How many True Christians are there? - Page 2

crimresearch · 14th May 2012, 06:24 PM

Originally Posted by CplFerro

Dear Dinwar,

That's an interesting point. But, it relies a little too much on denominational conformity--the real test of a Christian should be if he lives his life with love for his fellow-men, not how often he attend church, no? In that case, how many people do you think count as True Christians?

Cpl Ferro

Again, is that what the Bible says is required to enter the category of 'Christian'? Perfection, love, and maybe martyrdom?

ponderingturtle · 14th May 2012, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

Errrrmm... if you are talking about snake handling denominations, the snake won't bite you if you are a TC.

I thought it was you might get bitten but true christians are immune to the venom like they are immune to poison.

Lowpro · 14th May 2012, 07:02 PM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

I thought it was you might get bitten but true christians are immune to the venom like they are immune to poison.

That's supposed to be it for Christianity but I wonder if there are other religions that like to play with snakes...

I really don't know O.o

crimresearch · 14th May 2012, 07:42 PM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

I thought it was you might get bitten but true christians are immune to the venom like they are immune to poison.

Well, I'll admit that I haven't done any field research on the matter...

I may be confusing 'the lion and the lamb together' with 'Nice snakey'.

Dinwar · 14th May 2012, 07:52 PM

Originally Posted by CplFerro

Dear Dinwar,

That's an interesting point. But, it relies a little too much on denominational conformity--the real test of a Christian should be if he lives his life with love for his fellow-men, not how often he attend church, no? In that case, how many people do you think count as True Christians?

Cpl Ferro

No. You are wrong. Missing Sunday services is a MORTAL sin. Not a venial one, a MORTAL one. You may as well, as far as Christianity is concerned, burn down an orphanage full of babies and nuns as miss mass--you're just as damned.

Your god supposedly gave us 10 commandments. If you're a believer you believe GOD HIMSELF TOLD YOU TO DO THIS. But now you're saying "Oh, but He didn't mean it". I'd bet good money you can't even name the sin you're committing....

You're clearly picking and choosing which parts of the Bible to consider, and which parts of posts to respond to (if you hadn't, you'd have realized that my point was a tad wider than "Go to mass on Sunday"; that was merely an example illustrating a point). Obviously the number of True Christians, whatever the criteria we go with, does not include you, at least.

Dog Breakfast · 14th May 2012, 08:13 PM

Originally Posted by dafydd

A true Christain would give all their wealth away, as instructed by Jesus.

Every Christian I talk to always seem to consider themselves exempt because they tell me they're using all of their stuff to the glory of God. I have a hard time believing anybody can use their blender to that end, but hey, Jesus was being a bit harsh, I think, and most people see that, rationalization or not.

Mercurial Artism · 14th May 2012, 08:59 PM

Wait, is the OP serious? I thought this thread was going to intentionally point out the absurdity of declaring a subset of Christians as True Christians based on how closely they adhere to Jesus's teachings based on one denomination's interpretation.

Small Town Jesus · 14th May 2012, 10:11 PM

Originally Posted by CplFerro

Dear MG,

Where would I come by such evidence?

I can judge from my own experience in church that there's at least one person there who probably won't die for Christ and therefore can hardly be called a True Christian.

Cpl Ferro

It is quite likely that those you belittle so condecendingly don't consider you a 'True Christian' for equally spurious and preposterous reasons.

dafydd · 15th May 2012, 03:10 AM

Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto

{{ WELCOME BACK }}

Now that you are here, I suggest there are two; You and I.

. . .

Except I am not too certain about you.

Thank you. I am half a true Scotsman.

crimresearch · 15th May 2012, 06:35 AM

Originally Posted by Mercurial Artism

Wait, is the OP serious? I thought this thread was going to intentionally point out the absurdity of declaring a subset of Christians as True Christians based on how closely they adhere to Jesus's teachings based on one denomination's interpretation.

As serious as any of their other threads.

crimresearch · 15th May 2012, 06:36 AM

Originally Posted by Small Town Jesus

It is quite likely that those you belittle so condecendingly don't consider you a 'True Christian' for equally spurious and preposterous reasons.

And according to Scripture, one of those who would do so, is God...

CplFerro · 15th May 2012, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

Again, is that what the Bible says is required to enter the category of 'Christian'? Perfection, love, and maybe martyrdom?

Dear crimresearch,

If not exact then they're close to it. Do you have a better definition?

Cpl Ferro

CplFerro · 15th May 2012, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by Dinwar

No. You are wrong. Missing Sunday services is a MORTAL sin. Not a venial one, a MORTAL one. You may as well, as far as Christianity is concerned, burn down an orphanage full of babies and nuns as miss mass--you're just as damned.

