Definition of a Christian

C

Cellar_Door

Whose Worth's unknown
Registered Senior Member
My old R.E teacher once told me something that I didn't take any notice of at the time (hey so what else is new). However, in recent weeks during certain threads on this forum it's been exhumed from the bottom of my memories. It's as good a thing to make a thread about as any I suppose.

I asked him if he believed in God. Of course, being an R.E teacher doesn't mean that you do, but I was curious nonetheless. He said no. But then, he added...

"I'm not a Theist, but I'm a Christian. I follow the teachings of Christ because they in themselves are worthy of reverence. However, I have no idea whether this world was made by a God or not. And doubt doesn't constitute belief."

Any thoughts?
 
Cellar_Door said:
My old R.E teacher once told me something that I didn't take any notice of at the time (hey so what else is new). However, in recent weeks during certain threads on this forum it's been exhumed from the bottom of my memories. It's as good a thing to make a thread about as any I suppose.

I asked him if he believed in God. Of course, being an R.E teacher doesn't mean that you do, but I was curious nonetheless. He said no. But then, he added...

"I'm not a Theist, but I'm a Christian. I follow the teachings of Christ because they in themselves are worthy of reverence. However, I have no idea whether this world was made by a God or not. And doubt doesn't constitute belief."

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

He consciously chose to be deluded ?
Or more likely, he doesn't have a clue what Christianity is.
 
And you do?

Its pretty similar to Buddhist athiests on this forum. Many follow the works of Buddha, without caring about his views on gods and whether it was just one Buddha or many who wrote the texts.
 
He's an agnostic that likes the philosophy of Jesus. It's not surprising, Jesus said some really cool things, especially if you count the Gnostic gospels.
 
I thought the gnostic gospels predated Christ? And were of Syrian origin?
 
Some of them, the gnostic movement predates Jesus, but they liked to keep things fresh.
 
spidergoat said:
He's an agnostic that likes the philosophy of Jesus. It's not surprising, Jesus said some really cool things, especially if you count the Gnostic gospels.
Click to expand...

If you like those philosophies you have probably already adopted them by yourself. Why subscribe them to Jesus ? Or worse, Christianity.
 
You'd have to prove that it is possible to adopt something (by yourself) without learning of it. And everyone is entitled to decide who is their source of influence.
 
Enmos said:
If you like those philosophies you have probably already adopted them by yourself. Why subscribe them to Jesus ? Or worse, Christianity.
Click to expand...

It's just imprecise. Jesus didn't invent Christianity, but people think all his teachings are encompassed by the term.
 
It's just imprecise. Jesus didn't invent Christianity, but people think all his teachings are encompassed by the term.
Click to expand...

Well, according to the Bible, he played a large part in doing so. After all, when the term Christian was first coined, it literally meant 'follower of Christ'.
Nevertheless his use of the word was imprecise, as it is understood to have a slightly different meaning today.

However you have to admit that it's an interesting notion. Evidence now exists to suggest that in the infancy of the religion, Jesus was simply hailed as a great prophet and teacher. It is only the later chapters of the Bible which make reference to him being the son of God and a more spiritual figure.
 
Christianity used to mean a wide variety of things, varied interpretations and schools of the teaching of Jesus, sects of Judiasm basically. Later, Christianity was codified into the present orthodox doctrine, and the "heretical" schools shut down, their gospels destroyed.
 
What is the first known instance when he was called the son of God?
 
I have read that "son of" is something of a mistranslation. In those days, "son of" meant- of the same nature as. Not a literal son.
 
At simplest, a Christian is one who believes in, adheres to, relies upon and follows the Deity and teaching of Jesus Christ.

Since Jesus Christ said He was God, one cannot fully be a Christian and not believe in God. Most people who claim to be 'Christians' and then qualify it by not going to an organized church or being ambivalent or agnostic about the existence of God is probably a very moral person who tries his (her) best to be nice to others, not scratch in public and not park in handicapped spaces. And they usually give something to charity.

It always makes me curious about people who 'believe in Christ's teaching' but don't believe in the Deity of Jesus Christ. As the name suggests, the essential part of Christianity is Christ. Wow, what a concept. To 'believe in Christ's teaching' but not believing in Jesus Christ being God is equivalent to 'believing in the United States' but not accepting the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

On a similar note, people re-invent Buddhism all the time. Shinto comes to mind. I'm not Buddhist, so I really don't know but just for the record, could one be a Buddhist and deny reincarnation? Certainly one can adopt certain facets or tenets of Buddhism on sort of a 'buffet table' program - much as do the nearly Christians I've been discussing. I'm just wondering if Buddhists accept nearly Buddhists as the real thing?

Please note: None of this is to suggest anything evil or mean spirited about 'agnostic Christians'. However, they are factually mistaken.

On a less kindly note, I am always somewhat amused and amazed by non-Christians who purport to know all about Christianity. The remark, "Jesus didn't invent Christianity..." is such a howler. I have the same sort of reaction to some of the posters here who claim Dr. Einstein was wrong about light speed being a limit or saucer people causing the big bang.
 
spidergoat; May I direct your attention to a very useful website, www.blueletterbible.org

It has a search function that cross references Strong's Concordance and other lexicons. These resources give much information on exactly what certain words or phrases 'really mean'.

