Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is Christianity?
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 211 of 451 (760850)
06-26-2015 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 209 by herebedragons
06-26-2015 8:32 AM


Re: still trying to define what Christianity is.
That's not what they think
I am pretty sure they don't identify themselves as Christian. They actually believe Christians are heretics for claiming Jesus to be God and an uncreated being. They don't follow or worship Jesus, they only follow and worship Jehovah.
So, they would not self-identify as Christian (nor would they be offended at being excluded)
It may be different for different branches of JWs but when I tell a JW at my door that they aren't Christian they insist they are.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by herebedragons, posted 06-26-2015 8:32 AM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by herebedragons, posted 06-26-2015 10:16 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 212 of 451 (760854)
06-26-2015 9:23 AM
Reply to: Message 208 by herebedragons
06-26-2015 8:24 AM


The Creeds as definitive of a Christian
I have to wonder though, that if the Trinity was such an important idea in the early church, why was it not clear in the early Creeds as well as in the New Testament writings?
The Creeds spell out tenets hammered out in debate with various theologians who were then identified as heretics. The Trinity was implicit in scripture but wouldn't have been fully developed if it hadn't been for those who challenged the idea. Early believers knew Christ was God but the Trinity concept wasn't spelled out in detail until Athanasius.
I personally accept the doctrine and believe that the New Testament writings support the idea, but it is not clear to me that the writers and early church fathers really understood the concept and had made it a matter of doctrine. It seems to me they treated the Godhead as a trinity without realizing the implications and without implicitly explaining the doctrine... which of course leaves the whole issue up to interpretation at a later time.
Yes, something like that. The main thing is that the early church understood Christ to be God incarnate. The whole concept of the Trinity is there in scripture but had to be drawn out for it to be recognized by everyone.
I would also note that I would consider this to be the definition/criteria of the Christian religion. Being a part of the Christian religion is not necessarily a free pass on Judgement Day.
Which is why I'd say being born again is the essential part of the definition, if you're talking about being a Christian beyond what people can recognize.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by herebedragons, posted 06-26-2015 8:24 AM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 216 by herebedragons, posted 06-26-2015 11:17 AM Faith has replied
 Message 231 by Rocky.C, posted 06-28-2015 12:06 PM Faith has replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(1)
Message 213 of 451 (760855)
06-26-2015 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by jar
06-25-2015 9:47 PM


Re: who is a doctor or a Lion or an Elk?
I am not trying to simply banter or deal in semantics. This is a serious question.
Personally, I separate the "religion" of Christianity from the "practice" or "relationship" of Christianity. Religion is all the external stuff we do to try a look like a Christian or to fit in with a particular Club or gain favor with God. We think that if we belong to the right Club or believe the right doctrine or develop the right theology that somehow that will make us "True Christians." But it never really does, it only causes contention. It is only external dressings over a much bigger problem - our own inner struggles, our own personal sin.
The "relationship" of Christianity is different. It is about internalizing the teachings of Christ and allowing the Spirit to change us from the inside, change the core of who we are.
Can we absolve Christianity simply by claiming some are not really Christians?
NO. Absolutely not. The religion of Christianity is fraught with failures; we have a long, long history of very much anti-Christian behavior. I don't think it benefits any of us to simply sweep it under the rug by simply denying those people were "True Christians." Instead we should learn from it and try to do better, as you say
Are we not morally obligated to admit our collective and individual failures, acknowledge, confess and repent them, attempt to make amends and try to do better in the future?
One of the things I have learned by studying the history of Christianity is that it is not enough to go through the motions; to only externalize your faith. It has to be internalized, it has to become a part of who you are. It has to actually change you, otherwise it is just "whitewashing a tomb."
Another thing I have learn is that ultimately we are responsible for our own choices. Claiming that God wants me to do this or that (or doesn't want me to do this or that) is ultimately an attempt to shift the responsibility from myself to God and to provide justification for my actions. Instead, we should seek out what we believe God wants us to do and simply say "I feel this is the right thing to do."
Do we not have to acknowledge that Christians more often than not do not behave Christ-like?
Absolutely. I think one of the worst crimes in the Christian church today is that so many people put on a mask to hide their personal struggles and failings. We are afraid to admit that Christians often do not look very Christ-like. We are afraid to be real, reluctant to confess our sins, unwilling to accept responsibility, and uneasy about accepting the failings of others (while at the same time, quick to point them out).
I don't think it all that difficult to identify those that fall under the umbrella of the Christian religion, and I do think it to be a pretty broad umbrella. To identify who is a "True Christian" or someone who "practices" Christianity (a "relationship-type" Christianity) is a lot more difficult and probably, for all practical purposes, impossible. Jesus said "By their fruit you will know them." and this is probably the best criteria to judge. However, it doesn't make the distinction clear-cut. Probably rather than saying that someone is not a "True Christian" because of some behavior, the better criticism would be that the behavior is not Christ-like.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by jar, posted 06-25-2015 9:47 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 214 of 451 (760856)
06-26-2015 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 192 by NoNukes
06-25-2015 4:35 PM


