What Makes a Christian a Christian - Does Anyone Know?

[William]

[Replying to Tcg in post #760]

In any case it wasn't some rebellion against God as some theists may be likely to presume.

IF they call themselves "Christian" THEN it is safe to say that they will presume exactly that.

All of them or just Some?

Q: All of them or just Some?

This is a question which appears to have no answer which can be agreed to.

QFD: Does that make the question itself, rhetorical?

Rhetorical = Along the lines of - "a question asked in order to create a dramatic effect or to make a point rather than to get an answer."

[Miles]

.


In as much as Christians come so many colors, shapes, and sizes (there are more than 45,000 denominations globally)* I've always felt it wise to simply accept a person's claim they were a Christian to be enough, without establishing any requirements---yah gotta believe, or do, this or that---in order to qualify.


* source


.

[William]

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #10]

Well I agree that you have issues with your mother and that you feel your mother was somehow mocking or belittling these religions by claiming to be something she was not...but even that Paul was a Jew and a Roman - and knew his stuff re that - to what degree we cannot know because even within Judaism this is a problem.

And if in Judaism, the problem will persist through Christianity.

For example, there is Mystic Judaism which views those who call themselves "Jews" but are disinterested in the deeper meaning of the Hebrew language, as 'not really Jews', simply because of the disinterest.

Thus, any Christians who might argue a meaning of a Hebrew word as part of their defense of Christian beliefs, but take their cue from those Jews disinterested in the deeper meaning of the Hebrew language, are doing a disservice to that as well. It is a belittling being done, even that the ones doing it, don't realize that is what they are doing - like it appears your mother was also not realizing, what you were realizing about her behavior.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to William in post #1]

What Makes a Christian a Christian - Does Anyone Know?

Christ is the One who knows. Christ makes a person a Christian.



"Many are called, few are chosen."

"You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit—fruit that will last—and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you.

A Christian has been called and chosen, anointed/baptized with holy spirit - by Christ.

After me will come One more powerful than I, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie. I baptize you with water, but He will baptize you with the holy spirit.” Mark 1:7, 8


That is the baptism/anointing that the people received at Pentecost (Acts 2), and that Cornelius (and family/friends) received when speaking with Peter (Acts 10), and it is the same holy spirit that Christ breathed upon His apostles after His resurrection: And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the holy spirit." That is the same anointing of holy spirit that is being spoken of here:

As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him. 1John 2:27



**

A Christian is also a disciple (follower/student) of Christ.

(Though a disciple of Christ is not necessarily yet a Christian; remember that the apostles were disciples first, then later anointed with holy spirit, by Christ.)


Peace again to you all,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[nobspeople]

[Replying to tam in post #13]

Christ is the One who knows.

Does NOTHING to answer the question. This could be said of anything. When you're magic, anything's possible it seems. Might as well ask 'what makes dark matter dark matter'!

Christ makes a person a Christian.

Literally, no. That would mean said person has another (person?) within it, making said person a chimera of sorts.
Figuratively, does only a little more to answer the question that the first cryptic response.
But that's par for the course, I suppose: make it as cryptic as possible to seem superior and stroke the ego. Well done.

[William]

[Replying to tam in post #13]

Christ is the One who knows.

Does NOTHING to answer the question. This could be said of anything. When you're magic, anything's possible it seems. Might as well ask 'what makes dark matter dark matter'!

Christ makes a person a Christian.

Literally, no. That would mean said person has another (person?) within it, making said person a chimera of sorts.
Figuratively, does only a little more to answer the question that the first cryptic response.
But that's par for the course, I suppose: make it as cryptic as possible to seem superior and stroke the ego. Well done.

"I suppose: make it as cryptic as possible to seem superior and stroke the ego. Well done. "

I don't think it is a case that Tam is behaving in the manner you imply here nobspeople.

I think Tam is being genuine in her expressions but agree that some of those expressions could be made a lot clearer - that Tam could work on improving her communication to better help folk understand her position in Christ.

However, since I have gone through similar things as Tam makes witness of, I understand her better than you do, simply because of that. It is not that she is being cryptic or egotistical but that she is dealing with a subject that is far-reaching and very, very hard to understand, but [in comparison] not so hard to place ones faith in - but difficult nonetheless.

In saying so, I am not apologizing for the purposeful side-stepping tactics which Christians often use. I am saying that I do not think Tam is guilty of that, as she always appears to be trying her best, under quite difficult circumstances.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #13]

Christ is the One who knows.

Does NOTHING to answer the question.

It actually directly answers the question, and Christ WOULD be the one who knows because Christ is the One who does the choosing and anointing (as the verses supplied should indicate). He is also the Truth, and the Teacher.

Whether another person accepts that or not is a different matter.

Christ makes a person a Christian.

Literally, no. That would mean said person has another (person?) within it, making said person a chimera of sorts.

I'm not sure where you're getting that, unless you're assuming that 'holy spirit' is a person, rather than the breath/blood/seed of God.

