Definition of a Christian, Nicene-Christian and Non-Nicene Christian

[Erwin]

From here:
http://foru.ms/faq.php?faq=definition_christian

Foru.ms is an online community that is open to everyone - its foundations are based on Christian principles. There are members at Foru.ms who are Christians from different churches, denominations and backgrounds. For the purposes of certain forum-specific rules, Foru.ms uses the following definition of "Christian", which is divided into "Nicene Christian" and "Non-Nicene Christian" - the reason for providing these definitions is because these terms are used to describe some of our forums, and some of the subforum specific rules use these terms.

1. Christian

A Christian, simply put, is a disciple of Jesus Christ:
Acts 11:26 (NIV) "The disciples were called Christians first in Antioch."

To become a Christian, a person should refer to the following Scripture (for more details click here):
John 3:16 (NIV) "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son (Jesus), that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
Romans 10:9-13 (NIV) "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.""
Acts 2:38 (NIV) "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

2. Nicene Christian

Subforums can go further in depth and use additional Creeds and/or Scripture to separate Nicene Christians from Non-Nicene Christians, or may choose to set the optional sections as absolutes if they so choose, for example, to prohibit Nestorianism, Chiliasm, etc.

A Nicene Christian, is one who ascribes to the Nicene Creed (as follows with Scripture references):

We believe in (Romans 10: 8-10; 1 John 4: 15)
ONE God, (Deuteronomy 6: 4, Ephesians 4: 6)
Father (Matthew 6: 9)
Almighty, (Exodus 6: 3)
Maker of Heaven and Earth, (Genesis 1: 1)
and of all things visible and invisible. (Colossians 1: 15-16)

And in ONE Lord Jesus Christ, (Acts 11: 17)
Son of God, (Mathew 14: 33; 16: 16)
Only-Begotten, (John 1: 18; 3: 16)
Begotten of the Father before all ages. (John 1: 2)
Light from Light; (Psalm 27: 1; John 8: 12; Matthew 17: 2,5)
True God from True God; (John 17: 1-5)
Begotten, not made; (John 1: 18)
of one essence with the Father (John 10: 30)
through whom all things were made; (Hebrews 1: 1-2)
Who for us men and for our salvation (1 Timothy 2: 4-5)
came down from heaven, (John 6: 33,35)
and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary (Luke 1: 35)
and became man. (John 1: 14)
And He was crucified for us (Mark 15: 25; 1 Corinthians 15: 3)
under Pontius Pilate, (John 19: 6)
suffered, (Mark 8: 31)
and was buried. (Luke 23: 53; 1 Corinthians 15: 4)
And on the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures, (Luke 24: 1 1 Corinthians 15: 4)
and ascended into heaven, (Luke 24: 51; Acts 1: 10)
and sits at the right hand of the Father; (Mark 16: 19; Acts 7: 55)
and He shall come again with glory (Matthew 24: 27)
to judge the living and the dead; (Acts 10: 42; 2 Timothy 4: 1)
Whose Kingdom shall have no end. (2 Peter 1: 11)

And in the Holy Spirit, (John 14: 26)
Lord, (Acts 5: 3-4)
Giver of Life, (Genesis 1: 2)
Who proceeds from the Father [and the Son]; (John 15: 26)
Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; (Matthew 3: 16-17)
Who spoke through the prophets. (1 Samuel 19: 20; Ezekiel 11: 5,13)

In one, (Matthew 16: 18)
holy, (1 Peter 2: 5,9)
catholic, (Mark 16: 15)
and apostolic Church. (Acts 2: 42; Ephesians 2: 19-22)

I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. (Ephesians 4: 5; Acts 2: 38)
I look for the resurrection of the dead, (John 11: 24; 1 Corinthians 15: 12-49; Hebrews 6: 2; Revelation 20: 5)
and the life in the age to come. (Mark 10: 29-30)

AMEN. (Psalm 106: 48)

Yet, there is some variance amongst Nicene Christians.
* Some, but not all add the filioque
* Some, but not all adhere to Baptism for the remission of sins.
* Some, but not all attribute Mary as the mother of God.
* Some, but not all, believe Christ will reign for a literal 1000 years ending before the final judgment.
* Some, but not all believe Jesus did but God did not die on the Cross
* Some, but not all will not ascribe to creeds, yet their beliefs are in many cases summarized by the Nicene Creed, but out of deference to Sola Scriptura, they will not agree to any creed created by man.

For purposes of Foru.ms, the above statements for purposes of being identified as a Nicene Christian are optional. Examples of Nicene churches are Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Baptist, Reformed, Anglican etc.

3. Non-Nicene Christian

These are members who identify themselves as Christian, but for any number of reason cannot accept all or part of the Nicene Creed, outside of the previously mentioned options. Examples of Non-Nicene churches are Unitarian, Latter-Day Saints (Mormon), Jehovah's Witnesses etc.



Please discuss in this thread. I look forward to input from members.

 

[FatBurger]

What's the practical difference? In other words, what's the reason behind providing a definition?

 

[Erwin]

What's the practical difference? In other words, what's the reason behind providing a definition?

