There are Christians then there are the real Christians..please know the difference

Originally posted by ShiftTrio
ya know you can be good and do everything I teach but unless you tag my name to it and worship me your lost. Doesn't sound very peaceful. In order to keep some faith it makes more sense to me he means his teachings and ALL GOOD people will ok.

But thank you for your explanation.

Peace be with you..

To me, that quote sounds more like the writters of the bible wanted to make sure they were they only right religion. I could be wrong, but as was pointed out, that quote was written 100's of years after Christ spoke them.

What quote are you talking about?

BTW, of the Gospels, Mark, Matthew & Luke were all written around AD 70 or so, and John was written AD90. Not 'hundreds of years' after Jesus died, but by men who knew him or, in Luke's case, who interviewed people who knew him.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
christian is a label for people, tree is a label for a group of plants
you're deflecting

So is President of the United States, but just because I call myself that doesn't make it true. If I claim that, I'm not even a bad president, I'm no president at all, no matter my delusions. The same could be true if I were to say I was a member of congress.

I can say I am whatever I want, but that doesn't make it true because I do not match the criteria to be what I say I am. I can delude myself and possibly even others, into believing it is true, but opinion does not change fact. I can say blue is orange until I'm blue (orange?) in the face, but the fact remains that the color's wavelength is between 440 and 490 nm no matter how much I try to say it's between 585 and 620 nm.

Now, you're making an assumption in saying Christianity doesn't have a set criteria for entry, and it is false. 1 John 4:2 states the way to recognize false prophets and false spirits:

By this you know the spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God

There is very specific criteria for being a Christ follower (Christian) set out in scripture. By saying anyone who claims to be a Christian is, therefore, a Christian would be the same as me saying anyone who claims to be a member of congress, regardless of whether they were elected or not, is a member of congress.

Originally posted by jimboman
BTW, of the Gospels, Mark, Matthew & Luke were all written around AD 70 or so, and John was written AD90. Not 'hundreds of years' after Jesus died, but by men who knew him or, in Luke's case, who interviewed people who knew him.

So, you are saying that people who knew Jesus (people who were in their 30's when he died) and were still around 70 to 90 years later to write or give their interpretation of what Jesus said? I can't remember what someone said yesterday (Jesus or not) let alone 70 to 90 years from now. Plus, I doubt back then that people lived to their 100-120's.

Also, I was talking about the quote from John where Jesus says he is the only way. I believe that was made up by the people writting the bible to make their religion the only religion.

[edit on 4/13/2007 by Griff]

Two things to keep in mind, Griff. First, Christ, it is believed, died in 33 or 34 AD, which means the books were transcribed 35 years later and 50 years later.

The other thing to keep in mind is the oral tradition that took place in that time of history. Today we have in the western world a literacy rate around 97%, so we have become dependent on writing. Back in the day, it was far, far lower, so far more importance was put on accurately conveying a message.

A great example Josh McDowell uses to describe this is related to the game you probably played, Telephone.

In the game Telephone, you would start with a message, whisper it to someone else, and so on through a line of people, and you would get a completely different message by the end. The way such conversations worked in the days of the oral tradition, though, would be more accurately described as someone says loudly enough for the next two people in line to hear the message, then tells the person next in line to repeat it. Then they are either corrected or it is reiterated. Following that, the person who just received the message does the same thing with the next person in line. That next person, after getting the message right then goes to the first person and says, "this is what I heard; is it correct?"

Far less likely to become distorted with all the checks.

This is one of those arguments/discussions that we humans have been having ever since we could speak and had the strength to bash the heads in of our neighboring tribe because they didn't think as we did...As far as who has the best beief in a Christ-like philosophy, I vote for the Quakers. That aside, I found this amusing. I think it sums up the strange and contradictory silliness of the old-testament god idea and why it was such a revolution that Jesus came and preached to do unto others, etc. It's a letter from the "Stop Dr. Laura" campaign a few years ago.

Dear Dr. Laura,
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I
have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that
knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend
the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that
Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the
specific laws and how to best follow them.

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates
a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors.
They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair
price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in
her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is,
how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and
female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A
friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not
Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated
to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I
have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading
glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle
room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev
19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes
me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing
garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester
blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town
together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to
death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep
with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident
you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and
unchanging.

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.

[edit on 13-4-2007 by asala]

Originally posted by junglejake
Far less likely to become distorted with all the checks.

Even then, it will still get distorted. Why? Because the original speaker will not always be there to correct the message.

Also, Thanks for clarifying the AD thing. I always get confused if it was at birth or at death.

