What is a Christian?

[Zerbie]

'Bout time I asked. :p What makes the definition of Christian? What are the criteria?

(Why am I certain that this is one of the questions with innumerable answers? My husband told me that some people have different definitions for what *is* and is not Christian. Can anyone clarify what the basic defining points *might* be?)

[jewelsangel]

Very good question, Zerbie. I often wonder myself as a so-called Christian. I think for me, it is somebody who believes in Christ and that he died for the sins of all mankind. Plain as that. One of the pastors of my past taught us one Sunday that it was actually first used as a derogatory term for people who followed Christ when He still walked the earth. Christians include Catholics, though I've heard that Catholics don't believe any of the Protestants are actually Christian.

[jewelsangel]

Very well said! I don't think I have every seen a better definition than that.

[jewelsangel]

I didn't know that either. We are deluded? Interesting. My sister is Catholic now. I should get a sense of what she thinks.

[Zerbie]

I shudder at your mower analogy more than you can possibly know, Dave.

No,:( I did not post this to open a wormcan, tho I understand that potential. I posted it as a wide-eyed question because I don't know, and sincerely want to.

I am going to have to go thru your long sentence point for point to see what I glean from it.

Thank you both.

[Zerbie]

Okay. Define: "son of the Living God"

By which I mean, define son, and define Living God.

[nmwolfboy]

A Christian is someone who believes that Jesus of Nazareth was the totally divine and totally human son of the Living God who, by his teachings, by his love, by his self-sacrificial death, and by his victory over death, revealed the true essential nature of God (as the fount of all goodness and love) and thereby reconciled humanity to God in spite of all that humanity does to seperate itself from the love which is God.

U-dog, i don't think i've ever heard a better definition.

Zerbie, a very similar discussion is occurring on another lgbt Christian board which i read and on which i occasionally post. No one has posted as good a response as U-dog has here.

As to your question about "son of the Living God" i agree with U-dog's explanation. In addition to the reference being metaphorical, i'd also add that the phrase denotes a relational connection to God. When the doctrine of the Trinity comes up, it can often be a lawn-mower moment. :eek: (especially among Christians)

Another way to look at the doctrine of the Trinity (other than the traditional Father, Son, Holy Ghost) is: Speaker, Word, Breath. Or Creator, Redeemer, Comforter (no, not like a duvet!) All these different metaphors enrich this particular doctrine for me.

When the subject of 'what/who is a Christian' arises (especially on that other discussion board) i find that frequently people want there to be one, definite answer to your thread-starting question. The point i usually try to make is that Christianity is not and has never been homogeneous or monolithic in how the faith is defined. From the earliest days of the church catholic, there have been differing opinions, viewpoints, and doctrines. And that remains true today. What it means to 'be a Christian' is always going to have a range of differing opinions.

Bottom line for me is not what people profess to believe, but how they represent Christ in their relationships with themselves and others.

Pax, :dove:
scott

[Zerbie]

A Christian is someone who believes that Jesus of Nazareth was the totally divine and totally human son of the Living God who, by his teachings, by his love, by his self-sacrificial death, and by his victory over death, revealed the true essential nature of God (as the fount of all goodness and love) and thereby reconciled humanity to God in spite of all that humanity does to seperate itself from the love which is God.
.

What does "reconciled humanity to God" mean? Was there an argument?


U-dog, i don't think i've ever heard a better definition.

Then why am I still unclear on what it means? :confused:

Not dissing U-dog, but I guess I really want to find one defining answer so that I know what we're talking about. If there isn't one, then how do you know if someone is christian or not, or I guess you never know, then do you?



Zerbie, a very similar discussion is occurring on another lgbt Christian board which i read and on which i occasionally post. No one has posted as good a response as U-dog has here.
:D
We got a good 'un. :love:



When the subject of 'what/who is a Christian' arises (especially on that other discussion board) i find that frequently people want there to be one, definite answer to your thread-starting question. The point i usually try to make is that Christianity is not and has never been homogeneous or monolithic in how the faith is defined. From the earliest days of the church catholic, there have been differing opinions, viewpoints, and doctrines. And that remains true today. What it means to 'be a Christian' is always going to have a range of differing opinions.

So how do you know if someone qualifies or not?


Bottom line for me is not what people profess to believe, but how they represent Christ in their relationships with themselves and others.

Pax, :dove:
scott

So, what are the deal-breakers? (The question is for everyone, not just Scott.)

[scott snedeker]

A Christian is someone who believes that Jesus of Nazareth was the totally divine and totally human son of the Living God who, by his teachings, by his love, by his self-sacrificial death, and by his victory over death, revealed the true essential nature of God (as the fount of all goodness and love) and thereby reconciled humanity to God in spite of all that humanity does to seperate itself from the love which is God.

So? what do you all think? What is a Christian in ONE (very long but grammatically correct) sentence.



U-Dog!

You articulate an Interesting and soul-warming definition. If I may I would like to examine one of its components:

The metaphysical belief:

"....someone who believes that Jesus of Nazareth was the totally divine..."

I have seen many folks who maintain that this is the only Requirement to defining themselves as a christian. And by not having this metaphysical belief are damned. That nothing else is required. Other conditions and rules are perhaps recommeded but not required.

I see many who use this as a license to do some very un-Christ like things with total immunity to any accountability of abuse and predation because of the "divine privilege afforded over lesser humans" that comes with this metaphysical belief.


It is implying that even though one believes the spiritual energy which connects all living things is love, disagreement with another human's metaphysical construct damns one to hell or nonsentience.

It is this implied non-conformity to this metaphysical belief clause and its consequences that I have no doubt coerces millions by fear.

I believe that a spiritual paradigm that employs fear is flawed and cultivates disconnection from lovingkindess to all living things.

Believing Christ was divine is beautiful and empowering and definitely connects the conscious self to lovingkindess which is the label you and many others call God.

Believing and teaching that lack of this belief damns one to hell and insentience seems completely off the mark to me, And by including this in the definition gives the term "Christian" a frightful taint of fear and hate. A taint that I doubt Christ would sanction in his message and would gently compassionately correct as a misunderstanding.

In other words I believe that Christ is not the only gifted being to understand that the connection of conscious self to lovingkindness to all living things. And that through forgiveness we become free from suffering and therby allow us to let in, and grow..... peace, love, and the joy to be alive.

[Zerbie]

Zerbie- I think believe is secondary, and even quite unnecessary. I guess that means you won't find me reciting the Apostles Creed. But then again, Jesus didn't write that. The Creed was, as I understand it, an effort to establish power and control over the Christian body as it existed at the time the Creed was formulated. In reductionist terms, it was written to affirm certain things in the wake of what where considered heretical views.

Ok.. Call me a heretic!

What do I think? I think your question can be answered simply.

Being a Christian means following the teachings of Christ. And what is the teaching of all teachings?

To love your neighbor as yourself. Sounds very Buddhistic to me. Same deal. One finds compassion for others by first finding compassion for one's self. It all goes back to the heart.

Loving yourself and your neighbor is something you do, not something you believe.

All the other stuff is window dressing for the ego. Nice to have, but not necessary when push comes to shove.

:love::love::love: This must be why people always say to me "Oh, I see, you're Buddhist." Despite I've never learned what Buddhism is.

Brilliant Daniel. I love it.
Of course, your definition makes a lot of non-christians christian.
I guess the words have to remain meaningless.




U-Dog!

You articulate an Interesting and soul-warming definition. If I may I would like to examine one of its components:


It is this implied non-conformity to this metaphysical belief clause and its consequences that I have no doubt coerces millions by fear.

I believe that a spiritual paradigm that employs fear is flawed and cultivates disconnection from lovingkindess to all living things.

You would have really cringed at a sign I saw on a church I drove past a week or so ago. The sign said: "Fear the Lord and all other fears will perish."

I had a pretty disrespectful gut-reaction when I saw it. :o



Believing Christ was divine is beautiful and empowering and definitely connects the conscious self to lovingkindess which is the label you and many others call God.

