What is a Christian?

[Set the Fallen]

Yes so many are like this.. but not all .. Living over here in N.Ireland, a lot of Catholics and Protestants wouldn't care to try and convert anyone

I think the problem is - When you get smaller groups of Christians that push at others to convert.. and condemn what they feel are sinners and a few over time that have killed and hurt in gods name ..this seems to lay a bigger impact than the millions that don't care to do any of that

You take IE - A group of MUFC supporters ( Manchester United Football Club)...And a good lot of them love to go along and cheer on their fav team.........then you get a handful of MUFC supporters that kick up riots..and people get hurt all the time

So what does that do??? It puts a huge blemish all over the MUFC name....When you hear of an Man United match - you think - god help us if they lose... riots galore....This will be because of the handful of MUFC supporters that caused a large impact., therefore has seriously flocked it up for the rest of the supporters who don't cause riots..........( excuse the french)

That's the problem with beliefs... you wish to protect something less valuable than life.

People forget to think in such maters as religion, sports and different sort of things. They forget that there are only people behind it all, just like them, they forget that on the other side, there are people just like them, though they migth not act or see things as them. There are people who lives another way, and that still survives, which make people question themself, and some people do not like their own lifes being questioned.

What do you see as people's rights as human beings? We need to establish that first and foremost. Then, how do you think religion destroys these rights.

Interesting link. Shame it has absolutely nothing to do with Christians suggesting victims forgive their attackers. Nice try with the Norwegian article though.

Any living being, human or not, has rights to exist their own way.

People has a right to live their lifes like they please, religion destroy these rights by condemning and shuning freedom.

(Btw, the article is about people forcing rape victims to forgive the rapers because they are to kind people to really have done it... that the victims are shuned or even attacked by their own family... it's really sick how christian act in this time and age.)

I'm hoping you have some evidence for your blanket statement that most Christians are crazy. And I mean evidence that actually backs it up this time.

Okay, you need prof? Evidence you could simply find by checking their history?

http://whatstheharm.net/exorcisms.html

From this day and age... need more? (lots of link in this link)

Also I can find a lot beside just exorcisms(from this year).

These boring cases of trying to cause unecacary war/fightor whatever.

Also I can find some other cases, more on them raping children thinking they will get away with it...

And, the history of

speaks for itself...

(as I have a slow working pc, I don't wanna trow away my time finding more facts)

Anyways, those people that are not crazy and "are" christians, don't enteierly believe in god.

Most of them, today are half christians, making them more or less bearable, since they are not brainwashed to think (gaaaahhh, I was going to find a link on this, but it takes forever, but most probably know about this were they have a school that teaches children to kill in usa and the rest of the world) they are right and all others are wrong. In other words, I find their actions that of a crazy person.

Please do go into other subjects. Ones where you have evidence would be a good start perhaps. You aren't using your 'heavy shots' because you don't have any, be honest.

I am honest, but not diligent or hard working enough to find everything you need (for I have a life, meaning I can't trow away my time all day on here just to find the truth that others tend to overlook, because it does not fit their image).

What you and so many others fail to grasp is that religion is not about control. Organised religion may be said to be about control (that's a whole other debate) but a person's own religion is their business. You codemn all religious people because you think they see you as doomed for hell if you do not believe. And yet you yourself judge them to be evil for what they do believe. If you don't see the irony there, you really need help.

At the end of the day, a person's beliefs are entirely their own choices. Not God's, not Allah's, not Odin's nor any other being's. You have no right to take that from them or to judge them as evil when you truly do not understand what they believe.

Hopefully one day, you'll realise how wrong you are. If you do, and you come on here and apologise, I'm sure almost everyone will forgive your ill-thought comments and undeserved judgements. Not because it's the Chirstian thing to do, but because it's the right thing to do. Ultimately, that's what faith is about - doing the right thing.

That is were your wrong.

Religion has always been about control, it always has and always will be.

[Setton]

Any living being, human or not, has rights to exist their own way.

People has a right to live their lifes like they please, religion destroy these rights by condemning and shuning freedom.

(Btw, the article is about people forcing rape victims to forgive the rapers because they are to kind people to really have done it... that the victims are shuned or even attacked by their own family... it's really sick how christian act in this time and age.)

