What is it to be Christian ?

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by skysidhe

I wonder why we don't have threads about 'what it is to be a Satanist, witch or Pagan. Christianity is just a soft target. Like political affiliation.

Personally, I've always wanted to do a 'what is a pagan' thread.

Because Pagans don't get caught doing stupid stuff like this. And if they do, at least they don't come off as hypocrites.

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (Reuters) - The president of America's National Association of Evangelicals, who has been a vocal opponent of gay marriage, resigned on Thursday after an accusation he had a sexual relationship with a male escort.
Ted Haggard, who denied the accusation, also "resigned temporarily" as senior pastor of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, according to a statement from the church.
"I've never had a gay relationship with anyone," Haggard said in an interview with Denver television station KUSA on Wednesday night. "I'm steady with my wife. I'm faithful to my wife."
The New Life Church statement said Haggard could "not continue to minister under the cloud created by the accusations."

Didn't Mari talk about these guys in a thread somewhere?
This week Bill Maher's joke was "Republicans are against gay marriage, because they know that congressman need to be able to play the field." Maybe that's why this guy was against gay marriage.

[Stormieweather]

I think many so-called Christians pick and choose what they will take literally from the Bible. The parts that are contradictory or impossible are argued to be an allegory or parable. The differences in interpretation are the root of the various religious sects. And each sect insists that they are the ones with the 'truth'. Some say to just live as Christ-like as possible, others say every word in the Bible is accurate. Therefore, I refuse to buy into any one person or group of peoples proclamation that their way is the right way, and that they (and only they) have the correct path to salvation. I submit that I have as much right to my own interpretation as anyone else.

Maybe God is just another name for the 'highest power' (along with Jehovah, Jesus, Yahwen, Elohim, Allah, Brahman, Ekam, Deus, etc.). Maybe the existence of this supreme being is too expansive for our minds to comprehend so we create rules, rituals and symbols to help us feel more in control of our insignificant little lives. Just as with civilization itself, we need for religion to have form and substance. Maybe our narrow-minded views of God and religion stems from the same ignorance and lack of comprehension that spurred the theories of a flat earth, a solitary planet or solar system.

Then again, maybe God did send Christ, his only-begotten son, to die for our sins so that we can gain salvation and go to heaven. Speaking of heaven, what and where is that exactly? Is it a black hole? Another planet? A different plane of existance? Utopia somewhere in space? Or is it a reborn 'earth' (if so, how will we fit generations of the saved on our little earth?)

I find it fascinating that people will put forth impassioned arguements regarding the legalistic interpretation of the Bible and yet expect so much to be taken on 'faith'. How convenient that portions of the Bible such as the Creation or the Flood described in Genesis can be disregarded when it contradicts science or common sense.

[mrnoodle]

Originally Posted by Stormieweather

I think many so-called Christians pick and choose what they will take literally from the Bible. The parts that are contradictory or impossible are argued to be an allegory or parable. The differences in interpretation are the root of the various religious sects. And each sect insists that they are the ones with the 'truth'. Some say to just live as Christ-like as possible, others say every word in the Bible is accurate. Therefore, I refuse to buy into any one person or group of peoples proclamation that their way is the right way, and that they (and only they) have the correct path to salvation. I submit that I have as much right to my own interpretation as anyone else.

This is how we're supposed to look at it, IMO. Religion is not the answer, God is. You can go directly to God, and don't need priests, bishops, preachers, or any other go-between. That doesn't mean that church is a bad thing -- far from it. By associating with other believers, you get lots of benefits. You can hold each other accountable, discuss faith, pray for each other. Flying solo all the time doesn't do much for most people; most often, it occurs because churches or church leaders have failed people. This guy in Colorado Springs is a perfect example. He has 14,000 or something people in his church. I would be willing to bet that half of them never enter a church building again because their faith has been so trampled on. If 500 people show up for services next week, they'll be lucky.