Believing and teaching that lack of this belief damns one to hell and insentience seems completely off the mark to me, And by including this in the definition gives the term "Christian" a frightful taint of fear and hate.

Udog didn't say anything about a lack of that belief having any bad consequences. Just that the presence of it was a component in the definition he uses of christian.



In other words I believe that Christ is not the only gifted being to understand that the connection of conscious self to lovingkindness to all living things.

Definitely not!!

[Gennee]

Christian is a Greek word which means 'Christ-like'. It was first used by non-Christians in Antioch because the apostles resembled who Christ was by their character.

A Christian believes that Jesus died for their sin. Men and women act upon it by repenting of sin and asking Jesus (his spirit) to come into their heart and change them from within. It has nothing to do with what denomination one is affiliated with or what church one attends. It has nothing to do with where you come from, gender, race, sexuality, or socioeconomic status. The gospel is open to all.

Gennee

:love::pray::good:

[jewelsangel]

Wow, U-dog! I don't know how right you are, but what an amazing explanation for the history/purpose of reconciliation to God.

I was thinking about Adam and Eve last night and I had concluded (and been taught) that the fall of Adam and Eve was due to their disobedience. God told Adam not to eat of this one tree - and he, as the "head of household" so-to-speak was supposed to make sure that he AND Eve obeyed. But Eve, who did not receive the original instruction from God, disobeyed. What makes me think is this: What would have happened if Adam had said "no" instead of disobeying God? I think the punishment of being separated from God and cast out of Eden would not have taken place. After this point, God required sacrifices, etc. but they just weren't enough and man could not keep up. So, God had to send the only possible PERFECT sacrifice which was his own being to reconcile man back to Him. And by believing and confessing that God did this through Jesus, we reconcile our hearts and minds to Him.

Boy, I really need to get back to church!

[Zerbie]

**********

[Zerbie]

**********

[Daniel]

Here is the deal.

The opinion you shared with her is, in my opinion, shallow, ill-informed ,and rather sophomoric.


Know what? I'll follow the suggestion of many a Buddhist teacher and say Thank You, and take your words - your criticism- to heart. Criticism is considered an avenue for growth, even if one doesn't necessarily agree with it: it's important to honor the person giving it no matter the intention or motivation.

Namaste.



~

Since this post was written, the person who it was written for- U-dog- deleted his former posts on this thread. I have, therefore, deleted my original post on this thread as well as succeeding posts -excepting this one which serves as explanation. That said, my original post still survives in one of Zerbie's posts- and I don't have any issue with that: I do not wish to retract my words as much as I wish to retract the animus which they engendered. A very difficult thing to do when misunderstanding balloons something else entirely.

It is never fun when two parties disgree in such a public manner. I wish, if anything, that the criticisms leveled against me had been done in PM. However, that was not the case. As such, I regret even having an opinion about matters which, to the party in question, are beneath the pale.

However, I can only be the person who I am, and offer U-dog- as I have above, the high regard with he deserves and which I give him.

I apologize for breaking the flow of this thread and disturbing what could have been- and I hope will be still- calm and clear understanding.

[Zerbie]

I am sorry. I shouldn't have said that. I love you both very, very much.

[Zerbie]

And I'm a yoga practitioner, so I really can kick my own butt. :p

Gentlemen.
I posted this question for a particular reason having to do with my own problems and doubts regarding the term "Christian," what it means generally and specifically to others, and what it means with regard to a certain question about my own life that has been in my head lately.

I appreciate both your answers, and everyone else's as well. Both of your responses contain valuable gems which I enjoy and appreciate, and hope others will appreciate them as well.

I love you. It hurts to watch your recent exchange.
:'(

[Steven E. Webster]

Oh Zerbie! You sure know how to stick your head in a lawnmower and get others to do the same. :D

A Christian is someone who believes that Jesus of Nazareth was the totally divine and totally human son of the Living God who, by his teachings, by his love, by his self-sacrificial death, and by his victory over death, revealed the true essential nature of God (as the fount of all goodness and love) and thereby reconciled humanity to God in spite of all that humanity does to seperate itself from the love which is God.

So? what do you all think? What is a Christian in ONE (very long but grammatically correct) sentence.

U-dog and other friends,

I'm sorry this conversation has seemed to have soured before I even took notice of it. I thought I'd go back and quote this early post from U-dog, and comment on that. I'm not going to say that U-dog is wrong, but I'm not sure this "doctrinally-correct" response is the most helpful.

The word "Christian" as I understand the history of it, orginally meant "a little Christ." There is a tradition in Christianity sometimes referred to in Latin as "imitatio Christi" (if I spell it right)--it just means "the imitation of Christ." It suggests that those who aspire to be Christians should strive (by God's grace) to be like Jesus. Its more about how one lives than about what one believes.

What precisely one believes about Christian doctrine may not be so important. I am decidedly not a Calvinist as U-dog professes to be. I'm a Wesleyan, and with John Wesley I believe that people can be mistaken about a whole lot of beliefs and still be Christians. (I claim this as permission to be mistaken myself).

Also, with Wesley, I believe the world is also populated by a sizable number of "honest heathen" who may be just as close or closer to God and to "salvation" (whatever that may be) than a great many who believe all the correct Christian doctrines (whatever those might be).

I'm glad U-dog reminds us somewhere of "The Great Commandment" of love. Can't argue with that.

I like U-dog's point about the fact that all we know about Christ is a product of the early Christian community reflecting on the life and death of a person who left no written record of his own. Jesus must have been a remarkable person!

I guess I have to confess to being a modernist. I can't believe in a literal resuscitation of Jesus' crucified body (it just seems unlikely to me). I think the scholar Marcus Borg has it right when he suggests that the doctrine of the resurrection is metaphorical or symbolic of redemption from human injustice and faith in God's justice (even though that seems delayed). Actually, it's a metaphor that is not easily "cashed in" for literal words/meanings. That's why I'm still perfectly happy to celebrate Easter and proclaim my faith in "the resurrection of the dead."

The adult church school class I attended this Spring studied Marcus Borg's book, "The Last Week" which gives his interpretation of the scriptural texts on Jesus' death and resurrection. It's very good! The folks in the large United Methodist Church where this was studied found it very compelling. Maybe we are all "honest heathen."

It's all about hope (and faith and love).

Steven Webster

[tymejumper]

Oh Zerbie! You sure know how to stick your head in a lawnmower and get others to do the same.




*screaming and the sound of brains splattering everywhere*

Hmmmm, what is a Christian? The answer I come up with is "Someone whom believes Jesus is the son of God and chooses to follow his teachings" I know, I know, pretty bland run of the mill answer, but then it's hard to think with your brains all over the lawn!:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[scott snedeker]

So, what are the deal-breakers? (The question is for everyone, not just Scott.)

I believe that the only deal breaker is to insist that you can DO something to warrant the love of God or DO something to warrant the hatred of God. God is totally free and able to save you or damn you ... love you or hate you and there ain't nothing you can do to coerce him or influence him. You can't believe him into loving you and you can't "behave" him into loving you and you can't "obey" him into loving you. It all starts with God.


The mistake that Christians make is in thinking that salvation is a "reward" for right belief in Jesus. It isn't. That would be just another form of "works righteousness". Salvation isn't a reward.. its just a consequence. If you believe that Jesus is the revelation of a loving God then you are going to trust God to do whats best for you ... and... he will. Salvation is just a consequence. God is the fount of all good things and the source of every blessing. I can do nothing to make the fountain flow or to stop its flow. All I can do is allow it to flow into me and through me into the world around me.


And I think that you do just that! U-Dog!

You just might be the most Druidic Christian I have ever met!

I'm glad You are here to provide spiritual light to the Christian folk!

:love::love::love:

[andrewlittle]

... but I've got something to say, and it may not be pretty.
Acts 26:28 Agrippa said to Paul, "Are you so quickly persuading me to become a Christian?"
29 Paul replied, "Whether quickly or not, I pray to God that not only you but also all who are listening to me today might become such as I am-- except for these chains."

