what is a christian?
Prompted by another probing and insightful post from the daily delights released by Clare Flourish, I got to thinking about what makes a person a Christian. This popular religion has two millennia of auspicious history under its belt; followers in 197 countries; around 41,000 denominations; and around 3.2 billion adherents. Given these impressive statistics, I think it’s important to be clear about exactly what beliefs make a person a Christian. And, to this end, I present an almost scientific analysis of key Christian beliefs.
Bible – The key religious book of the Christian faith.
- Fundamentalist Christian groups believe the Bible is the inerrant word of their omniscient god. No mistakes or contradictions.
- The Catholic Church agrees that the Bible is the divinely revealed word of their god. However, they have a very significant add-on. “God’s Revelation comes to us through the Apostolic Tradition and teaching authority of the Church.” So, supplementary texts are encouraged, just like in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, who have their Book of Mormon.
- The United Church of Christ takes an open view, with conservative and liberal interpretations, but urges the importance of understanding the historical and cultural context around the Bible.
- The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America believes “God’s inspiration is confined to the original languages and utterances, not the many translations”.
- Some people believe that the King’s James Bible is the only English translation worth considering and that anyone reading the New International Version is “truly blinded by Satan”.
- Some groups, like Jehovah’s Witnesses, have their very own, more correct translations.
Baptism – A key ritual of the Christian faith.
- Baptists and Seventh Day Adventists are among the groups who believe that immersion baptism of believers is the only way to do it.
- Catholic Church Canon Law states: “Parents are obliged to see that their infants are baptised within the first few weeks. As soon as possible after the birth, indeed even before it …”
- The Lutheran Church concedes there “is no example in Scripture of a baby being baptized” but goes on to state that “infants are born sinful and are in need of forgiveness”. They then quote Jesus “He who believes and is baptized shall be saved; he who believes not shall be damned” (Mark 16:16). They therefore believe that if a baby dies before it’s baptised, it’s going straight to a place called Hell.
- Mormons believe that people can still be baptised when they’re dead.
Trinity – A key doctrinal point of the Christian faith.
- Jehovah’s Witness state that neither the word nor the doctrine of the trinity is mentioned in the Bible.
- Yahweh’s Restoration Ministry does “not believe that the Holy Spirit constitutes a third person of a trinity, which is a concept conceived in ancient mystery religions.”
- Andrew Womack Ministries “believe in one eternal God who exists as three separate persons; the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” (Phone the help line for orders and prayers)
Conclusion
I think we can wrap this up now and examine our findings. Christians are people who believe there is a supernatural creator we cannot see, hear, smell, touch or taste, but can visit us in the form of a spirit. They believe a man called Jesus, who was also their god, visited the earth 2000 years ago to leave a message for humanity. If you are a Christian and think that anything else you believe is ‘correct’, you are mistaken. As my work has demonstrated, unfortunately there is only a one in 3.2 billion chance that this is the case. And that’s assuming that one person currently alive could be viewed as having a ‘correct’ view of an imaginary deity’s beliefs.
I’m a little confused. Is this just a list of trivia about different sects within Christianity?
LikeLike
I sense you have been confused for some time. Tell me your troubles….my son. And stop playing with your rosary when I’m talking to you.
LikeLike
My rosary is bigger than your rosary.
LikeLike
Why aren’t you off teaching Josh?
LikeLike
I’m reading. Trying to find something he says that I don’t actually think is justifiable….
LikeLike
Oh good grief…maybe you aren’t deconverted enough…
You had a President that actually believed the world was created in seven days.
He has command over an armed force that could start a war if he wanted…oh, wait a moment…he did.
These people walk among us…
LikeLike
So far unable to find similarities between Josh and GW. Will keep you posted.
LikeLike
Yes, I realise I could have put more thought into making it coherent, but I’m impatient with the publish button and short on time. Do you genuinely not get it or are you just looking for a fight? 🙂
LikeLike
Not looking for a fight, just wondering what you were getting at.
