Defining a "Christian"

[Nadiine]

Who defines what a genuine Christian is? Namely if one rejects the Scriptures as God's inspired word to man?

[NewGuy101]

I think it's more if you are within the boundries of orthodoxy. If you believe in a triune God that died for your sins you should be ok. If we are going to apply scripture as a prereq for salvation than we have to be consistant an apply it to people in africa who do not have access to a bible but proclaim Christ as king!

[Criada]

Who defines what a genuine Christian is? Namely if one rejects the Scriptures as God's inspired word to man?

God does!

I think it's more if you are within the boundries of orthodoxy. If you believe in a triune God that died for your sins you should be ok. If we are going to apply scripture as a prereq for salvation than we have to be consistant an apply it to people in africa who do not have access to a bible but proclaim Christ as king!

But not having a bible isn't the same as rejecting scripture!!

[NewGuy101]

God does!



But not having a bible isn't the same as rejecting scripture!!
The essence is the same, not having the word of God. Does having it saves you?

[Criada]

The essence is the same, not having the word of God. Does having it saves you?
No, obviously not. We are saved by the death and resurection of Jesus.
Um - sorry - what is the question here?

[GreenMunchkin]

Gotta say, if someone doesn't believe Jesus rose again physically, I just do not see how that person can claim to be a Christian.

[Simon_Templar]

I think it's more if you are within the boundries of orthodoxy. If you believe in a triune God that died for your sins you should be ok. If we are going to apply scripture as a prereq for salvation than we have to be consistant an apply it to people in africa who do not have access to a bible but proclaim Christ as king!
There is a significant difference between not having access to the word of God in written form, and rejecting the word of God in written form.

In one you simple are ignorant, in the other you are deliberately rebelious.

consider that one of the necessary beliefs of an orthodox Christian, according to the creed, is believing that the Holy Spirit has spoken by the prophets.
I would argue that the intent of that statement is belief not only that the Holy Spirit has spoken by the prophets, but that what he has spoken has been accurately preserved and transmitted as well.

thus, in my opinion, belief in the inpiration of scripture is part of the creed and thus a necessary part of orthodox Christianity.

[LivingLifeHisWay]

My hubby and I discuss this one a lot b/c we know people who consider themselves Christian but we bieleve aren't. It's hard b/c we don't doubt them to be critical we doubt because we love them and if they aren't truly saved we want them to be. We encourage them and pray that they will come to know Jesus as their Savior.

But in the end God knows their heart and I don't want to spend my days finger pointing and trying to decide who's a Christian or not. It's tough.

Don't know if I have added to this conversation but that's my 2 cents - for all their worth. lol ::):

[MercyBurst]

If though shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus Christ, and believe in thy heart that God raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Repent and be converted.

Ye must be born again.

That about takes care of it.

[JoeWill]

When I did my degree in religion, I used to draw people's attention to the born again experience. This was due to the fact that lecturers felt that if a group defined themselves as "Christian", then they must be Christian. It was difficult to tell anyone that you had to believe in the bodily resurrection of Christ for example, because they would just point to people who call themselves "Christian" and who don't believe that; who give a non-literal interpretation to the Easter experiences etc. There were even "Christian" philosophers who didn't believe in Jesus.

So I found it helpful to begin by pointing out the fallacy of thinking that by saying you are something, automatically makes it so. Then I might point out that the Bible does talk about this thing called the born again experience, as a possible way of differentiating true Christians from nonimal Christians. I might give an example, such as the English Vicars who went to hear Billy Graham speak and realised they were unsaved. They became born again that night. Then I could lead into what the scriptures say from there.

[Nadiine]

My hubby and I discuss this one a lot b/c we know people who consider themselves Christian but we bieleve aren't. It's hard b/c we don't doubt them to be critical we doubt because we love them and if they aren't truly saved we want them to be. We encourage them and pray that they will come to know Jesus as their Savior.

But in the end God knows their heart and I don't want to spend my days finger pointing and trying to decide who's a Christian or not. It's tough.

