celebrity writers

What Is a Christian?

Defining What it Means to Follow Christ

Oct 4, 2007

One of the questions sure to draw a wide range of impassioned opinions is this one: What exactly is a "Christian"?

Determining who is or is not a "Christian" requires that one first define the term "Christian."

So, what is Christianity?

According to Adherents.com, over 2 billion people worldwide identify themselves with Christianity, making it the most dominant religion in the world. That number, however, comprises a wide array of self-described “Christians” from Pope Benedict XVI to Billy Graham and from Jesse Jackson to Pat Robertson.

The best way to define “Christianity” is to look to the historical-grammatical character of the word itself. It originates from the first century offshoot of Judaism – an offshoot that centered on (and still centers on) the first century teacher named Jesus of Nazareth – otherwise known as Jesus “the Christ.”

The word “Christ” literally means “Anointed One,” and Christians universally believe that Jesus was (and, in fact, is) the “Anointed One.” The central point of Christianity is that Jesus of Nazareth is “the Christ.”

And who are the "Christians"?

According to the New Testament book of Acts, the followers of Jesus were first called “Christians” in Antioch, an ancient city located on the left bank of the Orontes River in what is now Antakya in southern Turkey.

Followers of Jesus Christ quickly spread throughout the Greco-Roman world and beyond, founding churches and changing social orders in their wake. Their doctrines were informed by the teachings and prolific writings of Jesus’ apostles, a group of men personally chosen by Jesus to take his message into the world. Many of their writings became part of the New Testament Scriptures in our Bible today.

It therefore is logical to carry this over to today, and state that a “Christian” today would likewise embrace the belief that Jesus is the Christ, the Anointed One of God. What’s more, it’s logical to assume that a Christian today would line up with the same basic theology of those first called “Christians” in the book of Acts.

Therefore, a “Christian” (whether first century or twenty-first century) is best understood as one who professes a belief in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, and who has staked his or her entire life on that belief.

Evangelicals emphasize that becoming a true Christian requires a sincere, heartfelt decision to trust and accept Christ as one’s Savior. Going to church, reading the Bible, trying to pray, and doing good works are not enough. These things are simply the result of being a good Christian, but not the cause of it.

As one anonymous quote puts it: ““Faith makes a Christian. Life proves a Christian. Trial confirms a Christian. Death crowns a Christian.”

**The above article is written by the author from an evangelical perspective. Contrary or additional feedback is more than welcome in the discussion area.

The copyright of the article What Is a Christian? in Protestantism is owned by Brian Tubbs. Permission to republish What Is a Christian? in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Comments

Oct 7, 2007 10:23 AM

Pink :

In your article of October 4, 2007, you wrote:
.
"Evangelicals emphasize that becoming a true Christian requires a sincere, heartfelt decision to trust and accept Christ as one's Savior. Going to church, reading the Bible, trying to pray, and doing good works are not enough. These things are simply the result of being a good Christian, but not the cause of it.
.
"As one anonymous quote puts it: 'Faith makes a Christian. Life proves a Christian. Trial confirms a Christian. Death crowns a Christian'."
.
Not be be ornery; but, how does this equate to what Jesus taught?

Oct 8, 2007 6:32 AM

Pink :

.
Emile Durkheim (1858-1917)
.
http://www.emiledurkheim.com/
.
Sociology is the study of man and his groups. As such, it takes no position one way or the other promoting one life style or the other; instead, its scholars seek understanding about our relationships with each other.
.
Emile Durkheim is the father of Sociology--its thought and study. In one of his papers, he defines Christianity in the following way:
.
"The merits of Christianity are praised and we are discreetly invited to embrace them. But are we to ignore the fact that the originality of Christianity consisted precisely in a remarkable development of the individualistic spirit? Whereas the religion of the ancient city-state was quite entirely made of external practices, form which the spiritual was absent. Christianity demonstrated in its inner faith, in the personal conviction of the individual, the essential condition of piety. First, it taught that the moral value of acts had to be measured according to the intention, a preeminently inward thing which by its very nature escapes all external judgments and which only the agent could competently appraise. The very center of moral life was thus transported from the external to the internal, and the individual was thus elevated to be sovereign judge of his own conduct, accountable only to himself and to his God. Finally, in consummating the definitive separation of the spiritual and the temporal, in abandoning the world to disputes of men. Christ delivered it at once to science and to free inquiry. This explains the rapid progress made for the scientific spirit from the day when Christian societies were established. Individualism should not, then, be denounced as the enemy which must be combated at any cost."
.
----------------
.
The above was copied from Page 86 in Readings in Social Theory; fourth edition; edited with introduction by James Farganis, Vassar College--New School University; McGraw Hill; Copyright 2004, The Free Press.

