Maybe if you knew the Bible, you wouldn't have to ask???

Leviticus was given to the Israelites and concerned many ceremonial laws. Jesus clarified much of Leviticus however. Jesus life and word is the example Christians try to follow.

From Book of Mark
And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;

19Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?

20And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.

21For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,

22Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:

23All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.

Note that diet is stricken from the things that are considered evil, but fornication is not.
Also note that fornication and adultery are listed seperately. I would imagine fornication is sexual immorality other than adultery which would include any sexual conduct outside of the husband and wife. Now , there could be SOME non marital sex that was ok and others which werent, but that doesnt seem logical to me. Again, I err on the side of more self control. I am no better or worse than any fornicator so long as my lover is not my husband, but I wont count all relationships equal to that of the one of husband and wife. It is the model and the one that is repeatedly promoted and blessed in the bible and the one in real life which keeps our species on this earth.

Catching up here...

I'm unfamiliar with Mr Ray's book, but I've made a note of it, and I'll check it out.

The definition of Christianity is not about a "personal view" on the subject, any more than my describing to you what a Dog is. If I told you that a dog has 4 legs and all giraffes have 4 legs - does it make a dog a Giraffe?

If you tell me that you know a few Catholics who are Christains - does it make every Catholic a Christain? I don't recall there being anything said about Catholicism in the definition of what a Christian is.

While Hitler may at one time been a Catholic he was never a Christian. Unless you can demonstate to me how all Catholics are Christains - I remain convinced of Hitlers not having been a Christian. If anything - he was a Darwanist. He was also an Occultist. Two other things you won't find in the definition of Christainity.

Which, by the way - I'm still curiously awaiting your definition of Christianity, and where you derive it from?

"I remain convinced of Hitlers not having been a Christian. If anything - he was a Darwanist. He was also an Occultist. Two other things you won't find in the definition of Christainity."

STILL with the denials...and you offer no links or references...of course I've already seen the revisionist's writings on that matter.

Hitler was absolutley considered a Christian and had the support of the Christians to commit murder.. .and now you say Catholics are not "Christian"??? And then it got weird...

http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/are_catholics_christian.htm

But I have been amused as people scurry to defend their past afilliations with death and destruction from their religion...very amusing...

Hostility towards Muslims and Gays? Where do you get this idea? It's totally contradictory toward Christian belief. This - if anything, is a product of secular misunderstanding of Christian belief, for this is the only place you'll find this idea. While it may be evidenced by "Pseudo-Christains" - or those who's idea's of Christainity are legalistic and Cult-like - I don't consider this "class" of people any more Christain, than an Atheist sees Stalin as representative to his belief, or a Muslim thinking Bin Ladin is a representative of what they believe. In this way - one can consider Hitler as not representing Christainity in any way.




Since the first century - since it is a biblical mandate. This comes directly from Jesus. For it is he who said "By their fruit you will know them" (a slight paraphrase on my part - but non_the_less - the point he was making)



While your observation has some validity to it - I think your concluison is a simplistic one. It is regularly accepted that we determine the "labels" we put on people by their actions. We do it with people in sports, we do it with Performers, polititions... Try to get a raise in corporate America by merely telling your bosses that you're a great worker, and that they should ignore the actions you do to support this because it's too convienient to label you by your actions.

The bottom line is - how can anyone be justified about whatever believe system they own up to when their actions contradict their claims?

You'll have to forgive me if I find it a bit suspect that to provide me with evidence that Catholics are Christians (as in mutually exclusive as you are intimating) by taking me to a Catholic based site on the internet, and then tell me I'm in denial. Tsk tsk...

I go back to my request..

Can you tell me in your own words - What is a Christian?

So far - it is my understanding - that you think a Christian is a Catholic. What of those who do not think Catholicism is any more representative of Christain belief than Democracy - but get their idea of Christianity from the bible - which speaks nothing of Popes, and actually says to "call no man Father...".

