Redemptionsong
Well-Known Member
Psalm 27:1. 'The LORD is my light and my salvation'.
It's not our light that shines, but the light of the LORD that shines from within us!
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What is an authentic Christian?
- Thread starter F1fan
- Start date
It's not our light that shines, but the light of the LORD that shines from within us!
Kelly of the Phoenix
Well-Known Member
Not what Jesus said.
Redemptionsong
Well-Known Member
1 Corinthians 10:4. 'And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ'.
Redemptionsong
Well-Known Member
It's what Jesus meant. We know this by comparing passages of scripture.
Redemptionsong
Well-Known Member
Not so. Jesus came to die, and he died.
Scripture says, 'Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good'. [Romans 12:21]
Redemptionsong
Well-Known Member
Why, then, did he write nothing about himself?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Even though they may not have even been exposed to the Gospel? Are they likely to be condemned, iyo?
ppp
Well-Known Member
Do you understand what rational means?
Same reason as I have to believe that they wrote it without a revelation from pixes or air elementals or tulpa.
Don't care.
Don't care.
Nope.
InChrist
Free4ever
No, they are serving themselves and they twist and use God’s word for their self-interest. No where do the scriptures support exalting self over others or any such actions. If you think so, then you have believed the lies of blasphemers and don’t know the Bible.
Redemptionsong
Well-Known Member
Yes, l believe so. Condemnation (referring to death) has come upon all humanity and l cannot find any scripture to suggest that there is eternal life except through Christ.
Why would there be a need to preach the gospel if eternal life was gained by other means?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Would they go to hell, iyo?
But let me add that if belief in Jesus was so essential to salvation, then what about all the people who live prior to 30 c.e. or those who lived in other locales who would not even have a clue who Jesus was? Why would God supposedly not care about them?
Redemptionsong
Well-Known Member
We know from Hebrews 11 that there were men of faith throughout the OT. These men were justified by their faith, meaning that righteousness was accounted to them for their faithfulness. And it was God, as the Word, that accounted righteousness to them for their faith.
This must mean that Christ is the righteousness of God, and the righteousness of God is the Spirit of Christ.
When we come to the NT, the righteousness of God dwells amongst men and comes to be within men (as Holy Spirit) through faith in Jesus Christ.
If a person does not get to hear of the promises made in Jesus Christ, then they must live as those who existed before the birth of Jesus. They are, once again, justified by their faith in God which they know only through law or conscience.
As l see it, the advantage of having Christ appear as a man is that we are given the opportunity to know God 'face to face'.
If a man lives by faith in God, and dies without knowing about Jesus, then judgment will determine whether his heart accepts the righteousness of God. In other words, a person cannot deny Christ and claim to accept the righteousness of God.
Last edited:
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I agree with the above, but the question I'd have is what exactly entails denying Christ? Jesus said: "I came to serve, not to be served", thus I tend to think that to "deny Christ" may pertain to rejecting the "law of love" regardless as to one's religious affiliation. IOW, "It's the message".
After he was crucified, obviously and understandably many of his followers basically deified him, which I don't do. But then, I also well know what we read in the scriptures by & large cannot be verified nor objectively denied.
Thus, if one in any faith, possibly including atheists and agnostics, are doing the right thing by living that basic teaching, who am I to judge them negatively? I don't know if that's correct, but I lean in that direction.
BTW, I don't judge anyone on which denomination or religion they may or may not believe in, nor do I disdain in any way atheists or agnostics that live in a humane way.
Take care.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe then, the definition of a Christian does not fit the fallacy because it is not a false definition but a real one.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I don't believe you understand what is just.
Muffled
Jesus in me
Possibly. I believe the definition of sin for a Christian depends on what the Holy Spirit says it is and not everyone has the Holy Spirit so that can vary. So the bottom line is that authentic Christians may have different ideas of what is sin depending on how well they hear the Holy Spirit.
Redemptionsong
Well-Known Member
As l see it, the problem for many people is distinguishing between the righteousness of man and the righteousness of God [see Romans 10:1-4]. The righteousness of God is only available through Christ because only he conquered sin (making resurrection to eternal life possible). Can any other person make this claim to sinlessness?
Good to talk, and to ponder these important questions!
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I don't believe he was, but I don't claim he wasn't. I tend to think the belief that he was sinless is based on hyperbole, somewhat similar to what we saw right after Gandhi was assassinated.
Ditto back at ya, and enjoy the rest of the weekend.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Here's some verses that have been the reason why some Christians handle snakes and drink poison.
Mark 16 [The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have verses 9–20.]
9 When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. 10 She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping. 11 When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it.
12 Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country. 13 These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.
14 Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.
15 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”
19 After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. 20 Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.
Here's an article about the snake handling Christians...9 When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. 10 She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping. 11 When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it.
12 Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country. 13 These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.
14 Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.
15 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”
19 After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. 20 Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.
The recent death of a Christian minister from West Virginia who believed that the Bible instructs the faithful to handle snakes and drink poison has put into question a doctrine many believe is unbiblical and dangerous but that its adherents, biblical literalists, say they are compelled to obey.
