Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
Ronald, I think you add another vowel every time I see you type Jesus 'real' name.
Why are you positive?
-
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!
who are the Christians?
- Thread starter Corban
- Start date
Because I have been shown the correct way. I know this as well as I know God exists and I exist. It has been proven time and time again to me through the experiences I've had. This is the standard answer, and I already know your standard response (so spare it), but I have yet to see another step up and say their way has also proven to be the correct way. The only people who speak up here are the ones who don't even believe in God. Everyone else COULD say the same thing about their religion, but no one else does. They seem to be intimidated by your flimsy atheist conviction. Either way, I'm the only one saying my way is the only way.
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
Dan, this is a hump which is acting as a bit of a brick wall to the conversation. You really should consider sharing your experiences.
I wonder why...
Considering that you won't even speak of these little 'experiences' suggests the same thing for you. Why do you call my conviction flimsy?
I've told you before I can't really encapsulate these kinds of experiences in the human language. It's actually a very common situation. Maybe I've asked you this before; but can you tell me what salt tastes like? Pretend I've never tasted it before and describe the taste to me.
It has been proven time and time again to me through the experiences I've had.
And you refuse to explain those experiences, how convenient.
So, how are we to comprehend your experiences without knowing anything about them?
We can only come to the conclusion that your experiences had nothing to do with gods and were merely the result of your imagination running wild coupled with your inability to discern reality from fantasy.
No other logical conclusion is apparent.
And you refuse to explain those experiences, how convenient.
So, how are we to comprehend your experiences without knowing anything about them?
We can only come to the conclusion that your experiences had nothing to do with gods and were merely the result of your imagination running wild coupled with your inability to discern reality from fantasy.
No other logical conclusion is apparent.
I've told you before I can't really encapsulate these kinds of experiences in the human language.
Yet you are perfectly willing to accept these experiences as proof beyond a shadow of doubt that gods spoke to you. If they spoke to you, what did they say? IF they didn't speak to you, then don't say they spoke to you. Tell us your experience was a warm feeling of joy or something along those lines. But don't try and feed us a line that gods spoke to you if there are no words to convey.
It only makes you look the fool.
Yet you are perfectly willing to accept these experiences as proof beyond a shadow of doubt that gods spoke to you. If they spoke to you, what did they say? IF they didn't speak to you, then don't say they spoke to you. Tell us your experience was a warm feeling of joy or something along those lines. But don't try and feed us a line that gods spoke to you if there are no words to convey.
It only makes you look the fool.
Well, as we've seen before, there are many opinionated people here. So I decided to make a topic dedicated to just religion. I would like to start off this topic, which I presume will sooner or later turn into a debate, with a term that now a days is used in a very loose sense by a great amount of individuals: Christian. Some people mean no more by it than a person who attempts to live a good life. In that sense I suppose there would be Christians in all sects and creeds; but I do not think that that is the proper sense of the word, if only because it would imply that all the people who are not Christians all the Buddhists, Confucians, Mohammedans, and so on- are not trying to live a good life. I do not mean by a Christian any person who tries to live decently according to his lights. I think that you must have a certain amount of definite belief before you have a right to call yourself a Christian. The word though doesnt have quite such a full-blooded meaning now as it had in the times of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. In those days, if a man said that he was a Christian it was known what he meant. You accepted a whole collection of creeds which were set out with great precision, and every single syllable of these creeds you believed with the whole strength of your convictions.
Nowadays we are more vague in out meaning of Christianity. There are two items that are essential to anybody calling himself a Christian.
a) You must believe in God and immortality
b) You must believe that Christ was, if not divine, the best and wisest of man.
Therefore I take it that when I tell you why I am not a Christian I have to tell you two different things: first, why I do not believe in God and in immortality; and, secondly, why I do not think that Christ was the best and wises of man, although I grant him a very high degree of moral goodness.
As I said before, in olden days it Christianity had a much more full-blooded sense. For instance, it included the belief in hell. Belief in eternal hell-fire was an essential item of Christian belief until pretty recent times. In England, it ceased to be an essential item because of a decision of the Privy Council and from that decision the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of York dissented, but in England our religion is settled by Act of parliament, and therefore the Privy council was able to override their Graces and hell was no longer necessary to a Christian. Consequently I shall not insist that a Christian must believe in hell.
Now my question is, are you a Christian, if so, why?
Nowadays we are more vague in out meaning of Christianity. There are two items that are essential to anybody calling himself a Christian.
a) You must believe in God and immortality
b) You must believe that Christ was, if not divine, the best and wisest of man.
Therefore I take it that when I tell you why I am not a Christian I have to tell you two different things: first, why I do not believe in God and in immortality; and, secondly, why I do not think that Christ was the best and wises of man, although I grant him a very high degree of moral goodness.
As I said before, in olden days it Christianity had a much more full-blooded sense. For instance, it included the belief in hell. Belief in eternal hell-fire was an essential item of Christian belief until pretty recent times. In England, it ceased to be an essential item because of a decision of the Privy Council and from that decision the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of York dissented, but in England our religion is settled by Act of parliament, and therefore the Privy council was able to override their Graces and hell was no longer necessary to a Christian. Consequently I shall not insist that a Christian must believe in hell.
Now my question is, are you a Christian, if so, why?