We have some forums using the term "Nicene" in the forum title. Also, subforums are using the "Nicene Creed" as a basis for some of their rules.

It makes sense to make site-wide definitions that subforum rules can be based on (similar to the 5 Christian Principles that rules can be based on too).

 

[Angeldove97]

Thank you Erwin

 

[sparklecat]

Is all participation in subforums (not just debate) ever going to be limited based on these definitions? If so, will staff ever be called upon to decide if a person meets the definition regardless of their professed beliefs, or tell someone they don't belong in an area/qualify for a faith icon?

I don't fully understand the need for a definition either, and am a bit uneasy, given some of foru.ms' history.

 

[Erwin]

I can see why you are concerned sparklecat. Some of the subforums are already using the Nicene Creed to limit debate hence the need to define it for those who may not be aware of what it is. There are no plans to implement "forced" faith icon changes if that's what you mean, although a person who is obviously not a Christian ie. not a disciple of Christ/believer of Christ/follower of Christ (as per the above definition) who uses a Christian icon is essentially "bearing a false testimony" which is against one of our five Christian principles - such a person would be encouraged to clarify why they are using a Christian icon as we do not want to encourage misrepresentation - similarly, a person impersonating a Muslim and is obviously not one but is only doing so to prove a point will also be discouraged. It's really hard to make sweeping generalised statements and each case has to be looked at on its own merits.

I'm not sure if that's clear at all - the above examples are really an extension of the "no false testimony" principle which should be clarified in a forum rule.

 

[FatBurger]

We have some forums using the term "Nicene" in the forum title. Also, subforums are using the "Nicene Creed" as a basis for some of their rules.

It makes sense to make site-wide definitions that subforum rules can be based on (similar to the 5 Christian Principles that rules can be based on too).

Ok, thanks. I share sparklecat's uneasiness, but I guess we'll have to see how it plays out.

 

[Letalis]

Is all participation in subforums (not just debate) ever going to be limited based on these definitions? If so, will staff ever be called upon to decide if a person meets the definition regardless of their professed beliefs, or tell someone they don't belong in an area/qualify for a faith icon?

I don't fully understand the need for a definition either, and am a bit uneasy, given some of foru.ms' history.

Shouldn't that be left to the discretion of each forum and the guidelines they choose to enact?

 

[sparklecat]

Shouldn't that be left to the discretion of each forum and the guidelines they choose to enact?

Possibly. I would tend to think that completely excluding anyone would fall foul of the 'love your neighbor' principle. Certainly self-determination is important here, but not if it conflicts with the core goals.

 

[Erwin]

Possibly. I would tend to think that completely excluding anyone would fall foul of the 'love your neighbor' principle. Certainly self-determination is important here, but not if it conflicts with the core goals.

I think subforums won't be excluding non-Christians, but they may restrict non-Christians from debate etc.

 

[FatBurger]

Shouldn't that be left to the discretion of each forum and the guidelines they choose to enact?

For my part, my uneasiness comes from the potential of subforums to deviate greatly from the site purpose. I haven't seen much evidence of that, I'm just wondering about the possibility.

E.g. if the Brunette forum suddenly discovers there's someone with auburn hair posting with a Brunette icon, so the forum-specific rules get them banned from the entire site.

 

[Letalis]

This was brought up in the staff forums a little while ago (on a forum's complete autonomy).

http://foru.ms/t5955541

 

[Lisa0315]

Okay, I am very grateful for this, but I have a question along the lines of Sparklecat.

One of my dear friends here went from atheist to sporting a Christian icon. She decided after working with Christians in the wiki that she wanted to be a follower of the TEACHINGS of Jesus Christ, but, sadly, she still did not believe in God.

Now, I believed with my whole heart that God was working on her and in time, she would believe and call on the name of Jesus.

However, while sporting the Christian icon, she stated that she did not believe in God. There were many who hurt her feelings and told her she should take down her Christian icon.

Now, here is the thing. She switched back to her atheist icon and has since left the forum. I am so upset for her and disappointed that people could not see that this person was a true seeker.

Please, Erwin, please establish some kind of rule for a case like this.

Lisa

 

[Erwin]

As stated, the first post provides a very minimal but absolute definition of a Christian - a disciple of Christ - and how a person can be a Christian.

According to the definition, your friend is an atheist, clearly not a Christian, which I think we can all agree - however, whether she should have been picked on or forced to change her icon is a different matter altogether - I would have preferred that she be spoken to in a respectful and friendly manner - because after all, we are here to assist others in becoming Christian (as described by the definition) not chase them away from it.

A rule to prevent the above from happening again is beyond the scope of providing definitions but may be set as a forum rule however. The definitions are not specifically rules but form the basis and reference point for them, like the 5 Christian principles.

And it's 1 am so I better sleep!

 

[SunMessenger]

Okay, I am very grateful for this, but I have a question along the lines of Sparklecat.

One of my dear friends here went from atheist to sporting a Christian icon. She decided after working with Christians in the wiki that she wanted to be a follower of the TEACHINGS of Jesus Christ, but, sadly, she still did not believe in God.

