What is a true christian?

[thaiboxerken]

I submit that there are no true christians, and that if one actually did exist, that the real christian would qualify for, and win the JREF challenge.

Radbrook isn't a christian, he's just a wanna-be christian. Until you prove yourself a christian, Rad, I'll only refer to you as such.

How do we objectify what a true christian is, you ask? Well we look at the words in the bible itself, and where jesus outlines what a true believer is and can do.

# Mk.16:17-18 "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

# Lk.10:19 "Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you."

So, here it is, the criteria of determining what a real christian is. I will say righ tnow, without at doubt, that Radbrook is not a christian, as he cannot do the feats outlined above.

[Radrook]

To me it really doesn't matter what you think or anyone else thinks about me in terms of being or not being a Christian..


So I lack the motivation to participate in this thread in the manner you hoped.

Sorry.

[Iacchus]

Is it possible God may have changed the rules since then? And no longer allows such miracles to occur? (at least to a much lessor extent). There are different ways of Him manifesting Himself (through lessor miracles) which are equally impressive. Besides, look at all the miracles Jesus wrought, as well as Moses. Did it really make that much difference to those who witnessed them? Look at what happened to the children of Israel after all the miracles Moses performed. No doubt some were affected, but as a rule most weren't, and they went on griping and complaining as if nothing occurred. Which is why they had to wander through the wilderness for 40 years.

So in that respect what good do miracles do? Especially since the greatest miracle of all occurs when we die and go to heaven. How can you beat that? Kind of makes all this stuff on earth seem rather petty and foolish doesn't it?

[dmarker]

So your god changed the rules and didn't tell us?

How convenient!


Originally posted by Iacchus
Is it possible God may have changed the rules since then? And no longer allows such miracles to occur? (at least to a much lessor extent). There are different ways of Him manifesting Himself (through lessor miracles) which are equally impressive. Besides, look at all the miracles Jesus wrought, as well as Moses. Did it really make that much difference to those who witnessed them? Look at what happened to the children of Israel after all the miracles Moses performed? No doubt some were affected, but as a rule most weren't, and they went on griping and complaining as if nothing occurred. Which is why they had to wander through the wilderness for 40 years.

So in that respect what good do miracles do? Especially since the greatest miracle of all occurs when we die and go to heaven? How can you beat that? Kind of makes all this stuff on earth seem rather petty and foolish doesn't it?

[dmarker]

But, Rad, wouldn't that settle exactly who was a True Christian once and for all?


Originally posted by Radrook
To me it really doesn't matter what you think or anyone else thinks about me in terms of being or not being a Christian..


So I lack the motivation to participate in this thread in the manner you hoped.

Sorry.

[Iacchus]

Originally posted by dmarker

So your god changed the rules and didn't tell us?

How convenient!Well, have had enough things to happen to me in my life to know better. Although it was primarily on a smaller scale and on a personal level. So it's something in that sense that really can't be taken away from me. All the convincing in the world is not going to convince me otherwise.

[Radrook]

Originally posted by dmarker
But, Rad, wouldn't that settle exactly who was a True Christian once and for all?




Since you have shown genuine interest I will start compiling the necessary data and will provide it later tonight. At the latest tommorow.

But it is not an effort to prove anything about mysekf.
Just as a general guide to what the Bible says on the subject of what connstitutes expectec or ideal Christian behavior.

BTW
That doesn't mean we should use the data to say for sure who will and who wil not gain eternal life. Only God knows that. For example, I cannot say for sure if Hitler will or will not ultimately gain eternal life when and if brought back in reseurection.

Only to say that there ar certain guidelines which are clearly given with which we can fairly accurately uidentify what is and wgat is not Christiuan behavior.

[thaiboxerken]

Is it possible God may have changed the rules since then? And no longer allows such miracles to occur?

Well, since you are just making it all up anyway, sure. However, that leaves us with the question as to how can we establish a true christian from one that is just claiming to be a christian.


So in that respect what good do miracles do?

Oh, I think that healing sick people would do alot of good. I guess i'm just weird that way.

Especially since the greatest miracle of all occurs when we die and go to heaven.

If you say so. Sounds like a bunch of nonsense to me. You are simply making excuses as to why you can't perform the feats of a true believer.

How can you beat that? Kind of makes all this stuff on earth seem rather petty and foolish doesn't it?

Nope, just your religion, god and beliefs.

[thaiboxerken]

I still maintain that you are only a psuedochristian, Rad. You are no true believer, as true believers can perform the feats. You cannot.

[thaiboxerken]

Just as a general guide to what the Bible says on the subject of what connstitutes expectec or ideal Christian behavior.

Where, in the bible, does it even mention christians?

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
I submit that there are no true christians, and that if one actually did exist, that the real christian would qualify for, and win the JREF challenge.

Radbrook isn't a christian, he's just a wanna-be christian. Until you prove yourself a christian, Rad, I'll only refer to you as such.

How do we objectify what a true christian is, you ask? Well we look at the words in the bible itself, and where jesus outlines what a true believer is and can do.

# Mk.16:17-18 "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

# Lk.10:19 "Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you."

So, here it is, the criteria of determining what a real christian is. I will say righ tnow, without at doubt, that Radbrook is not a christian, as he cannot do the feats outlined above.

Well, I do not know Radbrook, but never the less, I think the that only true Christians are Jews.

As far as I can tell,
Jesus was born a Jew, raised as a Jew, died as a Jew, and was buried as a Jew;
Jesus never repuditiated the Jewish faith;
nor did Jesus actually start a new religion.

However, what some of his followers did was decidely different from what he did.

[brian0918]

http://www.fishing-catalog.com/SOSProd/trolling.jpg

[Wally]

Originally posted by Crossbow


Well, I do not know Radbrook, but never the less, I think the that only true Christians are Jews.

As far as I can tell,
Jesus was born a Jew, raised as a Jew, died as a Jew, and was buried as a Jew;
Jesus never repuditiated the Jewish faith;
nor did Jesus actually start a new religion.

However, what some of his followers did was decidely different from what he did.

Most people who consider themselves to be Christian are actually Paulines, (followers of a religion created by Saul/Paul) the beliefs of which would completely baffle the historic Jesus.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Christianity, in its modern form, is a belief system. (OK, a bunch of different, sometimes related belief systems, but I'm simplifying.) It is prudent to assume anyone who professes the belief truly holds it, and is therefore a Christian, unless compelling evidence exists that they are dissembling for one reason or another.

Saying someone is not a 'true Christian' because they fail to perform feats the founder of the faith said they could is the same as claiming someone is not a true fan of the Undertakers (http://www.the-undertakers.com/The%20Undertakers%20&%20Fan%20Gallery.htm) because they haven't the foggiest idea how to party classic rock style.

[Kitty Chan]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
I submit that there are no true christians, and that if one actually did exist, that the real christian would qualify for, and win the JREF challenge.