There are three references to the noun christianon in the Bible. Of the three, the only one that give a hint of meaning by the context is in the Acts passage above. And, to boot, most translations miss the context entirely.

The context comes from the antogonist, Agrippa, who asks the question. What Agrippa really asks is, "En oligo mey peytheis christianon poyesai". Yes, this is going to be a geek-fest - get over it. The critical word is the last in the Greek, being last because of Greek syntax.

poyesai does not mean "to become", "to be" or anything else remotely passive. poyesai mean "to do". The question is really, "In short time, do you persuade me to do Christian?" Paul's answer uses the word opoyos, which is a participle from the Greek verb and means, "I do" or "doing". Paul's response doesn't correct the notion of a Christian being associated with doing, but reinforces it.

So, if I may restate Zerbie's question, "How does one DO Christian?" It isn't something we claim, something we call ourselves, something we argue about, something we get snippy about - it is something we do. The closest thing we have in English is the noun "Christian", but the word in Greek is a participle - it is a verb form that is used like a noun, but keep the verbal or active mening of the original verb.

So, I am not a Christian, but I may do Christian. What does doing Christian look like? I'm not sure I would recognize an example of doing Christian from the "Christian" responses to Zerbie's original question.

Doctrine is a fine and good thing - for doing theology. This was a heartfelt question, however, that had at its root, I believe, Zerbie's desire to see if she can find any affinity with that label or notion. I heard in Zerbie's question (and I could be wrong), "Tell me what a Christian is, so I can decide if I have any interest in it whatsoever." And that discussion trailed off into almost ad hominem comments and huffiness over the answers proffered and the subsequent questions that arose.

If I was Zerbie, I think I might just say, "If I've just seen Christian, I don't think I'm interested." "Doing Christian" has to include how we dialogue about some of the very fundamental issues that it raises. The history of the church is full of episodes of walking off in a huff. How about we show what doing Christian looks like that just might be in contrast to the way the Christian church has conducted itself over the millenia.

There's a time and place for working out our relationship issues, but I am afraid I must say this thread is neither. It has done nothing for the original question, other than show dis-grace. Can we please show some of the grace that we profess?

[andrewlittle]

Ephesians 4:
I therefore, the prisoner in the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, making every effort to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all.
But each of us was given grace according to the measure of Christ's gift... The gifts he gave were that some would be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until all of us come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to maturity, to the measure of the full stature of Christ.
We must no longer be children, tossed to and fro and blown about by every wind of doctrine, by people's trickery, by their craftiness in deceitful scheming. But speaking the truth in love, we must grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every ligament with which it is equipped, as each part is working properly, promotes the body's growth in building itself up in love.
Now this I affirm and insist on in the Lord: you must no longer live as the Gentiles live, in the futility of their minds. They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of their ignorance and hardness of heart. They have lost all sensitivity and have abandoned themselves to licentiousness, greedy to practice every kind of impurity.
That is not the way you learned Christ!

Zerbie, this is the understanding I hold to about doing Christian. Paul was far from perfect, but this feeds my soul and informs how I live - usually.

I do, on more occasions than I care to think about, transgress and show less humility, patience and gentleness than I wish I did. My "bearing with one another in love" falls short. Such a case is my previous post. Some of it should have been in private to those involved. By doing so publicly, I showed the same same lack of sensitivity and grace that I pointed out in others behavior. It's that log in my eye thing, I guess.

So to u-dog and the others - I am sorry. But, to Zerbie, there are other ways to do Christian and, when we're at our best, it's a beautiful set of caring and loving actions in which we do Christ as well as we can.

[Zerbie]

:love::love::love::love::love:

You have written what I have been thinking, but not said.

... but I've got something to say, and it may not be pretty.

Andy. It's the prettiest thing I've read all day. :love:


poyesai does not mean "to become", "to be" or anything else remotely passive. poyesai mean "to do". The question is really, "In short time, do you persuade me to do Christian?" Paul's answer uses the word opoyos, which is a participle from the Greek verb and means, "I do" or "doing". Paul's response doesn't correct the notion of a Christian being associated with doing, but reinforces it.

I have been thinking, especially this week, that perhaps Christian is better conceptualized as a verb. But societal opinion seems to be that it is a noun. I wanted a grasp of what that noun is.


So, if I may restate Zerbie's question, "How does one DO Christian?"

Well that, I think we have a good grasp on. It's you, Scotty, Danny, Udog, Tdogg, and so on. What you do is to manifest love.

It isn't something we claim, something we call ourselves, something we argue about, something we get snippy about - it is something we do. The closest thing we have in English is the noun "Christian", but the word in Greek is a participle - it is a verb form that is used like a noun, but keep the verbal or active mening of the original verb.

So, I am not a Christian, but I may do Christian. What does doing Christian look like? I'm not sure I would recognize an example of doing Christian from the "Christian" responses to Zerbie's original question.

Doctrine is a fine and good thing - for doing theology. This was a heartfelt question, however, that had at its root, I believe, Zerbie's desire to see if she can find any affinity with that label or notion. I heard in Zerbie's question (and I could be wrong), "Tell me what a Christian is, so I can decide if I have any interest in it whatsoever."

Yes, Andy.

And that discussion trailed off into almost ad hominem comments and huffiness over the answers proffered and the subsequent questions that arose.

Well I was disappointed when that happened here since this was a question that meant much to me. But it is over now and we're back on track. :)

If I was Zerbie, I think I might just say, "If I've just seen Christian, I don't think I'm interested."
Oh Andy. You have NO idea how often I say that. Every time we have a visitor of the kind that gets moved to the foyer I wonder if I'm an idiot for wanting to learn what Christian is. Every time I read the paper or see the news.
This was nothing.


How about we show what doing Christian looks like that just might be in contrast to the way the Christian church has conducted itself over the millenia.
See, that's what's confusing. What's really Christian is not what the Christian churches are or do??? I know it is more complex than that. Just venting a bit.


There's a time and place for working out our relationship issues, but I am afraid I must say this thread is neither.

Thank you, Andy. I did want to preserve this thread as a place to explore answers to the question.

I think it was my fault for posing a theoretical-looking question about which people here have passionate feelings, without providing any background for the personal reason behind the question. I just wanted to keep my reason private for the moment. Now that I look at where the thread went, I regret not providing that background up-front. Still Andy - it's over. I believe I know why the conflict happened, and now we need to let it be over. Let's forget that unpleasantness. They are wonderful, passionate, spiritual men who are dedicated to becoming their best selves :love:- in very different paths. I respect their differences, and welcome them to continue sharing as much as they are willing in response to my question.

The reason for the question is as you say, Andy. To give it more immediacy, I went to a church last weekend and had a pleasant experience. I plan to go back.
I have been wondering if I belong there.

[Zerbie]

Zerbie, this is the understanding I hold to about doing Christian. Paul was far from perfect, but this feeds my soul and informs how I live - usually.

I do, on more occasions than I care to think about, transgress and show less humility, patience and gentleness than I wish I did. My "bearing with one another in love" falls short. Such a case is my previous post. Some of it should have been in private to those involved. By doing so publicly, I showed the same same lack of sensitivity and grace that I pointed out in others behavior. It's that log in my eye thing, I guess.

So to u-dog and the others - I am sorry. But, to Zerbie, there are other ways to do Christian and, when we're at our best, it's a beautiful set of caring and loving actions in which we do Christ as well as we can.

Oh hon'! Wish I had seen this before I spent the hour replying to your previous post!! Now I feel foolish for having continued to talk about stuff that is over. Over! Sorry everyone. :o

Know what, Andy? We're all doing that as we find our way - and we each have a vantage point from which we cannot perceive the entire picture. That's just the nature of life. Everyone here is amazing because you all strive consciously on a regular basis to become more aware and to embody fullness of love and kindness to a greater extent every day than you did the day before. I see you all developing, into "Christs" if you will, step by inevitable step, every day.

Okay here're my thoughts about the religious nature of the Christ question as it applies to us today. I think 99.9999999% of the time it is a verb. It is something that you do and practice. And that ultimately, practicing it relentlessly over a lifetime, you begin by fits and starts to *be* it. The goal is that one day, you become one with it, such that you are Christ, but Christ is not you.

