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.

[muhammad rasullah]

Jesus (peace be upon him) cannot save you from anything he never said he was anyones savior. So you cannot be saved by Jesus (pbuh) by being a christian and you cannot be saved by Jesus (pbuh) if you are not. Jesus (pbuh) never made such a claim.

He may not have every claimed to be a "savior" but he definitely inferred it. He most definitely talks about shedding his blood, which would be spilt for you and about having his body broken for you.

No he doesn't! This is only according to what the bible says he said and the authenticity has been in question and proven to be unreliable since it was written. So we can't take from the bible that these words of shedding his blood and things of that sort inferring that he is the savior or anything like that to be true. Besides if he did say such a thing that is a blatant contradiction in the bible. it then leads to other discussion about is Jesus God? And why Jesus can't be God?

[Goose]

As for your question, "is it possible to become saved then still consider yourself saved if you are not a disciple?" - Our salvation is not dependant on becoming a disciple. Therefore we can't lose our salvation on the sole criterion we are not following Christ's teachings.

I believe you have a non-sequitar here and I don't believe there are any scriptures to back up what you're saying.

How is it a non-sequitur? Please explain. I've given plenty of scripture that clearly shows we are saved by a process of belief, repentance and grace. If you have a scripture that suggests we are saved by something other than this or can lose our salvation because we don't follow Christ's teachings, on let's for example go the extra mile, then it's high time you produced it.

A scenario. Let's say you are accepted into a sports team. Why are you accepted in? Because of your skills in that sport. You're one of the best. But what if you refuse to obey the rules that have been set of players to follow. What if you cheat a lot, play dirty and what if you bring the game into disrepute. Will you be kept on just because you are a great player? No. Likewise I don't think you can claim that just because you are saved by an act of faith means that act of faith is going to keep you in good steed with the creator from then on.

Poor analogy. We don't have to be one of the best or a great player to be accepted onto the Christian team. If anything, one can be the worst player and make the team because we make the team through grace, not performance.

What you seem to be suggesting is that once saved, always saved, no matter what you do afterwards. The only way to become unsaved is if you renounce Christ. Is that what you are suggesting?

We are beginning to cover old ground. All you are now doing is asking the same basic questions, worded differently, that I've already answered.

I believe that you can lose your salvation by not following the rules. i.e not being a disciple of Christ.

Where does it say one can lose their salvation by not being a disciple or not following the rules? What rules? Please quote the scriptures.

We can go back to discussing individual scriptures if you like.

I would love for nothing more. It would be more productive than debating your personal life story.

One can consider them self saved, of course. But the NT spends plenty of time providing internal checks for a believer to know whether or not they have the type of faith that saves. As well as external checks so Christians can identify real believers.

See you talk about these internal checks and I agree that they are there. But it would suggest to me that if a Christian sees they cannot put a check next to a box, then their salvation is not assured.

Hello? Isn't that a good thing? That a Christian can say, "Hey, wait a minute, I'm missing a check in that box, I better address that." Those checks are there precisely so we CAN be assured of our salvation, not cause a Christian to lose it.

None of the scriptures you quoted worked against me. In fact I saw them as enhancing my own argument. There were plenty of scriptures quoted that we were still debating. I did not have the time to deal with a whole heap more. So I chose to deal with the ones that were Christ's teachings rather than Pauls. I did not want to get bogged down discussing meanings of hundreds of scriptures, which is why I was reluctant to bring in any more at that point. Paul's were the obvious ones to omit as to me Jesus's ones carry more weight. Don't they carry more weight for you?

Nope. I see all scripture as equal. I'm not in the awkward position of rejecting certain scriptures because I don't like them or they hurt my argument. And when you are done addressing all the scripture I gave earlier I'll give you some more.

The first one addressed people who think there is no way they could fall from faith.

No. It addresses a fall to temptation not a fall from faith.

1Corinthians 10:12-13 Therefore, the person who thinks he is standing securely should watch out that he does not fall. No temptation has overtaken you that is unusual for human beings. But God is faithful, and he will not allow you to be tempted beyond your strength. Instead, along with the temptation he will also provide a way out, so that you may be able to endure it.

