Smasharoo wrote:
It's extremely relevant to the idea of any group of people assuming that they are saved (especially if they believe that others who are not in the group aren't). Which is why I found it completely ironic that a born again Christian would reference it (and manage to fail to understand what it said about his own position on salvation).
Yeah, except that it's not and you misunderstood it AND the explanation. The point is that it's not a competition, and not to be jealous of others apparent lack of effort relative to your own.
Yeah, because it's God's decision who gets paid and who doesn't, not yours. If God wants to give a guy who worked 5 minutes a full day's pay, that's his choice. Get it? It's about how God decides who is worthy, not man. Holy hell you guys are dense! I linked and quoted a source that said this exact thing, yet you're still going to insist it's something else? Why? Because I'm saying it and you have a pathological need to believe that I'm wrong?
Wow. Just... wow.
Quote:
Kelvy understands it perfectly. Joph does as well. I imagine most 9 year old Sunday School children understand it.
They understand incorrectly. I'm just not sure how much more clearly I can say this. We could ask 100 Bible experts what the parable means, and all 100 of them will include some form of "God chooses who goes to heaven, not man" in their explanation. It's part of what the parable teaches. If you don't get that, that's your failure, not mine.
Quote:
Not sure what you're @#%^ing missing but it has ZERO to with people "assuming" they are saved.
It does have a lot to do with people making assumptions about what is required to be saved though. If we equate "receiving one denarius" to "going to heaven", the entire thing is about the first group assuming that since they worked a full day to get their denarius, that it would be unfair for someone who worked less to get the same reward. This is exactly about one group believing they know what is required to be saved, and then being pissed to discover that people who didn't do the same things they did *also* got saved.
It's the whole freaking point of the parable!
Quote:
In point of fact, the primary selling point of Christianity is the CERTAINTY that ANYONE can be saved if they accept Christ.
Yup. "Can be". I could have sworn I already addressed this point. The other primary point of Christianity (and I'm sure you'd normally agree any religion that depends on an untestable reward) is that no one can be certain if they've really earned salvation. No one. It's about keeping people on the straight and narrow, right? The whole "anyone can be saved if they accept Christ into their hearts" is to ensure that no one thinks "well, I've been a bad person all my life, so there's no point in trying to change".
"Accepting Christ" is about more than standing up in front of people and saying "I accept Christ as my savior". That's the point.
Quote:
There are lots of mysteries in any invisible man in the sky story, but this parable is absolutely not alluding to them. If anything it's preaching certainty and community. Each sinners path is equally valid IF he repents and accepts Christ. Hitler on his deathbed or Mother Teresa (actually she seems to have been a bit of an attention ***** fraud, but let's stipulate the persona most people mean when they reference her).
If that were the only lesson, then it wouldn't mention the first workers being upset that they got the same pay as the people who showed up last. It's *also* teaching people that God decides who is saved, not man.