What is a True Christian?

Mort deHann put it rather well:

quote:

---

"There is a vast difference between coming to Jesus for salvation and coming after Jesus for service. Coming to Christ makes one a believer, while coming after Christ makes one a disciple. All believers are not disciples. To become a believer one accepts the invitation of the Gospel, to be a disciple one obeys the challenge to a life of dedicated service and separation. Salvation comes through the sacrifice of Christ; discipleship comes only by sacrifice of self and surrender to His call for devoted service. Salvation is free, but discipleship involves paying the price of a separated walk. Salvation can't be lost because it depends upon God's faithfulness, but discipleship can be lost because it depends upon our faithfulness." DeHaan, M. R. Hebrews.

---

Note that salvation is a free gift---as you have stated---personally I dont agree with the idea that GOD simply chooses everyone. I believe that everyone is not damned foreknowingly, however.Discipleship means doing which you also have stated.Your whole belief about there being more of other groups--including atheists--in heaven than many Christians would only make sense if God chose everybody. Where I disagree with you is that I believe that we must choose Him...He is the door through whom we enter.

As I am thinking about an answer to this question, the entire argument becomes clearer in my mind.

What is the difference between a club and a family?

Is a child in a family expected to follow or adhere to the belief of his/her parents or are they just as accepted for being the contrarian...the rebel?

Were the father adopting children, would or should he care what culture they were from? Whether they had been in prison or not? Whether they were honest or not? If they were mentally challenged and had special needs which may require more of his time and money?

---

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.~Proverbs 28:26

I believe that it deserves a moment or two of our discourse. Lets break it down and see if we agree or disagree with what this statement asserts.
A believer by definition believes in the teachings, example, or even character of Jesus Christ. According to DeHann, Coming to Christ makes one a believer. We have discussed the concept of salvation and "being saved" before--IIRC you say that no one can really know until after they die--perhaps not even then.Correct me if I'm wrong but you conclude that a Disciple...a doer of what Christ did...does not even need to be a believer. Your belief is unique and is logical only if Paul was wrong and that the death,burial, and resurrection is not the central message of the Gospel. I believe that the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ is what has given meaning to the charge and has been the lynchpin of most chapters of the club...not to mention the family. As far as that goes, I believe that there are two bodies of people...two families if you will. One is the Body of Christ. The other one is not willing to be adopted. By that fact alone, the second family is defined.Will you critique DeHanns quote and explain how you understand it to mean?

Of course not. Paul was not simply a man selling something. Paul was, in my belief, a man on a mission who believed that much of what he spoke at his meetings was inspired not by his own imagination or motive but by the living God Himself. Of course we had no reporter on the scene, camera and mic in hand...so we must use other ways to judge Pauls integrity and mental stability.

I would say that motive and intention matter. When we exhort,encourage, or teach each other we either use truth as we understand it or truth as we define it. And in this context we are limiting scripture to what is found in the modern canon..(NIV,NKJV,KJV) Mark Twain can take a seat and write more about Tom and Huck. Jesus knew what the Law said but elaborated based on the premise that the truth is written on human hearts and is not found in a scroll. Or as some critics do, conclude that Jesus was a mythical character in a book...as was Moses. Their basic argument is that human wisdom,fable, and story change over time at the whims of the authors and/or storytellers. I disagree based on observation. I ask who said it. I ask to whom was it being said. I ask what the cultural context was.Of course, I believe that Jesus not only existed and was alive but that He is alive today and that the comforter---the Holy Spirit---can speak through any one of us. I weigh my answers carefully when I present them here. Consensus would suggest that there is no way that i can prove such an answer so to attempt to do so merely digs me a bigger hole to crawl out of. I also must consider my audience. If we are arguing that absolute moral truth can come through one human to another, the point of whether a manuscript is original or not only pertains to the estimated human lifespan of the purported speaker. If we conclude that the stories were and are "made up" we have a different argument.Then we have a third argument. What is truth? Is truth relative or absolute? Is the truths gleaned from the Bible any more special than Mark Twain and the Perfect Stranger?Again....what is truth?

This graph is interesting: According to this, there were original manuscripts.

Are you thus saying that if GOD ever existed apart from human imagination and that IF Jesus was a great prophet and messenger from GOD that we have no way to learn from the stories apart from revising them according to our own logic, reason, and reality? So in other words, whatever we make up and rewrite is the legacy to pass on to the next generation....got it.I realize that there is a lot of bad religion out there. You may have mentioned a time or two that one of the worst effects of modern Christian teaching is the shirking of personal responsibility for our daily actions and behaviors.I might argue that belief is more important than people think. You may think that helping folks out to the car with their groceries carrys a lot of moral weight, but I would argue that the example you are giving them also hinges on whether you are talking to them about the source of your daily inspiration rather than simply showing them the content..while perhaps joking about Donald Trumps sex habits.They see the overall character that you are.

My name is Phat and I approve of this message! So you just do it because you are charged to do it. Correct?No other motives? I think I'm liking your response so far.Tell me though...does it matter how you behave while helping them?