If religion is "necessary" why will it still "not save" us?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jamil_joseph02
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jamil_joseph02

Guest
hi. can religion save us? i hear that most non Catholics answer with a big NO on this one. They say that it is not religion but faith in Jesus that will save you. ergo having a religion is unnecessary. i even saw a photo in FB of one friend of mine which says “all religion will only bring me to hell”. now i find that a bit “extremist” of this “religion will not save you” phenomenon.

well my honest response is that religion, though it will not save us, is the instrument with which we can know salvation. it is the instrument which will teach and lead us to a relationship with God and get to know His teachings. the instrument with which we can know His will for us.

i use the analogy of using a glass or a cup to drink water. it is not the cup that will satisfy our thirst, it is the water. but it is only through the cup that we can drink that water in there (although in reality you could use other containers. but in the case of knowing God, it is ONLY THROUGH religion which we can attain it). in other words, a cup is still “necessary” to satisfy your thirst.

now here’s my problem though, if religion is necessary, why will it still “not save us”? don’t you agree that WHATEVER is necessary for salvation can also “lead” you to salvation? and therefore religion indeed “saves”? i believe that whatever is “necessary” can save you. or else it won’t be “necessary” at all, if it’s not even beneficial in the first place. or the glass in the water analogy is not the proper analogy at all?
 
If we take “religion” to mean obedience to Christ, and to the authority he established, than it does save us, in the same sense that faith saves us.
 
jamil_joseph02 said:
hi. can religion save us? i hear that most non Catholics answer with a big NO on this one. They say that it is not religion but faith in Jesus that will save you. ergo having a religion is unnecessary. i even saw a photo in FB of one friend of mine which says “all religion will only bring me to hell”. now i find that a bit “extremist” of this “religion will not save you” phenomenon.

well my honest response is that religion, though it will not save us, is the instrument with which we can know salvation. it is the instrument which will teach and lead us to a relationship with God and get to know His teachings. the instrument with which we can know His will for us.

i use the analogy of using a glass or a cup to drink water. it is not the cup that will satisfy our thirst, it is the water. but it is only through the cup that we can drink that water in there (although in reality you could use other containers. but in the case of knowing God, it is ONLY THROUGH religion which we can attain it). in other words, a cup is still “necessary” to satisfy your thirst.

now here’s my problem though, if religion is necessary, why will it still “not save us”? don’t you agree that WHATEVER is necessary for salvation can also “lead” you to salvation? and therefore religion indeed “saves”? i believe that whatever is “necessary” can save you. or else it won’t be “necessary” at all, if it’s not even beneficial in the first place. or the glass in the water analogy is not the proper analogy at all?
Click to expand...
You’re drowning. I throw you a life preserver and pull you in (its one of those round ones with a rope attached to it that you see in old movies). Both myself and the life preserver are necessary for you being saved, but you really can’t argue that the life preserver saved you in any but the most indirect manner (as the tool I used to save you). The Catholic faith is the life preserver God threw to us.
 
jamil_joseph02 said:
now here’s my problem though, if religion is necessary, why will it still “not save us”? don’t you agree that WHATEVER is necessary for salvation can also “lead” you to salvation? and therefore religion indeed “saves”? i believe that whatever is “necessary” can save you.
Click to expand...
The cup might be empty, or contain something other than water.
 
J.M.J.
Hi,

‘Religion’ in its true definition is actually a part of the virtue of justice. It’s a virtue that entails offering service and worship to God as best you know how. So, even pagans had this virtue, even though they obviously had it imperfectly and misdirected it toward gods and trees and fire and things. See St. Thomas on this one.

Religion’s a natural human virtue then, and keeping that in mind, it should be said that Christ didn’t come to destroy human nature, but to raise it up. So, when anyone who tells you, “Well Christ came to get rid of religion and communal worship,” or something like that, ask them this question: why would Christ come to abolish a part of man’s nature that He was responsible for creating?

