Christians

[Statler Waldorf]

---

God was consistent in His revelation, scripture is God’s revelation and it is available for anyone who wants to read it.

But which one is the one God was consistent with? The original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek? Innumerable translations since then? Modifications to the Canon which have taken place since it was supposedly settled over sixteen hundred years ago?

There is no "one Scripture." Depends on which variant of the Bible a particular church selects as "scriptural."

I've heard it said (I do not know if it is true) that Islam only regards the Arabic version of the Koran as "true," because that is the language it was written in. Presumably they wish to avoid what the Christian churches have done: picked and chosen which version of the Bible is Scripture, and which are not.

The KJV for example, is only four hundred years old this year. Ain't a word of Hebrew or Greek in it. And most people to-day cannot read four hundred year old English (such as Shakespeare), so it is safe to presume they can't read the KJV, either.

---

Valid question. The original texts are the inspired word of God. I am not aware of any written in Aramaic, but yes Hebrew and Greek. That is why it is important to use several different translations when doing scriptural study; this is why I think King James Only-ists can get themselves into trouble. An excellent read on the matter if you are interested is "Knowing Scripture" and "How Can I Trust the Bible" both by RC Sproul. I am not aware of any real definitive evidence suggesting any of the manuscripts were ever modified or tampered with, so if you have some please do present it, thanks.

[Zenith]

Being a brit, all this stuff seems a bit weird, so I thought I'd browse a Christianity site. OMFG, they can't agree on anything. Seeing threads like 'how has god helped you' made me cringe. People saying things happen because god decides it, quickly followed by another Christian saying I don't believe god interferes etc. I take it many of you have seen this turd, but I think a nice link to insanity is fit here.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7565902/

The big problem with general christian forums is that... well, you may find all denominations there. That's why all the fights. If you'll seek out an orthodox forum or a catholic forum or a specific protestant forum, you may get other results. What you say sounds similar to: "oh, I've visited a religions forum, with all kinds of theists - muslims, christians, hindus, buddhists, etc. They can't agree with anything!". In other words, the christian denominations are so different one from another that you can consider them different religions.

[Ryft]

[Atheists do not disagree on] our beliefs on deity, or its power, or our interpretation of atheism. It's quite simple. Christians, on the other hand ... [snip rest]

Category error. The counterpart of atheists is theists—and not all theists are Christian.

And yes, atheists disagree on belief about deity. There are atheists who think some deities are possible, and others who think no deity is possible; there are atheists who think some deities are coherent and others who think no deity is coherent, and so on; when it comes to deity, atheists who are strict metaphysical naturalists disagree with atheists who are not. And so on. And there certainly is disagreement over the interpretation of atheism. Some view atheism so broadly that even starfish and cat turds are considered atheists (they too lack belief in deity, you see), while others view atheism as applicable only to entities for which theism can be expected (since starfish and cat turds cannot be theists, it is meaningless to count them as atheists); there are strong atheists who consider weak atheists as lacking the courage of their convictions, while there are weak atheists who consider strong atheists as misunderstanding what atheism means. And so on it goes.

Simplifying it does not make it simple. It does, however, make you wrong.

You have a mild point, Statler. Atheists don't always agree. But it doesn't matter; they are not supporting a worldwide religion for others to adhere to.

Not to put too fine a point on it, Cinjin, but neither are theists. Some theists do (e.g., Muslim caliphate) but it would be a gross error to say that theists do—just as there are some atheists who want to eradicate all religion from the face of the earth in favour of secularist ideology, but not all atheists advocate that.

There are literally hundreds of denominations that claim the flag of Christianity. Not only do they disagree on doctrinal issues, they disagree on the tiniest of issues. Case in point, my neighbor across the street attends a "Christian" church; his pastor is gay and they don't even believe that Jesus Christ was Son of God ... [snip rest]

Anyone can claim to be Christian. That does not mean they are. I know individuals who profess belief in a nebulous concept of god who claim to be atheists. I ignore what they claim and look at whether their beliefs correspond to the label they self-identify to; if it doesn't, then I pat them on the head, give them a cookie, and deem them confused. What I don't do is take them at their word and decide the term 'atheist' has no coherent meaning. There is a basic definition of 'atheist' beyond which the term ceases to apply. The same goes for the definition of 'Christian' (Greek christianos).

The original texts are the inspired word of God. I am not aware of any written in Aramaic, but ...

He may be referring to the popular but disproven idea that Matthew was originally written in Aramaic.

[Cinjin]

There are literally hundreds of denominations that claim the flag of Christianity. Not only do they disagree on doctrinal issues, they disagree on the tiniest of issues. Case in point, my neighbor across the street attends a "Christian" church; his pastor is gay and they don't even believe that Jesus Christ was Son of God ... [snip rest]

Anyone can claim to be Christian. That does not mean they are. ...

Yes it does. All one has to do is define christianity one way: Christ Like. And if they feel that they are Christ like, regardless of their ridiculous notions, they can call themselves christians and your point of view becomes just as arrogant as say, a third, more credible denomination that happens to differ in doctrinal practices from your own. Please keep in mind, that I understand and even partially agree with you, but defining the term Christianity has proven to be very open to interpolation - as we have hundreds of various sects, denominations, and micro-communities of christianity to prove the validity of my original point.
Regardless of the fact that others may not recognize them as "christians" (according to their own definition), that doesn't change the fact that others do. Add to that - that they read and worship from the same Bible, and what you've got is simply another sect of Christianity that disagrees with everyone else.

