Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is a 'true Christian'?
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 3597 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 1 of 141 (726335)
05-08-2014 7:41 AM



[A true Christian] takes the Bible as the final authority, believes in salvation by faith in Christ alone through God's grace, nothing added.
We often hear this definition or something like it stated by adherents of today's fundamentalist Protestant sects. This example comes from post 462 of the 'Protestantism through the Ages' thread. The assumption fundies make, based on a Golden Age myth crafted and retold by their leaders, is that early Christians used this formula and that more recent fundamentalist sects have 'restored' it.
Not so. I submit that the definition of 'true Christian' shown above is a doctrinal formula of Reformation origin. To ascribe it to early Christians is an anachronism. In historical terms it is both impractical and incomplete. This can be demonstrated.
We may then consider what additions and modifications the definition requires in order to meet the test of historical plausibility. In doing so, some merits will be seen in the approach that was actually taken by pre-Protestant Christians.
'Comparative Religion' would seem to be a natural fit. Thanks for considering this topic.
___
Edited by Archer Opteryx, : typo
Edited by Archer Opteryx, : typo

Archer O
All species are transitional.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-08-2014 10:52 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied
 Message 4 by nwr, posted 05-08-2014 11:24 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied
 Message 5 by Minnemooseus, posted 05-08-2014 11:47 PM Archer Opteryx has not replied
 Message 9 by PaulK, posted 05-09-2014 1:16 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied
 Message 13 by Faith, posted 05-09-2014 5:50 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied
 Message 31 by Omnivorous, posted 05-09-2014 4:03 PM Archer Opteryx has not replied
 Message 63 by Archer Opteryx, posted 05-10-2014 2:16 PM Archer Opteryx has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 2 of 141 (726337)
05-08-2014 10:24 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the What is a 'true Christian'? thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(3)
Message 3 of 141 (726340)
05-08-2014 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Archer Opteryx
05-08-2014 7:41 AM


In historical terms it is both impractical and incomplete.
If you define a Christian with a qualification that requires the Bible, then none of the people who existed before the Bible was compiled could be considered Christians. Which would include the authors.
St. Paul? Nope, not a "true Christian", he couldn't have taken the Bible as the final authority
We may then consider what additions and modifications the definition requires in order to meet the test of historical plausibility.
I don't think that we are able to define a "true Christian". There's so much variety within Christianity and nobody really knows what's right.
The best way to define a Christian is: "someone who honestly thinks they're a Christian".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Archer Opteryx, posted 05-08-2014 7:41 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by faceman, posted 05-08-2014 11:55 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 24 by Phat, posted 05-09-2014 2:27 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 36 by NoNukes, posted 05-09-2014 8:14 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


(5)
Message 4 of 141 (726344)
05-08-2014 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Archer Opteryx
05-08-2014 7:41 AM


A true Christian is someone who believes that:
  • Jesus got almost everything wrong, except his death. He was spectacularly wrong in his sermon on the mount and in his view of wealth;
  • Moses made a huge mistake when he included a commandment against adultery instead of one against homosexuality.
Edited by nwr, : No reason given.

Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Archer Opteryx, posted 05-08-2014 7:41 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by RAZD, posted 05-09-2014 11:37 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 5 of 141 (726426)
05-08-2014 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Archer Opteryx
05-08-2014 7:41 AM


Jesus Christ was the only true Christian
Everyone else falls short (and Kinky Friedman said "They don't make Jews like Jesus anymore").
That said, my impression is that there are numerous atheists who better follow at least some of JC's teachings, and are more "Christ like", than numerous proud Christians.
Would that make them Christian atheists or atheist Christians?
Moose

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith
"Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien
"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Archer Opteryx, posted 05-08-2014 7:41 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied

  
faceman
Member (Idle past 3385 days)
Posts: 149
From: MN, USA
Joined: 04-25-2014


(3)
Message 6 of 141 (726428)
05-08-2014 11:55 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by New Cat's Eye
05-08-2014 10:52 AM


The best way to define a Christian is: "someone who honestly thinks they're a Christian".
If I honestly think I'm Napoleon Bonaparte, does that make it so?
A true Christian, as Paul would have clearly been, is someone who acknowledges that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, was crucified for our sins and rose again, thereby defeating death. It's not so hard.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-08-2014 10:52 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by AZPaul3, posted 05-09-2014 12:56 AM faceman has replied
 Message 11 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-09-2014 2:14 AM faceman has replied
 Message 18 by ringo, posted 05-09-2014 12:43 PM faceman has replied
 Message 64 by Archer Opteryx, posted 05-10-2014 2:44 PM faceman has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(2)
Message 7 of 141 (726432)
05-09-2014 12:56 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by faceman
05-08-2014 11:55 PM