The article says nothing about that. Did you mean to source another article maybe?

So people have the right to live as they like but they shouldn't be Christian? Quite a contradiction there.

Okay, you need prof? Evidence you could simply find by checking their history?

http://whatstheharm.net/exorcisms.html

From this day and age... need more? (lots of link in this link)

Also I can find a lot beside just exorcisms(from this year).

These boring cases of trying to cause unecacary war/fightor whatever.

Also I can find some other cases, more on them raping children thinking they will get away with it...

And, the history of

speaks for itself...

(as I have a slow working pc, I don't wanna trow away my time finding more facts)

This doesn't prove that most Christians are evil. It proves that there are some who are, just as in any group of people.

Anyways, those people that are not crazy and "are" christians, don't enteierly believe in god.

Most of them, today are half christians, making them more or less bearable, since they are not brainwashed to think (gaaaahhh, I was going to find a link on this, but it takes forever, but most probably know about this were they have a school that teaches children to kill in usa and the rest of the world) they are right and all others are wrong. In other words, I find their actions that of a crazy person.

So to you, a person is only a Christian if they are crazy? Well no wonder your reasoning's so screwed up then.

I am honest, but not diligent or hard working enough to find everything you need (for I have a life, meaning I can't trow away my time all day on here just to find the truth that others tend to overlook, because it does not fit their image).

So you're reasoning for thinking all Christians are evil is that you are lazy? Nice Logic there

That is were your wrong.

Religion has always been about control, it always has and always will be.

How is someone controlled because they believe in God? Since everyone has their own individual take on their faith, they can hardly be said to be controlled.

[markdohle]

Dear all

A Questions

Are mormans christians?

Yes, they follow Christ.

[Ronztrek]

what exactly makes a person a Christian?

Actually there was only ONE real Christian. Yeah it didn't work out too well for the dude; they nailed him to a cross a couple of thousand years ago. Sorry man, **** happens.

[Beckys_Mom]

Actually there was only ONE real Christian. Yeah it didn't work out too well for the dude; they nailed him to a cross a couple of thousand years ago. Sorry man, **** happens.

This is really silly... You call Jesus a Christian??? The term Christian = follower of Christ <--- you are calling Jesus a follower of himself

[Beckys_Mom]

But what does it mean to "follow Christ"?

The only way THEY see fit.... Who are you or anyone to judge ??

[Beckys_Mom]

So mormans are christians then? I want your opinion

You quoted me giving my opinion I said YES... what more do you want? If you want blood, I am not a donor

[+Link of Hyrule]

The only way THEY see fit.... Who are you or anyone to judge ??

Right, so hypothetically- I think it's ok to murder, commit adultery, steal, curse my parents. I don't believe it is necessary to repent or show any remorse for any time I hurt someone. I don't believe it necessary to forgive others. I also claim to be a Christian.

Now Jesus said do not lie. He said do not commit adultery. He said do not steal. He said to repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near. He said to repent, and to forgive.

How can I still be called a follower of Jesus if I am not actually following what he says? If I claimed to be a Buddhist and suggested that Enlightenment could be earned by acting on our attachment to life and what it offers, then anyone who knows what Buddhism is about is sure to tell me that I'm seriously mistaken. The core of Buddhism is to remove suffering by removing our attachment, but if I say that the way to remove our suffering is to ensure w are always engaging our pleasure (eg, hedonism) then it's obvious I'm not a Buddhist.

But when it comes to Christianity I'm just supposed to accept when someone says they are one??? No other religion on the planet except Christianity is treated that way!

~ PA

[+Link of Hyrule]

As an added thought here, as I wrote my last post I was reminded of a character in one of my favourite sci-fi shows, Babylon 5. A character by the name of Byron was around for a few episodes in the final season. He was the leader of a group of telepaths. He promoted a pacifistic lifestyle and never caused any violence. But because telepaths weren't trusted, they were often targeted for abuse. Byron responded to violence with non-violent words. Eventually he was killed in an explosion.

Many of Byron's followers took it upon themselves to take violent revenge on those who killed Byron. They even used the mantra "Remember Byron" in their attacks. Despite that Byron promoted peace and non-violence, his name was being used as justification for terrorist actions.

