What is a Christian?

[Adrift]

You're conveniently forgetting our past entanglements both here and in private mail as well as the other thread about Christianity where you engaged in the same sort of cross-questioning thereby forcing an opinion which you have about my particular approach to apologetics. I find this valueless and in the end just you pushing your little cart around and hoping to garner applause from those who admire your style. I admit I was a fan until I witnessed the way you powered you way through the Wicca thread and did not even consider that there was a conversation to be had. Shame on you!

Peace,
Eric.

Oh, please. Stop with the melodrama.

[headheart]

Oh, please. Stop with the melodrama.

Don't you think it's about time you owned those words and stopped with all the cross-examinations and insinuations.

Goodbye,
Eric

[Adrift]

Don't you think it's about time you owned those words and stopped with all the cross-examinations and insinuations.

Goodbye,
Eric

I don't know what you mean by "owned those words". Why can't you just reply to people in a normal and casual fashion? And would you please drop the wounded routine you're doing. Again, this is a public forum. People are going to have differences of opinion, or are going to want to clarification about what an OP means. You either need to get used to that or get used to being offended.

[headheart]

Goodbye. I hope you find ways to build bridges rather than continue to distance yourself from those who are attempting to build bridges to you. Peace, Eric.

[Adrift]

Goodbye. I hope you find ways to build bridges rather than continue to distance yourself from those who are attempting to build bridges to you. Peace, Eric.

If bridge building means not questioning one's ulterior motivations, or tip toeing around a discussion in hopes that you don't unintentionally hurt someone's feelings, I guess I don't need those bridges.

[headheart]

Oops, look like I missed your boot 'n stake routine bored-again-christian. < as if that ain't a dead giveaway.

I'm a very direct person who doesn't have the desire or time to play games.

Blunt. Oh, no, no, no you are certainly a master at playing games and this thread is only the tip of the iceberg.

But... you didn't want to discuss the matter. You essentially said "hey all, let's discuss this topic", and then offered a Conclusion by citing Stott and proclaiming that all other replies "fell short". So far, I've agreed with just about all of the replies offered in this thread except that only yours was the best one. So your accusation doesn't hold water, and is probably better applied to yourself.

This was not the only thread which was dealing with this and your best work is to be viewed here: Route 66

I don't know what any of this means.

That's exactly the point. However instead of asking you compound questions. (Hostility)

Understanding the etymology and roots of a word seem to have more than a little relevance.

It has no relevance at all. Stop in the name of love.

Peace,
Eric

[headheart]

If bridge building means not questioning one's ulterior motivations, or tip toeing around a discussion in hopes that you don't unintentionally hurt someone's feelings, I guess I don't need those bridges.

I guess this is where we depart from each other and you trample on toes and drive your stake into the heart of anyone who doesn't quite have as much knowledge as you do. How can I breath when surrounded by more of your supercilious repartee. It's a banquet for flies and daresay you enjoy them more than I do.

I'll let you have the last word, for that's all you seem to want to do.

Goodbye.
Eric.

[pancreasman]

Here we go again. Yet another thread where Eric demonstrates he cannot tolerate disagreement with his implicit task of instructing us how to be truly spiritual ... like him. This forum is a place where people DISCUSS things rather than get lectured to. You will find here people who DISAGREE with any particular assertion you make. The valuable ones are those who can articulate clearly and with BREVITY their reasons for holding a contrary view without resorting to PERSONAL attack. In the to and fro of discussion people ask QUESTIONS in order to clarify their understanding of your statements and their IMPLICATIONS and SUPPORT. This is how discussions work.

[headheart]

You will also find those like who annunciates their views with caps just to make sure that no-one misses their hypnotic mind cult style of one-liner supercilious repartee.

Peace,
Eric

[pancreasman]

You will also find those like who annunciates their views with caps just to make sure that no-one misses their hypnotic mind cult style of one-liner supercilious repartee.

Peace,
Eric

Back to content. Why is your choice of what makes a Christian superior to those others have put? I, for one, can see that they are all centred in Christ. That's entirely appropriate, but one can't stop there in some vague new-agey way. You have to examine what you think you know about Christ, what you believe about Him, what you think His mission is. This differentiates various Christians from each other. You can't paper over those differences by blithely agreeing that you all are dedicated to Christ when you have different ideas about who Christ is.

[headheart]

Back to content. Why is your choice of what makes a Christian superior to those others have put? I, for one, can see that they are all centred in Christ. That's entirely appropriate, but one can't stop there in some vague new-agey way. You have to examine what you think you know about Christ, what you believe about Him, what you think His mission is. This differentiates various Christians from each other. You can't paper over those differences by blithely agreeing that you all are dedicated to Christ when you have different ideas about who Christ is.

