Is it possible to be saved but not be a disciple of Christ?

[OnceConvinced]

In another thread:

No to a) and b) for the Christian faith. Selling one's possessions and/or abandoning all earthly pursuits is not a direct requirement for "salvation."

How do you interpret this scripture?:
Luk 14:33 "So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be My disciple."

Is it possible to be saved but not a disciple of Christ?

Of course.

I know there are many Christians out there who believe that all it takes to be a Christian is to accept Christ as your savior and nothing else. However there is a lot of fine print in the bible that expects a lot more than just that and when people like myself say I am no longer a Christian there are a lot of excuses given by Christians as to why I was not a true Christian to begin with. It seems that just accepting Christ as your savior is not enough to be considered a "true Christian".

So can one be saved and not be a disciple of Christ?
Is it possible to have salvation without following Christ and doing what he says we should be doing?
If I accepted Christ as my savior and was "saved", now that I am an ex-Christian, and no longer a follower of Christ, am I still saved?
Please justify your answers.

[Goose]

In another thread:

No to a) and b) for the Christian faith. Selling one's possessions and/or abandoning all earthly pursuits is not a direct requirement for "salvation."

How do you interpret this scripture?:
Luk 14:33 "So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be My disciple."

Is it possible to be saved but not a disciple of Christ?

Of course.

I know there are many Christians out there who believe that all it takes to be a Christian is to accept Christ as your savior and nothing else. However there is a lot of fine print in the bible that expects a lot more than just that and when people like myself say I am no longer a Christian there are a lot of excuses given by Christians as to why I was not a true Christian to begin with. It seems that just accepting Christ as your savior is not enough to be considered a "true Christian".

So can one be saved and not be a disciple of Christ?
Is it possible to have salvation without following Christ and doing what he says we should be doing?
If I accepted Christ as my savior and was "saved", now that I am an ex-Christian, and no longer a follower of Christ, am I still saved?
Please justify your answers.

Let's look at Luke 23:39-43

Now one of the criminals hanging there kept insulting him, saying, "You are the Christ, aren't you? Save yourself and us!" But the other one rebuked him, saying, "Aren't you afraid of God, since you are suffering the same penalty? We have been condemned justly, for we are getting what we deserve for our deeds, but this man has done nothing wrong." Then he went on to say, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom!" Jesus said to him, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise."

This is one of clear cut cases in the NT where we are told in no uncertain terms that a person has been granted paradise by Jesus.

The criminal :
1) Begins with a fear of God
2) Acknowledges he has commited wrong deeds and justly deserves punishment
3) Asks Jesus to remember him
4) Acknowledges that the heavenly kingdom is Jesus'. In other words, believes Jesus is more than a mere man.

In an instant the man is granted salvation depsite the fact he has done things bad enough to wind up on a cross. The criminal has no time become a disciple or to accomplish any good works to pay for his sin. He is saved by belief and grace.

[OnceConvinced]

Let's look at Luke 23:39-43

Now one of the criminals hanging there kept insulting him, saying, "You are the Christ, aren't you? Save yourself and us!" But the other one rebuked him, saying, "Aren't you afraid of God, since you are suffering the same penalty? We have been condemned justly, for we are getting what we deserve for our deeds, but this man has done nothing wrong." Then he went on to say, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom!" Jesus said to him, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise."

This is one of clear cut cases in the NT where we are told in no uncertain terms that a person has been granted paradise by Jesus.

The criminal :
1) Begins with a fear of God
2) Acknowledges he has commited wrong deeds and justly deserves punishment
3) Asks Jesus to remember him
4) Acknowledges that the heavenly kingdom is Jesus'. In other words, believes Jesus is more than a mere man.

In an instant the man is granted salvation depsite the fact he has done things bad enough to wind up on a cross. The criminal has no time become a disciple or to accomplish any good works to pay for his sin. He is saved by belief and grace.

But you see, the fact that he has no time to be a disciple is the key factor in this scenario. This is a special situation where the man accepts Christ just before his death. How can he be expected to be a disciple when he's on the verge of death? Would it be fair for Christ to condemn him when he hasn't even had the opportunity to be a disciple? This man didn't have the benefit of lots of people preaching about Christ to him, nor did he have the NT to instruct him on how he must live a Christian life either. You might even say this guy is an even more special situation than any other man since then who has repented on his death bed.

For most people the acceptance of Christ comes a long time before their death, so you cannot really compare. The scenario you have given there is at the extreme end of the scale, so can't really be applied to everyone.

At the other end of the scale we have babies and children who are below the age of understanding and are not going to go to Hell for their sins (or so most Christians believe). But yet the rules state we must accept Christ as our personal savior. So we have two scenarios at the extreme ends fo the scale here. One, the beginning of life, facing death, where kids are automatically saved without having the chance to be Christ's desciple and we have a man who has lived a long time, facing death who is not going to have a chance to be Christ's disciple. They are not your typical scenarios and as such cannot be used across the board when deciding who is saved and who is unsaved.