***
If the belief-structure I've just written can qualify anywhere in anyone's definition of Christian, then in that specific I can be considered to be one. But if it can't, then I can never be called a Christian and the question becomes simply whether the church I like will welcome a non-Christian to come enjoy their programs from time to time. They seem like such a dear group of people that I think the answer to that would be 'yes.'

[BruceChris]

Can Zerbie be a verb, too? Now I Like That Idea.

Namaste' Bruce Chris

[paul]

Gee, looks like I missed all the fun :eek::lol:.

Z,

I heard that "Christian" means "little Christ."
:love:
paul

[Jennifer5]

Oh hon'! Wish I had seen this before I spent the hour replying to your previous post!! Now I feel foolish for having continued to talk about stuff that is over. Over! Sorry everyone. :o

Know what, Andy? We're all doing that as we find our way - and we each have a vantage point from which we cannot perceive the entire picture. That's just the nature of life. Everyone here is amazing because you all strive consciously on a regular basis to become more aware and to embody fullness of love and kindness to a greater extent every day than you did the day before. I see you all developing, into "Christs" if you will, step by inevitable step, every day.

Okay here're my thoughts about the religious nature of the Christ question as it applies to us today. I think 99.9999999% of the time it is a verb. It is something that you do and practice. And that ultimately, practicing it relentlessly over a lifetime, you begin by fits and starts to *be* it. The goal is that one day, you become one with it, such that you are Christ, but Christ is not you.

***
If the belief-structure I've just written can qualify anywhere in anyone's definition of Christian, then in that specific I can be considered to be one. But if it can't, then I can never be called a Christian and the question becomes simply whether the church I like will welcome a non-Christian to come enjoy their programs from time to time. They seem like such a dear group of people that I think the answer to that would be 'yes.'
Zerbie, I think that one of the nice things about the definition of the word Christian is that it has many interpretations. I think that if you believe in Christ, that probably makes you a Christian... however there are clearly many opinions. I also think that you don't have to be Christian to enjoy a Christian church (as you pretty much mentioned).

I think that in time it will become clearer to you whether or not you are Christian. In the mean time, I think you enjoy the church and their community regardless.:love:

[kara speltz]

Okay here're my thoughts about the religious nature of the Christ question as it applies to us today. I think 99.9999999% of the time it is a verb. It is something that you do and practice. And that ultimately, practicing it relentlessly over a lifetime, you begin by fits and starts to *be* it. The goal is that one day, you become one with it, such that you are Christ, but Christ is not you.

***
If the belief-structure I've just written can qualify anywhere in anyone's definition of Christian, then in that specific I can be considered to be one. But if it can't, then I can never be called a Christian and the question becomes simply whether the church I like will welcome a non-Christian to come enjoy their programs from time to time. They seem like such a dear group of people that I think the answer to that would be 'yes.'

Dear Zerbie: I really love your definition. It's unique but cuts to the core of what I believe Jesus was all about. Thank you so much for that.

Kara

[Zerbie]

Zerbie, I think that one of the nice things about the definition of the word Christian is that it has many interpretations. I think that if you believe in Christ, that probably makes you a Christian... however there are clearly many opinions. I also think that you don't have to be Christian to enjoy a Christian church (as you pretty much mentioned).

I think that in time it will become clearer to you whether or not you are Christian. In the mean time, I think you enjoy the church and their community regardless.:love:

Dear Zerbie: I really love your definition. It's unique but cuts to the core of what I believe Jesus was all about. Thank you so much for that.

Kara


Oh my. . . I was thinking of bumping this thread. That was earlier today. For various reasons I decided not to, but I'm glad it came back up to the top regardless.

I suspect I will never think of myself as Christian. I have a feeling for Jesus, but I am allergic to religious Christianity. Plus, I just don't connect with it.

Thank you, Jennifer and Kara, for the kind, thoughtful comments.

This thread makes me revisit what was in my head when I started it nearly a year ago. That was right after my first visit to the church I now go to fairly often. I remember now. I liked their program enough to want to go back, but not being Christian, I wasn't sure if I belonged there. This thread was started in an effort to get a sense of whether or not it was proper for me to be there, since I was thinking that you had to be Christian to go sit in the building.

Not long after we had this discussion on here, one of the church leaders openly invited everyone to come participate in a ritual they have, whether you are Christian or not. So that answered my question for me in quite a definite way (the question being, 'should I be here.')

That question being answered, it took the question of "could I be considered a Christian" off the table for me, since it was clear I don't need to answer it.

I never felt like I belonged in a church - churches that I tried thoroughly disappointed me in every way. Every time I went to one before, I just felt like I was in a room full of Martians, or like I was the lone Martian in a room full of Earthlings, however you'd prefer that I put it.
Having a bit of a lonely week last May, I was inspired to check out some local churches once again and just see if it might be something that could have some place in my life, now and then, in moderation.

Since murderous homophobia was THE reason I flew at warp-speed away from anything having to do with Christianity back in little-girlhood, it was necessary that any church I might 'try' be an affirming church. Wasn't going to waste a minute of my time on a church that can't even get a simple thing like that correct.

A google search on 'gay affirming churches Phoenix' brought up an extensive list of churches all around the valley. I sifted through, eliminating places that were more than 30 miles away, and also eliminating places which had a belief-system statement posted on the website which indicated "We believe ABC-XYZ" items, if I did not happen to believe all of the items listed. That second criterion eliminated the vast majority of the churches from my list. :p

Remaining was a place in central Phoenix which had a very vague home-page, not really indicating much in the way of specific beliefs or affiliations with larger organizations. The webpage pictured a bunch of rainbow flags, plus I know a PFLAG mom/activist who goes there who stated she and her husband are "the oldest and the straightest people there," but that they have been warmly welcomed, so I decided that it just might have some possibility.

I emailed the pastor explaining that I was thinking of visiting, I'm not accustomed to churches, 'is there anything I should know?" He wrote back and said the church was "not high church" and it's "very non traditional." I didn't know what either of those things meant, but they sounded like they were positives, so I checked it out. Scared out of my wits of walking into a "church." That was the end of May. This is February, and I still go there rather often.

[Jennifer5]

Oh my. . . I was thinking of bumping this thread. That was earlier today. For various reasons I decided not to, but I'm glad it came back up to the top regardless.

I suspect I will never think of myself as Christian. I have a feeling for Jesus, but I am allergic to religious Christianity. Plus, I just don't connect with it.

Thank you, Jennifer and Kara, for the kind, thoughtful comments.

This thread makes me revisit what was in my head when I started it nearly a year ago. That was right after my first visit to the church I now go to fairly often. I remember now. I liked their program enough to want to go back, but not being Christian, I wasn't sure if I belonged there. This thread was started in an effort to get a sense of whether or not it was proper for me to be there, since I was thinking that you had to be Christian to go sit in the building.

Not long after we had this discussion on here, one of the church leaders openly invited everyone to come participate in a ritual they have, whether you are Christian or not. So that answered my question for me in quite a definite way (the question being, 'should I be here.')

That question being answered, it took the question of "could I be considered a Christian" off the table for me, since it was clear I don't need to answer it.

I never felt like I belonged in a church - churches that I tried thoroughly disappointed me in every way. Every time I went to one before, I just felt like I was in a room full of Martians, or like I was the lone Martian in a room full of Earthlings, however you'd prefer that I put it.
Having a bit of a lonely week last May, I was inspired to check out some local churches once again and just see if it might be something that could have some place in my life, now and then, in moderation.

Since murderous homophobia was THE reason I flew at warp-speed away from anything having to do with Christianity back in little-girlhood, it was necessary that any church I might 'try' be an affirming church. Wasn't going to waste a minute of my time on a church that can't even get a simple thing like that correct.