The reason is that people are looking for good examples. Especially when it comes to God stuff, which is so difficult to figure out on your own, people want someone to stand up and say "I have it all figured out, listen to me". Unfortunately, there are all too many people who are willing to step into that position. That makes the churchgoer tend to stop at the preacher. Why study for yourself, or make direct appeals to God, when so-and-so is so obviously better qualified? Catholicism is the most egregious example of this mindset, but it extends to every sect.

But the pastor is only human, too. He or she has the same temptations, weaknesses, and proclivities as anyone sitting in the pews or walking by on the street outside. That's why it's so important for a pastor to be a servant, and not some kind of Moses-like figurehead. When you get too much power, and aren't accountable to anyone, and start telling people you are the final expert on all things moral and ethical, you are already doomed to fail, and spectacularly. And all the people who mistakenly put their faith in a person instead of in God will have that faith shattered, and many never recover spiritually. That makes the CO Springs guy's hypocrisy so damaging.

Maybe God is just another name for the 'highest power' (along with Jehovah, Jesus, Yahwen, Elohim, Allah, Brahman, Ekam, Deus, etc.). Maybe the existence of this supreme being is too expansive for our minds to comprehend so we create rules, rituals and symbols to help us feel more in control of our insignificant little lives. Just as with civilization itself, we need for religion to have form and substance. Maybe our narrow-minded views of God and religion stems from the same ignorance and lack of comprehension that spurred the theories of a flat earth, a solitary planet or solar system.

Mostly agree. God is just another name for someone who we lack the ability to comprehend, and our need to have things neatly tucked into cubbyholes is where most religion comes from.

Then again, maybe God did send Christ, his only-begotten son, to die for our sins so that we can gain salvation and go to heaven.

That's what Jesus said, and unless he was perpetuating a giant fraud or was clinically insane, I have no reason to doubt him.

Speaking of heaven, what and where is that exactly? Is it a black hole? Another planet? A different plane of existance? Utopia somewhere in space? Or is it a reborn 'earth' (if so, how will we fit generations of the saved on our little earth?)

Who knows? Doesn't matter, really, once you have accepted how limited our comprehension of God is.

I find it fascinating that people will put forth impassioned arguements regarding the legalistic interpretation of the Bible and yet expect so much to be taken on 'faith'. How convenient that portions of the Bible such as the Creation or the Flood described in Genesis can be disregarded when it contradicts science or common sense.

The legalism is no longer necessary because of Christ. He fulfilled the law and released us from it by his sacrifice. It's just hard for people to let go of. Does that mean that I can do whatever sin I want without fear of consequences? No, it means that if you've accepted Christ as your lord and king, your spirit changes so that you want to do what is right and acceptable to God.

Did creation occur exactly as we perceive, based on the words in the KJV version of Genesis? 7 calendar days, as measured by the earth's rotation? Not likely. It's a convenient way to discount all things of God for people who like to nitpick. It's a convenient way to discount the natural process of evolution for people who are afraid that to think scientifically is an affront to God. But regardless of the validity or lack thereof of the Genesis account, nature itself points to the hand of a creator. Different thread.

There's quite a bit of evidence for the flood, it's not as popular a whipping boy for atheists as it once was.

I dunno. People are weak, God is strong. Put your faith in the latter, not the former. Serve both. The formula has never failed.

[Flint]

I can only answer for myself, but I do follow the message of Christ, and I just don't understand what I could possibly have to gain by calling myself Christian. It's fascinating, and a little frustrating, honestly, that I can't seem to get a coherent explanation regarding this. It usually ends up being "something that can't be explained, you just have to feel it in your heart" or whatever. That kind of non-logic just rubs me the wrong way.

[mrnoodle]

A Christian is someone who has accepted Christ as their savior. That's all it means. If you have done this, it will reflect in your life -- but not 100% of the time, because the ever-present condition of sin is too much to be overcome by human willpower. Hence the need for salvation.

