Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,411 Year: 3,668/9,624 Month: 539/974 Week: 152/276 Day: 26/23 Hour: 2/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is a 'true Christian'?
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 141 (726479)
05-09-2014 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by faceman
05-09-2014 4:11 AM


That's not me commanding it, but rather reporting it.
If you were just reporting it, then it wouldn't be coming along with your interpretations of what it means and how it works.
Its not up for you to say. A person could be considered, by God, to be a Christian without fullfilling one of the qualifications you insist upon.
Correct, it's not up to me. If it were, I'd let everyone in. The very simple qualification I listed was outlined by Jesus in the Bible. I don't insist upon it, Jesus does.
Romans 10:9 writes:
If you declare with your mouth, Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
That would be Denying the antecedent, a logical fallacy. If P then Q. Not P therefore not Q. That doesn't work.
A better verse to make your claim would be where Jesus said that no one comes to the Father except through him (John 14:6). But still, that doesn't mean that people who don't think Jesus is God cannot be a Christian. Its possible that they could still come to the Father through Jesus even thought they didn't think he was God, we really don't know.
Anyways, in the parable of the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25, Jesus explains that there will be Christians who are not saved and there will be non-Christians who are saved, so he disagrees with your qualifications in some parts of the Bible.
but you have to hold on to Romans 10:9, otherwise you're lost.
Regardless, you could still be a Christian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by faceman, posted 05-09-2014 4:11 AM faceman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by faceman, posted 05-10-2014 1:03 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1426 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(4)
Message 17 of 141 (726502)
05-09-2014 11:37 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by nwr
05-08-2014 11:24 AM


Moses made a huge mistake when he included a commandment against adultery instead of one against homosexuality.
Actually you are told not to covet thy neighbors ass ... thus covering bestiality and sodomy in one fell swoop.
(and there were probably more on the third tablet, the one Moses dropped ... )

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by nwr, posted 05-08-2014 11:24 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 433 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 18 of 141 (726509)
05-09-2014 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by faceman
05-08-2014 11:55 PM


faceman writes:
If I honestly think I'm Napoleon Bonaparte, does that make it so?
That's a poor analogy. We're talking about people who think they're folowers of Jesus, not people who think they're Jesus.
If you honestly think you are a follower of Napoleon, who's to say you're not? Napoleon, maybe. But other people who claim to be followers of Napoleon don't get to decide whether you are or not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by faceman, posted 05-08-2014 11:55 PM faceman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by faceman, posted 05-10-2014 1:11 AM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 433 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 19 of 141 (726512)
05-09-2014 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Phat
05-09-2014 10:00 AM


Re: Phats Opinion
Phat writes:
I could also claim to be a true athlete, but one minute on the track, or on the Pitchers Mound, or the Tennis Court would quickly confirm or deny my claim.
That would confirm or deny your claim of being a good athlete. Why can't you be a "true athlete" without being any good at it?
Phat writes:
Whoever trusts in Jesus, though he believes one moment and dies the next, has his life hid with Christ in God.
I ask repeatedly and never get a good answer: What does it mean to "trust in Jesus"? Does it mean believing he was a real person, five-foot-nine with a beard and long hair? Or does it mean doing what He wanted you to do?
Phat writes:
In essence, relationship with Jesus is a definite indicator.
Again, what does "relationship" mean? Does it mean saying, "I do, I do, I do believe in spooks," or does it mean doing thngs that He would like you to do?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Phat, posted 05-09-2014 10:00 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Phat, posted 05-09-2014 1:36 PM ringo has replied
 Message 22 by Phat, posted 05-09-2014 1:44 PM ringo has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18298
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 20 of 141 (726520)
05-09-2014 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by ringo
05-09-2014 12:52 PM