Were these people "Byronists"? Followers of Byron, or was Byron's name being used wrongly? According to some logic, they were following Byron! His pacifism be damned, if someone wants to kill in his name, then he or she is still a Byronist

I don't understand the logic, but some people think it valid

Edited June 7, 2011 by Paranoid Android

[ChloeB]

Right, so hypothetically- I think it's ok to murder, commit adultery, steal, curse my parents. I don't believe it is necessary to repent or show any remorse for any time I hurt someone. I don't believe it necessary to forgive others. I also claim to be a Christian.

Now Jesus said do not lie. He said do not commit adultery. He said do not steal. He said to repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near. He said to repent, and to forgive.

How can I still be called a follower of Jesus if I am not actually following what he says? If I claimed to be a Buddhist and suggested that Enlightenment could be earned by acting on our attachment to life and what it offers, then anyone who knows what Buddhism is about is sure to tell me that I'm seriously mistaken. The core of Buddhism is to remove suffering by removing our attachment, but if I say that the way to remove our suffering is to ensure w are always engaging our pleasure (eg, hedonism) then it's obvious I'm not a Buddhist.

But when it comes to Christianity I'm just supposed to accept when someone says they are one??? No other religion on the planet except Christianity is treated that way!

~ PA

No, I don't think you're supposed to accept it at all. That's why Christianity is becoming a joke or is because all so many people believe Christianity is about is getting saved, full stop. They believe it's accept Jesus is the son of God, died for your sins, and poof you're a Christian, reading the bible, going to church, all just supplements, and any kind of sin, they can be forgiven for anyway if they accept that so the only verse that really concerns them is John 3:16, over and done with. I'll give you an example, I went to spend the weekend with my best friend this past weekend and while I was there, we went to visit her mother who had just went to a funeral about 2 weeks prior of my best friend's cousin. He was killed in a car wreck in his senior year, was involved in every kind of sport you could think of and really popular and his funeral she said was like nothing she'd ever seen. They had told people at his funeral that the one thing that my friend's cousin would want from them, they could do to honor him and what he'd want most for them is to get saved and to be with him again one day, and right in the middle of this funeral, that's exactly what they were doing - people were going up to the front and accepting Christ. Now seriously, how genuine is that? And people thought this was just the most grand thing, touching and were just overwhelmed by this, and these are Christian people who are loving this, because that's all it is so much anymore, PA, a gesture, not a life-changing decision, a real conversion into a new way of believing, but insurance. So no, you have every right to have higher expectations of what it is to be a Christian, otherwise, you yourself may as well call it a gesture.

[Beckys_Mom]

Right, so hypothetically- I think it's ok to murder, commit adultery, steal, curse my parents. I don't believe it is necessary to repent or show any remorse for any time I hurt someone. I don't believe it necessary to forgive others. I also claim to be a Christian.

A lot ( heck of a lot) of Christians from all over do a lot of these things you list <-- doesn't mean they are not christians

You are a sinner too PA>. and you did say once - ALL SINS are equal...all evil.... so.. by your own logic... they are no different to sinning than you

[+Link of Hyrule]

A lot ( heck of a lot) of Christians from all over do a lot of these things you list <-- doesn't mean they are not christians

This is where I disagree. One of the core teachings of Christianity in my estimation is "love your neighbour as yourself". If this hypothetical individual thinks it is ok to murder, commit adultery, and steal from others, then they are not showing love. Therefore, they are not Christians, even if they say they are!

You are a sinner too PA>. and you did say once - ALL SINS are equal...all evil.... so.. by your own logic... they are no different to sinning than you

The matter is not the sin itself, it is the fact that the hypothetical individual to which I spoke of thinks it is ok to do these things. As you say, all sins are equal and therefore the same as sin I do. But the difference is that a Christian confesses their sin and repents thereof - and by "repent", I mean actively turning to try and live a life that does not involve that sin. If this hypothetical person thinks it is ok to murder and commit adultery and steal, then they think it is ok to sin. Therefore they are not Christian, even if they claim they are!

