1. 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!

Conservative Heresies: What is a real Christian?

Discussion in 'Same Faith Debates' started by angellous_evangellous, Apr 13, 2006.

  1. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    I challenge anyone on RF to find a statement of mine that contains as much bile directed at another member. I will gladly remove or edit the post and publically and privately apologize.
     
  2. Squirt

    Squirt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,239
    Ratings:
    +158
    You're right. You know, I almost never quote from the Book of Mormon on this forum, but your comments got me to thinking about 3 Nephi 11:29, where the resurrected Christ says to the Nephites, "For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another." It's very discouraging to be told time and time again that we aren't "real" Christians, that the Savior we worship isn't the "genuine" Christ. So as not to give in to the "spirit of contention" that these accusations stir up in me, I have decided to put angellous_evangelous on ignore. I cannot read his posts without responding, and responding gets me nowhere. Thank you, Nutshell, for reminding me what I had temporarily forgotten.
     
  3. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    One wonders if there are any rules at all sometimes.
     
  4. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    There is an OP on this thread, and it does not mention Mormonism. This thread has been highjacked beyond all recognition, and has turned into an Angellous stoning session.

    Rock on!
     
  5. Scuba Pete

    Scuba Pete Le plongeur avec attitude...

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    16,472
    Ratings:
    +3,192
    Religion:
    Christian Taoist
    From www.Dictionary.com

    disciple
    a scholar, sometimes applied to the followers of John the Baptist (Matt. 9:14),
    and of the Pharisees (22:16), but principally to the followers of Christ. A
    disciple of Christ is one who (1) believes his doctrine, (2) rests on his
    sacrifice, (3) imbibes his spirit, and (4) imitates his example (Matt. 10:24;
    Luke 14:26, 27, 33; John 6:69).


    Disciple came from the latin for "pupil"
     
  6. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    scholar is listed first

    thanks, Netdoc
     
  7. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    36,930
    Ratings:
    +5,496
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    So, a disciple is someone who studies what his teacher teaches, and follows those tenets. I buy that. But it still doesn't address that the definition of "Christian" and "disciple" may be two separate things.
     
  8. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    From wiki "Christian"

    "A Christian is a follower of Jesus Christ. There are different interpretations of what exactly that entails, however. In any case, Christians by definition are a part of Christianity. Christians are monotheistic, meaning they follow only one God."

    That introduction seems imprecise because later in wiki...

    "Yet other Christian denominations require a formal commitment to become a member such as baptism in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, such as with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."
     
  9. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_denominations

    Non-mainstream Christianity

    While a precise definition of what constitutes mainstream Christianity is difficult at best, there are some groups that fall outside of what is popularly construed to be Christian groups, but share some manner of historical connection with the larger community of Christians.

    Considering this diversity, it may be impossible to define what Christianity is without either rejecting all definitions, or adopting a particular definition as authoritative and thus excluding others. In terms of the modern aim of scientific and objective definition, both options are considered problematic.

    Christianity, even in its infancy as a Jewish sect, rejected ethnic definition. It was conceived and grew as an international religion with global ambitions, spreading rapidly from Judea to nations and people all over the world. Doctrines, rather than ethnicity, define essential Christianity - even where ethnic groups have been Christian for generations. The multiplicity of communities of faith may be partly accounted for by the definition of Christianity according to specific points of indispensable doctrine, the denial of which sets the heretic, or apostate, outside of the "Church", where perhaps he is accepted by another "Church" holding doctrines compatible with his own.

    Points of distinctive doctrine may be a very small number of simple propositions, or very numerous and difficult to explain, depending on the group. Some groups are defined relatively statically, and others have changed their definitions dramatically over time. As an example, before the Enlightenment, Christian teachers who denied the doctrine of the Holy Trinity (a widely held doctrine about the nature of God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit formulated from New Testament passages in 325), would be cast out of their churches, and at times exiled or otherwise deprived of the protection of law. In later times, some points of the traditional doctrine of the Trinity are considered false doctrines according to groups such as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Iglesia ni Cristo, and the Jehovah's Witnesses (representing tens of millions of believers combined). For example, Latter-day Saints teach that God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are three distinct personages.

    Other movements coalesced to form today's Unitarian Universalism, whose member congregations recognize to varying degrees and in different ways their Christian origins. Unitarians and Universalist have historically been non-creedal and congregations have been self-governing, such that when the denominations consolidated in 1961, some congregations and individual Unitarian Universalists continued to identify themselves broadly as Christian, even more as "followers of Jesus."
     
