And just like that the Bankrupt USA is going to moon all of a sudden...............

[Kordoba]

 

[VonBonfire]

This implies each denomination worships a different or fake Jesus. I understand it more as each (Christian) denomination worships the same Jesus, just in different ways.

Neither Floyd or you answered the question. Is the Jesus of jehovah's witnesses the same jesus? Mormons? An LGBTQ church that has a woman pastor and rainbow flags? Jim Jones People's temple? Westboro baptist? If it's same Jesus, just in different ways, then I can start any old church, with any radicalized theology, and claim that Christ is there. In fact, it makes church pretty much irrelevant per the verse monkey uses below.

The "minor details" are actually major details which is why statements of faith and theology are very important matters.

IMHO the overarching message of the Bible is "Who so ever believes in Him...". There is no additional qualifier.

Matthew says:
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

 

[MadAsAHatter]

Neither Floyd or you answered the question. Is the Jesus of jehovah's witnesses the same jesus? Mormons? An LGBTQ church that has a woman pastor and rainbow flags? Jim Jones People's temple? Westboro baptist? If it's same Jesus, just in different ways, then I can start any old church, with any radicalized theology, and claim that Christ is there. In fact, it makes church pretty much irrelevant per the verse monkey uses below.

The "minor details" are actually major details which is why statements of faith and theology are very important matters.

I think you may be taking my post out of context. I wasn't really referring to fringe/radical theologies. I was meaning basic Christian churches that all hold similar core beliefs where the difference between them are mainly ceremony.

I'm not sure which question you asked that you're referring to? The one about which one is the real Jesus?
If that's the question, I'd say if the church is abiding by the teaching of the Bible and Jesus then they're all worshiping the real Jesus.

 

[VonBonfire]

I was meaning basic Christian churches that all hold similar core beliefs where the difference between them are mainly ceremony.

If that's the question, I'd say if the church is abiding by the teaching of the Bible and Jesus then they're all worshiping the real Jesus.

That's what's being discussed though. Floyd using one scripture "wherever two or three are gathered in my name".

What's disputed here is what the bible teaches, and 250+ different denominations all say something different about Christ's teachings and how they are applied to a greater or lesser degree. So how do you reach a consensus? I don't think it's possible. It's all based on whatever a given denomination decides to declare as truth which in my view is building a god in your own image, based on one's owns likes, dislikes, and biases.

What you refer to as "ceremony" is basically what the entire liturgical service in the orthodox (and catholic) church has revolved around for 2000 years i.e communion, and existed hundreds of years before the scriptures were compiled into what is now known as a bible. Further, the protestant bible doesn't contain as many books in it as a Catholic bible, or an Orthodox bible. So with that in mind, what then, in your opinion, is a "basic Christian church"?

 

[MadAsAHatter]

What's disputed here is what the bible teaches, and 250+ different denominations all say something different about Christ's teachings and how they are applied to a greater or lesser degree. So how do you reach a consensus? I don't think it's possible. It's all based on whatever a given denomination decides to declare as truth which in my view is building a god in your own image, based on one's owns likes, dislikes, and biases.

You could apply this to the Orthodox church as well.
I say many paths can lead to the same destination.

What you refer to as "ceremony" is basically what the entire liturgical service in the orthodox (and catholic) church has revolved around for 2000 years i.e communion, and existed hundreds of years before the scriptures were compiled into what is now known as a bible. Further, the protestant bible doesn't contain as many books in it as a Catholic bible, or an Orthodox bible. So with that in mind, what then, in your opinion, is a "basic Christian church"?

My opinion is a "basic Christian church" is one that holds the core message of Jesus' teachings. The details may be slightly different, but every major Christian religion holds the same common denominator concerning the core doctrine.


Full disclosure before discussing any further. I have my own set of spiritual beliefs. I was raised catholic, but am not religious. It was the whole "my religion is better than yours" thing that drove me away from all churches/denominations.

 

[VonBonfire]

You could apply this to the Orthodox church as well.