Radbrook isn't a christian, he's just a wanna-be christian. Until you prove yourself a christian, Rad, I'll only refer to you as such.

How do we objectify what a true christian is, you ask? Well we look at the words in the bible itself, and where jesus outlines what a true believer is and can do.

# Mk.16:17-18 "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

# Lk.10:19 "Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you."

So, here it is, the criteria of determining what a real christian is. I will say righ tnow, without at doubt, that Radbrook is not a christian, as he cannot do the feats outlined above.

The problem with what you have posted is your clip out from the bible to ask a question. What is a true Christian would utimately be Gods decision anything else is judgemental on our parts.

I cannot say although Radrook mentioned some guidelines hes going to post which we can see later.

Unless you want to decide by the criteria you have selected above only, which may be a answer but its only one situation to determine if one is christian.

[Kitty Chan]

sorry the boards are not posting correctly this was double

[thaiboxerken]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas


Saying someone is not a 'true Christian' because they fail to perform feats the founder of the faith said they could is the same as claiming someone is not a true fan of ..

Well then, what are the objective criterium for determining who is a true christian or not?

You are making the very point that I wanted to instill. People like Radrook want to say anyone that does any "evil" thing is no longer a christian, in his mind, there is no such thing as a bad christian. So, I am simply asking for objective criteria to determine who a true christian is.

Why is Jesus of the bible wrong on his criteria?

[thaiboxerken]

What is a true Christian would utimately be Gods decision anything else is judgemental on our parts.

Isn't Jesus supposed to be part of god, son of god or god himself? Was this Jesus cat just making up stuff? Isn't he the person who christianity is all about, yet his words mean nothing? WTF is that all about? How can you worship a god/diety/prophet if you don't believe the words he says?

It doesn't make sense.

[Kitty Chan]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
Saying someone is not a 'true Christian' because they fail to perform feats the founder of the faith said they could is the same as claiming someone is not a true fan of the Undertakers (http://www.the-undertakers.com/The%20Undertakers%20&%20Fan%20Gallery.htm) because they haven't the foggiest idea how to party classic rock style.

:D :D :D

[Kitty Chan]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
What is a true Christian would utimately be Gods decision anything else is judgemental on our parts.

Isn't Jesus supposed to be part of god, son of god or god himself? Was this Jesus cat just making up stuff? Isn't he the person who christianity is all about, yet his words mean nothing? WTF is that all about? How can you worship a god/diety/prophet if you don't believe the words he says?

It doesn't make sense.

Yes Jesus is the Son of God, no He wasnt making it up. Maybe you misunderstood what you quoted me above.

I will try to clear it up

WE are not to decide whos christian or not as WE do not know truly what the other person is about. Jesus knows what we are about what our motives truly are. So therefore He will know a true christian when He sees one. He even wrote in the bible that not everyone who calls Me Lord will I recoginize.

In other words, He knows the fakes using His Name, the true ones using His Name.

[The GM]

I tend to disagree w/ TBK on a lot of stuff I read from him, but this time I think he's on the right trail.

I would also say that I have certainly met those who try to live up to the Christian ideal. Let Radrook post those, since he volunteered. (I reserve the right to comment if I see something that does not jive w/ the ideals I am familiar w/ or if I see inaccuracies.)
It's the ideology that modern Christians subscribe to. The supernatural stuff that TBK refers to doesn't appear to happen.

[Kitty Chan]

Originally posted by Crossbow


Well, I do not know Radbrook, but never the less, I think the that only true Christians are Jews.

As far as I can tell,
Jesus was born a Jew, raised as a Jew, died as a Jew, and was buried as a Jew;
Jesus never repuditiated the Jewish faith;
nor did Jesus actually start a new religion.

However, what some of his followers did was decidely different from what he did.

Dont wanna get too far ahead just waiting on Radrook but as a direct answer to your answer this is what Jesus message was all about, tearing down the walls etc that gentile could worship God as well as Jew. No it wasnt a new religion it was a fullfillment of the existing one. Problem was it stepped on some toes of the powerful and the unchanging.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
Well then, what are the objective criterium for determining who is a true christian or not?
Who said there had to be objective criteria?

What is the objective criteria for determining who is a true New York Islanders fan or not? Do they have to wear an Islanders sweater once a week at least? Must they know who was the 3rd line right-winger for the 84-85 season?

You would probably take anyone at their word if they said they were a New York Islanders fan, unless you had compelling reason not to. If, for instance, you found out they thought the Islanders were a water polo team, you could probably conclude they were pulling your leg. Why they'd bother is anyone's guess.

It's the same with religious belief, as far as I can tell.

You are making the very point that I wanted to instill. People like Radrook want to say anyone that does any "evil" thing is no longer a christian, in his mind, there is no such thing as a bad christian. So, I am simply asking for objective criteria to determine who a true christian is.
If you are asking how Christians should judge who is a true Christian, I'd say that's a matter best left up to the Christians. I know I don't appreciate it when a Christian tries to tell me what a 'real atheist' is or does or believes. I figure they probably don't appreciate it either.

If (some form of) Christianity turns out to be true, then it is (as Kitty pointed out) God's call. The mind of the Christian God is notoriously inscrutable, even to self-professed Christians, so where is it you think this answer will come from?

Why is Jesus of the bible wrong on his criteria?
The same reason any 2000 year old founder of an idea might not be a complete authority on all manifestations of that idea in the present day. Ideas evolve. Damned memes.

Or, if you prefer this answer: the same reason Bill Torrey didn't get to set criteria for who's a New York Islanders fan.

[Radrook]

Originally posted by Crossbow


Well, I do not know Radbrook, but never the less, I think the that only true Christians are Jews.

As far as I can tell,
Jesus was born a Jew, raised as a Jew, died as a Jew, and was buried as a Jew;
Jesus never repuditiated the Jewish faith;
nor did Jesus actually start a new religion.

However, what some of his followers did was decidely different from what he did.

Christians are persons who have accepted Jesus as their savior and sghow that they have by livingChristian lo

[Radrook]

Originally posted by Crossbow


Well, I do not know Radbrook, but never the less, I think the that only true Christians are Jews.

As far as I can tell,
Jesus was born a Jew, raised as a Jew, died as a Jew, and was buried as a Jew;
Jesus never repuditiated the Jewish faith;
nor did Jesus actually start a new religion.

However, what some of his followers did was decidely different from what he did.

Christians are persons who have accepted Jesus as their savior and sghow that they have by livingChristian loves. Whether such persons be Gentiles or of Jewish extraction is irrelevant.

Jesus spoke of a NEW Covenant that would replace the Old Covenant. In fact, he came to fulfill the Old Covenant via his sacrifice.

BTW
what authority are you basing your statements on?

[Radrook]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
I still maintain that you are only a psuedochristian, Rad. You are no true believer, as true believers can perform the feats. You cannot.


I can live with that evaluation.