  10. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    36,930
    Ratings:
    +5,496
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    I think what I'm getting at, is that there is a fundamental difference between being a follower and being a Christian. I think that some Christians do not follow the tenets set forth by Christ, and I think that some who follow those tenets would never call themselves "Christian."

    "Christian" denotes (at least in poopular usage) someone who adheres to a predetermined set of doctrines and aligns oneself with one or another of various communities or organizations. Therefore, when asked if someone is a "real" Christian, what is being asked is, in part, if the the person identifies with an organization that teaches "correct" or "acceptable" doctrine. This is like the old debate, "are Mormons "Christians?" To the Mormons, they are the only (real) Christians. To other groups, they are not. While we may agree that Mormons follow Christ, it has been argued that they are not Christians, because their doctrines are not traditional. (***I'm not saying that I agree with this assessment of Mormons...it's just an example.:))
     
  11. nutshell

    nutshell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    7,136
    Ratings:
    +669
    AE, you posted the following:

    emphasis added


    Then, you specifically select quotes from wikipedia that mention the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

    Seems like your contradicting yourself here. So when the LDS rush to this thread to defend themselves against your attacks, please don't try to tell us our posts have nothing to do with the OP - your posts and quotes about our faith are an open invitation.

    Good day,
    -nutshell
     
  12. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    This protest comes so late that it hardly has any meaning.

    I've been responding to LDS concerns. The thread has been highjacked. I had never intended to address LDS concerns at all in this thread. I just thought that I would share what I saw in wiki, being that the OP has been completely forgone.
     
  13. nutshell

    nutshell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    7,136
    Ratings:
    +669
    Interesting. It seemed to me you and sojourner were getting the thread back on topic when you choose to throw out the LDS church name again.
     
  14. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    I was pointing out an inconsistency in the wiki article on the definition of a Christian. It applies to both the OP and my discussion with sojourner. The mentioning of LDS is purely incidental.
     
