What are the Characteristics of a NT Christian?

[Rhondazvous]

Ah, but it seemed clear enough 'back in the day', so SOMETHING changed.

And what of those EXTREMELY clear (classical) marital vows ??  

What undoes something likely that freely entered into, in a church, before God and congregation ??

The marriage vow can be anything you want it to be.It's a state ceremony, after all. "By the power invested in me by the STATE of California I now pronounce you man and wife."

"Do you, Rhonda Johnson, promise to take this man...until you find out what an asshole he is?" And I can't find out until after I say "I do."

Isn't gambling one of the 7 deadly sins?

[SteveII]

Just because you're butt hurt over not having any good arguments for your position, don't commit ad homs on the rest of us.

We are rightly sceptical of Jesus claims for the simple fact that there is no evidence at all supporting them. There is the claim, and that's it.

Well, except for the evidence we do have (which I will repeat as often as you make your silly, juvenile claim): The churches spread throughout the empire within 15 years of Jesus' death, the the 27 different authenticated writings discussing Jesus and his teachings, and ancillary works and references throughout the first century.

You may not like the evidence, but there is large amounts of evidence that points to the fact that Jesus not only walked the earth, but people genuinely believed he was the Son of God that came to make possible a relationship with God.

[Brian37]

Just because you're butt hurt over not having any good arguments for your position, don't commit ad homs on the rest of us.

We are rightly sceptical of Jesus claims for the simple fact that there is no evidence at all supporting them. There is the claim, and that's it.

Well, except for the evidence we do have (which I will repeat as often as you make your silly, juvenile claim): The churches spread throughout the empire within 15 years of Jesus' death, the the 27 different authenticated writings discussing Jesus and his teachings, and ancillary works and references throughout the first century.

You may not like the evidence, but there is large amounts of evidence that points to the fact that Jesus not only walked the earth, but people genuinely believed he was the Son of God that came to make possible a relationship with God.

No such thing as a human with magic super powers. Nobody is born with invisible god goo  without a second set of DNA. And nobody survives that act of torture intended to murder someone dead. You do that to a human in reality, they would die AND STAY DEAD.

I rely could give a shit less what you claimed happened. There is no record of his existence outside what the bible claims. All that crap was manufactured and put in the NT AFTER THE FACT. But I really don't give a shit. If you found the body of a man all that would mean is you found a MAN, not a fucking magician.

Nobody was born a virgin. Nobody poofed water into wine. Nobody walked on water. Nobody cured the blind. None of the fantastic claims the bible says he did happened. All mythology, nothing more. Other religions back then and prior also had deities and heros who made claims of performing fantastic feats. 

It is simply another underdog wins the day story. Nothing more. The bible could claim Jesus turned a frog into a prince or claim he farted a Lamborghini out of his ass and it would still be NONSENSE.  None of the fantastic claims happened. Nobody saws the woman in half either.

---

Christian "Christianity became successful and spread"

Me "So what" 

Jews "We finally became a nation"

Me, "So what".

Muslims, "We have billions of members"

Me, "So what"

Buddhists, "We have billions of members"

Me, "So what"

Hindus, "We have large numbers too".....


Yep and? Still does not mean humans have special powers or talk to a hero from a divine place. 

All religions are successful for one reason only, people buy into them. 

Most humans do have a pet claim, but you do know what claims are like, everyone has one.

[Mister Agenda]

And there goes most of the Christian population again. 'Striving to live by the teachings of Christ' would be a gross exaggeration of the effort most American Christians put into actually trying to live by the teachings of Jesus as depicted in the Bible.

I think you could start by knocking off all the ones who aren't welcoming to foreigners, are pro-war, or unsympathetic to poor people or convicts. The ones who haven't taken the time to actually read an entire Bible. Most of the ones who show up to church once a month or less.

It's a pretty long list, and that's only for 'striving', not succeeding. Most of those folks aren't even trying. They're putting in the least effort they think they can get away with to avoid hell and the anger of their neighbors, and keeping the opinions that suit them personally whenever possible, which seems to be almost always.

See, that's the thing though. You say most Christians hate foreigners, like war, and don't have compassion for poor people/imprisoned people. I simply don't see that. What you describe above seems like really shitty people, and that has simply not been my experience. I mean, sure, there are bad seeds everywhere and we are no exception, but it has definitely not been my experience that most Christian people, or even many of them, are like that at all. I can't say I even know any Christian people being that way (not saying they don't exist though).   

I mean, my family and I were foreigners. We moved to the US from South America when I was 7 years old, and while we have become citizens since then, both my parents still have really heavy accents. No one was unwelcoming to us when we got here. I started off here at a Catholic school (2nd grade) and knew absolutely 0 English. None of those Catholic teachers/students/parents were ever mean to me or my family.  

I don't see anyone liking war, either. Or not having compassion for the poor. There are a TON of Christian charities. My church was always advertising volunteer opportunities and running fund raisers for the less fortunate.

