Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8871 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-23-2018 7:27 PM
209 online now:
Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (1 member, 208 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: paradigm of types
Upcoming Birthdays: DrJones*
Post Volume:
Total: 840,658 Year: 15,481/29,783 Month: 1,425/1,502 Week: 182/241 Day: 61/74 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
456
7
89Next
Author Topic:   What Is A Christian (Remix)
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 91 of 133 (426180)
10-05-2007 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by ringo
10-05-2007 2:49 PM


It seems just the opposite to me.

We were talking about different things. I knew it!

The topic is what makes a Christian a Chriatian, not who "we" consider to be a Christian.

At first read, I thought the OP was talking about the opposite of that.

I still think that might be what Phat intended. But I could be wrong.

Take a look at Message 44:

quote:
...if you said that you were a Christian but you don't believe and follow Jesus. Then I would say Nuh-uh. Or if you said that you don't think that Jesus was God's son. Or if you thought that Jesus never existed.
I agree with you. Anyone may be able to make it into heaven by doing the good philosophies of the tales told round the campfire, but to be a Christian, you need to relate to Christ IMHO.

It seems Phat is not talking about who is a christian, in the sense of who is saved, but who is a Christian in the sense of who should be called a Christian.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by ringo, posted 10-05-2007 2:49 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by ringo, posted 10-05-2007 3:21 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded
 Message 94 by jar, posted 10-05-2007 3:35 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1855 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 92 of 133 (426182)
10-05-2007 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by New Cat's Eye
10-05-2007 3:02 PM


You'll find Christians that accept or reject any combination of those. But they could still be considered Christians.

i am well aware. however, very many of them seem to think they own the rule book.

Still though, there's some minimum requirements for who we should consider Christians.

Certainly, being a follower of Christ is one of them. Maybe the only one?

i think we're walking in circles.

I'm not talking about the saving. I'm just talking about the label.

isn't the saving the purpose of the label? you know, so we know who's going to hell or not? (not that *i* care, but it seems to be a popular point of discussion.

Again, I'm not judging their status with God. I'm trying to find the criteria for who we, as Christians, should consider others as Christians or not.

again, i think the status with god determines who is a christian. and determining who they are doesn't affect or shouldn't affect your relations with them in any way. since it shouldn't affect your relations with them, it shouldn't matter.

I don't think the criteria can be just being like Christ, because that would include non-Christians like Gandhi who is a Hindu and not a Christian but happens to be like Christ.

i think it would be easily enough decided to exclude anyone who claims a different title.

because a non-Christian (like a double-agent or something) could easily become a member while not be a Christian.

i think this idea is unnecessarily paranoid. what purpose would one have in pretending to be a christian? unless you treat your christians and your non-christians differently.

What do you think the criteria should be?

i think the best knowledge we have is claim. even if someone is not like christ but claims to be a christian, they can be. people are flawed, that's what jesus was for. maybe his path is harder than yours. but. i really think it's unnecessary and all too divisive to waste time sitting around pontificating on who's a christian and who isn't.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-05-2007 3:02 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 15429
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 93 of 133 (426184)
10-05-2007 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by New Cat's Eye
10-05-2007 3:08 PM


Catholic Scientist writes:

It seems Phat is not talking about who is a christian, in the sense of who is saved, but who is a Christian in the sense of who should be called a Christian.

Phat said, "... to be a Christian, you need to relate to Christ IMHO."

What I've been saying is that "relating to Christ" means doing like Christ, not saying, "I relate to Christ."

(Phat might not have meant that, exactly - but he will by the time I get through with him. :p )


“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place”
-- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-05-2007 3:08 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Phat, posted 10-05-2007 4:47 PM ringo has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30920
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 94 of 133 (426185)
10-05-2007 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by New Cat's Eye
10-05-2007 3:08 PM


Okay.
It seems Phat is not talking about who is a christian, in the sense of who is saved, but who is a Christian in the sense of who should be called a Christian.

So, a person who is recognized by a Christian Church and who subscribes to the bylaws of the club and identifies him or herself as a club member is a Christian?


Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-05-2007 3:08 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1110 days)
Posts: 6164
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 95 of 133 (426199)
10-05-2007 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Cold Foreign Object
10-04-2007 5:00 PM


Re: Phat & Jar: how we explain their "Christianity"
Phat writes:

In an off topic rant in the Discussion of Moderation thread, Iano made this comment:

As Ray says Phat, there were no rant. Rant involves expression of anger, hatred, frustration and none of these emotions where present when I wrote what I wrote. Jar does what Jar does and it's as plain as the nose on my face. I would not go so far as Ray and imply that Jar is beyond redemption however - he is lost but he can be found (i sincerely hope)

Nor would I go so far as Ray and say that you (like Jar) are not saved. I haven't read you enough to comment and what I have read would incline me to think you are indeed saved. Any suspicion I might have to the contrary, would rest not on the fact that you align yourself with evolutionists but more on the fact that you align yourself with atheists (and "double-agents" like Jar).

If you are a Christian you should be troubled by the world, be at emnity with the world, feel yourself alien in this world (as a citizen of heaven). You should despise yourself for conforming to the pattern of this world (even if at times you can't help but do so). I don't detect that trouble in you.

Instead you seem to want to bed the world. Lie down with all and sundry. Perhaps your gifting is peacemaking (for that runs through all you write). If so it should not be at any cost. If you are a Christian you fight on one side. You can be fair and honourable and decent but a soldier you must be all the same. Not a friend to the enemy

{AbE} I should have put it so...

Ray writes:

5th columnism is simply a synonym or variation of "double agent." The concept of double agent has a person feigning loyalty to one entity while seeking its destruction from within. Jar fits the bill perfectly. He argues against the veracity of the Bible tooth and nail. Logically real Christians do the exact opposite.

Edited by iano, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 10-04-2007 5:00 PM Cold Foreign Object has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Phat, posted 10-05-2007 4:51 PM iano has responded
 Message 105 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 10-05-2007 6:00 PM iano has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 11328
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 96 of 133 (426200)
10-05-2007 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by ringo
10-05-2007 3:21 PM


Remix
This topic sure moves fast!

  • Some people believe that God died for everyone, and that salvation is unearned and not chosen. Others believe that Baptism is a central prerequisite. Still others believe that although God chose all of us, we must respond to His call.

    Ringo writes:

    What I've been saying is that "relating to Christ" means doing like Christ, not saying, "I relate to Christ."

    so does "doing like Christ" mean praying a large portion of the day?

    I agree that being Christlike could be done by a Hindu, a Buddhist, or an Atheist.

  • I don't agree that it is irrelevant whether or not Christ even actually lived. The whole idea of God becoming man has enormous implications. To throw that belief away is to reduce God to whatever
    philosophical concept one chooses to ascribe to Him.

    IMB, God is not a product of human definition and wisdom. God exists and permeates our daily lives whether or not we choose to acknowledge Him. (An unsupported assertion, I know! )

    The issue seems to hinge on whether doing good simply for the sake of doing good carries as much weight with God as the concept of trusting in Him and allowing His Spirit to permeate your daily life.

    Edited by Phat, : spellcheck-o-rama


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 93 by ringo, posted 10-05-2007 3:21 PM ringo has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 99 by ringo, posted 10-05-2007 5:09 PM Phat has responded

      
  • Phat
    Member
    Posts: 11328
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 97 of 133 (426203)
    10-05-2007 4:51 PM
    Reply to: Message 95 by iano
    10-05-2007 4:45 PM


    Re: Phat & Jar: how we explain their "Christianity"
    My observation was that not all Christians believe that one needs to be saved. Are we to conclude that they are not real Christians by believing in inclusivism?

    Further, not all denominations of Christianity believe that the Bible is inerrant. Can one side claim the moral high ground in that regard?

    Iano writes:

    If you are a Christian you fight on one side. You can be fair and honourable and decent but a soldier you must be all the same. Not a friend to the enemy

    So who is this enemy?

    Edited by Phat, : added


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 95 by iano, posted 10-05-2007 4:45 PM iano has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 98 by iano, posted 10-05-2007 5:03 PM Phat has not yet responded
     Message 100 by iano, posted 10-05-2007 5:11 PM Phat has not yet responded
     Message 102 by jar, posted 10-05-2007 5:20 PM Phat has not yet responded

      
    iano
    Member (Idle past 1110 days)
    Posts: 6164
    From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
    Joined: 07-27-2005


    Message 98 of 133 (426208)
    10-05-2007 5:03 PM
    Reply to: Message 97 by Phat
    10-05-2007 4:51 PM


    Re: Phat & Jar: how we explain their "Christianity"
    Phat writes:

    My observation was that not all Christians believe that one needs to be saved

    Hmmm. Could you name the cult who believes otherwise?