Christ didn't breathe a person into His disciples; He breathed holy spirit (the breath/blood/seed of God), also known as the water of life (John 14:14, Isaiah 55:1, John 7:37-39, Revelation 22:17)

(I know at least one of those verses identifies the water of life with the spirit - John 7:37-39 - though the translators often chose to personify spirit as a person. Not because it had to be translated that way, but because of the belief in the trinity. Erring pen of the scribes and all that, see Jeremiah 8:8. However, the word being translated to personify spirit as a 'whom or he' are also able to be translated as a 'which or it'. See: https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon ... jv/tr/0-1/ )

The KJV actually does describe the spirit as 'which' rather than 'whom':

In the last day, that great day of the feast, [Jesus] stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)


The scribes also chose what to capitalize, based on what they believed, not based upon what is actually in the text. You can see that in various translations where some will capitalize "Him" and others will not. That is a choice later scribes make, influenced by doctrines and tradition, but not necessarily truth.



Peace again.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to William in post #15]

I don't think it is a case that Tam is behaving in the manner you imply here nobspeople.

No question about being genuine or not. It's the MO of their type of response: over hyperbole, oft getting lost in their own 'reasoning'.

I am saying that I do not think Tam is guilty of that, as she always appears to be trying her best, under quite difficult circumstances.

I'm not saying there's necessarily any purposeful ill-intent at all (though it's always possible). Double worded, excessive 'explanation' is oft the retort from this poster. As far as 'trying her best', that remains to be seen, but I'm not hopeful that's it's being done in a positive way. JMO, of course.

And any 'difficulty' is of their own making. Being a christian is NOT hard nor difficult any more than being any other 'type' of self chosen, life-style allows.

Still, it does little to nothing to answer the question, per usual.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #15]

I don't think it is a case that Tam is behaving in the manner you imply here nobspeople.

No question about being genuine or not. It's the MO of their type of response: over hyperbole, oft getting lost in their own 'reasoning'.

I am saying that I do not think Tam is guilty of that, as she always appears to be trying her best, under quite difficult circumstances.

I'm not saying there's necessarily any purposeful ill-intent at all (though it's always possible). Double worded, excessive 'explanation' is oft the retort from this poster. As far as 'trying her best', that remains to be seen, but I'm not hopeful that's it's being done in a positive way. JMO, of course.

And any 'difficulty' is of their own making. Being a christian is NOT hard nor difficult any more than being any other 'type' of self chosen, life-style allows.

Still, it does little to nothing to answer the question, per usual.

What Tam is attempting to express is what I see as Mysticism. Tam may not agree with me on that, but her words do align with what I understand as being from Mysticism, and that is of no surprise to me as I also see biblical Jesus as a Mystic.

If you have not investigated mysticism, then it is far more likely that you will only be able to 'hear' Tam's words as 'not answering the question' - and Tam is saying that it is not She who is responsible for answering the question. It is you who are tasked with finding out - or to put in more objectively - it is all of us humans who have that task.

Tam is simply pointing you to her [current] understand of "Christ"... and while it is not necessary for you to trust that she speaks the truth, nor is it necessary to think that she is coming from an egotistical position - or at least I do not see that she does - I remain open to that being proven the case, but for now am not buying it

Meantime...is it a stumbling block for you?

[nobspeople]

[Replying to William in post #18]

What Tam is attempting to express is what I see as Mysticism. Tam may not agree with me on that, but her words do align with what I understand as being from Mysticism, and that is of no surprise to me as I also see biblical Jesus as a Mystic.

Then it's as simple as saying that in a succinct way. Which, for how, as eluded them.

If you have not investigated mysticism, then it is far more likely that you will only be able to 'hear' Tam's words as 'not answering the question' - and Tam is saying that it is not She who is responsible for answering the question. It is you who are tasked with finding out - or to put in more objectively - it is all of us humans who have that task.

Thus the 'mystic' part it would appear. As far as tasks are concerned, with a deity that is said to 'love' humanity, it seems we only have to knock, and the door will be open. That would be the only 'task'. The rest is up to god, as we can't force god to do anything.

Tam is simply pointing you to her [current] understand of "Christ"...

I don't agree. Tam seems to be pointing to their own superiority when one looks at the language used in their responses. KISS: keep it simple stupid, as they say. That's all that need to happen here. Why make it more complicated and cryptic than it needs to be other that to feed one's egocentric thinking?

and while it is not necessary for you to trust that she speaks the truth,

That's totally irrelevant to me in this matter. What's 'true' for one may not be for the other. I'm less interested in that than the people and why they think they way they do.

nor is it necessary to think that she is coming from an egotistical position

No reason to see the relevance in this, either, in regards to this topic as the answer is quite simple.

is it a stumbling block for you?

Not likely, but define 'it' as used here, for clarity.

As for speaking specifically about TAM, I'm done with that - let's stick to the topic.

[William]

[Replying to nobspeople in post #19]

As for speaking specifically about TAM, I'm done with that - let's stick to the topic.

I thought we were sticking to the topic. We want to know what makes a Christian a Christian. Perhaps egotistical expression is one of those things?

Or, perhaps not?

How are we to know? That is the thread topic question.

The Statement: "In any case it wasn't some rebellion against God as some theists may be likely to presume."

The response: "IF they call themselves "Christian" THEN it is safe to say that they will presume exactly that.
[If I am not mistaken, Tam calls herself a Christian and believes that there was some rebellion against God.]
The further response: Q: "All of them or just Some?"
The response to that: "This is a question which appears to have no answer which can be agreed to."
The question for debate:
QFD:Does that make the question itself, rhetorical?

Are you therefore arguing that Tams post did not even attempt to answer the QFD?