What defines a Christian?

[leastone]

So, it would appear that you're suggesting we know a true follower of the Lord because another true follower will say that he is. That's a little weak.
One possible objection, take another believer who happens to believe something different to you, whose experience of God is different to yours. This person could say that he recognizes you to have a contrary spirit. Of course you might say the same thing back to him, but who are we to believe. I'm not necessarily saying I don't believe you, but I am going to need a better answer to my original question.

Please accept that I am far too weak to supply you with adequate, satisfactory answers.

The contrary spirit I referred to was one that was contrary to the holiness/ godliness that a faithful and true life in the Spirit of Good and Truth would bring about in the person's spiritual "condition." However, regardless of the "stature" of a person, or his particular religious affiliation, it is the Light (of Love/Truth) that exposes and reveals godlessness/unholiness and manifests its ugliness in the face of the glory of God, that is, the beauty of holiness.

Certainly, the beauty of holiness/humility is not restricted to Christians, but is available to all who, in your words, cavalier, have "experience of God." But even then, as one may discern the fragrance of same Holy Spirit praying through a Baptist, Reformed, Charismatic, or Orthodox Whatever, yet sounding different through each, one may discern differences in the spiritual "flavour" of different faiths. That does not necessarily constitute all their adherents as "contrary." Contrariness is to be found in the heart, not in the creeds.

I meant your experience, cavalier, since I called you by name. To restate the Teacher's heart:

Trust Me. Listen to me. Do you hear what I'm saying? Now go and do it: Live Love.

I hope that I am doing just that in my own experience, yea, even in this thread. If all you see is weakness, pray that God be strong through it.

Respectfully,

Learner.

 

[kenod]

Kenod, I think the topic of this thread is: What defines a Christian? NOT: What defines a fundamentalist?

It will be thoughtful of you in the future to stick to the topic of the thread.

Thank you.

Ruby

ok

 

[kenod]

Thus my focus is fundamentalism.

Sorry, I must have misunderstood.

 

[cavalier]

Please accept that I am far too weak to supply you with adequate, satisfactory answers.

Your ability to supply a good answer is not being called into question, rather your reasoning.

The contrary spirit I referred to was one that was contrary to the holiness/ godliness that a faithful and true life in the Spirit of Good and Truth would bring about in the person's spiritual "condition." However, regardless of the "stature" of a person, or his particular religious affiliation, it is the Light (of Love/Truth) that exposes and reveals godlessness/unholiness and manifests its ugliness in the face of the glory of God, that is, the beauty of holiness.

Certainly, the beauty of holiness/humility is not restricted to Christians, but is available to all who, in your words, cavalier, have "experience of God." But even then, as one may discern the fragrance of same Holy Spirit praying through a Baptist, Reformed, Charismatic, or Orthodox Whatever, yet sounding different through each, one may discern differences in the spiritual "flavour" of different faiths. That does not necessarily constitute all their adherents as "contrary." Contrariness is to be found in the heart, not in the creeds.

Perhaps this would be easier if we stayed on topic. The debate and your initial answers were on "What defines a Christian?" Not as you have, perhaps to save face, turned it into here, "How do we know who, Christian or otherwise, lives a faithful and true life in the Spirit of Good and Truth?"

In answer to the first question, "What defines a Christian?" you wrote, "being known" by the Lord to be his true follower would ultimately define whether or not one is a Christian in Spirit and in Truth.
I asked, How do we know who is known by the Lord to be his true follower?
Since it is a spiritual relationship/fellowship that we enter into, those who have His Spirit recognize one another even if strangers in a strange place.
Meaning that true Christains would recognize one another.
So in answer to the question, "What defines a Christian?" it seems you would answer, it is someone who is recognized as a Christian by another Christian.

Great, now all we need to do is find ourselves a Christian.

 

[leastone]

Dear cavalier,

I am a Christian.

From that certainty I have in no uncertain terms stated:

* The Lord Christ would surely know His own;

* Those who share His Spirit would recognize one another as being in Him, and also recognize those of a contrary spirit, if allowed by the Lord (that is, if the discernment of spirits is operative in their lives, either as a "gift," or developed through exercise).

