What Do Christians believe?

[Albion]

I don't believe that my previous post argued that a person who labels himself as a follower of another religion or god would qualify as a Christian.

On your other big point--your contention that Christians who disagree with you on various doctrinal matters are, as a result, ersatz Christians rather than genuine, Christians--I must also disagree. What you've described falls outside of the "common denominator" I identified before when contending that acceptance of Christ Jesus as God and as Savior is the standard, although we both have met people who say, when it comes to any set of ideas, that they believe X and yet have no idea what they're talking about.

Still, I appreciate that you responded and gave me the opportunity to read your POV.

 

[Stravinsk]

I don't believe that my previous post argued that a person who labels himself as a follower of another religion or god would qualify as a Christian.

I was careful to underline the point I was responding to, not this misrepresentation in the quote above.

On your other big point--your contention that Christians who disagree with you on various doctrinal matters are, as a result, ersatz Christians rather than genuine, Christians--I must also disagree. What you've described falls outside of the "common denominator" I identified before when contending that acceptance of Christ Jesus as God and as Savior is the standard, although we both have met people who say, when it comes to any set of ideas, that they believe X and yet have no idea what they're talking about.

Straw man. That wasn't my argument.

Perhaps you don't get it because you are one of the dishonest ones I speak of. You say it is a matter of *me* being disagreed with and my judgement that follows. Not so. It is simply a matter of recognizing that the Jesus many Christians worship and "follow" is simply NOT the same entity as the Creator described in the Hebrew bible (aka: God of the "old" Testament). You cannot say Pork is clean but also unclean at the same time. You cannot say to remember the Sabbath but then to forget all about it. You cannot say God does not change but then in the next breath say he does change.

Repackage that however you like. I know you will. It is Christ who claims that He and the Father are one. Most Christians pay lip service to this but to many that is all that they do. It is not a matter of interpretation like someone would need to interpret "Pork is unclean" as needing an interpretation - it is simply a matter of, well - having a little intellectual integrity and not engaging in doublespeak.

 

[Albion]

I was careful to underline the point I was responding to, not this misrepresentation in the quote above.



Straw man. That wasn't my argument.

Perhaps you don't get it because you are one of the dishonest ones I speak of. You say it is a matter of *me* being disagreed with and my judgement that follows. Not so. It is simply a matter of recognizing that the Jesus many Christians worship and "follow" is simply NOT the same entity as the Creator described in the Hebrew bible (aka: God of the "old" Testament). You cannot say Pork is clean but also unclean at the same time. You cannot say to remember the Sabbath but then to forget all about it. You cannot say God does not change but then in the next breath say he does change.

Repackage that however you like. I know you will. It is Christ who claims that He and the Father are one. Most Christians pay lip service to this but to many that is all that they do. It is not a matter of interpretation like someone would need to interpret "Pork is unclean" as needing an interpretation - it is simply a matter of, well - having a little intellectual integrity and not engaging in doublespeak.

Looks like my assessment was correct...if unpopular with you.

It is surprising to me, however, that your main argument hangs on a very routine misunderstanding of Jesus' words when he described the Father and himself as "one." At the very least, you might study up on that.

 

[Stravinsk]

Looks like my assessment was correct...if unpopular with you.

It is surprising to me, however, that your main argument hangs on a very routine misunderstanding of Jesus' words when he described the Father and himself as "one." At the very least, you might study up on that.

My understanding is just fine. I may have alluded to only one scripture, however, it is merely your assertion that it comprises my entire position on the subject.

 

[Albion]

My understanding is just fine. I may have alluded to only one scripture, however, it is merely your assertion that it comprises my entire position on the subject.

Maybe it's just a reading problem, then.

I didn't "assert" that it comprises your "entire position on the subject." In one post, I described that as a "big" point, and in another as your "main" point, but never as your entire position.

 

[hedrick]

I claim Deism mostly because I think it fits me as opposed to the various "molds" Christians like to define themselves (and others) into. Among those are rejection of certain gospels (Luke and Mark) and Saul/Paul's letters as being inspired (they contain truths mixed with errors). The book we know as the Bible was put together by the Roman Catholic Church. There is no law nor teaching of Yeshua that says I must accept it as Authoritive - EXCEPT Yeshua's acknowledgement of the Hebrew Cannon at the time and those Gospels written by disciples rather than non-disciples.