What answer are you looking for? What criteria have to be met before you consider the answer complete?

edited for clarity

[Flint]

That isn't exactly what you said it meant before now, so for starters, a criteria would be consistency. Then, we can address the issue that not everyone agrees with your definition, or definitions. So who is right? Not everybody can be right, so there can't be one right answer.

Unless you use the definition I do: Christians are people who choose to call themsleves Christians, and I respect whatever their reasons are.

Next, this would eliminate the sneaky "but those aren't real Christians" excuse which makes it literally impossible to ever criticize Christianity.

[mrnoodle]

It's exactly what I said before. Jesus said he was the son of God and that he was sent to pay for our sins. If you believe the "message of Christ", you believe this. If you believe it, and accept it for yourself, bam! You're a Christian. Convincing anyone else that you are is your own task, of course.

I'm beginning to suspect that you don't want a real answer, you only want someone to agree with you that there is no set definition. But there is. And there are only so many ways to say the same thing.

[mrnoodle]

From some etymology site:

Christian
O.E. cristen, from L. Christianus, from Gk. christianos, from Christos (see Christ). First used in Antioch, according to Acts xi.25-26. Christianity "the religion of Christ," is from c.1303. Christian Science is from 1863.

the passage in question:

Originally Posted by Acts11:25-26

25Then Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, 26and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great numbers of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch.

[Flint]

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

It's exactly what I said before. Jesus said he was the son of God and that he was sent to pay for our sins. If you believe the "message of Christ", you believe this. If you believe it, and accept it for yourself, bam! You're a Christian. Convincing anyone else that you are is your own task, of course.

I'm beginning to suspect that you don't want a real answer, you only want someone to agree with you that there is no set definition. But there is. And there are only so many ways to say the same thing.

No, I believe the message of Christ as I read it, not as a dogmatic construct that has been interpreted by others, and, no I am not a Christian just because you say so. Christianity is a human social institution that I choose not to join, for my own reasons; just like others do choose to join, for their own reasons. And just because you have an answer that you think is right, it doesn't make it right for everybody. It's a real question and it doesn't have an easy answer, even if you keep repeating variations of the same theme.

I'm not convinced that there is a better definition than mine, because it is fair to everybody, and I don't have to impose it on anybody, the way your definition would be imposed on me (if I believed the right things exactly the same way you do). My earth-shattering idea is that if you say you are a Christian I just believe you.

[mrnoodle]

How would you interpret

Originally Posted by JC

I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man comes unto the Father except through me

[Flint]

I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man comes unto the Father except through me.

I believe he is saying that if you understand his message, really understand it, then you are guaranteed of being on the right path.

[DanaC]

apart from transubstantiation, the nature of the trinity has caused more schisms within Christianity than pretty much anything else :P

Edit:

I think the biggest weakness/strength of the church is that it prays on the lazy... then creates/encourages lazy people.
Faith takes work, VERY HARD, constant, diligent work... "but it you just listen to me I can cut through all of that and give you the inside line, just help us pay for all this stuff, most of it (less than 10% on average in reality) is going to help others!" is religion's line & it is total BS. (Instead of line I wanted to say schpeal but I don't know how to spell it)

If it were, "we are a group of like-minded/faith(ed) people who want to help each other on our path" that would be fine... "we will only take/use as much as it takes to maintain our infrastructure and no more, there will be no associates that work for the institute, as it will be for all our benefit, we will all volunteer...." you get the idea. (The Mormon Church tries to say that they do this, it is a lie, they are, I think, the fourth richest company in the US, if churches were listed in those rankings. With associates intentionally placed in high ranking political positions, both locally and nationally. As opposite from that ideal as you can get).
Also... if that were true, there would be no dogma, especially stuff like some guy in Europe decides to make-up the rapture and everyone buys it. All the descendants of Calvinism with their Dooms Day shit (Though Watchtower is a blast to read) that never comes to pass and takes the focus off of the word.
It is all smoke and mirrors to INTENTIONALLY take the focus off of your personal relationship with your Savior and God so you are dependent/addicted to the fear/salvation cycle that they get you hooked-on.
The pay off is as much as you will shell out to keep from going to hell. I have never met a preacher in a poor neighborhood that did not live twice as well as his flock, & I have known a lot of them and am related to two.