Obviously you have a very different idea of what a Christian is than I do. For you, it seems to be just a label that someone can call themselves but otherwise means pretty much anything or nothing. But I think the term "Christian" is far more than just a label one may choose to attach to themselves. As I said in my previous post, Christianity is the only religion in the world that is apparently given this accord. If I claimed to be a Buddhist but said that the way to end suffering was to indulge our attachments, then no person that knows what Buddhism is will agree that I am a Buddhist. If I claimed to be a Jew but claimed that worshipping many gods was ok, then no one who knows Judaism will agree that I am a Jew. But Christians are different. It doesn't matter what they believe or what they do, if they use the label, then that's enough!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!??!?!?!?!?

Sorry, that just won't sit with me. Ever!

~ Regards, PA

[Leonardo]

This is where I disagree. One of the core teachings of Christianity in my estimation is "love your neighbour as yourself". If this hypothetical individual thinks it is ok to murder, commit adultery, and steal from others, then they are not showing love. Therefore, they are not Christians, even if they say they are!

If everyone sins, PA, does this then mean your definition of "what is a Christian" must include "someone whose sins are unintentional"?

Would that mean that no-one is a Christian?

[+Link of Hyrule]

If everyone sins, PA, does this then mean your definition of "what is a Christian" must include "someone whose sins are unintentional"?

Would that mean that no-one is a Christian?

Not quite, Leo. I wouldn't exactly say sins that are "unintentional", that is completely wrong. It would be more correct to say that the definition of a Christian MUST include someone who struggles with sin, and repents when they stuff up. This is in contrast with the type of person who calls themselves "Christian", and yet does not struggle with their sins because they don't care about how they act. And when I say "repent", I don't mean simply saying sorry. Saying sorry is not repentance. Repentance is a process, not a word. This process involves acknowledging behaviour and then taking steps to remedy that behaviour.

My example was a hypothetical one, intended to show the absolute extreme of a professing believer who doesn't care who they hurt as long as they get what they want. Does that clarify?

~ PA

[BUG101687]

christian is faith that jesus christ was born virgin birth and hes is the son of god . jesus christ die on cross for our sin and resurrected on third .

who that believe on name jesus christ may be save . we walk by sight but by faith . rejoice kingdom of god has truly come.

[Beckys_Mom]

This is where I disagree. One of the core teachings of Christianity in my estimation is "love your neighbour as yourself". If this hypothetical individual thinks it is ok to murder, commit adultery, and steal from others, then they are not showing love. Therefore, they are not Christians, even if they say they are!

If all christians do in fact sin... then you may as well say not one of you are true christians...well to be fair minded about it all then you would have to look at it that way

You cannot possibly claim that those that commit sins do not care to repent....

The matter is not the sin itself, it is the fact that the hypothetical individual to which I spoke of thinks it is ok to do these things. As you say, all sins are equal and therefore the same as sin I do. But the difference is that a Christian confesses their sin and repents thereof - and by "repent"

As I just mentioned above.. you cannot possibly know what they feel after they have thought it was ok to sin... All Christians that sin at the time feel it is ok to commit the sin on the moment they do so.... that doesn't mean that later on they will not feel the need to repent.... For you to say likewise is not exactly you giving facts.. If you get IE - into a heated argument and you say rotten things to IE me...and later repent... at the time you felt it was ok to say it...but later you felt bad....

You would need to know for 100 % sure that all those that commit sins truly think it is OK to commit these sins at all times...if you don't, then you should not peg them as such

Obviously you have a very different idea of what a Christian is than I do.

No, I just feel it is hypocritical for anyone to judge other Christians who sin...when they know for a fact all sin..To act like they never repent is biased and is a matter of judgemental opinions...

Jesus said - Judge not lest ye be judged.. and let he who be without sin, cast the 1st stone <-- Not well ok you repented so go ahead and chuck the stone

A Christian can sin... repent...sin again and keep doing the same thing over and over.... I do not know a single Christian that doesn't..and you do not differ PA...If you wish to be fair minded.. then you will understand

A number of people ( speaking in general...meaning not aiming this at you) ....love nothing more than to judge others, while prising themselves up on that high pedestal..and will act like hypocrites and not realise they are

Sorry, that just won't sit with me. Ever!

Please do not take offence... but what does not sit with me.. is someone like yourself who once claimed - all are sinners.. and all sins are equal..evil sins.. and to know this and you said it clear... then think it is ok to claim those that sin and think it is ok to do so at the time.. do not repent......

