27 Nov 08
Originally posted by KellyJayThere is no such thing as a 'true meaning' of any word.
Okay, than how can anyone act unChristian since there really isn't any
true meaning of the word only several different points of view about it?
Kelly
I have tried to explain what I meant and will try again:
When I say that Christian A calls Christian B unChristian then he means that Christian B is acting in a way that Christian A believes is the correct way for Christians (of his variety) to behave.
Christian A may even declare Christian B to not be a Christian where what Christian A means by that claim is that Christian B does not do enough of what Christian A believes is necessary for someone to be a Christian.
27 Nov 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadI believe that was what I said too, it only means what everyone thinks
There is no such thing as a 'true meaning' of any word.
I have tried to explain what I meant and will try again:
When I say that Christian A calls Christian B unChristian then he means that Christian B is acting in a way that Christian A believes is the correct way for Christians (of his variety) to behave.
Christian A may even declare Christian B to n ...[text shortened]... B does not do enough of what Christian A believes is necessary for someone to be a Christian.
there is no truth to the statement of "true Christian" in your opinion.
You actually added that nothing is really true with words as well, which
I suppose only adds to your point, but takes away from there ever
being a true meaning within the human experience as we express
ourselves in word or thought.
Kelly
28 Nov 08
Originally posted by KellyJayI am not sure if we agree or disagree, but let me just add this comment:
You actually added that nothing is really true with words as well, which
I suppose only adds to your point, but takes away from there ever
being a true meaning within the human experience as we express
ourselves in word or thought.
Kelly
When I say a word it has a meaning. It usually has only one unique meaning at the time I say it. Whether anyone listening understands that meaning is another matter. That meaning cannot be described as its 'true' meaning as it may mean something different when I use it in a different context or when someone else uses it.
However, there is still nothing wrong with someone defining a Christian and then claiming that anyone who does not fit that definition is not a 'true Christian'.
01 Dec 08
Originally posted by twhitehead"However, there is still nothing wrong with someone defining a Christian and then claiming that anyone who does not fit that definition is not a 'true Christian'."
I am not sure if we agree or disagree, but let me just add this comment:
When I say a word it has a meaning. It usually has only one unique meaning at the time I say it. Whether anyone listening understands that meaning is another matter. That meaning cannot be described as its 'true' meaning as it may mean something different when I use it in a differen ...[text shortened]... an and then claiming that anyone who does not fit that definition is not a 'true Christian'.
So my point remains, if anyone can define it any way they want why
bother complaining about how Christians are acting unChristianlike?
Since both are just terms that can be defined by anyone, any way
at all?
It only becomes important if there is a bottom line in what is in fact
a Christian.
Kelly
01 Dec 08
Originally posted by KellyJayI was not complaining. I was asking whether Christians feel that way about other 'Christians'. My question is if someone is not acting the way you as a Christian think Christians should act then would you declare them to be non-Christian?
So my point remains, if anyone can define it any way they want why
bother complaining about how Christians are acting unChristianlike?
Since both are just terms that can be defined by anyone, any way
at all?
It only becomes important if there is a bottom line in what is in fact
a Christian.
Kelly
Not so at all. The question is perfectly valid and important without any absolutes involved.
01 Dec 08
6 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadTwhitehead,
I was not complaining. I was asking whether Christians feel that way about other 'Christians'. My question is if someone is not acting the way you as a Christian think Christians should act then would you declare them to be non-Christian?
[b]It only becomes important if there is a bottom line in what is in fact
a Christian.
Kelly
Not so at all. The question is perfectly valid and important without any absolutes involved.[/b]
I have not read every post in this thread. But to your persistence in making the issue "Who and who not is a "Christian" ANYWAY ??" I propose this answer:
I would no fall for the bait of miticulously and exhaustively listing every Christian on the planet so you can know whose who. I would not take this bait.
Being an atheist you of course only care, if at all, about what is the opinion of Christians. You exclude God's view of things from your reasoning.