Re: Phats Opinion
David Platt,small group study writes:
"Follow Me." These two words contained radical implications for the lives of the disciples. In a time when the sons of fishers were also fishers, these men would have grown up around the sea. Fishing was the source of their livelihood and all they'd ever known. It represented everything familiar and natural to them.
That's what Jesus was calling them away from.
By calling these men to leave their boats, Jesus was calling them to abandon their careers. When He called them to leave their nets, He was calling them to abandon their possessions. When He called them to leave their father in the boat by himself, He was calling them to abandon their family and friends. Ultimately, Jesus was calling them to abandon themselves.
Thats David Platts take on it. Evidently he does not consider Jesus as a dead spook.
ringo writes:
Does it mean believing he was a real person, five-foot-nine with a beard and long hair? Or does it mean doing what He wanted you to do?
I think that we have established already---in other threads--that doing what He wants(wanted, for some) us to do is a necessity. jar would argue that it does not matter if we believe He is alive or not, while others would argue that it is only through His transforming Spirit that we can by nature even love our neighbor without coveting his ass or his wife or anything else.
ringo writes:
What does it mean to "trust in Jesus"?
To me, it means trusting that I am doing the best that I can do on a daily basis...in communion with His living Spirit. Others may not feel the need for that belief in order to do the best that they can do. Personally, I believe that He lives in me. Some fully understand what I'm talking about while others may think my belief a bit bizarre.
Edited by Phat, : spellcheck

When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to meannothing more nor less.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by ringo, posted 05-09-2014 12:52 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by ringo, posted 05-09-2014 1:44 PM Phat has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 433 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 21 of 141 (726521)
05-09-2014 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Phat
05-09-2014 1:36 PM


Re: Phats Opinion
Phat writes:
Evidently he does not consider Jesus as a dead spook.
What I'm saying is that it doesn't make any difference whether He's a dead spook or a fictional character. Neither prevents us from following Him.
Phat writes:
... others would argue that it is only through His transforming Spirit that we can by nature even love our neighbor without coveting his ass or his wife or anything else.
I keep pointing out (and you seem to keep ignoring) the fact that it isn't - in reality - only Christians (whether true or not) who demonstrate love for their neighbours. Why do you continue to repeat a mantra that is obviously false?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Phat, posted 05-09-2014 1:36 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Phat, posted 05-09-2014 1:58 PM ringo has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18298
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 22 of 141 (726522)
05-09-2014 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by ringo
05-09-2014 12:52 PM


Re: Phats Opinion
ringo writes:
Why can't you be a "true athlete" without being any good at it?
Either you are athletic or you are not. There is a point where one cannot run fast enough to catch the pop fly to right field. If they are not good at baseball, they are not athletic enough to catch the ball.
Going further with these analogies...I suppose that one could simply go and do good for others without being religious....thus they are a true humanist. My point is that by definition, a Christian has trust that Jesus Christ is alive today (in Spirit) and that they trust this Spirit in daily communion...be it formal or informal. A humanist would have no desire (or self professed need) to trust anything apart from themselves or other living humans to be in communion with. I would agree, however, that Jesus would not shun them for such belief. Perhaps they would not feel in communion with Him since they lacked belief yet that would not prevent Him from having communion with them---even without their conscious awareness of such a thing.

When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to meannothing more nor less.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by ringo, posted 05-09-2014 12:52 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by ringo, posted 05-10-2014 11:53 AM Phat has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18298
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 23 of 141 (726525)
05-09-2014 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by ringo
05-09-2014 1:44 PM


Re: Phats Opinion
ringo writes:
What I'm saying is that it doesn't make any difference whether He's a dead spook or a fictional character.
To some it would.
Paul...who purportedly got knocked off his high horse and blinded before he accepted Jesus...argues that if the Gospel is false...the entire calling is in vain.
1 Corinthians 15:1-17 writes:
1 Cor 15:1-17
Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
9 For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them-yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. 11 Whether, then, it was I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.
12 But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.
I can see your point---however---that it is actions that count more than beliefs. Thus, you may argue that it is irrelevant if the Gospel is true or if Jesus actually existed...as long as you live the actions that the character in the book lived.
Apparently, the author of Corinthians did not think so. I would say---in conclusion---that doing is better than mere believing. Faith without works is dead. And actions speak louder than words. I do not diminish the words in Corinthians, however. The character in the book must be eternally alive even if fictional. Thats a requirement of this character.