Don't know if I have added to this conversation but that's my 2 cents - for all their worth. lol ::):
Thanks for your 2 cents :wave:

The Bible says "you will KNOW them by their fruit". I think God tells us what the fruit of a genuine Christian is, and then we're to inspect the fruit of people who claim to be of the same God.

I think it's one thing to see someone that struggles with sin, feels heavy conviction by God and seeks to follow His commands... and quite another to see and hear people that claim God and openly promote all kinds of sin and disregard the Bible.

In other words, just seeing somebody commit a "sin" isn't exactly fruit that they're lost (which means we would also qualify as being lost at times too)... I think
the ones we should be recognizing are the ones that openly promote what scripture calls evil/sin & worldly principles, who don't have a love for their [conservative] brethren and have a general lack of conviction by the Spirit God puts within us upon salvation.

[Nadiine]

Gotta say, if someone doesn't believe Jesus rose again physically, I just do not see how that person can claim to be a Christian.
That and other things - but they say it!

My biggest definition "crisis" is by those who deny the Bible is even inspired by God. When you remove the written standard and definition of the God of Israel, then it's open to anyone's claims and truth is thrown out.

How can a genuine Christian REJECT the bible as God's truth to us??? Or, lack most understanding of what it's saying; to claim it's all "metaphorical"/"analogical" I think this is the bottom line of the definition problem.
They remove the bible, then point at YOU as the evil person when you reject their claims to knowing the same God you know.

Biblically, they SHOULD understand the bible is both literal and metephorical in different areas. Interpreting some verses wrongly is one thing, not being able to understand even the most simple things it's teaching shows that they most likely have no clue who the God in the Bible is. imo

& here's my question to anyone; how do you convince them that they would understand the Bible differently or correctly if they were born again??
good luck with that.

[JoeWill]

& here's my question to anyone; how do you convince them that they would understand the Bible differently or correctly if they were born again??
good luck with that.

You may not be able to convince them with argumentation.

Everytime you say something like: "How can you be a Christian and not believe all these parts of the Bible?", the answer might come back: "Why should you need to believe much of the Bible to be a Christian?"

Some things we just seem to know, but are hard to rationalise into a persuasive argument. Morality is another good example of this.

One possibility is to give examples of how the born-again experience leads to stronger conviction in the scriptures. The Vicars from Bath (Britain) who went to hear Billy Graham speak in the 1980s, realised they weren't saved, and became born again. As a result, the Bath area has generally been less liberal in its Christian teachings than much of Britain for the last 20 years.

Probably if you give examples like this, it will at least plant a seed in people's minds, as we tend to go away from a discussion with some of the other person's view having a little influence over the way we see things.

[Nadiine]

You may not be able to convince them with argumentation.

Everytime you say something like: "How can you be a Christian and not believe all these parts of the Bible?", the answer might come back: "Why should you need to believe much of the Bible to be a Christian?"

Some things we just seem to know, but are hard to rationalise into a persuasive argument. Morality is another good example of this.

One possibility is to give examples of how the born-again experience leads to stronger conviction in the scriptures. The Vicars from Bath (Britain) who went to hear Billy Graham speak in the 1980s, realised they weren't saved, and became born again. As a result, the Bath area has generally been less liberal in its Christian teachings than much of Britain for the last 20 years.

Probably if you give examples like this, it will at least plant a seed in people's minds, as we tend to go away from a discussion with some of the other person's view having a little influence over the way we see things.
Thanks for your input - I guess what I should have asked instead of "how do you convince them", is "how do we keep the standard definition" over the church?

Imo, it's bcuz of heretics who came along during the early church times, that the church would create a creed that would put an end to it.
Today, we can't seem to do that.... why not? Not that a creed would "stop" heresy.... but it would at least keep the Standard of biblical teaching on Christianity for the mainstream church.

Would a creed even help in today's subjective world?

