Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Pre-1492 Americans

  • 20-02-2008 2:33am
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭


    Hey, I am a Christian, but I wonder what others think about the topic of salvation for people who lived in the Americas between 33AD and 1492 AD? With no Eurasian contact the Americans could have no way of hearing the good news. This seems to undermine Christ's claim that only through him would we reach God.

    What are your opinions? Could you point me towards any theologians who have addressed this issue?


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,845 ✭✭✭2Scoops


    Mormon Jesus visited the Americas during this period and spread the good news.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    As far as I know those who do not hear the Gospel, will have some form of mercy put upon them.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    Húrin wrote: »
    Hey, I am a Christian, but I wonder what others think about the topic of salvation for people who lived in the Americas between 33AD and 1492 AD? With no Eurasian contact the Americans could have no way of hearing the good news. This seems to undermine Christ's claim that only through him would we reach God.

    What are your opinions? Could you point me towards any theologians who have addressed this issue?
    The first thing I'd say is that all salvation comes through Christ's death on the cross. Only Christ could pay the price of our sins because of His infinite dignity.

    God takes into account people's ignorance of the Gospel and I imagine He would judge them according to their own beliefs and conscience. But their sins will only be forgiven due to the shedding of Christ's blood.

    God bless,
    Noel.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Didn't Jesus say the only way to be saved was to have belief in him? How could they have belief in him if they didn't know he existed.

    And why say that in the first place if being unaware of Jesus meant you were judged simply on your good deeds, rather than belief in him, which surely would be better for most people?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    Yet another thread for Christians to tailor their beliefs to fit in with reality and logic. Pre-1492 Americans where fine until us Europeans came and corrupted their way of life forever. White Europeans should be eternally ashamed of that.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,420 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Pre-1492 Americans where fine until us Europeans came and corrupted their way of life forever. White Europeans should be eternally ashamed of that.
    It wasn't so much corruption as near-obliteration.

    In the century following the European invasion, between death from military action and diseases, it's currently believed that the indigenous city-based population of South America was reduced to around 10% of its pre-invasion level.

    This statistic puts Ratzinger's comment that the people of South America were "silently longing" for christianity into some kind of historical context.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    Wicknight wrote: »
    Didn't Jesus say the only way to be saved was to have belief in him? How could they have belief in him if they didn't know he existed.
    Fair point. Nobody actually knows who will be saved. For all we know maybe only Christians will be saved but I believe God's mercy will extend further.
    Wicknight wrote: »
    And why say that in the first place if being unaware of Jesus meant you were judged simply on your good deeds, rather than belief in him, which surely would be better for most people?
    God doesn't want us living in ignorance. "The truth shall set you free". The way I look at it, a good Christian has a better chance of being saved that someone of another faith. Jesus commanded that the Gospel be preached to all nations. Ignorance only diminishes your chances of being saved.


  • Registered Users Posts: 520 ✭✭✭Bduffman


    2Scoops wrote: »
    Mormon Jesus visited the Americas during this period and spread the good news.

    :eek:


  • Registered Users Posts: 520 ✭✭✭Bduffman


    Jakkass wrote: »
    As far as I know those who do not hear the Gospel, will have some form of mercy put upon them.

    Well thats not very fair on everyone else is it? I mean those who have heard the gospel have to live by it - but those who didn't don't have to? Sounds like they had it easier yeah?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 900 ✭✭✭CaptainNemo


    Húrin wrote: »
    Hey, I am a Christian, but I wonder what others think about the topic of salvation for people who lived in the Americas between 33AD and 1492 AD? With no Eurasian contact the Americans could have no way of hearing the good news. This seems to undermine Christ's claim that only through him would we reach God.

    What are your opinions? Could you point me towards any theologians who have addressed this issue?

    The issue is unresolvable unless you make any one of a number of assumptions:

    1) The religion thing is not fair. Most of the beings who have ever lived will go to hell through ignorance. Deal with it, heathens! Somewhat harsh, but a majority view.
    2) We come back until we hear and receive the Good News. In other words, reincarnation. Fair, but unfortunately a heresy.
    3) Christ's message, and therefore God, can be reached through the religion of your choice - in other words all religions are paths to Heaven. Somewhat more fair but also a heresy.
    4) Souls can be retrieved from Hell. Haven't heard this theory. As far as I'm aware most Christian sects consider Hell to be permanent.
    5) Native Americans may have been able to hear the Good News via the earlier contacts with the rest of the world (the Chinese and the Vikings both discovered America before Columbus). True, but does not address the larger question about those who by accident have not heard of Christ.
    6) Hell does not exist; all conscious life will eventually attain unto God at the end of time, since God ultimately IS all conscious life already. An optimistic minority view.
    7) Don't worry about it, since no one will be able to give you anything other than their own opinion anyway, and you will never know the truth. The pragmatic approach.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    Bduffman wrote: »
    Well thats not very fair on everyone else is it? I mean those who have heard the gospel have to live by it - but those who didn't don't have to? Sounds like they had it easier yeah?
    And living according to the Gospel is some kind of burden is it? I know it doesn't look that way to most of us but it is in fact true freedom. It's a consequence of original sin that sin is appealing and that it appears to give us freedom.

