required threshhold of faith required for Christians to be saved is not clear

required threshhold of faith required for Christians to be saved is not clear, the requirements are either too vague, or too listy/dogmatic.

the bible says if you confess with your mouth jesus is lord, and beleive in your heart that he was raised from the dead you will be saved. it also say if you believe in the lord you will be saved. it also has all kinds of other statements.i'm sure if you do these, that is sufficient. but what about various other scenarios, like the content of 'sinner's prayers' that dont include those things?what or where exactly is the threshhold?if you believe he existed or is God is that enough? probably not cause the bible says demons do likewise.what about a list of of common beleifs? that you rely on him generally, that he is your savior, that you are a sinner, that he is lord, tha he rose from the dead, that he was incarnated, that he is God, that he is the son of God, that you believe you are saved (plenty of christians say you must believe you are saved, or you aren't saved), substitutionary atonement v 'christus victor' etc etc.ask different christians, get a different answer, almost every time. they just have 'gut feelings' but dont have firm answers. you'll note a different answer pretty much every time.some say you have to admit you're a sinner and that he is your savior. what if you believed all the other things and not these? or what if you believe you're a sinner, and that he's a savior, but not that he's God, or a various type of atonement belief. eg, chrsitaus victor v substitutionary.some say that he is God is required, some say legal substitution is mandatory.and how do you demarcate the requirements for those who are new to the faith, and those who are really knowledgeable? it might be seen a okay for a newbie to miss a thing or two, but less understandable for the expreinced etc. does this come into play?so what's the magical formula?

Are Catholics only considered christians by protestants when they try to use the ad populum argument? Cos if you remove the none christian catholics you don't end up with a very large number of christians at all.

To be rightcheous or get into heaven? To be rightcheous you give up all your possessions and follow Jesus(to his death). Selflessness and Martyrdom is quite rightcheous wouldn't you agree? 

To get into heaven? Different, you just gotta accept Christ, acknowledge your sinfulness, and accept the forgiveness that was offered with his death. Getting into heaven doesn't mean you are rightcheous, just means you were absolved of your sins fmpov

I think alot of the conflict on the simple formula is because it's just a scosh hard to stomach that say, a violent criminal could get into heaven because he accepts Christ's forgiveness, while a person who has not harmed another would not if they did not accept. 

It really amount to wanting to render unto God, what God has no interest in(Caesars things aka material and earthly matters). 

This is all of course just my interpretation of the NT. I dont practice, and am rather skeptical of religion 🤔

Perhaps but his argument suffers the same fatal problem.

For example, if I say vanilla does not taste good, I must then explain how come it's the most sold flavor if I say it doesn't taste good.

But linate doesn't do debate very well. He just posts his opinions and then runs to post another opinion elsewhere.

 

Well... forums are just more casual discussion so linate can post and not respond. Their choice 

honestly though, why would you need to address that? Something being popular =\= being good or right? Its a decent indicator, but not always 

Ice cream flavor being popular does mean it tastes good.

The #1 religion means it's entry requirements are not too vague. His argument is built on that relationship.

"The #1 religion means it's entry requirements are not too vague." 

True, for Christianity as a whole, the entry requirements make taking on the torch quite accessible 🤔. I see what you mean 

what if someone believes Jesus was the messiah and rose from the dead but don't believe Jesus dying saved him? or in some other way they 'believe in' Jesus that doesn't include the specific things you list? as i said in my opening post, the bible says if you believe Jesus is lord and that he rose from the dead, you will be saved, or if you 'believe in' him you will be saved. are you contradicting the bible, or are you injecting more into what it means to believe Jesus is 'lord' or 'believe in' him?

fun topic 

most christians have like a 'marriage' with jesus. they have a relationship. what's the threshhold of a marriage? at its minimum, it's hard to define. but as a functional phenomenon, it's a living faith and complete.