Cognitive impairment and salvation

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

DaisyJane

I probably should be working.
The question of the need to know and accept Christ came up during the Matthew study, and has cropped up again in the Mark thread. I think the idea is worth unpacking but I didn't want to derail P3s Bible study.

What of situations where one cannot know or accept Christ/salvation such as with cognitive impairment of any kind? Are these people saved or doomed? How do people make sense of this?

I personally believe that we are all people of God. Period.
 
DaisyJane: "What of situations where one cannot know or accept Christ/salvation such as with cognitive impairment of any kind? Are these people saved or doomed? How do people make sense of this?"

Jesus teaches that salvation depends on living up to the degree of spiritual light that one can receive. Thus, to the degree that one is incapable of perceiving the light, one is not held accountable by God: "Yhat servant who did not know [what his master wanted] and did what deserved a beating shall receive a light beating. For from the one to whom much has been given, much will be required; and from the one to whom much has been entrusted, even more will be demanded (Luke 12:48)."

DaisyJane: "I personally believe that we are all people of God. Period."

Well then, you personally believe that Jesus was wrong when He said:
"Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your father in heaven (Matthew 5:44-45)."
Jesus teaches that status as God's children is not automatic, but rather depends on a righteous way of being.
 
But those who care most about their "righteous way of being" have more commonly found a "self-righteous way of being." You're like Exhibit A here.

This is an exclusivity that allows complete a**holes like yourself to feel smug about it. It's the perfect belief if you like to envision your opponents suffering, and covering yourself with "prayers" for them.

I wish Christianity had more reason to believe that God's love was universal, but the evidence for that is overwhelmed by the evidence against, both in scripture, and in life. There is no evidence for any afterlife outcome, unless we commission a study, inflicting head trauma on subjects and getting them to write down later what they experienced while we were trying to kill them.
 
Does the cognitive dissonance formula pop in when passions override intelligence in a blind nebula?

Leaves the populace in a dark cloud ... well isn't that the jack of all trades ... and then you're out!
 
As I shared on the Matthew thread DaisyJane, I believe that, due to the activity of God, one may receive Christ in the waters of baptism.

Further, I believe that, due to the activity of God, one may be saved through the hearing of God's Word.

What's important is God's activity. God will work through the ways God has chosen to save each and every one of God's elect.
 
Pure God-love would create a blind passion that would be criminally deficient of responsibility of any soulful activity ... and thus the soul finds itself poisoned by the pickle! Some dehydration and arid ness may be noted ...

A grand resolution ... don;t think! Is that destructive on a larger scale ?

Bad God! Will we label that satire or a demonic ... void?

Admit it is a Christianity with something missing because of the burn holes ... the fire tender as Dan!
 
Can we pair oligarchy and dogma ... as something without motive sensations? Unmovable when god is the mysterious traveller ... allah in peace ... restive Gods where the weal turns slowly ...

Tis something to process when oligarchs tell the demos not to think about it ... the common mist!

Does shutdown of process remove hope and charity and concert the demos to oligarchal excesses ... lying, cheating, slavery and crowing murder to survive?

Tell me that demos are not hopeless when against the mass of Monis ... metaphor or anagram ... look at it from the other side ... some neurologists say projecting is evil as one get beyond themselves ... and into the question! Some deny questions what so ever ...

Superfluous creeps?

Superfluous; unnecessary, especially through being more than enough.

Often redundant because the isolated just don't grasp ... soulfully sad how this goes ... allowing that intelligence is strangely beyond those staunch types ... and yet the word continues to evolve ... a sign?

May be more complex than the simple can grasp ... nonetheless seized by concepts ... thought makes them insecure ...

Dissonant cognizance as ERis Cis ... spontaneity? There may be icons that it is about to blow ... tote M's? Stems of the tree of epistemology? The unknown is questionable?
 
Last edited:
Quakers believe that there is “ that of God in everyone”. My experience tells me that that is what connects us. It also sometimes seems that cognitive skills can be a hinderance to connect with that part of us. If there is a need for salvation, I think we need to be saved from overthinking things.
 
Quakers believe that there is “ that of God in everyone”. My experience tells me that that is what connects us. It also sometimes seems that cognitive skills can be a hinderance to connect with that part of us. If there is a need for salvation, I think we need to be saved from overthinking things.

God as love must be pryed out ... as in the swamp of words available for understanding ... some digging may be prerequisite ... stones will not go well there .. they sink to quickly into obscurity! Vast sense of occult ... dark, unknowns!