[Ossai]

Radrook
Jesus spoke of a NEW Covenant that would replace the Old Covenant. In fact, he came to fulfill the Old Covenant via his sacrifice.
Yet Jesus fulfilled none of the criteria of the messiah. How was his bad weekend supposed to fulfill the old covenant?

Ossai

[thaiboxerken]

WE are not to decide whos christian or not as WE do not know truly what the other person is about.

Right.

Jesus knows what we are about what our motives truly are. So therefore He will know a true christian when He sees one. He even wrote in the bible that not everyone who calls Me Lord will I recoginize.

Yes, but JESUS gave specific traits to be recognized that determine who a true believer is. So, why is it that we don't see invincible, invulnerable and superhealer christians running around on earth? Why is it that we can't even find one? Was Jesus a liar?

[thaiboxerken]

Originally posted by Radrook


Christians are persons who have accepted Jesus as their savior and sghow that they have by livingChristian loves. Whether such persons be Gentiles or of Jewish extraction is irrelevant.


Well then, how can you try to tell people that Hitler was not christian? This criteria of yours is extremely subjective. You christians can't even agree amongst yourselves who a true christian is.

Who said there had to be objective criteria?

I did. This is because idiot christers seem to want to claim alot of other fellow christians as not being real christians anytime that christian does somethign a little too evil. Basically, I'm am showing the fallacy of the True-Scotsman argument that christians use so often. I'm also showing them that their own bible has outlined what a true christian is already, and that they ignore that scripture because people don't possess those superpowers.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Thai,

From a (professing) Christian's standpoint, a True Christian would be anyone who, by virtue of their beliefs and/or actions, will earn eternal reward upon death. If (as both you and I believe, it seems...correct me if I am wrong) no version of Christianity is true, then there are no True Christians as such.

When a Christian says 'X is not a True Christian,' it is not so much a statement about X as it is a statment about their own beliefs. The 'objective criteria' you require are unlikely to materialise. Each Christian will have their own idea of what the criteria are.

Similarly, when you (or any non-Christian) ask a Christian what makes a True Christian, you need to realise that the answer is tied to their beliefs, in fact, is a facet of their beliefs. Now, you are certainly free to conclude that their beliefs are in error, but what purpose is served by just telling them their criteria are wrong? Why should a Christian take a non-Christian's advice on what criteria to use?

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by Radrook


Christians are persons who have accepted Jesus as their savior and sghow that they have by livingChristian loves. Whether such persons be Gentiles or of Jewish extraction is irrelevant.

Jesus spoke of a NEW Covenant that would replace the Old Covenant. In fact, he came to fulfill the Old Covenant via his sacrifice.

BTW
what authority are you basing your statements on?

Er, I based my thoughts on the same authority that I expect you use as well.

Namely, the New Testament.

[Kitty Chan]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken

WE are not to decide whos christian or not as WE do not know truly what the other person is about.

Right.

Jesus knows what we are about what our motives truly are. So therefore He will know a true christian when He sees one. He even wrote in the bible that not everyone who calls Me Lord will I recoginize.

Yes, but JESUS gave specific traits to be recognized that determine who a true believer is. So, why is it that we don't see invincible, invulnerable and superhealer christians running around on earth? Why is it that we can't even find one? Was Jesus a liar?

More accurately Jesus gave us specific traits (although I dont think traits is the correct term but I will go with it for sake of discussion) ways to determine a true believer. He doesnt need them we do.

Now, what you are asking is if Im a christian I should be able to be invincible, invulnerable and a superhealer??? Or more specifically what you quoted from the bible earlier in this thread. Is this correct?? I just wanna know Im understanding you.

[Kitty Chan]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
Thai,

From a (professing) Christian's standpoint, a True Christian would be anyone who, by virtue of their beliefs and/or actions, will earn eternal reward upon death. If (as both you and I believe, it seems...correct me if I am wrong) no version of Christianity is true, then there are no True Christians as such.

When a Christian says 'X is not a True Christian,' it is not so much a statement about X as it is a statment about their own beliefs. The 'objective criteria' you require are unlikely to materialise. Each Christian will have their own idea of what the criteria are.

Similarly, when you (or any non-Christian) ask a Christian what makes a True Christian, you need to realise that the answer is tied to their beliefs, in fact, is a facet of their beliefs. Now, you are certainly free to conclude that their beliefs are in error, but what purpose is served by just telling them their criteria are wrong? Why should a Christian take a non-Christian's advice on what criteria to use?

I think what you said is pretty fair understanding. I myself dont worry about the reward part actually I dont believe its a reward per say more of being with or without God would be slightly more accurate.

I think there is alot of misunderstanding in this subject as there is in pretty much any subject. But discussion can clear up misconceptions, ie another thread about the peace sign I never knew it was anti nuke group. Now I know more.

[NoZed Avenger]

In context, it seems that Jesus was referring specifically to "them that believe," meaning the eleven apostles who had not originally believed the resurrection (Mark 16 v. 11, 14). This seems confirmed by the 'miracles' performed by the apostles themselves and listed in Acts and Hebrews.

I am not familiar with the Luke reference right off, but I suspect that it is the same context problem -- i.e., these were promises/authorities granted to the original apostles in spreading the word, and not a definition of "true Christian" used by Jesus within the Bible.

N/A

[dmarker]

The problem is that no one can give a definition of a True Christian.

Rad thinks he is a True Christian. Hitler thought he was a True Christian. Torquemada thought he was a a True Christian. The list goes on and on.

Since the criteria of being a True Christian is based upon the individual's own belief that they are a True Christian, Hitler and Torquemada are just as much a True Christian as Rad.

[dmarker]

double post

[thaiboxerken]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
Why should a Christian take a non-Christian's advice on what criteria to use?

It's an attempt to get idiots like Rad to see that their claims of what a true christian is is simply a belief and not a fact, and it is also fallacy. Rad wants to think Hitler was not a true christian, despite the facts.

So, I'll go by the words that the founder of christianity, Jesus, said who a true christian is. It's outlined in the bible. There are no true christians according to those criteria.

[thaiboxerken]

Originally posted by Kitty Chan

Now, what you are asking is if Im a christian I should be able to be invincible, invulnerable and a superhealer??? Or more specifically what you quoted from the bible earlier in this thread. Is this correct?? I just wanna know Im understanding you.

Yes, this Jesus cat said what true believers can do. So, that leaves 4 options.

Jesus lied.
There are true believers can do what he said.
There are no true believers.
Or, it's all a bunch of BS.

I lean towards #4.

[Radrook]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken


Yes, this Jesus cat said what true believers can do. So, that leaves 4 options.

Jesus lied.
There are true believers can do what he said.
There are no true believers.
Or, it's all a bunch of BS.

I lean towards #4.


Jesus also said that thee would be persons doing those powerful works and that those persons would not be Christians. In fact, he called them evildoers.