So in summary. A man facing death is a very extreme circumstance so you cannot apply the same rules to him as you do to every other human being.

[OnceConvinced]

I fully understand the whole idea of grace, which God would be showing in both those extreme situations. I understand that it's God's grace that saves us and that works are not what is important. However a disciple is a follower and to be a disciple of someone you make them your teacher. To become "born again" you are actually becoming a disciple of Christ. So to say "I'm a Christian, I've been born again" and saying "I'm not a disciple of Christ" is a contradiction. To say "I'm a Christian", but then to refuse to follow his example and his teachings makes it clear you're not really a Christian at all. It's like saying I'm a bus driver and refusing to drive buses or saying I'm a chef but refusing to do any cooking. So if someone is not really a Christian, how can they be saved?

[Goose]

But you see, the fact that he has no time to be a disciple is the key factor in this scenario. This is a special situation where the man accepts Christ just before his death. How can he be expected to be a disciple when he's on the verge of death? Would it be fair for Christ to condemn him when he hasn't even had the opportunity to be a disciple? This man didn't have the benefit of lots of people preaching about Christ to him, no did he have the NT to instruct him on how he must live a Christian life either. You might even say this guy is an even more special situation than any other man since then who has repented on his death bed.

You asked if one needs to be a disciple to be saved. I've given you a clear cut example that shows, no, one does not. If you wish to dismiss this as merely a "special situation" then I think some of the burden now falls on you to show, from scripture, why the normal process for salvation necessarily requires one to be a disciple in order to be saved. Please specify the correct amount of time one must be a disciple and how one determines the correct amount of knowledge one must have attained to qualify for salvation. I think these would be important questions to answer. I'll await your case for this.

For most people the acceptance of Christ comes a long time before their death, so you cannot really compare. The scenario you have given there is at the extreme end of the scale, so can't really be applied to everyone.

What about all the people that followed the same pattern of this criminal near the end of their life. Are they saved? Sure they are.

At the other end of the scale we have babies and children who are below the age of understanding and are not going to go to Hell for their sins (or so most Christians believe). But yet the rules state we must accept Christ as our personal savior. So we have two scenarios at the extreme ends fo the scale here. One, the beginning of life, where kids are automatically saved without having the chance to be Christ's desciple and we have a man who is facing death who is not going to have a chance to be Christ's disciple. They are not your typical scenarios and as such cannot be used across the board when deciding who is saved and who is unsaved.

Hold on. Children are not subject to the requirements for salvation because they have not reached the age of accountability. This makes sense and is just. Being too young to be a disciple has nothing to do with it.

So in summary. A man facing death is a very extreme circumstance so you cannot apply the same rules to him as you do to every other human being.

Death is an extreme scenario regardless of the circumstances. A person could go to an evangelistic meeting give his life to Christ and die in the car ride home. He has not had time to become a disciple, yet he is saved.


I didn't answer this question early.

If I accepted Christ as my savior and was "saved", now that I am an ex-Christian, and no longer a follower of Christ, am I still saved?

I believe that if one can consciously choose salvation, one can consciously renounce it. I can't say for certain what your fate will be. That's not my decision to make. However, the scriptures do give us an idea of what is in store for apostates:

2Peter 2:20-21

For if, after escaping the world's corruptions through a full knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled and conquered by them, then their last condition is worse than their former one. It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness than to know it and turn their backs on the holy commandment that was committed to them.

I fully understand the whole idea of grace, which God would be showing in both those extreme situations. I understand that it's God's grace that saves us and that works are not what is important. However a disciple is a follower and to be a disciple of someone you make them your teacher. To become "born again" you are actually becoming a disciple of Christ. So to say "I'm a Christian, I've been born again" and saying "I'm not a disciple of Christ" is a contradiction. To say "I'm a Christian", but then to refuse to follow his example and his teachings makes it clear you're not really a Christian at all. It's like saying I'm a bus driver and refusing to drive buses or saying I'm a chef but refusing to do any cooking. So if someone is not really a Christian, how can they be saved?

I understand what you are saying here. But this really is a product of what comes after committing one's life to Christ. Following the teachings of Christ in and of themselves is not what saves us. Jesus said this in John 3:16. No mention of discipleship there.

However, we would be right to be sceptical of one's sincerity and therefore their salvation that says "I'm born again" but seems not to make an effort to change to come in line with Christ's teachings. But this is another issue all together.

[JoeyKnothead]

Sounds like one can carry on as they choose, and then right before they die just say they believe and they're good to go. In cases where a person is at the end of their life, God is gracious enough to forgive. I think this fails to represent the case for the 'life long' adherent.
Where the person lives their life as a believer, to then not follow what Jesus teaches is a bit hypocritical. I fail to see the connection between a person at the end of their life as equal to the person in the middle of theirs.
What kind of God is this that doesn't care what you do in the course of your life, just as long as you profess your belief in Him right before you die?
I am reading from this it is more important to believe than to act on the belief, and I find that a bit odd. I would much prefer someone do a good thing because its my will, than they would just believe that I want them to do good but not actually do any good.
This is why I personally don't see much value in scripture, it's so full of loopholes and contradictions anyone can interpret it to mean whatever they want.

