"Christian" is a useless term

[Rlyeh]

The term "Christian" is almost meaningless. Although there is only one Church - the body of Christ, essentially the avatar of Jesus - there are many, many denominations, groups, movements, and belief systems. One person who calls himself Christian may actually have diametric beliefs to another Christian. All of this can make it difficult to discuss Christianity without identifying specific beliefs and influences.

So any word that refers to a larger group composed of smaller groups is meaningless?

[SpiritWriter]

I don't think its a useless term, but it's definitely true that you cannot assume anything about a person just because they call themselves a Christian. Some people call themselves Christians and don't even believe in God... one example.

I think discussing scripture, or religion is fun and I think the differences are also amazing. People who cannot have a conversation about it need growth in my opinion.

well I should say it is fun to discuss with certain people, some people make it very irritating, and those would be the extremists, even then it is a little bit fun just because people's psyches need to get pushed on sometimes

Edited October 21, 2013 by SpiritWriter

[SpiritWriter]

Labels and titles altogether need to be seen differently by all. We label something and think it needs to be a certain way. We are people with beliefs and we choose titles but we shouldn't then be restricted by them or looked at in a certain way, or expected to behave or think in a certain way. Its ridiculous. Titles lead to separation, this is our minds doing this to ourselves, labeling ourselves, labeling each other, categorizing.

This is NOT a Christian problem. All people suffer from this, this is why there are wars, not because of religion... because of our minds need to categorize and feel superior.

If you are critical against Christians because of this, stop. That means you are doing the same thing. You don't know what a person thinks or believes because they call themselves Christian, really and truly, you have absolutely no idea.

Edited October 21, 2013 by SpiritWriter

[Doug1029]

The term "Christian" is almost meaningless. Although there is only one Church - the body of Christ, essentially the avatar of Jesus - there are many, many denominations, groups, movements, and belief systems. One person who calls himself Christian may actually have diametric beliefs to another Christian. All of this can make it difficult to discuss Christianity without identifying specific beliefs and influences.

The Nicene (or Apostle's) Creed says: "I believe in One God, Maker of Heaven and Earth, who was conceived of the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary and suffered under Pontius Pilate. He descended inro Hell. On the third day He rose again from the dead. He ascended into Heaven where He sits at the Right Hand of God the Father Almighty from whence He shall come to judge the Quick and the Dead. I believe in the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and the life ever-lasting. Amen."

That's the definition agreed upon in 325 AD and still the defining statement of Christianity. As I do not believe it, I guess I am not a Christian.

Doug

[scowl]

If you are critical against Christians because of this, stop. That means you are doing the same thing. You don't know what a person thinks or believes because they call themselves Christian, really and truly, you have absolutely no idea.

This is why "Christian" has become a meaningless term.

[Mr Walker]

The Nicene (or Apostle's) Creed says: "I believe in One God, Maker of Heaven and Earth, who was conceived of the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary and suffered under Pontius Pilate. He descended inro Hell. On the third day He rose again from the dead. He ascended into Heaven where He sits at the Right Hand of God the Father Almighty from whence He shall come to judge the Quick and the Dead. I believe in the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and the life ever-lasting. Amen."

That's the definition agreed upon in 325 AD and still the defining statement of Christianity. As I do not believe it, I guess I am not a Christian.

Doug

Not necessarily This is the doctrine adopted by the roman catholic church.There were many forms of Christian before this date including jewish and gnostic Christians. There have been many forms since, including the original protestant churches and modern churches which have returned to basic biblical principles While many of their basic beliefs are similar there are exception.s My wife's church and many others, from reading and study of the bible, do not believe in hell as a punishment for example. Nor do they believe that people go to heaven or hell when they die, but follow the bible teaching that we all rest in our graves until the judgement days. For them punishment is death. "the wages of sin is death." not eternity in hell.

ON the other hand, if read broadly, I guess many of those churches would believe in god as the maker of heaven and earth, while many mainstream Christians (catholic and protestant) no longer would.

Edited October 21, 2013 by Mr Walker

[danielost]

Today there are three basic christian churchs. Roman catholic,( not christian) eastern orthadox, (break away from catholic), and mormon(who believ christ came to the new world). Everyone else is a break away f rom one of the above. I forgot the church in ethiopia.

[SpiritWriter]

This is why "Christian" has become a meaningless term.

It may be meaningful to the person calling themselves a Christian though. Its meaningfulness is based on perspective.