Your god supposedly gave us 10 commandments. If you're a believer you believe GOD HIMSELF TOLD YOU TO DO THIS. But now you're saying "Oh, but He didn't mean it". I'd bet good money you can't even name the sin you're committing....

You're clearly picking and choosing which parts of the Bible to consider, and which parts of posts to respond to (if you hadn't, you'd have realized that my point was a tad wider than "Go to mass on Sunday"; that was merely an example illustrating a point). Obviously the number of True Christians, whatever the criteria we go with, does not include you, at least.

Dear Dinwar,

I have mangled my meaning. I'm trying to ask, how many nominal Christians are serious and how many are just going through the motions for social reasons.

And, what is that sin's name, pray?

Cpl Ferro

crimresearch · 15th May 2012, 07:08 PM

Originally Posted by CplFerro

Dear crimresearch,

If not exact then they're close to it. Do you have a better definition?

Cpl Ferro

What's wrong with the one in the Bible?

Spend your whole life as did the disciples, giving up every material possession like a monk or nun, so that you can experience the suffering of Jesus and be his servant 24/7?

Those are the only ones that the Bible directly calls Christians.

CplFerro · 17th May 2012, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

What's wrong with the one in the Bible?

Spend your whole life as did the disciples, giving up every material possession like a monk or nun, so that you can experience the suffering of Jesus and be his servant 24/7?

Those are the only ones that the Bible directly calls Christians.

Dear crimresearch,

Okay, let's go with that. By those standards, how many True Christians are there in the world today?

Cpl Ferro

bookitty · 17th May 2012, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by CplFerro

Dear MG,

Where would I come by such evidence?

I can judge from my own experience in church that there's at least one person there who probably won't die for Christ and therefore can hardly be called a True Christian.

Cpl Ferro

And there you go, part of the reason why I'm not a Christian any more. Once I started questioning theology beyond the feelgood C. S Lewis variety, it became pretty clear that "following Christ" was ill-defined. Even if you stick to just the first 4 book of the New Testament and ignore all the other "Jesus totally would have said this if he was here right now!" stuff.

A small example, you have the beatitudes which were practically written for liberal, pacifist tree-huggers like myself. Except that liberal, pacifist tree-huggers like myself aren't content with waiting around for someone else to succor the grief-stricken or give the meek the earth. If I take things into my own hands, if I am not humble enough to wait for future goodness, am I Christian?

The more I tried to find a place for myself within Christ's teachings, the more I felt as if the whole thing was childish and placating.

AvalonXQ · 17th May 2012, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

What's wrong with the one in the Bible?

Spend your whole life as did the disciples, giving up every material possession like a monk or nun, so that you can experience the suffering of Jesus and be his servant 24/7?

Those are the only ones that the Bible directly calls Christians.

That's not correct.

The Bible says that the disciples of Paul and Barnabas who were in Antioch were first called Christians (Acts 11:26). They neither left their homes nor gave up their material possessions; they listened to God's word and worshipped together.

So, if you're talking about the Biblical definition, that's it.

Dinwar · 17th May 2012, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by CplFerro

Okay, let's go with that. By those standards, how many True Christians are there in the world today?

Considering you don't follow the Ten Commandments, which are part of the Bible, you'll have to excuse yourself from this number.

AvalonXQ · 17th May 2012, 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by Dinwar

Considering you don't follow the Ten Commandments, which are part of the Bible, you'll have to excuse yourself from this number.

If following every instruction given to everyone is a requirement for being a Christian, then we're all out.

Of course, we are specifically told in the Bible itself that this is not the case, so let's try to refine our definition.

bookitty · 17th May 2012, 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

If following every instruction given to everyone is a requirement for being a Christian, then we're all out.

Of course, we are specifically told in the Bible itself that this is not the case, so let's try to refine our definition.

Wait what? So Christians don't have to follow all the rules but it is totally OK for Christians to try to enforce the rules for other people. God forgives Christians when they fail but Christians give no leeway to homosexuals, women who need abortions, women who want to use birth control and so on.

Dinwar · 17th May 2012, 04:46 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

If following every instruction given to everyone is a requirement for being a Christian, then we're all out.

I know context isn't your strong suit, but you really should read the thread. My post refers to a very specific issue that was raised earlier in this thread.

Besides, following every instruction IS a requirement for being a Christian. Those are your rules. If you don't follow your rules, than you by definition aren't in the group defined by those rules. All this statement is, is an attempt to excuse hypocrisy and the cherry-picking of which rules you REALLY need to follow. After all, "Believe Jesus Christ was the son of God" is merely a rule. Maybe that's one we can pass on, eh? "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" is just one of those pesky rules--we've already established that the Ten Commandments aren't actually binding (that context I mentioned earlier), so maybe that's one of those rules that doesn't apply. Congratulations! Hindus are not True Christians.

AvalonXQ · 17th May 2012, 05:11 PM

Originally Posted by bookitty

Wait what? So Christians don't have to follow all the rules but it is totally OK for Christians to try to enforce the rules for other people.

You're misunderstanding.

"The set of rules God expects Christians to follow" =/= "the set of instructions God gave to anyone, at any time, in the Bible."

The issue here isn't selective application of "the rules", but a misunderstanding as to which rules are "the rules".

I'm not expected to go to war with the Midianites, or take a prostitute for a wife, or build a giant boat, or circumcise every member of my household, or find an unridden colt, or go to Ninevah, or keep the Sabbath.

All of these things are instructions in the Bible, not to members of Christ's church but to some other individual or group. To the Israelites, to Abraham, to Noah, etc. None of them are binding on Christians, because they were not written to Christians.

AvalonXQ · 17th May 2012, 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by Dinwar

Besides, following every instruction IS a requirement for being a Christian. Those are your rules. If you don't follow your rules, than you by definition aren't in the group defined by those rules.

Right! So the question is, "which rules are the rules that define what it is to be a Christian?"

The Bible does a pretty good job of answering this question, but you don't get an answer from just opening up to a random set of instructions given to the Israelites. You need to actually read the Bible -- what it says about Christianity, the church, Jesus' commandments, and the Law of Liberty. And then you find out that, sure enough, the Law of Moses (including the Ten Commandments) are not binding on Christians.

Elypsis44 · 17th May 2012, 05:41 PM

Back in my believer days, I saw many a fellow church member get a diagnosis of cancer. Instead of cheering and being happy that they were going to 'go home' and be with Christ, every single one of them asked for prayers and availed themselves of medical science in an attempt live a bit longer.

Dunno, they sure didn't seem too excited about dying for that faith. Or with that faith. Whatever.

Craig4 · 17th May 2012, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

Right! So the question is, "which rules are the rules that define what it is to be a Christian?"

The Bible does a pretty good job of answering this question, but you don't get an answer from just opening up to a random set of instructions given to the Israelites. You need to actually read the Bible -- what it says about Christianity, the church, Jesus' commandments, and the Law of Liberty. And then you find out that, sure enough, the Law of Moses (including the Ten Commandments) are not binding on Christians.

That's an interesting interpretation. Of course all other interpretations are equally valid.

AvalonXQ · 17th May 2012, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by Craig4

That's an interesting interpretation. Of course all other interpretations are equally valid.

I interpret your post as meaning that you would like to buy a duck, if anyone has one for sale.

I'm sorry, but I don't have a duck for sale. If I get one later, I'll PM you. Thanks.

crimresearch · 17th May 2012, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

That's not correct.

The Bible says that the disciples of Paul and Barnabas who were in Antioch were first called Christians (Acts 11:26). They neither left their homes nor gave up their material possessions; they listened to God's word and worshipped together.

So, if you're talking about the Biblical definition, that's it.

I already cited the only 3 places in the Bible where people are identified by the word 'Christian'.

Quote:

Acts 11:26 - And when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. So it was that for a whole year they assembled with the church and taught a great many people. And the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.

Acts 26:28 - Then Agrippa said to Paul, "You almost persuade me to become a Christian."

1 Peter 4:16 - Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in this matter.

Disciples, teaching, and suffering. That's it. The 'give up your wordly possessions' and other admonitions are found elsewhere.

Very little in common with the use of the term today.

crimresearch · 17th May 2012, 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by CplFerro

Dear crimresearch,

Okay, let's go with that. By those standards, how many True Christians are there in the world today?

Cpl Ferro

I would guesstimate that the percentage of people who use Christianity as their standard and follow the precepts as literally as possible, is less than 1%

AvalonXQ · 17th May 2012, 06:08 PM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

Disciples, teaching, and suffering. That's it. The 'give up your wordly possessions' and other admonitions are found elsewhere.

Very little in common with the use of the term today.

Actually, it's very much how the word is in use today.

The common concept in all three of these places is that "Christian" is a designation that comes from the outside for those who follow Christ.

The disciples in Antioch were called Christians, presumably by others in Antioch.

Agrippa, a non-believer, referred to those who follow Paul's teachings as "Christians".

And Peter talks about "suffering as a Christian", that is, being persecuted because you have been identified as a Christian.

So, based on these, the definition of Christian is "one who is identified by the outside world as being part of the church of Christ".

Stomatopoda · 17th May 2012, 06:30 PM

One, and he died on the cross.

godfinders · 17th May 2012, 06:53 PM

Hi everyone. I'm new here (obviously), referred to by AtheistJulie on Twitter.

To answer the OP I think the number of 'True Christians' under that particular definition cannot be counted. If you're going only by those who are martyred today for their faith I know human rights organizations are trying to keep track of religious persecution in China, Korea, Nigeria and certain Muslim countries. Christian missionaries are routinely persecuted, detained, imprisoned and beheaded. Since I can't post links yet I'd say Google "christian missionary beheaded' and see what comes up.

As far as later arguments such as

Quote:

Wait what? So Christians don't have to follow all the rules but it is totally OK for Christians to try to enforce the rules for other people. God forgives Christians when they fail but Christians give no leeway to homosexuals, women who need abortions, women who want to use birth control and so on.

This a generalization pertaining to the behavior of some Christians, not all. The distinction here I guess should be made between people who are religious versus those who are spiritual. Plenty of people say "Lord, Lord" and don't make it into the Kingdom, but it's the ones that do the will of God [love the Lord God and love your neighbor as yourself] that make it into the Kingdom of Heaven (ie, are true Christians) (Matthew 7:21-23).

I am sorry for those who have tangled with hardline fundamentalist types who seem to think that the grace of God has been extended only to white middle class Americans from the central US that vote Republican. I have spent most of my time as a Christian outside of church instead of inside because of this kind of attitude. And BTW, Jesus didn't have light brown hair and blue eyes.

To sum up, I don't think dying for your beliefs is necessarily the test of a "true Christian" but how you live out your beliefs. Judging others when the Bible says plainly it's up to God to do the judging, excluding others who are different when the Bible says God created all of us unique and is His image and so on are the kinds of behaviors that made me stay in the closet for nearly 20 years.

So now I'm out.

badnewsBH · 17th May 2012, 07:18 PM

Let's see...

There's Bale, and Slater... Um, I'm gonna say two. Three, if you count Fletcher. Oh, four, because of Sister. Yep, four, that's my final answer.

Pope130 · 17th May 2012, 08:13 PM

Originally Posted by badnewsBH

Let's see...

There's Bale, and Slater... Um, I'm gonna say two. Three, if you count Fletcher. Oh, four, because of Sister. Yep, four, that's my final answer.

Infidel! How can you possibly ignore Claudia?

badnewsBH · 17th May 2012, 08:47 PM

Originally Posted by Pope130

Infidel! How can you possibly ignore Claudia?

I knew I was forgetting one! And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the entire set of True Christians (tm)...

wait for it...

the Babylon 5! Waka waka!

crimresearch · 18th May 2012, 07:47 AM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

Actually, it's very much how the word is in use today.

The common concept in all three of these places is that "Christian" is a designation that comes from the outside for those who follow Christ.

The disciples in Antioch were called Christians, presumably by others in Antioch.

Agrippa, a non-believer, referred to those who follow Paul's teachings as "Christians".

And Peter talks about "suffering as a Christian", that is, being persecuted because you have been identified as a Christian.

So, based on these, the definition of Christian is "one who is identified by the outside world as being part of the church of Christ".

I suppose maybe God is dumb enough to fall for that specious argument.

crimresearch · 18th May 2012, 09:21 AM

http://health.yahoo.net/news/s/nm/af...e-for-u-s-nuns

OK, so which ones are the True Christians... the Pope with his retinue in that palace, or the nuns feeding the poor and speaking truth to power?

Dinwar · 18th May 2012, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

Right! So the question is, "which rules are the rules that define what it is to be a Christian?"

The Bible does a pretty good job of answering this question, but you don't get an answer from just opening up to a random set of instructions given to the Israelites. You need to actually read the Bible -- what it says about Christianity, the church, Jesus' commandments, and the Law of Liberty. And then you find out that, sure enough, the Law of Moses (including the Ten Commandments) are not binding on Christians.

How....convenient.

Quote:

I interpret your post as meaning that you would like to buy a duck, if anyone has one for sale.

I'm sorry, but I don't have a duck for sale. If I get one later, I'll PM you. Thanks.

You ARE aware that there's been about 2k years worth of study of your holy book, yes? And that many of those people were just as devoute as you hold yourself to be? You are insinuating that yours is the ONLY possible valid interpretation--an extremely proud statement (though I suspect that whole Seven Deadly Sins thing is only for those Jews).

Alternative interpretations cannot be dismissed as completely nonsensical--otherwise, I can dismiss YOUR interpretation as completely nonsensical without further justification. And in fact, I could do so WITH justification, seeing as how your interpretation is at odds with...well, nearly every Biblical scholar I've come across. So if you want your arguments to be taken seriously, it would probably help if you weren't so dismissive of the THOUSANDS of people who agree with you that the Bible is the Word of God, but disagree with you on interpretation. If you're merely going to dismiss them without further discussion, I will begin dismissing your arguments with "...and therefore Avalon wants to buy a duck."

dafydd · 18th May 2012, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

That's not correct.

The Bible says that the disciples of Paul and Barnabas who were in Antioch were first called Christians (Acts 11:26). They neither left their homes nor gave up their material possessions; they listened to God's word and worshipped together.

So, if you're talking about the Biblical definition, that's it.

There are non-biblical descriptions of what it takes to be a Christian?

dafydd · 18th May 2012, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by bookitty

Wait what? So Christians don't have to follow all the rules but it is totally OK for Christians to try to enforce the rules for other people. God forgives Christians when they fail but Christians give no leeway to homosexuals, women who need abortions, women who want to use birth control and so on.

Religion=Hypocrisy.

dafydd · 18th May 2012, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

If following every instruction given to everyone is a requirement for being a Christian, then we're all out.

Rem acu tetigisti.

14th May 2012, 06:24 PM	#41
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by CplFerro Dear Dinwar, That's an interesting point. But, it relies a little too much on denominational conformity--the real test of a Christian should be if he lives his life with love for his fellow-men, not how often he attend church, no? In that case, how many people do you think count as True Christians? Cpl Ferro Again, is that what the Bible says is required to enter the category of 'Christian'? Perfection, love, and maybe martyrdom?
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

14th May 2012, 06:47 PM	#42
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 26,432	Originally Posted by crimresearch Errrrmm... if you are talking about snake handling denominations, the snake won't bite you if you are a TC. I thought it was you might get bitten but true christians are immune to the venom like they are immune to poison.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

14th May 2012, 07:02 PM	#43
Lowpro Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 4,527	Originally Posted by ponderingturtle I thought it was you might get bitten but true christians are immune to the venom like they are immune to poison. That's supposed to be it for Christianity but I wonder if there are other religions that like to play with snakes... I really don't know O.o
	__________________ "If I actually believed that Jesus was coming to end the world in 2050, I'd be preparing by stocking up on timber and nails" - PZ Myers

14th May 2012, 07:42 PM	#44
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by ponderingturtle I thought it was you might get bitten but true christians are immune to the venom like they are immune to poison. Well, I'll admit that I haven't done any field research on the matter... I may be confusing 'the lion and the lamb together' with 'Nice snakey'.
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

14th May 2012, 07:52 PM	#45
Dinwar Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 8,960	Originally Posted by CplFerro Dear Dinwar, That's an interesting point. But, it relies a little too much on denominational conformity--the real test of a Christian should be if he lives his life with love for his fellow-men, not how often he attend church, no? In that case, how many people do you think count as True Christians? Cpl Ferro No. You are wrong. Missing Sunday services is a MORTAL sin. Not a venial one, a MORTAL one. You may as well, as far as Christianity is concerned, burn down an orphanage full of babies and nuns as miss mass--you're just as damned. Your god supposedly gave us 10 commandments. If you're a believer you believe GOD HIMSELF TOLD YOU TO DO THIS. But now you're saying "Oh, but He didn't mean it". I'd bet good money you can't even name the sin you're committing.... You're clearly picking and choosing which parts of the Bible to consider, and which parts of posts to respond to (if you hadn't, you'd have realized that my point was a tad wider than "Go to mass on Sunday"; that was merely an example illustrating a point). Obviously the number of True Christians, whatever the criteria we go with, does not include you, at least.
Dinwar Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 8,960	__________________ GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment. Ein krieg ohne feinde.

14th May 2012, 08:13 PM	#46
Dog Breakfast Critical Thinker Join Date: May 2012 Location: Why not? Posts: 351	Originally Posted by dafydd A true Christain would give all their wealth away, as instructed by Jesus. Every Christian I talk to always seem to consider themselves exempt because they tell me they're using all of their stuff to the glory of God. I have a hard time believing anybody can use their blender to that end, but hey, Jesus was being a bit harsh, I think, and most people see that, rationalization or not.
	Last edited by Dog Breakfast; 14th May 2012 at 08:14 PM.

14th May 2012, 08:59 PM	#47
Mercurial Artism Scholar Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 108	Wait, is the OP serious? I thought this thread was going to intentionally point out the absurdity of declaring a subset of Christians as True Christians based on how closely they adhere to Jesus's teachings based on one denomination's interpretation.
Mercurial Artism Scholar Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 108

14th May 2012, 10:11 PM	#48
Small Town Jesus Critical Thinker Join Date: May 2003 Location: London Posts: 270	Originally Posted by CplFerro Dear MG, Where would I come by such evidence? I can judge from my own experience in church that there's at least one person there who probably won't die for Christ and therefore can hardly be called a True Christian. Cpl Ferro It is quite likely that those you belittle so condecendingly don't consider you a 'True Christian' for equally spurious and preposterous reasons.
	__________________ 'Can't believe how strange it is to be anything at all' - Jeff Mangum

15th May 2012, 03:10 AM	#49
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto {{ WELCOME BACK }} Now that you are here, I suggest there are two; You and I. . . . Except I am not too certain about you. Thank you. I am half a true Scotsman.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

15th May 2012, 06:35 AM	#50
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by Mercurial Artism Wait, is the OP serious? I thought this thread was going to intentionally point out the absurdity of declaring a subset of Christians as True Christians based on how closely they adhere to Jesus's teachings based on one denomination's interpretation. As serious as any of their other threads.
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

15th May 2012, 06:36 AM	#51
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by Small Town Jesus It is quite likely that those you belittle so condecendingly don't consider you a 'True Christian' for equally spurious and preposterous reasons. And according to Scripture, one of those who would do so, is God...
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

15th May 2012, 10:37 AM	#52
CplFerro Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,383	Originally Posted by crimresearch Again, is that what the Bible says is required to enter the category of 'Christian'? Perfection, love, and maybe martyrdom? Dear crimresearch, If not exact then they're close to it. Do you have a better definition? Cpl Ferro

15th May 2012, 10:41 AM	#53
CplFerro Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,383	Originally Posted by Dinwar No. You are wrong. Missing Sunday services is a MORTAL sin. Not a venial one, a MORTAL one. You may as well, as far as Christianity is concerned, burn down an orphanage full of babies and nuns as miss mass--you're just as damned. Your god supposedly gave us 10 commandments. If you're a believer you believe GOD HIMSELF TOLD YOU TO DO THIS. But now you're saying "Oh, but He didn't mean it". I'd bet good money you can't even name the sin you're committing.... You're clearly picking and choosing which parts of the Bible to consider, and which parts of posts to respond to (if you hadn't, you'd have realized that my point was a tad wider than "Go to mass on Sunday"; that was merely an example illustrating a point). Obviously the number of True Christians, whatever the criteria we go with, does not include you, at least. Dear Dinwar, I have mangled my meaning. I'm trying to ask, how many nominal Christians are serious and how many are just going through the motions for social reasons. And, what is that sin's name, pray? Cpl Ferro

15th May 2012, 07:08 PM	#54
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by CplFerro Dear crimresearch, If not exact then they're close to it. Do you have a better definition? Cpl Ferro What's wrong with the one in the Bible? Spend your whole life as did the disciples, giving up every material possession like a monk or nun, so that you can experience the suffering of Jesus and be his servant 24/7? Those are the only ones that the Bible directly calls Christians.
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

17th May 2012, 03:50 PM	#55
CplFerro Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,383	Originally Posted by crimresearch What's wrong with the one in the Bible? Spend your whole life as did the disciples, giving up every material possession like a monk or nun, so that you can experience the suffering of Jesus and be his servant 24/7? Those are the only ones that the Bible directly calls Christians. Dear crimresearch, Okay, let's go with that. By those standards, how many True Christians are there in the world today? Cpl Ferro

17th May 2012, 04:08 PM	#56
bookitty Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 5,532	Originally Posted by CplFerro Dear MG, Where would I come by such evidence? I can judge from my own experience in church that there's at least one person there who probably won't die for Christ and therefore can hardly be called a True Christian. Cpl Ferro And there you go, part of the reason why I'm not a Christian any more. Once I started questioning theology beyond the feelgood C. S Lewis variety, it became pretty clear that "following Christ" was ill-defined. Even if you stick to just the first 4 book of the New Testament and ignore all the other "Jesus totally would have said this if he was here right now!" stuff. A small example, you have the beatitudes which were practically written for liberal, pacifist tree-huggers like myself. Except that liberal, pacifist tree-huggers like myself aren't content with waiting around for someone else to succor the grief-stricken or give the meek the earth. If I take things into my own hands, if I am not humble enough to wait for future goodness, am I Christian? The more I tried to find a place for myself within Christ's teachings, the more I felt as if the whole thing was childish and placating.
	__________________ No more cupcakes for me, thanks.

17th May 2012, 04:20 PM	#57
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by crimresearch What's wrong with the one in the Bible? Spend your whole life as did the disciples, giving up every material possession like a monk or nun, so that you can experience the suffering of Jesus and be his servant 24/7? Those are the only ones that the Bible directly calls Christians. That's not correct. The Bible says that the disciples of Paul and Barnabas who were in Antioch were first called Christians (Acts 11:26). They neither left their homes nor gave up their material possessions; they listened to God's word and worshipped together. So, if you're talking about the Biblical definition, that's it.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Last edited by AvalonXQ; 17th May 2012 at 04:21 PM.

17th May 2012, 04:20 PM	#58
Dinwar Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 8,960	Originally Posted by CplFerro Okay, let's go with that. By those standards, how many True Christians are there in the world today? Considering you don't follow the Ten Commandments, which are part of the Bible, you'll have to excuse yourself from this number.
Dinwar Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 8,960	__________________ GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment. Ein krieg ohne feinde.

17th May 2012, 04:23 PM	#59
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by Dinwar Considering you don't follow the Ten Commandments, which are part of the Bible, you'll have to excuse yourself from this number. If following every instruction given to everyone is a requirement for being a Christian, then we're all out. Of course, we are specifically told in the Bible itself that this is not the case, so let's try to refine our definition.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

17th May 2012, 04:35 PM	#60
bookitty Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 5,532	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ If following every instruction given to everyone is a requirement for being a Christian, then we're all out. Of course, we are specifically told in the Bible itself that this is not the case, so let's try to refine our definition. Wait what? So Christians don't have to follow all the rules but it is totally OK for Christians to try to enforce the rules for other people. God forgives Christians when they fail but Christians give no leeway to homosexuals, women who need abortions, women who want to use birth control and so on.
	__________________ No more cupcakes for me, thanks.

17th May 2012, 04:46 PM	#61
Dinwar Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 8,960	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ If following every instruction given to everyone is a requirement for being a Christian, then we're all out. I know context isn't your strong suit, but you really should read the thread. My post refers to a very specific issue that was raised earlier in this thread. Besides, following every instruction IS a requirement for being a Christian. Those are your rules. If you don't follow your rules, than you by definition aren't in the group defined by those rules. All this statement is, is an attempt to excuse hypocrisy and the cherry-picking of which rules you REALLY need to follow. After all, "Believe Jesus Christ was the son of God" is merely a rule. Maybe that's one we can pass on, eh? "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" is just one of those pesky rules--we've already established that the Ten Commandments aren't actually binding (that context I mentioned earlier), so maybe that's one of those rules that doesn't apply. Congratulations! Hindus are not True Christians.
Dinwar Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 8,960	__________________ GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment. Ein krieg ohne feinde.

17th May 2012, 05:11 PM	#62
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by bookitty Wait what? So Christians don't have to follow all the rules but it is totally OK for Christians to try to enforce the rules for other people. You're misunderstanding. "The set of rules God expects Christians to follow" =/= "the set of instructions God gave to anyone, at any time, in the Bible." The issue here isn't selective application of "the rules", but a misunderstanding as to which rules are "the rules". I'm not expected to go to war with the Midianites, or take a prostitute for a wife, or build a giant boat, or circumcise every member of my household, or find an unridden colt, or go to Ninevah, or keep the Sabbath. All of these things are instructions in the Bible, not to members of Christ's church but to some other individual or group. To the Israelites, to Abraham, to Noah, etc. None of them are binding on Christians, because they were not written to Christians.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

17th May 2012, 05:14 PM	#63
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by Dinwar Besides, following every instruction IS a requirement for being a Christian. Those are your rules. If you don't follow your rules, than you by definition aren't in the group defined by those rules. Right! So the question is, "which rules are the rules that define what it is to be a Christian?" The Bible does a pretty good job of answering this question, but you don't get an answer from just opening up to a random set of instructions given to the Israelites. You need to actually read the Bible -- what it says about Christianity, the church, Jesus' commandments, and the Law of Liberty. And then you find out that, sure enough, the Law of Moses (including the Ten Commandments) are not binding on Christians.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

17th May 2012, 05:41 PM	#64
Elypsis44 Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 3,439	Back in my believer days, I saw many a fellow church member get a diagnosis of cancer. Instead of cheering and being happy that they were going to 'go home' and be with Christ, every single one of them asked for prayers and availed themselves of medical science in an attempt live a bit longer. Dunno, they sure didn't seem too excited about dying for that faith. Or with that faith. Whatever.
Elypsis44 Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 3,439

17th May 2012, 05:47 PM	#65
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ Right! So the question is, "which rules are the rules that define what it is to be a Christian?" The Bible does a pretty good job of answering this question, but you don't get an answer from just opening up to a random set of instructions given to the Israelites. You need to actually read the Bible -- what it says about Christianity, the church, Jesus' commandments, and the Law of Liberty. And then you find out that, sure enough, the Law of Moses (including the Ten Commandments) are not binding on Christians. That's an interesting interpretation. Of course all other interpretations are equally valid.
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363

17th May 2012, 05:51 PM	#66
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by Craig4 That's an interesting interpretation. Of course all other interpretations are equally valid. I interpret your post as meaning that you would like to buy a duck, if anyone has one for sale. I'm sorry, but I don't have a duck for sale. If I get one later, I'll PM you. Thanks.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

17th May 2012, 05:59 PM	#67
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ That's not correct. The Bible says that the disciples of Paul and Barnabas who were in Antioch were first called Christians (Acts 11:26). They neither left their homes nor gave up their material possessions; they listened to God's word and worshipped together. So, if you're talking about the Biblical definition, that's it. I already cited the only 3 places in the Bible where people are identified by the word 'Christian'. Quote: Acts 11:26 - And when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. So it was that for a whole year they assembled with the church and taught a great many people. And the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch. Acts 26:28 - Then Agrippa said to Paul, "You almost persuade me to become a Christian." 1 Peter 4:16 - Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in this matter. Disciples, teaching, and suffering. That's it. The 'give up your wordly possessions' and other admonitions are found elsewhere. Very little in common with the use of the term today.
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

17th May 2012, 06:04 PM	#68
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by CplFerro Dear crimresearch, Okay, let's go with that. By those standards, how many True Christians are there in the world today? Cpl Ferro I would guesstimate that the percentage of people who use Christianity as their standard and follow the precepts as literally as possible, is less than 1%
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

17th May 2012, 06:08 PM	#69
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by crimresearch Disciples, teaching, and suffering. That's it. The 'give up your wordly possessions' and other admonitions are found elsewhere. Very little in common with the use of the term today. Actually, it's very much how the word is in use today. The common concept in all three of these places is that "Christian" is a designation that comes from the outside for those who follow Christ. The disciples in Antioch were called Christians, presumably by others in Antioch. Agrippa, a non-believer, referred to those who follow Paul's teachings as "Christians". And Peter talks about "suffering as a Christian", that is, being persecuted because you have been identified as a Christian. So, based on these, the definition of Christian is "one who is identified by the outside world as being part of the church of Christ".
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

17th May 2012, 06:30 PM	#70
Stomatopoda Muse Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 861	One, and he died on the cross.
Stomatopoda Muse Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 861

17th May 2012, 06:53 PM	#71
godfinders New Blood Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1	Hi, Neophyte Here Hi everyone. I'm new here (obviously), referred to by AtheistJulie on Twitter. To answer the OP I think the number of 'True Christians' under that particular definition cannot be counted. If you're going only by those who are martyred today for their faith I know human rights organizations are trying to keep track of religious persecution in China, Korea, Nigeria and certain Muslim countries. Christian missionaries are routinely persecuted, detained, imprisoned and beheaded. Since I can't post links yet I'd say Google "christian missionary beheaded' and see what comes up. As far as later arguments such as Quote: Wait what? So Christians don't have to follow all the rules but it is totally OK for Christians to try to enforce the rules for other people. God forgives Christians when they fail but Christians give no leeway to homosexuals, women who need abortions, women who want to use birth control and so on. This a generalization pertaining to the behavior of some Christians, not all. The distinction here I guess should be made between people who are religious versus those who are spiritual. Plenty of people say "Lord, Lord" and don't make it into the Kingdom, but it's the ones that do the will of God [love the Lord God and love your neighbor as yourself] that make it into the Kingdom of Heaven (ie, are true Christians) (Matthew 7:21-23). I am sorry for those who have tangled with hardline fundamentalist types who seem to think that the grace of God has been extended only to white middle class Americans from the central US that vote Republican. I have spent most of my time as a Christian outside of church instead of inside because of this kind of attitude. And BTW, Jesus didn't have light brown hair and blue eyes. To sum up, I don't think dying for your beliefs is necessarily the test of a "true Christian" but how you live out your beliefs. Judging others when the Bible says plainly it's up to God to do the judging, excluding others who are different when the Bible says God created all of us unique and is His image and so on are the kinds of behaviors that made me stay in the closet for nearly 20 years. So now I'm out.
godfinders New Blood Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1	Last edited by godfinders; 17th May 2012 at 07:25 PM.

17th May 2012, 07:18 PM	#72
badnewsBH Thinker Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 173	Let's see... There's Bale, and Slater... Um, I'm gonna say two. Three, if you count Fletcher. Oh, four, because of Sister. Yep, four, that's my final answer.
badnewsBH Thinker Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 173

17th May 2012, 08:13 PM	#73
Pope130 Muse Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Oregon Posts: 965	Originally Posted by badnewsBH Let's see... There's Bale, and Slater... Um, I'm gonna say two. Three, if you count Fletcher. Oh, four, because of Sister. Yep, four, that's my final answer. Infidel! How can you possibly ignore Claudia?

17th May 2012, 08:47 PM	#74
badnewsBH Thinker Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 173	Originally Posted by Pope130 Infidel! How can you possibly ignore Claudia? I knew I was forgetting one! And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the entire set of True Christians (tm)... wait for it... the Babylon 5! Waka waka!
badnewsBH Thinker Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 173

18th May 2012, 07:47 AM	#75
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ Actually, it's very much how the word is in use today. The common concept in all three of these places is that "Christian" is a designation that comes from the outside for those who follow Christ. The disciples in Antioch were called Christians, presumably by others in Antioch. Agrippa, a non-believer, referred to those who follow Paul's teachings as "Christians". And Peter talks about "suffering as a Christian", that is, being persecuted because you have been identified as a Christian. So, based on these, the definition of Christian is "one who is identified by the outside world as being part of the church of Christ". I suppose maybe God is dumb enough to fall for that specious argument.
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618