Same ole same ole.

[Godscreated]

There are literally hundreds of denominations that claim the flag of Christianity. Not only do they disagree on doctrinal issues, they disagree on the tiniest of issues. Case in point, my neighbor across the street attends a "Christian" church; his pastor is gay and they don't even believe that Jesus Christ was Son of God ... [snip rest]

Anyone can claim to be Christian. That does not mean they are. ...

Yes it does. All one has to do is define christianity one way: Christ Like. And if they feel that they are Christ like, regardless of their ridiculous notions, they can call themselves christians and your point of view becomes just as arrogant as say, a third, more credible denomination that happens to differ in doctrinal practices from your own. Please keep in mind, that I understand and even partially agree with you, but defining the term Christianity has proven to be very open to interpolation - as we have hundreds of various sects, denominations, and micro-communities of christianity to prove the validity of my original point.
Regardless of the fact that others may not recognize them as "christians" (according to their own definition), that doesn't change the fact that others do. Add to that - that they read and worship from the same Bible, and what you've got is simply another sect of Christianity that disagrees with everyone else.

Same ole same ole.

In that reasoning Cinjin anyone could claim to be anything as long as they define that they are whatever like, irrespective of their actions, I'm affraid that does not fly.

[Cinjin]

There are literally hundreds of denominations that claim the flag of Christianity. Not only do they disagree on doctrinal issues, they disagree on the tiniest of issues. Case in point, my neighbor across the street attends a "Christian" church; his pastor is gay and they don't even believe that Jesus Christ was Son of God ... [snip rest]

Anyone can claim to be Christian. That does not mean they are. ...

Yes it does. All one has to do is define christianity one way: Christ Like. And if they feel that they are Christ like, regardless of their ridiculous notions, they can call themselves christians and your point of view becomes just as arrogant as say, a third, more credible denomination that happens to differ in doctrinal practices from your own. Please keep in mind, that I understand and even partially agree with you, but defining the term Christianity has proven to be very open to interpolation - as we have hundreds of various sects, denominations, and micro-communities of christianity to prove the validity of my original point.
Regardless of the fact that others may not recognize them as "christians" (according to their own definition), that doesn't change the fact that others do. Add to that - that they read and worship from the same Bible, and what you've got is simply another sect of Christianity that disagrees with everyone else.

Same ole same ole.

In that reasoning Cinjin anyone could claim to be anything as long as they define that they are whatever like, irrespective of their actions, I'm affraid that does not fly.

No it shouldn't fly. And yet it's done all the time. Constantly. Islam is the worst, but Christianity is a close runner up.

[Godscreated]

There are literally hundreds of denominations that claim the flag of Christianity. Not only do they disagree on doctrinal issues, they disagree on the tiniest of issues. Case in point, my neighbor across the street attends a "Christian" church; his pastor is gay and they don't even believe that Jesus Christ was Son of God ... [snip rest]

Anyone can claim to be Christian. That does not mean they are. ...

Yes it does. All one has to do is define christianity one way: Christ Like. And if they feel that they are Christ like, regardless of their ridiculous notions, they can call themselves christians and your point of view becomes just as arrogant as say, a third, more credible denomination that happens to differ in doctrinal practices from your own. Please keep in mind, that I understand and even partially agree with you, but defining the term Christianity has proven to be very open to interpolation - as we have hundreds of various sects, denominations, and micro-communities of christianity to prove the validity of my original point.
Regardless of the fact that others may not recognize them as "christians" (according to their own definition), that doesn't change the fact that others do. Add to that - that they read and worship from the same Bible, and what you've got is simply another sect of Christianity that disagrees with everyone else.

Same ole same ole.

In that reasoning Cinjin anyone could claim to be anything as long as they define that they are whatever like, irrespective of their actions, I'm affraid that does not fly.

No it shouldn't fly. And yet it's done all the time. Constantly. Islam is the worst, but Christianity is a close runner up.

We should observe the actions of anyone who makes a claim to bewhatever, if their actions do not match their claim then they are not what they claim and thus can be ignored.

[Foxtrot Uniform]

There are many catholics who disagree on the practices of their church, mor(m)ons too. Many accept gays as equal, aren't racist and marry to outside religions, does that make them any less catholic? No, it does not. If I believe in the evangelical god, I am still christian regardless of your beliefs. The only qualifier for being christian is following christ, just like for islam the qualifier is following muhammad, belief is belief regardless of flavor.

[frankiej]

There are many catholics who disagree on the practices of their church, mor(m)ons too.

the racism in Mormonism... I know a couple of Mormons who when I pointed out that their beliefs are racist they, for some ridiculous reason, did not understand my point. Oh wait, the ridiculous reason is because their religion is ridiculous.

[Statler Waldorf]

There are many catholics who disagree on the practices of their church, mor(m)ons too. Many accept gays as equal, aren't racist and marry to outside religions, does that make them any less catholic? No, it does not. If I believe in the evangelical god, I am still christian regardless of your beliefs. The only qualifier for being christian is following christ, just like for islam the qualifier is following muhammad, belief is belief regardless of flavor.

How can you be a follower of Christ if you do not follow His teacings? For example. He was the son of God and God, he was the coming Messiah, He would raise from the dead on the third day, love your enemy, and He would come again.