pub crawler
New Yorker
?
How does one become a Christian? (a survey)
- Thread starter pub crawler
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
80sU2isBest
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2000
- Messages
- 4,970
You must believe in Christ Jesus and his redemptive work on the cross, and subsequent resirrection. You must be born again (accept Jesus as Lord and Savior, follow him).
80sU2isBest
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2000
- Messages
- 4,970
Then why bother posting in this thread?
Lilly
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
whoa there 80s, must be born again? let's see, i believ in Christ, but i've never been 1. baptized 2. confirmed 3. anything else like that. so, i'm not a Christian? 'cos silly me, i thought the only prerequisite to 'becoming' a Christian was believing in Christ.
Achtung Bubba
Refugee
I'd personally appreciate if we were recognized as "Christians", not "xians".
That said, I *believe* that this is the core of Christianity, belief in the following:
* That God is the omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good Creator of everything.
* That we humans have been given the free will to follow God's commandments and have failed miserably. "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23).
* That the results of our self-centeredness is utter separation from God. "For the wages of sin is death..." (Romans 6:23a).
* That Jesus Christ the Son of God, fully human and fully God, came and lived a perfect life and was killed in our place.
* That after three days, Christ rose from the grave, that He IS risen and still alive today, in Heaven preparing a place for us.
* That faith in Christ (and that alone) saves us from ourselves. "...but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 6:23b)
* That we are to obey His commandments, which are chiefly: Love God, love thy neighbor, and spread the gospel.
I BELIEVE that I have included all the important points and only those points. I believe that most denominations look at those who deviate from the above as following a separate religion.
For example, some believe Christ was not fully God (merely a prophet), some believe Him not fully man (some apparation). Most Christians would agree that either belief is outside the faith.
That said, I *believe* that this is the core of Christianity, belief in the following:
* That God is the omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good Creator of everything.
* That we humans have been given the free will to follow God's commandments and have failed miserably. "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23).
* That the results of our self-centeredness is utter separation from God. "For the wages of sin is death..." (Romans 6:23a).
* That Jesus Christ the Son of God, fully human and fully God, came and lived a perfect life and was killed in our place.
* That after three days, Christ rose from the grave, that He IS risen and still alive today, in Heaven preparing a place for us.
* That faith in Christ (and that alone) saves us from ourselves. "...but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 6:23b)
* That we are to obey His commandments, which are chiefly: Love God, love thy neighbor, and spread the gospel.
I BELIEVE that I have included all the important points and only those points. I believe that most denominations look at those who deviate from the above as following a separate religion.
For example, some believe Christ was not fully God (merely a prophet), some believe Him not fully man (some apparation). Most Christians would agree that either belief is outside the faith.
Achtung Bubba
Refugee
Lilly, denominations treat baptism differently. Mine, for example, believes it to be only an outward sign of commitment (nothing more), so a person who gave his life to Christ on a Wednesday and died on a Friday will go to Heaven despite the fact that he was to baptised Sunday. Further, we recognize it only as something someone can knowingly participate in (no infant baptisms), and we thus have nothing comparable to confirmation.
I believe 80s was saying that being "born again" is merely accepting Christ as Lord and Savior, and not necessarily discounting you out of the faith.
(John 3:1-7 has Christ Himself speaking about the importance of being born again.)
No offense, but I believe you're jumping the gun.
Faith in Jesus Christ as the Messiah, the Son of God, who lived, died, and was resurrected.
Period.
Melon
------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time
Period.
Melon
------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time
Vorsprung
War Child
Another question...
How to convince a sceptic(not an anti-religious) person?????
------------------
Vorsprung durch Technik
How to convince a sceptic(not an anti-religious) person?????
------------------
Vorsprung durch Technik
Lilly
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
None taken, 'cos I was. However, I have a really tough time with discussing religion with words like "must", I don't know why, but I do.
My family is Irish Proto-Catholic, so religion is a hot spot around me. Attending a Lutheran church for my cousin's confirmation, there was my Catholic family doing the sign of the cross and getting some odd looks. It made me feel rather self-conscious about my faith (which is not something that needs help, since I am developing my faith daily).
As for baptism, my immidiate family believes you should choose God, although we are 'Catholics'. Though I've been thinking about it, I don't think I'm ready yet at all.
And Bubba, I agree with your points of the core of Christianity. And 80s, sorry about jumping you there, it's just a touchy subject.