Matthew 7
22. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23. Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

[dmarker]

Originally posted by Radrook



Jesus also said that thee would be persons doing those powerful works and that those persons would not be Christians. In fact, he called them evildoers.


Matthew 7
22. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23. Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

How do you know that you are a Christian and not an evildoer? After all Satan is pretty subtle and could have easily led you astray without you realizing it.

[Navigator]

Originally posted by Crossbow

However, what some of his followers did was decidely different from what he did.

Then how can they be called 'followers of Jesus'?

If the bible makes any mentions of 'Christians' it does so through the pen of Paul.

Jesus called his 'followers' Disciples

[Radrook]

Originally posted by Navigator


Then how can they be called 'followers of Jesus'?

If the bible makes any mentions of 'Christians' it does so through the pen of Paul.

Jesus called his 'followers' Disciples

Is there any sin involved in his followers calling themselves Christians?

[Marquis de Carabas]

Thai,

I see where you're coming from, and what you're trying to establish now. I still stand by everything I've said. If you manage to pry out of Rad exactly what his criteria are, you will still have just one Christian's opinion. Many Christians may, in fact, agree with him, but many will not. There's just not going to be a clear-cut answer here.

As for Hitler, he said a lot of conflicting things about religion throughout his life. Even if you want to call him Christian (and I grant there are ample quotes to back you up here) you must admit that he was not acting in accordance with mainstream Christian thought at the time, and especially not the mainstream at this time. I see no inconsistency with a Christian believing he's rotting in Hell as we speak.


Kitty,

Thanks for the input. I hope I didn't sound too much like I was calling all Christians mercenaries. You've helped illustrate my point that different Christians see it differently. :D

[Iacchus]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas

Kitty,

Thanks for the input. I hope I didn't sound too much like I was calling all Christians mercenaries. You've helped illustrate my point that different Christians see it differently. :D There are just as many Christians as there are people. However, there is only one sun in the sky (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=43091).

[Marquis de Carabas]

Yeah, yeah, and on a clear night, I can see Uranus. Could you try not to derail this thread?

[Ossai]

Marquis de Carabas
As for Hitler, he said a lot of conflicting things about religion throughout his life. Even if you want to call him Christian (and I grant there are ample quotes to back you up here) you must admit that he was not acting in accordance with mainstream Christian thought at the time, and especially not the mainstream at this time.
What conflicting things did Hitler say about religion? Include sources and/or links please.
Hitler was, from everything I’ve read, Catholic. Looking at all Christian sections equally Catholics outnumber any of the others (I’m deliberately ignoring the many flavors of Catholic here), so how was Hitler not expressing main stream views? Did the Vatican excommunicate, or even denounce him, while he was in power?

Ossai

[Radrook]

Originally posted by Ossai
Marquis de Carabas

What conflicting things did Hitler say about religion? Include sources and/or links please.
Hitler was, from everything I’ve read, Catholic. Looking at all Christian sections equally Catholics outnumber any of the others (I’m deliberately ignoring the many flavors of Catholic here), so how was Hitler not expressing main stream views? Did the Vatican excommunicate, or even denounce him, while he was in power?

Ossai

Why would you set up Vatican approval as the guidline for Chrisiianhood? The Vatican did not speak out against Dracula either because not speaking out against Dracula was to its political advantage.

[Lord Emsworth]

Originally posted by Radrook
Why would you set up Vatican approval as the guidline for Chrisiianhood?


Sorry for borrowing a phrase of yours from another thread, but ...

The pope is "officially recognized as inspired" and moreover infallible. :rolleyes:

[thaiboxerken]

Originally posted by Radrook



Jesus also said that thee would be persons doing those powerful works and that those persons would not be Christians. In fact, he called them evildoers.


Matthew 7
22. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23. Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

This is utter bullsh..... The NT also condemns that jewish people for placing jesus on the cross. Jesus told the jews "you are either with me or against me". Hitler was merely hating the jews that killed jesus, just like Paul and Jesus did.

[thaiboxerken]

As for Hitler, he said a lot of conflicting things about religion throughout his life. Even if you want to call him Christian (and I grant there are ample quotes to back you up here) you must admit that he was not acting in accordance with mainstream Christian thought at the time, and especially not the mainstream at this time. I see no inconsistency with a Christian believing he's rotting in Hell as we speak.

It was mainstream for christians to hate jews at that time. Hitler took advantage of the hate the christians had. Oh, and I don't see any consistency in what christian beliefs are, as they are dynamic, changing and morph according to situation. People like Rad simply want us to believe that christians are the most perfect people in the world, and if a person is not almost-perfect, then they are christian. I want to know RAD's criteria for determining what a christian is, so we can actually know where he's coming from when he says stupid crap like "he wasn't a true christian".

Then again, I guess I do know that he's coming from unsanity in his statements.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Ossai,

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/mischedj/ca_hitler.html
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/sn-hitler.html

Both an atheist and a Christian website reporting conflicting quotes, albeit from the same sources. And, in fairness...

http://www.ffrf.org/fttoday/nov02/index.php?ft=carrier.html

...calling the translations of the source of the anti-Christian quotes into question. I had not previous to this morning heard these doubts raised, but must admit I'm not much of a Hitler scholar. If you have any further information, please advise.

Hitler was, from everything I’ve read, Catholic. Looking at all Christian sections equally Catholics outnumber any of the others (I’m deliberately ignoring the many flavors of Catholic here), so how was Hitler not expressing main stream views?
Many times he did express mainstream views. You will note that my original post said he "was not acting in accordance. "[emphasis added] Perhaps I should have been more clear that the specific action I refer to is the ordering of genocide. Do you assert that mainstream Christian thought at the time supported genocide?

Did the Vatican excommunicate, or even denounce him, while he was in power?
No, but you knew that. Still, lacking the balls to openly decry something is not the same as supporting it. And I wager your average Catholic on the street (and there were many more of those than there were Vatican officials) wasn't too big on genocide.

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
It was mainstream for christians to hate jews at that time.
Quite a bold statement. Was it also mainstream for Christians to endorse the genocide of Jews at the time?

[NoZed Avenger]

/tap, tap

Is this thing on?!

[Ossai]

Radrook
Why would you set up Vatican approval as the guidline for Chrisiianhood? The Vatican did not speak out against Dracula either because not speaking out against Dracula was to its political advantage. Are you now saying that Catholics aren’t TRUE Christians?


Marquis de Carabas
I’ll have to look over the links you provided later, hopefully tonight or tomorrow.
Perhaps I should have been more clear that the specific action I refer to is the ordering of genocide. Do you assert that mainstream Christian thought at the time supported genocide? Historically speaking, this is from memory of my western civ class, yes*.

*The Jews and Gypsies were historically the scapegoat of the European continent (not saying there weren’t others) and were blamed, discriminated again, etc.
Going so far as to say that mainstream Christians supported genocide, I can’t comment on. But, as far as the Catholic Church goes, it did indeed support genocide and actively supported it as well, no I’m not talking about the Jews in this instance. Given that, as well as the prevailing attitude supported by the Church, it is not surprising that the Church did not speak out against the holocaust.