No, I think it relates very much to your salvation. The entire chapter seems to be warning that sin is so dangerous that you could find yourself falling from God's grace. This pretty much enhances my argument that if you are not following Christ's teachings (being a disciple), then you are in danger of falling from grace.

Except of course that the verse and chapter in question say nothing about "salvation" or falling from "God's grace." How you see this as enhancing your argument is again baffling. Actually, the chapter tells us God will not allow us to be tempted by sin beyond what we can handle (verse 13).

And the second one shows that it takes more than belief to retain your salvation and that even Paul realised he could lose it.

How you get all that from 1 Corinthians 9:27 is beyond me.

By taking it in context and reading the entire chapter?

Nice one. Now tell us how you get all that from 1 Corinthians 9:27.

I know where you're coming from though.

No, I don't think you do.

Believe me, I do. I was right there where you are now.

And where is that, OC? Where am I?

There was never any doubt in my mind (thus my name OnceConvinced)...

Never a doubt? I doubt that.

You perogative of course, but no, never, ever. I even had Christians incredulous when I made that comment. I in turn was incredulous at their lack of faith in God. Doubts did come, obviously later on, which is why I am an ex-Christian now. But that wasn't untill in my 30s (having become a Christian at the age of 7)

Please don't take this the wrong way (as an ad hom), but if one never had a doubt or question of any kind small or large at any point leading up to or during their Christian walk, then honestly, I'm sceptical of that person's ability to think critically. Which of course makes me think little, if any, critical thinking went into your path to de-conversion. Though you'll no doubt argue that it was critical thinking that lead you away from Christianity it will now be hard to buy that in light of your admission.

Hardships never dented my faith. Neither did pain or suffering. I've had no real bad experience in the church (apart from a couple of camps I went to as a kid) My firsts doubts started to rise when I started to discover that the words written in the bible could not be trusted. That they weren't all they were cracked up to be and it had been a long time since I had seen God do anything in my life. It was not an easy realisation to come to and I was in denial for a long time, refusing to accept I had been deluded. Even now it is still a hard thing to accept that I was deluded for over 30 years of my life.

I did believe I knew God's voice and there were times when God seemed to be leading me down a particular path and I was so convinced about it. All these signs seemed to be pointing in the direction. Things seemed to fit together perfectly. For many years, I felt I was able to rely on that. But then around three years ago, I learnt a hard lesson when I found out that on that occassion, it wasn't God. I guess you could say it was a drastic thing, because it made me realise that all those previous times I thought God was guiding me, he wasn't. I was just kidding myself. I don't want to go into details on scenario, but it was a real wake up call for me.

From here
Maybe you could reconcile the contradictions in your story for me. Was it the hard lesson from 3 years ago that you found out wasn't God guiding you that started it all or was it the discovery that the words in the Bible couldn't be trusted.

...and it was inconcievable to me that I could ever become an ex-Christian.

If it was inconceivable at the time you were a Christian then you were obviously trying to conceive if you could become an ex-Christian. Which means you entertained the idea. One wonders why you were entertaining the idea of becoming an ex-Christian while you were a Christian.

This is very weird logic and contradictory to the meaning of the word itself. For something to be inconceivable means that it's something that cannot be conceived. In other words, something that would simply never come to mind.

Dictionary meaning for my use of the word:
1 impossible to imagine or think of:
The idea that they might not win was inconceivable to them.
It would be inconceivable for her to change her mind.

But it did come to mind by your own admission. One must be able to conceive the idea to determine if it is inconceivable. The analogy in the definition you cite shows this. The team must first imagine themselves not winning in order to arrive at the position that not winning is inconceivable. It's a paradoxical statement to say it is inconceivable to think of something in the sense that it can't be thought. One must think of it first to know if it is inconceivable. You thought of becoming an ex-Christian first, then arrived at the position that this was inconceivable or more appropriately unbelievable or unthinkable. Why were you thinking about becoming an ex-Christian while you were a Christian?

Leaving Christianity was a thought I could never entertain. If was a statement of faith for me. "I could never leave the faith. I could never be so foolish". Exactly the stance that you are taking in this thread. I take it that you have seriously considered leaving the faith many times? For me I never got to any stage where I though "I wonder if I should become an ex-Christian". For me it was one day a couple of years ago, when I realised that I could not longer consider myself a Christian.