For me as a Christian, I do not only consider the matter from the human viewpoint, even if from a Christian's viewpoint. I have to consider also seeing the matter through God's eyes and through Christ's eyes.
Having said that I would direct you to the second and third chapter of Revelation. And notice in those two particular chapters the repetition of this phrase :
"He who overcomes ...." or "To him who overcomes ...".
The audience is all Christians.
The human concept is the to be a "Christian" is to in some sense have "arrived". That view has some merit. From that standpoint of the sinner's need to be saved from eternal punishment, to have been regenerated into a Christian is to have had THAT particular need met.
But that is not the only need that has to be met. God has a need for Christians to be overcoming and not defeated. God needs a testimony - "the testimony of Jesus" which is participated in by those who "overcome". We may call them overcomers yet that word is not in the Bible. The closest phrase I can think of to it is "more than conquers" (Romans 8:37)
In the letters to the seven churches there is the ending phrase to each letter - "To him who overcomes...." meaning to the Christian who through grace, is not defeated but overcomes some particular adverse situation, beit backslidding, corruption, persecution, lukewarmness, loss of the first love, too closeness with the corrupt world, mixture in evil things, mixture in demonic things, apostasy, hypocrisy, failure to finish things through, suffering .... etc. etc. etc.. all these matter are things which Christ grace can empower the cooperating believer to overcome.
To recap, yes, from the human perspective we may only be concerned with "Whose a Christian and who isn't." That may address OUR need. But to see things more through the eyes of God it is a matter of who is a Christian who is overcoming.
I do not have a phone list for you or a website which enumerates throughout the world who are the Christians who are overcoming. My task is to overcome myself in Christ and help other believers to overcome.
So "Who is and who is not a Christian anyway?" is important. I don't say it is not. But some of us Christians do not exalt this issue to be above all others. We, looking from the viewpoint of Jesus, are also concerned with being an "overcoming" Christian.
See Revelation 2:7; 2:11; 2:17; 2:26; 3:5; 3:12; 3:21
01 Dec 08
jaywill,
Thanks for the post.
I don't want an exhaustive list of the worlds Christians or even a single example. I am more interested to know whether you ever make a judgment as to whether someone is or is not a Christian based on their behavior.
For example if Hitler claimed to be Christian would you say that his behavior essentially rules out the possibility that he was a real Christian?
01 Dec 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasEvolution does not matter one way or another when it comes to being
Is there good christians who do believe in evolution?
Do christians that believe in evolution go to heaven when times due?
a Christian. The only thing that would do, one way or another, is give
you a belief system about the universe that is either flawed or not,
depending on how and if evolution were true or not.
Kelly
01 Dec 08
Originally posted by robbie carrobiet is this appeal which the Christian tries to emulate to the best of his ability, based on his knowledge of Christs teachings that may determine whether he is a christian or not, for to be sure, others also may possess and display these qualities naturally...
i think that i have stated quite unconditionally that someone who does not practice the teachings of Christ in full consciousness of what they are cannot be described as a Christian regardless of their claims, for it is very simple that a Christian is simply someone who applies the teachings of Christ, is it not so? you stated earlier that you found ...[text shortened]... enefit of not only the recipient but others as well, this is what makes Christianity so special.
Are you suggesting that an individual can be a follower of Christ without the empowerment of the Holy Spirit? The reason I ask is because you said that "the Christian tries to emulate to the best of his ability... Christ's teachings" (italics mine), and that "others... may possess and display these qualities naturally..." In your post you lay all the stress on personal ability and natural endowment, without mention of the Holy Spirit. Was this intentional?
Biblically speaking, personal ability and natural endowment are superseded by the power of the Holy Spirit to produce the required holiness in a believer's life. Didn't Jesus say, "I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing"? (John 15:5). If we can do nothing apart from Christ, if it is impossible to "bringeth forth" fruit apart from Christ, doesn't this nix the idea that following Christ can be accomplished in one's own power?
"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law" (Galatians 5:22-23).
01 Dec 08
Originally posted by muppymanHats off to you, sir.
