Pope responds question from atheist - Can a non-believer be saved?

[superfreddy]

Pope Francis published a response letter to questions posed by a self proclaimed atheist named Scalfari and published in Italian newspaper La Repubblica. He calls for unity and an open dialogue. He adds an interesting observation, saying that the Christian God can forgive even non-believer. This is curious because as far as I know, the NT specifically says that one cannot achieve salvation without Jesus.

Sorry about the Italian link, I couldn't find a translation.

http://www.repubblica.it/cultura/2013/09/11/news/sintesi_lettera_bergoglio-66283390/?ref=HREA-1

 

[Dog Breakfast]

He adds an interesting observation, saying that the Christian God can forgive even non-believer. This is curious because as far as I know, the NT specifically says that one cannot achieve salvation without Jesus.

I've read some speculation that while you can't achieve salvation without Jesus, non-believers can achieve salvation because they they had a relationship with Jesus without knowing it. Footprints in the sand, maybe.

 

[superfreddy]

I've read some speculation that while you can't achieve salvation without Jesus, non-believers can achieve salvation because they they had a relationship with Jesus without knowing it. Footprints in the sand, maybe.

I heard that explanation before, but it's not what Francis said. Here's a Google translation of his response from the Italian original:

"God's mercy has no limits if you go to him with a sincere heart and a contrite , the question for those who do not believe in God is to obey his conscience . Sin, even for those who have no faith , there is when you go against conscience. Listen and obey it means, in fact , decide in the face of what is perceived as good or as bad. And on this decision you play the goodness or evil of our actions"

He seems to be saying that you do not need to believe in Jesus to be saved. If that's so, why going through the motions?

 

[tsig]

I heard that explanation before, but it's not what Francis said. Here's a Google translation of his response from the Italian original:

"God's mercy has no limits if you go to him with a sincere heart and a contrite , the question for those who do not believe in God is to obey his conscience . Sin, even for those who have no faith , there is when you go against conscience. Listen and obey it means, in fact , decide in the face of what is perceived as good or as bad. And on this decision you play the goodness or evil of our actions"

He seems to be saying that you do not need to believe in Jesus to be saved. If that's so, why going through the motions?

Because while you may luck on the right path on your own it's safer and surer to follow the teachings of the one, true church.

 

[Navigator]

He seems to be saying that you do not need to believe in Jesus to be saved. If that's so, why going through the motions?

He is the head of the Catholic Church and is being asked by the Atheist for an answer.
From his own perspective, he needs to be saying 'Jesus is Lord/Saviour'.

He has answered from the perspective of the Atheist.

There are some words attributed to coming from Jesus (I think) that tell a parable where these self righteous types run around doing things 'to be seen' rather than from the heart as it were. On the 'big day' Jesus will rebuke them when they say 'lord lord' we did 'such and such' for you etc...and he tells them to naff off because he does not 'know' them and in the same story a lowly personality stands before him expecting the same, and he tells that person 'welcome' and that person is genuinely surprised and says something like 'but lord I did not even believe in you or follow you etc' and the lord replies that 'you gave water to the thirsty and food to the hungry and basically loved helping people so in as much as you did these things for strangers, you did them for me.'

Something like that anyway...so the Pope has answered the Atheist without contradiction.

Obviously the belief that one 'needs to believe in Jesus in order to be saved' is erroneous, if I am correct in my understanding that the above story is attributed to having been said by Jesus.

If so - then your question might need to be addressed toward those who preach that you cannot be saved unless you believe in Jesus.

 

[Kopji]

I like this pope better than the last one though.

 

[Explorer]

There are some words attributed to coming from Jesus (I think) that tell a parable where these self righteous types run around doing things 'to be seen' rather than from the heart as it were. On the 'big day' Jesus will rebuke them when they say 'lord lord' we did 'such and such' for you etc...and he tells them to naff off because he does not 'know' them and in the same story a lowly personality stands before him expecting the same, and he tells that person 'welcome' and that person is genuinely surprised and says something like 'but lord I did not even believe in you or follow you etc' and the lord replies that 'you gave water to the thirsty and food to the hungry and basically loved helping people so in as much as you did these things for strangers, you did them for me.'