Oct 8, 2007 11:45 AM

Brian Tubbs :

I wrote this article, knowing that you, Migisi, and some of the other critics here would disagree. The article was written with a wider audience in mind than merely those who frequent the discussion boards. There's little more I can say on this subject to try to persuade you that Jesus asserted his own deity during his earthly ministry and that he identified himself as the way to heaven. These things are, I believe, very clear in the Gospels - but you and others don't see it that way. So, we are going to have to agree to disagree.

Oct 8, 2007 1:18 PM

Pink :

.
Jesus asserted his own deity during his earthly ministry and that he identified himself as the way to heaven.
.
It's not a matter of the two of us agreeing or disagreeing with each other, is it? I think that was part of your point.
.
My personal opinion is that Jesus brought his Gospel to people on an "In the Here and Now" way of looking at things. I understand--at least I think so--that your idea is that his Gospel had everything to do with the after life as far as the idea of Salvation is concerned. That sounds a lot like a reworked idea out of the Catholic Church to me.
.
No offense.
.
:)

Oct 8, 2007 1:23 PM

Boanerges :

persuade you that Jesus asserted his own deity during his earthly ministry

I thought it a well written article, Brian..

here is a link that will highlight some of Jesus' words, where He said them, and why...... hope the info finds its way to something meaningful, and noteworthy.....

The Days of Noah! - Are They Here?
http://prophecyinthenews.com/articledetail.asp?Article_ID=210

Mount Hermon: Gate of the Fallen Angels
http://prophecyinthenews.com/articledetail.asp?Article_ID=191

"During the ministry of Jesus, He and His disciples visited Caesarea Philippi (see cover photo) where the Jordan River springs forth from the slopes of Mount Hermon. In the cover photo, one can see the grotto and cave where Baal worship was in full swing. While observing these shrines, Jesus posed the question: "Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?" (Matt. 16:13). Jesus was standing in the territory of His great enemy, Satan, and his idolatrous Nephilim. It was the area out of which the Antichrist would arise."

Oct 8, 2007 1:41 PM

Pink :

.
I didn't find any fault with your article. I thought it was pretty good and I drew attention to it by posting a reply. It roused my curiosity and I asked a question about how the quotation I cited equated to what Jesus taught.
.
:)
.

Oct 9, 2007 1:07 PM

Brian Tubbs :

Pink, I think Jesus' message had to do with BOTH the "here and now" and the after-life. Jesus did preach in Matthew, after all, that the "Kingdom of God is at hand." That's here and now. So, in that sense, I agree with you.

Oct 9, 2007 1:13 PM

Pink :

.
"...Jesus' message had to do with BOTH the 'here and now' and the after-life"
.
Can you say what you think Jesus' message had to do with the "here and now" of life?
.
And, my second question is, do you think Jesus believed that people's sins were justification for them being cut off from God? Can you give any reference to back up your opinion on your answer? Take your time, these are important questions. Brian specifically, but anyone?
.

Oct 9, 2007 9:30 PM

Migisi :

.
I wrote this article, knowing that you, Migisi, and some of the other critics here would disagree.
.
Why did you think I would disagree with your definition of a true Christian? Why do you think it would it matter to me?