..... You need to ask yourself - Do you know for sure?...No point in calling all sins equal and evil.. if you claim to sin yourself.. Just because you personally feel you repent...but that doesn't mean you never sin.... You can claim to strive...but those that hurt others and think it is oK to hurt at the time.. may well repent too... you all do not differ according to your own logic

Sorry PA but I am going on what you once told me on equal sins...if you really think they are all equal.. then obviously those that sin will feel it is ok to do it at the time... it doesn't mean they wont repent and try not to..

Edited June 8, 2011 by Beckys_Mom

[Beckys_Mom]

Not quite, Leo. I wouldn't exactly say sins that are "unintentional", that is completely wrong. It would be more correct to say that the definition of a Christian MUST include someone who struggles with sin, and repents when they stuff up. This is in contrast with the type of person who calls themselves "Christian", and yet does not struggle with their sins because they don't care about how they act. And when I say "repent", I don't mean simply saying sorry. Saying sorry is not repentance. Repentance is a process, not a word. This process involves acknowledging behaviour and then taking steps to remedy that behaviour.

A hypothetical Christian.. can go out, get into a fight and think it is OK to hurt the other ..( at the time)... but later repent....they could feel bad later.. and strive not to again.. and out of the blue find themselves doing similar... well they are not perfect.. ..We ALL try not to be bad...it in no way means will won't be bad again The tricky part is.. knowing if they cared to or not... This is something no one can truly know... therefore pointless to pass that judgement

Edited June 8, 2011 by Beckys_Mom

[libstaK]

This is where I disagree. One of the core teachings of Christianity in my estimation is "love your neighbour as yourself". If this hypothetical individual thinks it is ok to murder, commit adultery, and steal from others, then they are not showing love. Therefore, they are not Christians, even if they say they are!

The matter is not the sin itself, it is the fact that the hypothetical individual to which I spoke of thinks it is ok to do these things. As you say, all sins are equal and therefore the same as sin I do. But the difference is that a Christian confesses their sin and repents thereof - and by "repent", I mean actively turning to try and live a life that does not involve that sin. If this hypothetical person thinks it is ok to murder and commit adultery and steal, then they think it is ok to sin. Therefore they are not Christian, even if they claim they are!

Obviously you have a very different idea of what a Christian is than I do. For you, it seems to be just a label that someone can call themselves but otherwise means pretty much anything or nothing. But I think the term "Christian" is far more than just a label one may choose to attach to themselves. As I said in my previous post, Christianity is the only religion in the world that is apparently given this accord. If I claimed to be a Buddhist but said that the way to end suffering was to indulge our attachments, then no person that knows what Buddhism is will agree that I am a Buddhist. If I claimed to be a Jew but claimed that worshipping many gods was ok, then no one who knows Judaism will agree that I am a Jew. But Christians are different. It doesn't matter what they believe or what they do, if they use the label, then that's enough!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!??!?!?!?!?

Sorry, that just won't sit with me. Ever!

But what about "thou shalt not judge for in whatsoever manner ye judge so shall ye be judged". I hear what you are saying PA truly I do, it's just that as BM said who are we to judge?

In principle it all works so well but in life, if we are to "forgive" as we are asked to then we must accept many things from others, for instance:

Matthew 18:21

"Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times? "Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times ?"

The version I know says seventy times seven times infact ....

If we truly forgive someone then we accept that they did not know any better when they acted in sin, and as they continue to sin we know that they still have not learned any better, it seems they get up to 490 times to learn, but how do we know what number they are up to, we don't so we cannot judge?

Edited June 8, 2011 by libstaK

[Beckys_Mom]

. I hear what you are saying PA truly I do, it's just that as BM said who are we to judge?

Exactly... I personally believe in striving to live better and not hurt anyone... I normally would feel bad for my actions.. But I know there are times when I have done something wrong, I know at the time I felt it was OK to do it.... but I know later I felt bad..and prayed for forgiveness in my own way.. And by that I also not only told the person I was sorry..but SHOWED it...

Don't mean I cannot find myself hurting someone in the future.. .I am after all not perfect

You do not need to be a Christian to have a moral conscience

Matthew 18:21

"Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times? "Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times ?"