Re: who is a doctor or a Lion or an Elk?
at least the question regarding whether Mary was a virgin
If Jesus was born of a normal conjugal relationship between Mary and Joseph, doesn't it pretty much change the nature of Jesus? I think that is a pretty important premise.
that all humans will be bodily resurrected don't seem essential to me.
It doesn't say "all humans" it says "The resurrection of the body." It could be debatable as to what that means - resurrected as a spirit body, a physical body, all humans, only some humans, what? But the point is that death is not the end, death does not have the final victory. Another important premise.
I also don't find a belief in hell to be essential either.
No, not hell in the traditional sense. In this context it is more referring to "the grave" or "Sheol", the "underworld," the place where the dead go. It does not refer to the hell where the wicked go for judgement.
This is another important premise, since some deny that Jesus actually died. They suppose that he was in a coma or some other kind of ethereal state, but the Creed states that he was DEAD, he even went to the place where the dead go.
If you were talking to such a person who professed to be Christian, how long do you think it might take to find out that he had such strange beliefs. For me, only the belief or lack of belief in hell is likely to come up during a conversation and maybe not even that.
True. I would be unlikely to grill someone about their particular set of beliefs and there are a lot of important issues that would be very unlikely to come up. But that doesn't change what we might say about where the line is or what the distinction is between Christian and other religions.
By my definition (which I altered in a message to jar to be "accepts and confesses the Apostles Creed AND self identifies as a Christian.") is to identify the Christian religion, not what a "True Christian" is.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by NoNukes, posted 06-25-2015 4:35 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 224 by NoNukes, posted 06-26-2015 6:22 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 215 of 451 (760858)
06-26-2015 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 211 by Faith
06-26-2015 9:02 AM


Re: still trying to define what Christianity is.
It may be different for different branches of JWs but when I tell a JW at my door that they aren't Christian they insist they are.
Yea, from my conversations with my aunt (who is JW) I got the impression that that are really a separatist group. They don't really associate themselves with the Christian religion. They consider Jehovah's Witness to be the TRUE religion, not just an offshoot of Christianity. But I guess they do call themselves "Christians."
Here is a statement from their website
quote:
Are Jehovah’s Witnesses Christians?
Yes. We are Christians for the following reasons:
We try to follow closely the teachings and behavior of Jesus Christ.1 Peter 2:21.
We believe that Jesus is the key to salvation, that there is not another name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must get saved.Acts 4:12.
When people become Jehovah’s Witnesses, they are baptized in the name of Jesus.Matthew 28:18, 19.
We offer our prayers in Jesus’ name.John 15:16.
We believe that Jesus is the Head, or the one appointed to have authority, over every man.1 Corinthians 11:3.
However, in a number of ways, we are different from other religious groups that are called Christian. For example, we believe that the Bible teaches that Jesus is the Son of God, not part of a Trinity. (Mark 12:29) We do not believe that the soul is immortal, that there is any basis in Scripture for saying that God tortures people in an everlasting hell, or that those who take the lead in religious activities should have titles that elevate them above others.Ecclesiastes 9:5; Ezekiel 18:4; Matthew 23:8-10.
So, they call themselves Christians, but are not part of the Christian religion - based on the statement "we are different from other religious groups called Christian."
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by Faith, posted 06-26-2015 9:02 AM Faith has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 216 of 451 (760873)
06-26-2015 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 212 by Faith
06-26-2015 9:23 AM