Oct 9, 2007 10:38 PM

Migisi :

.
And, my second question is, do you think Jesus believed that people's sins were justification for them being cut off from God?
.
Wouldn't it depend on whether the person was 'saved' or not? The 'unsaved' sinners are cut off. The 'saved' sinners are not. Isn't that Christian doctrine?
.
Jesus quoted Isaiah several times. No surprise, since salvation was the main theme of the Book of Isaiah. Therefore, I ~assume~ he'd have believed Isaiah to be correct when he said:
.
"But your iniquities have separated you from your God; your sins have hidden his face from you, so that he will not hear." Isaiah 59:2
.
But I could be wrong. But if a sinner wasn't separated from God, why did Jesus serve as an atonement?

Oct 10, 2007 5:21 AM

Pink :

.
Wouldn't it depend on whether the person was 'saved' or not? The 'unsaved' sinners are cut off. The 'saved' sinners are not. Isn't that Christian doctrine?
.
But, where do we read Jesus' wprds that each one of us deserves to be cut off from God unless we accept his sacrificial death on the cross as the propitiation for our sins? I'm not saying it isn't in there. I am asking where is it written?
.
It should be a very easy question to answer.
.
.

Oct 10, 2007 7:40 AM

Migisi :

.
But, where do we read Jesus' words that each one of us deserves to be cut off from God unless we accept his sacrificial death on the cross as the propitiation for our sins?
.
I can't find a Jesus quote where he specifically says this. I suppose one could use John 14:6 - "Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'", and Jn 10:9 - "I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved."
.
Jesus does address the cutting off in his vine analogy, IMO.
Jn 15:1 - "I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. 2He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful.... 6If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned."
.
.

Oct 10, 2007 7:56 AM

Pink :

.
But, these statements by Jesus are not strong support of the popular theme that is promoted by popular Christianity.
.
In fact, they can be interpreted in other ways.
.
Such strong statements as are made by the popular religionism of the day MUST be able to be EASILY supported; OTHERWISE the statements end up being little other than a stretch. Persons should not be expected to give in to unfounded claims.
.
Where are the claimants? The question I'm asking is central.
.

Oct 10, 2007 8:49 AM

Pink :

.
Migisi sez, "...I could be wrong. But if a sinner wasn't separated from God, why did Jesus serve as an atonement?
.
I think we need to get a good handle on the implications of that great question.
.
A person wakes up one day with the realization that they are a sinner separated from God. The implications are all about a horrific eternity to put it mildly.
.
And, when the person comes back with, "I'm not such a bad person that I deserve such a fate", WHO or WHAT is it that tells them that, yes, indeed, they are such a sinner deserving to be swept away?
.
Now, I could be wrong as well; but, it looks to me like the condemnation itself is the barrier that keeps us separated from God. Can we put our fingers on the source of that condemnation--who is it that makes the accusation.
.
The accusation--itself--is the condemnation?
.
.

Oct 10, 2007 11:01 AM

Migisi :

.
WHO or WHAT is it that tells them that, yes, indeed, they are such a sinner deserving to be swept away?...
Can we put our fingers on the source of that condemnation--who is it that makes the accusation.
.
Jesus believed in hell, and talked about condemnation. Is he the source?
.
Many go there: Matthew 7:13 "... wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it."
.
A place of torment: Luke 16:19-31 "The rich man also died and was buried. And being in torments in Hades ... he cried and said 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.'"
.
Everlasting punishment: Matthew 25:46 "And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
.
Everlasting fire: Matthew 25:41 "And then He will say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.'"
.
Furnace of fire: Matthew 13:41 "The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practise lawlessness, and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth." (Matt 13:49-50) "The angels will come forth, separate the wicked from among the just, and cast them into the furnace of fire.
.
Lake of fire: Revelation 20:15 "And anyone not found in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire."
.
Fire and brimstone: Revelation 14:10 "If anyone worships the beast ... he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb."
.
Unquenchable fire: Matthew 3:12 "His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire."
.
Prepared for the devil: Matthew 25:41 "And then He will say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.'"
.
Body and soul suffers there: Matthew 5:29 "If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell." (Matt 10:28) "And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill

Oct 10, 2007 11:10 AM

Pink :

.
Good work.
.
A lot to check out.
.
:)
.
But, all of that seems to talk about people that deserve condemnation through their actions.
.