A true Christian, as Paul would have clearly been, is someone who acknowledges that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, was crucified for our sins and rose again, thereby defeating death. It's not so hard.
Then why all this consternation over evolution? Why all the BS about talking snakes, fluds and queers?
What you said would mean that "true christians" couldn't care less if they were related to some long ago ape, or if their little girl was gay, or if an atheist was president.
Yet, for some strange reason, it does seem to matter and, as we have seen all throughout this forum, those who see some of the bible as myth and allegory are branded "not true christians". By your definition, why would a "true christian" care if the flud or the entire bible was apocryphal?
I think that, to most "true christians," there is a lot more to being a "true christian" than what you relay.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by faceman, posted 05-08-2014 11:55 PM faceman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by faceman, posted 05-09-2014 1:10 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
faceman
Member (Idle past 3385 days)
Posts: 149
From: MN, USA
Joined: 04-25-2014


(2)
Message 8 of 141 (726433)
05-09-2014 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by AZPaul3
05-09-2014 12:56 AM


Then why all this consternation over evolution? Why all the BS about talking snakes, fluds and queers?
Simple - if Jesus is who He said He was, which is God, then He must be trusted. If He must be trusted, then the word must be trusted, because He also proclaimed Himself to be the Word.
If you believe the Bible to be a myth, then you believe Jesus to be a myth.
What is a "flud"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by AZPaul3, posted 05-09-2014 12:56 AM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by AZPaul3, posted 05-09-2014 1:17 AM faceman has replied
 Message 94 by Phat, posted 12-08-2014 8:24 AM faceman has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 9 of 141 (726434)
05-09-2014 1:16 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Archer Opteryx
05-08-2014 7:41 AM


Of course in my experience the position of most fundamentalists would be better summed up as:
A "true" Christian takes fundamentalist doctrine as the final authority, overruling even the Bible
The inerrancy doctrine is a perfect example, but I've seen fundamentalists blatantly misrepresent the Bible and even argue against it here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Archer Opteryx, posted 05-08-2014 7:41 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(3)
Message 10 of 141 (726435)
05-09-2014 1:17 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by faceman
05-09-2014 1:10 AM


So to be a "true christian" one must not only believe in the boy and his gift of salvation, but in the literal words of the bible? Which bible? Which language? Which interpretations? To be a "true christian" you must also be a biblican and worship the bible too?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by faceman, posted 05-09-2014 1:10 AM faceman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by faceman, posted 05-10-2014 12:36 AM AZPaul3 has replied
 Message 52 by Larni, posted 05-10-2014 9:50 AM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 141 (726439)
05-09-2014 2:14 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by faceman
05-08-2014 11:55 PM


If I honestly think I'm Napoleon Bonaparte, does that make it so?
Of course not, we can easily determine that.
A true Christian, as Paul would have clearly been,
Clearly, yet he existed before the Bible did. So "belief in the Bible" cannot be a qualification, right?
A true Christian, as Paul would have clearly been, is someone who acknowledges that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, was crucified for our sins and rose again, thereby defeating death. It's not so hard.
Its not up for you to say. A person could be considered, by God, to be a Christian without fullfilling one of the qualifications you insist upon.
Then why all this consternation over evolution? Why all the BS about talking snakes, fluds and queers?
Simple - if Jesus is who He said He was, which is God, then He must be trusted. If He must be trusted, then the word must be trusted, because He also proclaimed Himself to be the Word.
That's your personal interpretation. You don't get to decide who is, and who is not, a Christian.
If you believe the Bible to be a myth, then you believe Jesus to be a myth.
False. A true Christian could believe that the Old Testament, the old complex and convoluted laws about how you should behave that Jesus replaced with the simplified 'love God and each other', was not literally true (i.e. a "myth" {which has a wide definition}).
Most Christians ignore a lot of that OT stuff.
What is a "flud"?
The Noahic Flood.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by faceman, posted 05-08-2014 11:55 PM faceman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by faceman, posted 05-09-2014 4:11 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
faceman
Member (Idle past 3385 days)
Posts: 149
From: MN, USA
Joined: 04-25-2014


(3)
Message 12 of 141 (726448)
05-09-2014 4:11 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by New Cat's Eye
05-09-2014 2:14 AM


Its not up for you to say. A person could be considered, by God, to be a Christian without fullfilling one of the qualifications you insist upon.
Correct, it's not up to me. If it were, I'd let everyone in. The very simple qualification I listed was outlined by Jesus in the Bible. I don't insist upon it, Jesus does.
Romans 10:9 writes:
If you declare with your mouth, Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Just think of it as abiogenesis at work in the tomb, then you can accept it easier.
Most Christians ignore a lot of that OT stuff.
You can ignore everything else if you want (though I don't recommend it), but you have to hold on to Romans 10:9, otherwise you're lost. That's not me commanding it, but rather reporting it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-09-2014 2:14 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-09-2014 10:26 AM faceman has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 13 of 141 (726452)
05-09-2014 5:50 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Archer Opteryx
05-08-2014 7:41 AM