[JoeWill]

Thanks for your input - I guess what I should have asked instead of "how do you convince them", is "how do we keep the standard definition" over the church?

Imo, it's bcuz of heretics who came along during the early church times, that the church would create a creed that would put an end to it.
Today, we can't seem to do that.... why not? Not that a creed would "stop" heresy.... but it would at least keep the Standard of biblical teaching on Christianity for the mainstream church.

Would a creed even help in today's subjective world?
The thing is, churches have used force to ensure that these creeds were adhered to throughout much of history. Until quite recently you wouldn't have been able to practice heretical "Christianity" without putting yourself at risk.

It is not the creed on its own.

[Nadiine]

(it's not letting me post your quote to reply - I keep seeing this glitch pop up where it makes me sign in to either edit my own post or quote your post:mad: :confused: )

Anyways, Paul was clear in how to handle problems inside the church - that was to expel the ones in open sin. I strongly disagree with physical violence to enforce Orthodoxy (or unorthodoxy for that matter).

I guess the problem is that entire churches are springing up everywhere - it's not so much "inside" an orthodox church that the heresy is infiltrating.
It's SURROUNDING the evengelical church and at that point, since it's not from "within", the church has no authority to expel anyone or stop it.

All they can do is preach against it... which in the postmodern day and age is now viewed as "hate speech & attack" instead of loving correction. Honestly, if we talked and acted just like some of the NT apostles, we'd be burned at the stake for HATRED. :/

People today refuse correction and repentance imo.

[Lisa0315]

Who defines what a genuine Christian is? Namely if one rejects the Scriptures as God's inspired word to man?

Well, we are but vessels of honor. We speak what we know is true, and the Holy Spirit convicts them. If they do not listen to HS, then, there is nothing we can do.

Lisa

[Nadiine]

Well, we are but vessels of honor. We speak what we know is true, and the Holy Spirit convicts them. If they do not listen to HS, then, there is nothing we can do.

Lisa
Sweety, I can recommend a great lip waxing product if you'de like (or maybe some hormonal therapy)?:P LOL

But seriously, thanks for your reply. I was just exploring what the church could do in the times we live in with so many ignoring the bible and claiming Christianity.

[Lisa0315]

Sweety, I can recommend a great lip waxing product if you'de like (or maybe some hormonal therapy)?:P LOL

But seriously, thanks for your reply. I was just exploring what the church could do in the times we live in with so many ignoring the bible and claiming Christianity.

I have facial hair??? No way!!!!

Are you going to be in my contest? See my siggy?

I don't know what the Church can do except pray and live Godly lives. We cannot force people to accept the truth. When the Church had that power, it was abused.

Lisa

[Simon_Templar]

When I did my degree in religion, I used to draw people's attention to the born again experience. This was due to the fact that lecturers felt that if a group defined themselves as "Christian", then they must be Christian. It was difficult to tell anyone that you had to believe in the bodily resurrection of Christ for example, because they would just point to people who call themselves "Christian" and who don't believe that; who give a non-literal interpretation to the Easter experiences etc. There were even "Christian" philosophers who didn't believe in Jesus.

So I found it helpful to begin by pointing out the fallacy of thinking that by saying you are something, automatically makes it so. Then I might point out that the Bible does talk about this thing called the born again experience, as a possible way of differentiating true Christians from nonimal Christians. I might give an example, such as the English Vicars who went to hear Billy Graham speak and realised they were unsaved. They became born again that night. Then I could lead into what the scriptures say from there.
the problem here is that the terminology involved is heavily denominational in nature. When you begin speaking of "the born again experience" most people from traditional denominations are just going to give you a puzzled look because they don't use the same language.

They may very well BE born again, and have a relationship with God, but they don't use those same terms in the same way that protestant evangelicals do. The result is that you'll run into alot of genuine christians who just have no idea what you're talking about.