Oct 11, 2007 6:37 AM

Pink :

.
You've given me a lot to think about, Migisi.
.
You build a good case that Jesus was involved in the religionist scam.
.

Oct 11, 2007 6:37 AM

Pink :

.
Duplicate post--Ignore

Oct 11, 2007 7:27 AM

Brother_Jones :

You build a good case that Jesus was involved in the religionist scam.

It looks like Migisi agrees with C.S. Lewis that a reasonable person has three choices for Jesus. Liar, Lord, or Lunatic.

the oldtimer.

Oct 11, 2007 7:31 AM

Pink :

.
YOU are wishin' that were the case.
.
:)
.

Oct 11, 2007 9:06 AM

Brother_Jones :

YOU are wishin' that were the case.

Your case for a belliguered, rebellious, protesting, first century misfit guy like yourself is the height of an idiotic mindset. You can't get anybody to buy into it. It is just silly.

the oldtimer.

Oct 11, 2007 9:24 AM

Pink :

.
A first century misfit? Now that is a great combination of words!
.
heh heh heh
.
O tay, Bubba, o tay.
.
You da man.
.
:)
.
Did you mean, beleaguered, or did you mean, belligerent, as in your interactive style?
.

Oct 11, 2007 9:27 AM

Migisi :

.
But, all of that seems to talk about people that deserve condemnation through their actions.
.
Per his own words, Jesus condemned people for simply not believing in him. The unbelievers might've been wonderful people. But just because they didn't accept ~his~ spiritual ideas, Jesus condemned them. How's that sit with you?
.
You build a good case that Jesus was involved in the religionist scam.
.
I assume Jesus was a religious zealot, since he made religion his profession. Since Jesus, we've had and have professional religionists who use ~Jesus'~ words to judge and condemn others. So, indirectly (or directly?), Jesus ~is~ involved in the religionist scam. That's how I see it, anyway.

Oct 11, 2007 9:31 AM

Migisi :

.
It looks like Migisi agrees with C.S. Lewis that a reasonable person has three choices for Jesus. Liar, Lord, or Lunatic.
.
I've never read anything Lewis wrote, so I don't know if I agree with him or not.

Oct 11, 2007 9:32 AM

Brother_Jones :

Now that is a great combination of words!

Do you feel confident that you have encouraged anybody here on the suite to follow Jesus?

the oldtimer.

Oct 11, 2007 9:36 AM

Brother_Jones :

I've never read anything Lewis wrote, so I don't know if I agree with him or not.
Good dodge. Lewis put if pretty simply, maybe so that folks like you could feel your choice. Liar, Lord, or Lunatic. I guess maybe you could also choose to believe Jesus was a non person in that nobody like Him ever existed which would be choosing Liar for those who wrote about Him existing and talking to them daily. Can you think of another choice for who Jesus might have been?

the oldtimer.

Oct 11, 2007 9:37 AM

Migisi :

.
You can't get anybody to buy into it.
.
How do you know that, Jones? Can you speak for everybody and anybody?

Oct 11, 2007 9:38 AM

Pink :

.
You DO build a good case.
.

Oct 11, 2007 9:39 AM

Brother_Jones :

How do you know that, Jones? Can you speak for everybody and anybody?

No, I can't. Can you think of anybody that buys into Pinky's idea of Jesus?

the oldtimer.

Oct 11, 2007 9:41 AM

Pink :

.
Do you feel confident that you have encouraged anybody here on the suite to follow Jesus?
.
No, I don't; but, that isn't my purpose for being here.
.
But, I do hope some have asked themselves questions about what it is that they believe it means to follow Jesus.
.
Maybe some churchies will take a second look at what it is that they think they are following.
.

Oct 11, 2007 9:44 AM

Migisi :

.
Can you think of anybody that buys into Pinky's idea of Jesus?
.
I've never taken a survey to be able to say one way or the other, Jones. And, unlike you, I wouldn't presume to speak for anybody.