These are kind words, from a kind chap about kind people, and comments on misplaced sychophancy. Has to be a good positive thing that makes us all feel better in an often cruel world. What I don't understand is why it has to be linked to the supernatural. Being kind and loving is the most natural and beneficial act a human can impart to a fellow human.

The pope is trying to be kind, that is all. Drop the robes, the rituals, the magic, and the riches, and you have someone who is making an effort to be kind, for its own sake.

 

[Navigator]

These are kind words, from a kind chap about kind people, and comments on misplaced sychophancy. Has to be a good positive thing that makes us all feel better in an often cruel world. What I don't understand is why it has to be linked to the supernatural. Being kind and loving is the most natural and beneficial act a human can impart to a fellow human.

The pope is trying to be kind, that is all. Drop the robes, the rituals, the magic, and the riches, and you have someone who is making an effort to be kind, for its own sake.

Couldn't agree more. And kind not just to those known to the person but to strangers as well.

In other words, not for any praise or back-slapping etc, but just for the sake of it.

It is not a 'religious' thing. It is a human thing. Kindness.

It isn't linked to the 'supernatural' in reality. Religion does not own the rights to such behavior. The individual has no need to be identifying with religion etc before kindness is enabled, recognized or sanctified.

It is an act which of its own, proves its worth.

 

[Craig B]

The Christian scriptures, and Christian teachers, can't make up their minds how people are saved - through faith or works, or if people outside the Church can be saved. Traditionally they have mainly gone for faith or: "outside the Church there is no Salvation". This was the view of earlier Popes. See Unam Sanctam, Boniface VIII, 1302

Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

If Francis is going to abandon this once and for all, he will have done humanity a great service. But he'll run into problems with the traditionalists. Unlike his predecessor who strove to conciliate them, Francis needs to be firm and fearless in his dealings with the SSPX and their like.

 

[Navigator]

The Christian scriptures, and Christian teachers, can't make up their minds how people are saved - through faith or works, or if people outside the Church can be saved. Traditionally they have mainly gone for faith or: "outside the Church there is no Salvation". This was the view of earlier Popes. See Unam Sanctam, Boniface VIII, 1302 If Francis is going to abandon this once and for all, he will have done humanity a great service. But he'll run into problems with the traditionalists. Unlike his predecessor who strove to conciliate them, Francis needs to be firm and fearless in his dealings with the SSPX and their like.

I seem to remember some other expression attributed to Jesus. Something about many coming after he departs the scene claiming to be his followers and doing things in his name basically to lead people away from what he taught.

If this is the case, Christianity itself could be seen to be that (or the most successful) which came after he left and in his name deceived the masses.

It is doubtful therefore that Christendom is going to change its stance after all these centuries of indoctrination.

It is far more likely you will change your own.

 

[Craig B]

... It is doubtful therefore that Christendom is going to change its stance after all these centuries of indoctrination.

It is far more likely you will change your own.

From what to what?

 

[Puppycow]

This is curious because as far as I know, the NT specifically says that one cannot achieve salvation without Jesus.

Doesn't the Bible also say that a rich man can't possibly go to heaven?

And yet you have the "prosperity gospel" school of Christianity. Basically the Bible can say anything you want it to say. It's just a matter of reading some passages and ignoring others. And perhaps interpreting the passages you do read in creative ways.

 

[Bikewer]

We had a lot of discussion about the "rich man" thing when I was in high school (rather long ago...)
As I recall, the actual quote is to the effect that "it is more difficult for a rich man to attain heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle."

