Post was initially to say bump to say OP if you're still around and want to divulge in all the infos you have on Buddhism that you say isn't common knowledge I'd be very interested to hear it, please either in this thread or starting a new one like you say
But then saw this post >>701893
>God will judge any non-christian by what they know,
Fine
>but if they rebel against what they know, they will go to hell.
Fine
>That means that if a Buddhist slips up ONCE and does not do the proper rites within their religion to obtain absolution, Satan will drag them to hell with him.
Wut
Had to comment: This seems like an extraordinary view that I wouldn't think is common at all, particularly the suggestion that God works through and accepts the rites of other religions as valid means of obtaining salvation? Given other religions' anti-Christian nature, it doesn't make sense that the conditions on which salvation outside of Christ would depend is adherence to the rituals and rules of something that is inherently anti-Christ at it's core? Surely any salvation outside of Christ would be despite this not because of it?
I get this (the third part of the green text, not my comments above) would probably be a common view amongst liberal/inclusivist types but am very surprised to see it here. Does this mean there are 'two gospels' operating in reality despite their only being one written of the NT? Like I said, I thought if you wanted to be inclusivist, you made sure to emphasise that people were saved despite their adherence to anti-Christian worldviews philosophies and religions not because of fulfilling the obligations of them?
(As to how this actually worked, personally I've never been sure and always wondered, given that I'm not sure of a) the extent and uniformity of application of the so-called 'Golden Rule', b) emphasis on man's helplessness (i.e. not works based) and c) the extent of the recoginition of the need for forgiveness and to forgive among the different religions, world views etc. etc. - doubting that it's the case that the above three aspects are actually emphaised amongst the other religions to the same extent as they are in Christianity and by what means, I always just assumed that the only legitimate salvation outside of Christianity could actually only manifest itself with a person who has not known Christ at some point personally acknowledging their weakness, that they have a sin debt that needs atoning for and that they cannot atone for it themselves and that they out of instinct and desperation call out to a power greater than themselves, that we know as God, for help - I can't picture it being anything else - only because I think of Roman's 1:20 which says that everyone is without excuse…or does this passage only refer to the existence of God and not his holiness, his perfection, his justice, mercy, our sin, inability to atone for our sin, his plan for redemption etc. etc.)