[DeWitz]

The Nicene (or Apostle's) Creed says: "I believe in One God, Maker of Heaven and Earth, who was conceived of the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary and suffered under Pontius Pilate. He descended inro Hell. On the third day He rose again from the dead. He ascended into Heaven where He sits at the Right Hand of God the Father Almighty from whence He shall come to judge the Quick and the Dead. I believe in the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and the life ever-lasting. Amen."

That's the definition agreed upon in 325 AD and still the defining statement of Christianity. As I do not believe it, I guess I am not a Christian.

Doug

Good point, but don't forget about the Holy Spirit. In the Nicene Creed, second chronologically to the Apostles, belief is "in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, who proceeds from the Father [and the Son. . .}. The glitch here is that Western Christians (Roman Catholic and Protestant) say the whole phrase, "the Father and the Son," but the Greek, Russian, Serbian, and other Orthodox bodies state only, "from the Father." That's how dicey it gets even within those who define themselves as Christian.

This is a major reason why the West and the East are not 'in communion' (sharing the Eucharist). So even the interpretation of an intended universal credo isn't uniform.

[danielost]

But Jesus damned entire groups of people en mass, especially if they opposed him in any way. One term, "a generation of vipers" comes to mind. Pharisees were "wicked and adulterous people". Jesus swore that anyone who was against him would be be cast "into everlasting fire". He regularly referred to Sodom and how that will be a picnic compared to what would happen to sinners of his time.

Respect for sinners? Sorry, I can't find it.

Sorry, I think you misunderstood my post.

Christ condemned groups of people, not the indivigual, the same wy I do the catholic church or gay people or the kkk.

[Doug1029]

Not necessarily This is the doctrine adopted by the roman catholic church.There were many forms of Christian before this date including jewish and gnostic Christians. There have been many forms since, including the original protestant churches and modern churches which have returned to basic biblical principles While many of their basic beliefs are similar there are exception.s My wife's church and many others, from reading and study of the bible, do not believe in hell as a punishment for example. Nor do they believe that people go to heaven or hell when they die, but follow the bible teaching that we all rest in our graves until the judgement days. For them punishment is death. "the wages of sin is death." not eternity in hell.

ON the other hand, if read broadly, I guess many of those churches would believe in god as the maker of heaven and earth, while many mainstream Christians (catholic and protestant) no longer would.

The Apostle's Creed version is the official statement of belief of the Presbyterian church.

The critical part is the belief that Jesus rose from the dead. This proves he was God. Thus, if you please him, you can be saved from death, too. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, if this is just a story, then there is no "secret knowledge" that cannot be accessed by dint of mind. If this is so, then the church is bogus and its demands for special treatment, are frauds. So it all hinges on the one question: did Jesus rise from the dead?

Doug

[scowl]

The critical part is the belief that Jesus rose from the dead. This proves he was God. Thus, if you please him, you can be saved from death, too. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, if this is just a story, then there is no "secret knowledge" that cannot be accessed by dint of mind. If this is so, then the church is bogus and its demands for special treatment, are frauds. So it all hinges on the one question: did Jesus rise from the dead?

Doug

Is this why most "Christians" don't know anything about the Bible and sometimes get mad when quote it?

[scowl]

Sorry, I think you misunderstood my post.

Christ condemned groups of people, not the indivigual, the same wy I do the catholic church or gay people or the kkk.

You believe that homosexuals aren't a group of people. Then what are they?

[danielost]

No, they don't like being called stupid or retarded or told they don't understand something, just because they don't believe it.

[Doug1029]

Is this why most "Christians" don't know anything about the Bible and sometimes get mad when quote it?

Most of the "Christians" I know don't read the Bible. They find it boring. They'd rather let a charlatan tell them what it says than actually be bothered to learn anything.

More is the pity. It's a fascinating group of legends, like Beowulf and the Iliad.

Doug

Edited October 22, 2013 by Doug1029

[Mr Walker]

The Apostle's Creed version is the official statement of belief of the Presbyterian church.

The critical part is the belief that Jesus rose from the dead. This proves he was God. Thus, if you please him, you can be saved from death, too. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, if this is just a story, then there is no "secret knowledge" that cannot be accessed by dint of mind. If this is so, then the church is bogus and its demands for special treatment, are frauds. So it all hinges on the one question: did Jesus rise from the dead?

Doug

I do not know if christ rose from the dead, and i choose not to believe in anything unknown. I was certain enough of this, aged about 12, to politely refuse to be confirmed in my mother's church. (The church of england in Australia) But I follow christ's teachings about what is known. How to live on earth and the rewards for all which this brings, including establishing the kingdom of heaven on earth, and direct connection to god. I live as much like christ lived as i can. I claim to be christian by choice of life style, but i am not a believer, and do not think christ was exclusively the only path to god. God came directly to me, after all, which kind of disproves that piece of theology in my mind.