How convenient. Everytime I say something you say you had the same stance and said the same things. Is this proving something? It's all very interesting, but are you debating or preaching now?

I think you are trying too hard to place the blame of my deconversion on me.

So, it's all God's fault?

We all wear glasses, OC. It's called a worldview. You changed your theistic/Christian glasses for the glasses of an agnostic/sceptic. I tried the agnostic/sceptic glasses for a time in my life and I found I kept bumping into the walls and furniture and stuff. Life is much clearer to me with my theistic/Christian glasses on.

No, I didn't change my glasses. I took the ones I had off, saw that things were completely different without them on and chose to look at things critically from then on, not just accepting everything I was told or what I read based on a preconcieved notion of God's existance. A sceptic/agnostic is a very neutral position to take.

Oh yes, the objective and entirely neutral position of the sceptic/agnostic.

[Goose]

Jesus (peace be upon him) cannot save you from anything he never said he was anyones savior. So you cannot be saved by Jesus (pbuh) by being a christian and you cannot be saved by Jesus (pbuh) if you are not. Jesus (pbuh) never made such a claim.

He may not have every claimed to be a "savior" but he definitely inferred it. He most definitely talks about shedding his blood, which would be spilt for you and about having his body broken for you.

No he doesn't! This is only according to what the bible says he said and the authenticity has been in question and proven to be unreliable since it was written. So we can't take from the bible that these words of shedding his blood and things of that sort inferring that he is the savior or anything like that to be true. Besides if he did say such a thing that is a blatant contradiction in the bible. it then leads to other discussion about is Jesus God? And why Jesus can't be God?

The Qur'an says the Gospel is from Allah. The Qur'an also says Allah's word can not be altered. At what point did Allah allow the Gospel to be altered and corrupted as the Bible was in circulation, largely as we have it now, when the Qur'an was written?

It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong).

Qur'an datbase

[muhammad rasullah]

Jesus (peace be upon him) cannot save you from anything he never said he was anyones savior. So you cannot be saved by Jesus (pbuh) by being a christian and you cannot be saved by Jesus (pbuh) if you are not. Jesus (pbuh) never made such a claim.

He may not have every claimed to be a "savior" but he definitely inferred it. He most definitely talks about shedding his blood, which would be spilt for you and about having his body broken for you.

No he doesn't! This is only according to what the bible says he said and the authenticity has been in question and proven to be unreliable since it was written. So we can't take from the bible that these words of shedding his blood and things of that sort inferring that he is the savior or anything like that to be true. Besides if he did say such a thing that is a blatant contradiction in the bible. it then leads to other discussion about is Jesus God? And why Jesus can't be God?

The Qur'an says the Gospel is from Allah. The Qur'an also says Allah's word can not be altered. At what point did Allah allow the Gospel to be altered and corrupted as the Bible was in circulation, largely as we have it now, when the Qur'an was written?

It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong).

Qur'an datbase

If you know anything about the history of your bible you would then know that it has already went through five MAJOR revisions. Specifically the king james version. That's why it's called a version it means its not the same as it once was however that may have been.
Allah says in the quran that the injeel (gospel) was given to Isa (Jesus peace be upon him) So show me the gospel of Jesus and then we can talk. He didn't give a gospel to matthew, mark, Luke and John Where is the Gospel of Jesus. That's what I believe. Not what people who never met and walked with Jesus wrote about him including Paul. So you have 27 books of the NT and about 10% is supposed to be Jesus's words. Allah didn't say he would protect the bible from being corrupted. The bible was written by Man so it is not Allah's word in its entirty there are small portions in the bible which can be recognized as coming from Allah but not the Whole bible.
The bible once had 73 books catholic version and those 7 books where then taken out as doubtful. Who inspired then to be taken out? The revised standard version of the bible removes John 5:7 as an interpolation saying it was never there in the oldest manuscripts which they have used. Older than the King James version by about 100 years. the RSV also reduces matthew 16:9 and on to footnotes.
This is why they are called versions. If your gandfather writes a will and dies and then his son makes a major change in his will, then his son makes a major change in his grandfather's will then the next and the next. Is it fair for that person to say what he has is still his great great great grandfather's will? NO!!! So why does every bible say the king James version as if it is the same as when it was originally published. Wrong just wrong.
Version- A description or account from one point of view, especially as opposed to another: Your version of the accident differs from mine.
A particular account of some matter, as from one person or source, contrasted with some other account:
There telling you on your bible that it has been changed and you dont even realize it. Yet you continue to call or think of it as a translation.
Translate- to turn from one language into another or from a foreign language into one's own. to explain in terms that can be more easily understood; interpret.
So basically a translation is from one language to another explaining it so it can be easily understood. But you don't take something out or put something in when you translate it.
That's when it becomes a version also a translation but more so a different version.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Page 4 Post 34