When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to meannothing more nor less.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by ringo, posted 05-09-2014 1:44 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by ringo, posted 05-10-2014 12:03 PM Phat has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18298
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 24 of 141 (726526)
05-09-2014 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by New Cat's Eye
05-08-2014 10:52 AM


Word Up
If you define a Christian with a qualification that requires the Bible, then none of the people who existed before the Bible was compiled could be considered Christians. Which would include the authors.
Not so. The word was the word in the beginning. The word(s) were spoken orally long before they were written down. The early believers surely had some impartation from the spoken word---if not the written.

When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to meannothing more nor less.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-08-2014 10:52 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-09-2014 2:38 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 141 (726530)
05-09-2014 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Phat
05-09-2014 2:27 PM


Re: Word Up
If you define a Christian with a qualification that requires the Bible, then none of the people who existed before the Bible was compiled could be considered Christians. Which would include the authors.
Not so. The word was the word in the beginning. The word(s) were spoken orally long before they were written down. The early believers surely had some impartation from the spoken word---if not the written.
But the Bible is the books. If you base your definition of being a true Christian as believing in the books, then the people who lived before the books could not be considered Christians. Which is obviously in error, so the definition cannot be based on the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Phat, posted 05-09-2014 2:27 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Faith, posted 05-09-2014 2:59 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 26 of 141 (726532)
05-09-2014 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by New Cat's Eye
05-09-2014 2:38 PM


Re: Word Up
The Bible today is the "books" but Paul's teachings were inspired before they were bound into a book, and all the New Testament writings were considered to be inspired before they were bound into a book. They were recognized as inspired by the early church and passed around as individual writings for many years before the canon was fully recognized and long long before it was bound into a book. And the Old Testament was the inspired source for the New Testament writers themselves.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-09-2014 2:38 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-09-2014 3:03 PM Faith has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 27 of 141 (726533)
05-09-2014 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Faith
05-09-2014 2:59 PM


Re: Word Up
The Bible today is the "books" but Paul's teachings were inspired before they were bound into a book, and all the New Testament writings were considered to be inspired before they were bound into a book. They were recognized as inspired by the early church and passed around as individual writings for many years before the canon was fully recognized and long long before it was bound into a book. And the Old Testament was the inspired source for the New Testament writers themselves.
Right, and therefore, believing in the books cannot be a requirement for being a Christian. There were Christians before there were the books.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Faith, posted 05-09-2014 2:59 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 05-09-2014 3:38 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(3)
Message 28 of 141 (726535)
05-09-2014 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by New Cat's Eye
05-09-2014 3:03 PM


Re: Word Up
The Christians who were before the books believed what we now believe THROUGH the books. The point is what we believe not what form it came to us in.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-09-2014 3:03 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-09-2014 3:49 PM Faith has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 29 of 141 (726536)
05-09-2014 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Faith
05-09-2014 3:38 PM


Re: Word Up
The Christians who were before the books believed what we now believe THROUGH the books. The point is what we believe not what form it came to us in.
Okay, so then there's no requirement to believe in the Bible to be a true Christian.
And your definition that a true Christian must take the Bible as the final authority is in error.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 05-09-2014 3:38 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Faith, posted 05-09-2014 3:57 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 30 of 141 (726537)
05-09-2014 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by New Cat's Eye
05-09-2014 3:49 PM


Re: Word Up
Okay, so then there's no requirement to believe in the Bible to be a true Christian.
And your definition that a true Christian must take the Bible as the final authority is in error.
No, let's take this very slowly. The books we have now contain the same truths the early Christians believed who did not have the books we have. They had the original teachers, and soon they also had many of the separate writings of those teachers. It's all the same teachings, whether in our Bible or word of mouth as they originally got it. Now we have it in book form and we don't have the teachers around to teach us as they did, so it's a good thing we have the books that preserve their teachings for us. And because the books contain those inspired teachings the Bible is the final authority and we must believe it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-09-2014 3:49 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-09-2014 4:16 PM Faith has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024