------------------
Every question possesses a power that does not lie in the answer.
[This message has been edited by Lilly (edited 03-13-2002).]
It is very difficult, mostly because of the widely differing nature of Christianity. Obviously, the mental stereotype of a Christian is that they are judgmental, and completely lacking in reason, latching on to such far-fetched ideas as "creationism," and very legalistic, creating a moral structure that many of us find silly (i.e., "a good Christian doesn't drink, smoke, cuss, play cards, dance, believe in evolution," etc.)
The "silent" Christian, to me, is the liberal Christian, who generally rejects all that legalism and has more of a personal faith, but is so tolerant that they have no problem with non-believers. Then, of course, it is those right-wing Christians who insist on evangelism to the non-believers, but carry all that legalistic baggage, coming across as a cult member half of the time. As one of those "silent" Christians, I find myself disgusted by many of the actions of the conservative Christians, so I can only imagine what non-believers must think!
So, essentially, that is why I think that Christianity is difficult for skeptics, because they are only exposed to one side of Christianity, when, in reality, there is a great rainbow of colors to it.
Melon
------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time
FYI, "infant baptism" in Roman Catholicism is one of the things we inherit from the medieval stoics, who believed that, due to original sin we inherit from Adam and Eve (not to mention the "evil" we inherited from being born from an "evil" woman), we were all inherently tainted. However, through baptism, the original sin that automatically condemned us to hell was washed away in baptism.
If a child died before baptism, he/she was stuck in a state of "limbo" for all eternity, since the original sin keeps them from entering heaven. If a competant individual died before baptism, he/she would automatically go to hell. With that in mind, baptism was less of a process of initiation into the Christian Church (remember that this originated before the days of Protestantism) as it was a way to purify your soul of the inherited original sin of Adam and Eve.
Since the Second Vatican Council (1964), this idea of "baby limbo" and "inherent evil" has been thrown out, and "infant baptism" is now the first initiation rite into the Catholic Church. The Sacrament of Confirmation, done somewhere during ages 12-15 (depending on the local diocesan preference), is the sacrament where you make a conscious effort to join the Church.
There are lots of misconceptions about Catholic baptism (even amongst Catholics), so I thought I'd comment on it.
Melon
------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time
If a child died before baptism, he/she was stuck in a state of "limbo" for all eternity, since the original sin keeps them from entering heaven. If a competant individual died before baptism, he/she would automatically go to hell. With that in mind, baptism was less of a process of initiation into the Christian Church (remember that this originated before the days of Protestantism) as it was a way to purify your soul of the inherited original sin of Adam and Eve.
Since the Second Vatican Council (1964), this idea of "baby limbo" and "inherent evil" has been thrown out, and "infant baptism" is now the first initiation rite into the Catholic Church. The Sacrament of Confirmation, done somewhere during ages 12-15 (depending on the local diocesan preference), is the sacrament where you make a conscious effort to join the Church.
There are lots of misconceptions about Catholic baptism (even amongst Catholics), so I thought I'd comment on it.
Melon
------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time
80sU2isBest
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2000
- Messages
- 4,970
Lilly, "you must be born again" are Christ's words, not mine. And it doesn't have anything to do with being baptized or confirmed. Those are simply ways that people show the world they hav become Christians. No, being born again is simply what happens when you become a Christian - the old nature, the sin nature is crucified with Christ, and the "born again" part comes in when your new spirit is resurrected with Christ. The Bible says that as Christians, we are dead to sin, the sin nature and has been crucified and we are new creations. "being dead to sin" doesn't mean that our flesh will never sin again, but rather that the Holy Spirit leaves in us now, and while the flesh may sin, the spirit is perfect. "Born again" has nothing really to do with man's efforts or good deeds, but rather simply accepting God's free grace and gift of slavation. That's all "born again" has ever meant. I don't know why people are scared of the term. It's quite Biblical.
80sU2isBest
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2000
- Messages
- 4,970
Thanks, Achtung, you explained it wonderfully.
and why refer to it as that? last i checked, "xian" is not a word to show religious affliation.
speedracer
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2001
- Messages
- 7,604
Well, the x could mean
-the shape of a cross, the symbol of salvation
-the Greek letter Chi, the first letter in the Greek spelling of Christo
-x, for people who want Christ to have nothing to do with Christmas
I think those are all the possible interpretations.
Achtung Bubba
Refugee
Apology accepted, Ravenstar.
