The Definition of "Christian"

[JanYpe 17]

Originally posted by: Jezus53

Originally posted by: Retep Molinari

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

Originally posted by: Jezus53

Cart, horse. Nobody's claiming that Christian is a subgroup of Catholic, it's the other way around. quote>

The other way around? How so? How is Catholism a subgroup of Christianity? If you see the history of the Christian church, you would see that Christianity, if any, would be the subgroup. But that is not the point.quote>

they mean that in a very literal way because they are not Christians.quote>

I reiterate:

How does one make the claim that a group of people who worships Christ as their savior is not Christian "in a literal way"?

quote>

Let me make this simple. They are Catholic not Christian just as how Christians are not Catholic.quote>

These comments are inane (not a typo).  Catholics are Christian, Christians are not necessarily Catholic.  Get it together, man.

Barbarossa

quote>

I second that. To add, Christian is the "mother group" which can be split between Catholics and Protestants (including methodists, baptisis, mormons, lutherians, calvinists, etc)

quote>

*face palm*

This is why arguing on the internet sucks. Look, when I say Christian I mean Protestants in your terms and I will start using that term to try and clear things up. Also, the first statement I said is from a historical view point, the second one is the view point of other people. If you are trying to catch me contradicting myself then you failed. If you want my personal opinion on this then here it is, it's a huge waste of time and should never be brought up. I could care less if you are Catholic, Christian, Jewish, Satanist, whatever. As long as you respect my view then I'll respect yours. I am only speaking on behalf of the other side. There is my view and I am done trying to defend the other side. Good day.

quote>

You can *face palm* all you want, but they're not the ones using the wrong terms dude. Saying "Christian" when you mean "Protestant" is implying it is the only Christianity and that Catholicism is completely seperate from it. No one cares how much any of you favour your own flavour of god, but all we're saying is that it doesn't make objective sense to apply that favoritism when it comes to definitions.

[fukuda 351]

I think that we are in the wrong place to look for objective sense, jan.. Let's say that this topic is more about emotions than actual objectivity of any sort

[Sam 163]

So were the twelve disciples Christians then? (they followed the teachings of Jesus Christ). What about all those who were followers of the teachings of Jesus Christ from about 50 AD for the first few centuries. I was certainly always taught (through my church at the time) that they and the disciples were the first Christians. Which would make all who come after them (historically speaking) Christians too.

The image below (from wikipedia) is a pretty fair summary of what I was taught in history as well.

What about the Orthodox churches? Their split was more ancient than the Catholic/Protestant split.

[fukuda 351]

serious page flip

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Jezus53 18]

I want to apologize for my comments earlier. I was in a very bad mood due to some real life issues and I came in here and acted like a child. I also want to apologize for not being clear on terminology. I was not under the impression that Protestant and Christian did not the mean the same thing since I have been brought up with both being the same thing. You all bring up some excellent arguments and I can see the depth of this issue is a lot deeper than I original thought it would be.

[frogface 354]

I think we should look to the bible to see the definition of whos a true christian tm and jesus says true believers will be able to pick up snakes and drink poison without any ill effects,

so the question is who wants to go first !

[ShortStraw 1]

Originally posted by: frogface

I think we should look to the bible to see the definition of whos a true christian tm and jesus says true believers will be able to pick up snakes and drink poison without any ill effects,

so the question is who wants to go first !quote>

I once accidentally ate half a box of rat poison (don't ask) and suffered absolutely no ill effects.  A few years later I unwittingly (again, don't ask) drank about 2 ounces of Naptha (lighter fluid) and again, felt no effects whatsoever.

I have picked up snakes on numerous and varied occasions in my life and never been bitten.