Edited October 22, 2013 by Mr Walker

[danielost]

You believe that homosexuals aren't a group of people. Then what are they?

Again you twist what I said. Homosexuals is a group while a gay person is an individual. I stand against homosexuals, but I treat the gay person the same as I would anyone else.

[scowl]

Again you twist what I said. Homosexuals is a group while a gay person is an individual. I stand against homosexuals, but I treat the gay person the same as I would anyone else.

How could I twist your twisted claim that you respect a homosexual but don't respect homosexuals?

I guess an individual doesn't pose a threat to you but a group of them do.

[freetoroam]

Again you twist what I said. Homosexuals is a group while a gay person is an individual. I stand against homosexuals, but I treat the gay person the same as I would anyone else.

And when 2 or more gay individuals get together, thats when you are against them?

[danielost]

No, the life style, it is a sin.

[+Paranoid Android]

Perhaps it would be help to add some perspective. I am "against" premarital sex. Am I therefore intolerant of those who have premarital sex? Geez, if I was I'd be against an awful lot of people, including (but not limited to): my parents had sex before marriage, my brother had sex before marriage, my last girlfriend had two children out of marriage, my best friend from high school had premarital sex. That doesn't mean I am against any of them. But I do not approve of their actions.

But that's the point. It's THEIR actions, THEIR choices. They have the Right to live how they choose. Just because they live in a way that I wouldn't doesn't mean I don't value and respect them. But suddenly replace "premarital sex" with "homosexual" and I'm bigoted and intolerant. My comments about my parents, brother, ex-girlfriend, and best high school friend get relegated to the same line as "oh, I have gay friends" (which I do, just for the record, and actually find it funny that people see that as a negative when I bring it up).

[freetoroam]

No, the life style, it is a sin.

What is the sin bit?

What is this "lifestyle" you are refering to?

Its ok for a gay person to be gay as long as they are on their own? You been watching too much little Britain:

[Mr Walker]

Certain lifestyles and practices bring certain consequences.

I try to convince people they should not drink or smoke. I disapprove of drinking and smoking both because of their social cosst and also because o the harm it does to the individuals, but I love people who drink or smoke the same as non drinkers or smokers.. Homosexuality is more complex, being tied into not just a humans sexual orientation but their sense of identity. None the less, like obesity drinking and smoking, homosexuality poses dangers and costs to the individuals and societies involved with it.

These must be managed on a social basis withoutr discrimination against individuals but with careful regard to the physical consequences of any behaviour. The physical dangers for both men and women of same sex sex are as real, identifiable and known, as those for smoking or drinking. At least people can choose not to smoke or drink, but it is neither fair nor reasonable to expect people to refrain from loving others, or having sex with those they love. Thus more practical and realistic education, and other methods, mu t be used to help homosexuals be safe. Man y GLBT health services do just this.

Edited October 24, 2013 by Mr Walker

[scowl]

Certain lifestyles and practices bring certain consequences.

Ain't that the truth! My gay friends as a group are more happy than the married heterosexuals I know. I can understand why some people want them to burn in hell.

[Mr Walker]

[/size]

Ain't that the truth! My gay friends as a group are more happy than the married heterosexuals I know. I can understand why some people want them to burn in hell.

I do not know any gay people to make this comparison. I would say it depends on why they are happy.

My wife maintains that happiness is not a good indicator of the success of one's life although i am very happy with my life and marriage of 40 years.

I was talking of physical consequences which cannot be created by emotional or psychologica means. Homosexuals men and women have higher cancer rates than hetero sexuals just as smokers have higher cancer reates than non smokers. One link may be that homosexuals have a higher rate of both drinking and smoking than heterosexuals and thus an incresed incidence of cancers and other diseaes caused by these lifestyle behaviours.

The reasons WHY homosexuals smoke and drink more is open to debate of course. In part it is because of social pressure and stress caused by discrimination, but also because statistically they spend moretime in places like bars, hotels and clubs, trying to find partners not available in the neighbourhood or work place.

However, certain sexual practices which are optional for heterosexuals, but essential for homosexuals during sex, do considerably increase the risk of some forms of cancer.

One has to be educated about these facts and act to minimise the harm.

PS No one burns in hell, because it does not exist. The consequences of our lives are a direct result of our own choices and behaviours in life.

Edited October 25, 2013 by Mr Walker