A google search on 'gay affirming churches Phoenix' brought up an extensive list of churches all around the valley. I sifted through, eliminating places that were more than 30 miles away, and also eliminating places which had a belief-system statement posted on the website which indicated "We believe ABC-XYZ" items, if I did not happen to believe all of the items listed. That second criterion eliminated the vast majority of the churches from my list. :p

Remaining was a place in central Phoenix which had a very vague home-page, not really indicating much in the way of specific beliefs or affiliations with larger organizations. The webpage pictured a bunch of rainbow flags, plus I know a PFLAG mom/activist who goes there who stated she and her husband are "the oldest and the straightest people there," but that they have been warmly welcomed, so I decided that it just might have some possibility.

I emailed the pastor explaining that I was thinking of visiting, I'm not accustomed to churches, 'is there anything I should know?" He wrote back and said the church was "not high church" and it's "very non traditional." I didn't know what either of those things meant, but they sounded like they were positives, so I checked it out. Scared out of my wits of walking into a "church." That was the end of May. This is February, and I still go there rather often.

Hmm... I hadn't realized that I bumped this. I must have seen you viewing it earlier and then decided to check it out. :rolleyes:

Oh well, I think it's a good topic. :love:

[Jennifer5]

What's a denomination?

Umm... I need a dictionary...

demonination: a religious group, usually including many local churches, often larger than a sect: the Lutheran denomination.

or UCC, or Catholic, etc, etc.

[Zerbie]

Umm... I need a dictionary...

demonination: a religious group, usually including many local churches, often larger than a sect: the Lutheran denomination.

or UCC, or Catholic, etc, etc.

Well, it sounded like a term from high school math class.

Ah, yes, I'm vaguely aware of all those names. Those classifications, looking from the outside, they seem so meaningless . . . religion should be universal.

Oh dear -- does this mean I should be going to a 'universalist' church?

[Jennifer5]

Well, it sounded like a term from high school math class.

Ah, yes, I'm vaguely aware of all those names. Those classifications, looking from the outside, they seem so meaningless . . . religion should be universal.

Oh dear -- does this mean I should be going to a 'universalist' church?

It that what a "universalist" is?!

So what denomination is our church? Perhaps.... MCC, UCC, Congregational, other...

[BruceChris]

Presbyterian, Methodist, Episcopalian or Anglican, Lutheran, Catholic and many, many others. I'm not sure where the cutoff is between major and minor denomination, I will duck that one. In Europe, there are Eastern Orthodox, and Russian Orthodox. There are even some of those in North Minneapolis, come to think of it.

On Public Radio, on the program "Speaking of Faith", one religious scholar said that Christianity is not about what you believe, it is about how you treat other people. Now THAT is the definition that I try to live by, and I am far from perfect at it. I'll take the slings and arrows of those who do not find that sufficient.

A clarification. A Universalist is someone who believes that God's love is so all encompassing that we ALL go to heaven. Unitarian Universalist is about the most liberal denomination.

I think that the right church, the right denomination is one that allows you to grow, and become a more loving person. (I'll never make it as a theologian, with that as my starting point)

Namaste', Bruce Chris

[BruceChris]

Denominations are usually $10's, $20's, $50's, and $100's.

BC

[Jennifer5]

A clarification. A Universalist is someone who believes that God's love is so all encompassing that we ALL go to heaven.

I think that the right church, the right denomination is one that allows you to grow, and become a more loving person. (I'll never make it as a theologian, with that as my starting point)

Namaste', Bruce Chris
You may not be any theologian, but your answers are good enough for me. :love:

So is a Universalist a Christian? I get the impression they can be, but don't have to be? What's a Unitarian Universalist?

[BruceChris]

So is a Universalist a Christian? I get the impression they can be, but don't have to be? What's a Unitarian Universalist?

Some are, some arn't. Ask one.

BC

[Jennifer5]

Some are, some arn't. Ask one.

BC

I don't think I know any.

Back to Zerbie now. :D

[dsdrane]

I can only imagine that Jesus is constantly appalled by many who purport to be Christians.

It took me a lifetime to see past the hijackers of his message and teaching.

This is from Wikipedia:

In response to a lawyer's question, "Master, which is the great commandment in the law?", Jesus answered: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets" (Gospel of Matthew 22:35-40) [Bold mine.]

To be a Christian is to attempt to live these two "new" commandments. Being humans, we naturally fail, but that doesn't mean we should stop striving to live them. Christianity, to me then, is a process.

It's also the death of self...or the death of death. We are no longer a single person, but rather part of a larger whole: a family, a community, a planet, a universe -- all that God has created. Through Christ and his sacrifice, I becomes we.

Regarding demoninations, I ultimately landed in the Episcopal Church because I support a theology that is not ossified but continually wrestles with reinterpretation based on tradition and reason. I also appreciate a liturgy that supports and underscores the ultimate death of self: Christ's crucifixion and resurrection. Taking weekly communion (some take it every day), reminds us of this sacrifice, reminds us of the commandments, reminds us that we are WE...here and now and eternally connected across all time.

It's pretty powerful stuff, actually, and I hardly ever make it through the Eucharist without a serious shiver or, occassionally, even choking up.

[Jennifer5]

I can only imagine that Jesus is constantly appalled by many who purport to be Christians.

It took me a lifetime to see past the hijackers of his message and teaching.

This is from Wikipedia:

In response to a lawyer's question, "Master, which is the great commandment in the law?", Jesus answered: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets" (Gospel of Matthew 22:35-40) [Bold mine.]

To be a Christian is to attempt to live these two "new" commandments. Being humans, we naturally fail, but that doesn't mean we should stop striving to live them. Christianity, to me then, is a process.

It's also the death of self...or the death of death. We are no longer a single person, but rather part of a larger whole: a family, a community, a planet, a universe -- all that God has created. Through Christ and his sacrifice, I becomes we.

Regarding demoninations, I ultimately landed in the Episcopal Church because I support a theology that is not ossified but continually wrestles with reinterpretation based on tradition and reason. I also appreciate a liturgy that supports and underscores the ultimate death of self: Christ's crucifixion and resurrection. Taking weekly communion (some take it every day), reminds us of this sacrifice, reminds us of the commandments, reminds us that we are WE...here and now and eternally connected across all time.

It's pretty powerful stuff, actually, and I hardly ever make it through the Eucharist without a serious shiver or, occassionally, even choking up.
I think this is one of my favorite explanations. I think that a more people would be Christian if they heard this.

[stevejones]

The word Christian means Christ-Like. It means you try to live your life as close to Jesus Christ as possible. Will you be perfect at it? No. There was only one perfect man but perfection with Jesus Christ is something we should strive for. Will we ever reach it? No. But Jesus loves us to be close to him. He died for us so we would live for him. You ask him into your heart and you live your life according to the teachings of Jesus Christ. That is my semi definition of being a Christian I could go on and on but I wont bother you with it

[Zerbie]

I can only imagine that Jesus is constantly appalled by many who purport to be Christians.

It took me a lifetime to see past the hijackers of his message and teaching.

This is from Wikipedia:

In response to a lawyer's question, "Master, which is the great commandment in the law?", Jesus answered: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets" (Gospel of Matthew 22:35-40) [Bold mine.]

To be a Christian is to attempt to live these two "new" commandments. Being humans, we naturally fail, but that doesn't mean we should stop striving to live them. Christianity, to me then, is a process.

It's also the death of self...or the death of death. We are no longer a single person, but rather part of a larger whole: a family, a community, a planet, a universe -- all that God has created. Through Christ and his sacrifice, I becomes we.

Regarding demoninations, I ultimately landed in the Episcopal Church because I support a theology that is not ossified but continually wrestles with reinterpretation based on tradition and reason. I also appreciate a liturgy that supports and underscores the ultimate death of self: Christ's crucifixion and resurrection. Taking weekly communion (some take it every day), reminds us of this sacrifice, reminds us of the commandments, reminds us that we are WE...here and now and eternally connected across all time.

It's pretty powerful stuff, actually, and I hardly ever make it through the Eucharist without a serious shiver or, occassionally, even choking up.

Thank you. This is what I needed.

