show there is a similarity in salvation?

The Gathis, written between 600 and 300 bc.

Quote and reference the passage.

However, I suspect that the Chrisitan Salvation was more influenced as a counter point to the Cult of Augustus, which used the exact same terminology in Latin, but dated from 30 bce.

Quote and reference the passage. Your suspicians along with your feelings are not evidence.

Here is a christian source that discusses it

http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/ar ... icleId=388

As far as Mithra and salavation. look at Yasna, 53

Yasna 53

Verse 1:
Every wish of the prophet Zarathushtra Spitama have been fulfilled in the best possible manner and
Ahura Mazda, the Lord of Life and Wisdom, has granted him the best blessings, i.e. a happy,
prosperous and holy life through all Eternity. Even those who have opposed him have learnt to pay
him reverence and follow the good religion in every word and action.
Verse 2:
So, let all strive with thought, word and deed to satisfy Mazda. Let each one choose to perform good
deeds as his worship. Kavi Vishtaspa, the faithful devotee of Zoroaster together with Maidyo-Mah
and Frashaoshtra are treading the path of Truth and have chosen the Faith inspired and revealed by
the Saoshyant (1), or the Savior of Mankind, taught by Ahura.

[TMMaria]

"But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live." --Ezekiel 18:21-22

We are justified by our behavior.

"For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith." --Romans 3:28-30

We are justified by faith in Jesus Christ.

Justified by faith means it isn't your own works that won you salvation; no one's righteousness is good enough to transcendent to God's level of sanctification...but instead it is thanks to Jesus' works of resurrection, His incarnation, His dwelling amongst us, His death, His resurrection in perfect obedience to the Father's perfect counsel....that we would have merits to the Sanctifier, God's Holy Spirit and Giver of the Sanctifying Grace that was lost due to original sin, who make us "justified" and sanctified before God.

However, your own works and righteousness shall justify whether your faith is but a dead faith or a faith lived out in collaboration, in unity with Jesus's. So yes, our works and behavior is just as important in our own personal salvation...Jesus's works is but a gift to us. When it comes to creatures of free will such as mankind, God does not impose but observes our right to accept this gift or not...our attitudes toward goodness, our attitudes toward Jesus express in actions, thoughts, deeds signify our acceptance or denial of God's gift.


When we accept God's gift of salvation, the consolation is despite the best of intentions and will to live life as God calls us, we will still fall short and where we fall short Jesus's shall fill in to justify us before God. That's why, Jesus died for all of mankind living before His time on earth, during, and after.