LikeLike
Wow, it’s clearly even worse than I thought. Maybe I should do a re-write. Just pointing out that there are a billion interpretations and everyone thinks their particular brand, with their personal slant, is correct. I guess I want Christians to pause before they spray their version of the ‘truth’ at people, because if the very basics (Bible, trinity, baptism) show such a range in interpretation, the rest of it has no hope. Maybe I’ll do one with marriage, contraception and food after all …
LikeLike
So it was just an example of some of the fringe Christian sects and cults juxtaposed together?
LikeLike
What? Is the Catholic Church ‘fringe’? By ‘sects and cults’ are you trying to make them seem odd? Churches with big followings and churches with little followings – all using the same book to tell you completely different things that are all ‘divinely inspired’ by a clever god, and ‘correct’.
LikeLike
I guess I meant “juxtaposed with everything else.”
Wouldn’t you expect to see a bunch of fringe elements pop up regardless of whether the central item is true or not? Even among the most well-versed and homogenous group of physicists, each has his or her own pet theories and concentrations. Doesn’t make gravity false.
The problem I have with this kind of approach—and I see it often—is the lack of falsifiability. It doesn’t seem like there’s any thought given to what one would or wouldn’t expect to actually see.
LikeLike
I don’t know what you mean. Wouldn’t the inerrant word of an omniscient god be clearer than humans struggling with science?
LikeLike
Even so, people can twist anything to fit their agenda if they so choose. That’s the nature of human language.
The presumption of inerrancy is prejudicial, especially when it’s left undefined. Christianity doesn’t necessarily require belief in a verbally inspired and inerrant Scripture.
LikeLike
Well, that was one of my points. Thanks. 🙂 You never did clarify what branch you come from. Mormon?
LikeLike
Goodness no. 🙂 Fundamentalist non-denom dispensational patriarchal home schooled. With a focus on presuppositional apologetics.
My point is, you can’t take the beliefs of one sect and try to use them to invalidate the system as a whole.
LikeLike
Wow, that sounds like a lot of fun! 🙂 What do you think of homeschooling? When the anti-gay marriage people start talking about kids missing out on one gender or the other, I say it’s every parent’s responsibility to make sure their children have as wide experience as possible and, for instance, homeschooling is a bad idea, as is limiting a child’s experience to just one gender.
I understand your point. Do you understand mine? Christianity is a big jumble of sects claiming to be the correct interpretation. They can’t all be right – and it does indeed invalidate at least the ones who claim they are the ‘one, true, church’ – because only one of their thousands could be that one …
LikeLike
Home schooling is a tricky issue. Although there are certainly pitfalls to be avoided—I wasn’t as well socialized or as culturally aware as I should have been—it can be very rewarding. Home schooled children are quite often much more adept at dealing with a wide range of peers, even if their interactions with immediate peer groups are a little strained. It also allows for more opportunities; I already had my first college degree before I graduated high school.
Do you think it really is a bad idea to limit a child’s experiences to one gender?
I certainly understand how jumbled the many sects are. If at least one sect claims it is the One True Church and all others are Irreconciliably Damned, then clearly not all of them can be right.
But that should make us want to look for patterns, just to see what we can learn. What percentage of sects (by number of sects) teach exclusivity? Do they make up a majority or a minority of the total number of Christians worldwide? What do they have in common? How are they viewed by the non-exclusive sects?
And patterns do emerge. The majority of Christians worldwide are in non-exclusive sects. With a few exceptions (Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Church of Christ), the exclusive sects are tiny, and virtually all involve some sort of personality cult.
Non-exclusive sects (which make up the per capita majority) all pretty much agree on what’s required to be orthodox, and they view the exclusive sects with a sort of sad resignation. They may claim to be the best or the oldest or the most exciting, but they don’t claim their sect is the only path of salvation.
In conclusion….what defines “Christianity” is pretty well settled by what the majority non-exclusive Christians have in common. Applying the benchmarks of one of the little only-way sects to the religion as a whole just doesn’t add up.
LikeLike
You write so much that it’s an effort to reply or know where to start …
I think children should be exposed to as many different points of view and types of people as possible by their parents – with no preconceptions of what their child will be like (even if we do all hope they’ll agree with us, chances are not).