Christ came to form a new people who would offer worship, “in spirit and truth.” The Church has always held that we are saved by the regeneration of Baptism, and through a living faith nourished by the Sacraments and lived out through good works. That’s how we’re saved.

This is definitely too short a response to your question, and I apologize if I got something wrong or wasn’t clear. I guess the most important point is this, though: don’t let your antagonists define the terms of the discussion in a way that backs you into a corner. Find out what they really mean!

Yours in Christ and Our Blessed Mother,​

 
“Religion” is not necessary. Christian Baptism is (generally) necessary, and it is 100% guaranteed to save us (it never fails). Baptism is not “religion” but is rather a religious belief (a belief about something of a religious nature). So I suppose you could say that “belief” is necessary - if nobody believed that Baptism was beneficial, nobody would do it.

FWIW, valid Christian Baptism can be conferred upon anyone by anyone (provided that person is capable of forming proper intent, which is merely the intent to do whatever the Church does in Baptism - even if the minister does not understand it). The minister need not be Catholic, and need not be Christian, and need not even believe in God (which would make his intent hypocritical, but that is irrelevant; the intent need not be sincere, only intellectual). A twelve-year old girl could administer valid Christian Baptism (and the recipient would be just as “saved” as someone Baptized by a Pope).
 
oldcatholicguy said:
You’re drowning. I throw you a life preserver and pull you in (its one of those round ones with a rope attached to it that you see in old movies). Both myself and the life preserver are necessary for you being saved, but you really can’t argue that the life preserver saved you in any but the most indirect manner (as the tool I used to save you). The Catholic faith is the life preserver God threw to us.
Click to expand...
I like this. Well said.
 
Hmmmmm, you make a lot of good points. Religon definitely has its place in society, and when the people of the church get together they do a lot of good.

I used to attend church myself and it did introduce me to faith which I still have. But what I found was that after a while, church is also a place that can place many chains on a person. From what I experienced, it is the first place that preaches come as you are, you’re perfect, now change. It is also the place that preaches not to judge and it is the first place where I felt I have been judged, and harshly in some churches. It is also a place that eroded my self esteem and inflated an unhealthy ego.

I wouldn’t recommend anyone else stop attending, but personally I have never felt really comfortable in any church or religon, (I’m more spiritual) and I have been a guest in every one of them except for the Catholic church.

I guess religion can save us, but there are plenty of “religious people” that don’t act like they’re very Christian.
 
jamil_joseph02 said:
hi. can religion save us? i hear that most non Catholics answer with a big NO on this one. They say that it is not religion but faith in Jesus that will save you. ergo having a religion is unnecessary. i even saw a photo in FB of one friend of mine which says “all religion will only bring me to hell”. now i find that a bit “extremist” of this “religion will not save you” phenomenon.

well my honest response is that religion, though it will not save us, is the instrument with which we can know salvation. it is the instrument which will teach and lead us to a relationship with God and get to know His teachings. the instrument with which we can know His will for us.

i use the analogy of using a glass or a cup to drink water. it is not the cup that will satisfy our thirst, it is the water. but it is only through the cup that we can drink that water in there (although in reality you could use other containers. but in the case of knowing God, it is ONLY THROUGH religion which we can attain it). in other words, a cup is still “necessary” to satisfy your thirst.

now here’s my problem though, if religion is necessary, why will it still “not save us”? don’t you agree that WHATEVER is necessary for salvation can also “lead” you to salvation? and therefore religion indeed “saves”? i believe that whatever is “necessary” can save you. or else it won’t be “necessary” at all, if it’s not even beneficial in the first place. or the glass in the water analogy is not the proper analogy at all?
Click to expand...
God, alone, saves us. But God chooses not to save us without us-without our wills involved in the process. Therefore we need to hear/learn about the God who saves us; that’s the role of religion.
 
It is necessary to have a car or other vehicle if I want to drive. But that is not all that is necessary. I need petrol, I need to be licensed to drive and so on. There are numerous things that are necessary to my driving.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top