Corban
Member
i appreciate all your amusing banterings, but try and stay on topic. The purpose of this thread is not to prove the existance of God, it is not even to question that existence in the positive or negative.
The question i have been trying to get at and which has only beed moderately discussed, is what is a christian? many people have commented and said it is someone who believes in Christ, but that leads to the essence of my question, who then is Christ? if all these different groups believe very different things, they can not belive in the same being, therefore they can not all be Christians. I want poeple to take a stand in whatever it is they believe, wether athiesm, Lutheranism, Islam, whatever just take a stand and accept that if your a Catholic you don't share the beliefs of a Baptist, and if your a Baptist you of necessity think other churches are false. I hate when people group all these denominations and call them all Christian, there can not be more than one group, that is truly Christian.
The question i have been trying to get at and which has only beed moderately discussed, is what is a christian? many people have commented and said it is someone who believes in Christ, but that leads to the essence of my question, who then is Christ? if all these different groups believe very different things, they can not belive in the same being, therefore they can not all be Christians. I want poeple to take a stand in whatever it is they believe, wether athiesm, Lutheranism, Islam, whatever just take a stand and accept that if your a Catholic you don't share the beliefs of a Baptist, and if your a Baptist you of necessity think other churches are false. I hate when people group all these denominations and call them all Christian, there can not be more than one group, that is truly Christian.
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
Christ is Jesus.
Says who? There are hundreds of interpretations of the bible, likewise there are hundreds of different sects of Christianity. They all worship the same 'being', just by different sets of rules.
People already do this. Baptists act like their own little religion as it is. Catholics don't have all the same beliefs that Baptists do, but both sects believe Jesus was the son of god, and believe the bible was divinely inspired, so they are both Christian.
Corban
Member
"Says who? There are hundreds of interpretations of the bible, likewise there are hundreds of different sects of Christianity. They all worship the same 'being', just by different sets of rules." -Cerdiwen018
Think about what you just said, if they have their own interpretations about Christ, they can not believe in the same being because Christ does not change and 2 peter tells us that no prophecy of the scriptures is of any private interpretation, so their can be only one true interpretation, any others are false and they therefore worship a false Christ. It's the same as if I worship my dog and call him Christ, I would be just as much a Christian as these people who have false beliefs, by your definition, and i do not accept that.
Think about what you just said, if they have their own interpretations about Christ, they can not believe in the same being because Christ does not change and 2 peter tells us that no prophecy of the scriptures is of any private interpretation, so their can be only one true interpretation, any others are false and they therefore worship a false Christ. It's the same as if I worship my dog and call him Christ, I would be just as much a Christian as these people who have false beliefs, by your definition, and i do not accept that.
Corban
Member
(Q) said:
then if i worhsip my dog and call him a Christ, i am therefore a Christian. My point is to make the distinction that false beliefs about Christ mean you worship a false Christ, and should not be called a Christian.
If i worship my shoe and call it budha, am i a budhist, of course not, i've only created my own relgion, which is a ******* religion of the original and i should not be associated with the original
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
I can agree with that. What does it matter to others what someone calls himself?(Q) said:
Corban - look at my profile - I have just proclaimed myself a Christian. I will attend a Christian church this Sunday and tell everyone there I am a devout Christian.
Will they accept me with open arms into their flock?
Most likely in a heartbeat, especially if I pull out my checkbook.
Will they accept me with open arms into their flock?
Most likely in a heartbeat, especially if I pull out my checkbook.
then if i worhsip my dog and call him a Christ, i am therefore a Christian.
No, you are therefore a lunatic.
If i worship my shoe and call it budha, am i a budhist
No, you merely have a foot fetish.
i've only created my own relgion, which is a ******* religion of the original and i should not be associated with the original
Unfortunately, there are far too many interpretations of the original. In fact, each person will have their own individual interpretation. A single version (ie. YOUR version) cannot be deemed the correct version, yet all and none will be the correct versions.
It's quite the conundrum.
No, you are therefore a lunatic.
If i worship my shoe and call it budha, am i a budhist
No, you merely have a foot fetish.
i've only created my own relgion, which is a ******* religion of the original and i should not be associated with the original
Unfortunately, there are far too many interpretations of the original. In fact, each person will have their own individual interpretation. A single version (ie. YOUR version) cannot be deemed the correct version, yet all and none will be the correct versions.
It's quite the conundrum.
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
Oh my god, (Q), you have GOT to keep your religion labeled 'Christian'. That is too funny!
Perhaps, but you see, the problem here is that no one knows what the one and only true interpretation is. Until we do, all interpretations must be accepted as potentially correct, and therefore on equal footing. Let me guess though--I'll bet YOU have the correct interpretation, don't you, you little sneaky thing! Well come on then, let's hear it! Quit holding out on us!
Corban
Member
(Q) said:Corban - look at my profile - I have just proclaimed myself a Christian. I will attend a Christian church this Sunday and tell everyone there I am a devout Christian.
Will they accept me with open arms into their flock?
Most likely in a heartbeat, especially if I pull out my checkbook.
yes they will accept you, but that's the problem, who is the they, like i said i can worship my dog and call myself a Christian. Someone like you who doesn't believe in Christ can indeed call themself a Christian, and many people with false beliefs do take the name Christian and that's the essence of my question.