My certainty of being a Christian comes from the testimony of the Spirit, and from the "fellowship" the saints share with the Spirit of God in Christ---it is a spiritual union of "kindred" spirits---even a "habitation" of God in the Spirit.

A curious neglect in the thread so far to define a Christian is any reference to the "body" of Christ. Only a member of a body can be considered "part" of that body, or included in its purpose, function, life, whatever. Of course, I do not consider this "household" of God to be constituted by, or contained in, creeds, confessions, theologies, let alone social organizations, dress and behavioural codes, or buildings. It is a spiritual reality, reflected, albeit rather poorly, in the myriad of expressions in countless situations and circumstances through twenty centuries of Christianity. In all those times, in all circumstances, for all followers of Jesus Christ, whether it be martyrs at the stake, or prosperity preachers in luxurious auditoriums in affluent societies, the spiritual reality remains the same:

The Spirit of Christ knows His own; in His Spirit, His own know one another.

I have no face to save about this. I am not mistaken or uncertain about this. Not at all.

Respectfully,

Learner.

 

[cavalier]

Dear cavalier,

I am a Christian.

From that certainty I have in no uncertain terms stated:

* The Lord Christ would surely know His own;

* Those who share His Spirit would recognize one another as being in Him, and also recognize those of a contrary spirit, if allowed by the Lord (that is, if the discernment of spirits is operative in their lives, either as a "gift," or developed through exercise).

My certainty of being a Christian comes from the testimony of the Spirit, and from the "fellowship" the saints share with the Spirit of God in Christ---it is a spiritual union of "kindred" spirits---even a "habitation" of God in the Spirit.

In my head I have never questioned whether or not you are a Christian. I honestly apologize if I have given that impression in my posts.

A curious neglect in the thread so far to define a Christian is any reference to the "body" of Christ. Only a member of a body can be considered "part" of that body, or included in its purpose, function, life, whatever. Of course, I do not consider this "household" of God to be constituted by, or contained in, creeds, confessions, theologies, let alone social organizations, dress and behavioural codes, or buildings. It is a spiritual reality, reflected, albeit rather poorly, in the myriad of expressions in countless situations and circumstances through twenty centuries of Christianity. In all those times, in all circumstances, for all followers of Jesus Christ, whether it be martyrs at the stake, or prosperity preachers in luxurious auditoriums in affluent societies, the spiritual reality remains the same:

The Spirit of Christ knows His own; in His Spirit, His own know one another.

I have no face to save about this. I am not mistaken or uncertain about this. Not at all.

Respectfully,

Learner.

Ok

 

[wil]

Learner...am I completely wrong or are you repeatedly describing the conventional christian concepts and beliefs.

If so, are you aware you are in the liberal christian discussion group, where we are fully aware of what those in the christian discussion group think on this matter and we are exploring what a liberal christian thinks.

the body, the blood....symbolism....birth, death, resurection....symbolism...is acceptable over here...

 

[leastone]

Alas! The learner has leprosy!

....are you aware you are in the liberal christian discussion group

Really, wil--yes, I am.

we are fully aware of what those in the christian discussion group think on this matter and we are exploring what a liberal christian thinks.

Do you mean, on the matter, "What defines a Christian?"

we are exploring what a liberal christian thinks

.

It seems I have offended and transgressed by offering what I see as the very essence of what/who would define a Christian, and I did so as a "liberal" Christian. What makes me a liberal? The same thing that makes you think you're one---the way way you think about yourself, and the ideas you entertain as your (current) truth.

Learner...am I completely wrong or are you repeatedly describing the conventional christian concepts and beliefs.

If it seemed repetitive, it was in response to the flow of the thread, and trying to avoid being drawn into some (s)word fighting.

the body, the blood....symbolism....birth, death, resurection....symbolism...is acceptable over here...

Many a slip between the Cup* and the lip...

Well, wil, don't recall writing about all those things, but if I do, it would be because it seems (to me, at least) relevant to the topic (and that is only fair, since I am then the one writing my own mind, and not guessing yours, or what will please the most).