The version I know says seventy times seven times infact ....

If we truly forgive someone then we accept that they did not know any better when they acted in sin, and as they continue to sin we know that they still have not learned any better, it seems they get up to 490 times to learn, but how do we know what number they are up to, we don't so we cannot judge?

Very interesting...amazing how easy it is overlooked...It can however get twisted into something else!!

Edited June 8, 2011 by Beckys_Mom

[+Link of Hyrule]

If all christians do in fact sin... then you may as well say not one of you are true christians...well to be fair minded about it all then you would have to look at it that way

You cannot possibly claim that those that commit sins do not care to repent....

My hypothetical scenario was referring to the type of person who thinks it's ok to do these things (ie, they see nothing wrong with it). That is different to someone who may do the same thing, and then repent afterwards (though as I said, the word "repentance" involves more than just saying sorry).

Please do not take offence... but what does not sit with me.. is someone like yourself who once claimed - all are sinners.. and all sins are equal..evil sins.. and to know this and you said it clear... then think it is ok to claim those that sin and think it is ok to do so at the time.. do not repent......

..... You need to ask yourself - Do you know for sure?...No point in calling all sins equal and evil.. if you claim to sin yourself.. Just because you personally feel you repent...but that doesn't mean you never sin.... You can claim to strive...but those that hurt others and think it is oK to hurt at the time.. may well repent too... you all do not differ according to your own logic

Sorry PA but I am going on what you once told me on equal sins...if you really think they are all equal.. then obviously those that sin will feel it is ok to do it at the time... it doesn't mean they wont repent and try not to..

And if they repent then they are obviously "struggling with sin". However, if someone is just going to go and get drunk, bash their wife, plead for forgiveness and then do it again and again and again and again (this is just a hypothetical scenario) then that is not repentance. As you say, if there is repentance then I am all for helping them, but if they think it is ok to hurt others for their own benefit (as in the first hypothetical scenario earlier in this thread) then they don't see it as a sin. If they ever do see it as a sin and repent, then they are on the right track. But to sit there without remorse and act that way while professing to be Christian - that is the hallmark of a hypocrite, and Jesus has very clear things to say about hypocrites (depart from me you evil-doers seems to ring a bell right about now).

[+Link of Hyrule]

But what about "thou shalt not judge for in whatsoever manner ye judge so shall ye be judged". I hear what you are saying PA truly I do, it's just that as BM said who are we to judge?

Define "judge"? I walked across the road this afternoon on my way home. I looked left and right, and "judged" that the oncoming car was too far away to hit me if I crossed the road right then. The judging that Jesus speaks of is the idea of condemnation (eg, "you will burn in hell, sinner"). But to assess a person's behaviour and suggest that they are living an un-Christ-like manner, that is an observation. It may be condemnation if the intention behind the words are done to put them down, but if it is done to help them then it is not condemnation (not in any way that Jesus intended, at least).

As I said, if I claimed to be a Buddhist and said that the way to alleviate suffering was to indulge our attachments, then it would be fair to say that I am not really following the teachings of Buddha, correct? I might believe I am, but every Buddhist, and many non-Buddhists would be well within their Right to point me to the error of my ways. Christianity seems to be held to a different standard in this, correct?

In principle it all works so well but in life, if we are to "forgive" as we are asked to then we must accept many things from others, for instance:

Matthew 18:21

"Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times? "Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times ?"

The version I know says seventy times seven times infact ....

If we truly forgive someone then we accept that they did not know any better when they acted in sin, and as they continue to sin we know that they still have not learned any better, it seems they get up to 490 times to learn, but how do we know what number they are up to, we don't so we cannot judge?

We forgive as often as we need to. That goes without saying. But if a person is unrepentant (ie, not asking for forgiveness), while we may forgive them in our own hearts, it is their choice to continue to act in a way that is contrary. I think you are using this passage outside of it intended meaning of a brother (either by blood or by belief) who stuffs up but continues to seek forgiveness with you, rather than an unrepentant person who sees no reason to seek forgiveness.

[keven3]

Regarding the seventy times seven passage: I learned that the meaning of that phrase in those times meant something like "unlimited"--Jesus meant for us to never stop forgiving others.