    Further, not all denominations of Christianity believe that the Bible is inerrant. Can one side claim the moral high ground in that regard?

    The Bible? Could you show me a copy? I mean a copy of the inerrant copy the inerrantists adhere to?

    The way I see it Phat? My girl has a '96 Ford Fiesta parked outside her house which is having its brake discs replaced tomorrow. Without error is it? No! Does it fulfill all its essential functions (and more) despite this? Yes.

    Inerrant enough - for those who can discern. For those who cannot there is hope in Jesus Christ.

    Edited by iano, : No reason given.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 97 by Phat, posted 10-05-2007 4:51 PM Phat has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 109 by Brian, posted 10-06-2007 5:39 AM iano has not yet responded

      
    ringo
    Member
    Posts: 15429
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005
    Member Rating: 1.8


    Message 99 of 133 (426210)
    10-05-2007 5:09 PM
    Reply to: Message 96 by Phat
    10-05-2007 4:47 PM


    Re: Remix
    Phat writes:

    so does "doing like Christ" mean praying a large portion of the day?

    What makes you think He did that? I mean, is it in the Bible, or is it just another one of those things that fundies make up to separate Jesus from us?

    The whole idea of God becoming man has enormous implications. To throw that belief away is to reduce God to whatever philosophical concept one chooses to ascribe to Him.

    All ideas about God are philosophical concepts that people choose to ascribe to Him. I'm just trying to elevate (not reduce) those ideas above the comedy stylings of the fundamentalists.

    The issue seems to hinge on whether doing good simply for the sake of doing good carrys as much weight with God as the concept of trusting in Him and allowing His Spirit to permeate your daily life.

    If we trust in Him and allow His Spirit to permeate our daily lives, what other effect could there be than doing good simply for the sake of doing good?

    Conversely, if somebody doesn't do good simply for the sake of doing good, how can he be trusting in God? And how can he be allowing God's Spirit to permeate his daily life?


    “Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place”
    -- Joseph Goebbels
    -------------
    Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
    Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 96 by Phat, posted 10-05-2007 4:47 PM Phat has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 129 by Phat, posted 12-19-2017 6:42 AM ringo has responded

      
    iano
    Member (Idle past 1110 days)
    Posts: 6164
    From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
    Joined: 07-27-2005


    Message 100 of 133 (426212)
    10-05-2007 5:11 PM
    Reply to: Message 97 by Phat
    10-05-2007 4:51 PM


    Re: Phat & Jar: how we explain their "Christianity"
    So who is this enemy?

    Everyone who is not saved. Jar, Percy, Dr Adequate, Schraf, PaulK, Chiroptera, Larni, Omnivorous...RobinRohan when he was around..etc.

    People. Plenty of 'em

    Edited by iano, : No reason given.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 97 by Phat, posted 10-05-2007 4:51 PM Phat has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 101 by ringo, posted 10-05-2007 5:19 PM iano has not yet responded

      
    ringo
    Member
    Posts: 15429
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005
    Member Rating: 1.8


    Message 101 of 133 (426217)
    10-05-2007 5:19 PM
    Reply to: Message 100 by iano
    10-05-2007 5:11 PM


    Re: Phat & Jar: how we explain their "Christianity"
    iano writes:

    quote:
    So who is this enemy?

    Everyone who is not saved. Jar, Percy, Dr Adequate, Schraf, PaulK, Chiroptera, Larni, Omnivorous...

    Are there going to be warning signs around this "heaven" of yours, so those of us not on your list don't wander in by mistake? :)


    “Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place”
    -- Joseph Goebbels
    -------------
    Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
    Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 100 by iano, posted 10-05-2007 5:11 PM iano has not yet responded

      
    jar
    Member
    Posts: 30920
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004
    Member Rating: 1.7


    Message 102 of 133 (426218)
    10-05-2007 5:20 PM
    Reply to: Message 97 by Phat
    10-05-2007 4:51 PM


    Re: Phat & Jar: how we explain their "Christianity"
    Notice when you ask "So who is this enemy?"

    iano replies:

    iano writes:

    Everyone who is not saved. Jar, Percy, Dr Adequate, Schraf, PaulK, Chiroptera, Larni, Omnivorous...RobinRohan when he was aroujnd..etc.

    People.

    What a telling response. Enemy!

    So funny.