Christians will never agree on what Christianity or what a Christian is, or for that matter who Christ as long as they have their noses in books and that includes the Bible. Unless the spirit of Christ is deliberately engaged except where such a thing is utterly impossible one's time here on earth would have been wasted.
I could have written more about 'utterly impossible' but this keyboard is very sensitive and I lose the screen.
Once I met my pastor in the street and he asked me this same question, but simpler. He asked me, "What is the cut-off point?" I quoted this following second part of a passage from Paul's letter to the Romans: '....if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.' (Romans 8:9)
I recall Dr. Francis Schaeffer speaking of his regrets that he had made it all about reason at L'abri and quoted a passage he believed was a sure test to know ( 1 John 4:1-3 ) but added the thoughts conveyed in the passage I quoted above as he discussed the importance of a spiritual encounter with Christ. I believe it was his very last sermon.



Peace,
Eric.

[pancreasman]

Christians will never agree on what Christianity or what a Christian is, or for that matter who Christ as long as they have their noses in books and that includes the Bible. Unless the spirit of Christ is deliberately engaged except where such a thing is utterly impossible one's time here on earth would have been wasted.
I could have written more about 'utterly impossible' but this keyboard is very sensitive and I lose the screen.
Once I met my pastor in the street and he asked me this same question, but simpler. He asked me, "What is the cut-off point?" I quoted this following second part of a passage from Paul's letter to the Romans: '....if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.' (Romans 8:9)
I recall Dr. Francis Schaeffer speaking of his regrets that he had made it all about reason at L'abri and quoted a passage he believed was a sure test to know ( 1 John 4:1-3 ) but added the thoughts conveyed in the passage I quoted above as he discussed the importance of a spiritual encounter with Christ. I believe it was his very last sermon.



Peace,
Eric.

But who are we to judge whether another has 'engaged' with the Spirit of Christ? How are we to judge whether we ourselves have engaged with the spirit of Christ? It seems you have a quite negative view about other Christians which presumes knowing their interior spiritual state. The only things we have access to are what people say and how they behave.

1 Peter 3:15 but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;

It seems to me that a Biblical position is a careful balance between reason and faith, and interior mysticism balanced by participation in the believing community.

[headheart]

I've met such strong opposition from Christians with regard to prayer, meditation and contemplation as the first step to knowing G-d referring to it as nothing to do with Christianity and using words such as your words = "some vague new-age,y way" and so I posted up some ideas to the internet for those who might be tired of being told about G-d but not how one might know G-d: (Don't be put off by SHIVA, for the pages cover a wide cross-section of views) SHIVA and then SHIVA (Part 2 – TRIMURTI ) SHIVA (Part 3 – Brahma) -> SHIVA (Part 4 – THE INCARNATIONS OF LORD VISHNU ) -> SHIVA (Part 5a – Meditation) -> SHIVA (Part 5b – Meditation) , SHIVA (Part 5c – Meditation) , SHIVA (Part 5d – Meditation) , SHIVA (Part 5e – Meditation) , SHIVA (Part 5f – Meditation) , The Influence of Classical Ideas in the Humanities

brainmindneuronsandfree.jpg

[headheart]

But who are we to judge whether another has 'engaged' with the Spirit of Christ? How are we to judge whether we ourselves have engaged with the spirit of Christ? It seems you have a quite negative view about other Christians which presumes knowing their interior spiritual state. The only things we have access to are what people say and how they behave.

1 Peter 3:15 but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;

It seems to me that a Biblical position is a careful balance between reason and faith, and interior mysticism balanced by participation in the believing community.

I think that there are many Christians who like myself got dead tired of the round of reason and faith, or reason vs faith arguments and began studying the way of the early Christian mystics. Though some argue it is elitist they do so because they either associate it with something New Age, Hindu or Occult and therefore preach out LOUD about the need for mental ascent to axioms, propositions, historically verifiable evidence and even hit with the scientific arguments if they feel it will serve the agenda of reason and faith based doctrines. The idea of a completely mystically based foundation with a personal relationship with the spirit of G-d is too vague and in the opinion of some (some calm but others very HOT) means they might end up praying with a Muslim (God forbid , Krishna , Buddhist , Hindu , American Indian, Jew or even a Wiccan etc. ) I find it too narrow and lacking in any of the freedom that I believe exists when one lets go of the one-way and everyone else is wrong attitude. The term Christian is elitist and fails to grasp what Jesus had in mind and which many enjoy in a more open way with all their brothers and sisters. For we are all G-d's children, His offspring.

Peace,
Eric.

[firstfloor]

Well, I’ve finished the Cohen lectures; researching this very question from an historian’s point of view. Christianity seems to be a bit of a dog’s breakfast, theology wise, not that Judaism is perfect by any means. If I had to choose between them I think I would take Judaism and go light on the various prohibitions.