To outsiders, mainstream Christians included, snake handling seems foolhardy at best and deadly at worst. And despite commending their desire to be obedient to Scripture, Christians have argued that snake handlers are wrong to take Jesus' words in Mark 16:17-18 literally...
Mark Randall "Mack" Wolford, pastor of House of the Lord Jesus in Matoaka, was passionate about handling snakes during worship services and, according to what the Pentecostal leader told The Washington Post last year, might have drunk two gallons of strychnine – a strong poison commonly used as pesticide to kill rats. If not strychnine, some snake-handling churches keep a flask of carbolic acid at the altar instead.
Wolford, 44, died May 27, about eight hours after being bitten by one of his poisonous yellow timber rattlesnakes during an outdoor Sunday service at a wildlife park about 60 miles from the House of the Lord Jesus church, where his funeral was held this past Saturday.
Despite his agonizing death – Wolford had refused medical help, choosing to battle the venomous attack from home as he had done many times before – and the similar death of his serpent-handling father nearly 30 years ago, Wolford's mother indicated to The Washington Post that her faith had not been shaken.
"It's still the Word, and I want to go on doing what the Word says," Vicie Hicks Haywood told the publication days after witnessing her son's death.
The "word" that Haywood and dozens of other small Signs Following Holiness congregations primarily in Appalachian states stand on is found in the King James Version of Mark 16:17-18.
Jesus, instructing his disciples to preach the Good News to the world, tells them what signs will accompany those who believe: "... In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."
A belief in divine power and healing, including speaking in tongues, or unknown or foreign languages, is not uncommon to Christians. But the Signs Following community is unique when it comes to an interpretation of this passage in Mark, which some scholars doubt was included in the original Gospel account.
In the article it also quoted a pastor saying...Mark Randall "Mack" Wolford, pastor of House of the Lord Jesus in Matoaka, was passionate about handling snakes during worship services and, according to what the Pentecostal leader told The Washington Post last year, might have drunk two gallons of strychnine – a strong poison commonly used as pesticide to kill rats. If not strychnine, some snake-handling churches keep a flask of carbolic acid at the altar instead.
Wolford, 44, died May 27, about eight hours after being bitten by one of his poisonous yellow timber rattlesnakes during an outdoor Sunday service at a wildlife park about 60 miles from the House of the Lord Jesus church, where his funeral was held this past Saturday.
Despite his agonizing death – Wolford had refused medical help, choosing to battle the venomous attack from home as he had done many times before – and the similar death of his serpent-handling father nearly 30 years ago, Wolford's mother indicated to The Washington Post that her faith had not been shaken.
"It's still the Word, and I want to go on doing what the Word says," Vicie Hicks Haywood told the publication days after witnessing her son's death.
The "word" that Haywood and dozens of other small Signs Following Holiness congregations primarily in Appalachian states stand on is found in the King James Version of Mark 16:17-18.
Jesus, instructing his disciples to preach the Good News to the world, tells them what signs will accompany those who believe: "... In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."
A belief in divine power and healing, including speaking in tongues, or unknown or foreign languages, is not uncommon to Christians. But the Signs Following community is unique when it comes to an interpretation of this passage in Mark, which some scholars doubt was included in the original Gospel account.
Greg Laurie, senior pastor of Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside, Calif., suggested in a Facebook response to a reader doubtful that God "would agree with this practice," that the passage in Mark is to be interpreted spiritually and not literally...
Now that is interesting. So, we have a passage that is questionable about its authenticity. But the rest of what Mark and the other gospel writers wrote is unquestionably true? But if these verses are true, they shouldn't be taken literally? And why is that? Could it be because it doesn't make sense and would be stupid to follow what it says? But the rest of the NT does make sense and should be believed and followed without any doubt?
So, who are the more "authentic" Christians? The ones that take everything absolutely literally? Or the ones that use their brains and get a more reasoned interpretation of the things written in the gospels? I think there are some Christians who will say the "authentic" ones are the ones that believe like they do.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Are some healings the "figment" of the person's imagination? Or even faked? Are some who claim to be Christian healers, frauds? Are some Catholics healed? Are some Mormons healed? How about JW's? Or what about non-Christians? Are Hindus healed? Or Muslims? Or what about religions thought by some to be cults? Like Scientologists... Do some of them get healed? If any of these other people that have contradictory beliefs as yours get healed, then was it God and the Holy Spirit doing it?
I would hope that your Christian beliefs are true and real. And that it was God and the Holy Spirit that healed you, but what about the healings, and I would suspect there are some, in these other religions? Since it wasn't the God you believe in, but a belief in a different God, then what? Was it a figment of their imagination? Is their belief in their religion just a figment of their imagination? I think some Christians do think that way... That the beliefs are false, and the people have been duped into believing.
Then it gets down to Christian versus Christian. Some have fallen for false doctrines, and some, the "authentic" Christians have the true beliefs.... and of course, live by them. Sorry, but religious beliefs, even yours, and religious experiences are just too easily faked... And some people are just too easily fooled. And, of course, it's not you, but it's always the other people that are the ones being fooled.