Melon, no surprises, but I disagree on a point or two:
That seems insufficient, compared to what I listed. Specifically on the issues of WHY Christ died and to what degree we are to follow His teachings.
After all, Satan believes that Christ is the ressurected Son of God.
I don't believe that "right-wing Christians" alone insist on evangelism:
* Matthew 28:19 ("teach all nations")
* Mark 16:15
* Acts 1:8
Further, Acts and the Epistles document the fact that the first Christians preached extensively; we should probably follow suit.
Most importantly, there's the implication that the Gospel message itself motivates evangelism. Great Commission aside, the New Testament also teaches these three truths:
* Man is doomed on its own (Romans 6:23).
* Christ is the only way to salvation (John 14:6).
* We are to love our neighbors (John 13:34).
(There are, of course, other verses; I list just one as an example.)
If those three statements are true, it follows that we should preach the Gospel to everyone.
(And, as an aside, I'm not sure what happens when faithful Buddhists die. I like to hope they too find God, but I still believe that that is only possible through Christ, whether or not the Buddhists are cognizant of Him. At any rate, such a hope is less certain than the Christianity itself; and such a hope is not an excuse to avoid evangelism.)
I admittedly don't follow the commandment as well as I should, but that doesn't invalidate the Great Commision: Christ explicitly teaches it, the Apostles followed it, and the basic tenets of Christianity imply it.
[This message has been edited by Achtung Bubba (edited 03-13-2002).]
Melon, no surprises, but I disagree on a point or two:
That seems insufficient, compared to what I listed. Specifically on the issues of WHY Christ died and to what degree we are to follow His teachings.
After all, Satan believes that Christ is the ressurected Son of God.
I don't believe that "right-wing Christians" alone insist on evangelism:
* Matthew 28:19 ("teach all nations")
* Mark 16:15
* Acts 1:8
Further, Acts and the Epistles document the fact that the first Christians preached extensively; we should probably follow suit.
Most importantly, there's the implication that the Gospel message itself motivates evangelism. Great Commission aside, the New Testament also teaches these three truths:
* Man is doomed on its own (Romans 6:23).
* Christ is the only way to salvation (John 14:6).
* We are to love our neighbors (John 13:34).
(There are, of course, other verses; I list just one as an example.)
If those three statements are true, it follows that we should preach the Gospel to everyone.
(And, as an aside, I'm not sure what happens when faithful Buddhists die. I like to hope they too find God, but I still believe that that is only possible through Christ, whether or not the Buddhists are cognizant of Him. At any rate, such a hope is less certain than the Christianity itself; and such a hope is not an excuse to avoid evangelism.)
I admittedly don't follow the commandment as well as I should, but that doesn't invalidate the Great Commision: Christ explicitly teaches it, the Apostles followed it, and the basic tenets of Christianity imply it.
[This message has been edited by Achtung Bubba (edited 03-13-2002).]
Angela Harlem
Jesus Online
If there is any grey area, melon and Bubba will disagree. It seemed as though melon just gave a succinct answer, whereas Bubba was more detailed.
I've noticed a lot of born again Christians feel this great need to include the prefix 'born again' when naming their beliefs. Maybe that's what Lilly was getting at.
?
Dunno, I'm religionless.
I've noticed a lot of born again Christians feel this great need to include the prefix 'born again' when naming their beliefs. Maybe that's what Lilly was getting at.
?
Dunno, I'm religionless.
pub crawler
New Yorker
My own thoughts...
If someone asked me how to become a Christian, I don't know that I'd even talk much about faith. I am more interested in the tangible. The here and now. I think that if someone is pursuing communion with god (or God), and that there is evidence of that pursuit in the way they live their life (however difficult or impossible said evidence may be to quantify), then they are a believer, or a Christian, or whatever they prefer to be called. And whether they smoke, drink or cuss is irrelevant to me, 'cause I do most of that stuff.
I also believe that some Christians are really working against themselves by using what I call "Jesusspeak." I respectfully disagree with the use of such terms as "Born Again," "The Great Commission," "redemption," etc., and even the term "sin." The use of these terms is not a huge issue with me but I have to say, I'm sure there are people reading this thread who have no idea what any of this stuff means, and indeed, who are likely put off by the use of such terminology.
Getting back to the issue at hand, I don't know that I have the answer to the question "How does one become a Christian?" It's not a black and white issue for me; hence, I'll probably be redefining my answer forever. I try to be a good person.... that's all I can do.