Ossai

[Ossai]

Marquis de Carabas
I’ve looked at the first site listed.
The book they keep quoting from is Hitler's Table Talk by Hugh Redwald Trevor-Roper. The same Hugh Trevor-Roper that authenticated the Hitler Diaries, which were proven to be a hoax. Go here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Trevor-Roper) for a bit about that. At a cursery glance almost every link I pulled up thru google also referenced the same book. At the very least this throws doubt on the authenticity of the reference.

Ossai

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by Navigator


Then how can they be called 'followers of Jesus'?

If the bible makes any mentions of 'Christians' it does so through the pen of Paul.

Jesus called his 'followers' Disciples

Well, it looks like none of disciples did things like start a new religion, repuditate the Jewish religion, start a Papacy, et al. These sorts of things were done some years, if not decades, after their deaths.

And so what if they call themselves 'Christians' or not? I have personally seen others call themselves 'lovers of freedom', 'Celts', 'Templars', 'Indians', and so on, but just because a person gives his views a label, that does not mean that the label is valid.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Ossai,

I'm reaching much the same conclusion running around on the net today looking stuff up. Note the third site I gave, which reaches the conclusion that the Table Talks notes are authentic, but the translation from which all the quotes are drawn is poorly done (and from a French translation of the original German, no less.)

There are a few quotes towards the bottom of that page, when properly translated, that seem to indicate that Hitler felt at times that mainstream Christianity was flawed, and he was doing it the right way.

I'm still of the opinion that Hitler's religious beliefs are a bit too complex to categorize him as just a good little toe-the-line Catholic boy. He seems to have viewed Christianity primarily as a means to an end. Which came first, his Christianity or his anti-Semitism? Kinda hard to tell.

As for the Catholic church's culpability. I do realize that historically they were often enthusiastic about genocide. I was under the general impression they had gotten that more or less under control by the 20th Century. At the time, I think that mainstream Christian thought would have been against genocide.

More creedence, I think, can be lent to the argument that the Church, though perhaps (ballslessly) against genocide by WWII, had laid much of the groundwork in the previous centuries that eventually begat the Holocaust. I've the name of an author at home who holds this view. I'll get that for you tonight.

(I think we're derailing the thread, btw)

[Kitty Chan]

Ok here is what christians believe, (I dont like the label true christian) anyway, this is the most important points. This is a indicator of one who is following Christ, should agree with this.

Apostles' Creed

I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth: And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord, Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, Born of the Virgin Mary, Suffered under Pontius Pilate, Was crucified, dead, and buried: He descended into hell; The third day He rose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, And sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost; The Holy catholic Church, the Communion of Saints; The Forgiveness of sins; The Resurrection of the body, And the Life everlasting. Amen.

of particular note: (The word "catholic" means "relating to the church universal" and was the word used in the original version of the Creed. It does not mean the Roman Catholic Church, but the church, the body of Christ, as a universal fellowship.)

there is more at the following link

http://www.billygraham.org/qna/qna.asp?i=577

I get the feeling Im not supposed to copy paste the content of a link?? copyright no no?

This is basic to what a christian should "DO".

Now, because one feels a new sense then one would perform any good works, helping others, etc.

There is another section that describes different "gifts" or simply put "what you are good at" that varies obviously with different people. Thats where you start to find the sort of things that started this thread. (Although I do think it was directed to the Disiples the stuff at the start).

And I dont think its necessarily derailing talking if Hitler was a christian or not. Im going with not because there is one way for sure to tell a "True" christian or at least one who is "trying" their best and that is:

You will know them by their fruit, what comes of them, what was / is their effect?

What was Hilters results ?

I have heard that some think that Hitler was misunderstood and no one tried to see things from his side. Maybe it was hard to see his side when he thought you should be dead . . . You are German, How would you like to see the Nazis driving up the street and your mom says hide, dad says I have nothing to hide I did nothing wrong. (and he hadnt) The Nazis come in take dad and that is the absolute last anyone hears of him. So you change your name and escape to Canada. Such was the fate of my best friends grandpa.

The Legion in Canada has a motto

"Lest we forget"

or my personal fav

"fools rush in where fools have been before"

[thaiboxerken]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas

Quite a bold statement. Was it also mainstream for Christians to endorse the genocide of Jews at the time?

Well, the Pope certainly didn't make any fuss about it until AFTER the fact. Oh, and yes.. in Europe, there was a big anti-semite sentiment.

[thaiboxerken]

"Which came first, his Christianity or his anti-Semitism? Kinda hard to tell."

Hitler's anti-Semitism was a product of his Christianity. So it seems to be a redundant question.

[thaiboxerken]

Ok here is what christians believe, (I dont like the label true christian) anyway, this is the most important points. This is a indicator of one who is following Christ, should agree with this.

Apostles' Creed (snip)

Ok, so that's what christians believe. I notice that there is nothing regarding how a christian should behave in that creed. It also doesn't show how to determine who is a true christian or not.


Now, because one feels a new sense then one would perform any good works, helping others, etc.

You don't think Hitler felt a "new sense" when he had jewish people exterminated?

There is another section that describes different "gifts" or simply put "what you are good at" that varies obviously with different people. Thats where you start to find the sort of things that started this thread. (Although I do think it was directed to the Disiples the stuff at the start).

Some people are good at murder.

And I dont think its necessarily derailing talking if Hitler was a christian or not. Im going with not because there is one way for sure to tell a "True" christian or at least one who is "trying" their best and that is:

You will know them by their fruit, what comes of them, what was / is their effect?

That is part of it, but you are conveniently leaving out the other criteria that Jesus stated, the criteria that involves having superpowers.


What was Hilters results ?

He delt a very powerful blow to the jewish religion and population, thus helping to ensure that christianity remains the majority religion in Europe. What Hitler did helped the christian religion gain and retain more power over the masses. Spreading faith at the end of a sword, it's what made christianity the most popular religion in Europe.

[Navigator]

As for Hitler, he said a lot of conflicting things about religion throughout his life. Even if you want to call him Christian (and I grant there are ample quotes to back you up here) you must admit that he was not acting in accordance with mainstream Christian thought at the time, and especially not the mainstream at this time. I see no inconsistency with a Christian believing he's rotting in Hell as we speak.

Greetings Marquis de Carabas

From secular science pov, Hitler is where Albert E is...nowhere.

Dead and Gone.

However, both individuals memories live on, and with Hitler there is this fascination, much as with Albert E.
Funny thing is, that the other world powers united under 'Christianity' and eventually slammed Nazism..so one part of Christianity booted another.
The part that booted Nazi's supported a different version of freedom.
It also supported Israel.
Anything which supports Israel somehow succeeds ordinarily.

Funny that.

:)

Anyhoo...time they is a-changing...

