What is a True Christian?

It is not related to my belief system but rather the conclusion based on all the evidence.What things might define a Christian?A belief that Jesus is the son of God? Well, then anyone who says they believe that qualifies as a Christian until you can come up with a valid test of beliefs.Membership in a recognized chapter of Club Christian? Then anyone who is a member of a recognized chapter of Club Christian qualifies as a Christian until you can come up with a valid test of accreditation.Someone who behaves like Jesus commanded? Then those who behave like Jesus commanded even if NOT a member of a chapter (recognized or unrecognized) of Club Christian qualifies as a Christian.But there are really few things that can be used to determine membership. As you say, many claim membership. You claim membership. Faith claims membership. The Pope claims membership.What objective criteria do you suggest that should be used to test such claims?The body of evidence says that Christians as a group do not behave any differently than any other social demographic.The body of evidence says that Christians have been at least as violent and intolerant and more successful at genocide than any other group in history.The body of evidence shows that Christianity was spread mostly by politics, power and commerce and not by Jesus message.The body of evidence shows Christians have been creating definitions of what makes a Christian almost since the beginning and so there are thousands of chapters in Club Christian with each writing their own Club Standards and denying the legitimacy of members in all other chapters.I actually think it is not even necessary to be a member of a chapter of Club Christian, particularly a recognized Chapter. I am willing to agree that if you as an example think you are a Christian then I will accept you as a Christian.But if you have a criteria to suggest, present it for consideration. The evidence shows though that such criteria most often are simply meant as a way to exclude those who might disagree with the position of the criteria presenter.

Perhaps you find meaning in that but I really can't see it at all. Nor does it have any relevance I can see to the topic or discussion. But Phat, I am simply repeating what Jesus is said to have said?

I have no use for terms like disciple. No, that is not at all correct. My belief is not unique, it may well be a minority view I am sure. But my position has value for those clothed, fed, healed, comforted, educated, protected.The promise of a life after death and of rewards is an easy and attractive sale but does it have value for those not clothed, fed, healed, comforted, educated, protected? That is the position of many of the marketers of Christianity.I do not think it was Jesus position but then Jesus was never a Christian. Sure, it is word salad marketing meant to create a feel good emotion and feeling of superiority. It's a total worthless. meaningless exercise in propagandizing.

But there are NO original manuscripts.

No one questions that there were originals but I see no way we can assume to know what those originals said.

It's not simply rules changing but the very Gods changing. Jesus is marketing an entirely different God than was being marketed in Exodus or Leviticus.

But Jesus was not a Christian and Christianity is a creation of folk after Jesus death.

My point is that the evidence shows the material that is called scripture varies based on the goals, era and culture of the authors and the interpretation of that so called scripture depends on the goals, era and culture of the reader.The idea of an inerrant Bible is modern. It's built around an extra Biblical cultural disconnect from both the actual texts in the so called scripture and the processes that were involved in creating the various Canons. It is a cultural concept peculiar to some chapters of Club Christian.A great example is the application of the "All scripture..." quote mine to the concept of scripture equally Bible. Of course even the concept of a Bible did not exist at the time that passage would have been written. Even then the only material canonized was likely the first five books of the Old Testament.Then there is Jesus. Again, the evidence shows the character Jesus not through a single God Breathed lens but rather through the biases, culture, era and goals of many different authors. The Synoptic Gospels present one point of view, John a different point of view and the Epistles are more about developing the basic structure (including the infighting of the various visions of what the new club would be like) of Club Christian; important issues like who could be a member, what initiation rites will be used, what will be the Mission Statement and Vision Statement of the new club.If you look at the passages attributed to the character Jesus in the different stories it would seem his vision was primarily two fold, to reform his religion, Judaism; and to outline a new set of moral and social guidelines that were oriented outwards as opposed to inwards, a secular view of mankind as opposed to the Jewish exclusive vision. It was a change from the concept of a People Apart and Chosen to the position of a People Among the Chosen but just one of many such Peoples.But even the above reflects my era, goals and culture. As we can see in this and so many other threads, other people with other goals and culture even from the same era interpret scripture differently.And that is the point.There is no True Christian, They are all True Christians.Edited by jar, : rally applin spallin fist ---------> fiRst

But stop and think about what you find interesting.First, no one doubts that there were original manuscripts but as I and others have pointed out, not a single example has ever been found. We simply do not know what any original manuscript said.Second, look at the dates they claim.The earliest examples of written records we have found go back about 1500 to 2500 years before the earliest date they claim for original manuscripts.Before there were written records there was the oral history. Oral histories are known for evolving over time to fit the audiences desires.So there are a few conclusions based on the data you presented. Even if the Young Earth nonsense was accepted there were thousands of years worth of material transmitted only orally before getting put into written form. If we accept the Old Earth position there was hundreds of thousands of years of modern human history not recorded at all in the Judaic Original Manuscripts.Even when you move forward to the Christian Era we do not have any Original Manuscripts and we only have the few manuscripts that were selected for inclusion into the Canon. We know though that there were many other such documents since there are examples in what was included showing Jesus quoting from them.I made part of my living as a writer of both fiction and technical non-fiction and so can testify from first hand knowledge that what gets finally published often has only a general flavor of what was originally written.

Amazing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!What I said was that "Oral histories are known for evolving over time to fit the audiences desires." But I never argue or assert anything carries moral weight or that moral weight has any meaning or value.The inspiration for my acts is a perceived possibility to help someone else and has absolutely nothing to do with morals or morality.Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

I think it's best to be polite and try not to injure folk while helping them or forcing or imposing help where it is not wanted. But most similar stuff really just goes unnoticed. No one sees you put carts back in the rack instead of the parking space, bring in the neighbors trash can, pick up trash or any of the tiny little things we could all be doing everyday that would improve the quality of life for everybody.

It's not a matter of doing the impossible or even the very difficult. It takes no more effort to push a cart sitting next to you car into the store than it does just to walk to the store. It takes no effort to help someone reach a package on a high shelf. It only adds a second to hold a door open for others. And it's far easier to squat so you are at eye level when talking with kids.No one needs to save the world, we just need to help within a ten foot circle.Edited by jar, : very vary