Going back to some other sentiments brought forward in the thread. Its popular among evangelicals to judge everything by the experience a person had. Rather than by the doctrines that they hold to.
A person can give agreement to a set of doctrines, without having really ever had a genuine experience of God. However, a person can just as easily have had false experiences based on any number of things other than the truth.

For example, most here would not consider mormon's to be christians. I have talked with mormons and they claim to believe in Jesus Christ, and one of the key tactics they use in their missionizing is to tell people to pray about the warm fuzzy's that the mormons talk about as their religious experience.
In other words, they have experiences too.

There are all sorts of religious experiences which are 'real' in that they are powerful to the person who experiences them. The fact that some people attach the name Jesus to their experiences, doesn't necessarily make them true.
It is adhering to the truth, that makes them true.

[JoeWill]

the problem here is that the terminology involved is heavily denominational in nature. When you begin speaking of "the born again experience" most people from traditional denominations are just going to give you a puzzled look because they don't use the same language.

Well I used to get opportunities to elaborate on what I meant. I didn't just say "you've got to be born again" - I talked about it.


For example, most here would not consider mormon's to be christians. I have talked with mormons and they claim to believe in Jesus Christ, and one of the key tactics they use in their missionizing is to tell people to pray about the warm fuzzy's that the mormons talk about as their religious experience.
In other words, they have experiences too.


Nevertheless, God uses Christian testimonies powerfully to affect people. For example the experiences of people who have come out of cults are very valuable for helping those still involved.
There are all sorts of religious experiences which are 'real' in that they are powerful to the person who experiences them. The fact that some people attach the name Jesus to their experiences, doesn't necessarily make them true.
It is adhering to the truth, that makes them true.

I agree. But don't forget we are talking about how we might convince others of what true Christianity is. A liberal or non-Christian would just tell you that truth is relative. You would be back to trying to explain why what you call "truth" is truth.

[sageoffools]

Actually, the term Christian did not come from God (not directly anyway) It was an attempt at an insult directed at the disciples when they were in Antioch (Acts 11)
Remember many of the "nonChristians" did not like Jesus, they gave this term to the disciples to mock the fact they they were being like this "wacko". The disciples embraced the term, though.
The word "Christian" technically means "little Christ". So who is a Christian? A Christian is a person who is living like Christ, not a person who believes a set of doctrines or attends a certain church or even every person who is "born again" (of course, every person that is born again should be a Christian, but that is not always the case). A real Christian is a person who asks himself in all seriousness WWJD, and then lives his life to do it.

"Be like Jesus this my song,
in the home or in the throng
Be like Jesus all day long,
I would be like Jesus"

[JoeWill]

A Christian is a person who is living like Christ, not a person who believes a set of doctrines or attends a certain church or even every person who is "born again" (of course, every person that is born again should be a Christian, but that is not always the case).

You are confusing the etymology of the word "Christian" with it's meanings today. The context of the word Christian in this discussion has been to make a distinction between those "Christians" who are merely nominal Christians, and those who have the real thing.

A person who is living like Christ will also have entered into a close spiritual relationship with God the Father, just as Jesus has such a relationship. This requires them to be born again, as the natural man does not understand the things of God (I Corinthians 2:14).

[Nadiine]

Actually, the term Christian did not come from God (not directly anyway) It was an attempt at an insult directed at the disciples when they were in Antioch (Acts 11)
Remember many of the "nonChristians" did not like Jesus, they gave this term to the disciples to mock the fact they they were being like this "wacko". The disciples embraced the term, though.
The word "Christian" technically means "little Christ". So who is a Christian? A Christian is a person who is living like Christ, not a person who believes a set of doctrines or attends a certain church or even every person who is "born again" (of course, every person that is born again should be a Christian, but that is not always the case). A real Christian is a person who asks himself in all seriousness WWJD, and then lives his life to do it.

I'd have to note here that without the doctrine found in our Bibles, we wouldn't know exactly how to "follow" Jesus or do what Jesus would do bcuz the Bible is our model of Him and His teachings.