You see - I don't believe you have any idea what a christian even is - let's start there, and convince me my belief is unfounded.

well just like every other denomination Christians are considered Christians for what we have faith in and how we go about everything. And no catholics are not Christians, they are just that Catholics. Catholics ask for forgiveness from someone and call them father, when in the bible tells us to go to our closets to pray to God *infering being alone* and call no man Fahter. But to answere the original question a Christian is

1. Someone who knows Jesus was the son of God and has come to earth and died for our sins and was the ultimate sacrifice for all of us.
2. The only way to get into heaven is through Jesus Christ
3. We will be judged of our actions here on earth after we pass away and will get our reward for our earthly actions weather that's going to heaven or ending up in hell

That's the general note of a christian, not going to go into anymore detail cause that differs from denominations.

There is no possible dialogue the moment one insinuates, suggests, question or claims outright that Catholics are not christians.

Delusion and deceit is not exclusively the tar of protestant fundamentalists, but all fundamentalists are possessed by that disease.

Fundamentalists don't seem to realize one bit that at the end of the day, their diseased dogma only has room for one christian standing!

The ONE with the 'RIGHT TRUTH', this personal and individual interpretation of the definitive version of EVERYTHING!!!

Eljay, you obviously are not bigotted, shallow and manipulative, but your question: 'what is ons's definition of a true christian?' is bigotted, shallow, and leads to a losing battle, especially when you claim that the largest body of christians, CATHOLICS, in your personal and individual opinion, are not christian unless they meet YOUR PERSONAL AND INDIVIDUAL FUNDAMENTALIST SOURCED INTERPRETATION of what is a christian!!!

I do not defend catholics or other religious denomination, but the christian house is burning, and the pyromaniacs are christians themselves, lighting up other christian dwellings!!!


Sort that one out first and then get to this 'general religious debate'.

It would be tremendously inappropriate for non-christians to get involved in this millennia old christian battle for primitive and barbaric 'word of god' control.

Catholics are Christian, they worship Christ.

You are wrong. Hitler WAS NOT a Christian.

To claim he was - shows a serious lack of understanding the meaning of a Christian, in which case - anything you have to say is moot.

I expect you to correct yourself on this.


Not that again Eljay?!?!?!

Hitler was baptized and raised in the most thorough of Christian tradition and faith.

Like you Eljay, he developed his own interpretation of what a GOOD CHRISTIAN was, and devoted his whole life to it. What he ended up concluding was that the catholic church failed him and his people, protestants only deserved his utmost contempt, and JESUS counted on him to deliver the real fight!!!

Hitler showed every sign of a devout christian youth, turned christian militant, turned fundamentalist, and the rest is history.

Was Hiltler sane and balanced in his view of christianity, Jesus, Jews, himself, his nation, etc.???

Like all fundamentalists, he started out posting a mildly paranoid neurotiuc behavior. For just the right number of fundamentalists (the leaders), when this behavior not only goes unchecked, but is instead encouraged by a shared mass neurosis, the dormant neurosis turns rapidly into a a dangerous phychosis.

So if it will make you happy Eljay, Hitler progressively became, in hte last quarter of his lifetime, a dangerously psychotic fundamentlist christian of a church of one.

But a christian he sure was. Your personal meaning and interpretation of christian, however true it may for you, is totally irrelevant.

The point 'middleearthing' is making, is one worth discussing and mastering: 'fundamentally :), FUNDAMENTALISM IS LATENTLY DANGEROUS, whether in the hands of religious, political, social or individual entities.



Voile;

How are you my friend.

Please Voile - do not insult the general intelligence of those on the site, and their opinion of what you have to offer by claiming that Hitler was a Christian because he was Baptised. And further more - I think you'll have a hard time convincing me that God was unaware of the decisions that Hitler made in his life (or was going to make after his baptism) and indwelt him with the Holy Spirit anyway?

Perhaps you are confusing the issue by equating Religious Fanaticism and Christainity, and defining them as mutually exclusive? If so - we have directly opposing definitions of Christainity. That would mean that Fanatics like Osama bin Laden, and Christopher Hitchens are Christains by this definition.