Greetings Radrook...how's it hangin' dude?
Is there any sin involved in his followers calling themselves Christians?

What is *SIN*?
I am pointing out an obvious...Christians follow Paul before they follow Jesus.
In most instances, Paul is the substitute...the thing that allows Xianz to blah blah and point finger.
However, I concede that Jesus is also recorded as blah blahing and pointing finger, which is inconsistent with other jems such as the time when the 'Jews" brought a prostitute before him...and were eager and expectant that 'Godz Son would agree with them that she should by 'Law" be stoned for her *SIN*
However, Masterfully, Jesus doodled in the sand (probably miles away from the dramatic issue force on him) and having finished dawing. looketh up and sayth "He/she/it who iz without *SIN* may of course chuck the first rock"

According to most movies, everyone present (eyes cast downwards) dropped their stonez and went home.

Funny that....

PQLiar.

Anyhoo, such wisdom doesn't add up to the other story about Jesus cursing the fig tree.

And thier is NO point n saying he was allowed to or privilaged because he was the perfect son of a virgin whom had 'relations' with G_D and virginally present such perfection to the world.

All that has done is to create a hicup in the way the rest of us view ourselves as inferiour because our moms were not virgins and we are not perfect.

Get Real....Get Israel.

Now I am not saying that the Jesus Myth does not have some Jems in which to garner for personal evolution, - indeed, some mighty great parables have been forthcoming from the storybook - but if there is one particular thread which impresses me, it is the one which speaks of self empowerment through discernment and personal deliverence from the impractical sillyiness interwoven within the wisdom.

[scribble]

Originally posted by Navigator
... Nazi's ...

...how's it hangin' dude?...

I am pointing out an obvious...

...Xianz...

...jems...

...'Godz...

...iz...

...According to most movies...

...stonez...

...thier is NO point n saying...

...privilaged...

...Get Real....Get Israel....

...Jems in which to garner for...



In another thread of yours, I aksed you whether you were a brilliant child or a regular fool.

Though you didn't respond, the answer is in: you appear to be a foolish child.

[Navigator]

Originally posted by scribble


In another thread of yours, I aksed you whether you were a brilliant child or a regular fool.

Though you didn't respond, the answer is in: you appear to be a foolish child.

Yeah, yeah, and on a clear night, I can see Uranus. Could you try not to derail this thread?


(Golly - ! Infacto - this iz the very first contribution you have offered thiz thread, and it aint even on topic!...I will keep an I on U.)

To answer your post below...I didn;t feel the need to answer such a question as it were not relevent to that thread either.
Besides, every forum has it 'monitors' whom just go about poking silly remarks and looking impotant r Maybe if I felt serious I wood go have a look at the threads you have started and see if there are any.
Surely a 'Master Poster' as yerself (Posts: 2125) haz MANY!!

Portrait of a "Foolish Childz?"
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?s=&postid=57831

In fact it is. That photo is almost ten years old.

GODDAMN I was hot then. Thanks for finding that. I have to go be alone now.

:)

(Apart from your immature rudeness, I think you likeable...enjoy youSelf)
;)

Real cheap shot, getting me to agree to not derail the thread further, then editing your post to include new insults.

You are a foolish child indeed.


Now now now....I am anything but 'cheap' ...and the most foolish of children leave standing the self adulation of adults.
I am flattered that you care to know 'what' I am....'tis more than I have cared to know of you.
:)
Oh...WTF...:D

[scribble]

Originally posted by Navigator


Yeah, yeah, and on a clear night, I can see Uranus. Could you try not to derail this thread?


I thought that was real funny the first time I heard it. You're not original either, I guess.

But yes, I'd be glad to shut up on the off-topic things now. I just wanted you to know I had my answer despite your refusal to respond to the question.

Edited to add:

Real cheap shot, getting me to agree to not derail the thread further, then editing your post to include new insults.

You are a foolish child indeed.


Surely a 'Master Poster' as yerself (Posts: 2125) haz MANY!!


I had many once upon a time. At least one was even nominated for a language award.

These days, your assesment is mostly correct; I'm no police or monitor, I just don't suffer fools lightly, and telling everyone how stupid they are takes up all my time.


Portrait of a "Foolish Childz?"
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?s=&postid=57831


In fact it is. That photo is almost ten years old.

GODDAMN I was hot then. Thanks for finding that. I have to go be alone now.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Thai,

Yes, anti-semitism was common in Europe, but there were Christians elsewhere. And I really was wondering about worldwide Christian sentiment. The Christian faith(s) is so varied you can always find a good number to go along with you on nearly anything. I'm actually rather curious to know how widespread the anti-semitism was, among Christians. If you have any relevant information, please advise.

As to my remark about which came first for him, it was a bit more than a simple rhetorical device. It's another question I'm fairly interested in. Chronologically, of course, I realize he was raised Catholic, and developed anti-semitic beliefs in young adulthood.

When I ask which came first, I don't mean by timeline. I mean which was the priority? Which drove the other? Did Hitler hate Jews, and use Christianity to back him up? Or did he believe his faith instructed him to hate Jews? I was a hockey fan long before I was a smoker, but I won't be blaming the Great One for my lung cancer one day. Let's not go propter hoc'n our post hocs.

Again, I am no Hitler scholar. The one book I have read on him (Explaining Hitler by Ron Rosenbaum) left me with the impression that Hitler's priorities are still an open question among scholars. If you have evidence that the weight of scholarly opinion falls one way or the other, and the matter is resolved, once again, please advise.

Finally, since I note you call Kitty on the points raised in your original question, did you even notice NoZeD Avenger's post? I repost it here, hoping to draw your attention to a valid point you may have missed...

Originally posted by NoZeD Avenger
In context, it seems that Jesus was referring specifically to "them that believe," meaning the eleven apostles who had not originally believed the resurrection (Mark 16 v. 11, 14). This seems confirmed by the 'miracles' performed by the apostles themselves and listed in Acts and Hebrews.

I am not familiar with the Luke reference right off, but I suspect that it is the same context problem -- i.e., these were promises/authorities granted to the original apostles in spreading the word, and not a definition of "true Christian" used by Jesus within the Bible.

N/A


If it be deemed unkosher (:D) that I lifted that entire post, I extend my deepest apologies. I meant not to offend, merely to bring to light a point of view that got regrettably lost in the shuffle.

edited to fix silly formatting error

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally lifted by Navigator
Yeah, yeah, and on a clear night, I can see Uranus. Could you try not to derail this thread?

I guess I needn't have worried about lifting that NoZed quote. Instant Karma slapped me right in the face...

[Navigator]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas

I guess I needn't have worried about lifting that NoZed quote. Instant Karma slapped me right in the face...

What? YOU Worryz?
https://www.neodata.com/mad/images/alfreden.gif

[Kitty Chan]

I amended my previous post as its easier than going in several directions. Thai here is a place to start to answer your original question, Obviously I am not like Slyvia and cant read your mind of all the specific questions so Im just trying gimme a break . . .