If someone asked me how to become a Christian, I don't know that I'd even talk much about faith. I am more interested in the tangible. The here and now. I think that if someone is pursuing communion with god (or God), and that there is evidence of that pursuit in the way they live their life (however difficult or impossible said evidence may be to quantify), then they are a believer, or a Christian, or whatever they prefer to be called. And whether they smoke, drink or cuss is irrelevant to me, 'cause I do most of that stuff.
I also believe that some Christians are really working against themselves by using what I call "Jesusspeak." I respectfully disagree with the use of such terms as "Born Again," "The Great Commission," "redemption," etc., and even the term "sin." The use of these terms is not a huge issue with me but I have to say, I'm sure there are people reading this thread who have no idea what any of this stuff means, and indeed, who are likely put off by the use of such terminology.
Getting back to the issue at hand, I don't know that I have the answer to the question "How does one become a Christian?" It's not a black and white issue for me; hence, I'll probably be redefining my answer forever. I try to be a good person.... that's all I can do.
zoomerang II
War Child
If i believe that the universe was created from a ball of noxious gases 9 billion years ago...
If i believe in evolution and continuing evolutionary theory...
If i believe that christ existed and lived and died...
If i am unsure in my mind whether or not JC was actually born to a virgin and actually resurrected from the dead and is actually the son of god...
If I follow Christ's actions and commandments (accepting that this is contradictory to my being unsure about the above points)...
Can i still be a christian?
If i believe in evolution and continuing evolutionary theory...
If i believe that christ existed and lived and died...
If i am unsure in my mind whether or not JC was actually born to a virgin and actually resurrected from the dead and is actually the son of god...
If I follow Christ's actions and commandments (accepting that this is contradictory to my being unsure about the above points)...
Can i still be a christian?
80sU2isBest
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2000
- Messages
- 4,970
I believe that if you are unsure of the above things about Christ, you are not a Christian, because it doesn't have anything to do with what you do, but rather your belief, faith and trust in what was done for you by the Lord Jesus.
[This message has been edited by 80sU2isBest (edited 03-14-2002).]
BabyGrace
Refugee
my question is why does religion do this? I'm not pointing fingers at anyone here, logical discussion has never been a problem, but why is it that people feel a need, the whole world over, to blatanttly defy others' beliefs. I mean, alright I'm getting totally off topic here so go ahead and ignore me if you'd like, but I've been studying the Middle East lately, as many people have I'm sure, and I cannot comprehend why the 3 major religions in that area are so incredibly intolerant of eachother. Even the groups within the religions. Why can't people just accept what other people believe and live their lives in peace? I personally think as Ive said before that all religions go back to one God...why argue the details? People become so possessive of the tiniest little aspects of their belief that they feel the need to violate their own morals just to protect them...
it just blows my mind. I think if everyone could just step back and look at the situation reasonably they'd see how ridiculous it is. But that's so impossible
ahh whatever, excuse my rant.
how do you become a Christian pub crawler? I'm not actually sure, I was raised in the a Presbytarian Church from the time when I was 4, when I was baptized so that's how it went for me. The biggest thing is believing in Jesus Christ as our Savior, oh yes and practicing tolerance, I think. But then again I was never confirmed because I'm not sure about the Church, so I'm sure my answer is all wrong.
------------------
You make yourself vulnerable to change in your life. But in the end, you've got to become the change you want to see in the world.
-the B-man
80sU2isBest
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2000
- Messages
- 4,970
You're right, BabyGrace, people should be more "tolerant" of other people's beliefs, if "tolerance" means not beating each other up or insulting people for their beliefs.
However, there is indeed a reason why people (regardless of what faith they are) try to convert people. It's to share the good thing you feel God has given you. Think of it this way; if someone gave you an unlimited supply of money, and told you that there was enough for everyone in the world to have as much as they want and no one would ever run out, wouldn't you run and tell everyone you knew, so that they could share in it? I don't think you would hoard it all yourself, would you? That's why people evangelize.
Also, the reason Christians, Jews and Muslims "argue the details" is because each one of our religions says that it is the ONLY way to God. Jesus said "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father but by me", and there are other claims as to Christianity being the only way. People of the Muslim faith think theirs is the only way, also. Same with Judaism. That's why it's impossible for every oen of us to be right. Based on these claims, if Christianity is right, Islam and Judaism are wrong. If Islam is right, Judaism and Christianity are wrong. And so on. That's why the details must be discussed. It is a quest for absolute truth.
