Can one follow Christ and not be a "Christian"?

[Luce NDs]

While I am not a Calvinist, I do not consider it to be kooky.

Only mortals are kooky ... considering their belief in knowing little ... even in arrival is dark as the shadow in the primal garden of mind ... mostly a swamp it appears ...

 

[unsafe]

Jae ---your quote ------unsafe, I believe that God and I are in regular dialogue. unsafe, . Have a good evening.

Well that could be Jae but keep asking about Salvation cause your spiritual connection with God died not your spirit -----Spirits don't die ----you reconnect spiritually with God when you accept --receive Christ as your Lord and Saviour ------The Holy Spirit bears witness to our human Spirit that we are a child of God ----verse 16 16 The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.

Romans 8 (GW)
God’s Spirit Makes Us His Children

12 So, brothers and sisters, we have no obligation to live the way our corrupt nature wants us to live. 13 If you live by your corrupt nature, you are going to die. But if you use your spiritual nature to put to death the evil activities of the body, you will live. 14 Certainly, all who are guided by God’s Spirit are God’s children. 15 You haven’t received the spirit of slaves that leads you into fear again. Instead, you have received the spirit of God’s adopted children by which we call out, “Abba! Father!” 16 The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children. 17 If we are his children, we are also God’s heirs. If we share in Christ’s suffering in order to share his glory, we are heirs together with him.

unsafe says -----This 8 min 49 second video explanation on the above Scripture is from John Piper --this is his view on what verse 16 means -----



Desiring God
Published on Dec 10, 2014
The Holy Spirit has a massive role in Romans 8, and in the rest of the Bible, but he is often overlooked. In this lab, John Piper highlights the work of the Holy Spirit, specifically three ways he testifies that we are the children of God.

.

you have a good evening as well Jae

 

[Jae]

Well that could be Jae but keep asking about Salvation cause your spiritual connection with God died not your spirit -----

I never stated my spiritual connection with God died unsafe. Indeed, that I stated my belief that God and I engage in regular dialogue suggests I believe that my connection with God is ongoing.

Spirits don't die ----you reconnect spiritually with God when you accept --receive Christ as your Lord and Saviour ------

We've been through this more than once unsafe, not getting into it against with you at this time.

The Holy Spirit bears witness to our human Spirit that we are a child of God ----verse 16

16 The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.

Romans 8 (GW)
God’s Spirit Makes Us His Children

12 So, brothers and sisters, we have no obligation to live the way our corrupt nature wants us to live. 13 If you live by your corrupt nature, you are going to die. But if you use your spiritual nature to put to death the evil activities of the body, you will live. 14 Certainly, all who are guided by God’s Spirit are God’s children. 15 You haven’t received the spirit of slaves that leads you into fear again. Instead, you have received the spirit of God’s adopted children by which we call out, “Abba! Father!” 16 The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children. 17 If we are his children, we are also God’s heirs. If we share in Christ’s suffering in order to share his glory, we are heirs together with him.

Agreed.

 

[Pavlos Maros]

What would call these believers who murder and live a life of organized crime ?
Ever watch the God Father?

Catholic Christians, No wonder they have a confessional. They need to be absolved on a regular basis.

I know many I'm southern Italian

I know many too. Met them many years ago. In Tenerife. Got invited over, been going ever since. I have a home in Sicilia.

 

[revjohn]

If someone believes in and follows in Jesus in some way, does that automatically label them "Christian" whether they want it or not? Would you treat someone who believes as monk does as Christian even if they explicitly said they were not?

To rightly wear the label of Christian two things need to happen.

1) An observer has to have some idea about who Christ is/was and what Christ did/does.
2) That observer has to make an observation about the similarity of a certain thing/action with Christ.

That is it.

Depending upon the observer the observation is either accurate or it is not.

Here on Wondercafe2 our observations are rather limited to appearances. Things read like . . .

I suppose that can form some basis for comparison.

 

[Luce NDs]

To rightly wear the label of Christian two things need to happen.

1) An observer has to have some idea about who Christ is/was and what Christ did/does.
2) That observer has to make an observation about the similarity of a certain thing/action with Christ.

That is it.

Depending upon the observer the observation is either accurate or it is not.

Here on Wondercafe2 our observations are rather limited to appearances. Things read like . . .

I suppose that can form some basis for comparison.