Re: The Creeds as definitive of a Christian
Early believers knew Christ was God but the Trinity concept wasn't spelled out in detail until Athanasius.
But I don't see that it is really clear that the Apostles had the concept of a Trinity in mind when they wrote their scriptures. That concept had to be pieced together later. Maybe some had a better idea of it than others, but it doesn't appear to be a universally understood concept. It is almost presented as a contradiction that needed to be resolved. In one place it says that God is one; in another it says Jesus is God and the Father is as well. That's a contradiction... how do you resolve it? The doctrine of the Trinity.
I already said I accept the Trinity, and it makes sense to me (as much sense as it can, I guess). But it was a doctrine that developed later rather than something that the Apostles clearly and distinctly taught and that allows some openness to interpretation and makes me willing to consider some inclusivity in my definition of Christian.
Now, the concept of a Trinity IS an Article of Faith of the Church of the Nazarene, of which I am a member, and I would not consider someone who rejected the Trinity to be a Nazarene, but that's a different subject, right?
Which is why I'd say being born again is the essential part of the definition,
Except that you don't believe I can be born-again since I believe the earth is very, very old and that life came to be like it is today because of evolutionary processes. So rather than making born-again part of the definition, you define what it means to be born-again. Belief that the Bible is literal truth, belief that the earth is only 6,000 years old, belief in a trinity, belief in a literal hell, etc. are the criteria for being born-again or at the least, are the signs that one is born-again.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Faith, posted 06-26-2015 9:23 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by Faith, posted 06-26-2015 11:50 AM herebedragons has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 217 of 451 (760887)
06-26-2015 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 191 by NoNukes
06-25-2015 4:18 PM


Re: who is a doctor or a Lion or an Elk?
NoNukes writes:
But the point of my aunt's rather impractical hypothetical is that simply identifying Church attendees is not the correct way to define true Christians. So either you missed my point or I didn't tell the story correctly.
No, I got your point. I was just pointing out that your aunt, bless her soul, was wrong.
NoNukes writes:
Ridiculous or not, the arrest of people for being Christ-like is exactly the point of the story.
And the point of the story is wrong. No government would arrest people for showing some aspect of Jesus' teaching in their lives. They'd arrest people who are members of a Christian organization.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by NoNukes, posted 06-25-2015 4:18 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by NoNukes, posted 08-03-2015 4:27 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 218 of 451 (760888)
06-26-2015 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 193 by Jon
06-25-2015 4:42 PM


Re: who is a doctor or a Lion or an Elk?
Jon writes:
Because sometimes when the people are too busy scuffling amongst themselves they can be trusted not to notice the large dick raping them in the bank.
That's a nice conspiracy theory but I don't think it matches reality. Do you have any examples of authoritarian governments that encourage people to "scuffle amongst themselves"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Jon, posted 06-25-2015 4:42 PM Jon has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 219 of 451 (760889)
06-26-2015 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 216 by herebedragons
06-26-2015 11:17 AM