Stories, myths lies and myrrh will occur as this is stirred ... myrrh has this oh dour sense ...
 
The stinking mystery must be poked as dour ... Jan that's sometimes really deeply behind ... am ule-ism?

"J" is the "I" of the gaff ... can steer elephants ... or bull as BS!

It too must be digested ... why some feel that gnawing ... flow of sticks?

Pokes from all directions ... demos alien sense ... like bump in the night ... an abstract?

Cloud of words ...
 
Quakers believe that there is “ that of God in everyone”. My experience tells me that that is what connects us. It also sometimes seems that cognitive skills can be a hinderance to connect with that part of us. If there is a need for salvation, I think we need to be saved from overthinking things.
Love this!
 
The question of the need to know and accept Christ came up during the Matthew study, and has cropped up again in the Mark thread. I think the idea is worth unpacking but I didn't want to derail P3s Bible study.

What of situations where one cannot know or accept Christ/salvation such as with cognitive impairment of any kind? Are these people saved or doomed? How do people make sense of this?

I personally believe that we are all people of God. Period.

I guess "need to" and "know" are perhaps the problematic interpretations, as is "saved" IMO. I too believe God is present in all, and as a prior minister was fond of saying to us (every week!) "You are the beloved child of God = there is nothing you can do to make God love you more or less". It was a good reminder to me.
 
I guess "need to" and "know" are perhaps the problematic interpretations, as is "saved" IMO. I too believe God is present in all, and as a prior minister was fond of saying to us (every week!) "You are the beloved child of God = there is nothing you can do to make God love you more or less". It was a good reminder to me.


Some systemic beliefs would trash that ...
 
I guess "need to" and "know" are perhaps the problematic interpretations, as is "saved" IMO. I too believe God is present in all, and as a prior minister was fond of saying to us (every week!) "You are the beloved child of God = there is nothing you can do to make God love you more or less". It was a good reminder to me.

It may have been pleasant to your ears - but was it true? Is it what the Bible says? The United Church minister I had when I was growing up used to spout a similar line every week. His was, "God loves you, and God loves his children everywhere."
 
It may have been pleasant to your ears - but was it true? Is it what the Bible says? The United Church minister I had when I was growing up used to spout a similar line every week. His was, "God loves you, and God loves his children everywhere."

Why would God offer salvation if God did not love us? I mean, arguably, if God loves all of us equally, then universalism should be true but to even offer the possibility to all suggests love of some degree. Where one has to wonder is when one gets to limited atonement per Calvinism. If God elected to save x but not y at the beginning to time, can God be said to love x and y equally? However, that's likely getting off-topic for this thread and it's likely been discussed somewhere before.

What of situations where one cannot know or accept Christ/salvation such as with cognitive impairment of any kind? Are these people saved or doomed? How do people make sense of this?

Of course, unmerited Grace, whether universal or limited, resolves the dilemma since the decision is entirely God's. Knowing and accepting Christ are not required to for salvation and, in fact, are arguably gifts of Grace so are available to anyone who receives such Grace.
 
Last edited:
Hi DaisyJane,
Scripture doesnt address every scenario IMO which sometimes causes us to just "wing it" without the specific guidance from the Bible IMO.
I like the analogy of God as a mother hen who protects and will save her children. Most loving mothers can relate to this as gathering her children under her wings for protection ...even sacrificing themselves if necessary. Whatever happens to our children we will do our best to protect them because they are ours. ......no matter what. I see God much the same way.
 
Quakers believe that there is “ that of God in everyone”. My experience tells me that that is what connects us. It also sometimes seems that cognitive skills can be a hinderance to connect with that part of us. If there is a need for salvation, I think we need to be saved from overthinking things.

And Quakers are right in the sense that all humanity is created "in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:26-28)." But what does the phrase "image and likeness" mean? In the Ancient Near East, powerful kings set up statues of themselves in conquered lands to symbolize their presence and authority there, despite their physical absence. So we represent God's presence and authority in the world to "subdue the earth" (to use the assumed conquest metaphor). But this divinely ordained mastery of the earth can be executed righteously or unrighteously, with ecological sensitivity or selfish exploitation. So Jesus refutes the OP's claim that "we are all people of God" by denying our automatic status as "children of God" in favor of disciples' acquiring this status through righteous loving conduct (so Matthew 5:45).

St. Augustine eloquently expresses the biblically intended synthesis of these claims in his famous prayer:
"Thou hast made us for Thyself and our hearts are restless until we find our rest in Thee."
In the OP DaisyJane claims that "we are all people of God."
 
Back
Top