I think you’re playing down how ‘correct’ each sect/denomination feels about their interpretation. How many American Christians claim that Obama can’t be a ‘real’ Christian because he won’t say homosexuality is a sin? I expect most of them come from Christian churches that don’t claim exclusivity, but they all feel confident judging who’ll be saved.
LikeLike
Not that it’s bad if that’s what it is, haha.
LikeLike
If you asked every Christian what it takes or requires to be a Christian, you would get more answers than there are Christians!
LikeLike
LOL
LikeLike
Haha, yes, perhaps 1 in 3.2 billion was shortening the odds.
LikeLike
I’m pretty sure it also matters what day of the week you ask… LOL
LikeLike
You did not mention the bodily resurrection or the nature of the Eucharist, or contraception, though those are differences within rather than between denominations.
Two thousand years of political compromises, power games we are supposed to relinquish, warm communities which can stifle or support, though the wars were states’ power games rather than doctrinal differences, really.
Thank you for the plug.
LikeLike
I was going to explore marriage and contraception, and maybe food too. But there’s never enough time, and I like to publish while I’m still finding it all amusing (short attention span).
LikeLike
Point of order:
The very first print run of the King James Bible stated that:
“Thou shall commit adultery.”
Apparently this was considered incorrect and all copies were recalled and destroyed and the printers fined heavily.
This quite clearly demonstrates that people were mucking about with the inspired Word of God almost from the off.
I believe the original copy was the correct translation and feel strongly enough that I am going to have an affair with the neighbour and show the wife my original copy of the KJV to prove it.
God wills it….
LikeLike
Technically it was like the 10th or 11th printing in 1631. =P
LikeLike
Keeping us all honest I see? 😉
LikeLike
Sorry, my Bad History muscle twitched. I strained it back when I taught writing and it’s never been the same since. =P
LikeLike
If you’re looking for another pool to jump into, I’m back on the askthebigot, over my head in biblical references about lesbians – the new post, My Interview with a “Not Ex-Lesbian” Child of God.
LikeLike
I’ll be right over.
LikeLike
Like your comments!
LikeLike
Sorry? No, you’re not.
That word usage is almost as bad as people who use the phrase. ”..in my humble opinion.”
I genuinely think you enjoy being a Smarty-Pants.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t mind being corrected, I am not churlish, but I’d stake money that you were the same if not worse when you were a little Sunbeam for Jesus. Your style of repartee reminds me a lot of unklee – you will have encountered him on Nate’s blog – although he bats for the other side.
I hope for your wife’s sake and especially your kid’s you are less enthusiastic about ‘oneupmanship’ around them.
LikeLike
Actually, I’m genuinely sorry when I let my overcorrective tendencies get the best of me. This whole blogging thing is, among other things, an exercise in self-control to try and not come off like a jerk. I play it off, but I really don’t want to be a jackass. So yeah — sorry.
And I was far worse back in the day, I can guarantee that. 🙂
LikeLike
Yes, I thought you might have been.
So I take you are trying to cure your god complex by slumming it with the heathens, then?
How’s that going for you?
LikeLike
Not too bad so far. Having trouble with one 18th-Dynasty Pharaoh, though.
In all seriousness: it’s as much about figuring out what I actually believe as anything else.
LikeLike
Only one Fair O? Would you like a chat with my dad?
Ah…still a fence-sitter than?
I always find it best to ask the question, ‘What would Jesus think?’
Works for me, every time.
LikeLike
There are a great many fences, and I’m slowly finding that most of them don’t extend much further than the horizon I once was restricted by. Yet others extend much farther than I could ever see myself traveling.
Maybe I should rent a go cart.
Jesus would think the Earth was flat, so there’s a problem right off the bat.
LikeLike
If you’re looking for more perspectives to help you in your quest, please (PLEASE) check out quinersdiner.com, start following, and get involved in helpful discussions with all their posts. There are many. And they’re all horrible.
LikeLike
Sounds exciting.
LikeLike
And John Zande has a new post that I think you should scrutinise. 🙂
LikeLike
The one about logic?
LikeLike
The one about the Cat in the Hat.