Re: The Creeds as definitive of a Christian
I'm not claiming the writers of the scriptures had the Trinity in mind, but what they wrote showed the nature of Father, Son and Holy Spirit that was there for Athanasius to put together as the Trinity, the New Testament descriptions along with all the similar references in the Old Testament to the same Trinitarian facts, and the New Testament says the prophets of old time didn't understand a lot of what they wrote either, which we should expect of revelations given by God. They wrote what God showed them so it was all there for later understanding.
I don't know if you're born again or not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by herebedragons, posted 06-26-2015 11:17 AM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by herebedragons, posted 06-26-2015 12:22 PM Faith has replied
 Message 238 by Rocky.C, posted 06-29-2015 10:41 AM Faith has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 220 of 451 (760903)
06-26-2015 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by Faith
06-26-2015 11:50 AM


Re: The Creeds as definitive of a Christian
I don't know if you're born again or not.
But it's not good enough for me to say that I am, you would need to know if I believe all the "right" things, correct. Things that are beyond the Apostle's Creed, beyond "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved." and "Whoever believes on him will have everlasting life." You need more than that to decide if someone is saved (i.e. "True Christian") or not, correct?
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by Faith, posted 06-26-2015 11:50 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by jar, posted 06-26-2015 1:18 PM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 223 by Faith, posted 06-26-2015 1:37 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 221 of 451 (760911)
06-26-2015 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 220 by herebedragons
06-26-2015 12:22 PM


Re: The Creeds as definitive of a Christian
Of course neither the Apostle's or Nicene creeds say anything about salvation or a requirement for salvation.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by herebedragons, posted 06-26-2015 12:22 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
Rocky.C
Member (Idle past 3008 days)
Posts: 32
Joined: 06-17-2015


Message 222 of 451 (760912)
06-26-2015 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 163 by Faith
06-24-2015 8:56 AM


Re: Sunday worship and SDA legalism
But with Jesus' atonement, we are no longer required to keep the law. We are not under law, but grace Romans 6:14-15. The Sabbath is fulfilled in Jesus. He is our rest. We are not under obligation, by law, to keep it. And this goes for the Sabbath as well. It is not a requirement that we keep the law. If we were, then we still be under the law, but we are not.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***There are no recorded instances in the Holy Bible showing that the early Church and the Apostles thought that the first day of the week was special. However, the Book of Acts records numerous instances of them still observing the Saturday Sabbath.
Acts13:42 "And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath."
Notice that the Gentiles pleaded with Paul to come back and preach to them the following Sabbath! If the Sabbath was no longer in force, and if it had been replaced with Sunday, wasn't this a perfect opportunity for Paul to tell the Gentile this? He could have easily said why wait until then. Let's do it tomorrow.
Acts 13:44 "And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God."
They were simply obeying the 4th Commandments.
John 15:10 "If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love."
Acts 17"2 "And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,"
Sure enough, obeying the 4th Commandment.
Acts 18:4 "And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks."
The Jews and the Greeks. Jesus said that the Sabbath was made for man--not just the Jews and the Israelites.
The10 Commandments have been in force since creation.
The Sabbath was set apart from the beginning.
Genesis 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
Genesis 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
Sanctify means to set apart. It means to bless it and keep it holy.
My brother believes that any day could be a Sabbath, even every day. God did not mean for man to take every day off and to have a holy convocation (a public assembly, a meeting). We are commanded to rest on the Sabbath, and to hold meetings.
God was very, very satisfied with His six days of creation. The Seventh day Sabbath keeps us focused on the Creator and on His goal.
The Sabbath was not instituted at Sinai. The Israelites observed the Sabbath by collecting a double portion on the sixth day. They were not permitted to work on the Sabbath.
Genesis 39:1-9
When Potiphar left Joseph in charge of his house Potiphar's wife tried to seduce him, but Joseph would not acquiesce;verse 9 tells us why.
9 "There is none greater in this house than I; neither hath he kept back any thing from me but thee, because thou art his wife: how then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?"
The sin against God was adultery; Commandment #7.
When King Abimelech took Abraham's wife, Sarah, into his harem, the Lord visited Him in a dream and told him that if he touched Sarah that he would be a dead man. Genesis 20:1-9. Both God and Abimelech termed adultery "a great sin."
To commit murder as Cain did to Abel was a sin from the beginning or it would not have mattered. #6.
Both Adam and Eve stole from God--the fruit. #8
They put someone else before God--Satan. #1
They Coveted that which was not theirs. #10
They did not honour their Father--which for them was God.
Abraham obeyed God's statutes and His Commandments.
Genesis 26:5 "Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws."
Abraham was neither an Israelite, nor a Jew. Abraham's grandson was the progenitor of the Israelites; and, his great grandson was father of the Jews.
Hebrew 4:1-9
1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.
2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.
4 For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.
5 And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.
6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:
7 Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.
8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.
9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
Notice verse 9. The word rest is from the Greek 4521. It is "Sabbaton." The Sabbath is still a day of rest for God's people.
Again, I remind people:
1John 2:3-4 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Faith, posted 06-24-2015 8:56 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 223 of 451 (760917)
06-26-2015 1:37 PM
Reply to: Message 220 by herebedragons
06-26-2015 12:22 PM