Deism normally means that God isn't involved in the world. It doesn't sound to me like you think that. If Jesus is actually Lord and Savior it seems like you're some variant of Christian.

 

[Stravinsk]

Looks like my assessment was correct...if unpopular with you.

It is surprising to me, however, that your main argument hangs on a very routine misunderstanding of Jesus' words when he described the Father and himself as "one." At the very least, you might study up on that.

Maybe it's just a reading problem, then.

I didn't "assert" that it comprises your "entire position on the subject." In one post, I described that as a "big" point, and in another as your "main" point, but never as your entire position.

Sure you did, but you aren't honest enough to admit it. Typical. Not my reading problem (see underlined bolded section), and not my misunderstanding either. But now I want to get into it and hear with what kind of tongue you will speak:

John chapter 5. Verse 16-18

Was Christ breaking the Sabbath law as it says?

 

[Imalive]

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"

He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"

Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"

He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"

Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.

Meanie!

:smirk:

 

[Josiah]

On the one hand, I believe that Christians should take truth and doctrine seriously. I believe the current obsession with and incorporation of uber relativism into Christianity may be the most destructive and dangerous thing to happen in Christianity. Doctrine matters, truth matters. And I believe this is affirmed by Scripture.

On the other hand, I hold that there is MUCH that is simply beyond our limited, finite, human ability to understand/comprehend - and that it is wise to acknowledge this. I deplore the abandonment of the concept of "MYSTERY" (especially in Western Christianity beginning in the middle ages), our insistence that I should ask myself endless questions, appoint myself as THE infallible/unaccountable Answer of my questions, I then appoint myself as the one to dogmatize my answer to my question and thus force everyone else to agree with me (if they hope to be with me in Heaven and just be smart like me). Much of false doctrine as resulted from this extreme egoism and individualism ... and the accompanying abandonment of MYSTERY. [Note: here "me" "myself" and "I" can mean any individual, church or denomination). Much overthinking has resulted in much bad theology. In the words of my Greek Orthodox friend, "Christians seem unwilling to shut up." Often "I don't know" is wise. But "it doesn't matter what anyone thinks" is dangerous and wrong.


There's often a lovelessness underpinning all of this. Egoism and individualism at times mean that individual (persons, churches, denominations) insist "You must agree with ME or you can't be a Christian or saved or at least as pious/spiritual/holy as ME." The attitude stinks but it's a familiar odor. I may disagree with another Christian on some matter - maybe even one treasured by me. It means we disagree. That's it. That's all. By virtue of the mercy of God, in light of the Cross of Christ, because of the gift of faith in Christ as our one and all sufficient Savior, we're both full and unseparated and equal brothers in Christ and both going to heaven. THERE Christ will inform everyone that I was right about everything. That's soon enough.



Pax Christi


- Josiah

 

[Andrew]

We are the body of Christ and of his royal blood which governs the nations of believers and the light of the world.

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

 

[Stravinsk]

lDeism normally means that God isn't involved in the world. It doesn't sound to me like you think that. If Jesus is actually Lord and Savior it seems like you're some variant of Christian.

Strictly speaking, Deism rejects revealed religion - if the basis of that religion is simply that it is revealed and not testable/provable. I am not a strict Deist in this sense - as I believe there is enough evidence to support the historicity of very large sections of the bible.

"Deism normally means that God isn't involved in the world."

Normally - but to my understanding it does not mean "doesn't" or "won't". It means, "normally".

Here's how I would express that that a Christian might understand:

A man is suffering from Scurvy. By God's Sovereign Design - by His Will in the Design - the only answer to this disease is adequate Vitamin C. So again for diseases like beriberi or Pellagra - it is by God's Design - His Will - that certain B vitamins cure these diseases.
By contrast - A christian ignorant of these cures (willful or otherwise) may think that God will override His Design (or make exception for it) in order to do what THEY want (typically). A Deist will tell you - no, not normally - as God has put His Sovereign will into the Design and will not break it except in certain special circumstances.

As a Deist - I can also safely say that it is within my belief that certain diseases arise due to different types of rebellion against His Design, expressed as His Sovereignity. For example - sexual perversion and promiscuity have helped give and spread diseases related to these practices.

Again - a Christian might think that prayers or (as is often expressed) calling on God as their personal servant for their will, will induce Him to change his Design for their rebellion against it - and will bring about change. And a Deist will likely answer no or "not normally".