I'm not saying we're all saints. Far from it. But I do think the majority of us are just normal human beings who really do try to follow the basic teachings of Christ. Again, I have lived in several places, but never lived in the deep south like you have, so maybe that's where our different experiences come to play.

I didn't actually say that most Christians hate foreigners, or anything that could be considered reasonably close to that. One, 'not welcoming' is not a synonym for 'hate'. Two, I was listing subgroups that would constitute a majority of Christians if added together, no claim that any single subgroup constitutes a majority by itself. I try to be careful about what I claim, please read my posts going forward as if you understand that. That said, 53% of Americans want to keep Syrian refugees out of our country, but 11% would make an exception for Christian refugees. Since 75% of Americans and a very high percentage of Trump voters were Christians (he got 52% of the Catholic vote and 80% of the Evangelical vote), I infer a very strong level of support by American Christians for keeping out refugees, especially if they're not Christians.

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/artic...settlement

However, if you're saying that most Christians are just average morally, no better or worse than non-Christians, I tend to agree. I thought with that 'striving to follow the teachings of Jesus' stuff you were holding them to a higher standard than most of them can actually meet, but you seem to be okay with the ones who are just 'Team Jesus' average Americans who are not particularly devout being counted as 'true Christians'. It seems like a disconnect to me. Either you accept people who say that they are Christians but can't reasonably be described as 'striving to follow the teachings of Jesus', or you hold them to that standard and call out the ones who aren't actually striving to follow Jesus as 'not true Christians'.

strive
verb
gerund or present participle: striving

make great efforts to achieve or obtain something.
"national movements were striving for independence"

•struggle or fight vigorously.
"scholars must strive against bias"

---

Just because you're butt hurt over not having any good arguments for your position, don't commit ad homs on the rest of us.

We are rightly sceptical of Jesus claims for the simple fact that there is no evidence at all supporting them. There is the claim, and that's it.

Well, except for the evidence we do have (which I will repeat as often as you make your silly, juvenile claim): The churches spread throughout the empire within 15 years of Jesus' death, the the 27 different authenticated writings discussing Jesus and his teachings, and ancillary works and references throughout the first century.

You may not like the evidence, but there is large amounts of evidence that points to the fact that Jesus not only walked the earth, but people genuinely believed he was the Son of God that came to make possible a relationship with God.

Except that is not evidence of what you want it to be evidence of. No one disputes that Christianity caught on. So what? So did Islam (and it's catching up despite Christianity's 800 year head start). No one disputes that Christians believed Jesus was the Son of God...that's what being a Christian means.

But none of that is evidence that Jesus was actually the demigod miracle-worker he needs to be for your religious beliefs to actually be true. The same evidence doesn't work for Krishna being an incarnation of Vishnu or Mohammed taking dictation from the archangel Gabriel. Having a standard of evidence means you have to apply it equally, without favor, to all similar claims. If you accept an argument from 'lots of people believed it', then you have to accept similar claims from other religions.

Christianity really existed and still does, and Christians believe Jesus was the son of God or God incarnate. That's not at all what is under contention here.

[vorlon13]

Well, except for the evidence we do have (which I will repeat as often as you make your silly, juvenile claim): The churches spread throughout the empire within 15 years of Jesus' death, the the 27 different authenticated writings discussing Jesus and his teachings, and ancillary works and references throughout the first century.

You may not like the evidence, but there is large amounts of evidence that points to the fact that Jesus not only walked the earth, but people genuinely believed he was the Son of God that came to make possible a relationship with God.

No such thing as a human with magic super powers. Nobody is born with invisible god goo  without a second set of DNA. And nobody survives that act of torture intended to murder someone dead. You do that to a human in reality, they would die AND STAY DEAD.

I rely could give a shit less what you claimed happened. There is no record of his existence outside what the bible claims. All that crap was manufactured and put in the NT AFTER THE FACT. But I really don't give a shit. If you found the body of a man all that would mean is you found a MAN, not a fucking magician.

Nobody was born a virgin. Nobody poofed water into wine. Nobody walked on water. Nobody cured the blind. None of the fantastic claims the bible says he did happened. All mythology, nothing more. Other religions back then and prior also had deities and heros who made claims of performing fantastic feats. 

It is simply another underdog wins the day story. Nothing more. The bible could claim Jesus turned a frog into a prince or claim he farted a Lamborghini out of his ass and it would still be NONSENSE.  None of the fantastic claims happened. Nobody saws the woman in half either.

---

Christian "Christianity became successful and spread"

Me "So what" 

Jews "We finally became a nation"

Me, "So what".

Muslims, "We have billions of members"

Me, "So what"

Buddhists, "We have billions of members"

Me, "So what"

Hindus, "We have large numbers too".....


Yep and? Still does not mean humans have special powers or talk to a hero from a divine place. 

All religions are successful for one reason only, people buy into them, or sometimes they are threatened with disembowelment if they don't join up.

Most humans do have a pet claim, but you do know what claims are like, everyone has one.

TFTFY.

