Well, as I said in the other thread, I see a big difference between one scene–that we know of–and a Chick tract.
Both the Roman Catholic church and the Eastern Orthodox church accept the Nicene Creed; however, the Western church added the “filioque” clause (“and the son”), which the Eastern church considered heretical for some theological reasons (don’t ask me to explain- it seems very trivial to a liberal Christian as myself). Coptic Christians were represented at the Council of Nicea and hold, if I remember correctly, that their representatives were actually instrumental in writing the Nicene Creed (but I can be wrong about that).
I do not know of anyone who has fallen away from faith,most of the people I know that have left their belief system left because it no longer made sense to them. It isn’t weakness they just have a different mind set. Just as children no longer believe in Santa Clause. Some people convert to a faith because they feel they need something more in their life. No matter what faith one follows it came from a human sorce, as anything we read, learn,or are told. In a sense we have faith in a human that stated such as the word of God. For some it is helpful for others not.
Monavis
My working definition of a Christian: Someone who believes the following:
that a historical figure, Jesus of Nazareth was in fact, the Messiah of the Jewish people–not a Messiah, the Messiah, singular–& that this somehow means something to them, even as a Gentile, today.
[Edit]…that this somehow means something centrally important to them, even as a Gentile, today.[/Edit]
You have described one definition a Christian in name. What do you call a “Christian in name” that ignores and willfully violates His greatest commandments. (see post #78)
What do you call someone that does not fit your definition, yet follows His Holy Spirit?
r~
Exactly. The spectrum is pretty broad and varies from person to person. To some the term may have negative connotations in which Christian means judgemental hypocrite.
For others it is the love Jesus spoke of reflected in a persons actions. That’s more my definition. IMHO a Christian is only those who sincerely seek to transform their life through a dedication to what Christ taught. Church attendance and doctrine mean squat. If the living spirit isn’t in your heart and reflected in your actions then it’s just lip service.
You call him “Pat Robertson.”
While I am sure your definition of faith serves your purposes, it is not the only one, nor does it encompass what faith means to everyone. You use it as a synonym for belief, and even that is stretched to avoid implying understanding, or commitment to principle. Not everyone falls into you conveniently contemptible definition.
Tris
What is contemptible about letting people believe as they wish? Because they leave a Faith doesn’t make them weak. When one converts to your faith are they being weak? People believe what helps them to survive this life and I see nothing wrong in that as long as they do not bring harm to others.
I know, and have known people of many different faiths (and some atheists), they were and are kind and loving people, their particular failth has been a good thing for them, yet if they got to gether they would not agree.
And yes I agree there are many beliefs different than mine and if no one else believes the same it doesn’t bother me,we are all humans and I respect all humans. I do not try to tell someone who belives differently than me that they are sinners and need converting, as a matter of fact Jesus only critized the people who thought they were the perfect example of how one should live it’s faith. At least that is what the author of the New Testement quoted him as doing.
Monavis
Would a person who is an atheist but saw logic in most of the ten commandments and lived his life that way be a christian.
Of course not. For one thing, the ten commandments are from Jewish scripture. Jews live according to them…does this mean they are Christians, too?
yes
if they lived by them
This would be a contrdadiction in terms. Several of the commandments are explicit exhortations to specific theistic belief and/or practice (No gods before me, no graven images, don’t take the Lord’s name in vain, honor the sabbath). One cannot simultaneous be an atheist and live by those particular commandments.
Living by the other stuff (don’t murder, don’t steal, don’t cheat on your spouse, be decent to your parents, don’t covet other people’s stuff) is basic ethical behavior but most of it (except maybe the coveting) is so basic and near universally recognized as being fundamental components of moral behavior (meaning that most people perceive them as rules they’re supposed to follow even if they don’t always adhere to them), that I think it’s all but a useless way to define what is “Christian” as it really only excludes people who are real assholes, namely unrepetant murderers and thieves, and to a lesser degree, parent abusers and adulterers (or at least people who cause emotional harm to their spouses by cheating on them. I wouldn’t say that all extramarital sex is necessary harmful if it doesn’t involve deception or betrayal…of course, that’s now how Yahweh would see it, though).
I think you need a little more meat on a defintion of Christians rather than simply people who don’t kill or steal or chase after strange.
Everything Diogenes says here I agree with.
And…I don’t understand your answer to my question. How is it possible that Jews who believe in the 10 commandments are Christians? Are you saying that there is no fundamental difference between Jews & Christians? Or…what? I seriously do not understand your logic here.
The Ten Commandments, Roy Moore et al. to the contrary, are not the center of Christian ethical teaching. The latter is New Testament material, taught by Jesus and to a lesser extent by Paul.
The Ten Commandments were laws given the Israelites (–> Jews) as a part of Torah.
The point was, I think, intended to be ironic: if “following the Ten Commandments” is the core of being Christian, then therefore, automatically practicing Jews, who do, are therefore Christians by definition. (Notice the minor problem with regard to Jesus that this raises.)
Others have already approached the ten commandments issue. On another note, Jesus seriously expanded on the ten commandments. He spoke of an inner transformation not just superficial obedience. It’s not just don’t commit adultery. It’s don’t harbor lingering lust for your neighbors wife for then adultery is in your heart even if you never commit the act. If you hate your brother you have committed murder in your heart even if you refrain from the physical act.
So no, obeying the commandments is not enough. A superficial morality is not enough. Jesus wanted people ti begin to understand that they could be transformed from within and that’s where heaven really was.
I bear good news, you’ve got it backwards. Jesus did not expand sins, he reduced them. Fear not to wear garments of wool and cotton together. Savor the abominations of shellfish and pork. Enjoy meat and dairy together.
Jesus did not expand sins, he forgave them. It is not that sinning in the heart is as bad as the actual sin; it is that the actual sin is no worse than the thought.
What is more important than sin is how one treats fellow sinners. Does one hypocritically judge and persecute and deny another sinner, or does one love other sinners as self and treat them as equal; no matter the sin?
Heaven is found in loving and accepting your neighbors as equals. Heaven is found in helping others find their peace.
ItS
r~
Unfortunately, none of these claims actually appear as spoken by Jesus in Scripture. The closest you get would be the vision of Peter in Acts in which he is told to not call any of the creations of God “unclean,” (which as stated would permit the partaking of shellfish and pork but would have no change on the rules regarding wearing of blended fiber garments or eating meat together with dairy).