A question to all: Am I a "Christian"?

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

My mother was an overboard Christian and she believed that frogs were evil. She was not alone. Now, if frogs were evil, how is it that god used frogs to invest a town as a sign to help free the Jews for Moses. It seems like these creatures were under the control of God. This is just one example of how people misinterpret things.

Another example is that people hate picker bushes. God says "Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field" So people hate these bushes. The thing is that the chemistry of the thistle actually can be a medicine and extend the life of our organs if consumed reasonably, this gives us a longer and less sickly life. Now how come people hate these things. The Church has known for a long time that these can cancel out many types of poisoning, but did not tell everyone. It can help the body detox and work properly. But we learned to curse these things and rip them from the ground. It does not have to be holy thistle either, other types also work but are less potent....and free.

Now these are just a couple of examples of how people are blinded to see the truth. Yet the church does not really address these rumors and lets people fear a frog, thinking that they are a little off. Now, frogs can carry disease, but that is not actually a devil thing, if you don't harass them and wash your hands after touching them, you do not have much to worry about. Some of the sayings we have made in the past were created to keep kids from harassing wildlife, but it got turned around and some people fear frogs.

Sorry about getting off topic. I just wanted to show you that even the most religious people can be misled and believe a lie. It is their pride that causes this, their tendency to judge others. That is the job of god. I won't look the other way or turn the other cheek if someone threatens my family. I don't know what nut wrote that in the bible. It was meant to keep people from making enemies of their neighbors because of minor disputes. It was meant to deter people killing someone in their community for minor disputes. This helped to form the justice system we have in America, bring your disputes in front of a judge, hoping he is not bribed by the other person or believes in unfair practices. Even the corruption of the judicial system is mentioned in the bible somewhere. Some things never change, but our perception of them does.

You know? Wtf? Frogs and ignorance of medicinal plants and... WHAT? HOW COME I NEVER HEARD of these things you claim we believe in. Come by my place and I will serve you some Brigham tea from desert shrubs if you are ill. I have been into health and wellness now for nearly 30 years and am unaware of the ignorances you proclaim. I feel sorry for you to have to feel your own mother is dumb. Please do not do that to my mother. Your whole post is a strawman, a weird one at that. Nobody thinks like that, unless, yes thats it, unless your mother is a christian voodoo priestess, then that would make sense.

a reply to: manna2

What? My goodness, that's quite a projection!

I fell in no hole. I didn't set a trap, either. I asked whether my set of circumstances and beliefs would - in the opinion/according to the faith of others on this forum - be what they considered "Christian."

I do not feel "humbled" because I wasn't being prideful or disingenuous to begin with! I stated from the outset what I intended. Some people would feel that since I was baptized and confirmed in the Episcopal Faith, that I am a member of that faith, though in "lapsed" standing. Some would feel that since I did not go through a born-again process as an older person, I would not be counted as a Christian.

There are over 30,000 denominations of Christianity. Each of them has their own standards, or definitions, or limitations on who they consider to be a genuine "Christian." I was looking forward to hearing how people of various denominations define "who is a Christian." I got wonderful answers, and my questions were answered.

You and I had different understandings of what "The Golden Rule" means. I posted my definition of it, and some information regarding its origins (long before Jesus). It's a universal tenet. You then attacked me as ignoring half of it, and I honest-to-God could not figure out what you were talking about, until I realized you were referring NOT to "The Golden Rule", but to "Jesus's command". They are different things, though both include treating others with compassion and refraining from doing things to them that one would not want done to themselves.

Perhaps it is YOU who fell into the trap you imagined to be there.

Serdgiam challenged my motives, and I answered him straight up. The OP was written straight up. I simply wanted to know whether members would "count" me as a Christian according to THEIR STANDARDS/UNDERSTANDING of what it means!

That's all!!

Lol, keep digging, thats ok. Jesus was quoting scripture. He too was under attempts to trap him by the pharisees that posed the question, "what is the greatest commandment". He quoted scripture from prophets long dead. Like you said, it was universally known. You just assume it is something borrowed.
See how much more you have to elaborate on now that you are called out? You honestly believe you are the model by which we should all hold as a standard ofwhat is good and even implied from the op that you are christianbecause you are "good". The bible defines that as pride. Yeshua declared "there is none righteous, not even one; all fall short"
you attempt to make Him a liar. We saw but you didnt. It is pride that steered your thoughts when you contemplated the thread and its pride that makes you now defend your actions and words. We see this in how you continually lift yourself up as the model. You feigned sincerity to season the bait but i saw no one fall in the hole you dug but yourself and a poser or 2.a reply to: BuzzyWigs
Oh, btw. I never claimed you were humbled, quite the opposite. I claimed, as others have, that you are driven by your pride. Being humbled would be..., lol, a Christian thing...

a reply to: manna2

See how much more you have to elaborate on now that you are called out? You honestly believe you are the model by which we should all hold as a standard ofwhat is good and even implied from the op that you are christianbecause you are "good". The bible defines that as pride. Yeshua declared "there is none righteous, not even one; all fall short"
you attempt to make Him a liar. We saw but you didnt.