By the quoted definition of "True Believer" and taking into account that I'm a devout Agnostic I can't help but wonder if I also live outside the Laws of Natural Selection. . . cause that would be awesome.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: Jezus53

I want to apologize for my comments earlier. I was in a very bad mood due to some real life issues and I came in here and acted like a child. I also want to apologize for not being clear on terminology. I was not under the impression that Protestant and Christian did not the mean the same thing since I have been brought up with both being the same thing. You all bring up some excellent arguments and I can see the depth of this issue is a lot deeper than I original thought it would be.quote>

Thank you, Jezus53.   I believe there is value in understanding other points of view.  I'm glad you are willing to look at what people here are saying.

and, thank you, sam, for the chart.   As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[ExiL3 10]

Well, I am not religious my self, but I grew up in a family that was fairly religious (grandparents, uncles/aunt etc.) and to me it seems like a christian, wherever the person may be orthodox or protestant, could be described by the following words:

- Superstitious (self explanatory, as I am an atheist)

- Believes in one (1) all knowing God, and his counterpart (yes, Satan  

- Believes in The Creation as described in the bible (in short terms, god made us, and everything over a period of time)

- Believes that Jesus was/is the son of god, and sacrificed himself for humanity

- We are created in God's own image (we shall inherit the earth etc.)

- Believe they should teach other humans of their religion and pass it on to their next

- Believe that others who do not believe in Jesus as the saviour and God as his father will be judged and will "go to hell"

- Are waiting to recieve the final judgement themselves

- That homosexuality, in it's sense is unnatural and not intended by God. BUT disagreement if it is sinful or not.

- That the Bible is a (fairly) sufficiant guide to ethics (and live by the 10 commandments)

Like I said, I am not religious my self and this is my idea of a Christian person, and I might have left something out that I did not think of. 

,take care!

[Duke of York 23]

You know ...we can talk all day about different Theologies and the

Liturgy of Different Church's and wether there right or wrong...The

main thing to understand is that the true Church is the Body and

Family of Christ...As for us Humans to even try to interpret the word

of God we must thank God for His mercy on our ignorance and pray

daily for enlightment to the truth...

St.Matthew 7:7

Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

St. Matthew 7:8

For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it

shall be opened.

(KJV)

It is referencing to the knowledge of God....And the Enlightment of the Word...

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: Duke of York

...The main thing to understand is that the true Church is the Body and

Family of Christ...quote>

 

Christians, of whatever flavor, believe that (or some version of that).

The billions of non-Christians on the planet do not.

 

[Duke of York 23]

Reply to SkiGeek,

Yes, for people who do not believe it is merely the study or

timeline of a certain Church...However if they do not believe,

then I would think that it is irrelevant for them to discuss the proper

way to worship and understand a God they do not believe in...

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: Duke of York

Reply to SkiGeek,

Yes, for people who do not believe it is merely the study or

timeline of a certain Church...However if they do not believe,

then I would think that it is irrelevant for them to discuss the proper

way to worship and understand a God they do not believe in...quote>

I think it's interesting to understand the history of various religions including their beliefs and practices.   I like understanding various points of view.

If people only studied things that were "relevant" to them, most people would know very little about world history.

 

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: SkiGeek

I believe there is value in understanding other points of view.quote>

Knowledge is the mortal enemy of prejudice.

Originally posted by: ExiL3

a christian, wherever the person may be orthodox or protestant, could be described by the following words:quote>

A few items in your list are bothering me.

- Believe they should teach other humans of their religion and pass it on to their nextquote>

Most Christians won't be handing out pamphlets on the subway, or taking any other sort of "active recruiting" meaures. Some won't even push the matter on their children. When I became an atheist at 8 years old, my mother was none too pleased, but didn't try and change my mind. Though I think she was convinced at the time that it was just a phase I was going through and that in a year or two I'd get over it and be back in sunday school. Actually, she claims nowadays that god told her not to try and reconvert me. I told her she's nuts that she actually thinks that god's talking to her, but there you go.

- Believe that others who do not believe in Jesus as the saviour and God as his father will be judged and will "go to hell"quote>

Not all Christians believe this. Many believe that a righteous non-christian can still get into heaven. And the Catholic church teaches that upon death, all are shown the way of Christ and given the option to accept it and go to heaven or decline it and go to hell. Last call for redemption and/or opportunity for those who in life were never shown the teachings of Christianity.

- That homosexuality, in it's sense is unnatural and not intended by God. BUT disagreement if it is sinful or not.quote>

...this seems so much more specific and topical than the other items to the point where it almost sounds like a cheap shot.