Now, I believed with my whole heart that God was working on her and in time, she would believe and call on the name of Jesus.

However, while sporting the Christian icon, she stated that she did not believe in God. There were many who hurt her feelings and told her she should take down her Christian icon.

Now, here is the thing. She switched back to her atheist icon and has since left the forum. I am so upset for her and disappointed that people could not see that this person was a true seeker.

Please, Erwin, please establish some kind of rule for a case like this.

Lisa

There have been many icon issues in the past. I do not think the icon itself is all that important to have in a place open to all. We have titles,signatures an avatars where we can post our faith if we choose to. Why must we limit a person to an icon at all. I know they can choose no icon but the mere presence of them in no way makes it easy for one to truly and clearly express themself like they can in the title, signature or avatar. My suggestion is do away with them completely . That will make the solutions to problems like these more fluid.

I think I know the incident you have posted about here and that is so sad to hear that your friend has left. I am sorry.

 

[Letalis]

IIRC (and I might not), ver. 1.0 rules included a provision against proselytizing for non-Christian beliefs. The definition of "Christian" provided here is very broad, and is binding on the entire site.

Can a forum include, in their forum-specific rules, a provision against proselytizing for non-Nicene beliefs? Could they, for example, choose to define "Christian", for the purposes of the proselytizing rule, a bit narrower?

 

[GreenMunchkin]

For my part, my uneasiness comes from the potential of subforums to deviate greatly from the site purpose. I haven't seen much evidence of that, I'm just wondering about the possibility.

E.g. if the Brunette forum suddenly discovers there's someone with auburn hair posting with a Brunette icon, so the forum-specific rules get them banned from the entire site.

Sub-forums were already autonomous in that respect, though.

Providing there's no forced yanking of icons, will it really change anything? It was the witch-hunts that caused a lot of hurt feelings.

Using a definition as loose as "Is a follower of Christ" is incredibly inclusive, but likewise, people who wanted a return to having the Nicene as the site's fundamental tenet will feel reassured, also.

It's sort of win win.

 

[Lisa0315]

There have been many icon issues in the past. I do not think the icon itself is all that important to have in a place open to all. We have titles,signatures an avatars where we can post our faith if we choose to. Why must we limit a person to an icon at all. I know they can choose no icon but the mere presence of them in no way makes it easy for one to truly and clearly express themself like they can in the title, signature or avatar. My suggestion is do away with them completely . That will make the solutions to problems like these more fluid.

I think I know the incident you have posted about here and that is so sad to hear that your friend has left. I am sorry.

She was a huge contributor to the Main Wiki rules. She was influenced by the Christians she worked with. She sported a Custom Title and a signature that spoke of what Christianity meant to her. It was about inviting strangers in and going into the worst places to find the lost and the broken.

She understood Jesus. She simply did not believe ON Jesus. Yes, that would have sent my friend to hell, but I feel as if the blood will be on our hands now. We had a chance to bring her to belief and we have now lost it.

All because of stupid icons. I like my icon, but this thing that has happened breaks my heart.

Lisa

 

[mnphysicist]

For my part, my uneasiness comes from the potential of subforums to deviate greatly from the site purpose. I haven't seen much evidence of that, I'm just wondering about the possibility.

E.g. if the Brunette forum suddenly discovers there's someone with auburn hair posting with a Brunette icon, so the forum-specific rules get them banned from the entire site.

The FSR's could get them banned from the forum where the FSR's are used, but unless its a site wide issue, it would seem to be a very bad idea to ban someone site wide based upon FSR violations in a single forum.

The FSR's do need to conform to the 5 principles, Erwin mandates, and rules ver 1.0, thus I think it would really be pushing the limits for them to deviate from the sites goals and purposes. If this turns out to be an issue, we could probably request an Erwin mandate to prevent it from happening.

IIRC (and I might not), ver. 1.0 rules included a provision against proselytizing for non-Christian beliefs. The definition of "Christian" provided here is very broad, and is binding on the entire site.

Can a forum include, in their forum-specific rules, a provision against proselytizing for non-Nicene beliefs?

Sure, and if they wanted to use the Nicene Creed without the exceptions as stated in the site wide definitions, or even another creed, that would be fine. They could also choose to use specific scripture or doctrinal beliefs as well.

Could they, for example, choose to define "Christian", for the purposes of the proselytizing rule, a bit narrower?

For the purpose of the proselytizing rule as applied to a fsr, that makes a lot of sense. For purposes of correcting other Christians in the fsrs, that would not be good. Ie, restricting post content, and restricting debate are fine. Corrective witness is a very good thing, but it should be done in posts, not in the fsrs..

 

[Letalis]

For the purpose of the proselytizing rule as applied to a fsr, that makes a lot of sense. For purposes of correcting other Christians in the fsrs, that would not be good. Ie, restricting post content, and restricting debate are fine. Corrective witness is a very good thing, but it should be done in posts, not in the fsrs..

Thank you.

Many forums (congregations, mostly) have "statement of beliefs." Is there anything restricting them from adding something along the lines that Christianity is defined according to the Nicene Creed?