If I am given an opportunity to define a tree, albeit a new species that has not been given its proper, lengthy Latin name, it would be impossible not to relate it to its source, or kind; impossible not to rely on known tree terminology; in fact, quite silly to seek to describe it as something beyond the plant kingdom. It would still have roots, a body (trunk), branches, leaves, and flowers that become seed so that it can reproduce after its own kind. That is just the nature of things.



Respectfully,

The leprous learner.

*Shall I not drink the cup the Father hands me? Must we not all?

 

[Caimanson]

It seems I have offended and transgressed by offering what I see as the very essence of what/who would define a Christian, and I did so as a "liberal" Christian. What makes me a liberal? The same thing that makes you think you're one---the way way you think about yourself, and the ideas you entertain as your (current) truth.

Hello Learner, if some people in this thread contest your views as non-liberal, can you explain more in what way do you see yourself as a liberal christian. Honest question.

Alvaro

 

[leastone]

Dear Alvaro,

I appreciate you asking, but I am not sure that it is appropriate to answer on this thread (not on topic). Not that I see anybody else ever having to explain themselves, or that the guidelines as set forth by the one whose house this is, is clearly understood by all. We are all guests here, and welcome anywhere in the house, so long as we behave, not "think as others do."

In short, I left conservative (Reformed) Christianity early 1970's, and "graduated" from mainstream Pentecostal/Charismatic Christianity a decade ago. I have spent almost thirty years studying every avenue, nook and cranny (sect, cult, denomination, church, faith, religion) I could, even to the extent of being involved with some, or sitting under their teachings, and I am still at it. I have discarded many of the things I previously thought important for a Christian to believe, and found that it made no difference to my faith and relationship to God. I am still a Christian and am presently trying to integrate what little I can grasp of scientific revelation with the core of my spiritual understanding, which has more to do with mysticism than creeds and confessions. I have not been a member of any church for ten years, nor do I attend any services, except when asked to speak; I live in isolation as a hermit, like a monk, given to a life of reading, studying, and writing about the spiritual life---in simplicity, silence, and solitude. I am hardly near anything that some here have so hastily projected onto me. I see myself as a solitary in Christ, and, yes, a rather liberal one.

Thanks for asking. I have had to take a look at myself ---to define a Christian (such as I). Oops, I've just boxed myself in.

Respectfully,

Learner

 

[RubySera_Martin]

In conversation with a person from another forum I was given the idea that liberal Christianity is a "spirituality using Christian themes." I think (but may be wrong) that this describes what Wil is aiming for.

Originally posted by wil:

the body, the blood....symbolism....birth, death, resurection....symbolism...is acceptable over here...

I guess that would be the "themes" this person meant.

Originally posted by leastone:

In short, I left conservative (Reformed) Christianity early 1970's, and "graduated" from mainstream Pentecostal/Charismatic Christianity a decade ago. I have spent almost thirty years studying every avenue, nook and cranny (sect, cult, denomination, church, faith, religion) I could, even to the extent of being involved with some, or sitting under their teachings, and I am still at it. I have discarded many of the things I previously thought important for a Christian to believe, and found that it made no difference to my faith and relationship to God.

It seems you have set your own standards as to what "conservative" and "liberal" mean. It differs considerably from what the rest of us on this forum mean by it. It's all relative.

For example, I come from a horse and buggy Mennonite community. The conservative element of the horse and buggy community uses steel rim buggy wheels, whereas the liberal segment uses rubber tire buggy wheels. I come from the liberal segment. You would probably say it is ultra-ultra conservative. We thought it's the happy medium.

We felt that anybody who drove a car was fairly liberal. Those churches that allow TV, cut hair and pants on women, and women preachers are lost to the world, barely worthy the name of Christian because they are all-out liberal. That is how it appeared to us. I have moved away from them in recent years but I will always remember their standards in these things.

So you see it's relative. By some standards, having a driver's license is liberal. By other standards, anyone who accepts the traditional teaching on such things as communion and the divinity of Christ is conservative.

Wil, correct me if I'm wrong. I think you are saying that by this latter standard leastone is conservative, and that on this forum you would like to explore Christian concepts on the level that most Christians would consider heretical and outside the domain of Christianity. If so, I am in full agreement with you.