[SteveII]

---

Well, except for the evidence we do have (which I will repeat as often as you make your silly, juvenile claim): The churches spread throughout the empire within 15 years of Jesus' death, the the 27 different authenticated writings discussing Jesus and his teachings, and ancillary works and references throughout the first century.

You may not like the evidence, but there is large amounts of evidence that points to the fact that Jesus not only walked the earth, but people genuinely believed he was the Son of God that came to make possible a relationship with God.

Except that is not evidence of what you want it to be evidence of. No one disputes that Christianity caught on. So what? So did Islam (and it's catching up despite Christianity's 800 year head start). No one disputes that Christians believed Jesus was the Son of God...that's what being a Christian means.

But none of that is evidence that Jesus was actually the demigod miracle-worker he needs to be for your religious beliefs to actually be true. The same evidence doesn't work for Krishna being an incarnation of Vishnu or Mohammed taking dictation from the archangel Gabriel. Having a standard of evidence means you have to apply it equally, without favor, to all similar claims. If you accept an argument from 'lots of people believed it', then you have to accept similar claims from other religions.

Christianity really existed and still does, and Christians believe Jesus was the son of God or God incarnate. That's not at all what is under contention here.

The problem is with defining words.

Evidence refers to pieces of information or facts that help us establish the truth of something. Proof is a conclusion about the truth of something after analyzing the evidence. Evidence is suggestive of a conclusion. Proof is concrete and conclusive.

The churches spread throughout the empire within 15 years of Jesus' death, the the 27 different authenticated writings discussing Jesus and his teachings, and ancillary works and references throughout the first century is certainly evidence that Jesus did what the people claim he did and said the things they claim he said. 

Proof can have different thresholds. Anywhere from more likely than not (preponderance of the evidence), to beyond a reasonable doubt, to absolute. These are all arrived at by considering evidence. So, to say that my list is not evidence is simply wrong. What you mean is that in your opinion, it is not proof. That's fine--that is the threshold you chose.

[Mister Agenda]

No, it isn't. Not if the same kind of evidence doesn't work for the supernatural claims for Krishna, Mohammed, and Buddha. Evidence has to point to specific conclusions. The only thing people believing in supernatural events has ever successfully pointed to is that people are prone to believe supernatural events occur. When there's no strong direct evidence of such events, ever, there's no good reason to suppose that for some particular story, this time the supernatural stuff is real.

[Brian37]

No such thing as a human with magic super powers. Nobody is born with invisible god goo  without a second set of DNA. And nobody survives that act of torture intended to murder someone dead. You do that to a human in reality, they would die AND STAY DEAD.

I rely could give a shit less what you claimed happened. There is no record of his existence outside what the bible claims. All that crap was manufactured and put in the NT AFTER THE FACT. But I really don't give a shit. If you found the body of a man all that would mean is you found a MAN, not a fucking magician.

Nobody was born a virgin. Nobody poofed water into wine. Nobody walked on water. Nobody cured the blind. None of the fantastic claims the bible says he did happened. All mythology, nothing more. Other religions back then and prior also had deities and heros who made claims of performing fantastic feats. 

It is simply another underdog wins the day story. Nothing more. The bible could claim Jesus turned a frog into a prince or claim he farted a Lamborghini out of his ass and it would still be NONSENSE.  None of the fantastic claims happened. Nobody saws the woman in half either.

---

Christian "Christianity became successful and spread"

Me "So what" 

Jews "We finally became a nation"

Me, "So what".

Muslims, "We have billions of members"

Me, "So what"

Buddhists, "We have billions of members"

Me, "So what"

Hindus, "We have large numbers too".....


Yep and? Still does not mean humans have special powers or talk to a hero from a divine place. 

All religions are successful for one reason only, people buy into them, or sometimes they are threatened with disembowelment if they don't join up.

Most humans do have a pet claim, but you do know what claims are like, everyone has one.

TFTFY.

"TFTFY"? I do have some social media lingo under my belt, but not familiar with that.

[vorlon13]

There, Fixed That For You

[vorlon13]

Ah, but it seemed clear enough 'back in the day', so SOMETHING changed.

And what of those EXTREMELY clear (classical) marital vows ??  

What undoes something likely that freely entered into, in a church, before God and congregation ??

The marriage vow can be anything you want it to be.It's a state ceremony, after all. "By the power invested in me by the STATE of California I now pronounce you man and wife."

"Do you, Rhonda Johnson, promise to take this man...until you find out what an asshole he is?" And I can't find out until after I say "I do."

Isn't gambling one of the 7 deadly sins?

People write their own vows frequently, but many use the classic 'till death us do part, what god has put together, let no man put asunder'  but even the classic version apparently has a hidden asterisk that leads to an additional clause:

no, no not really, we don't really mean it, and even though we are promising such things, in a CHURCH, before GOD, we aren't taking it very seriously BECAUSE the church itself ISN'T TAKING IT SERIOUSLY EITHER, FUCK YOU JESUS AND YOUR SILLY IDEAS, WE KNOW BETTER THAN YOU.