LikeLike
Tsk tsk Ark. I think you and I are into oneupmanship. I believe physicsandwhiskey has a brain like a computer that sees ‘ILLOGICAL’ or ‘INACCURATE’ flashing before his eyes. He’s very straightforward in his points, and never smarmy nonsense like Unkleeeee – please don’t be unnecessarily rude and compare him with someone like that just because you’re a wee bit sensitive about being WRONG. 🙂
LikeLike
I am never wrong. We have been over this umpteen times. And I am not going to start explaining why all over again.
And I am not sensitive dammit! I just have a few ocd type emotional Freudian issues, that’s all, and if you don’t stop being mean I will refuse to look at your pictures any more.
LikeLike
Oh, I don’t think you’d take such drastic measures and deny yourself my photographic genius. 🙂
LikeLike
Sorry to butt in here, dear, but I think he might, you know?
He has been doing all sorts of strange things lately. And after all, he is only a silly man.
And us girls know about their egos, don’t we , dear.?
LikeLike
Haha, yes, silly men!
LikeLike
I’m glad physicsandwhiskey is around – no-one else challenges in a meaningful way. But it’s tiring. 🙂
LikeLike
Oh..and nice gazania by the way.
Got some cracking bee pics coming your way soon.
LikeLike
Gazania? I live and learn.
LikeLike
Okay…I didn’t mean to be a smarty pants horticulturist. Thought you’d know.
They are indigenous to South Africa. Give it Back, all right!!
LikeLike
Paraphrasing Nietzsche, a casual stroll through any loony bin can show you that faith doesn’t prove anything.
LikeLike
Keeps people busy though!
LikeLike
I heard so does collecting stamps — with way less after and side effects!
LikeLike
I like anything John Lilley likes.
LikeLike
I think Humanity 777 is stalking you! You clicked like, (s)he clicked like … oh my god! Are you the 777?? Now that would be cool!
LikeLike
From us outsiders, I think anyone who believes in the divinity of some dude named Jesus qualifies them to be Christian… and I love seeing them go at each other with this whole “True Christian” nonsense.
LikeLike
It is an entertaining aspect of the jumble!
LikeLike
So you don’t think Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormons or Unitarians or United Church of Christ are Christians? Yikes. You’re worse than a Baptist.
LikeLike
JW’s believe that Jesus was the son of a god – it doesn’t get more divine than that. Mormons and United Church of Christ believe this also, so I’m not sure where your objects come from.
As to UU, no. Many of them are not Christians. I know atheists who identify as UU members. What I’m saying is that acting like all UU’s believe any one thing is pretty ludicrous in itself.
LikeLike
JWs believe Jesus was the created archangel Michael. Generally speaking, divine beings and created beings are not in the same category. United Church of Christ holds a similar view.
Mormons believe that Jesus was a human being who, as the first soul created by Elohim, was also chosen to be the savior of the rest of the human beings.
What I’m saying is that acting like “believing Jesus was divine” is the only legitimate definition of “Christian” is pretty ludicrous too.
LikeLike
Maybe my definition of divine is broader than yours. Savior of mankind, etc. qualifies in my book.
LikeLike
Even a purely normal person could still end up being the savior of mankind, haha.
There are a lot of different viewpoints a person could have about Jesus.
“Jesus was the physical manifestation of the Divine Creator.”
“Jesus is one of the members of the divine eternal trinity.”
“Jesus is one of the members of the divine trinity.”
“Jesus was an angel who became a god.”
“Jesus was a man who was adopted by God and became an angel.”
“Jesus was a created demigod.”
“Jesus was the positive energy of God corresponding to the Old Testament’s negative energy of God.”
“Jesus reached enlightenment.”
“Jesus reached higher enlightenment than any other sage.”
“Jesus was the second greatest prophet.”
“Jesus was the greatest philosopher.”
“Jesus was a good teacher.”