And in any case, the disagreement is not so much about whether or not there is sin involved, but rather about whether it's being gay in general that's sinful (most Protestant churches) or just specifically having gay sex (Catholic Church).

I'm sure there are people who would claim to be Christian and who see nothing wrong with either of those things, but, well, I think most would consider them not to be a "proper christian".

[Blazerhawk 162]

I think what Duke of York means is that those who don't care shouldn't be trying to start a debate. One thing about Americans is that, as a group, we are much more likely to register opinions on issues we have no knowledge. This is one reason polls will show that 80% of Americans are "Christian."

Personally, I take the definition to mean one person who believes in Christ and trusts in Him as Savior. Labeling religions or denominations as Christian is a misuse of the word.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: crushedcar

 One thing about Americans is that, as a group, we are much more likely to register opinions on issues we have no knowledge. This is one reason polls will show that 80% of Americans are "Christian.".quote>

More detailed statistics are here.   Some of them are quite interesting.

80% believe in the resurrection of Christ and 27% believe in reincarnation.  So at least 7% believe in both.

96% of the Christians believe in the resurrection of Christ, as do 26% of the non-Christian.

 

[Duke of York 23]

Reply to SkiGeek,

Well, I do understand that non-believers have a interest in the History of the Church....

However I still think it is interesting that people think that they can have an opinion

in a subject that they do not believe in...For example, A person who doesn't believe see's

the Church much like an artifact....something that has facts until a conclusion or explanation...

And that mentality or thinking process will not suffice for Theology...Theology is the study of

God....And to understand God one must believe He is there first.. correct...History is a material and

Earthly thing...Therefore it can be studied...Though Religion is a Spiritual walk with God in which

the person learns through a process with Him...God through the Holy Spirit

teaches Christians...

Basically what I'm trying to say is that there is a difference in stating History and Church facts...

And theology and interpretation of God's Word....

I would also like to add that the reason Christians do not force God on other people is because

it is every individuals decision to embrace and believe in God and His Son Christ...All we can do as Christians

is do our best with the help of God to deliver the message..After that it is beyond our hands...God gave Mankind freewill..

[ShortStraw 1]

Originally posted by: crushedcar

I think what Duke of York means is that those who don't care shouldn't be trying to start a debate. One thing about Americans is that, as a group, we are much more likely to register opinions on issues we have no knowledge. quote>

I've studied religions quite closely for many years now.  I'm a history buff and one cannot appreciate the history of the development of our species without also studying religions and their impact on us over time.

I was raised to be a christian.  Like many americans, I began to have doubts in childhood and by the time I reached adulthood I no longer identified myself as a christian.  nevertheless, I live amongst christians in a primarily christian neighborhood/town/region and I find that the more I learn about christianity in general the better I understand the christians around me.  I feel that this qualifies me to debate in theological matters despite the fact that I do not hold any particular religion to be absolute truth.

Besides, "A wise man has great power, and a man of knowledge increases strength."

[Jezus53 18]

Originally posted by: SkiGeek

96% of the Christians believe in the resurrection of Christ, as do 26% of the non-Christian.

 

quote>

Huh, 96%? Shouldn't that be 100%? I think the definition of Christian is a litte vague if 96% believe that instead of 100%.

[Sam 163]

Originally posted by: SkiGeek

Originally posted by: crushedcar

 One thing about Americans is that, as a group, we are much more likely to register opinions on issues we have no knowledge. This is one reason polls will show that 80% of Americans are "Christian.".quote>

More detailed statistics are here.   Some of them are quite interesting.

80% believe in the resurrection of Christ and 27% believe in reincarnation.  So at least 7% believe in both.

96% of the Christians believe in the resurrection of Christ, as do 26% of the non-Christian.

 

quote>

I found these ones even more interesting (from the same survey):

• one percent of Christians do not believe in God,
• 8% do not believe in the survival of the soul after death,
• 7% do not believe in miracles,
• 5% do not believe in heaven,
• 7% do not believe in the Virgin birth and
• 18% do not believe in hell.