Re: The Creeds as definitive of a Christian
You'd have to believe some basic stuff but I don't have the energy to get into trying to define it right now, but I think there are lots of people who are born again based on some pretty flimsy understanding of doctrine, just nothing outright contradictory. Most of them will eventually grow in their knowledge of doctrine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by herebedragons, posted 06-26-2015 12:22 PM herebedragons has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by anglagard, posted 06-27-2015 2:12 PM Faith has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 224 of 451 (760959)
06-26-2015 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 214 by herebedragons
06-26-2015 9:58 AM


Re: who is a doctor or a Lion or an Elk?
If Jesus was born of a normal conjugal relationship between Mary and Joseph, doesn't it pretty much change the nature of Jesus? I think that is a pretty important premise.
Important, but mandatory?
It is not vital that Mary is a virgin. What is important is that Joseph is not the father of Jesus. I understand that having Mary be a virgin makes such questions easier to answer, but that's a poor reason in my opinion.
t doesn't say "all humans" it says "The resurrection of the body." It could be debatable as to what that means - resurrected as a spirit body, a physical body, all humans, only some humans, what?
If I am reading you correctly it seems that 'resurrection of the body' might be more specific an idea than is needed. I don't think getting a new spirit body counts as having your body resurrected.
No, not hell in the traditional sense. In this context it is more referring to "the grave" or "Sheol", the "underworld," the place where the dead go. It does not refer to the hell where the wicked go for judgement.
What makes you think that?

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by herebedragons, posted 06-26-2015 9:58 AM herebedragons has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 225 of 451 (761050)
06-27-2015 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by Faith
06-26-2015 1:37 PM


Re: The Creeds as definitive of a Christian
HBD writes:
But it's not good enough for me to say that I am, you would need to know if I believe all the "right" things, correct. Things that are beyond the Apostle's Creed, beyond "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved." and "Whoever believes on him will have everlasting life." You need more than that to decide if someone is saved (i.e. "True Christian") or not, correct?
Faith writes:
You'd have to believe some basic stuff but I don't have the energy to get into trying to define it right now, but I think there are lots of people who are born again based on some pretty flimsy understanding of doctrine, just nothing outright contradictory. Most of them will eventually grow in their knowledge of doctrine.
You, just like Marc9000 failed to answer HBD's question, who is a Christian? My understanding is that both of you believe Catholics are not Christians. Are Methodists? Presbyterians? Episcopalians? Lutherans? indeed even Southern Baptists Christians according to you or Marc9000?
Please define Christian so that we can answer the question what is Christianity?
I realize you are tired Faith, please feel free to take your time.

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider. - Francis Bacon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by Faith, posted 06-26-2015 1:37 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by Faith, posted 06-27-2015 2:36 PM anglagard has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024