    Also those who live according to the gospel will be rewarded for doing so. The more we practice self-denial for love of God and neighbour, the greater the merit we gain and the "higher" our place in Heaven will be. When we perform good works, we grow in grace and this makes us capable of receiving more from God.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,534 ✭✭✭FruitLover


    White Europeans should be eternally ashamed of that.

    Why? None of us were alive when it happened.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    FruitLover wrote: »
    Why? None of us were alive when it happened.

    Truth.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Truth.

    I'm all for truth, particularly when it involves highlighting historical injustices and atrocities.

    However, I fail to see why I should feel ashamed because people who were the same colour as me behaved appallingly 500 years ago. Should all black people feel ashamed of the genocide in Rwanda? :confused:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Bduffman wrote: »
    Well thats not very fair on everyone else is it? I mean those who have heard the gospel have to live by it - but those who didn't don't have to? Sounds like they had it easier yeah?

    As has been said before by Noel, I'd argue that it is easier to live ones life with the Gospel than without.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    Jakkass wrote: »
    As has been said before by Noel, I'd argue that it is easier to live ones life with the Gospel than without.
    Really? Narrow is the road that leads to life and few there are that find it... Wide and easy is the road that leads to death. Or something like that. Certainly for me, Christian life is an uphill struggle.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    kelly1 wrote: »
    Really? Narrow is the road that leads to life and few there are that find it... Wide and easy is the road that leads to death. Or something like that. Certainly for me, Christian life is an uphill struggle.

    I can only imagine.


  • Registered Users Posts: 520 ✭✭✭Bduffman


    kelly1 wrote: »
    And living according to the Gospel is some kind of burden is it? I know it doesn't look that way to most of us but it is in fact true freedom. It's a consequence of original sin that sin is appealing and that it appears to give us freedom.

    Also those who live according to the gospel will be rewarded for doing so. The more we practice self-denial for love of God and neighbour, the greater the merit we gain and the "higher" our place in Heaven will be. When we perform good works, we grow in grace and this makes us capable of receiving more from God.

    Regardless of whether its easier to live by the bible or not is not the point. My point is that some, who never heard of jesus, could live their lives by their own laws, regardless of how different those laws are from christianity, and still they will get some kind of allowance?? What if their morality was VERY different from christianity? Did they still get favouritism? And if they don't & are sent to hell isn't that unfair on them?


  • Registered Users Posts: 520 ✭✭✭Bduffman


    kelly1 wrote: »
    Really? Narrow is the road that leads to life and few there are that find it... Wide and easy is the road that leads to death. Or something like that. Certainly for me, Christian life is an uphill struggle.

    Which emphasises my point that those that never heard of jesus could have an easier life AND perhaps get to heaven?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,196 ✭✭✭BrianCalgary


    Bduffman wrote: »
    Which emphasises my point that those that never heard of jesus could have an easier life AND perhaps get to heaven?

    An easier life? I don't think so. Living in constant fear of so many different spirits and trying to appease them all?

    Last week we suffered through a second week of the daytime high being -25C, the nighttime low down below -40C and the windchill hovering close to -50C.

    I thought about what life was like 150 years ago in Teepees burning Buffalo dung for warmth? Then the Europeans arrived with technology that helped keep everybody warm. Too bad the virus's came with them, and the alcohol.

    Living by the gospel can at times be a struggle as kelly1 says, yet at the same time it becomes an easier life, and far more contented.

    I was just yesterday speaking with someone who is involved in AIDs relief in Africa. He was saying that the victims who come to know Christ do have an easier go of it because they have hope.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,534 ✭✭✭Soul Winner


    Húrin wrote: »
    Hey, I am a Christian, but I wonder what others think about the topic of salvation for people who lived in the Americas between 33AD and 1492 AD? With no Eurasian contact the Americans could have no way of hearing the good news. This seems to undermine Christ's claim that only through him would we reach God.