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kitty Chan
Ok here is what christians believe, (I dont like the label true christian) anyway, this is the most important points. ]This is a indicator of one who is following Christ , should agree with this.

Apostles' Creed

I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth: And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord, Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, Born of the Virgin Mary, Suffered under Pontius Pilate, Was crucified, dead, and buried: He descended into hell; The third day He rose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, And sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost; The Holy catholic Church, the Communion of Saints; The Forgiveness of sins; The Resurrection of the body, And the Life everlasting. Amen.

of particular note: (The word "catholic" means "relating to the church universal" and was the word used in the original version of the Creed. It does not mean the Roman Catholic Church, but the church, the body of Christ, as a universal fellowship.)

there is more at the following link

http://www.billygraham.org/qna/qna.asp?i=577

I get the feeling Im not supposed to copy paste the content of a link?? copyright no no? I dont know so Im asking.

This is basic to what a christian should "DO". This is where one starts, then you grow from there. With anything you gotta start somewhere. Its the first step.

Now, because one feels a thankfullness to what Christ did and said one will want to try to follow in what Christ taught, one would want to try to help others etc. Thats another step.

There is another section that describes different "gifts" or simply put "what you are good at" that varies obviously with different people. Thats where you start to find the sort of things that you were first asking about. So you see I was not avoiding anything. (I can post specifically these gifts if you want)

TO Marquis

I dont think its necessarily derailing talking if Hitler was a christian or not. Im going with not because there is one way for sure to tell a "True" christian or at least one who is "trying" their best and that is:

You will know them by their fruit, what comes of them, what was / is their effect? Aside to Thai: This is another indicator of a true christian

What fruit did Hitler produce? Here is an example below . . .

I have heard that some think that Hitler was misunderstood and no one tried to see things from his side. Maybe it was hard to see his side when he thought you should be dead . . . You are German, How would you like to see the Nazis driving up the street and your mom says hide, dad says I have nothing to hide I did nothing wrong. (and he hadnt) The Nazis come in take dad and that is the absolute last anyone hears of him. So her family changed their name and escaped to Canada which was not easy to do. They didnt just hop a plane, escape means escape. Such was the fate of my best friends grandpa. The pampered population that exists today has no clue of the horrors of those days and is in danger of the following:

The Legion in Canada has a motto

"Lest we forget"

or my personal fav

"fools rush in where fools have been before" [/QUOTE

[Marquis de Carabas]

Kitty,

Hitler presents an interesting challenge for my rather nonchalant way of deciding who is a Christian. As stated, as a non-Christian, I just take anyone at their word about it in lieu of contradictory evidence.

Now, there are many quotes on record (see my above links for a few) having Hitler express his belief in Christianity. So, he's got the profession of belief part down. Do his actions constitute evidence against this claim? That's the tough bit...

Certainly, his actions (or, I suppose, more precisely, his orders for others' actions) were atrocious. Certainly, his actions are repulsive to most mainstream Christians today. Possibly, they were repulsive to many Christians at the time (Ossai, maybe thai, and I are working on this one, see above.)

This would tend to make me go along with judging them by their fruits. Them's some nasty bananas right there. In which case, it seems I have the contradictory evidence I require.

However, I can reconcile Hitler's actions as the culmination of (certain) facets of (some) Christian thought. At times, some Christians have endorsed anti-Semitism. At times, some Christians have endorsed wholesale slaughter of perceived enemies.

This leads me to think that perhaps the man was sincere about his religious convictions, and he was just far more extreme than most professing Christians today.

Christian? Non-Christian? I'm still not sure I'd say one way or the other. Bastage? Indubitably.

Of course, even if one accepts the premise 'Hitler was a Christian,'

'Hitler was a bastage.'
'Therefore, Christians are bastages.'

does not follow.

[Radrook]

A true Christian is a person incapable of losing his patience an using foul language.

[scribble]

Originally posted by Radrook
A true Christian is a person incapable of losing his patience an using foul language.

Whaaaa?

[dmarker]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
Kitty,

Hitler presents an interesting challenge for my rather nonchalant way of deciding who is a Christian. As stated, as a non-Christian, I just take anyone at their word about it in lieu of contradictory evidence.

Now, there are many quotes on record (see my above links for a few) having Hitler express his belief in Christianity. So, he's got the profession of belief part down. Do his actions constitute evidence against this claim? That's the tough bit...

Certainly, his actions (or, I suppose, more precisely, his orders for others' actions) were atrocious. Certainly, his actions are repulsive to most mainstream Christians today. Possibly, they were repulsive to many Christians at the time (Ossai, maybe thai, and I are working on this one, see above.)

This would tend to make me go along with judging them by their fruits. Them's some nasty bananas right there. In which case, it seems I have the contradictory evidence I require.

However, I can reconcile Hitler's actions as the culmination of (certain) facets of (some) Christian thought. At times, some Christians have endorsed anti-Semitism. At times, some Christians have endorsed wholesale slaughter of perceived enemies.

This leads me to think that perhaps the man was sincere about his religious convictions, and he was just far more extreme than most professing Christians today.

Christian? Non-Christian? I'm still not sure I'd say one way or the other. Bastage? Indubitably.

Of course, even if one accepts the premise 'Hitler was a Christian,'

'Hitler was a bastage.'
'Therefore, Christians are bastages.'

does not follow.

Never said that all Christians are bastages. Just pointed out that there is no clear objective way to judge whether or not someone is a True Christian. Hitler could easily be a True Christian for all anyone knows.

[dmarker]

Originally posted by Radrook
A true Christian is a person incapable of losing his patience an using foul language.


Thanks for the laugh, Rad. You have to be the best arguement against Christianity ever conceived.

[Radrook]

Yawwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnn!

[Radrook]

Originally posted by Navigator
As for Hitler, he said a lot of conflicting things about religion throughout his life. Even if you want to call him Christian (and I grant there are ample quotes to back you up here) you must admit that he was not acting in accordance with mainstream Christian thought at the time, and especially not the mainstream at this time. I see no inconsistency with a Christian believing he's rotting in Hell as we speak.

[quote]Greetings Radrook...how's it hangin' dude?
Is there any sin involved in his followers calling themselves Christians?

What is *SIN*?
I am pointing out an obvious...Christians follow Paul before they follow Jesus.
In most instances, Paul is the substitute...the thing that allows Xianz to blah blah and point finger.
However, I concede that Jesus is also recorded as blah blahing and pointing finger, which is inconsistent with other jems such as the time when the 'Jews" brought a prostitute before him...and were eager and expectant that 'Godz Son would agree with them that she should by 'Law" be stoned for her *SIN*
However, Masterfully, Jesus doodled in the sand (probably miles away from the dramatic issue force on him) and having finished dawing. looketh up and sayth "He/she/it who iz without *SIN* may of course chuck the first rock"

According to most movies, everyone present (eyes cast downwards) dropped their stonez and went home.