Oct 11, 2007 9:50 AM

Brother_Jones :

No, I don't; but, that isn't my purpose for being here.

I'm sure you won't take my encouragements and get in the bible and attempt to draw close to Christ and His words. You love to run around with the folks who have an equal amount of snot in their nose as you have directed towards the message of Christ. You are headed for the direction that you chose which is not being anything like Jesus.

the oldtimer.

Oct 11, 2007 9:51 AM

Migisi :

.
Good dodge.
.
Not a dodge. Just the truth. How can I know if I agree without knowing what he wrote?
.
Lewis put if pretty simply, maybe so that folks like you could feel your choice. Liar, Lord, or Lunatic. 
.
I wouldn't know what he put simply.
.
I guess maybe you could also choose to believe Jesus was a non person in that nobody like Him ever existed which would be choosing Liar for those who wrote about Him existing and talking to them daily.
.
Yes, I 'could'. But do I? You seem to know what everybody's thinking, so tell me.
.
Can you think of another choice for who Jesus might have been?
.
I'll give it some thought and get back to you.

Oct 11, 2007 9:55 AM

Brother_Jones :

How can I know if I agree without knowing what he wrote?

lol. I feel like I'm whippin a dead horse here. I just posted what C.S. Lewis wrote. That Jesus was either Lord, Lunatic, or Liar. You have now read what Lewis wrote. You can agree or not agree. But you have read what Lewis wrote. Right?

the oldtimer.

Oct 11, 2007 9:55 AM

Pink :

.
You love to run around with the folks who have an equal amount of snot in their nose as you have directed towards the message of Christ.
.
Your style gives strong meaning to the word, hubris, RC.
.

Oct 11, 2007 10:09 AM

Brother_Jones :

Your style gives strong meaning

the ole phil likes to slip and slide.
You never answered my question at the outset. Why do think Jesus went around forgiving absolute strangers of their sin?

the oldtimer.

Oct 11, 2007 10:30 AM

Brian Tubbs :

During my periods of doubt (especially my second one), I did a lot of research into Lewis' argument. I think there IS a fourth choice.

Here's the way I see it...

1. Jesus was either the Lord, the Son of God, the Christ or...

2. Jesus was a fraud and a liar, deliberately engaged in deceit and manipulation to build up his personal religion and/or power base or...

3. Jesus was insane, crazy, a lunatic or...

4. Jesus was a powerful teacher, whose life and teachings were hijacked and embellished by his followers (including and perhaps especially Paul - and then the early church leaders of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries)

It seems to me that Migisi and Pink hold to Category or Choice Number Four. Now, Pink, Migisi, if I'm incorrect, correct me. I'm not trying to think for you. I'm just stating my impression of where you're coming from.

Oct 11, 2007 10:32 AM

Brian Tubbs :

John 3

Oct 11, 2007 10:35 AM

Brian Tubbs :

Good research, Migisi. Jesus talked about hell more than he talked about heaven. A lot of people don't realize that.

Oct 11, 2007 10:38 AM

Brian Tubbs :

Migisi is being very honest with the biblical record in that Jesus did preach hell and he did preach that people had to believe in him. As such, Jesus' teachings are the foundation for Christianity.

Pink, your comment that this all means Jesus was probably part of the "religionist scam" says a LOT about where you're coming from. Your preconceived bias (dare I say "hostility"?) against organized religion outweighs any respect you may have for Jesus of Nazareth. In other words, if it can be shown that Jesus' beliefs are different from yours, rather than reconsider your beliefs - you will simply cast Jesus aside with all the other religious leaders you've likewise cast aside.

That's your choice, but I think it's helpful for you to see it for what it is.