Originally posted by: Jezus53

Originally posted by: SkiGeek

96% of the Christians believe in the resurrection of Christ, as do 26% of the non-Christian.

 

quote>

Huh, 96%? Shouldn't that be 100%? I think the definition of Christian is a litte vague if 96% believe that instead of 100%.

quote>

Well that's the catch. A holy book may say people should believe X, Y and Z. The church may say the people should believe X, Y and Z. But when it comes down to it, people believe whatever they want, in whatever combination they want, regardless of what someone else says, thinks or tells them, or what other people say or think those people believe.

So yes you probably will get some Christians who don't believe in God or Heaven, or the resurrection. That's the point and why religious beliefs are never absolute and shouldn't be taken as such. It really is an individual matter, no matter what the religious authorities themselves like to think. That's why you can't really say "all Christians...". Because if one persons beliefs are "..."  the only thing you can pretty much guarantee based on that is that no-one else in the world believes exactly the same thing.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Meg 368]

Just another reminder: Discuss the issues, not each other.

If you disagree with someone, talk about the issues you disagree with. Do not talk about the person you disagree with.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Jezus53

Huh, 96%? Shouldn't that be 100%? I think the definition of Christian is a litte vague if 96% believe that instead of 100%.quote>

In this case, the defintion of Christian is likely "an individual who puts 'Christian' under 'what religion are you?' on the survey".

So, perhaps it would be a bit more clear to say "96% of people who say they're Christian" rather than "96% of Christians" - which, depending on your point of view, may or may not be the same thing.

Originally posted by: ExiL3

As usual Duke it seams you only read and understand what you want to when reading my texts. As I said "...a christian...COULD be described by the following words:"quote>

...okay, I see the issue here. You meant that quite literally, as in "this may or may not actually define a member of the group". I took it in the way that the words "could be described as" or "could be defined as" typically are used - that is, "I'm saying that this could be considered the definition of a member of the group".

Though, it's not your fault. I trust that English isn't your first language, seeing as you're from Norway, and that you merely unintentionally stumbled onto an idiomatic expression there.

Originally posted by: Duke of York

I do understand that non-believers have a interest in the History of the Church....

However I still think it is interesting that people think that they can have an opinion

in a subject that they do not believe inquote>

So, what, just because I'm not a Christian means I'm not entitled to have an opinion about Christianity? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

Besides, I know plenty of Christians who think they're perfectly entitled to have an opinion about other religions and about non-belief (and they are), so it goes both ways.

A person who doesn't believe see's the Church much like an artifact....something that has facts until a conclusion or explanationquote>

For an atheist or agnostic, yes. For someone of a different religion, it might be a different story.

And that mentality or thinking process will not suffice for Theologyquote>

True to a certain degree, but there's more to the matter than just theology.

Theology is the study of God....And to understand God one must believe He is there first.. correctquote>

No, not really. As an atheist, my understanding of God ("I think the idea that he exists is ridiculous but many people do believe in him and they often believe X, Y, and Z") is no doubt very different from yours, but it's an understanding nonetheless.

History is a material and Earthly thing...Therefore it can be studied...Though Religion is a Spiritual walk with God in which the person learns through a process with Him...God through the Holy Spirit teaches Christiansquote>

It deoends on what sort of learning you're talking about really. Anyone who's interested in doing so can learn enough about the history, beliefs, and practices of Christians to get a Ph.D on the subject, write books about it, and teach classes about it. They can have an excellent understanding of Christianity; what they can't do is understand what it's like to be Christian unless they are one. There's a difference.

I would also like to add that the reason Christians do not force God on other people is because

it is every individuals decision to embrace and believe in God and His Son Christ...All we can do as Christians

is do our best with the help of God to deliver the messagequote>

The problem is that I don't think there's anyone in this country who's never heard of Christianity, so nobody needs to be made aware of its existence. Nevertheless, people still go around handing out fliers with titles like "The Burning Hell", imploring people to repent their sins and come to church. This is not "delivering the message"; I've only heard it a million times before, the answer was no the first time, it's still no, and it's always gonna be no. What it is is being a pain in the ass of non-believers and perhaps trying to scare people into going to church by threat of damnation (I doubt that works too often). This sort of active solicitation is completely uncalled for. You don't need to come to me, if I'm interested, I'll come to you.

