The panel question was: «Is explicit belief in Jesus»
death and resurrection necessary for eternal salvation?»
Not exact matches
Nevertheless, I followed the Hebrew calendar to the extent it was
necessary for me to identify — first — the exact date of Jesus»
death,
and then that of His birth (
and baptism
and resurrection, the dates of His
death and resurrection being the most important for us, Christians).
His stirring opening statement invoked a repeating Biblical pattern of creation,
death,
and resurrection to new creation to suggest that Protestantism is not a diseased form that needs to be restored to its original health, but the historically -
necessary senescence of something bound to die
and rise again as some new
and unforeseen synthesis.
In my view, belief in the
death and resurrection of Jesus is only
necessary for those whose target is salvation.
If I am to be convinced that belief in the
death and resurrection of Jesus are
necessary today to receive eternal life, those are the questions I need answered.
It teaches that all will be saved through Christ eventually,
and thus His
death and Resurrection is very
necessary!
Even so,
death lingers as the
necessary and sufficient condition of
resurrection; until then, Catholic Christians should
and will continue to seek the living among the dead.
All of us in FG know that His
Resurrection,
and not just His
Death, was
necessary for our justification.
But for those who live in the new age of
death and resurrection, the one inaugurated by the cross, such boasting is not only excluded, it is not
necessary.
Living a good life is NOT evangelism, I saw a sign that said «share the gospel, use words if
necessary», «if» I thought, you can not share gospel which is Christ
death and resurrection, without words unless you are a very talented mime artist.
It is not enough, for example, for one to say that the
death and resurrection of Christ has set us free, or to say that because freedom is inherent within one's nature it is not
necessary to work for it.
Hans von Campenhausen also agrees that «this expression may simply be used to underline the reality
and apparent finality of the
death itself,
and say nothing beyond this».21 We may take the reference to the burial in this early formula to mean simply that there was no doubt about the
death of Jesus, a
necessary fact to establish if the wonder of the
resurrection was to be fully appreciated.
When I read the paper, I came away understanding your view exactly as you have said it yourself — that you believe Christ's
death for sins,
resurrection,
and deity - humanity are not
necessary for the lost to believe in order to receive eternal life but they are part of something you can «the gospel» in a very broad sense of all NT revelation.
And the implications of the coming of Christ in the forgiveness of our sins, the assurance of life beyond and through death, the persistence of personality conceived in terms (natural to the time) of the resurrection of the body: these too were added to the Creed, as being necessary to the right understanding of the purpose and mission of Christ as come from G
And the implications of the coming of Christ in the forgiveness of our sins, the assurance of life beyond
and through death, the persistence of personality conceived in terms (natural to the time) of the resurrection of the body: these too were added to the Creed, as being necessary to the right understanding of the purpose and mission of Christ as come from G
and through
death, the persistence of personality conceived in terms (natural to the time) of the
resurrection of the body: these too were added to the Creed, as being
necessary to the right understanding of the purpose
and mission of Christ as come from G
and mission of Christ as come from God.
But it sounds like your saying that christs coming,
death and resurrection wasn't
necessary
If Jesus»
death and resurrection was sufficient to save you or me, then we don't need to add this «choice» to the list of things that are
necessary for it to happen.