Oct 11, 2007 10:38 AM

Pink :

.
Hubris is a word that especially seems to apply to your style, Bother Jones.
.
Why do [I] think Jesus went around forgiving absolute strangers of their sin?
.
Very good question. I don't recall you asking it. Maybe I don't follow everything that is written here--especially of late.
.
Does what Jesus did forgive men like Richard Speck and that Gurney cannibal of their sins? Did Jesus die so that men like Joseph Stalin could be at one with God?
.
I think one of the main reasons why Jesus forgave people their sins was that they really weren't sinners in the first place. Was a man blind because of the sins of his parents? Your idea of blood guilt would say so.
.

Oct 11, 2007 10:53 AM

Pink :

.
It seems to me that Migisi and Pink hold to Category or Choice Number Four. Now, Pink, Migisi, if I'm incorrect, correct me. I'm not trying to think for you. I'm just stating my impression of where you're coming from.
.
I don't mind being included with others who hold similar views to mine--that's fine with me. It may even be a compliment for all I know. :)
.
I'm not so sure what I think of the biblical Jesus. At one time, I held the view that Jesus was a personal entity of great spiritual strength. But, the more I get tested by those who are given support as Christian spokespersons, the more my view is diminished.
.
I used to give certain comments precedence over all others. Revelatioins 3:20 is an example. Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. I believed that and had a sense that it was an unfolding piece of reality in my life. But, I guess maybe I was wrong. It certainly is rejected by those here who give each other their support as being the true followers of Christ. What can I say? My personal experience doesn't seem to count with any Churchies. I have an idea of who or what it was that I thought was supping with me. Maybe Bother Jones will say as he has described my purpose in life quite often?
.

Oct 11, 2007 11:35 AM

Brother_Jones :

Does what Jesus did forgive men like Richard Speck and that Gurney cannibal of their sins? Did Jesus die so that men like Joseph Stalin could be at one with God?

I guess you probably have been around some pretty bad guys given the fact that you are an older gentlemen. When I am in the jails, it does sometimes occur to me that I wouldn't have done what murderers have done. But who know what I might be capable of doing if I thought nobody held anyone accountable. Most of us would like to punish somebody somewhere for what they may have done to us. We all share in sin, hatred, and malice to some degree. Nobody is excluded. That is the first thing that Jesus preached when He came preaching 'repentance.'

I think one of the main reasons why Jesus forgave people their sins was that they really weren't sinners in the first place.

Then I think Jesus would have been laughed around the block and run off for being presumptious. Look, I know I am a difficult person to deal with sometimes. Most people who spend great amounts of time trying to do Apologetics tend to be rather mean and hostile. Would my life have turned out to be much better if I spent it trying to persuade people not to take Jesus seriously? I don't believe so. I would just be another person who feels my own opinions weigh as much as Jesus' and folks should not pay that much attention to a dead guy from the past.

the oldtimer.

Oct 11, 2007 11:54 AM

Brother_Jones :

4. Jesus was a powerful teacher, whose life and teachings were hijacked and embellished by his followers (including and perhaps especially Paul - and then the early church leaders of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries)

I know this choice seems to have some followers but it presents two very difficult problems for me. His followers couldn't have known at the time of the writing of the New Testament how these testimonies would be received by anyone. And the other big problem is Paul. He seemed to have given up his status as a great religious person to be a person who is beaten, jailed, and persecuted for his beliefs. Why would he be motivated to spend his life in deception? He wrote the great love chapter in 1 Cor 13 and he has always seemed like a person who is telling the truth in a very calm, exact way. It just doesn't work for me to see a big conspiracy concerning a few guys or a bunch of guys who wish to control history by inventing a person like Jesus.

the oldtimer.

Oct 11, 2007 2:39 PM

Pink :

.
"...I think Jesus would have been laughed around the block and run off for being presumptious."
.
I think I know YOUR type only TOO WELL.
.
I expect YOU have NEVER been accused of anything of which YOU were not guilty. It's almost too easy for you to say something about how you are a "Sinner Saved by Grace". I can see you talking to some poor inmut telling him how your sins are just as dark to God as are his murder, rape, etc. YOUR sins! Hah! I can imagine.
.
But, I seriously doubt that YOU can identify with the person who is accused of something for which they bear no guilt whatsoever, other than the fact that people like you say they were born in sin. What a farce! :(
.
It makes sense to me that people exactly like you would have laughed Jesus around the block, as you say, for opening the door to the possibility that they could just reach out and have the Kingdom of God within their being and that they didn't need to kau-tau to the Religious Right of the day. Worse than that, they would have given all their support to the Church Rulers to get him lynched for teaching such a blasphemous thing.
.
Bother Jones--Sir Hudibras~
.