[McCulloch]

Sounds like one can carry on as they choose, and then right before they die just say they believe and they're good to go. In cases where a person is at the end of their life, God is gracious enough to forgive. I think this fails to represent the case for the 'life long' adherent.
Where the person lives their life as a believer, to then not follow what Jesus teaches is a bit hypocritical. I fail to see the connection between a person at the end of their life as equal to the person in the middle of theirs.
What kind of God is this that doesn't care what you do in the course of your life, just as long as you profess your belief in Him right before you die?
I am reading from this it is more important to believe than to act on the belief, and I find that a bit odd. I would much prefer someone do a good thing because its my will, than they would just believe that I want them to do good but not actually do any good.
This is why I personally don't see much value in scripture, it's so full of loopholes and contradictions anyone can interpret it to mean whatever they want.

There are enough valid criticisms of Christianity that we don't need to attack this kind of strawman version of Christianity. If you don't know the day and the hour of your own demise, then how can one plan to profess belief just before you die? If you really do believe in the teachings of Christianity, then how can you not live as if you believe it?

[Goose]

Joey raises some questions. Though McCulloch has made a good point about one's own demise I can see where, from the perspective of the non-believer, joey would have these questions. Even though they are probably not relevant to this thread they deserve a brief answer.

Sounds like one can carry on as they choose, and then right before they die just say they believe and they're good to go.

Believe and acknowledge they have sinned. But God knows the heart. We can't pull the wool over God's eyes.

In cases where a person is at the end of their life, God is gracious enough to forgive. I think this fails to represent the case for the 'life long' adherent.

There are scriptures that allude to Christians who have fruitful lives for God's kingdom on earth will store up treasures in heaven. So, I don't think it correct to say that long serving and obedient Christians will be snubbed so to speak.

Where the person lives their life as a believer, to then not follow what Jesus teaches is a bit hypocritical.

I'm not sure if you are referring to apostates here or just hypocritical Christians. If a person were living their life as a believer they would probably be following what Jesus taught. That would at least be the natural expectation. That would be good external evidence they were a real believer.

What kind of God is this that doesn't care what you do in the course of your life, just as long as you profess your belief in Him right before you die?

I see it as a gracious and loving God. You probably see it as something else.

I am reading from this it is more important to believe than to act on the belief, and I find that a bit odd.

Our personal opinions on the matter are irrelevant. Christianity is what it is.

I would much prefer someone do a good thing because its my will, than they would just believe that I want them to do good but not actually do any good.

Not quite sure what you men here.

[JoeyKnothead]

Sounds like one can carry on as they choose, and then right before they die just say they believe and they're good to go. In cases where a person is at the end of their life, God is gracious enough to forgive. I think this fails to represent the case for the 'life long' adherent.
Where the person lives their life as a believer, to then not follow what Jesus teaches is a bit hypocritical. I fail to see the connection between a person at the end of their life as equal to the person in the middle of theirs.
What kind of God is this that doesn't care what you do in the course of your life, just as long as you profess your belief in Him right before you die?
I am reading from this it is more important to believe than to act on the belief, and I find that a bit odd. I would much prefer someone do a good thing because its my will, than they would just believe that I want them to do good but not actually do any good.
This is why I personally don't see much value in scripture, it's so full of loopholes and contradictions anyone can interpret it to mean whatever they want.

There are enough valid criticisms of Christianity that we don't need to attack this kind of strawman version of Christianity. If you don't know the day and the hour of your own demise, then how can one plan to profess belief just before you die? If you really do believe in the teachings of Christianity, then how can you not live as if you believe it?

I stand by my statement.

God is shown to forgive someone who is on the verge of their own death, who 'suddenly' professes belief, and God disregards the past actions of the believer. As long as right before I die, I truly believe, then all my past misdeeds are forgiven according to the legend.

If you really do believe in the teachings of Christianity, then how can you not live as if you believe it?

When a religious person would kill another, in contradiction to the whole "Y'all ought not go around killing each other" deal, then they have [/i]not[/i] lived according to their belief.
When a religious person would attack another because they don't profess belief, then they have acted in contradiction to the whole "treat others as you'd like to be treated" deal.
I could go on and on.

[McCulloch]

God is shown to forgive someone who is on the verge of their own death, who 'suddenly' professes belief, and God disregards the past actions of the believer. As long as right before I die, I truly believe, then all my past misdeeds are forgiven according to the legend.

And what are the chances of that?

When a religious person would kill another, in contradiction to the whole "Y'all ought not go around killing each other" deal, then they have [/i]not[/i] lived according to their belief.

If it were only quite that simple. The same religion that teaches them not to commit murder, also teaches them that false teachers may endanger not just this life but the afterlife for those who listen. So silencing influential false teachers could be seen to be consistent with their teachings.