No, I do not believe I am a "model human being" - not at all. I never said I was "good", let alone "the best," and I did not claim to be a "Christian" or a "real" Christian, or anything of the sort.

If I had listed my mistakes and the things I feel remorse for - those things I am ashamed of - the thread would have become a "confessional", and that was not the point. I'm not making anyone a liar. I know none of us are perfect, and don't expect that I will ever be.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Please keep in mind that you are projecting onto me a set of beliefs that are entirely of your own imagining. If you interpreted my posts that way, and refuse to allow me to clarify or correct your impression, then there's no use in trying, so I will not be responding to you any further. (I didn't start this thread to ask for a brow-beating, nor to beat anyone else's brow. I have not told anyone they are "wrong" in what they believe....all I have done is said "that's not what I meant" when I was misunderstood/misconstrued.)

Have a good day.

It gets hard to understand how to reply when you quote me but add your own words in there to misrepresent what was said. In the end it just shows that from op to end you were disingenuous in declaring your motives. Its not brow beating. Its calling you out on bs. You play word games. Even your last post you added words to redefine what i actually said, and you put it in quotes even. Is that supposed to fool me? Or others? I am not projecting, but you are attempting transference in hopes of showing you are more christian than Christians.a reply to: BuzzyWigs

a reply to: manna2

It gets hard to understand how to reply when you quote me but add your own words in there to misrepresent what was said.

sigh.

I quote you and "add in my own words" to show how I'm "understanding" what you are saying.

In the end it just shows that from op to end you were disingenuous in declaring your motives.

No. It shows that I am attempting to understand. Like when I'm in conversation with someone, and they say something I don't understand, so I might say, "Wait - are you saying: this, this and that? Or am I not getting it." Hopefully, if they want to make themselves clear, they can find a different phrase or way to use their words - make an analogy, or remind me of some event or feeling I can relate to.

Its not brow beating. Its calling you out on bs.

Whatever. You are brow-beating me and attacking my character, and it's unwarranted.

You play word games.

No. I use language as a tool for communication. I have a very good command of English, writing, and phraseology.

Even your last post you added words to redefine what i actually said, and you put it in quotes even.

Not to "redefine" what you said - to re-utter it in my own words (paraphrase) to show how I interpreted it.

Is that supposed to fool me? Or others?

No, it's supposed to provide clarity on my thoughts and interpretations.

I am not projecting, but you are attempting transference in hopes of showing you are more christian than Christians

I'm not interested in being "more christian" than anyone else.

Now, again, kindly stop your assault. I got your point - you think I'm a BSer playing word games and trying to bait people.
You are wrong.

Your posts are the ONLY hostile, aggressive ones I got. I prevail upon you to desist.
You can carry on if you like, but I will NOT further respond. I have nothing more to say in my own defense, or toward you.

Ladies and gentlemen,
friends and readers;

As the thread winds down into yet another dead horse, I want to wrap up by saying to everyone (aside from manna2, who isn't having any of it) who responded to me, that I was delighted, and am very thankful, for the courtesy, thought, time, and care you have shown toward my questions.

The vast majority of you answered with kindness, sincerity, and neutrality - and for that I am, and always will be grateful.
I feel I have gotten to know you a little better, and I really regret any failure on my part in offering my own sensibilities in as clear and straightforward a manner as I could.

I feel a genuine warmth and regard within those responses, and that means a lot to me.

Thanks again. See you all around the boards!

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Buzzy,

Kudos for the thread! I would never start a thread, setting myself up for the beating you're taking here! LOL! Stars and Flagged!

I have thought about doing a similar thread, something like: "So You Think You're a Christian, or, "You may be a Christian....IF", "Are You Sure You're a Christian?", you know, to discuss who thinks you have to follow the Nicene Creed, who thinks you have to be baptized to be a Christian, what does it mean to be saved/born again to various Christians, etc.

It's clear that there is no ONE consensus on what it means to be a Christian.

a reply to: windword

Hiya wind!

It's clear that there is no ONE consensus on what it means to be a Christian.

Agreed.
That's why I was asking. I think most people understood that, and it's been pretty interesting. Very thoughtful answers - and almost all of them with no judgment. I think it went okay!!



Thanks for reading!

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Hopefully, in time, you will be able to look back at this specific post of yours and learn from it.