Leastone, according to the literature, "mainstream Pentecostal/Charismatic Christianity" IS conservative Christianity, even fundamentalist. You say you have graduated from them. Perhaps this puts you on par with regular eveyday Christians, but perhaps with a unique belief system that does not fit into an existing denomination. This does not make a person liberal by the standards that seem to be used here.

I am not in a position to determine who can and cannot post on this forum, or even on this thread. I just pick and choose what posts I read. What I am trying to do here is clarify some terms and definitions as I understand it.

For what it's worth, this info comes from the scholarly literature on the topic i.e. sociology and theology. This may not be the definitions this group wishes to operate by. I offer it only as information, in case it's helpful to anybody.

Ruby

 

[wil]

Namaste Learner and thank you for providing more info...

Now I've got to reread everything as what I saw in your previous posts made me wonder why you would consider yourself liberal....funny in reality I don't consider myself a liberal Christian, that is the box I get stuck in because I have all the same beliefs as others...or interpret the beliefs differently...

From reading your posts though...and this is what defines a Christian...and it is in the liberal thread...how do you see yourself/your responses as differing from mainstream?

peace and blessings,

wil

 

[RubySera_Martin]

Let me clarify. When I say a denomination is conservative or fundamentalist I am not saying it is bad. It's just a term to describe a certain type of beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours.

 

[Caimanson]

Dear Alvaro,
I have discarded many of the things I previously thought important for a Christian to believe, and found that it made no difference to my faith and relationship to God. I am still a Christian and am presently trying to integrate what little I can grasp of scientific revelation with the core of my spiritual understanding, which has more to do with mysticism than creeds and confessions.

Thanks Learner, imo your story if is not part of the topic it adds to it.

At the risk of paraphrasing your thoughts, you seem to espouse that one is a christian in the *strictily* spiritual sense, living with the holy spirit indwelling in us, and having spiritual fellowship with God.
If that is the case I think that the source of the misunderstanding is that your mystical view in my eyes is still very much conservative, at least from my ex-evangelical background. However from the outward point of view you are liberal, then traditions, creeds, behaviour, etc. are not really necessary(how refreshing!).

The problem is that people may still disagree with that mystical definition of a christian because it adheres to too much to the traditional biblical doctrines. Regarding the definition of the label christian I think is only important in as much as it allows us to agree what we are triying to describe, to help us communicate.

Personally I am still checking things out. Thanks for your story Learner, it reminds me that the important thing is what allows me to have a spiritual life of any sort.

Alvaro

 

[flowperson]

Learner:

Your personal story is very meaningful to me, and in significant ways is similar to the life I have led at times over the past twenty years or so. I am still seeking and am asking questions about it all, especially from the science/nature/technology side of things and what it really means to be a Christian.

IMO, in our times, this is the one thing that in the end will surely bring all of us different folk together, for we all must come to understand the places in which G-d planted us, in terms which transcend the economic aspects, so that we can deal realistically with the futures that we are creating for ourselves. We are all Created Co-Creators.

flow....

 

[leastone]

Dear all,

Thank you for your various responses.

I find it most uncomfortable being in the box (witness stand), but, of course, we may be called upon to be ready to give an account for the hope that is within us at any time, in any setting.

I wonder if hope, or love, can also be classified into shades of conservatism/liberalism (all relative, of course), they way we've done with the third one of the set, faith?

Wil, you sincerely ask: "...how do you see yourself/your responses as differing from mainstream?"

And Ruby ("in full agreement with you") says:"Wil, ...I think you are saying that by this latter standard leastone is conservative, and that on this forum you would like to explore Christian concepts on the level that most Christians would consider heretical and outside the domain of Christianity."

I reply:

We (including myself) would only know how my responses would differ from the mainstream once "Christian concepts....considered heretical and outside the domain of Christianity" are discussed here, and everybody free to join in with their points of view.

Respectfully,

Learner.

 

[RubySera_Martin]

Leastone, I admire your effort at answering our questions and understanding where we're coming from. You say:

Originally posted by leastone:

We (including myself) would only know how my responses would differ from the mainstream once "Christian concepts....considered heretical and outside the domain of Christianity" are discussed here, and everybody free to join in with their points of view.