For example: 'son of'
In the Greek language of the time the New Testament was written, 'son of' had the following meanings:

1) a son
-a) rarely used for the young of animals
-b) generally used of the offspring of men
-c) in a restricted sense, the male offspring (one born by a father and of a mother)
-d) in a wider sense, a descendant, one of the posterity of any one,
-*1) the children of Israel
-*2) sons of Abraham
-e) used to describe one who depends on another or is his follower
-*1) a pupil

2) son of man
-a) term describing man, carrying the connotation of weakness and mortality
-b) son of man, symbolically denotes the fifth kingdom in Daniel 7:13 and by this term its humanity is indicated in contrast with the barbarity and ferocity of the four preceding kingdoms (the Babylonian, the Median and the Persian, the Macedonian, and the Roman) typified by the four beasts. In the book of Enoch (2nd Century) it is used of Christ.
-c) used by Christ himself, doubtless in order that he might intimate his Messiahship and also that he might designate himself as the head of the human family, the man, the one who both furnished the pattern of the perfect man and acted on behalf of all mankind. Christ seems to have preferred this to the other Messianic titles, because by its lowliness it was least suited to foster the expectation of an earthly Messiah in royal splendour.

3) son of God
-a) used to describe Adam (Lk. 3:38)
-b) used to describe those who are born again (Lk. 20:36) and of angels and of Jesus Christ
-c) of those whom God esteems as sons, whom he loves, protects and benefits above others
-*1) in the OT used of the Jews
-*2) in the NT of Christians
-*3) those whose character God, as a loving father, shapes by chastisements (Heb. 12:5-8)
-d) those who revere God as their father, the pious worshippers of God, those who in character and life resemble God, those who are governed by the Spirit of God, repose the same calm and joyful trust in God which children do in their parents (Rom. 8:14, Gal. 3:26 ), and hereafter in the blessedness and glory of the life eternal will openly wear this dignity of the sons of God. Term used preeminently of Jesus Christ, as enjoying the supreme love of God, united to him in affectionate intimacy, privy to his saving councils, obedient to the Father's will in all his acts.

You are correct, the phrase (single word in Greek) can mean more than simply a physical offspring. In the case of God and the Son of God, it obviously cannot mean simply a physical offspring - God is Spirit and therefore would not sire physical offspring in the same manner as Zeus and Leda, for instance. The phrase does connote a relationship stemming from 'one which derives from another'.
 
I don't particularly have a problem with people following the teachings of Jesus. Calling themselves Christians, or refering to Jesus as "Jesus Christ", implies that they believe Jesus is God, even though they may not entirely believe that. But if they feel that the best way to define their moral structure is to call themselves Christian, I see no problem with it.

Plus, it allows them to take the good out of the message, and ignore the evil crap that was in the OT.
 
Archie said:
It always makes me curious about people who 'believe in Christ's teaching' but don't believe in the Deity of Jesus Christ...

As the name suggests, the essential part of Christianity is Christ. Wow, what a concept. To 'believe in Christ's teaching' but not believing in Jesus Christ being God is equivalent to 'believing in the United States' but not accepting the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
Click to expand...
Usually when people say that sort of thing they are talking specifically about Jesus’ teachings regarding morality and how to treat others, rather than every "teaching" that's ascribed to him in the bible. A better analogy might be someone who thinks that there are a lot of good ideas expressed in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence, but isn't so sure about certian parts of them.
 
Cellar_Door said:
My old R.E teacher once told me something that I didn't take any notice of at the time (hey so what else is new). However, in recent weeks during certain threads on this forum it's been exhumed from the bottom of my memories. It's as good a thing to make a thread about as any I suppose.

I asked him if he believed in God. Of course, being an R.E teacher doesn't mean that you do, but I was curious nonetheless. He said no. But then, he added...

"I'm not a Theist, but I'm a Christian. I follow the teachings of Christ because they in themselves are worthy of reverence. However, I have no idea whether this world was made by a God or not. And doubt doesn't constitute belief."

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

I like your teacher. Would that more Christians were more like him.

~String
 
I don't consider myself Christian, but I do agree with many of the ideas that are attributed to Jesus Christ. With the exception of free love Jesus sounds a lot like an ancient hippie to me. Jesus was all about love and peace, where as the God from the old testament did not have the same ideals. When I went to christian school. I was taught that a Christian is someone who believes the Jesus was the son of God and believe that he died and was resurrected again. Only to return to heaven. One of the two people who should have no physical remains. Apparently that is the big belief that separates Christians from Jews. But I am no longer a Christian so maybe the definition is different for different people.
 
Nasor said:
Usually when people say that sort of thing they are talking specifically about Jesus’ teachings regarding morality and how to treat others, rather than every "teaching" that's ascribed to him in the bible.
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand what you're saying. I know some people like that. One fellow I know claimed to be Christian because 1. "America is a Christian nation" (yes, he said that exactly); and 2. he had been in church - at some point in the past.

To be fair, he's a pretty good guy. He bathes regularly, doesn't cuss much, pays his bills on time, doesn't kick cats and doesn't park in handicapped spaces. Seriously, he's an okay guy and rather decent. But to a practicing Christian, that is not the definition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top