The above list comprises Catholics, Arians, Muslims, Eastern Orthodox, Mormons, Baptists, Buddhists, Unitarians, Gnostics, Wiccans, Thomas Jefferson, and more. To to say that some particular subset of the above qualifies a person as “Christian” and saying that the “True Christian” thing is just silly nonsense is a little silly in itself. There’s a huge spectrum of possible beliefs and you can’t say that your neat little box is automatically better than someone else’s.
LikeLike
There are people in that list that I would not consider to be Christian; so we disagree. I’m not a Christian: I really don’t care. I do appreciate the time you took explaining your viewpoint to me, but I grow a little weary. And anything further I say would just be debating for the sake of debate, something I am normally up for, but not tonight. Thanks again for the chat.
LikeLike
Understood. I’m not trying to start anything big here, anyway. I was just wanting to question the assumption that my “definition box” or your “definition box” is somehow simpler and more accurate than anybody else’s just because we’re more-or-less on the outside. I think we’ve done that. 🙂
LikeLike
Hmmm, a section was clearly missing from my post! 🙂
LikeLike
Replying here because the old thread was getting worn thin.
Sorry for being prolific, haha.
Children should certainly be exposed to as wide a field of understanding as possible. No argument there. I just wasn’t sure whether you were asserting that gay parents aren’t as good as straight parents.
My claim was that non-exclusive sects (which comprise the majority of Christians worldwide) don’t claim to be the only path of salvation and accept the legitimacy of other sects, regardless of how vehemently they may disagree over what they would view as “non-essential” doctrines (usually due to different traditions or history). This claim doesn’t mean that certain members of some of those sects won’t sometimes make loud and sweeping pronouncements about the salvation of a particular individual, especially when it’s someone as culturally and politically controversial as a black Democrat president.
It goes back to falsifiability, like I said before. If you think that the disparity of doctrine in Christianity demonstrates Christianity’s fallaciousness, you’ve got to be able to show what you think it SHOULD look like and why.
LikeLike
Do I indeed? A very clever god inspires humans to write down his very important rules and instructions for humanity. Everyone is interpreting the basics and the detail of these rules differently. There are four possibilities:
A. The rules aren’t clear enough (the god is stupid)
B. The god didn’t do a proper job inspiring the writers (the god isn’t very powerful)
C. The god doesn’t care much (not very benevolent)
D. It’s all lies
If the answer is A,B or C, the the answer is also D.
LikeLike
I only say “got to be able to show” because I’m assuming this is, at its heart, a viable argument based on a legitimate intuition. Falsifiability, then, is important.
The main issue would be with the statement, “Everyone is interpreting the basics and the detail of these rules differently.” Unless you posit that human beings are going to be magically purified of all self-interest simply by the process of reading these rules (which I don’t think is claimed by any faith), then it seems reasonable that at least SOME human beings would claim divergent interpretations, if only to disingenuously further their own ends. Wouldn’t you agree? So divergent interpretations don’t immediately imply A, B, or C.
Another issue is the assumed purpose of the Bible. A lot of fundamentalists, particularly the ones in the exclusive sects, treat the Bible as a list of unqualified instructions for all humanity without dependence on context or culture. But that’s not an essential Christian belief either. The majority of Christians would agree that the primary purpose of the Bible is to reveal information about God by chronicling his interactions with humanity, NOT to provide a decision engine.
LikeLike
“The majority of Christians would agree that the primary purpose of the Bible is to reveal information about God by chronicling his interactions with humanity, NOT to provide a decision engine.”
I really don’t agree with this. If that were the case, they wouldn’t reference Bible quotes to back up their varying points of view.
“at least SOME human beings would claim divergent interpretations” – Possibly. But ALL human beings have divergent interpretations. How many words are there in the Bible? Enough to make everything a whole lot clearer (if you’re a clever god who can see into the future).
LikeLike
Oh, people would certainly still quote Bible verses ad nauseum. Because they do. “We should do X, because God told so-and-so to do X, and so-and-so’s situation was comparable to our own.” And someone else merrily replies, “No, so-and-so’s situation differed substantively from our own by value Z, so our course of action should be X – Z.” And so it goes.
