Christian: Definition

[Moose]

I started this thread because of something that was said in another thread so I wouldn't go off topic.

 

Accepting Jesus isn't how you become a Christian.

 

What is the definition of a Christian? I've always believed it meant, "Follower of Christ", wouldn't you first accept Christ before you follow Him?

 

They will know we are Christians by our love.

 

Anyone can display love.

 

I suppose you could say that everyone has their own definition of what it is to be a Christian. To me, it's a soul that has accepted Christ as his/her saviour. We have realized that we as humans lack the ability to avoid sin. It's our understanding that we are not able to enter the kingdom of heaven unless we are cleansed of that sin.

 

God, being the loving God that He is, sent His Son, Jesus, to be the Christ, the Messiah to pay for our sins. With our sin debt paid in full, Jesus provided a way for those that believe on Him to be before God and have eternal life.

 

What is everyone's take on the meaning of being a Christian?

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by Moose

What is the definition of a Christian? I've always believed it meant, "Follower of Christ", wouldn't you first accept Christ before you follow Him?

One can follow Christ without accepting him.

 

Some people have the idea that once you stand up and say "I believe in Jesus", that they are saved, and anyone who does not do so, is not forgiven of their sins. I just look at it differently.

 

You remember the crucifixion? Who was the one that was let go? Jesus Barabbas. Barabbas literally means "Son of all fathers"--I think that many "Christians" put a lot of effort into reading the Bible, going to church, whatever. They like to think that their salvation is guaranteed because they can accept that Jesus was the son of God.

 

I think actions speak louder than mindsets.

Anyone can display love.

My entire point.

 

Christianity is not an elitist club.

 

I'll say it again--they will know we are Christians by our love.

[bluetuesday]

being a christian is being, or striving to be, like christ.

 

belief in jesus christ is meaningless if you do not have the love of christ - christ's commandment to love - at work in your life.

 

matt. ch7 v 21 is a clear example of this. jesus says that many who say to him, 'lord, lord' (i.e. those who recognise him as lord) but do NOT do the will of the father (which is that we should love one another as jesus loves us) will not enter into the kingdom of heaven. merely accepting jesus is who he says he is, is not nearly enough.

 

i believe those people who accept jesus as the christ and love one another as he loved us are christian.

 

i believe those people who don't accept jesus as the christ and love one another as he loved us are christian.

 

i believe those people who accept jesus as the christ and don't love one another as he loved us are not christian.

 

faith in jesus christ is fulfilling his commandment to love. by this and this alone, will we be known as christian.

 

the message of love, tolerance, selflessness, peace and understanding is a central tenet of all major religions. do you think this is a coincidence? it isn't. god has been whispering the same message to the hearts and minds of ALL his people for millennia.

 

love is the way. christian, muslim, hindu, jew, buddhist, atheist, agnostic, whatever religion, philosophy or way of life you embrace, to love as god commands is to find yourself at the heart of his will for mankind.

 

'i am the way, the truth and the life' does NOT mean if, and only if, you believe in jesus will you be saved. that is elitism. that is a perversion of jesus' entire message.

 

'i am the way, the truth and the life' means BE LIKE ME and you will be saved.

 

a loving atheist is closer to the truth and the heart of god than any christian who believes in the arrogance of his own superiority.

[moimeme]

Hooray Bluetuesday

 

Anyone can display love.

 

Oh but they don't. From the people who blame the homeless for being homeless to those who grump about paying taxes for social services to those who abuse people not of their religion, people fail to love. I'd say failure to love is far more common than displaying love, in fact. I think that loving is not nearly as widespread as it ought to be.

 

Remember the Pharisees?

The Pharisees perhaps meant to obey God, but eventually they became so devoted and extremist in very limited parts of The Law (plus all that they themselves added to it), that they became blind to The Messiah when He was in their very midst. They saw His miracles, they heard His Words, but instead of receiving it with joy, they did all that they could to stop Him - eventually to the point of getting Him killed because He truthfully claimed to be the Son of God.

http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/pharisee.htm

[Moose]

One can follow Christ without accepting him.

 

This is still a confusing sentence, at least to me. After I read the replies, everyone is willing to accept His message about love and acceptance, yet, you're telling me that one can follow Christ, without accepting the man He was at the same time? I just don't see how that is possible.

 

Some people have the idea that once you stand up and say "I believe in Jesus", that they are saved, and anyone who does not do so, is not forgiven of their sins. I just look at it differently.

 

I see your point here in this sentence. However when someone SINCERELY accepts Christ into their hearts and trusts that He is the Messiah who paid for their sins.....it's a life changing, heart thumping, weight lifting, peacefull reality that makes you higher than a kite! When I experienced that feeling, and realized that all of my shortcomings, my faults, all of my wrongs were lifted......I knew, like I know now that I'm forgiven. It doesn't mean that I'm basking in my:

arrogance of his own superiority.

 

I can't see how you can seperate the emotion of Love from the man Jesus......it's like you're replacing Him saying that all you need to believe, is Love.....to be saved, if that's true, then why did Christ have to die?

[moimeme]

I see your point here in this sentence. However when someone SINCERELY accepts Christ into their hearts and trusts that He is the Messiah who paid for their sins.....it's a life changing, heart thumping, weight lifting, peacefull reality that makes you higher than a kite!

 

Maybe for you.

 

I can't see how you can seperate the emotion of Love from the man Jesus......it's like you're replacing Him saying that all you need to believe, is Love.....to be saved, if that's true, then why did Christ have to die?

 

Somehow you've all muxed ip. Nobody said all you need to believe is love. They said all you need is to love. And why did Christ have to die? Because, once again, very few people do love. Very few.

[bluetuesday]

Originally posted by Moose

you're telling me that one can follow Christ, without accepting the man He was at the same time? I just don't see how that is possible.

 

 

moose, i just think the words 'follow' and 'accept' are open to interpretation.

 

follow means 'to undertake' or 'to be like' as much as it means 'to be a supporter of'.

 

accept means to willingly receive and to believe.

 

anyone who hears the message of christ and does not do it, fails to believe it.

 

if a man said he believed god existed, said he believed jesus was god, heard jesus command love and yet failed to love, the only conclusion i could draw was that he didn't really believe. he didn't accept.

 

the loving god of all creation, our father, says jump, we jump. you don't jump, you don't believe he means it or you don't believe he is who he says he is.

 

'love' is god's 'jump'. those who love, keep his commandments. that's the whole story.

 

by the way, i feel the kite high too. god bless you.

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by Moose

This is still a confusing sentence, at least to me. After I read the replies, everyone is willing to accept His message about love and acceptance, yet, you're telling me that one can follow Christ, without accepting the man He was at the same time? I just don't see how that is possible.

I'll try to be more clear.

 

Being Christian is about living out Christ's message, whether or not you consider yourself saved, whether or not you wear a cross necklace, whether or not you've even read about Jesus, whether or not you even care--is all irrelevant.

However when someone SINCERELY accepts Christ into their hearts and trusts that He is the Messiah who paid for their sins.....it's a life changing, heart thumping, weight lifting, peacefull reality that makes you higher than a kite!

So?

 

It's not about what you get from it, it's about what you give back.

When I experienced that feeling, and realized that all of my shortcomings, my faults, all of my wrongs were lifted......I knew, like I know now that I'm forgiven.

That's nice, I think--but it doesn't make you a Christian.

 

I can't see how you can seperate the emotion of Love from the man Jesus......it's like you're replacing Him saying that all you need to believe, is Love.....to be saved, if that's true, then why did Christ have to die?

No--it's not about *believing* in love. Few would say they don't believe in love.

 

It's about actually doing it. It's harder than it looks, because we have way too many people sitting on their ass thinking that they're forgiven no matter what because they've undergone a conversion experience.

[Moose]

It's about actually doing it. It's harder than it looks, because we have way too many people sitting on their ass thinking that they're forgiven no matter what because they've undergone a conversion experience.

 

I hear you there. I hope you weren't referring to anyone in particular, though. But you're absolutley right. Christians who aren't grateful for their salvation and walk around not contributing to spread the message of love, and place themselves above others are the ones who give the rest of us Christians a bad name.

[morrigan]

 

a loving atheist is closer to the truth and the heart of god than any christian who believes in the arrogance of his own superiority.

 

What an articulate post, bluetuesday! My boyfriend is an atheist and I consider him to be a far better Christian than I ever will be. He is one of the most genuinely kind hearted people I've known, in his own character and what he does for people, both friends and total strangers.

 

Believing in a higher power, going to church, or praying are as much whited sepulchres if the individual walks away from someone in need or denies assistance because they consider the person inferior.

 

I have met church going people who tried to live christian lives, but I do reject the notion that being baptized or any other religious symbolic act suddenly transforms a person's character. I am responsible for my faults and cruelties to other, it is for me to change or prevent those actions and to do the loving action or behavior. I don't think I can or should expect God to lift my sins from me. I'm more concerned about sick or unwanted people and animals--they deserve to receive salvation above me.