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by junglejake
Far less likely to become distorted with all the checks.

Even then, it will still get distorted. Why? Because the original speaker will not always be there to correct the message.

Again, you're making this assumption based on experience in a society driven by a written tradition. While the original speaker may not be there to correct the message, there were many who were there who were witness to the original speaker as well. In the event one person's rendition was inaccurate, it would be pointed out. There were many checks and balances in place. You would need the same distortion to be accepted by all witnesses and then perpetuated.

FYI,

RE: Oral Tradition

en.wikipedia.org...


Unscholarly or unsympathetic accounts of oral tradition as a discipline often render this moment, quite inaccurately, as reducing the great epics to the children’s party games of “telephone” or “Chinese whispers;” in fact, these games provide amusement by showing how messages are distorted through uncontextualized transmission, while Parry’s theory showed how the tradition provided a rich, reinforcing context which optimized the signal-to-noise ratio and thus improved the quality of transmission.

Regards,
-Rren

Question, if Jesus was around today. What would he call himself? Christian? Maybe something people would see as new age.

Originally posted by AMANNAMEDQUEST
Question, if Jesus was around today. What would he call himself? ... Maybe something people would see as new age.

What would you define new age as?

Real or fake, they're ALL wrong all the same.

I will NOT roast for eternity in a lake of fire (isn't that an oxymoron?) just because I don't think Jesus was/is God. NOT gonna happen.

But the Christians will still try to scare me with descriptions of Hell and the torture you will be forced to endure. And I'll be laughing at every crock they spew. I mean, if Christians are worshipping a Jesus with long blond hair and blue eyes, how do you expect me to take them seriously?

The Bible describes the best way to believe, its good to have faith but to put it to use also to do your part also. All sins are sins and some guidlines to live a straight path is there and at the end of the day God will judge it all we are not God's to judge. There are do's and don't but its not a hate filled one. Anything that shows anger is either for that time period as to explain the emotions and actions then and to explain how God in the future will be forced to deal with man kind, guess what God can get to a point where he has no choice as well even if it means wiping the earth clean. But he is not like doing it now he will give man time to develop it self be it freely or self destructive. I think there are different grades of Christains and the parable of the sower is like that. I guess you need a 24/7 connection with God and feel that he is next to you and in your thoughts are a bit like love suppose. I guess a real Christian needs to be prepared as who knows when we will die before we decide dedication then its too late. Some people are lucky and believe just before they die some 1 minute before they do.
The overal message is to believe and pass on the good things to people, if Jesus is the way and the door it's hard not to ignor the message.

I think as reading the posts above a Human form Jesus would be known as the Anti-Christ but a person like him today is hard to say as then he was seen as a blasphamy in his ways. Some today no doubt will see him as an occultic loony, but if he had powers? What would you believe if you saw his miracles?

[edit on 13-4-2007 by The time lord]

Thanks for posting this. I wholeheartedly agree with the thread maker.

There is a massive deception being worked on the people of the world, and the best things are actually the worst. the most holy things are actually trife and full of filth..

Far less likely to become distorted with all the checks.

The message might not have become distorted with the oral tradition. But when it was finally transcribed to paper is when the real distortions started. Then add to the fact there were different scribes copying various text from several different languages changing or misspelling one word could change the whole meaning of a passage. Then add the to the fact that this was done over several hundred years for the complete Bible. Then add to the fact that the bible was again translated from Greek to English around 600 years later. To think that nothing of the original meaning or intent of the oral stories has been lost or altered with the numerous transcribers and translations defies all logic.

My first question would be, on what are you basing the assumption that it took hundreds of years to compose the letters and gospel accounts in the Bible?

My second question would be to ask you if you're aware of how many manuscripts are in existence of the Bible, in how many languages, from in the first 300 years.

My third question would be, do you know what the next most copied ancient text is, and what the earliest copy in existence is in comparison to its authorship? (For example, if we had a book that is dated 1980 as the earliest copy, but the work was written in 1965, it would be 15 years after the authorship.)

Originally posted by AMANNAMEDQUEST
Question, if Jesus was around today. What would he call himself? Christian? Maybe something people would see as new age.

If Jesus were around today...Hmmm....Good question!

IMO; from 'my' understanding of Christianity, and Revelations:

Jesus will return to our planet and be called : "King of Kings; Lord of Lords".

He will come back again (in His time) IMO... & others of like faith, to 'govern' this world.

If He came back today and asked 'what to be called'?