As one of the "narrow minded atheists" if I was asked what defines a Christian, I would quote from the scripture which says, "If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus Christ, and believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you will be saved" that would constitute in my opinion, the only qualification required to claim the prize of salv ...[text shortened]... ould boast. But that's just my ignorant, narrow minded, atheistic, contortion of the facts.
01 Dec 08
1 edit
There's a lot of talk here of what one must do to be a Christian (accept Chirst as personal savior,...), but the Lutheran perspective is that our salvation is NOT something that we have any control of. It is Jesus who chooses US, not the other way 'round.
I do not purport to understand it; just reporting the facts as I've been taught them.
02 Dec 08
5 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadThanks for the post.
jaywill,
Thanks for the post.
I don't want an exhaustive list of the worlds Christians or even a single example. I am more interested to know whether you ever make a judgment as to whether someone is or is not a Christian based on their behavior.
For example if Hitler claimed to be Christian would you say that his behavior essentially rules out the possibility that he was a real Christian?
===================================[/b]
You're welcome. Thanks for reading it.
==========================================
I don't want an exhaustive list of the worlds Christians or even a single example.
=============================================
Okay. You are not are not playing a game of forcing us to list all the Christians. Good.
======================================
I am more interested to know whether you ever make a judgment as to whether someone is or is not a Christian based on their behavior.
=========================================
In the last analysis only God knows for sure. We as Christians may make a mistake.
Having said that, that is not an endorsement that we should try to be obscure and ambiguous in knowing. Once I lead someone to Jesus I try to give them the assurance that they indeed have been born of God to be a Christian. This is biblical to help them be assured of their salvation.
Now the Catholic may argue "Only God knows". And they are correct. But unlike the Catholic we don't use the rational "Only God knows" to encourage ambiguity about the assurance of one's salvation.
Yes, in the last analysis only God knows and one day there will be some surprises. However, we shold not use that as an excuse to encourage believers to be wishy washy and unsure about thier experience.
=======================================
For example if Hitler claimed to be Christian would you say that his behavior essentially rules out the possibility that he was a real Christian?
=====================================
Yes.
But sometimes I, jaywill, also behaved in such a way that I had to go to Christ and ask Him to cleanse me of hypocrisy.
I know little about what Hitler claimed to be. I do know that people will lay hold of that which is most noble, most holy, most pure, and most righteous to claim it as their banner, to dignify their hatred and sins.
We can expect that if Jesus Christ is the truth that many wicked people will say "I too am doing the work of Jesus Christ."
Basically, no one is getting away with ANYTHING. You may not see the vindication of the truth in your lifetime. But before God no one is getting away with anything.
In the parable of the wheat and the tares in Matthew 13:36-43 Jesus taught the disciples in essence this:
Do not as My disciples try to go through out the world and rid the world of false Christians. If you do that you will damage true ones. You do not have the discernment to distinguish the false from the true. Let them grow together in the world. At the last of days the angels of God will gather the false ones out of the world and throw them into a furnace of fire. The true ones will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their father.
If you read the parable carefully you'll see that Jesus said that we should not try to root out the false Christians from the real Christians in the WORLD. This does not mean that the disciples should not try to exclude false Christians from the church. It means that they should not try to police through the world and get rid of false Christians.
The Roman Catholic Church attempted to do this because she was practically the same as the world. In doing so she killed true believers and false believers alike. She killed heretics and she also killed and tortured real disciples of Jesus.
I had a English teacher suggest that we Christians needed a police force to protect the rest of the world from phony Christians. We do not have that. We are not instructed to try to do that. Anyone including Hitler has a right to at least say that they are following Jesus too.
We don't worry about it because in the end no one is getting away with anything:
"Therefore just as the tares are collected and burned up with fire, so will it be at the consummation of the age.
The Son of Man will send His angels and they will collect out of His kingdom all the stumbling blocks and those who practice lawlessness,
And will cast them into the furnace of fire. In that place there will be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.
Then the righteous will shine forth like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has an ear to hear, let him hear."
[b]