Achtung Bubba
Refugee
Angela:
Certainly, melon and I disagree on a LOT of issues, but I doubt that either of us are doing just to be contrary, just to pick a fight with the other.
Melon's definition was more succinct, but I also think it was *too* succinct. I think one should make things as simple as possible, but no simpler.
Let's say that I defined a square as "having four sides, all the same length, meeting at right angles" and Melon defined a square as simply "having four sides." In that example, Melon would have overgeneralized: he would have defined quadrilaterals; while that does include squares, it also allows for rectangles, rhombuses, etc.
Likewise, I think Melon's definition is too simple in that it doesn't mention human failings, obedience to Christ, etc.
pub crawler:
I agree that using specialized terms is useless when talking to a non-believer. If I were talking to a non-believer, I'd probably avoid the word "sin" and say something like this:
"God created each of us with a specific purpose - to follow Him and have a personal relationship with Him. Rather than create robots, He created us with the ability to choose Him or our own selfish ways. The problem is, we have all chosen to be selfish, time and time again. We have separated ourselves from God. He demands a level of perfection that we cannot reach on our own, regardless of how good we try to be. We've burnt the bridge between us and Him, and we can't build it back."
That said, I think it's fine for fellow Christians to use such specialized terminology - not to create a clique or to distance themselves from non-believers, but because it is generally easier to use the specialized terms:
It's easier to say "sin" than "disobedience and separation from God". It's easier to say "the Transfiguration" than "the miracle where Moses and Elijah showed up talking to Jesus." It's easier to say "the Great Commission" than "the commandment to go and preach the gospel."
I'll be happy explain any unfamiliar terms, but I think I can use these terms without causing too much damage.
zoomerang II:
I believe I agree with 80sU2isBest that belief in Christ as the resurrected Son of God is necessary. That's certainly not a criticism; I would just suggest that you reflect on whether Christ actually is what He said He is.
BabyGrace:
I would say that people aren't entirely intolerant, that the vast majority of people in this country believe that Christians, Jews, and Muslims should live and let live.
(Also remember: the predominantly Christian United States sent military aid to Somalia and the fomer Yugoslavia for the sake of Muslims.)
That said, we are not arguing details. We are arguing the very core of our beliefs. Even if we do believe in the same God (something I'm not entirely sure is the case), Christians believe Jesus Christ is the ressurected Son of God and the source of our salvation and Muslims believe He is merely a prophet.
That sort of gulf CANNOT be reconciled. It's not comparable to the differences between Christian denominations, which debate Transubstantiation and how to baptize; it's far too crucial. The two religions are ULTIMATELY incompatible.
80sU2isBest:
Good posts.
Certainly, melon and I disagree on a LOT of issues, but I doubt that either of us are doing just to be contrary, just to pick a fight with the other.
Melon's definition was more succinct, but I also think it was *too* succinct. I think one should make things as simple as possible, but no simpler.
Let's say that I defined a square as "having four sides, all the same length, meeting at right angles" and Melon defined a square as simply "having four sides." In that example, Melon would have overgeneralized: he would have defined quadrilaterals; while that does include squares, it also allows for rectangles, rhombuses, etc.
Likewise, I think Melon's definition is too simple in that it doesn't mention human failings, obedience to Christ, etc.
pub crawler:
I agree that using specialized terms is useless when talking to a non-believer. If I were talking to a non-believer, I'd probably avoid the word "sin" and say something like this:
"God created each of us with a specific purpose - to follow Him and have a personal relationship with Him. Rather than create robots, He created us with the ability to choose Him or our own selfish ways. The problem is, we have all chosen to be selfish, time and time again. We have separated ourselves from God. He demands a level of perfection that we cannot reach on our own, regardless of how good we try to be. We've burnt the bridge between us and Him, and we can't build it back."
That said, I think it's fine for fellow Christians to use such specialized terminology - not to create a clique or to distance themselves from non-believers, but because it is generally easier to use the specialized terms:
It's easier to say "sin" than "disobedience and separation from God". It's easier to say "the Transfiguration" than "the miracle where Moses and Elijah showed up talking to Jesus." It's easier to say "the Great Commission" than "the commandment to go and preach the gospel."
I'll be happy explain any unfamiliar terms, but I think I can use these terms without causing too much damage.
zoomerang II:
I believe I agree with 80sU2isBest that belief in Christ as the resurrected Son of God is necessary. That's certainly not a criticism; I would just suggest that you reflect on whether Christ actually is what He said He is.