Oct 11, 2007 3:44 PM

Brother_Jones :

Well, there is no point in beating up on each other. You can make some very good points about how preachers sometimes do that to folks. No argument from me. I've seen it too. I'm sorry if I get a little animated concerning the nature and character of Jesus. It pushes hot buttons at every angle. I am a sinner saved by grace. Maybe sometimes I don't act like it or represent Christ very well. But, I guess you are willing to admit the same bad attitude from time to time. Whatever Jesus said to anybody will be remembered and recounted long after you and I are gone because something quite amazing happened at that point in history. I believe it happened as the story is given to us. And you don't.

the oldtimer.

Oct 11, 2007 3:55 PM

Pink :

.
I bloom where I was planted.
.
I didn't make a choice to be born into the situation of my birth any more than you.
.
My bringing up was nothing I chose nor were the conditions of the society in which I grew to manhood.
.
But, I turned out to be a deviant--I went off away from what authority demanded of me. It appears that you didn't and that you stayed on the course to which you were launched.
.
My deviance brought me to where I have come to be. How was I able to be a deviant in a situation where others had control of my destiny?
.
Those are the kinds of questions over which people who think like you have their most serious problems.
.
It is all relative to your view of society which you have posted is just a bunch of people each capable of making their own autonomous choice about what to do next. We HAVE to forgive the little ones of their sins. And, we have a responsibility to help them to grow beyond where they have been planted. But, that's liberalism, isn't it? And that cannot be tolerated.
.
.

Oct 11, 2007 4:48 PM

Brother_Jones :

It is all relative to your view of society which you have posted is just a bunch of people each capable of making their own autonomous choice about what to do next. We HAVE to forgive the little ones of their sins. And, we have a responsibility to help them to grow beyond where they have been planted. But, that's liberalism, isn't it? And that cannot be tolerated.

Just disagreeing with you is all that I can do. You say we have to forgive the little ones of their sins. I never had to that. I never felt that I could forgive anyone unless they harmed me personally. And then I never thought of them as a little one if they damaged me personally. I think you are advocating humanism more than liberalism. And humanism doesn't really define sin. I don't especially have any kind of hard feelings about humanism or humanists. They reject Christ as Savior and there really isn't anything anyone can say to such a person to cause the spirit of God to fill them if they decide Jesus was some kind of a hoax. Usually a fit moment or an unusual crisis in life reminds most folks that life is all about forgiveness and redemption. It's not like there are hundreds of gods out there to choose from. God has come to us in the form of a man, Jesus Christ.

Humanism certainly has a right to preach that society and culture is the basic building block of life, not God.

the oldtimer

Oct 11, 2007 5:13 PM

Pink :

.
Preaching to the choir again.
.
Or should I say, still?
.
heh heh heh
.
:)
.
Your kids in G.R. are being treated to the color show with the change of seasons here in Michigan. Soon to hit Illinois.
.
.

Oct 11, 2007 5:37 PM

Migisi :

.
Yes, of the four you offered, I'd lean towards #4.

Oct 11, 2007 6:13 PM

Migisi :

.
I feel like I'm whippin a dead horse here... But you have read what Lewis wrote. Right?
.
Neigh, neigh. I've read what YOU wrote.
.
Of course you do know that in Mark 3:21, even Jesus' family (or friends) said "He is out of his mind" (or "beside himself", "lost his senses", depending on the Bible version). And in John 7:5, it's written "For even his own brothers [or "brethren"] did not believe in him." In Mark 6, his own townspeople in Nazareth rejected him. His family, brothers, and townspeople were all folks who knew him well, even intimately. That says a lot to me.

51 Comments