A casual perusual of the bible clearly demonstrates that by Hitlers actions - he was anything BUT a Christian. He was the poster boy for Darwinism if he was anything, and I know a great number of posters on this site who will be appalled at my calling them Christains because they believed in the Darwinian world view.


Hello Eljay, and let me wish you and yours the happiest of Christmas holidays!!!

Insulting people's intelligence?!?!?! Me!?!?!? Now! Now! Now! Eljay! You should know better than to go there!!!

Let me use a simple example to demonstrate where the insult to intelligence, if such was made, lies.
Since we are in the heart of Christmas Holidays, with all the family gatherings that we will all be plunged into, let me use the family as the perfect metaphor to clarify this 'state of belonging' with which you appear to have a serious issue.

Here goes the metaphor:

Two young couples meet in the local park of a new suburb where they have both recently bought their first homes. Among other things, they women discover that they are both pregnant with their first child and are both planning to have more children in the future.

Time passes, life is good, and our two families are spotted at the park again, as they have been doing for years, along with backyard family barbecues, camping trips, and a variety of other activities neighborhood families share together.

Paying attention to the discussion, though, all is not as well as it might have first appeared.

Mother 'B', is telling couple 'A', the latest episode of their '2' child. At 17, '2' child is purging his second jail term for drug trafficking, car jacking, and 7-Eleven store hold-ups.

In his early years, '2' was an exemplary young child. Without warning, somewhere in early adolescence, '2' started showing signs of minor delinquency. Escalating into full blown crime, laced with aggressive, rebellious and abusive conduct towards all.

'... I just don't know what happened!!!...', Keeps repeating Mother 'B'.
'... It is like I don't know him. It is as though he is not our son!!! ...'

'2' no longer behaves according to the family's values and principles. '2' doesn't live up to what a 'good' family member should be.

You get it Eljay?!?!?! Regardless of whether or not you live up to the 'subjective' ideal that 'family values' impose, '2' IS STILL THE SECOND CHILD OF THAT FAMILY. He still carries the name, is he's still an integral part of the fabric of that family.

Be ashamed of him all you wish, talk of disowning him all day long, '2' is still the delinquent son of that family.

Like it or not, that's what this family MUST OWN UP TO!!!

Likewise, that is what you and your christian family MUST OWN UP TO!!!

Excommunication from a family, biological, christian or otherwise, based on one's 'bad behavior', is not only cowardly and hypocritical, it is totally contrary to the most basic christian values.

It is time for all of us to put down our Pharisee's 'good behavior' checklists, and not only take responsibility for, but fully embrace the black sheeps in our respective families. That is the first lesson Jesus, whom you claim to serve, taught us all!!!

Now, the insult to anyone intelligence would be to keep peddling the 'good little christian morality checklist', like Mao's 'redbook', to arbitrarily judge who's 'in' the club! That is the insult to christians' intelligence IMO Eljay!!!





So - given your analogy, one becomes a Christian by being born into "the family", rather than it being a choice. Could you give me a biblical reference that supports this? Or am I mis-representing your definition of Christianity....

While I tend to agree with your views on religious fantacism - as related to Msharmony, and the general destruction it has on society at large, I fail to aline myself with your examples of it, and how you over simplify your catogorization. For instance - your broad brush painting of the "christianity" religion, as it were. You tend to define Christianity by societies general views of it, rather than the biblical derivation - where the term originates. So now we loose all meaning to the term, because we're now allowing for anyone's idea of what "Christainity" even means in the first place. This being clearly demonstrated by those who believe that Hitler was a Christian. At some point in his life, he may have been a Catholic... but I defy you to cite a time in his life when he was ever a Christain.

I tend to define the idea of the term "Christian" by the attributes the bible uses to describe those who claim "membership" to this family. I do not consider it valid to be a member of a denomination who claims to be "Christian" as a viable justification to be called a "Christian". My sense is that we do not share this opinion.

Where does your understanding differ from this - if it indeed does?