Plus, we have examples of Jesus using a whip and turning over tables in anger & rebuking Pharisees harshly -- in my personal experience, I see alot of people ignoring quite a few scriptures to tell us that Jesus is basically a tolerant, passive hippy throwback from the 60's.

I think doctrine is extremely important in being a Christian and the Bible has alot to say about "scripture" and "doctrine" if you do a word study on them.
:wave: :holy:

[sageoffools]

You are confusing the etymology of the word "Christian" with it's meanings today. The context of the word Christian in this discussion has been to make a distinction between those "Christians" who are merely nominal Christians, and those who have the real thing.

A person who is living like Christ will also have entered into a close spiritual relationship with God the Father, just as Jesus has such a relationship. This requires them to be born again, as the natural man does not understand the things of God (I Corinthians 2:14).

I'd have to note here that without the doctrine found in our Bibles, we wouldn't know exactly how to "follow" Jesus or do what Jesus would do bcuz the Bible is our model of Him and His teachings.

Plus, we have examples of Jesus using a whip and turning over tables in anger & rebuking Pharisees harshly -- in my personal experience, I see alot of people ignoring quite a few scriptures to tell us that Jesus is basically a tolerant, passive hippy throwback from the 60's.

I think doctrine is extremely important in being a Christian and the Bible has alot to say about "scripture" and "doctrine" if you do a word study on them.
:wave: :holy:

I think that my post may have been misunderstood.
I was not saying that a person who claims to be a Christian does not have to be born again or have a relationship with God, nor am I saying that they will not believe certain core truths about the Bible.
I am actually saying just the opposite. What I am saying is that not every person who is born again, nor every person who claims to believe a certain doctrine is a Christian.
I am a Baptist, I am born again, and I consider myself a Christian, but not every person that is a born again Baptist is a Christian, a Christian is someone who lives like Christ.
Do I think that being saved or born again is a requirement for being a Christian? Yes. Because, as JoeWill said, it is impossible to be like Christ without God's help.

[Criada]

I What I am saying is that not every person who is born again, nor every person who claims to believe a certain doctrine is a Christian.
I am a Baptist, I am born again, and I consider myself a Christian, but not every person that is a born again Baptist is a Christian, a Christian is someone who lives like Christ.
Do I think that being saved or born again is a requirement for being a Christian? Yes. Because, as JoeWill said, it is impossible to be like Christ without God's help.


Hmm. I think I agree with what you are saying - except that I would say that every person who is born again (not necessarily every person who *says* that they are) is a Christian. Because if someone is born again of the Spirit of God, how can they not be a Christian? Living like Christ comes from the fruits of the Spirit, and will follow...

[LivingLifeHisWay]

Most say that living for God is "proof" of the Holy Spirit dwelling within that person.....

But....

If a person backslides or is really struggling with sin they are either....

a) never truly converted

or

b) are truly converted but are just struggling and God will draw him/her back to Him

John 10:27-29> My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

The sticky part is can we decide which category they fall into or is that up to God?

I would say it's up to God but as brothers and sisters in Christ we can in love approach someone who seems to be struggling to encourage, support and pray for them. Prayer is SO important.

Prayer changes things. Prayers changes others. Prayer changes us. :hug:

[sageoffools]

Hmm. I think I agree with what you are saying - except that I would say that every person who is born again (not necessarily every person who *says* that they are) is a Christian. Because if someone is born again of the Spirit of God, how can they not be a Christian? Living like Christ comes from the fruits of the Spirit, and will follow...
That's true, and everyone that is born again should be a Christian, but that is not always the case. Even I, in my own life, do not always do what I know I should do, (as Paul said, "...what I would do, I do not, and what I would not, that I do") in those instances I am not being a Christian. There are people, even relatives of mine, that have gotten saved (born again) and then they backslid, they stopped going to church and started drinking and smoking, hanging out with the wrong friends, eventually God got ahold of them and changed them and brought them back to doing right. Although they were saved and never stopped being saved, for a while they were not Christians, because they were living like Christ.