    What are your opinions? Could you point me towards any theologians who have addressed this issue?

    You should read Hebrews 11. That will give you a full list of people who were saved without knowing Jesus and who lived centuries before He arrived on the scene.

    Also Paul to the Romans says:

    "All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares." Romans 2:12-16

    My opinion is that Jesus provided the sacrifice needed for God to able to take any people on the basis of their faith no matter what revelation God provided for them outside of the knowledge of Jesus. Without Jesus nobody could have been saved. He paid the price for all the sins of everybody past present and future including your future sins. In Romans 1:18-23 below God’s wrath is poured out on certain ones who simply do not give Him glory for His handiwork which was just the basic revelation of the creation itself not the revelation of the Law or Jesus just the creation itself.

    "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things."

    And because of this non-recognition of His hand in the creation God turns them over to this:

    "Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
    Romans 1:24-28

    But in case you are of a mind to use the above verse of scripture to beat up someone because of their sexual orientation like the Christian fundamentalist perfectionist preachers are prone to do then consider that he didn't just turn these people over to the aforementioned activities but also to the following ones that none of us are guiltless of, especially the debate one which we are doing now :D although the word is εριδος (Eris) it literally means contention.

    "Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:28-32

    So you see despite what we think the reason that God pours out His wrath is, it wasn't because these people did these horrible things, it was because they did not glorify Him for the creation itself. The horrible things they do are a result of God turning them over to them not the cause of His wrath. If God got mad at people that did this in relation to the general revelation in the creation itself then how much more will His wrath burn if we reject the only possible salvation from it once we have been told about it? God honours faith no matter where it shines forth be it in the Americas in AD33 or anywhere else for that matter and whether you've heard about Jesus or not. But He is the only door back to salvation and like it or lump it you will come through it whether you know it’s Him or not.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,148 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    We call them Native Americans :) and weren't they considered pagans anyway?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    .....Then the Europeans arrived with technology that helped keep everybody warm.....

    Give me a break what a weak argument for the arrival of Europeans as though we were saviours. The natives survived pretty well thats why they were there I imagine because they knew how to survive.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,245 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    Yet another thread for Christians to tailor their beliefs to fit in with reality and logic. Pre-1492 Americans where fine until us Europeans came and corrupted their way of life forever. White Europeans should be eternally ashamed of that.

    It would be nice if you let people reply first before condemning us.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,965 ✭✭✭GhostInTheRuins


    2Scoops wrote: »
    Mormon Jesus visited the Americas during this period and spread the good news.

    I thought that was sometime in the 19th century, at which time christianity was well established there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 520 ✭✭✭Bduffman


    Bduffman wrote: »
    Regardless of whether its easier to live by the bible or not is not the point. My point is that some, who never heard of jesus, could live their lives by their own laws, regardless of how different those laws are from christianity, and still they will get some kind of allowance?? What if their morality was VERY different from christianity? Did they still get favouritism? And if they don't & are sent to hell isn't that unfair on them?

    Any answer to this?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,196 ✭✭✭BrianCalgary


    Give me a break what a weak argument for the arrival of Europeans as though we were saviours. The natives survived pretty well thats why they were there I imagine because they knew how to survive.

    Ever been through a Prairie winter?

    I dont see any natives giving up their warm homes to move back into a teepee.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    D.T. Jesus wrote: »
    I thought that was sometime in the 19th century, at which time christianity was well established there.

    they found the plates of Nephi etc at that time according to the narrative, as far as I'm aware. Mormon Jesus had according to beliefs been in America soon after his time in Jerusalem. The Mormons believe that the Native Americans are descended from 2 tribes of Israelites, the Nephites and the Labanites. (tell me if I'm wrong in relation to Mormon theology someone)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    Ever been through a Prairie winter?

    I dont see any natives giving up their warm homes to move back into a teepee.
    What is the point to living in such a cold place? It makes no more sense to me than wanting to live in the Sahara desert.

    And what has this got to do with Jesus Christ?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    Ever been through a Prairie winter?

    I dont see any natives giving up their warm homes to move back into a teepee.

    So you insult their way of life? You believe they should be thankfull for the arrival of the white man? You have pretty much lost all credibility in that statement.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Wicknight wrote: »
    Didn't Jesus say the only way to be saved was to have belief in him? How could they have belief in him if they didn't know he existed.

    I'm trying to think of where Jesus said that. Could you provide a quote?