 

I feel Christ was not perfect--he made mistakes and had fears, he knew of the ordeal he would have to face. It didn't stop him from being generous and loving.

[packersgirl]

Here's my definition of being a Christian.

 

Being a Christian is being a follower of Christ, striving to be like him in every aspect of your life. Christ was perfect in every way, we as humans are not. So many people in this world call themselves Christians, and I truly believe that they think they are. They don't do anything bad, they are kind-hearted, loving people. But, how are they trying to get to heaven? You can't earn your way into heaven. Romans 6:23 says "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." And Ephesians 2:8-9 says "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- not by works, so that no one can boast."

 

Although being a Christian is about loving others as Christ loved us, a true Christian recongizes that Jesus came to this earth, died on the cross, rose from the dead three days later and asended into heaven in order to save us. A true Christian admits to the fact that he is a sinner and that he believes Christ did all of that for all of mankind... and not only does he admit that to God, but he admits that to himself, and others by his actions and way of life. Jesus says in John 14:6 "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

[dyermaker]

You can't earn your way into heaven. Romans 6:23 says "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." And Ephesians 2:8-9 says "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- not by works, so that no one can boast."

This is perhaps the most debated question in Christian theology.

 

I don't believe it's solved by a simple Bible verse, as the Bible says different things. Paul, as you point out, wishes to believe that salvation is acheived by grace and faith, whereas James believes that faith and grace has to manifest itself through good works.

 

James 2:24 - Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

 

I think they're both approaching the same issue differently. Right now, I lean towards James' approach, because I think our world desperately needs it. We have way too many Christians who are so content with their salvation (and often, with the lack of yours) that they choose not to do the good they're called to do.

 

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

James 2:17-21

[JackieQ]

To me (if I'm reading your posts right)... the differences you're describing are those between having a "religion" and truly trying to follow a way of life.

 

To me, the Christian religion is based on the way of life christ had. BUT it's often expanded and made more important by people than it actually is. Religion is a set of rules and regulations that you live by ... that may or may not have the Christian intent backing them. (Like the Pharasee that prayed on the corner). Trying to follow a truly Christian way of life generally involves adopting a religion but the emphasis is reversed.

 

Some of the most Religious people I know have been the most hurtful in my life. I've really struggled with this and am not sure I still totally have it resolved in my own head... (well...maybe it's my heart that doesn't have it resolved...that's harder). But, if someone really tries to follow Christ's intent...the goodness and love come through regardless of the rules or the regulations. Following those is a byproduct at that point.

 

I also have just plain come to realize that some of those people who were hurtful were human. They were living life as best they understood it.

 

jq...

[packersgirl]

Dyer... I totally see where you are coming from. Though, if Paul and James meant different things, the Bible would contradict itself, making it errant and not accurate. I love the book of James, and have read it many times. My interpretation of that passage refers to the fact that once you have a genuine faith, good works follow. Just like it was said in earlier posts, many people say they're not Christians yet are so full of good deeds, and those who are may be hurtful or unhelpful. A genuine faith brings out a love for people that can't be denied. Good works coincide with a genuine faith.

 

Honestly, how can anyone say that they love God, knowing full well that God is love, and not love others? But I do agree with you that our world definentaly needs love and good works. Faith without action is a dead faith.

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by packersgirl

Dyer... I totally see where you are coming from. Though, if Paul and James meant different things, the Bible would contradict itself, making it errant and not accurate.

I don't think so.

 

They're two different scholars, with two different approaches.

My interpretation of that passage refers to the fact that once you have a genuine faith, good works follow.

Which would be nice, if it were remotely true.

Honestly, how can anyone say that they love God, knowing full well that God is love, and not love others?

They're out there. They preach. They teach their children. They vote. They're elected.

 

http://www.godhatesfags.com

But I do agree with you that our world definentaly needs love and good works. Faith without action is a dead faith.

Which is only why I'd like to see a little less Paul and a little more James. We need it.

[moimeme]

Though, if Paul and James meant different things, the Bible would contradict itself, making it errant and not accurate

 

I suggest you go through the entire Bible. It contradicts itself all over the place.

[Moose]

Originally posted by moimeme

Though, if Paul and James meant different things, the Bible would contradict itself, making it errant and not accurate

 

I suggest you go through the entire Bible. It contradicts itself all over the place.

