What is a Christian?

[christiansoldier]

A small appeal here, if you don't mind - and this is directed to the thread, not to any individual contributing to it.

This thread started on the premise of people sharing what they felt defined a "Christian". However, as so often seems to happen, it is in danger of degenerating into an "I am right and you are wrong" argument, which is neither helpful nor in the spirit of Christ. It will only generate more heat than light.

The fact is that the Christian church, worldwide, is an incredibly varied body. There will be those of a fundamentalist/conservative stamp. There will also be though of a liberal disposition. And there will be those in between. There will be those with a very bible based faith, and those who centre everything sacramentally. This is a fact - and it is one of Christianity's great strengths that it has room for people of such widely varied personalities and needs.

I am quite happy to share what I think about different things. But I am not happy to get into debates about it if the implication is that I am "in error/wrong/less-christian" than someone else.

Let's have a little humility here, and a little respect for others. None of us has the whole truth here.

Mike

Sentiments noted and agreed with, Mike.

I got the impression from one of Javier's recent posts that you are a minister, is that correct?

[Didache]

Yes I am .. in London.

Mike

[christiansoldier]

Yes I am .. in London.

Mike

Would it be improper of me to hold you (or any minister) to a higher standard of teaching God's Word than what I would normally expect from a layman?

[Didache]

Would it be improper of me to hold you (or any minister) to a higher standard of teaching God's Word than what I would normally expect from a layman?

I think you could reasonably expect a minister to be theologically well educated, at least those in mainstream denominations with decent training. If that is what you meant, then I would say yes.

Two things though:

(a) You need to be careful though if by that you mean "how close are they to the way I see it". Any given minister may be of a different churchmanship than your own and because he/she does not see things as you do does not render their ministry flawed. This is what I meant by recognising that the church is a little bigger than any one branch.

(b) I am not persuaded that I (or any minister) is accountable to anyone in this forum - I am accountable to my denomination and my congregation (and, of course, to God).

Mike

[christiansoldier]

I think you could reasonably expect a minister to be theologically well educated, at least those in mainstream denominations with decent training. If that is what you meant, then I would say yes.

Two things though:

(a) You need to be careful though if by that you mean "how close are they to the way I see it". Any given minister may be of a different churchmanship than your own and because he/she does not see things as you do does not render their ministry flawed. This is what I meant by recognising that the church is a little bigger than any one branch.

(b) I am not persuaded that I (or any minister) is accountable to anyone in this forum - I am accountable to my denomination and my congregation (and, of course, to God).

Mike

Understood.

There are, I think, regardless of denomination, certain basic tenants that all Christians would hold in common.

First and foremost - Jesus Christ is God incarnate.

[Anbesol]

Understood.

There are, I think, regardless of denomination, certain basic tenants that all Christians would hold in common.

First and foremost - Jesus Christ is God incarnate.

Wouldn't it be 'To love God with all your heart, and to love your neighbor as your self.'

[christiansoldier]

That language is a bit tricky - as 'god' is understood differently between denominations, as is the science and understanding of 'incarnation'. So, whilst in some respects, I would totally agree that Jesus was/is God incarnate - in many ways it is understood, I would disagree with such an idea as well. I would also call the first and foremost tenant would be to simply love. Or, in the language of scripture, 'To love God with all your heart, and to love your neighbor as your self.'

Now, may I ask you - Why would an assertion of belief take priority over the tenant I just stated?

Simply because the whole point of God taking on the form of man, being scourged half to death, nailed to a tree, taking the sins of all upon Himself, is not only the epitome of the love of which you speak, but, though you reject the premise vehemently, it is the core of the belief structure laid out in God's Word.

So, whilst in some respects, I would totally agree that Jesus was/is God incarnate - in many ways it is understood, I would disagree with such an idea as well.

That statement isn't making a whole lot of sense to me... but then again it is 3 AM, maybe I'm too tired to appreciate the finer points. :idea:

[Didache]

Understood.

There are, I think, regardless of denomination, certain basic tenants that all Christians would hold in common.

First and foremost - Jesus Christ is God incarnate.

For my own definition of the "basics" see post 7 in this thread (first page)

Mike