BabyGrace:
I would say that people aren't entirely intolerant, that the vast majority of people in this country believe that Christians, Jews, and Muslims should live and let live.
(Also remember: the predominantly Christian United States sent military aid to Somalia and the fomer Yugoslavia for the sake of Muslims.)
That said, we are not arguing details. We are arguing the very core of our beliefs. Even if we do believe in the same God (something I'm not entirely sure is the case), Christians believe Jesus Christ is the ressurected Son of God and the source of our salvation and Muslims believe He is merely a prophet.
That sort of gulf CANNOT be reconciled. It's not comparable to the differences between Christian denominations, which debate Transubstantiation and how to baptize; it's far too crucial. The two religions are ULTIMATELY incompatible.
80sU2isBest:
Good posts.
Bubba, arguing on a fundamentalist level does nothing to a liberal Christian, by definition. I know I have argued on a fundamentalist level in the past (part so I could get my point across to conservative Christians, part for my own amusement and knowledge growth), but it certainly doesn't change my views on the Bible and 2000 years of Christian tradition, which I don't think is infallible.
pub crawler asked for a survey, and I gave my personal response, which is quite succinct. I do not think there is some long list of requirements to get the title of "Christian," but, without belief in Jesus Christ as the Messiah, then the title doesn't apply to you (hence the word "Christ" in "Christian").
As for that long list of supposed requirements (the one that makes me laugh is the one that I am supposed to believe I have "human failings," implying I'm evil), I don't think that all Christians have to share it.
As for the reference to Satan, you are playing semantics games. You know exactly what I mean: the only general requirement for Christianity is true faith in God and faith in Jesus. The rest of morality depends on conscience and the specific denomination you belong to, but those aren't "Christian" requirements.
I do respect others beliefs in this thread, including yours, but I do not share them. It is that simple. With that, I believe that, because of the strict requirements that conservative Christianity has placed on being a Christian, it has driven away far more potential converts than it has attracted. For those here who think that all Christians are like the fundamentalist "Bible Belters," I can assure you that that is wholly incorrect. There are plenty of liberal Christian sects, but they don't televangelize, nor scream of "fire and brimstone" on street corners, nor do they cast the first stone on non-believers.
I assure the "skeptics" of Christianity that if you sincerely have believe in Christ, but are rejected by the legalism of more conservative sects, there is still a place for you in it, even if it means that I have to found my own Christian denomination to do it.
Melon
------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time
pub crawler asked for a survey, and I gave my personal response, which is quite succinct. I do not think there is some long list of requirements to get the title of "Christian," but, without belief in Jesus Christ as the Messiah, then the title doesn't apply to you (hence the word "Christ" in "Christian").
As for that long list of supposed requirements (the one that makes me laugh is the one that I am supposed to believe I have "human failings," implying I'm evil), I don't think that all Christians have to share it.
As for the reference to Satan, you are playing semantics games. You know exactly what I mean: the only general requirement for Christianity is true faith in God and faith in Jesus. The rest of morality depends on conscience and the specific denomination you belong to, but those aren't "Christian" requirements.
I do respect others beliefs in this thread, including yours, but I do not share them. It is that simple. With that, I believe that, because of the strict requirements that conservative Christianity has placed on being a Christian, it has driven away far more potential converts than it has attracted. For those here who think that all Christians are like the fundamentalist "Bible Belters," I can assure you that that is wholly incorrect. There are plenty of liberal Christian sects, but they don't televangelize, nor scream of "fire and brimstone" on street corners, nor do they cast the first stone on non-believers.
I assure the "skeptics" of Christianity that if you sincerely have believe in Christ, but are rejected by the legalism of more conservative sects, there is still a place for you in it, even if it means that I have to found my own Christian denomination to do it.
Melon
------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time
Lilly
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
Angela: Yep, that's exactly what I was getting at. I just have such a negative connotation to being 'born again' though I'm not sure quite why.
melon: Thanks for the info on infant baptism, I didn't know some of that, and I find it really interesting.
zoomerang: To me, you are a Christian if you believe in Christ, as I previously stated. But, I don't know what some more educated people think about it...'cos I don't know for sure.
------------------
Every question possesses a power that does not lie in the answer.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
U2 Live From Sphere - Final Show SiriusXM stream
- Latest: Headache in a Suitcase