 

???????????????? Examples??????????????????

[dyermaker]

I've given you two huge, glaring examples.

 

1. Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 contain seperate creation stories, from different tribes, saying different things.

 

2. Two Gospels disagree on Christ's birth, and at least one of them is simply wrong.

[Moose]

Originally posted by dyermaker

I've given you two huge, glaring examples.

 

1. Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 contain seperate creation stories, from different tribes, saying different things.

 

2. Two Gospels disagree on Christ's birth, and at least one of them is simply wrong.

 

I don't see how Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 have conflicting creation stories, and point out to me what you mean about a disagreement on Christ's birth........explain this to me again?

[bluetuesday]

moose, it's on the dyer, moose, religion thread.

 

the one you thought you could put dyer off about until after thanksgiving when you hoped to have found the answer to the contradiction over the dating of christ's birth from a relative, if i remember correctly.

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by Moose

I don't see how Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 have conflicting creation stories,

It's simple, there are hundreds of Creation stories. The original compiler of the Bible just took two from two different sects of Judaism (one who may or may not have even been monotheistic) and put them as the first and second chapters of Genesis. No one cared that they contradicted each other, because no one took them as fact, they were just nice stories to tell.

and point out to me what you mean about a disagreement on Christ's birth........explain this to me again?

Oy, it's in the other religion thread we had. One Gospel says it happened during Herod's reign, the other said it was after the census (during which Herod had been dead for quite some time, and would be incapable of reigning).

[Moose]

Thanks for the reminder BT, I didn't forget that thread......

[BlockHead]

dyermaker

Christianity is not an elitist club.

 

I'll say it again--they will know we are Christians by our love.

So you are a salvation by works kind of guy.

 

God is a giant piggy bank, and if you put enough coins in, you go to heaven.

I think you made the typical politically correct response. It isn't much different from saying dogs and cats also go to heaven.

 

moimeme

Was God being intolerant by kicking Satan out of heaven?

moimeme

Oh but they don't. From the people who blame the homeless for being homeless to those who grump about paying taxes for social services to those who abuse people not of their religion, people fail to love. I'd say failure to love is far more common than displaying love, in fact. I think that loving is not nearly as widespread as it ought to be.

 

Remember the Pharisees?

You lack imagination. I can easily pull out my wallet and donate money to a worthy charity. I can volunteer at a soup kitchen. I can take one of those people into my home. I don't see what is so Christian about robbing people who have no interest in giving.

The government isn't the be-all and end-all solution for all of society's problems.

bluetuesday

belief in jesus christ is meaningless if you do not have the love of christ - christ's commandment to love - at work in your life.

What were those commandments?

Matt 22:36-40

36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'[2] 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[3] 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

dyermaker

They're two different scholars, with two different approaches.

They weren't scholars.

Who accredited them?

 

 

Who here, other than me, think that being Christian also involves a belief in, and devotion to God?

[Moose]

It's simple, there are hundreds of Creation stories. The original compiler of the Bible just took two from two different sects of Judaism (one who may or may not have even been monotheistic) and put them as the first and second chapters of Genesis. No one cared that they contradicted each other, because no one took them as fact, they were just nice stories to tell.

 

The 27th verse in Chapter 1 of Genesis simply says that God created man in His own image. And the 7th verse of Chapter 2, of Genesis explains how God went about it. How is that a contradiction? It's not.

 

Oy, it's in the other religion thread we had. One Gospel says it happened during Herod's reign, the other said it was after the census (during which Herod had been dead for quite some time, and would be incapable of reigning).

 

I know, I know, but isn't true that even if Herod is dead, his rule is still in place until a successor replaces him? I haven't found any evidence to support your theory, can you point some out?

 

Who here, other than me, think that being Christian also involves a belief in, and devotion to God

 

BH, you're not alone! I'm with you 110% brother!!

[bluetuesday]

Originally posted by BlockHead

Who here, other than me, think that being Christian also involves a belief in, and devotion to God?

 

 

blockhead, i agree with you on the devotion issue. being a christian means being devoted to god which means doing the will of god. so, by the way, does being a muslim. belief is nothing without devotion. belief without devotion is, in fact, disbelief.

 

no-one is devoted to god who does not do his will. and his will is that we love.

 

god has chosen to teach you his will through christianity. others have heard his message in the way god sees fit for them.

 

if god chooses to speak to his other children in a different way than he speaks to you, are you actually suggesting that those beloved children are damned to hell because they understand the same message in a different way?

 

moose, feel free to answer too.