Funny that....

PQLiar.

Anyhoo, such wisdom doesn't add up to the other story about Jesus cursing the fig tree.

And thier is NO point n saying he was allowed to or privilaged because he was the perfect son of a virgin whom had 'relations' with G_D and virginally present such perfection to the world.

All that has done is to create a hicup in the way the rest of us view ourselves as inferiour because our moms were not virgins and we are not perfect.

Get Real....Get Israel.

Now I am not saying that the Jesus Myth does not have some Jems in which to garner for personal evolution, - indeed, some mighty great parables have been forthcoming from the storybook - but if there is one particular thread which impresses me, it is the one which speaks of self empowerment through discernment and personal deliverence from the impractical sillyiness interwoven within the wisdom.

So that's your opinion?
Very interesting.

[thaiboxerken]

In context, it seems that Jesus was referring specifically to "them that believe," meaning the eleven apostles who had not originally believed the resurrection (Mark 16 v. 11, 14). This seems confirmed by the 'miracles' performed by the apostles themselves and listed in Acts and Hebrews.

The superpowers that Jesus ascribes to these people supposedly come from faith, not from simply being a disciple. So, if a person truly believes in Jesus, shouldn't he have superpowers too?

[thaiboxerken]

Originally posted by dmarker


Never said that all Christians are bastages. Just pointed out that there is no clear objective way to judge whether or not someone is a True Christian. Hitler could easily be a True Christian for all anyone knows.

This is really the point I'm getting to. Radrook has NO basis to say if someone was really a christian or not, especially if his criteria is "well, that guy killed someone" . Also, Hitler's christianity is rather a very tiny point.. even if Hitler lied about believing in jesus and god, he still led an entire nation of catholics to try to exterminate a culture of people.

What conclusion can be drawn from this? That irrational beliefs can lead to irrational and dangerous actions, and that belief in Jesus and God (by itself) do not make a person morally sound. In my experience, the more secular a christian is, the more peaceful they are.

[Radrook]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
In context, it seems that Jesus was referring specifically to "them that believe," meaning the eleven apostles who had not originally believed the resurrection (Mark 16 v. 11, 14). This seems confirmed by the 'miracles' performed by the apostles themselves and listed in Acts and Hebrews.

The superpowers that Jesus ascribes to these people supposedly come from faith, not from simply being a disciple. So, if a person truly believes in Jesus, shouldn't he have superpowers too?

Maybe Xray vision and super-speed too?
Maybe a piece of Caananite instead of Kryptonite will kill them.

:D

[dmarker]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken


This is really the point I'm getting to. Radrook has NO basis to say if someone was really a christian or not, especially if his criteria is "well, that guy killed someone" . Also, Hitler's christianity is rather a very tiny point.. even if Hitler lied about believing in jesus and god, he still led an entire nation of catholics to try to exterminate a culture of people.

What conclusion can be drawn from this? That irrational beliefs can lead to irrational and dangerous actions, and that belief in Jesus and God (by itself) do not make a person morally sound. In my experience, the more secular a christian is, the more peaceful they are.

Even leaving the decision to Christians themselves makes for much confusion. Do White Indentity Christians see the members of Black Baptist Churches as Christian? Are Mormons Christian?

I find that religious people tend to use their religion to justify their actions. "I was moved by, inspired by God" thends to be their theme.

[dmarker]

Originally posted by Radrook


Maybe Xray vision and super-speed too?
Maybe a piece of Caananite instead of Kryptonite will kill them.

:D


I'm sorry that the bible includes a definition of Christian that you can't live up to. But don't blame us, we didn't write it.

[kuroyume0161]

Originally posted by Radrook Christians are persons who have accepted Jesus as their savior and sghow that they have by livingChristian loves. Whether such persons be Gentiles or of Jewish extraction is irrelevant.

Jesus spoke of a NEW Covenant that would replace the Old Covenant. In fact, he came to fulfill the Old Covenant via his sacrifice.

Oh, really?! That's not how the 'Fathers' saw it. There was a great rift in the early church as to whether Christianity was to be restricted only to Jews or to allow Gentiles in. IIRC, Paul advocated allowing everyone while Peter vehemently opposed allowing anyone who wasn't Jewish (since this was a New Covenant with the tribes of Israel!!!). Only after a couple hundred years and the Council of Nicea ironed out those nasty thorns of differing opinions (and differing books) to determine what constituted canon did they finalize that everyone was included.

All Christians should be forced (as they are forcibly indoctrinated using the Bible of their unchosen sect) to read the noncanonical books (Gospel of Thomas, Mary, Protevangelion, Revelation of Peter, and so on). Then you'll see how many interpretations and variations and contradictions abounded about the "Truth(tm)(c)(r)" about Christianity.

Most of the Christian writings considered canonical at one time or another are anonymous or pseudonomyous or forged or borrowed or just plain made up to counter opposing arguments...

Kuroyume

[Bottle or the Gun]

The only true Christians were members of a small cult that may or may not have existed 2000 years ago. Everyone after that is just doing their own interpretation, which can not survive uncorrupted by change. As anyone knows, every idea or system is perfect until you bring a person into the equation.

[NoZed Avenger]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
The superpowers that Jesus ascribes to these people supposedly come from faith, not from simply being a disciple. So, if a person truly believes in Jesus, shouldn't he have superpowers too? [/B]

Presumably, these powers were given to the disciples as part of their effort to spread the faith. From a general reading of the New Testament, it seems possible that others with sufficient faith might be able to perform similar acts of faith, but I don't see that it is promised anywhere, except in the vaguest, allegory-type sense (i.e., the annoying Oracle-at-Delphi-not-quite-a-clear-answer that is always so annoying in these sorts of situations).

But my only point was that your cited verses/superpowers appear to be limited to those that were listed as present for his resurrection and were visted by him afterwards.

N/A

(who would take admantium claws over multiplying bread and fish, sorry)

[thaiboxerken]

Presumably, these powers were given to the disciples as part of their effort to spread the faith.

Actually, I don't think it says that jesus or god gave them powers to spread their faith, but that it was their faith that gave them the powers. Why is it that other faithful people wouldn't have the superpowers as well?

[Thurkon]

Unfortunately, there is no one definition of a "true" Christian, and the problem comes from our human subjectivity. We all can read a single sentence or group of sentences in any text and come up with an altered take on the meaning(s).

For example, does salvation depend on deeds:

"And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." John 5:29

...or belief:

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." Mark 16:16


The same goes for any religion, and man's interpretations thereof. Many say Islam is a peaceful religion, and speak about it thus with seeming authority...yet others use it to justify violence. The former might say the latter are misled and incorrect in their interpretation of Islam...

However, the truth is they both have equally valid points. No one can take such a complicated book and come up with the definitive interpretation. This is obviously true for our works of fiction, so why should religious texts be any different?