The bible was written by Man so it is not Allah's word in its entirty there are small portions in the bible which can be recognized as coming from Allah but not the Whole bible.

What evidence do you have that the Quran was not written by men? Keep in mind the Quran must be sent to a printer for publishing.

This whole translation thing is just goofy. Everyone admits translations can be fallible. What gets me is folks think the original is infallible. Incorrect data is incorrect regardless of its source or lack of translation.

[muhammad rasullah]

From Page 4 Post 34

The bible was written by Man so it is not Allah's word in its entirty there are small portions in the bible which can be recognized as coming from Allah but not the Whole bible.

What evidence do you have that the Quran was not written by men? Keep in mind the Quran must be sent to a printer for publishing.

This whole translation thing is just goofy. Everyone admits translations can be fallible. What gets me is folks think the original is infallible. Incorrect data is incorrect regardless of its source or lack of translation.

When I say written by men I do mean the actual literal writing of the bible but I am also referring to the source of the information. Meaning Allah is not the source or its author. That is what I mean. But when referring to the quran the actual writing of the words was written by men how else would it have been in a book. But unlike the bible the quran was memorized by hundreds if not thousand of people during its time and before it was written. And the source of the information in the quran its author is Allah. It testifies of itself which the bible doesn't do 55:1 ((Allah)) Most Gracious! 55:2 It is He Who has taught the Qur'an. 55:3 He has created man: 55:4 He has taught him speech (and intelligence).
There is nowhere you will find this in the bible.

The translation thing is not goofy translations can be wrong but at least you have the original text to refer back to in case there are mistranslations. The quran has never been changed. The arabic is still as it was when it was first written.
There is another thread for this discussion. The thread is Proof the quran is true. You can analyze my post in that thread and respond to them.

[Goose]

If you know anything about the history of your bible you would then know that it has already went through five MAJOR revisions. Specifically the king james version. That's why it's called a version it means its not the same as it once was however that may have been.

A revision and version are two separate things. A revision is an update or modernisation. A version or translation, in a Biblical sense, would refer to KJV, NIV, NASV and so on. Your Qur'an has the same issue. Even the quote I gave from the Qur'an has different versions.

003.003
YUSUFALI: It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong).
PICKTHAL: He hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture with truth, confirming that which was (revealed) before it, even as He revealed the Torah and the Gospel.
SHAKIR: He has revealed to you the Book with truth, verifying that which is before it, and He revealed the Tavrat and the Injeel aforetime, a guidance for the people, and He sent the Furqan.

So by your own logic the Qur'an must be corrupted because there are different versions of translation that have been revised over the years.

Allah says in the quran that the injeel (gospel) was given to Isa (Jesus peace be upon him) So show me the gospel of Jesus and then we can talk. He didn't give a gospel to matthew, mark, Luke and John Where is the Gospel of Jesus.

So Allah told you in the Qur'an to trust the Gospel as a guide, but at the time Allah was speaking of a phantom Gospel that no longer exists? Nor did it exist at the time the Qur'an was written? Nor is there any evidence this phantom Gospel of Jesus ever existed. Your Allah sounds like either a deceiver or mistaken. Or the third option is that Allah was speaking about the New Testament when he spoke of the Injeel in the Qur'an. Which would mean you must trust the Gospel revealed in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The extant Greek manuscripts for those Gospels predate the Qur'an by as much as 300 years and are the basis for most modern translations. So Allah has instructed you to trust the New Testament as it is translated from those early Greek manuscripts.