    Aslan is not a Tame Lion
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 97 by Phat, posted 10-05-2007 4:51 PM Phat has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 103 by iano, posted 10-05-2007 5:45 PM jar has responded

      
    iano
    Member (Idle past 1110 days)
    Posts: 6164
    From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
    Joined: 07-27-2005


    Message 103 of 133 (426227)
    10-05-2007 5:45 PM
    Reply to: Message 102 by jar
    10-05-2007 5:20 PM


    Re: Phat & Jar: how we explain their "Christianity"
    Jar writes:

    What a telling response. Enemy! So funny.

    What a biblically ignorant response. Tragic.

    If your wondering whether you are indeed saved Phat (and the saved can well wonder at times) then this exchange might tell you.

    Which side do you fall on of the two?

    Edited by iano, : No reason given.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 102 by jar, posted 10-05-2007 5:20 PM jar has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 104 by jar, posted 10-05-2007 5:48 PM iano has not yet responded

      
    jar
    Member
    Posts: 30920
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004
    Member Rating: 1.7


    Message 104 of 133 (426228)
    10-05-2007 5:48 PM
    Reply to: Message 103 by iano
    10-05-2007 5:45 PM


    Re: Phat & Jar: how we explain their "Christianity"
    If your wondering whether you are indeed saved Phat (and the saved can well wonder at times) then this exchange might tell you.

    Nope, worry not. Never even bother to think about it.

    As to being saved; in the words of a friend and Priest, "Hell? Oh hell, fuggidabutit!"


    Aslan is not a Tame Lion
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 103 by iano, posted 10-05-2007 5:45 PM iano has not yet responded

      
    Cold Foreign Object 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 975 days)
    Posts: 3417
    Joined: 11-21-2003


    Message 105 of 133 (426233)
    10-05-2007 6:00 PM
    Reply to: Message 95 by iano
    10-05-2007 4:45 PM


    Re: Phat & Jar: how we explain their "Christianity"
    [I recognize the fact that while the post I am responding to was a reply to one of my messages, you are apparently speaking directly to Phat.]

    I would not go so far as Ray and imply that Jar is beyond redemption however - he is lost but he can be found (I sincerely hope)

    I never said any person (much less Jar) was beyond redemption. What I did say was to explain how Jar could think of himself as a Christian while arguing against the Bible like any given Atheist might do.

    Surely the contradiction is obvious: Jar: "the Bible is mythical and not true in its history or science; but I am still a Christian."

    Why would anybody be a Christian if the source is completely false?

    This question is NOT answerable.

    This is why in my original post in this topic: Message 66 I said that we only need to explain Jar's belief about himself (which I did).

    As for Phat: he is certainly more "Christian" than Jar. I am not blind to his religious indications, but their are heathen priests in Japan and Haiti that can talk in tongues better than any Pentecostal and they tell you for certain that their source is Satan. We know Charles Darwin feigned Deism after 1836, but he was, in fact, an Atheist. Society is loaded with persons who wear crosses and say Protestant things. The point is that the Bible provides us with ways to determine who is walking with God and who is walking with Satan.

    The Bible says if the secular world approves of you or the religious status quo then you are walking with Satan. In the Bible, those who walk with God are persecuted by the world and the religious establishment. Since the Atheist-evolutionists of EvC approve of Phat, in this context this evidence tells us that Phat is not walking with God. It is axiomatic: whoever the world approves of is not walking with God - no exceptions. Phat is a Moderator and a evolutionist, he cares more about being liked by the status quo here than the word of God, which he pays lip service to. No matter how you slice it there is something wrong with the Christianity of a person who agrees with Richard Dawkins concerning the origin of mankind. Dawkins believes in human evolution because it flatly contradicts the Bible. The claim is founded on anti-God suppositions that predetermine and guarantee the conclusions, yet Phat, in "love with his Savior," thinks God understands, and has given him an exemption. What makes any person think that God would approve of any person who accepts the presuppositions of Materialism or Naturalism?

    He does not. God would never contradict His word and say it is okay to exclude Him.

    This is why I said Jar and Phat, like all TEists, are proof positive for the existence and power of Satan to deceive.

    Ray


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 95 by iano, posted 10-05-2007 4:45 PM iano has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 106 by iano, posted 10-05-2007 6:19 PM Cold Foreign Object has not yet responded

        
    Prev1
    ...
    456
    7
    89Next
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018