  15. jaareshiah

    jaareshiah Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Messages:
    137
    Ratings:
    +4
    In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said: "Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it; whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.(Matt 7:13,14) Then later, Jesus said : "Exert yourselves vigorously to get in through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will seek to get in but will not be able".(Luke 13:24) Thus, to gain "life" under God's kingdom requires ' vigorous ' effort, with few willing to make the needed changes, to imitate ' perfectly ' Christ Jesus.(Matt 5:48)
    For example, Jesus again said that his followers or true Christians must be "no part of the world". Hence as a result of this, these would be "hated".(John 15:19) He reiterated this hours laters when before Pilate, after Pilate had asked him whether he was a king, saying:"My kingdom is no part of this world. If my kingdom were part of this world, my attendants would have fought that I should not be delivered up to the Jews. But, as it is, my kingdom is not from this source." (John 18:36) Thus true Christians do not involve themselves in this "world's" politics. The apostle Paul was inspired to write that "all those desiring to live with godly devotion in association with Christ Jesus will also be persecuted."(2 Tim 3:12)
    Too, Jesus said that "You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind.’ This is the greatest and first commandment. The second, like it, is this, ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’"(Matt 22:37-39) And the apostle Paul, in quoting from Joel 2:32, wrote that "everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved."(Rom 10:13) Thus, James wrote that "God for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name, his name being Jehovah.(Acts 15:14) Hence, a true Christian must love Jehovah God and be unashamed of that name, just as Jesus was.(John 17:6,26)
    These ones are taught at the "house of Jehovah" to have beaten their "their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."(Isaiah 2:2-4 American Standard Version) Hence, these would not participate in any wars, but have become "meek ones".(Matt 5:5)
    Furthermore, Paul, in writing to the Corinthians, told them that "Do not become unevenly yoked with unbelievers. For what fellowship do righteousness and lawlessness have? Or what sharing does light have with darkness? " Hence, one who wishes to become a true Christian must avoid any false religious teachings, such as Christmas, Easter, even the teachings of a person being burned in a hellfire or that the soul is immortal. A brief look will help some to understand why.
    At Jeremiah 7:31, the nation of Israel is condemned for their having burned "their sons and their daughters in the fire". Yet Jehovah God sternly tells them that "they have built the high places of To´pheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hin´nom, in order to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, a thing that I had not commanded and that had not come up into my heart." And again, at Jeremiah 32:35, the Bible account says that "they built the high places of Ba´al that are in the valley of the son of Hin´nom, in order to make their sons and their daughters pass through [the fire] to Mo´lech, a thing that I did not command them, neither did it come up into my heart to do this detestable thing, for the purpose of making Judah sin." Thus, how could God torment people in a "hellfire" when he had already condemned the nation for this practice, saying that it was "which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination." ?(American Standard Version) How could God call this an "abomination" and "sin" and yet torment people himself in "hellfire" ? This would be hypocritical. But because the Greek words Hades and ge´en·na have been mistranslated by many Bibles, many have come to believe that God torments wicked people in "hell". The apostle John wrote that "God is love".(1 John 4:8) No loving parent would ever torment their children, only abusive ones. Of the wicked, Jesus does say that these will be destroyed, not tormented.(Luke 13:1-5)
    Of the soul, the Bible says that it can be "cut off" or put to death, at Leviticus 7:20, saying: "But the soul that eateth of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings, that pertain unto the Lord, having his uncleanness upon him, even that soul shall be cut off from his people."(King James Bible) That it can eat, for verse 25 says that "For whosoever eateth the fat of the beast, of which men offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord, even the soul that eateth it shall be cut off from his people", that the soul can "be afflicted" at Leviticus 16:29, that God condemns it for "eating blood" at Leviticus 17:10 and 12, that the soul can touch something "unclean" and be "unclean" itself, at Leviticus 22:6, that it can be purchased, at Leviticus 22:11, that it works and can be destroyed, at Leviticus 23:30, that it can " pine away" at Leviticus 26:16, that animals are souls at Numbers 31:28, that it has a desire to eat at Deuteronomy 12:15 and 20, that the soul can crave for "oxen...sheep...wine" at Deuteronomy 14:26, that Joshua destroyed all the souls of Makkedah at Joshua 10:28, that it has blood at Jeremiah 2:34, that the soul can be destroyed, for the apostle Peter said: "that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people."(Acts 3:23 King James Bible) Furthermore, Genesis 2:7 says of Adam: "And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."(American Standard Version) Thus, Adam was not given a soul, but rather he became a "living soul" after God "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life".In addition, Ezekiel 18:4 says that "the soul that sinneth, it shall die." Hence, the soul is us, with all our feelings and desires, and eventually it dies.
    Of Christmas, it is very well known that it originated from pagan sources, coming for the worship of the Persian sun god Mithra, whom the Romans worshipped. Microsoft Encarta notes that "
    most scholars believe that Christmas originated in the 4th century as a Christian substitute for pagan celebrations of the winter solstice. The Roman Catholic Church chose December 25 as the day for the Feast of the Nativity in order to give Christian meaning to existing pagan rituals. For example, the Church replaced festivities honoring the birth of Mithra, the god of light, with festivities to commemorate the birth of Jesus, whom the Bible calls the light of the world. The Catholic Church hoped to draw pagans into its religion by allowing them to continue their revelry while simultaneously honoring the birthday of Jesus."
    Similiarly of Easter, for what does the rabbit and eggs have to do with the resurrection of Jesus ? Rather, it came from the worship of an ancient Phoenician fertility goddess called Astarte, who
    had as her symbols the egg and the hare. She had an insatiable thirst for blood and immoral sex. Too, at Luke 22:19, Jesus did not tell his disciples to observe his resurrection but rather the day of his death.
    Jesus also told his faithful disciples to "go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: (Matt 28:19,20 American Standard Version) Thus, those who follow in Jesus footsteps are to be "witnesses....to the most distant part of the earth".(Acts 1:8)
    These are a few of the necessary "requirements" to gain life under God's kingdom, whether in heaven or on the earth.
     
  16. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    One can only wonder where this was copied from.

    Welcome to RF.
     
  17. kevmicsmi

    kevmicsmi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    1,360
    Ratings:
    +180
  18. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    I think that you saw Maize cover anything that I would protest to on another thread.

    http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31083
     
  19. sandy whitelinger

    sandy whitelinger Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2005
    Messages:
    10,911
    Ratings:
    +955
    Religion:
    Narrow-minded Biblist
    I vote thumbs up for infantile behavior.
     
Loading...