I think those who follow what King taught by example would be called womanizers and adulterers. I could be wrong.
A person yes, a group makes it more complicated. We do seem compelled to form an organization, select leaders with titles and create rules. It’s down hill from there. See Christian history.
I think the term god can legitimately be used to refer to “primary motivation” as in though shalt have no other gods before me.
There are clubs that that “worship” all kinds of things.
For the purpose of this thread and discussion, the supernatural is fine by me.
Well this has been an intersting and entertaining thread.
You know the Pharisees wanted Jesus to stop what he was doing because they found it offensive. Are you saying “Stop saying what you believe to be true becuase I find it offensive”?
I thought the purpose of this thread was to consider different concepts of Christianity without getting offended because someone disagreed.
Frankly I’m offended by you being offended so please stop being offended because to me…thats offensive and somehow akin to physical assault. {wink wink nudge nudge}
RW was simply stateing that in his opinion that Christian has much more to do with the Spirit Christ spoke of than what the dictionary says. It’s a valid point and you don’t have to agree. He clearly understood your position which is also valid.
Some terms are not clearly defined to all. Instead of argueing and being offended I find it more useful to strive to understand what it means to the person I’m communicateing with even if I don’t agree.
AHmen my brother.
I have enjoyed your posts Thanks you. I hope these posts reflect who you are and what you are striveing for.
Imagine my disappointment if I discovered you were in reality a crack addicted sexual deviant with a internet squandered flair for words and spiritual understanding. ;} in the Spirit of All and Each Dan
OK, I think we Christians have to come clean on one thing, in front of the non-christians. It is an important matter of doctrine, although not a popular one.
When folks spew spiritual filth, and immediately afterwards claim to be Christians, we are allowed to disown the filth. Unhappily, we don’t get to do the same for the spewer himself. He’s ours. And we really aren’t suppose to point fingers at him, and castigate him for his sins (and chasing you away from Jesus is a sin). We have to forgive him, and try to love him, and I promise you, at times that is really tough.
Now, we don’t have to support or defend the filth, and should tend first to the spewees, to see if we can alleviate the harm done in our Savior’s name. But, in the end, the raving lunatic with the wild eyed expression and the foam around his lips is with me. Sorry about the stuff he says, and I don’t agree. As hard as it might be to believe it, We are both loved by the same God, and saved by the same love. So are you, but I should probably get back to you in less volatile company, and go over that part. Let’s make that a date.
I need to talk with my poison spreading brother now, but that has to be done privately. Perhaps with a metaphoric brick. Huh, oh, sorry, no brick. With love. [sub]love, darn it. I have to love him. No, no, I want to love him.[/sub]
We haven’t decided what Christian and non Christian are yet have we?
Now theres a term I’ve never heard before. PLease explain your definition of spiritual filth. To me it would be Jerry Falwell saying we should blow them all away in the name of the Lord or Jimmy Swaggert maikng jokes about killing homosexuals. Oh,…and his congregation applauding the joke. Thats filth too.
OK, perhaps a public confession would clear things up.
I really don’t want to love Phelps. I’m not all that keen on loving Fallwell. Jack Chick is not my choice of folks with whom to share the joy of Christian fellowship. I spend a bit of time seeking out the people that it seems to me those guys have hurt, and wish to drive away from my Lord. But the message of my Lord and Savior is not that He hates Phelps. The message of Christ is that God loves you. And He wants me to love Phelps, Fallwell, Chick, Bush, Khomeni, and every other raving hate monger in the history of man.
It’s tough stuff. Very hard to actually live. I fall short all the time. In this very forum I chose to rebuke someone in my Lord’s own name. It was presumption, hubris, and as much a sin for me as the action of that person was for him. And in the same paragraph, I have to say that it is as much my duty to the Lord to speak out against the message of Hate, in its own right, as well as hate in the Lord’s name, and do so boldly. Quite a narrow path, it turns out to be.
The good news is that the Lord knows well how narrow the path is. He knows us, and our strengths, and our weaknesses, and he loves us, warts and all. But he loves Phelps. Really loves him, in the same divine way He loves me. I weep every time I hear another person twisting the love of God into a badge, and the admonition to live as an expression of faith into a cudgel to beat others for their transgressions. But the answer is to love; not to take my own turn to feel superior.
[QUOTE=Triskadecamus]
OK, perhaps a public confession would clear things up.
.
Agreed
Before you rebuked him, when was he intially buked ? ;}
again I agree, If God is the well from which all love is drawn then celibrate and offer gratitude for love where we experience it. There is no such thing as Christian love that is different from Buddhist love that is different from Muslim love.
The same principle applies to hatred. Bitterness, spitefulness. etc.
that is quite a temptation, especially on this forum.
You still didn’t answer my question though. I wouldn’t consider someone having different beliefs spiritual filth. such as
I don’t believe Jesus was not divine, or Jesus didn’t rise from the dead.
I’ll look for said rebuking and see if that helps.
Would you be so kind as to reference my post #153 above? The term has meaning, though as RW has been stressing, it should not be used to exclude, to quench the Spirit in others. But that meaning incorporates an actual intent. That’s part of the reason I brought up the Parable of the Two Sons: for Jesus Himself, whom one would have to concede to have some authority over what it means to be a Christian, those who do His will are His true followers, not merely those who claim the name.
I agree, and appreciated your useing that scripture. For the sake of this discussion though there are many who claim to be Christians and are widely recognized as such but do NOT do Christs will.