I think there may be a short-cut. In the opening paragraph I posted a link to a description of Liberal Protestants. I will repost it here for your convenience:

Originally posted by RubySera in Post 1:

If you look up the beliefs of Liberal Protestants on Beliefnet, you will see that a person does not necessarily have to believe in the miracles, the resurrection, or even in Jesus as the Christ in order to identify as a Christian.

Note the word "necessarily." Beliefnet says most liberal Protestants do believe in these things. Again, I may be wrong, but I think the level of liberalism we are attempting to explore here is that which does not require one to believe that salvation comes alone through belief in the shed blood of Christ, and that there is a very real possibility that there is no life after death. Personally, that is my goal and interest here.

I wonder if hope, or love, can also be classified into shades of conservatism/liberalism (all relative, of course), they way we've done with the third one of the set, faith?

I think perhaps there is a misunderstanding here. Faith is distinct from beliefs. I don't believe that faith, love, and hope are conservative or liberal. They just are. Each culture, society, and religion has its own way of expressing them.

As I see it, beliefs or creed are the "I believe" statements where people say things like "I believe in God the father of the only begotten son..." This is the level where I think about liberal and conservative.

Conservative holds the traditional views of "salvation alone through faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ who now sits at the right hand of the Father until he returns to judge the living and the dead" or something like that.

I don't think there is one established liberal position at this point and that this is why we want to explore it. If we identify as Christians yet reject this central tenet of orthodox Christianity, what is it that makes us Christian?

My goal in setting up this thread was to explore that question.

 

[InLove]

Hi, Peace to All Here--

Let me clarify. When I say a denomination is conservative or fundamentalist I am not saying it is bad. It's just a term to describe a certain type of beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours.

Thank you for that effort, Ruby. I am sure it resonates with many people.

If I may, I'd like to try and address the original question:

Perhaps it is really only the individual Christian who can define what The Christ means to him or herself. Organized religion keeps trying to do this, but inevitably runs in to all kinds of problems when it attempts, or appears to attempt, to impose limits on Love.

My thoughts.

InPeace,
InLove

 

[wil]

Perhaps it is really only the individual Christian who can define what The Christ means to him or herself.

a-amen, a-amen, a-amen amen amen....sing it sister...

 

[Dondi]

Conservative holds the traditional views of "salvation alone through faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ who now sits at the right hand of the Father until he returns to judge the living and the dead" or something like that.

I don't think there is one established liberal position at this point and that this is why we want to explore it. If we identify as Christians yet reject this central tenet of orthodox Christianity, what is it that makes us Christian?

My goal in setting up this thread was to explore that question.

Perhaps it is really only the individual Christian who can define what The Christ means to him or herself. Organized religion keeps trying to do this, but inevitably runs in to all kinds of problems when it attempts, or appears to attempt, to impose limits on Love.

InLove, I think you hit on something that I tried to emphasize in another thread. That what matters in the end is the Church of You. We are all trying to define what is a Liberal Christian, but I don't think we can come to a concensus because of the diversity of beliefs that are evident on this forum.

My Christianity will differ from your Christianity because as individuals striving to learn the "truth" or should I say "truths", we will inevidibly insert ourselves into that equation, through all our biases, experiences, and paths of learning.

Even in a church setting, more so in liberal than in conservative churches, you are going to have people disagree in beliefs. But I know for a fact that I would be found with some very unfundamentalist views in my own church should I voice my opinion on certain doctrines and beliefs (for example, I find myself at odds with the creation/evolution debate, I lean more toward thiestic evolution). Yet it is enough for me to concentrate on what I do agree with and that I function within the mission of the church and try to serve in love. I could argue my point, but to what end? All it will cause is strive. I am comfortable my own beliefs that I don't feel urge to voice the differences.

Interestingly, Jesus didn't seem to mind distinctions in His own day:

"And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
For he that is not against us is on our part." - Mark 9:38-40

Perhaps Christianity is as diverse as our individuality. We all have to eventually answer to God as individuals, should we find ourselves standing before our Maker.