Would a subtle enlightenment be acceptable being some oligarchs ... do not like anyone in the court being brighter ... and thus Satyr-like tones?

Could explain the church father's about the common people not knowing about Theo Logos ... and general illiteracy ... not to mention the understanding as partisan connection ... pure ration ... or lack thereof thus creating a hole in odd spaces ... sometimes taking the place of Quixotic Riangs ... inclusive of Onagers that may be standoffish ... creating a schism in psychic voids.

Imagine this kicking in the stalled aria ... explains bushel 've light ... at the bottom of a hole ... cave, tunnel of passion, etc.

 

[Pavlos Maros]

To rightly wear the label of Christian two things need to happen.

1) An observer has to have some idea about who Christ is/was and what Christ did/does.
2) That observer has to make an observation about the similarity of a certain thing/action with Christ.

Sorry John but that's a crock. Because by your definition no one is a christian because no one can know those things. People at the time could, but people today are so detached from that time they could not possibly know. Now you and some others may claim that jesus or god talks to you if so how can you know it's jesus, and have you seen a doctor lately.

 

[Mendalla]

Because by your definition no one is a christian because no one can know those things.

He didn't say "know", he said "have some idea". "Idea" can be a belief.

 

[Pavlos Maros]

He didn't say "know", he said "have some idea". "Idea" can be a belief.

That doesn't change anything whether they know or have some idea, the post still stands. Because they cant have any idea. only those that were around at the time could. The stories in the NT were written 50 to 90 years after Jesus allegedly existed. So the writers could not have any idea either. The bible cannot be an accurate representation of what the man thought said or did. Can it. It is just wishful thinking that it is.

 

[revjohn]

Sorry John but that's a crock. Because by your definition no one is a christian because no one can know those things. People at the time could, but people today are so detached from that time they could not possibly know. Now you and some others may claim that jesus or god talks to you if so how can you know it's jesus, and have you seen a doctor lately.

It isn't a crock. To describe something as fluffy I need to know what fluffy means and I need to be able to make a favourable comparison.

Rocks, in general are not fluffy. Kittens and puppies, in general are.

The best descriptions of who Jesus is/was and what Jesus said/says or did/does continues to be the Gospel accounts. Familiarity with those accounts allows one to make comparisons with what others say or do whether they are accepted as faithful accounts of real events or not.

 

[Luce NDs]

It is amazing when speaking of Christ the light ... who gets flamed by suggesting knowledge of the legend is fuzzy or not ... being how tricky the soul is when not believing it exists as a psyche function ... pundi tilly osis ... as Os Ire Ises ... Ice's? Not before things flame in emotion for a chit ... as chad ... thing s hanging!

I still am fascinated by what's missing given the darkness of the sol of mankind ...

 

[Pavlos Maros]

It isn't a crock. To describe something as fluffy I need to know what fluffy means and I need to be able to make a favourable comparison.

Rocks, in general are not fluffy. Kittens and puppies, in general are.

The best descriptions of who Jesus is/was and what Jesus said/says or did/does continues to be the Gospel accounts. Familiarity with those accounts allows one to make comparisons with what others say or do whether they are accepted as faithful accounts of real events or not.

Then in that case I need only repeat myself. "If some one has some idea about who Jesus is. Be it the Messiah/The Christ/The son of god. Then by default they are a christian. If they don't. Then they can call themselves whatever they like.

 

[GeoFee]

Hi,

"If some one has some idea about who Jesus is... ...then by default they are a christian.

A sweeping assumption. I know more than a little about Jesus and I am not a Christian. Something you and I could discuss reasonably?

George

 

[Pontifex Geronimo 13]

Hi,
A sweeping assumption. I know more than a little about Jesus and I am not a Christian. Something you and I could discuss reasonably?

George

You can’t know Jesus and not be a Christian. Of course you can know about Jesus without actually knowing him.

 

[Pavlos Maros]

Then in that case I need only repeat myself. "If some one has some idea about who Jesus is. Be it the Messiah/The Christ/The son of god. Then by default they are a christian.

Hi,
A sweeping assumption. I know more than a little about Jesus and I am not a Christian. Something you and I could discuss reasonably?

George

I don't see how that would be worth pursuing, as soon as you trip over yourself. Ridicule will rise, and you don't think that is productive. Whereas I think it provoke thought. It makes one consider the merits of what one were saying more deeply.