The question that brought me to Soulforce has been resolved by your words, and I don't need anything more.
:dove::dove::dove::dove::dove::dove::dove:

[stevejones]

I do hope what I said really helped. and that answer came from my heart and it was close to what wikipedia said lol...but thats how I feel..i really hope it helped

[Daniel]

That is, the difference between a verb and a noun.

There was a time when I thought of myself as a Christian. And then, later, I thought of myself as a Buddhist. Now- the label one way or the other isn't important.

It's the doing of a thing that is important to me.

Verbs are active, while nouns just sit there, looking pretty.

[Zerbie]

That is, the difference between a verb and a noun.

There was a time when I thought of myself as a Christian. And then, later, I thought of myself as a Buddhist. Now- the label one way or the other isn't important.

It's the doing of a thing that is important to me.

Verbs are active, while nouns just sit there, looking pretty.

Because in that 'verb state,' they are two names for the same thing.

[Daniel]

Because in that 'verb state,' they are two names for the same thing.

Would love to agree with you. However, while it may be the same thing, I'm not sure the thing we are talking about is a thing. :D

Doesn't mean its not real though.

This is an existential outlook however. Getting into the nature of reality. Whatever that is!

[Rick336]

To me, Christianity is the belief that God sent his son to earth to be the subject of a blood sacrifice so that we could all be saved from our sins and go to heaven when we die.

Wouldn't it have been a lot easier just to make us all sin-proof to being with?

Rick

[Daniel]

To me, Christianity is the belief that God sent his son to earth to be the subject of a blood sacrifice so that we could all be saved from our sins and go to heaven when we die.

Wouldn't it have been a lot easier just to make us all sin-proof to being with?


Talks about original blessing rather than original sin. They would agree with you (Matthew Fox etc). Turning traditional understanding on its head- as it were.

[dsdrane]

To me, Christianity is the belief that God sent his son to earth to be the subject of a blood sacrifice so that we could all be saved from our sins and go to heaven when we die.

Wouldn't it have been a lot easier just to make us all sin-proof to being with?

Rick

...for being so utterly predictable. It's good to know that, in these troubled and uncertain times, there are reliable people who will never fail to deliver what is expected.

I salute you!

[dsdrane]

I apologize for indulging in the guilty pleasure of calling someone out on their thread-hijackery -- translation: Zerbie's question was a serious one; Rick's "contribution", though no doubt serious, was nevertheless dripping with cynicism and condescension and does a disservice to the thread.

It's only too easy to be the turd in the punchbowl....

[Daniel]

I apologize for indulging in the guilty pleasure of calling someone out on their thread-hijackery -- translation: Zerbie's question was a serious one; Rick's "contribution", though no doubt serious, was nevertheless dripping with cynicism and condescension and does a disservice to the thread.

It's only too easy to be the turd in the punchbowl....

Oh gee. I don't know about this. I tend to agree with Rick insofar as, if one strips Christianity of its mystery and awe, the language that is used suggests a sacrifice- a blood sacrifice at that. OT anyone?

Does this demean anyone? I don't see that. It just points out that- on the face of it- humans can believe all sorts of things. It's when we start fighting for the right to be 'right' that the trouble starts.

My ego is bigger than your ego!

Compassion and love? I don't think one has to believe anything. It cuts through all that I, I, I, I, shit.

One just does it or not.

[dsdrane]

...pttthhhbbbttth!!!

You're a big poop. I hope you know that. (You fail me.)

[Jennifer5]

I apologize for indulging in the guilty pleasure of calling someone out on their thread-hijackery -- translation: Zerbie's question was a serious one; Rick's "contribution", though no doubt serious, was nevertheless dripping with cynicism and condescension and does a disservice to the thread.

It's only too easy to be the turd in the punchbowl....
David, I can't say that I agree with that. If you are right, then I agree that this isn't the thread for that. However, I think that if Rick is being sincere it probably hurts to have you insulting what he said.

[Daniel]

...pttthhhbbbttth!!!

You're a big poop. I hope you know that. (You fail me.)

A turd? Isn't that what poop is?

And since when am I supposed the save you? For that's what not failing would entail.

Know what the Buddha would say?

Save yourself! :lol:

David- I didn't say you or your faith was crap. But if you don't understand how others view the basic elements of the Christian faith, then you are like someone who only speaks one language and insists that everyone else must speak it too.

My point is this: we each have our point of view. At best, it is limited. And the desire to make that view absolute can only lead to suffering.

Perhaps these kinds of topics need a little grace, rather than the presumption that another is intent on getting under our skin.

And even if Rick intends to get under your skin?

So what?

At least he makes one think about the ground one claims to stand on.

[Rick336]

I apologize for indulging in the guilty pleasure of calling someone out on their thread-hijackery -- translation: Zerbie's question was a serious one; Rick's "contribution", though no doubt serious, was nevertheless dripping with cynicism and condescension and does a disservice to the thread.

It's only too easy to be the turd in the punchbowl....

I didn't hijack the thread. The thread was the question, "What is a Christian?" I gave my definition of what I believed to be a Christian. Then I put forth a question about the belief expecting an answer.

Instead of simply answering my question, your response was an example of how some Christians lash out in anger when someone dares to question their beliefs.

Rick

[Jennifer5]

I don't think it will happen again... but in case it might, let's stop now. Argue it out, but don't let what happened on page one repeat itself. Please.

[BrianB]

I don't think it will happen again... but in case it might, let's stop now. Argue it out, but don't let what happened on page one repeat itself. Please.

I believe John wrote how to do christian in his first epistle...love one another. Please argue gently. :love::love::love:

[Zerbie]

Would love to agree with you. However, while it may be the same thing, I'm not sure the thing we are talking about is a thing. :D

Doesn't mean its not real though.

This is an existential outlook however. Getting into the nature of reality. Whatever that is!

Nah Danny, it's okay. We do agree.:lol:

I didn't mean "thing" when I typed 'thing.' :D I just didn't have another word to refer to. . . what it is that we're talking about. :p

[dsdrane]

I didn't hijack the thread. The thread was the question, "What is a Christian?" I gave my definition of what I believed to be a Christian. Then I put forth a question about the belief expecting an answer.

Instead of simply answering my question, your response was an example of how some Christians lash out in anger when someone dares to question their beliefs.

Rick

Give me a break, Rick.

Your "answer" was nothing more than yet another chance to rain on a parade you happen to hate. It had nothing to do with Zerbie's question; it had everything to do with your oft-stated anti-thesism.

Your "question" does not warrant an answer, and you didn't pose it to get one. Your mind is made up. Fine. Is it so rude to ask you to allow others a chance to make up their own minds?

I don't like you Rick. I think you're simple-minded and, frankly, fascistic in your atheism. And I am perfectly happy to act as a foil to you here on these forums. I could care less about you personally, but I do care about other people reading this.

But, then, I pre-date political correctness.

(Bring it!)

[Daniel]

Nah Danny, it's okay. We do agree.:lol:

I didn't mean "thing" when I typed 'thing.' :D I just didn't have another word to refer to. . . what it is that we're talking about. :p

That's refreshing! :D:lol:

This makes me think about the Tibetan observation that, once something is written down, it is- essentially- lost.

If I understand it correctly, what they were trying to say is that 'understanding' has a nonverbal quality. That is, the understanding that one has in terms of the nondiscursive, meditative mind, is not something that can be easily put into words. Enlightenment anyone?

As such- it's not a thing. And the attempt to make it - one's experience -that is- into a thing- makes it (ha!) into something (ha! ha!) it is not.

Maybe this is why the Zen Buddhists resort to Haiku? Poetry can hold more of the numinous? Being being being? A verb not a noun?

:D

Now. What were we talking about? :eek:

[Zerbie]

I don't think it will happen again... but in case it might, let's stop now. Argue it out, but don't let what happened on page one repeat itself. Please.

I believe John wrote how to do christian in his first epistle...love one another. Please argue gently. :love::love::love:

Sweet hearts,

I love everyone who has been posting on this thread this evening, and you are all offering valuable gems. It hurts to see this lean towards directing negativity at any of you, from ANY side. Everything expressed, even the ideas and feelings expressed less than poetically, is valuable. More than that, all of you are incredibly valuable persons.