[A true Christian] takes the Bible as the final authority, believes in salvation by faith in Christ alone through God's grace, nothing added.
We often hear this definition or something like it stated by adherents of today's fundamentalist Protestant sects. This example comes from post 462 of the 'Protestantism through the Ages' thread. The assumption fundies make, based on a Golden Age myth crafted and retold by their leaders, is that early Christians used this formula and that more recent fundamentalist sects have 'restored' it.
Not so. I submit that the definition of 'true Christian' shown above is a doctrinal formula of Reformation origin. To ascribe it to early Christians is an anachronism. In historical terms it is both impractical and incomplete. This can be demonstrated.
It is definitely a formula of Reformation origin, no doubt about that, but it's a pithy way of expressing the scriptural formula for salvation, which had to be followed by the early believers even if not as clearly stated, or they wouldn't have been saved. Paul laid it out over and over again, that we are saved only by God's grace, through faith which is a gift of God, and this is what the Reformers codified in that formula.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Archer Opteryx, posted 05-08-2014 7:41 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Phat, posted 05-09-2014 10:00 AM Faith has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


(1)
Message 14 of 141 (726475)
05-09-2014 10:00 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Faith
05-09-2014 5:50 AM


Phats Opinion
I don't believe that a "true" Christian gets to define themselves merely by claiming to be such. I could also claim to be a true athlete, but one minute on the track, or on the Pitchers Mound, or the Tennis Court would quickly confirm or deny my claim.
Our good friend jar always claimed that it was all about what you do as opposed to what you believe and I agree that there is wisdom in that---although an atheist can and does often do as much good for the community--the likes of feeding and clothing needy people and/or volunteering in a variety of humanist ideals---thus works in and of itself is not an indication.
Upon browsing the internet for any possible insights from others---which I might agree with--I came upon this article:
What Is A True Christian? written by a Pastor, Jeremy Walker.( is a pastor of Maidenbower Baptist Church. He blogs at The Wanderer and is co-author of A Portrait of Paul: Identifying A True Minister of Christ)
Jeremy outlines four things that he feels are indispensable indications of true Christianity
1) The first indication is a humble and wholehearted embrace of the divine diagnosis of and remedy for sin (1Jn 1.7 - 2.2; 2.12-14; 3.5, 6, 23; 4.2, 9-10, 13-16; 5.1, 5, 10-13, 20).
A Christian man has an accurate view of himself as a sinning sinner. He acknowledges the just judgments of a holy God (Ps 51.4; Lk 15.18; 18.13). This Spirit-wrought conviction of sin leads to genuine repentance as his heart breaks over his godlessness: he becomes revolted by his sin and turns from it and forsakes it because it offends the Lord God (Jl 2.12-13).
With repentance is joined faith in Jesus as the Lord Christ is presented in the gospel in his might and majesty, his meekness and mercy. Faith receives Jesus, looks to Jesus, comes to Jesus, flees to Jesus, leans upon Jesus, trusts in Jesus, holds to Jesus, and rests upon Jesus. Let us remember that this is the essential point and gives birth to all that follows: the dying thief never had an opportunity to manifest the other three marks of saving faith (though he would have done had he lived), but still the Lord assured him, "Today you will be with me in Paradise" (Lk 23.43).
(Thus the bottom line) Whoever trusts in Jesus, though he believes one moment and dies the next, has his life hid with Christ in God.
2) The second indication is a humble reverence for and joyful devotion to God and his glory (1Jn 1.3-5; 2.12-15; 3.1-2; 4.12-13, 19; 5.1-2). A radical reversal of priority has occurred: the idol Self is toppled and God reigns in the heart. A change has occurred: a heart that by nature is enmity with God (Rom 8.7) has been replaced by one that loves God entirely (Lk 10.37). The man who lived for self now lives for God, offering himself as a living sacrifice (Rom 12.1-2).
Gratitude for grace received and delight in God himself issues in joyful service of the Lord of glory. This is a man convinced of God's excellent glory, for its own sake: he would, if called upon, serve without reward for he recognises God's worthiness to be served: Romans 11.36 seems entirely pleasing and proper to him, for God in Christ is now at the pinnacle of his thinking and feeling and doing.
The testimony of such a man's heart is "Whom have I in heaven but you? And there is none upon earth that I desire besides you. My flesh and my heart fail; but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever" (Ps 73.25-26). He believes it, knows it, pursues it, and repents afresh because he does not know and feel and prove it more.
He is concerned for God's name and God's people and therefore his time, energies, graces, gifts, faculties and efforts are consecrated to God, whether in the apparently spectacular or the genuinely mundane (1Cor 10.31). His chief end and great delight is to glorify God and to enjoy him now and forever. God in Christ is all in all to him, and he longs to know and feel and prove it more.