This would seem, on the face of it, to be an impossibility, until one realizes (as the priests explained it....) that the "eye of the needle" was a gate in the city that was quite small....A camel had to kneel to get through.
So....by extension, if the rich man was pious and respected God's law... No problem.
Alas, he still couldnt' "take it with him".
Also we have JC abjurring folks to give it all away at any rate.

 

[Craig B]

... This would seem, on the face of it, to be an impossibility, until one realizes (as the priests explained it....) that the "eye of the needle" was a gate in the city that was quite small....A camel had to kneel to get through.
So....by extension, if the rich man was pious and respected God's law... No problem.
Alas, he still couldnt' "take it with him".
Also we have JC abjurring folks to give it all away at any rate.

I think the priests were talking tosh. But if you can't take it with you, give it to the Church, eh?

I have read somewhere that the original saying didn't refer to a camel, but a "rope" going through the eye of the needle. Fatter than a thread, as a rich man is fatter than a poor one. It is said that the words rope and camel are similar in Aramaic, but I have never been able to confirm this.

Jesus is often recorded as speaking against the rich. Luke 16:

22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. 25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

He is in Hell because he had good things in life. So far as we can see, that is the sin for which he has been damned.

 

[Correa Neto]

Marketing, the need to conquest new customers while keeping ing the old ones... The more I think about it all, the more I conclude it all boils down to economy. Religions fight for customers, for market niches.

This pope is trying a new approach. Something more modern, which sounds good for the new generations. The old one betted on bracing the conservative sectors. Tradition and it all. The new one thinks the drain of customers from the Catholic church can be stopped -or slowed, or perhaps reversed- by adopting -or displaying- more progressive positions.

 

[Craig B]

Marketing, ... I conclude it all boils down to economy. Religions fight for customers, for market niches ... The new one thinks the drain of customers from the Catholic church can be stopped -or slowed, or perhaps reversed- by adopting -or displaying- more progressive positions.

I know this is going to look weird ... but is it possible he believes what he is saying, as a matter of principle?

 

[Professor Yaffle]

I know this is going to look weird ... but is it possible he believes what he is saying, as a matter of principle?

Oh, I think he does - but its possible that that was why he was chosen. With a conservative pope they were haemorrhaging membership, so they chose a different style this time.

With regard to who can be "saved" - the gospel puts a lot more emphasis on how you behave - feeding the poor, helping those less fortunate etc than it does on what you believe. I think there is just that one passage where Jesus says "nobody can come to the Father except through me". Some interpret that as you having to be a Christian, but it could equally well be interpreted as saying that you had to follow Jesus's example (whether that is what you are doing consciously, or just because you were trying to live a good life) to be saved. And that would fit in better with the rest of the Gospel stories, like the parable of the sheep and the goats.

At least that was how I rationalised things to fit in with my own beliefs and morals when I was still trying to be a Catholic.

 

[Slimething]

I know this is going to look weird ... but is it possible he believes what he is saying, as a matter of principle?

I'll accept that. The traditionalists in the RCC are quite powerful and vindictive against modernists from what I have read of them. This policy is quite courageous. Let's hope it sticks and not just the outcome of finally elevating a person with empathy to the level of pope.

 

[Polaris]

I like this pope better than the last one though.

I know, right? Who knew covering up massive amounts of child rape would be everybody's hot button?

 

[Craig B]

Oh, I think he does - but its possible that that was why he was chosen. With a conservative pope they were haemorrhaging membership, so they chose a different style this time.

With regard to who can be "saved" - the gospel puts a lot more emphasis on how you behave - feeding the poor, helping those less fortunate etc than it does on what you believe. I think there is just that one passage where Jesus says "nobody can come to the Father except through me".

No, there's also Mark 16

15 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

But Mark 16:9-20, including this absurd snake-brandishing, poison-quaffing nonsense, has been dismissed as an interpolation for many decades. It is not in the best early manuscripts. Some fundies love it, of course.