 

[Luce NDs]

But the Light of Christ is out there some abstract as under soul 'd at night ... san dahlia where would we be ...?

Thus Dolly sings and squeaks ... and the racket is all over the place about how light is put down ... by emotional folks ...

 

[blackbelt1961]

I don't see how that would be worth pursuing, as soon as you trip over yourself. Ridicule will rise, and you don't think that is productive. Whereas I think it provoke thought. It makes one consider the merits of what one were saying more deeply.

Bwhaaaaaaaaaaaaa

duck and weave, duck and weave

nice move

 

[Luce NDs]

Bwhaaaaaaaaaaaaa

duck and weave, duck and weave

nice move

You do not believe the biblical myrrh that about the great weaver? The story is thus fabricated beyond ya' ... you must plunge right into it for the adept ...

Some feel belted out ... chastity? Perhaps they should have been more charitable as the word creeps ... and nothing more fearful than virtue to those having it all well laid out without Cepheus ... one from the deeps ... yet un-dug by the facetious ...

 

[revjohn]

Then in that case I need only repeat myself. "If some one has some idea about who Jesus is. Be it the Messiah/The Christ/The son of god. Then by default they are a christian.

By that line of reasoning if some one has some idea about what a Big Mac is then by default they are an employee of McDonald's. Your argument is not compelling in the least.

"Christian" literally means "Christ-like" which is where the observation piece I mentioned above becomes critical. It is not enough to know/have some idea of who Jesus is, a similarity to that knowledge/idea is required. If, for example, the idea is that Christ is gentle (among other things) then simply knowing that Jesus was perceived to be gentle isn't enough for me to be like Jesus. I would have to be perceived as gentle myself in order to begin to be considered "Christ-like."

In as much as perceptions of Christ are far more complex than simply being gentle I probably would need to tick off a lot more boxes to achieve "Christ-likeness."

It also comes down to perception of self against the perceptions of others. Which is particularly true in a Christian context where the community of faith is often the corrective against individual ideas.

If they don't. Then they can call themselves whatever they like.

Everybody has the freedom to call themselves whatever they like. Ordinarily, there is no reason to contradict self-assessments.

That freedom doesn't extend to forcing others to describe them just as they like. Which explains the differentiation within Christianity as a whole. Certain ideas do not fly for the whole community and if the division between participants on an idea becomes marked (ie., Papal Infallibility) there will be schism. Christian belongs to the whole of Christian thought it is not owned by any particular Christian school.

 

[Luce NDs]

By that line of reasoning if some one has some idea about what a Big Mac is then by default they are an employee of McDonald's. Your argument is not compelling in the least.

"Christian" literally means "Christ-like" which is where the observation piece I mentioned above becomes critical. It is not enough to know/have some idea of who Jesus is, a similarity to that knowledge/idea is required. If, for example, the idea is that Christ is gentle (among other things) then simply knowing that Jesus was perceived to be gentle isn't enough for me to be like Jesus. I would have to be perceived as gentle myself in order to begin to be considered "Christ-like."

In as much as perceptions of Christ are far more complex than simply being gentle I probably would need to tick off a lot more boxes to achieve "Christ-likeness."

It also comes down to perception of self against the perceptions of others. Which is particularly true in a Christian context where the community of faith is often the corrective against individual ideas.



Everybody has the freedom to call themselves whatever they like. Ordinarily, there is no reason to contradict self-assessments.

That freedom doesn't extend to forcing others to describe them just as they like. Which explains the differentiation within Christianity as a whole. Certain ideas do not fly for the whole community and if the division between participants on an idea becomes marked (ie., Papal Infallibility) there will be schism. Christian belongs to the whole of Christian thought it is not owned by any particular Christian school.

Can one be halve Lit ... because of their attitudes towards avarice and adjuncts of the have not's ... normally despised by those with emotional powers and the means to the end part?

Brute sh heh is ... that one gone flaming off due to Roman Judi-ism ... a great punch to gentile history ... and thus history was corrupted ... curios lye?

Civilized life develops roughness ... grits ... and these wear on the powers ...always be prepared for the Reuben ... tis hierarchical .... staked!

In the end you'll get it ... the Shadow reigns ... dark and tricky as words go and you have not a grip on them ...!