In essence, relationship with Jesus is a definite indicator. I will say, however, that one can love Jesus without appearing religious, without proselytizing, and without attending a formal church---though I would add that communion with others is essential. (In a sense, we here at EvC engage in a form of communion simply by dialogue with each other)
3)The third indication is a principled pursuit of godliness with an increasing attainment in holiness (1Jn 2.3-8, 15-16, 19, 29; 3.3, 6, 10, 24; 4.13; 5.2-5, 21). The hypocrite likes the reputation of holiness, but the true child of God is satisfied only with the substance. He considers his ways, and turns his feet back to God's testimonies (Ps 119.59). The world no longer sparkles as it did - or, at least, his attraction to it and affection for it have been fundamentally altered - and now he lives for God, called to be holy as God himself is holy (1Pt 1.16). The bonds to sin have been broken, and the persistent habit of unmortified sinning has been shattered because of his union with Christ. The new root brings forth new fruit (Mt 7.20; 12.33-35). His obedience - though not yet perfect - is universal (throughout the whole man), habitual (a regular and consistent part of life), voluntary (he does it willingly, not because he is forced) and persevering (he continues to pursue obedience to the end). He has taken up his cross, and continues to do so daily, as a disciple of a crucified Christ (Mt 16.24-25). He pursues Christlikeness - it is the burden of his private and public prayers. He increasingly manifests the fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5.22-23); he has no love for the world (Jas 4.4); the previous pattern of conformity to, company with and compromise for the sake of the world is over (2Tim 3.4; 1Cor 16.33). This is not sinless perfection, but laborious progress. It does not mean that a Christian faces no battles but rather than he fights great battles, opposed as he now is to a raging and committed enemy of malice and power (Rom 7.13-25). Sometimes he wanders; sometimes he is on the back foot; sometimes, grievously, he backslides. However, the tone and tenor of his life is one of advance. The trajectory of his life over time is upward. The points plotted on his spiritual graph are not a seamless upward curve, and there are painful plateaus, but the line of best fit indicates persevering progress over time as sin dies and godliness is cultivated.
I understand the concept of godliness. It is the work of the Holy Spirit within ones life. One contentious point is the idea of no love for "the world". This does not mean to shun people...it means that a Christian believes that the world system and philosophy--the way society evolves---is flawed due to it being decided entirely by fallible humans who by nature have no reverence--or need--of God or of Gods character manifest through the living Christ.
4) A fourth mark that John identifies is affection for and attachment to God's redeemed people (1Jn 2.9-11; 3.10-18, 23; 4.7-11; 4.20 - 5.2). This is more than natural affection (just liking them), mercenary attachment (what you can get out if it), party spirit (a gang mentality), or mere presence (just turning up at the right place at the right time). The true Christian loves God's people because they are God's people, even though they may be unlovely in themselves. In that sense, he needs no other reason, and yet he has several. He loves them because of what they are to God, loved by him and saved by Jesus, and it is therefore Godlike to love them. He loves them because of what they are in themselves, marked out increasingly by the image of God, by likeness to the Jesus whom he loves. He loves them because of what they are to him, members together with him of the one body of which Jesus is the saving and sovereign head (1Cor 12.12-14, 26-27). He loves not in word only: it is manifest in his thoughts and deeds (Eph 4.1-6, 12-16, 25-32). He is a true churchman: he does not simply "do church" but views and responds to the saints individually and gathered together with affection, commitment, service and investment. He is not a spectator but a servant, concerned not just to get out but to put in.
I would add that to me, the affection is not just for "Gods" people but for all people...be they atheist or of another religion. Jesus did not only love His own.(The Jews) but He reached out to the pagans....later through the Apostle Paul.
This is to me all rather long and complicated. I would summarize it to say that a true Christian has a relationship with Jesus Christ (Whom we believe to be alive eternally and present with us today)

When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to meannothing more nor less.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Faith, posted 05-09-2014 5:50 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by PaulK, posted 05-09-2014 10:24 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied
 Message 19 by ringo, posted 05-09-2014 12:52 PM Phat has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


(2)
Message 15 of 141 (726478)
05-09-2014 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Phat
05-09-2014 10:00 AM


Re: Phats Opinion
Phat I'd say that that is a lot more Christian than the fundamentalist offerings, right up to point 4. And that's where it goes wrong - as you see.
The whole idea of becoming more loving to fellow Christians alone seems contrary to the Gospel teachings. Aren't Christians told to love their neighbours as themselves ? And who are their neighbours ? Just fellow Christians ? I hardly think that was the intent.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Phat, posted 05-09-2014 10:00 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024