Eljay, your personal views of what constitutes a (deserving) christian, even when you use your personal 'expert' interpretive skills of the bible as some sort of subjective authority for your position, doesn't change the fact that it is your personal opinion and interpretation. Another version of the 'god on my side' perverse way of ONE deciding what is right and wrong for ALL.

It is keeping a certain group locked into the old 'By choice or by birth' endless battle.
Or the infamous 'MY bible scriptures interpretation is right and yours is wrong' childish battle!!! Leading to insane notion that Catholics are not christians in some bible 'experts' eyes.

At that rate, the CHOSEN will be NONE!!! ... for the ONE whom might end up winning the 'I'M RIGHT, THEY'RE WRONG' ego contest, will be flushed for having judged all others!!!

Hitler was a catholic. Hitler was a christian. Hitler became radical in his christian views, then fundamentalist in his christian views, and finally, outright insane in his christian views!!! Supported throughout, by heavyweights of the christian church of the time.

And this bring US straight back to the heart of the topic.

What is your opinion 'the god virus'?

Since you and I agree on religious fundamentalism, and the general destruction it has on society at large, and surely you wouldn't be one to conveniently exclude christianity has having its own fringe of religious fundamentalists, it would be pertinent, given the topic of this thread, to hear your views on Dr. Darrel Ray's book.




Catching up here...

I'm unfamiliar with Mr Ray's book, but I've made a note of it, and I'll check it out.

The definition of Christianity is not about a "personal view" on the subject, any more than my describing to you what a Dog is. If I told you that a dog has 4 legs and all giraffes have 4 legs - does it make a dog a Giraffe?

If you tell me that you know a few Catholics who are Christains - does it make every Catholic a Christain? I don't recall there being anything said about Catholicism in the definition of what a Christian is.

While Hitler may at one time been a Catholic he was never a Christian. Unless you can demonstate to me how all Catholics are Christains - I remain convinced of Hitlers not having been a Christian. If anything - he was a Darwanist. He was also an Occultist. Two other things you won't find in the definition of Christainity.

Which, by the way - I'm still curiously awaiting your definition of Christianity, and where you derive it from?


Catholics are Christian, they worship Christ.


I think they get stuck in the "NOT ME (or NOT MY CHURCH)" mode....cherrypicking to fit and defend their own beliefs even if it defies historical fact...I could find a KKK member who'd swear he's a "True Christian" and other Christians who do not support his Klan cannot possible be "True Christians"...another example of religiosity's cryptic belief system that allows denial for their damage to humanity...denial by the numbers.

So if the religious should aknowledge their 'part' in religious extremism,,,should those who date aknowledge some 'part' in date rape or should those countries who take part in war aknowledge some part in terrorism? just curious


Extremism can and will evolve from just about any philosophy, or lifestyle. I still fail to see why those who take part in anything mainstream are responsible or should feel responsility for those who take those things to the extreme.

When did dating become a religion? Dating is the result of human instincts...not sure what you mean really.

I don't think many religious extremists will admit their mistakes in voting in the Dippic twice to wage war against Islam, and instead of taking responsibility they turn to the Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmanns.