Therefore, let's try our best to avoid hurting one another with our words. I know that's difficult when it comes to things that graze so close to our deepest wounds, and isn't it both telling and tragic that a thread asking what "Christian" is brings us all so close to those terrible things? I think this is the very stuff we all came here to heal.
Together, we have the stuff we need to make that happen for one another. David has a mature faith and mysticism, Rick has a mature scientific mind, healthy skepticism, and psychological inquiry, Daniel, a mixture of those elements, etc etc etc. Let's bring them all to bear on solving problems.

David, it's okay. :) You don't have to defend "my" thread; I don't feel it hijacked. I know Rick is less than enchanted with Christianity right now -- with all the reason in the world!!!!!!! Centuries of horror brought to this world by the christian church -- it certainly seems that on the whole, Christianity has brought a lot more harm to this world than good. I understand now, that is not Christianity's fault - it's peoples' fault.

David. What you wrote yesterday? You have no idea what it meant to me. If that is Christianity, then with it I have no problems, no quarrels, no questions. Just peace.

[Zerbie]

That's refreshing! :D:lol:

This makes me think about the Tibetan observation that, once something is written down, it is- essentially- lost.

If I understand it correctly, what they were trying to say is that 'understanding' has a nonverbal quality. That is, the understanding that one has in terms of the nondiscursive, meditative mind, is not something that can be easily put into words. Enlightenment anyone?

As such- it's not a thing. And the attempt to make it - one's experience -that is- into a thing- makes it (ha!) into something (ha! ha!) it is not.

Maybe this is why the Zen Buddhists resort to Haiku. Poetry can hold more of the numinous?

:D

Now. What were we talking about? :eek:

That makes complete sense! I followed these words with no problem at all. :D:D:D

(You've been practicing today?)

[Rick336]

Sweet hearts,

I love everyone who has been posting on this thread this evening, and you are all offering valuable gems. It hurts to see this lean towards directing negativity at any of you, from ANY side. Everything expressed, even the ideas and feelings expressed less than poetically, is valuable. More than that, all of you are incredibly valuable persons.

Therefore, let's try our best to avoid hurting one another with our words. I know that's difficult when it comes to things that graze so close to our deepest wounds, and isn't it both telling and tragic that a thread asking what "Christian" is brings us all so close to those terrible things? I think this is the very stuff we all came here to heal.
Together, we have the stuff we need to make that happen for one another. David has a mature faith and mysticism, Rick has a mature scientific mind, healthy skepticism, and psychological inquiry, Daniel, a mixture of those elements, etc etc etc. Let's bring them all to bear on solving problems.

David, it's okay. :) You don't have to defend "my" thread; I don't feel it hijacked. I know Rick is less than enchanted with Christianity right now -- with all the reason in the world!!!!!!! Centuries of horror brought to this world by the christian church -- it certainly seems that on the whole, Christianity has brought a lot more harm to this world than good. I understand now, that is not Christianity's fault - it's peoples' fault.

David. What you wrote yesterday? You have no idea what it meant to me. If that is Christianity, then with it I have no problems, no quarrels, no questions. Just peace.

Very well put Zerbie. :love:

Rick

[Rick336]

Give me a break, Rick.

Your "answer" was nothing more than yet another chance to rain on a parade you happen to hate. It had nothing to do with Zerbie's question; it had everything to do with your oft-stated anti-thesism.

Your "question" does not warrant an answer, and you didn't pose it to get one. Your mind is made up. Fine. Is it so rude to ask you to allow others a chance to make up their own minds?

I don't like you Rick. I think you're simple-minded and, frankly, fascistic in your atheism. And I am perfectly happy to act as a foil to you here on these forums. I could care less about you personally, but I do care about other people reading this.

But, then, I pre-date political correctness.

(Bring it!)

You're taking this way too seriously. Lighten up.

Rick

[Daniel]

That makes complete sense! I followed these words with no problem at all. :D:D:D

(You've been practicing today?)

Neither actually.

But I did stay at a Holiday Inn!

:eek: :lol:

[Jennifer5]

What this non-believer believes Christianity is....
7CobNWUXb1M&feature=related

[Jennifer5]

I ask you all to look at the thread I started because of what is going on here...
http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?p=66514#post66514

[Eugene]

Interesting topic. When I came out to myself several years ago, I was convinced I could remain a Christian and identify as homosexual also. Christians I knew and among whom I grew up don't think so, so I sought out Christians who did.

That's the problem. The Christians I found who accept the notion of "gay Christian" aren't people whom I consider to be Christians, in a theological sense. So there is an impasse, and I've decided it's better not to attend church. It's not something I'm upset about, and I still consider myself Christian. And maybe one day I'll find a gay-affirming church that doesn't simultaneously embrace Tarot, religious pluralism, "mother God", and the like, but I'm just not inclined to search now.

So for the record, I consider a Christian as someone who is a follower of Jesus with the caveat that it is important to get straight just who you mean by "Jesus". If you mean some sequential incarnation of a cosmic Christ or Buddha figure, then that's not who I mean by "Jesus". I mean the Hebrew God incarnate, Jesus of Nazareth.

[Zerbie]

I'm sure you're not the only one, Eugene. There is probably a church out there, somewhere, that has other people like you as fully participating members. I just wouldn't know what or where it is.

[dsdrane]

You're taking this way too seriously. Lighten up.

Rick

Wow.

Yes, actually, I do take this seriously. I was under the impression that we all did.

Why, in fact, does this forum exist? Why did Mel White create Soulforce? And, while we're at it, what function, if any, does atheism play in function of Soulforce?

It's fine to opine about the lack of God; but, given the blood-battered soldiers who wash up on our shores, survivers of religious-based inquisitions...do they really need to hear there is no God. I, for one, would like to tell them: God loves you -- you, the gay; you, the gender-questioning; you, the transsexual; you, the friend to the above.

Just because someone told you that God hates you...does that mean that someone else can't right that wrong and tell someone that God -- GOD! -- loves them...just the way they are.

Why? Because we are. WE ARE part of the universe. WE ARE part of the everything. We're not a mistake.

Don't blame GOD for religion. Religion is man-made; it's not God's fault.

Atheists need to stop being so pissed off. The anger blinds them.

[Zerbie]

Wow.

Why? Because we are. WE ARE part of the universe. WE ARE part of the everything. We're not a mistake.

YES! Yes, yes, yes yes yes! Exactly right. This is true. This is reality. Yes.


Atheists need to stop being so pissed off. The anger blinds them.

:(

Atheists are FAR from the only (or the most) pissed off. The generality above upset me. The atheists I know and have known (and the atheist that I was) are far more adept at seeing than the majority of 'religious' persons. They were the loving ones in a sea of ugliness. As are your words previously about the healing unity of God's love.

Sometimes the atheism is the result of great love. I would wager that it usually is.

I love your beautiful words David. We ARE all part of the universe. Let's focus on the positive, because in focusing on what's positive, we create more of it. More growth and more uplift. When we don't, I feel like we spiral into negativity.

[Rick336]

Just because someone told you that God hates you...does that mean that someone else can't right that wrong and tell someone that God -- GOD! -- loves them...just the way they are?

No one told me that God hated me. I'm not sure where you're getting this from.

WE ARE part of the universe. WE ARE part of the everything.

I totally agree.

Don't blame GOD for religion. Religion is man-made; it's not God's fault.

I can't blame God for anything because I have no evidence that there is a god.

Atheists need to stop being so pissed off.

I don't think atheists are anymore pissed off as a group than LGBT people or African Americans or the handicapped or fundamentalists Christians or Republicans or anybody else.

The anger blinds them.

The anger blinds us to what?


Rick

[dsdrane]

The anger blinds us to what?

That God loves you, you stupid, silly, god-negating-piece-of-humanness.

No matter how much you negate God, S/He will ultimately forgive you.

God is waaaaaay bigger than your ability/willingness to acknowledge Her/Him.