I am content to let Christ have the final authority but for the sake of arguement,
To what degree are we requried to do his will.
Is being nice enough? IS being nice while declareing him Lord enough?
I was going to stay out of this thread, since it’s not a matter I’m too concerned with nor anything with which I might intelligently contribute.
However, RWJefferson said this:
Sorry, RWJefferson but that’s not true. I’m not a Christian nor do I aspire to be on. I left Christianity many years ago and have never looked back. Tho your comment was not specifically directed at me, I don’t appreciate being labeled or assumed to be Christian. I find many things wrong with Christian theology, which is why I don’t practice it. Perhaps one of the worst is the attitude that many Christians have, that Christianity is the right religion and non-Christians will eventually come around.
The second worse is this idea that everyone is a “sinner.” Sorry, I’m not a sinner. Oh, I’m not calling myself perfect or infalliable. I have as many faults and foibiles as the next person. But I’m not some pathetic creature that needs to beg for forgiveness for simply being what it is: human. I think this is an incredibly skewed view of human nature and has done more harm than good in the long run.
As for the main question in this thread, here’s my take, as an outsider looking in:
Christian: a personal who sincerely tries to follow the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. I tihink all too many people get hung up over what are his teachings, what did he advocate, that they lose track of the basic definition.
By definition, if someone is a member of any religion doesn’t that mean that they think that that is the right religion?
If they think that their religion is not the right religion, why would they follow it?
Also, I don’t understand people who are not Christians (and thus reject Christian cosmotheory) who get offended when a Christian makes a statement about them (which is based on Christian cosmotheory) that they disagree with.
When I was in college, someone wrote to the college newspaper complaining that the Catholics on campus were telling people that if you’re not Catholic you’re going to hell.
This person was not Catholic and get very offended why someone would claim that they were going to hell.
To me, that was illogical.
If you don’t believe in the Catholic cosmotheory, then whatever they say should be inconsequencial, since you think they’re wrong.
If you think they’re right, then become a Catholic.
Of course, if Catholics had positions of power and affected your daily life based on their beliefs, then yes, that is something to get upset about. But if a Catholic simply believes, based on the cosmotheory he has accepted as correct, that you are going to hell, I don’t see what there is to get upset about.
If some loony tells me that, based on his loony theory, I’m going to a place he calls hell, what do I care?
Similarly, if this loony tells me that, despite me rejecting his theory, I am really a follower of his “religion”, I would just say “yeah, whatever”. Why get upset about it?
It IS a true statement because RW qualified it bt saying “By MY definition”
It is also true that you don’t agree with his definition.
I was a Christian years ago but choose not to call myself one now and agree with most of your objections about Christianity. We are all flawed in our own unique way.
Who’s to say if the flaws of Christians are better or worse than ours.
I understand what RW is saying. He associates the word Christian with the Spirit and what Jesus taught. Love and truth. Our common bond through our creator. In that sense anyone who sincerely seeks the Spirit, love and truth might be considered a Christian. Especially if you consider the words of Jesus mentioned above.
I understand not wanting to be associated with some of the things practiced by contemporary Christianity. Thats why I choose not to be called Christian. If someone calls me Christian because they think I’m striveing to live up to Jesus’ teachings I don’t mind.
It was beyond illogical; it was false. It has been over 50 years since any loose cannon Catholics even tried to make that claim (and the Church excommunicated them for their efforts).
Didn’t we say in a previous post that Jesus has the final word and he has asked that you guys quit judging each other? Well, you’re judging. If Jesus has the final word, then anyone who says they’re a christian, is a christian as far as mortals are concerned.
Uh…ok. I have a serious question. Why would you give up the good sensibilities you have and “love” (whatever THAT means) someone as reprehensible as Phelps? Why would you worship something that WANTS you to love that insane fuck?
Now, I’m not saying anyone should go out and KILL the asshole, but I do not understand someone who thinks that to disagree with and dislike this prick would *necessarily * be akin to feeling superior to him. Just accept his right to be an asshole. There is nothing to be gained, either personally or for the good of mankind, to proclaim your love for him.
Incidently…in my opinion, and from what little I know about you, you ARE better than him. Nothing wrong with that. You’re not more worthy to live than he is…but you are better.
First, snarky question:
Who says there aren’t any pharisees of the Sprit? (And trust me, I’ve met some. They’re scary folks.)
Second, a serious attempt to explain my take on the subject:
It’s kind of like being married. Some people say that All You Need is Love (cue music), some people say what matters is the commitment ('cause, admit it, emotions are a fickle thing), some people say what matters is the right rituals, and some say it’s nothing more than a piece of paper from the proper spiritual/political authorities.
Third, on the loving other people (yes, even jerkwads like Falwell):
Because, no matter how nice or decent or moral we are on the outside, we all have the potential (if not the actual reality) of devilishness. But God, being the nice guy that He is, loves us anyway. How could we, being saved by that Love, do any less?
(Confession time: Ain’t an easy thing for me, either. I have a general predilection for hating people - I’m not the social type by nature and I can hold a grudge for years and years.
Fortunately, God says to love my neighbor as myself, and since I don’t have the world’s highest self esteem…wait, you mean I can’t cop out like that, either? Drat. )
I think it’s about as logical to presume that my religion is right for other people as it is to presume that those other people all want to marry my husband.
)