I'm no Bible scholar but I had learned that in the past on several different occasions.

Keven

[Leonardo]

Not quite, Leo. I wouldn't exactly say sins that are "unintentional", that is completely wrong. It would be more correct to say that the definition of a Christian MUST include someone who struggles with sin, and repents when they stuff up. This is in contrast with the type of person who calls themselves "Christian", and yet does not struggle with their sins because they don't care about how they act. And when I say "repent", I don't mean simply saying sorry. Saying sorry is not repentance. Repentance is a process, not a word. This process involves acknowledging behaviour and then taking steps to remedy that behaviour.

My example was a hypothetical one, intended to show the absolute extreme of a professing believer who doesn't care who they hurt as long as they get what they want. Does that clarify?

~ PA

No.

The person in your example might repent, but are they considered a Christian before or after their repentence?

If only after, then you have to consider what if they "fall off the wagon"? Are they then not Christian again? From when?

Your premise is suggesting a Christian is only a Christian in the absence of intentional sin, but that implies anyone might be a Christian at some point in their lives, but not at others. So, is that person a Christian, or not?

By setting the barrier for being Christian as strictly as you do, you are suggesting that no-one is actually "a Christian", except temporarily - perhaps.

Please also note, PA, that no "sin" is more "sinful" than any other - and this is paraphrasing words you have used quite a few times in previous posts.

[+Link of Hyrule]

No.

The person in your example might repent, but are they considered a Christian before or after their repentence?

If only after, then you have to consider what if they "fall off the wagon"? Are they then not Christian again? From when?

Your premise is suggesting a Christian is only a Christian in the absence of intentional sin, but that implies anyone might be a Christian at some point in their lives, but not at others. So, is that person a Christian, or not?

By setting the barrier for being Christian as strictly as you do, you are suggesting that no-one is actually "a Christian", except temporarily - perhaps.

Please also note, PA, that no "sin" is more "sinful" than any other - and this is paraphrasing words you have used quite a few times in previous posts.

If they are unrepentant, period, then they are NOT Christian. If they are unrepentant but realise their mistake, and then repent, then they are Christian - provided that their repentance is genuine. If they "fall off the wagon" but continue to struggle with their sin (by "struggle with their sin", I mean they want to change, and try to change, but don't necessarily always succeed) then they are still Christian.

My hypothetical scenario was not intended to go so deep as it has. Perhaps I should have made it clearer when I gave the scenario, but I was referring to the type of person who called themselves a Christian but felt that it was ok (ie, not a sin) to hurt others as long as they benefited from it (adultery, theft, gossip, being just a few examples).

If a person is struggling with sin, and trying to change, putting God first, then though they may "fall off the wagon" (I do that myself, too - I am not a perfect Christian) they are not suddenly a non-Christian. The person who lies and cheats and steals and decides that this is acceptable behaviour is the one to whom I refer when I ask the question: Are they really Christian?

[ChloeB]

My hypothetical scenario was not intended to go so deep as it has. Perhaps I should have made it clearer when I gave the scenario, but I was referring to the type of person who called themselves a Christian but felt that it was ok (ie, not a sin) to hurt others as long as they benefited from it (adultery, theft, gossip, being just a few examples).

So people living together, having sex, and not hurting anyone, and not repentant for it, you'd go for them being Christians? Because your church booted people out for that and they weren't hurting anyone, so it's tough for you to say you aren't judging. I have a question for you, why does it bother you if someone calls themselves a Christian and don't act like one should according to your beliefs? Is it because it reflects on you? I mean I can understand that, but I was thinking about how you keep bringing up Buddhism; well a Buddhist might tell you that is a form of attachment in itself. You might think about how you're acting, PA, because when you define Christianity by sin and repentance and going around assessing and observing and pointing out to others, you've contributed to the state Christianity is today, an outward act, to talk and behave like a Christian for appearances, like that story I told you about the funeral, when it really should be a change on the inside and that's not something you can change about someone else, you can be a model of it and they can see your life and follow your example, but yacking at them, kicking them out of your church puts it all back on the outside. True change comes from within and your whole thread here is about outside of you, what are you really saying to people. Just think about that before you get defensive or mad, really think about it.