Unless there’s some overarching Christian belief I’m not aware of that says the Bible was intended as a logical decision engine, then there’s no reason to assume that every human ought to be expected to apply the Bible in the same way. As I pointed out in my recent post about rape, some problems have no solutions by definition. That’s not a defect in the Bible; that’s part of the human condition.
You say that “ALL human beings have divergent interpretations” — surely that’s not the case. Sure, few people will agree 100% on every single possible question, but that’s to be expected; contrary to common opinion, BIBLE doesn’t stand for “Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth”. It’s not a decision engine and it never has been.
LikeLike
I know. But most Christians use it as one. And the god God claims it’s his clever word. Are you not getting this?
LikeLike
Most Christians try to apply what they know of God from the Bible to make decisions about morality, but using the Bible as a prooftext decision engine is largely unique to fundamentalism.
And wait, what does God claim exactly?
LikeLike
Yawn. Well, that would depend on YOUR INTERPRETATION!! 🙂
LikeLike
“Just the facts, ma’am; just the facts.”
=P
LikeLike
There are a great many fences, and I’m slowly finding that most of them don’t extend much further than the horizon I once was restricted by. Yet others extend much farther than I could ever see myself traveling.
Maybe I should rent a go cart.
Jesus would think the Earth was flat, so there’s a problem right off the bat
Of course the Jesus metaphor was just that and certainly wasn’t meant to be taken literally. As we all know, Wholly Profits lack the fundamentals of the art of motorcycle maintenance.
Also,their tendency to eschew all things material usually begins with soap.
Being an atheist is only as difficult as you allow theists to make it for you.
LikeLike
Not really on topic, but I thought you might be interested in a live forum held at Princeton last night on the subject “Why I Am Not An Atheist.” Here’s the link (video available through the weekend only): http://new.livestream.com/mbc-tv/events/1998779/videos
Becky
LikeLike
Thanks Becky. I tried to have a look but my computer and internet connection aren’t fast enough to stream it. Besides, it’s almost two hours long, which is well beyond any free time I have! Nice to hear from you though. I did a post recently in response to our discussion about children and babies, which I tried to pingback to you, but perhaps you missed it. Obviously your comments are welcome, especially if I misrepresented your views in any way:
LikeLike
Sorry you couldn’t see it, Violetwisp–I have the same problem, which is why I didn’t realize how long it is. But I guess that makes sense–a forum at a prestigious university is going to be a little longer than the usual YouTube video. 😉
I actually did see your post re. children and wrote my own rebuttal post. I didn’t link to your article though. I never know if I should for rebuttals. I did the same today–my server was down for a while so I just now posted it: “A Christian is . . .” Nothing new, I don’t think.
Anyway, I appreciate the welcome. Your writing is thought-provoking and I appreciate that we can voice our different views in a forum kind of way.
Becky
LikeLike
Sounds interesting. I can’t find your rebuttal post – could you link to it?
LikeLike
No surprise–I should have realized it would be hard to find. I was addressing a larger issue but used the children/parenting topic as a supporting argument. The post is called “Do Good And Evil Exist?” – http://rebeccaluellamiller.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/do-good-and-evil-exist/
Thanks for your comment re “A Christian Is . . .” I’m off to answer it now. 😀
Becky
LikeLike
Anyone who claims to be a Christian is a Christian to me. “By the fruit, the tree is known.” Or somehting like that. 😉 These “fruit” are typically human, in inventing new interpretations and versions of their religion, to the point where some of the more different versions start live on as completely new religions. Just like Christianity came from Judaism and Judaism from the religions preceding it. And just like Islam and Mormonism have evolved from those. This just goes to show how religions are simply cultural projects by mere humans, and how none of them require any sort of “divine inspiration”. None of them have any clear evidence of any divine inspiration either, so the conclusion is simple.
LikeLike
Interesting you should use that quote. I’ve just been reading a Christian post using that very quote to ‘prove’ that Obama isn’t a Christian. Haha, I think I might post that next.
LikeLike
A lot of what the Bible claims Jesus said, is obviously misunderstood by people of faith, because of what they would want Jesus to have said. I have run into Christians using that very quote for the most ridiculous ends.
