This is taken from the Relgion Quiz that we (most) took. I found this question to be interesting, especially for Christains who seem to have a huge different answers for this question:

Are acts needed? Does faith alone provide a way into Heaven.

While I'm I don't have a definate idea of what the afterlife is (or even if there is one) Christains and may other relgions have it pretty well layed out. So, what are your thoughts on it?

Well in Ephesians 2: 8-9 it states that it's by God's grace that you are saved, through FAITH, it's a gift from God. It cannot be by works, so that no one can boast

Might one say that works are the ultimate testiment of Faith?

Reguardless though, if one says that one has faith, that one belives in Jesus as their savior and the like, wouldn't they aspire to live in the manner that Jesus taught, which would lead to acts anyways?

Works are not a determination in one's salvation but just as you accurately stated in your reply, when you have that faith and RELATIONSHIP with your savior, you do aspire to live as He lived. He was our perfect example. Difficult to do sometimes, of course and the cool thing is that He knows that too. He knows my strengths, my weaknesses, and even my secret sins. But because of my faith in Him (not myself) I am promised salvation.

I believe that the "problem" of faith and works is only a problem if salvation is the principal focus of your spirituality. However, I believe that if the love of Jesus Christ is your focus, then the division between faith and works disappears. They become one and the same.

Now, some might say that the love of Jesus Christ puts faith first. Perhaps. But even then, I think it would be odd to call it "necessary." Is it NECESSARY for a mother to love a child, or vice versa? Certainly not. I believe the same can be the case when one has a relationship with God. Is it NECESSARY for it to happen? Well I don't know. That's an odd way to put it. It just happens.

I think Luther said it best: "We are saved by faith alone, but true faith is never alone."

Edit: It would appear that I already brought that quote up in the other topic. Oh well, it still applies. :P

If then I am unable to follow a single faith, for the simple fact that a faith implies a dogma, and I reject this dogma because I cannot rule out the possible existence of the elements of other faiths, then what is to be my fate in the afterlife or God´s/Allah´s eyes? - hell/purgatory/nothingness? (regardless of whatever high level of altruism I may obtain on earth)

To reply to the topic we discussed in our PM's, to love is a willing act. But, with almost all decisions that require some sort of action, we have to take an honest look at motive. To have faith is a great thing but when we love God, is it because we fear Him and His wrath or do we willingly love Him because He loved us first? What is it you expect to gain in a love relationship with God?

I suppose that depends on who you ask. I personally don't have an answer to this question. What do others think?

Yes, love is not mere feeling, it also involves volition. But again, it is not MERELY an act. However, it is good to look at motive.

If we are to be completely honest about intention, then it would be hard for me to say that there is no element of fear in the context of one's relationship with God. But before we could even learn to fear God, God loved us, and I think that there is something within all people that in some way or another can acknowledge this. Again, I would look at a healthy parent/child relationship as an example. When children are young, are their acts done out of love or fear? Probably a little bit of both, depending on the situation. I have no reason to doubt that we carry our fears as part of our motivation in the acts that we do out of "love" for God. But I think in a healthy relationship with God, there will also be the motivation of true love and gratitude. As such, I do not think of my love relationship with God as existing primarily with some intention of GAINING anything per se.

From what I understand, in Allah's eyes, you have lived a good life (even though not an Islamic one) and thus get some points towards getting into heaven (not real points, but you know what I mean)

I believe that unconditional love is something that everyone deeply desires although it is difficult to comprehend and reciprocate. Our love toward others, no matter how pure we may believe it to be, is tainted. We do put conditions on it. I believe God does not but desires that we love the way He does. (Thus making it difficult to comprehend and reciprocate)

Faith is a human emotion, and works, though being inspirational, don't teach people to have faith. Humans have to teach faith, and use works like a textbook.

I agree with the idea that having the utmost faith would, in itself, lead to good works.

Of course, I'm not exactly Christian so I can't comment on what the Bible teaches, but I believe that God does not care about what faith you have, simply that you have faith.

I would disagree with the first statemment. Some people care only for what they can get and, thus, would never strive for unconditional love. On the other hand, I believe that there are others who can actually reach the state of loving someone unconditionally. Take, for example, Ghandi, Jesus, the Buddha, etc. (I imagine that you see Jesus as God, so that would discount him from this list, but since I see him as a human instead, he counts for my list) They were able to love people who they had never even met. Even enemies. Is that kind of love not unconditional? And if they could love people like that, I imagine that their love of people they knew and befriended would be even stronger.

I don't get what you're saying. I can understand the "having to teach faith" part, although I would disagree with it, but I don't get what you mean about the textbook part? Could you please explain?

I had a curious thought on this subject lately. Look at the English word "faithful." Now take the conventional meaning of the word "faith," in a religious context at least. People seem to think that "faith" it just believing in that which one cannot see, but it is much more than that -- faith is trust, and obedience. If one is full of faith, one is "faithful," and faithfulness is not about belief. It is about obedience. I'm curious as to the origin of the word "faithful," and if perhaps "faith" had a meaning more akin to "trust and obey" in the past.

That´s an interesting connection of the concepts "faith" and "obedience" + "trust". Isn´t that exactly what faith is, a total obedience to a spiritual doctrine in the same way, lets say for example, the avid Communist party member in Cuba may have an total obedience to a political doctrine, or the fervent obedience that so many Germans felt to Hitler in the 30s and early 40s?
If it´s trust too (as you say Nevin), it´s also a blind & unquestioning trust. Perhaps you´ve hit my problem in the bullseye there - both unquestioning obedience and blind trust are not concepts I can go along with easily.

Hm.. Just because something requires trust and obedience doesn't mean it needs to go unquestioned.

I can question the notion of the existence of God and not come up with a good answer, and then choose to trust that God exists anyway. It is possible to have a questioning faith.

Yes, exactly. This is one of the misconceptions about what it means to have faith that bothers me. It's not blind belief in that which we cannot see. It has very little to do with belief and much more to do with trust. One can question God's existence, while still trusting in God. I also think that it has less to do in trusting in God's existence, and more to trusting in God. Trusting in God's existence is pointless, we must trust in his guidance and that he will take care of us. That is one of the main ideas of Christianity, I think -- trusting in God rather than trying to do everything for ourselves.

The difference is that Christianity is not about obedience to a particular set of laws. It is about obedience to God, and everyone disagrees about what exactly it is that God is and what exactly it is that he commands. A particular denomination might excommunicate a member because of his or her theological views, but they cannot make them any more or less Christian, and they can certainly not make them any more or less saved. While devotion to a particular denomination might be similar to what you mentioned (and indeed, one needs only look at the Church in the Middle Ages to see how disastrous such blind unquestioning devotion can be), Christianity in and of itself is not at all like that. Christianity is about having a relationship with God, and discovering the truth, even if it does go against conventional church doctrine or a typical interpretation of the Bible.

As I said earlier, to trust in something does not mean that one does so blindly or that one does not question it.