[McCulloch]

So Allah told you in the Qur'an to trust the Gospel as a guide, but at the time Allah was speaking of a phantom Gospel that no longer exists? Nor did it exist at the time the Qur'an was written? Nor is there any evidence this phantom Gospel of Jesus ever existed. Your Allah sounds like either a deceiver or mistaken. Or the third option is that Allah was speaking about the New Testament when he spoke of the Injeel in the Qur'an. Which would mean you must trust the Gospel revealed in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The extant Greek manuscripts for those Gospels predate the Qur'an by as much as 300 years and are the basis for most modern translations. So Allah has instructed you to trust the New Testament as it is translated from those early Greek manuscripts.

1. Matthew 4:23
   Jesus was going throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness among the people.
2. Matthew 9:35
   Jesus was going through all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness.
3. Matthew 11:5
   the BLIND RECEIVE SIGHT and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the POOR HAVE THE GOSPEL PREACHED TO THEM.
4. Matthew 24:14
   "This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.
5. Matthew 26:13
   "Truly I say to you, wherever this gospel is preached in the whole world, what this woman has done will also be spoken of in memory of her."
6. Mark 1:14
   Now after John had been taken into custody, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God,
7. Mark 1:15
   and saying, " The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel."
8. Mark 8:35
   "For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel's will save it.
9. Mark 10:29
   Jesus said, "Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or farms, for My sake and for the gospel's sake,
10. Mark 13:10
    "The gospel must first be preached to all the nations.
11. Mark 14:9
    "Truly I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what this woman has done will also be spoken of in memory of her."
12. Mark 16:15
    And He said to them, " Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.
13. Luke 3:18
    So with many other exhortations he preached the gospel to the people.
14. Luke 4:18
    "THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD IS UPON ME,BECAUSE HE ANOINTED ME TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO THE POOR.HE HAS SENT ME TO PROCLAIM RELEASE TO THE CAPTIVES,AND RECOVERY OF SIGHT TO THE BLIND,TO SET FREE THOSE WHO ARE OPPRESSED,
15. Luke 7:22
    And He answered and said to them, "Go and report to John what you have seen and heard: the BLIND RECEIVE SIGHT, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the POOR HAVE THE GOSPEL PREACHED TO THEM.
16. Luke 9:6
    Departing, they began going throughout the villages, preaching the gospel and healing everywhere.
17. Luke 16:16
    "The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it.
18. Luke 20:1
    On one of the days while He was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes with the elders confronted

I suspect that the writers of the Qu'ran probably meant the same thing as the writers of the canonical Gospels when they used the term gospel.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Page 4 Post 36
First, let me say Hello to mr muhammad rasullah. I know we've come across each other, but I never introduced myself. I find mr muhammad rasullah to be a valid source of Islamic/Muslim information. It's good to see someone with this information in these forums. Though I may disagree with mr muhammad rassulah on a given position, I can say he's been a civil, thoughtful poster whose information is usually spot on, though I may disagree with the assesment of that data.

But unlike the bible the quran was memorized by hundreds if not thousand of people during its time and before it was written. And the source of the information in the quran its author is Allah. It testifies of itself which the bible doesn't do 55:1 ((Allah)) Most Gracious! 55:2 It is He Who has taught the Qur'an. 55:3 He has created man: 55:4 He has taught him speech (and intelligence).

This tells us nothing about the accuracy of the data. I can concede, at least for now, these folks memorized the Quran, and they accurately wrote it down. Until we can verify the source of the data, we have no way of knowing either way whether it is the actual words of Allah or if it was humans claiming these words for Allah.
In light of some of the more spectacular claims made, I don't see how we can see the Quran as other than human in origin.

I concede the translation issue can be important when determining later works based on the original. Where I think the issue is goofy, is where it is assumed the original is any more correct.

[Goose]

I suspect that the writers of the Qu'ran probably meant the same thing as the writers of the canonical Gospels when they used the term gospel.

The word gospel means "good news." From the perspective of the gospel writers Jesus -who he was, what he did, and why he did it - WAS the good news. If you think Jesus meant something different by the word gospel when he used it, I'd like to know what that is.

Mark 1:15 The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel. - that is believe in the good news. cf. John 3:16.