    Jesus did say that He is the only way to the Father - but that can be interpreted a number of ways. For example, if Christ paid for the sins of all humanity, and if God, on that basis, bestows mercy on some who have never heard of Christ, then that would seem fair enough.

    Jesus also said that those who believe on Him will be saved, and that those who choose not to believe on Him will be condemned. But that does not address the issue those who never had the choice to believe or not.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,196 ✭✭✭BrianCalgary


    So you insult their way of life? You believe they should be thankfull for the arrival of the white man? You have pretty much lost all credibility in that statement.

    Let's see CC. I live here. I have been on the reservations. I've dealt with natives.

    What's your experience? That allows you to make such comments.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    Let's see CC. I live here. I have been on the reservations. I've dealt with natives.

    What's your experience? That allows you to make such comments.

    I live in a country where millions of my country men were killed or displaced by a foreign power, were the population was reduced to a shadow of what it could be, where my natural tongue is that of a foreign invader. Where ridiculous religious division caused the death of many an innocent. And this was all in the name of that great civilizing force that was the British Empire. I wouldn't say I'm bitter(nor am I very patriotic/nationalist etc.) about it but I think its arrogant to think that the white man did this world any favours. They just took what they wanted and imposed their way of life on others and assumed they were right to do it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,196 ✭✭✭BrianCalgary


    I live in a country where millions of my country men were killed or displaced by a foreign power, were the population was reduced to a shadow of what it could be, where my natural tongue is that of a foreign invader. Where ridiculous religious division caused the death of many an innocent. And this was all in the name of that great civilizing force that was the British Empire. I wouldn't say I'm bitter(nor am I very patriotic/nationalist etc.) about it but I think its arrogant to think that the white man did this world any favours. They just took what they wanted and imposed their way of life on others and assumed they were right to do it.

    I'm well aware of all that. My Dad and wife left N. Ireland for those reasons. Me Dad a prddy and me wife an RC.

    Me ma left Dublin in the early 50's for other reasons.

    What is your experience with North American Natives, what have you witnessed to support that the arrival of teh white man was all bad?

    It wasn't only the English. There were the French, Spanish, Portuguese and Dutch.

    All of the European cultures had influence on North America at different times and continue to influence the cultural mosaic that is Canada.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    I'm well aware of all that. My Dad and wife left N. Ireland for those reasons. Me Dad a prddy and me wife an RC.

    Me ma left Dublin in the early 50's for other reasons.

    What is your experience with North American Natives, what have you witnessed to support that the arrival of teh white man was all bad?

    It wasn't only the English. There were the French, Spanish, Portuguese and Dutch.

    All of the European cultures had influence on North America at different times and continue to influence the cultural mosaic that is Canada.

    I agree it wasn't the only english I'd say there is the odd Englishman ashamed of the british empire I was using a specific example. You've got me on my experience of native americans I just find it hard to stomach that the taking of another's land can be justified by the provision of central heating. I get the feeling that there is this thinking that these people were waiting for the technologically/morally superior white man to take them away from there savage ways.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,196 ✭✭✭BrianCalgary


    I agree it wasn't the only english I'd say there is the odd Englishman ashamed of the british empire I was using a specific example. You've got me on my experience of native americans I just find it hard to stomach that the taking of another's land can be justified by the provision of central heating. I get the feeling that there is this thinking that these people were waiting for the technologically/morally superior white man to take them away from there savage ways.

    They weren't waiting for the technology. The way of life for a majority of the North American tribes was as hunters / gatherers, a few had crops, mainly in the east.

    Tribes raided other tribes for food and women. They also fought over land and pushed each other off good hunting grounds all for survival. The Europeans did nothing less. The Europeans brought disease, which killed many, as well as alcohol, which destroyed many a life. Europeans also exploited the land for monetary gain especially the beaver.

    White man killed indriscimanately, ie the buffalo.

    But all in all the life of the native North American was a harsh and dangerous life. Now th eproblem in NA is with how the governments treat the native and how the laws are set up against them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    They weren't waiting for the technology. The way of life for a majority of the North American tribes was as hunters / gatherers, a few had crops, mainly in the east.

    Tribes raided other tribes for food and women. They also fought over land and pushed each other off good hunting grounds all for survival. The Europeans did nothing less. The Europeans brought disease, which killed many, as well as alcohol, which destroyed many a life. Europeans also exploited the land for monetary gain especially the beaver.

    White man killed indriscimanately, ie the buffalo.

    But all in all the life of the native North American was a harsh and dangerous life. Now th eproblem in NA is with how the governments treat the native and how the laws are set up against them.

    Okay. I agree.


Advertisement