And, to be honest, it only sours my opinion of Christianity and religion in general to see people doing that. I've never seen an atheist doing any such thing.

[Duke of York 23]

Reply to Barbarossa,

 " Basically what I'm trying to say is that there is a difference in stating History and Church facts...

And theology and interpretation of God's Word.... "

I'm not saying that non-believers should not study religion...I would actually encourage it...

What I'm stating is that people who do not believe are studying the History of the Church and

it's physical properties. Which would be more the Study of Religions impact on society...Which is

different than studying the meaning of Gods Word.....

This is the definition of Theology from a webster dictionary...

" Science which treats of facts and phenomena of religion, and relations between God and man.

[Jezus53 18]

Well that's the catch. A holy book may say people should believe X, Y and Z. The church may say the people should believe X, Y and Z. But when it comes down to it, people believe whatever they want, in whatever combination they want, regardless of what someone else says, thinks or tells them, or what other people say or think those people believe.

So yes you probably will get some Christians who don't believe in God or Heaven, or the resurrection. That's the point and why religious beliefs are never absolute and shouldn't be taken as such. It really is an individual matter, no matter what the religious authorities themselves like to think. That's why you can't really say "all Christians...". Because if one persons beliefs are "..."  the only thing you can pretty much guarantee based on that is that no-one else in the world believes exactly the same thing.

quote>

That is so true. See, I've always had that thought in my head, but I never actually implemented it. I think being here is kinda opening my eyes.

Originally posted by: Duke87

Originally posted by: Duke of York

I do understand that non-believers have a interest in the History of the Church....

However I still think it is interesting that people think that they can have an opinion

in a subject that they do not believe inquote>

So, what, just because I'm not a Christian means I'm not entitled to have an opinion about Christianity? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

Besides, I know plenty of Christians who think they're perfectly entitled to have an opinion about other religions and about non-belief (and they are), so it goes both ways. quote>

To add on, my former church encouraged us to learn about other beliefs so we could understand what they were and why some one might believe in that idea. It is very important that we understand others beliefs. Sadly, I relized only recently.

I would also like to add that the reason Christians do not force God on other people is because

it is every individuals decision to embrace and believe in God and His Son Christ...All we can do as Christians

is do our best with the help of God to deliver the messagequote>

The problem is that I don't think there's anyone in this country who's never heard of Christianity, so nobody needs to be made aware of its existence. Nevertheless, people still go around handing out fliers with titles like "The Burning Hell", imploring people to repent their sins and come to church. This is not "delivering the message"; I've only heard it a million times before, the answer was no the first time, it's still no, and it's always gonna be no. What it is is being a pain in the ass of non-believers and perhaps trying to scare people into going to church by threat of damnation (I doubt that works too often). This sort of active solicitation is completely uncalled for. You don't need to come to me, if I'm interested, I'll come to you.

And, to be honest, it only sours my opinion of Christianity and religion in general to see people doing that. I've never seen an atheist doing any such thing.

quote>

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Jezus53

When I went on a missions trip to LA a few years ago we never stood on the corner and told people they were going to hell, instead we tried getting to know some of the homeless people. We tried getting them comfortable with us and then if we felt they would be willing to listen to us we would tell them, but never force them.quote>

Okay, now that's insidious. I think I'd rather people stand on a box and start screaming, then at least it's overt. Going to bums on the street and trying to "show them the way of god" by being nice to them... first of all, it's preying on the weak and helpless. Secondly, it smells like vile seduction. "I can solve all your problems... if you'll just come with me to my church... I can show you this little magic bullet for all your troubles named 'Jesus'..."

*shudder*

Of course, I see it that way because I look at anyone attempting to encourage people to find religion as a predator, like borg seeking new victims to assimilate into the collective (maybe the ship is a giant cross?). Many will beg to differ with that idea.

...although, the borg analogy could also be turned around and used on atheism as satan seducing people away from religion. It really all depends on who you think are the good guys and who you think are the bad guys here.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa