DEFINING Christianity: The Bottom Line.

[coolbluehair]

How does the Christian respond when asked the following:

What is the BOTTOM LINE of Christianity, i.e. the non-negotiable, undebatable, absolute must "believe/do" that DEFINES Christianity as distinct among belief systems? What is it that an individual must BELIEVE or DO that establishes him/her as a Christian -- or identifies him/her as non-Christian if he/she has NOT believed or done this thing? What is it?

I'm trying to find someone on this site who will address this question.

[Curious]

I have greatly enjoyed this thread. The answers given by Christians only strengthen my conviction that Christianity is irrational.

I have also read this thread and have come to the conclusion that it is not Christianity that is irrational but many of the Christians. I don't see what is irrational about doing good when it is possible and doing no ill when it is avoidable, which is what it is about when you get down to brass tacks. Jesus said to love one another yet many Christians think that believing that jesus is their saviour is the only criteria for salvation. So called Christians believe, in the hope of cheating death. The church scares the ignorant with the threat of eternal damnation against the promise of eternal bliss. Follow Jesus if you wish but don't expect reward for it, do it because it benefits others not yourself.

[starseyer]

I have also read this thread and have come to the conclusion that it is not Christianity that is irrational but many of the Christians. I don't see what is irrational about doing good when it is possible and doing no ill when it is avoidable, which is what it is about when you get down to brass tacks. Jesus said to love one another yet many Christians think that believing that jesus is their saviour is the only criteria for salvation. So called Christians believe, in the hope of cheating death. The church scares the ignorant with the threat of eternal damnation against the promise of eternal bliss. Follow Jesus if you wish but don't expect reward for it, do it because it benefits others not yourself.

Wow, that is a really liberal view of Christianity. It's not your type that I have problems with--anyone who believes as they will and respects the rights of others to belive what seems right to them is allright in my book. There is, of course, nothing illogical about "doing good when it is possible and doing no ill when it is avoidable" but of course you don't have to be a Christian, a theist, or religious at all to live that way.

[hamilrob]

Why is it that you believe there are no non-believers with an open mind?
I say ther are non-believers with an open mind, simply seeking truth, not trying to be convinced one way or the other.
I think it is clear you say there are no believers with an open mind, and we can understand this. Conviction eliminates an open mind.

I never said that. I never even mentioned the phrase "open mind". Maybe we should define what is a non-believer. There are people looking for something that may fall into the category of a non-believer who is open to change. There are people committed to non-belief that will simply not change the fact they they do not believe, open mind or no open mind. An open-minded non-believer will normally expose himself to many different faiths, philosophies, whatever. He may or may not chose at some point to adhere to one or another particular set of beliefs.

I don't know what kind of mind believers have, but I am sure there has been a fair amount of indoctrination and conditioning involved in their coming to whatever it is that they believe. An indoctrinated mind is hard to change. An open mind will consider change if allowed a certain amount of objectivity and independence of thought.

An Atheist, or a rationalist, or a materialist might be so convicted that they could be described as not having an open mind. I am, for the moment, a materialist (philosophically speaking). I am sure that the world around me is made up of detectable energy, be it in the form of matter, dark matter, energy or dark energy. As convicted as I am of this position, I am open enough to investigate beliefs in supernaturalism and gods, etc. What interests me most is WHY people have the beliefs that they do.

I listen with an open mind, but I confess, I am becoming biased over the years because it just doesn't seem real, the things people believe in. No doubt belief has an effect on one's life, regardless of the absence of evidence. This is a matter of psychology and much is available to read regarding this issue. So before we misquote each other, we need to define what is an open mind.

Is an open mind willing to change? Show me enough proof, and I may just change from my aforementioned position. I can only speak for my mind. Much of what I read in the bible is valuable wisdom, excellent guidance and raw inspiration. Much of what I read in the same bible is far from the mantle of truth. Much of it I accept as fablism, myth, and allegory. I don't believe the miracles or the resurrection are literal happenings. Their symbolic value is often missed in interpretations which regard them as literal.

For the things about the bible that I do not accept, I might well be considered a non-believer, but my mind is not shut. If I go so far as to first accept Jesus and all they say about Him, then what purpose would objuctivity serve then? How much growth would an open mind expect in the matter of becoming whatever it is that Christianity demands a person to become? I could be a non-believer who simply is looking for something to believe in because I may prefer belief to evidence-based reasoning. That's the non believer I was trying to describe in the first instance.

[bernee51]

So you want to debate Christianity, which is based upon the Holy Bible, but you don't want to include the Bible in the debate?

I was reacting to your one line reference to off-site christian propoganda.

That is not 'debate'

You seem to have made up your mind already, as evidenced by your responding to statements that have not even been made yet.

As have you based on the post to which I responded

I'm done with this discussion.

What 'discussion'?

[BeHereNow]

Hamilrob
My apologies. I see now that you were simply trying to simplify the problem.
You sound like an open minded nonbeliever to me.

[hamilrob]

Hamilrob
My apologies. I see now that you were simply trying to simplify the problem.
You sound like an open minded nonbeliever to me.

I BELIEVE you may be correct!! 8)

[Curious]

Wow, that is a really liberal view of Christianity. It's not your type that I have problems with--anyone who believes as they will and respects the rights of others to belive what seems right to them is allright in my book. There is, of course, nothing illogical about "doing good when it is possible and doing no ill when it is avoidable" but of course you don't have to be a Christian, a theist, or religious at all to live that way.

That is correct, you can be just as good a person while not believing in a God at all but it would still be consistent with the spirit of what Jesus was all about. Over the years the emphasis has shifted from what was a pretty plain and simple message. Instead of doing what is right people are told to do what they are told is right. To be a good Christian, people assume you have to spend half your life in church and praise God at every opportunity rather than living your life in a normal but respectful manner. If God wanted us to praise him non stop He wouldn't have invented sleep. If God loves His children and wants to help them, then by helping our brothers(or sisters) we are helping more than sitting around in a circle chanting. Following the example of Jesus is more to do with how you live your life than sharing in a particular ideology.

[hamilrob]

Following the example of Jesus is more to do with how you live your life than sharing in a particular ideology.

Is Christianity a way of life or a path unto salvation? Of course it is important to live righteously, but all religions aim at that. There is a particular something that sets Christianity apart from a lot of other religions and this is not the nature of the life of Christ, but of his death and what that means spiritually.

It's not about "following the example of Jesus". That's cool to do, but it's really about taking up the cross. The rich man had it all, but wanted more. He wanted eternal life too. He couldn't part with his material existence, so he "turned sadly away". He might have been moral, of good character and wealthy. He couldn't trade his life for what he wanted of Jesus. Jesus asks the Christian to make a huge sacrifice, not just to "live" a certain way. Christianity has a pointed message regarding eternal life and salvation and that goes beyond philosophy.

I discovered many similarities between Jesus and the Buddha who didn't even believe in a God. Many Christians tell you it's ok to "Live like Jesus" and follow the philosophy, but without the meaning, without the rebirth, without the belief in the resurrection and the second coming, you won't be there at that great banquet in the sky. That is what becomes repugnant to many who think they can pick and chose what they want to believe about Jesus and discard the rest. They will allow Jesus the distinction of "great prophet" but fall short of acceting him as the son of God or God himself.

When people ask me if I'm a Christian, I usually say I like the philosophy, but the supernatural stuff I can't handle. That will help my life on earth, they respond, but it won't get me past the pearly gates. I have a complete published debate carried out through e-mails with a fundamentalist Seventh Day Adventist Christian whom I have never met or talked with on the phone. It is available at www.ggod.info . It was a perfect match. Me the doubter; the skeptic; the rationalist; and him the committed, Young Earth Creationist Christian. We never changed each other, but we grew to like each other and continue to trade barbs as we continue to get our book, The Ggod Emails into the public conscience.

This literary endeavor is a microcosm of what it should or could be like if Christians and non-Christians disagree but maintain their level of mutual respect. There will be very little agreement between opposing sides in this forum, but hopefully there will be no condemnation or rash judgment as well. I am here to find out why Christians, and all religious persons think the way they do, and to offer my insight and opinion in a way that is not caustic or irritating. I have a background in Christian Theology as a divinity school graduate, and as a son growing up in a minister's home. I can't get with the Christian program or with the idea of religion in general.

Some will call me an atheist, but I refuse to characterize myself that way because the word carries an unfair connotation of evilness. Christians talk about atheists as if they are something bad, and that is far from true. I prefer to use terms like "freethinker", "rationalist", etc.

Is there a God? Well it certainly does not look like it. The picture is just too vast and diversified and too many people make up their own versions of God in an effort to tailor their religions to their lifestyles and political orientations. It would seem that God would be more singular than what is preached throughout the world’s various faiths and inside the many denominations of each faith. The image is confusing and hard to pin down because of the subjective nature of the truths therein. The only God whose existence is certain is the God that lives in the minds of believers, sustained by faith and worship, ritual and inculcation.

That God is multi-faceted surrealism. Such an entity appears to be more likely the work of human intelligence than a concrete reality existing somewhere beyond time and space, yet somehow alive in each and every being that lives. That would include trillions times trillions times trillions of lives existing throughout the universe. It’s too much for me to comprehend. I prefer to focus on the nature of humanity and the delicate art of reason unfettered by emotion; unobscured by imagination.

The human mind is a vast landscape precided over by emotions and given easily to imaginative thought and abstract reasoning. It is a seedbed for religious thinking which has no obligation to use empirical evidence as its base. The mind can trust visions, ephanies, voices, premonitions, etc as true information, never stopping to challenge the source as real or imagined. Religious thought is essentially irrational since reason is pre-empted by faith. There is a reason for that, I know, but at heart, it is what it is.

The final discernment for atheism lies in value as well as ethics. Atheists can balance the world and keep it from reverting to mindless theocracies which will certainly bring on a self-fufilled prophesy of an armageddon which will be bad for everybody. We need atheists and freethinkers to keep us sane. How an atheist behaves is critical. Far more critical than the behavior of a Christian who can always fall back on forgiveness and the infinite Love of God for his wrongful acts.

Any kind of unethical or bad action on the part of an atheist will bring his atheism into judgement, not his character. That's unfair, but that's the way it is. The better an atheist carries him/herself, the more difficult it is for a Christian to find the condemnation expected in a person who denies the existence of God. Atheism is a cross of a different construction; a challenge to prove it is ok to live without a theistic belief, and atheists should gladly rise to the task of showing the world the value that lies within the freedom of thinking outside of the box.

[Curious]

Following the example of Jesus is more to do with how you live your life than sharing in a particular ideology.

Is Christianity a way of life or a path unto salvation? Of course it is important to live righteously, but all religions aim at that. There is a particular something that sets Christianity apart from a lot of other religions and this is not the nature of the life of Christ, but of his death and what that means spiritually.

You would think so to listen to those who already have the philosophy cut, dried and ready for export.People might like to think that Jesus can cleanse them of their sins and admit them to heaven with no other criteria but belief that hewill save them. Personally I think the buck stops here. I understand from the view of many nonbelievers on this forum that what sets Christianity apart from other religions (or most anyway) is the arrogance of the majority of it's followers.

[perplexed101]

Following the example of Jesus is more to do with how you live your life than sharing in a particular ideology.

Is Christianity a way of life or a path unto salvation? Of course it is important to live righteously, but all religions aim at that. There is a particular something that sets Christianity apart from a lot of other religions and this is not the nature of the life of Christ, but of his death and what that means spiritually.

You would think so to listen to those who already have the philosophy cut, dried and ready for export.People might like to think that Jesus can cleanse them of their sins and admit them to heaven with no other criteria but belief that hewill save them. Personally I think the buck stops here. I understand from the view of many nonbelievers on this forum that what sets Christianity apart from other religions (or most anyway) is the arrogance of the majority of it's followers.

The majority of the followers these days are trinitarians and unitarians and there has to be a point somewhere down the line when their arrogance is challenged. im perhaps way out in the front to be one those to do so. This is the information age where knowledge has been increased and readily available, i guess now is better than never.