Ultimately, Rick doesn't have to believe. God will make it happen.

[sauu4equality]

I feel that the original question posed requires a conceptual framing to be answered. You are going to get a different answer from every group and individual that calls themself a Christian. For example, born-agains believe that you are only a Christian once you've had a born-again experience. This is not really true of other Christians. Catholics believe something entirely different. Calvinists believe it is something you are born with or without. So, to answer this question I would have to know from what perspective you want. I think what we have seen from the answers given is that there are as many definitions of a Christian as there are Christians. Just like the question of whether or not God exists (which for some reason was brought up on this thread), this question is personal to everyone and especially every Christian. For example, I like to call myself a Christian because I feel that he has been so grossly misinterpreted by the large majority of "Christians." By following his example, I feel that I am carrying on the legacy of an individual who I consider to have been a great man. My definition does not require that I believe anything metaphysical about him. Although if evidence emerges, I also have every right to believe it at that point. I would like to point out (because apparently it needs pointing out) that I am not being condescending by stating what I think about what a Christian is. And you do not have to be a "believer" or a theist to want people of all sexual orientations to be allowed to be a part of their faith community. I hope that one day gay Christians will be able to fully practice their faith in their faith community of choice. I do not anticipate participating with them, but that doesn't mean I will not work for their right to do so. I don't mean to pile on, but your response to Rick was as disproportionate as Israel's recent attack in Gaza. If you don't like Atheism that's fine, but the personal attack is evidence that you may be uncomfortable with your own beliefs.

[Zerbie]

I feel that the original question posed requires a conceptual framing to be answered. You are going to get a different answer from every group and individual that calls themself a Christian. For example, born-agains believe that you are only a Christian once you've had a born-again experience. This is not really true of other Christians. Catholics believe something entirely different. Calvinists believe it is something you are born with or without. So, to answer this question I would have to know from what perspective you want.

What I wanted to know was whether or not I am one.

[Jennifer5]

What I wanted to know was whether or not I am one.
That's the thing Zerbie, everyone else can tell you what they think a christian is; but only you can answer that question. :love:

[andrewlittle]

What I wanted to know was whether or not I am one.

Jennifer is right on the money. That is entirely up to you.

Don't worry about others definitions, theologies or ideologies. They are theirs to use in their spiritual walk.

I think, for what that is worth, that you need to ask yourself:

What do I see in the figure of Christ that attracts or repels me?

Is what I see worthy of emulation?

Can I live my life striving to be more like what I see and hear in the figure of Christ - can I be a little-Christ or be Christ-like to the world?

If the answers to these are positive, then I think you would be christian - let the [C]hristians who want to vet you worry about their own walks. You take yours holding Christ's hand, if that is what you see as worthy.

[Zerbie]

That's the thing Zerbie, everyone else can tell you what they think a christian is; but only you can answer that question. :love:

That's why I was asking though, I wanted to know what a Christian IS. How can I decide if I am a thing, if I don't know what the criteria are?


Jennifer is right on the money. That is entirely up to you.
Well if it's really up to me, then no, because I don't want to be. I just wondered if I might have been and not known it. That's why I asked the definition.


Don't worry about others definitions, theologies or ideologies. They are theirs to use in their spiritual walk.

I think, for what that is worth, that you need to ask yourself:

What do I see in the figure of Christ that attracts or repels me?

Is what I see worthy of emulation?

Can I live my life striving to be more like what I see and hear in the figure of Christ - can I be a little-Christ or be Christ-like to the world?

If the answers to these are positive, then I think you would be christian - let the [C]hristians who want to vet you worry about their own walks. You take yours holding Christ's hand, if that is what you see as worthy.

Well, I have always known the answers to those questions, but those questions and answers have appeared to have nothing to do with what the definition(s) or qualifications of Christianity are.

It sounds like you're saying all the technical criteria (creeds, professions, beliefs, outside affiliations) are just a lotta bull. ?? So then, if they are, what the bleep is the definition? You just get to make one up for yourself, then? Sounds like.

[Jennifer5]

It sounds like you're saying all the technical criteria (creeds, professions, beliefs, outside affiliations) are just a lotta bull. ?? So then, if they are, what the bleep is the definition? You just get to make one up for yourself, then? Sounds like.

I think you do. It's a very confusing topic, I don't think there will ever be a clear answer.

[Zerbie]

If no one can tell me what it is, then finding a definition just isn't going to be important to me. I'll just let it go.

Editing this 'cuz what I originally wrote could probably be interpreted as an insult, when I just meant that I'm dropping the subject. There doesn't appear to be an answer, I asked a gibberish question, started a lot of arguments, so ya know what? It isn't important. I don't need an answer. I was just becoming curious, is all.

[Jennifer5]

Careful, we'll start a fight again... :rolleyes:


Edit: remove the original quote :lol:

[Zerbie]

Careful, we'll start a fight again... :rolleyes:

I thought I had that edited before anyone read it. :lol::lol: I didn't sleep last night and nothing I say today makes much sense.

[Jennifer5]

I thought I had that edited before anyone read it. :lol::lol: I didn't sleep last night and nothing I say today makes much sense.

Sis, how do you think I manage to post so many crazy things? A lack of sleep brings up some interesting things. :lol:

[Daniel]

I asked a gibberish question, started a lot of arguments, so ya know what? It isn't important. I don't need an answer. I was just becoming curious, is all.

That's my opinion anyway. Even though there might not be a set definition, one that we call agree on, I think it is exceedingly important to ask such questions if only that it reveals a great deal, not only about the answers given, but also everything that is brought up. Says a lot actually.

Know what hasn't been talked about in this thread? The conservative view. Which goes something like this.

You are a Christian if you ask Jesus to come into your heart and to forgive you of your sins- if you sincerely call on his same- and take him as your Lord and Savior.

That's the kind of Christian I was taught to be during my Assembly of God past.

[Jennifer5]

That's my opinion anyway. Even though there might not be a set definition, one that we call agree on, I think it is exceedingly important to ask such questions if only that it reveals a great deal, not only about the answers given, but also everything that is brought up. Says a lot actually.

I completely agree... the question is important. Finding an answer isn't always necessary.

[Zerbie]

I completely agree... the question is important. Finding an answer isn't always necessary.

Agreed. The answer is not important, and I haven't wanted one since that week last May, anyway.

The ensuing conversation, now that has been telling.

[BruceChris]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[pnggrad79]

That is, the difference between a verb and a noun.

There was a time when I thought of myself as a Christian. And then, later, I thought of myself as a Buddhist. Now- the label one way or the other isn't important.

It's the doing of a thing that is important to me.

Verbs are active, while nouns just sit there, looking pretty.

Danny,
Actually, as an English teacher myself, a noun by itself is pretty boring. The way I describe it to my kids, as far as function goes, the noun sits there and waits to be dressed up by adjectives, verbs and adverbs. It is necessary to the sentence, but by itself is pretty boring.

Zerbie,
I got to this conversation kinda late, but to me, a Christian is a person who acknowledges Christ by his death on the cross for our sins, accepts that death as remission for them, and believes that Christ inhabits them spiritually to live out the life of Christ on earth. It by no means makes us perfect, but forgiven. Forgiven from what? Mistakes we make because of our humanness. In my understanding, when Adam and Eve sinned, communion with God was broken. God gave the law to his people after that, and attempted to show them that God was about their heart not about their actions. Knowing there was no way to establish communication with God, without God, He made himself into a man, and came to earth and his ony purpose was to reconnect man with God. What did that was Jesus' death on the cross.
Granted I think that the church has done a piss-pour job of representing Christ, and I think that the church leaves much to be desired, but the church collectively has been given the mission of living the life of Christ here on earth. They have not done very well.
I am a Christian, but more than that I am a follower of Christ, and a lesbian. I am grateful for what I grew up with as far as teaching, but realize that it was grossly incomplete and in some ways downright false. But it gave me a hunger to know more and seek out different ways to know God and know what it is He wants me to do.
It is a shame that a discussion of this topic has lead to such discord, but then again, Christianity is not without its ability to cause conflict...