As if it was really so hard to understand the proverb of it. Obviously by the most simple meaning it could have, it means that the followers of Jesus should act as their teacher, or their movement will be judged by their bad behaviour. As has happened. So, Jesus was exactly right, but Christians today would not want them, or their religion to be condemned by the actions of other Christians. Hence, they twist the meaning of this simple thought to be something complex and try to find some hidden agenda from it, that might fit their purpose.
The sad thing is, that their cultural indoctrination makes them blind to the most obvious meaning. This metaphor is often turned to mean something like, if you do not follow the tenets of Christianity, you are not a true Christian. But for it to mean that, would require Jesus would have known beforehand, that his followers are going to create a new religion. I doubt that, since he also said something like: “I have not come to demolish the law, but to fullfill it.” And in the story he made several references, that his action was for the Jews (only that the gentiles were people too). The fact that Jesus is seen as divine, has led this quite remarkable proletarian philosopher to be so often misunderstood. Not all he said was clever, or right and a lot of it is later fabrication, even if some of it is truly the words of one man, but the idea of him being a divinity changes a lot of sensible stuff he said, into weird mumbo jumbo. And also, wich is really strange, it seems to give people the license to cherry pick some of it as literal and some of it as mystical metaphors.
I guess in your example this Christian post was meant to set Obama outside of Christianity because he does not act like a “true Christian” because he is trying to help the poor by his medicare legistlation, or something? Because Jesus would not help the poor. Right?
So, ultimately a Christian is a non-Jewish person who claims to follow the teachings of this early Jewish rabbi, but picks and chooses what fits him/her using the idea, that this rabbi was not the son of god in traditional Hebrew meaning, as a man who follows their god,s creed, but as a flesh and blood son (unintelligently) as an excuse, for misinterpreting and misrepresenting what the rabbi alledgedly said.
LikeLike
Love your final paragraph! Pretty much sums it up, but doesn’t cover the Jews for Jesus …
I think I might have a browse round wordpress for people using that quote and see just how many odd contexts I can find it in. Thanks!
LikeLike
I’m Christian and I do not believe Christ was or is God, also the Bible does not support the teaching that says a Christian has to be water baptized, after Christ was resurrected baptism was and is the Holy Spirit (Acts 11:16-18), a person baptized in the Holy Spirit is a Christian.
Acts 11:16-18 clearly shows that water baptism is not the baptism that saves anyone.
I do not believe any English Bible is the true word of God, the King James English New Testament comes from the Greek text ,theTextus Receptus, the King James English New Testament does not agree in some places with the Greek text the Textus Receptus, all other English New Testaments comes from a text by Westcott & Hort, the Greek New Testament by Westcott & Hort does not agree in many places with the Textus Receptus, the TR was written long before the W&H, that proves that the New Testament has been changed by man.
Also Isaiah 9:6 in the English Bible does not agree with what Isaiah 9:6 says in the Hebrew Bible. Isaiah 9:6 is a popular verse that the false church uses to say, “Christ is God”
The Biblical definition of a Christian is someone that believes God’s Son, Yeshua is the Messiah that doesn’t practice sin. The majority of people in the world today that claim to be Christian do not speak the truth that is in the Bible, that means that they are either deceived or not born of the Spirit.
The false (Christian) church is much bigger than the true Christian church, no one led by the Holy Spirit will ever say, “Christ is God”, will ever say, “a person has to be water baptized to receive the Holy Spirit”, or will ever say, “the English Bible is 100% truth” because none of that is true, that shows you how many people are NOT led by the Holy Spirit.
The Bible does not support the teaching that says, “the devil, satan is a fallen angel”
The Bible does not support the teaching that says, “everyone is tempted by a fallen angel”
The Bible does not support the teaching that says, “the gospel has to be preached to everyone on the planet and then God will destroy the planet by fire”
The Bible does not support the teaching that says, “the New Testament was written about our time period”
The Bible does not support the teaching that says, “Christ died for everyone”
The Bible does not support the teaching that says, “God gave man free will”
The Bible does not support the teaching that says, “Revelation was written about our time period”
That shows you how many people have been deceived into believing something that is not true.
LikeLike