These snake-oil salesmen prey on the fact that it IS scary that your fate is in your hands alone, that you don't have any talismans or magic yellow brick roads laid-out in front of you..."Don't go astray or you will go to hellllllll!"
It is very easy to fall for that comfort, "perhaps they do know what God wants from me and all I have to do is accept their interpretation of the Bible (even though they do not have a thorough understanding of the historical time period in which it is referring to and they always interpret what it says in today's social framework), that way I don't have to feel like I alone in this."
But, they are not if they truly have faith, God is always with them and their heart really, TRULY, knows what is right, what path to take... that is what meditation and prayer are for. If you believe you know that you have a part of God in you... that will show you the way if you learn how to listen to it, really listen with the Word of Jesus as a guide.
Having a supportive community, there to help you as fellow faithful and one that preys on the insecurity of that relationship in a position of authority and dogma, teaching "Us-&-Them", the farthest thing from anything Christ ever stated, are two different things.... I have yet to find the first.
You just can’t put an individual in a position of power like that, especially one that makes people so vulnerable.
Pride is our one great weakness, that pathway to sin that is greased with our most basic animal urges. All of the Seven Deadlies (though not Biblical) are all sins of Pride, in one form or another.
To place an individual where their ego is between the faithful and God is just so much temptation that one cannot expect that most will succumb to some form of pride…
The solution, there is no one individual that is the interpreter, the authority, the final word on the Word but what you know in your heart to be true and right based on the teachings of Christ (not the OT). If a group forms, it is just that…. A GROUP, all equal in discussion and discourse for the purpose of spiritual kinship and learning, never authority, profit, regulation; or, especially, dogma.

[mrnoodle]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

I think the biggest weakness/strength of the church is that it prays on the lazy... then creates/encourages lazy people.
Faith takes work, VERY HARD, constant, diligent work... "but it you just listen to me I can cut through all of that and give you the inside line, just help us pay for all this stuff, most of it (less than 10% on average in reality) is going to help others!" is religion's line & it is total BS. (Instead of line I wanted to say schpeal but I don't know how to spell it)

If it were, "we are a group of like-minded/faith(ed) people who want to help each other on our path" that would be fine... "we will only take/use as much as it takes to maintain our infrastructure and no more, there will be no associates that work for the institute, as it will be for all our benefit, we will all volunteer...." you get the idea. (The Mormon Church tries to say that they do this, it is a lie, they are, I think, the fourth richest company in the US, if churches were listed in those rankings. With associates intentionally placed in high ranking political positions, both locally and nationally. As opposite from that ideal as you can get).
Also... if that were true, there would be no dogma, especially stuff like some guy in Europe decides to make-up the rapture and everyone buys it. All the descendants of Calvinism with their Dooms Day shit (Though Watchtower is a blast to read) that never comes to pass and takes the focus off of the word.
It is all smoke and mirrors to INTENTIONALLY take the focus off of your personal relationship with your Saviour and God so you are dependent/addicted to the fear/salvation cycle that they get you hooked-on.
The pay off is as much as you will shell out to keep from going to hell. I have never met a preacher in a poor neighborhood that did not live twice as well as his flock, & I have known a lot of them and am related to two.

You have just outlined why the first in line for judgement will be the "false prophets" a.k.a most televangelist types.

Originally Posted by 1 Peter 2:1-3

1But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. 3In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

This was before Benny Hinn. This was within 50 years of the death of Jesus.

[Flint]

Regardless of when and under what context, that scripture describes an inevitable aspect of human nature.