I was just making a statement at the end, not necessarily directed towards you, but anyone who might be reading as well. It wasnt really a suggestion to you, or anything of the sort. It was like saying "the sky is blue."

But, instead of focusing on expanding what you were truly seeking, you focused on a point that could somehow be contended even in agreement.

You could have shared numerous things, we could have talked about so many applicable ideas, but you focused on that.

Perhaps, next time, it would be more unifying to be open. Heck, even in this thread, Id love to hear about the new things you learned from your curiosity, but that doesnt seem to be happening...

I hope that in the future, we can explore things together rather than be guinea pigs. That tends to be a more in-depth and lasting exchange than setting up a thread in a way that inevitably puts you in a position of defending yourself.

a reply to: Serdgiam

Serdg,
perhaps we can simply discuss the things you want to discuss right here.

I did not create this thread to abuse "guinea pigs". I don't understand why you reject that statement of intent.
I am interested in what the various denominations use as the definition of "Christian." THAT is why I asked. If someone asked me whether I thought they were Christian, or Buddhist, or a heathen, or whatever, I would be able to say why I came to that 'label', I would think about my own definitions of those labels.

That is all it was.

Now, if you'd like to discuss the thread, I'm fine to do that. Please try to avoid slotting me into some unsavory faction of passive-aggressive manipulation. I know passive-aggression VERY WELL, and I also know better than to "use" people to perform "research" without their consent. I was clear and straight-forward in the OP.

Is there anything else?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Is there anything else?

Instead of continuing to defend your perspective vs. the validity of others, I would love to know what it is you learned from this thread specifically. I never said anything about passive-aggressive, nor did I slot you into any faction. You keep focusing on these things, rather than the invitation to explore the topic together.

So, I wont mince words as some sort of test anymore, that would be cruel;

Did you learn anything new? Or was your bias confirmed?

a reply to: Serdgiam

Did you learn anything new?

Yes, I learned something new.

Or was your bias confirmed?

What "bias"?

Okay - here's what I learned. I'll probably have to go back and reread everything again (I've already done that several times, but it was a lot of information)....

I learned about how people think of Episcopalians - Astyanax's responses, and Moresby's, were very helpful in that regard...
While I knew the history of how the Church of England got started (Henry VIII and all that - and I've studied it in depth, as well as the conflicts leading up to and acted out during the English Civil War), I did not know how other denominations viewed it, or how it had evolved - which Astyanax explained. I learned that some think Episcopalians are "faux".

I learned (and I guess this was a "bias", or expected response) that many think one has to be "born-again" - but not exactly what that entails.

I learned that not everyone thinks the Nicene Creed is enough, and that infant baptism doesn't cut it as far as some are concerned.

a reply to: Serdgiam

Let's see....also, I learned that some think to be a "Christian" one must believe things, not just say they believe it...but I did NOT learn how one is supposed to accomplish that.

I did learn that some think I had a terrible childhood, which I did not.

The only answers I got to "why didn't the lessons stick the landing?" had to do with either my mother, or the Episcopal church. Well, I can't go back and undo my mother, or the church. I also can't undo the impression I got as a small child while reciting the Nicene Creed or the Prayer of Humble Access that I was worthless - it is there. As intellectually as I try to look at it as an adult, that doesn't change the fact that I found the Creed preposterous, and the Prayer of Humble Access an exercise in self-loathing and shame (which, actually, seemed to be the point).

Now, while I was running errands today I was thinking about my beliefs about God - about the experiences I've had that confirm there is a greater and invisible comforting force out there.

A fairly recent example came to my mind: After my father's death, I was grieving profoundly - something I'd never experienced before. I was sitting outside on that beautiful autumn day with tears streaming down my face - not sobbing, not shaking, just weeping and missing my dad, and profoundly sorrowful. Then I felt what I can only call an "ethereal embrace" enfold me. Whether it was the love of my dad reaching through to me, or it was the Divine, the Source, the Creator, Jesus, or whatever one prefers to call it - I felt an overarching sensation of being held, comforted, soothed, and supported.

It was very profound.

I accepted that as 'communication' from beyond the veil - as a sign.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
What "bias"?

When we go into any situation, we tend to have a bias as to how that situation will work out. These are based on preconceived notions that may, or may not, be accurate. The only issue with bias is when our intent is to confirm it. Of course, this happens non stop with the human mind.

I learned that not everyone thinks the Nicene Creed is enough, and that infant baptism doesn't cut it as far as some are concerned.

Yes, I think that most Christians feel that you need to actively practice things to consider it as a title. I think this comes more from general human interaction than specifically religion though. Itd be like me saying I am a hockey player because I played it when I was younger, yet havent put on skates in years upon years.