I don't profess to 'put words in His mouth', or 'feign what He knows- but according to His work & teachings that He 'bestowed unto His followers':

We, as Christians are 'instructed' by our Lord, to: (paraphasing) "Watch for the fruits that come from a tree; to see what 'good/bad' fruit comes from these trees, to know and understand, what is 'good' & 'bad' advice/teachers/prophets/messiah.

Christians around the globe today use the universal abreviation: W.W.J.D.

What Would Jesus Do.

* What He instucted us to do; live according to His teachings and spread these teachings with a whole heart.

My first question would be, on what are you basing the assumption that it took hundreds of years to compose the letters and gospel accounts in the Bible?

Given the fact that there are no original text from the new testament it could well be any where form 30 years to a few hundred years after Jesus death as to when they were written. There is only theory and speculation. The fact still remains that none of the letters or gospels were written contemporaneously with the life of Jesus and further more it is widely accepted that Matthew, Mark Luke and John were not even written by the same disciples named as such.

In addition you still have the problem of transcribers interpreting both oral and various written accounts that spanned generations after Christ death.

My second question would be to ask you if you're aware of how many manuscripts are in existence of the Bible, in how many languages, from in the first 300 years.

I have seen estimates of up to 500 translations.

My third question would be, do you know what the next most copied ancient text is, and what the earliest copy in existence is in comparison to its authorship? (For example, if we had a book that is dated 1980 as the earliest copy, but the work was written in 1965, it would be 15 years after the authorship.)

The earliest version to survive in the Bible is Mark's Gospel. It was probably written between AD 75 and 85, and it was used - together with other sources - as the basis for the Gospels of both Matthew and Luke, each written a few years later. The Gospel of John is later again (perhaps around AD 100) and differs from the other three in concentrating on spiritual issues more than biography. It is not until well into the 2nd century that the four Gospels are given their names.

Meanwhile the texts are being ceaselessly copied and recopied on papyrus and later on parchment. A few fragments survive from the 2nd century, but the earliest complete New Testament (the Codex Sinaiticus, in Greek, written probably in Egypt, now in the British Library) dates from the late 4th century.

www.historyworld.net...

As you can see there are estimates as to when some of the gospels were written but the earliest known complete text is from the fourth century.

From my previous post you still have the problem of translations from several languages and scribes recording oral history and copying text over many generations and to think that everything was as the original after many copies, translations and generations again defies all logic.

[edit on 16-4-2007 by etshrtslr]

a lot of people are still throwing around the word christian like there is only one kind. i believe there are two kinds of christians.

the first kind is the anti-christ..ian. its the one "in place of" the real christian belief. the christian that believes in war and hate and judgment on other people. example...bush, sean hanity, most of the feel good christians who know little about christ and his teachings and are very much into the mainstream religion who call themselves christian. its a deception....which i think is part of the antichrist system to get the world to hate the real christianity.

then there are the real christians who take very seriously the teachings of christ who get thrown in there with bush and the like. please know that there are two different types. the antichrist..ians and the real chrisians. you can know the difference between the two by the fruits of their spirit....all of these lists are describing a real christian's character.


In 1 Cor 13, in the midst of Paul's description of the gifts of the Spirit, there is a section on love. While not directly about 'fruit', it is about what springs from love, and it is in much the same vein. According to verses 3-8, love:

* suffers long;
* is kind;
* does not envy;
* does not parade itself;
* does not get 'puffed up';
* does not behave rudely;
* is not provoked;
* does not think evilly, nor rejoice in sin;
* rejoices in the truth;
* bears all things;
* believes all things;
* hopes all things;
* endures all things.

In Phillipians 4:8, Paul advises us to think on things that are:

* true;
* noble;
* just;
* pure;
* lovely;
* of good report;
* of any virtue;
* worthy of praise.

In Colossians 3:12-16, the church members are told to put on (wear) these things:

* tender mercies;
* kindness;
* humility;
* meekness;
* patience.

Then, they are further instructed to:

* bear with one another;
* forgive one another;
* love;
* let the peace of God rule their hearts;
* be thankful;
* have the Word live in them;
* teach and admonish one another;
* sing with grace in their hearts.

This is all to be done in the name of Jesus, to further the purposes He came for.

For a visitor to Earth from outer space the word Christians means The people who believe that Jesus is the Christ.
Jews don't believe that Jesus is Christ.
Some christians like Jehovah witness believe Jesus was Son of God and the Messiah (christ is still to come.
The only people that fit the word christians are the Muslims ( they believe that Jesus and only Jesus is the Christ and that there is no other christ)
the people who identify themselves as christians actually believe that jesus is the Son of God ( or himself a God) in addition to him being the Messiah (ie Christ)

So the real Christians are the Muslims.
and the anti christians are every body else.