What some call "mainstream" are people who'd like to think they are rational yet oppose women's rights, and again VOTE CRAZY, want their prayer in our schools, their momuments on capitol lawns, impose abstinence only in schools,helped get Stim Cell research stymied, deny gays to marry, stop science...oust the teacings of evolution, and even revise history to make organized religion look "heavenly".

~~~

Overall:

You guys are all over the place on points...I see people like to pick an area they can grey so as to avoid the realities.

Oh and:

Explain to me how your "Christian Nation" allowed torture to happen? WE TORTURE? Are you schitting me? Did atheists do this, infiltrate past the Dippic's SS?

Here's a graph (Again) showing the extremist't type of view that evolution is false.

I'd say that America has more then it's fair share of extremists on this planet:

I apologize for my analogies, this is how my mind works and how I can best get the point across.

My point was this,,If you start with something , say religion or dating,.you will find people who abuse that thing, like extremists or date rapists but it doesnt correlate to me that it is because of the former that the latter exists.

Do you think if people didnt date, rapes would not happen? I dont believe that religion not existing would lessen the atrocities supposedly done in its name,, the atrocities would just be blamed on something else.

In fact, those committing the atrocities just dont wish to be self accountable and would always find something to blame,,but it just doesnt make it so.

msharmony,

I think you should drop the 'dating' analogy.

Last time I looked, I haven't found any hint of a dating 'preaching' group, elevating its 'devoted' daters to to stop at nothing to 'spread' the 'dating dogma'. There are no dating organisms, or 'big book' which suggest to kill, or to 'hate', or whatever it is you find in th e bif book.

Responsibility clearly lies with the initiator, the 'arouser'.
No authority of dating promotes rape?!?!? But many fundamentalist religious authorities promote intollerance, hatred and outright violence. Christian Fundamentalists are clearly a direct product of the christina family as whole.

Take responsibility!

Look what their God appointed leader did to science:

http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/science/default.asp

"The White House's favored tactics include misinterpreting information, ignoring scientific evidence, muzzling government scientists, censoring government studies, removing independent experts from federal advisory panels or stacking those panels with industry consultants. These tactics not only override basic environmental protections in favor of industry, but also undermines the authority of science itself."

And this does not mention the bad science of abstinence only programs in the schools...the health crisis due to that with a rise in teen pregnancies and also 1 in 4 teen girls now have an STD.

1 in 4 teen girls has sexually transmitted disease

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23574940/

I believe you are mistaken. Whether it is a PREACHED lifestyle or a highly promoted one is irrelevant. There are plenty of dating books, big and small which I think would be equivalent in size to the 'big book' you refer to. These books put in place guidelines of how to date, as the bible puts in place guidelines of how to live, or how to follow the example of Jesus(who did not preach anything about hating people or being violent).

To lump all of christianity in with the fundamentalists and extremists seems illogical to me. There are some 'black' organizations that promote things that I do not agree with and therefore I dont feel responsible for their actions just because I too call my self black. Many people call themself christian, but it doesnt make them responsible for each others choices or actions.

msharmony,

Can you give one dating book title that promotes violence and rape as a dating tactic???

On the other hand, when you say your big book only promotes 'guidelines of how to live', like some dating book might promote 'guidelines of how to date', you are being opportunistically selective by forgetting most of the 'old testament', which preaches and incites outright divisiveness, intolerance, and hatred.

Again, what authoritative dating book or books have your read, which would advocate extreme tactics such as the old testament, in the dating world?!?!?

Not wishing to get into a long interpretation of the Bible, but it would be more accurate to apply the New Testament teachings(specifically those things preached and lived by JESUS) which in many instances called to question some of the old testament laws(laws that were given to a specific people and not to all).

Jesus did not preach hate or incite violence or divisiveness. If you wish to see literature about relationships that advocates extreme tactics, simply choose your favorite search engine and type in BDSM.

Well I'm glad to hear that christians can finally drop the old testament!!! Too many of them seemed to use it when it was convenient, and drop it when it became embarassing!!!

This settles this exchange then, and I suggest you move on to tell your christian friends, whom spread intolerance and hatred towards ALL GAYS AND ALL MUSLIMS on these forums, TO STICK TO THE NEW TESTAMENT AND BURN THE OLD ONE!!!

I'm glad we're making progress here msharmony!

Voile;

I ask the question "What is a Christain" of you Voile, because I want you to answer it - not because I'm testing you on it.

You say that if one claims to be a Catholic - that makes them a Christian. That merely being born into a Cathiolic family makes one a Christian. Where do you get the information to validate this?

And to take your last claim a step further - I find it odd that a non-christian would argue the point of whether or not Hitler was a christian - with a confirmed Christian, and believe they're correct. In the meantime - being unable to provide a definition of what a Christian even is.

And I hardly think it shallow or manipulative to ask a non-christian to define their terms when they enter into a discussion about Christianity, and who is one and who isn't one.