The most interesting manifestation of faith, to me, is the idea that one can do as they wish (including harming others) as long as they simply have faith. I personally think this is a misunderstanding of scripture, but it is one that has been bought and sold extensively in the past centuries. i.e. You can do whatever you want during the week! Rape, pillage, plunder! As long as you have faith and attend church on Sundays, your ticket to heaven is assured. I have my doubts this is the case, and many wont come out and say it directly, yet in their actions we can see the truth.

If those are the things you learned, then it sounds like it is the beginning of your exploration of comparative religion (forgive me if I am incorrect). I think it is one of the most interesting areas of study in all of human history, personally. And it is one that can really lead to great understanding if one is more concerned with learning rather than being "right."

All of humanity has had essentially the same "data set" for all of recorded history. Technology has changed, but the universe itself is still operating under the same principles. And yet, look at how many different interpretations there are about it! Eventually, I think we will evolve to the point that we are more concerned with finding out the truth than arguing over who is right. I think one of the biggest steps would be in realizing that the behavior behind religious zealotry is also present in ideologies and perspective that do not include deities.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I learned that some think to be a "Christian" one must believe things, not just say they believe it...but I did NOT learn how one is supposed to accomplish that.

perhaps I didn't make myself clear...lol

Practice what you preach to "accomplish that"

a reply to: Serdgiam

If those are the things you learned, then it sounds like it is the beginning of your exploration of comparative religion (forgive me if I am incorrect). I think it is one of the most interesting areas of study in all of human history, personally. And it is one that can really lead to great understanding if one is more concerned with learning rather than being "right."

Actually, Serdg, I have been studying comparative religions for about 20 years now. This was but one more step into it, and interracting with real people with individual beliefs/ideas about, specifically, Christianity.

I know quite a bit about most of the world religions in general - but I don't know as much about the "comparative Christianity" category. Considering there are 30,000+ different varieties, that is some serious studying to do!!

I've learned, since the Arab Spring, quite a bit about Islam, and now I think I have a basic understanding of some of the schisms and sects of that faith - Shia, Sunni, Sikh, Wahhabi, Ahmaddiya, for example - but since I was not reared within the Muslim faith, I only get the basics - and I don't know the religion well enough to go much deeper except to read what people think.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Serdgiam
I did learn that some think I had a terrible childhood, which I did not.

I have seen that many feel that if you were brought up in a household that had anything whatsoever to do with Christianity (specifically), then your childhood was full of abuse, terror, beatings, molestation, fear, etc.

Many households do have these things, as terrible as it is.. but it can be present regardless of ideology or religion.

I accepted that as 'communication' from beyond the veil - as a sign.

I truly believe that at some point in the future, if we havent all destroyed ourselves, we will begin to explore these areas directly and without the intent to confirm bias. I am not convinced such happenings are solely in the brain, and I believe there are things going on that we can not perceive. It sounds obvious, but through peoples actions, you can see very clearly that some do not believe anything exists outside of humanities understanding. At best, it has no potential or reason to be explored scientifically.

Another interesting facet is that many feel that if God, or even just the "supernatural," is proven or explored scientifically that it somehow takes away from prior interpretations of the universe. Meaning, I know of many Christians that feel that their belief relies solely upon their lack of exploration.

a reply to: Akragon

Oh you're still here!! Yay!


It wasn't your post in particular that prompted that statement...
I want to know how to "accomplish" forcing oneself to believe something - how do I implant the belief in the resurrection (or the miracles) when I simply don't believe it, and never did? I hardly think that, at age 55, there is some magical formula that will change my brain into believing it.

I just don't.
I never did.

a reply to: Serdgiam

I truly believe that at some point in the future, if we havent all destroyed ourselves, we will begin to explore these areas directly and without the intent to confirm bias. I am not convinced such happenings are solely in the brain, and I believe there are things going on that we can not perceive.

Me, too!

It sounds obvious, but through peoples actions, you can see very clearly that some do not believe anything exists outside of humanities understanding. At best, it has no potential or reason to be explored scientifically.

This really bothers me, and I see it, too. The strict materialists who want nothing at all to do with exploring the so-called "paranormal" are the flip side of the "free-thinkers are Satan's slaves" folks.

Another interesting facet is that many feel that if God, or even just the "supernatural," is proven or explored scientifically that it somehow takes away from prior interpretations of the universe. Meaning, I know of many Christians that feel that their belief relies solely upon their lack of exploration.

Yup.
That.

Like I said in one of my posts - we (my brothers and I) were taught consistently that if we had questions, the solution was to: "Look it up!!" (lol, I can still hear my dad's voice saying it!)

So yeah, I've "looked it up."