Maybe you could. Historically, and in the archaeological record, the earliest churches are all orthodox i.e it's the first church.

I say many paths can lead to the same destination.

The "many paths" is a heretical idea that runs completely counter to what the bible states about the narrow way. The many paths idea is how you have 250 different variations on who Christ is, what his teachings are, and therefore what makes a Christian.

The details may be slightly different, but every major Christian religion holds the same common denominator concerning the core doctrine.

I would argue the details once you've gone past Lutheranism and Anglicanism become radically different as liturgy basically doesn't exist after that and the sermon became the core of a service, which results in 250 different denominations all having their own version of Christ. So again, which christ are we talking about when someone says "wherever 2 or 3 are gathered in my name"?

What makes a legitimate believer vs one that isn't and who is the authority that determines it? Is someone who accepts homosexual marriage a true Christian? Is a woman who doesn't cover her head a true Christian? Is a Christian who rejects fasting a true believer? Is a woman preacher/pastor/priest a true Christian? What about a believer that denies the trinity? What about a believer who doesn't believe in church at all?

What is a "basic Christian"? You say details don't really matter, but it's obvious that is the whole crux of the issue.

 

[MadAsAHatter]

Maybe you could. Historically, and in the archaeological record, the earliest churches are all orthodox i.e it's the first church.

Well being first doesn't automatically equate to being correct.

The "many paths" is a heretical idea that runs completely counter to what the bible states about the narrow way. The many paths idea is how you have 250 different variations on who Christ is, what his teachings are, and therefore what makes a Christian.

I don't necessarily see it that way. I'll illustrate my point in the form of a rhetorical question. What would be more important, going through a specific set of motions laid out by a church or accepting Christ into your life.

I would argue the details once you've gone past Lutheranism and Anglicanism become radically different as liturgy basically doesn't exist after that and the sermon became the core of a service, which results in 250 different denominations all having their own version of Christ. So again, which christ are we talking about when someone says "wherever 2 or 3 are gathered in my name"?

I think most Christians would agree the Christ being referenced is the son of God.
People can have different views of the same person. Their vantage point doesn't change the person they're looking at.

What makes a legitimate believer vs one that isn't and who is the authority that determines it? Is someone who accepts homosexual marriage a true Christian? Is a woman who doesn't cover her head a true Christian? Is a Christian who rejects fasting a true believer? Is a woman preacher/pastor/priest a true Christian? What about a believer that denies the trinity? What about a believer who doesn't believe in church at all?

What is a "basic Christian"? You say details don't really matter, but it's obvious that is the whole crux of the issue.

That's getting into the whole "my religion is better" aspect. All of those that you listed could be a "true Christian" if they accept God/Christ/Jesus into their life. Of all the different religions I've read on, that's been a core value of all of them; To accept Christ and his teachings into your life. It goes back to what I was saying about what's more important; following a ritual or accepting Christ. One who accepts Christ to me a "basic Christian."

 

[VonBonfire]

What would be more important, going through a specific set of motions laid out by a church or accepting Christ into your life.

I would argue the specific set of motions was laid out by Christ through his words and actions, during his time on earth. Scripture backs that. The life of Christ supports prayer, fasting, self denial. Accepting him as Lord and Savior is only the first step, not the sum total of Christian life. "Saved" in the past tense is not scriptural.

I think most Christians would agree the Christ being referenced is the son of God.
People can have different views of the same person. Their vantage point doesn't change the person they're looking at.

The book of Matthew says many false christs will arise. So how do you know which one is the true son of God? How is the standard established?

That's getting into the whole "my religion is better" aspect. All of those that you listed could be a "true Christian" if they accept God/Christ/Jesus into their life. Of all the different religions I've read on, that's been a core value of all of them; To accept Christ and his teachings into your life. It goes back to what I was saying about what's more important; following a ritual or accepting Christ. One who accepts Christ to me a "basic Christian."

You've contradicted yourself here. You say "to accept Christ and his teachings into your life" makes a true Christian. So what are the teachings? You think a true christian would marry same sex couples? Deny the trinity? Reject prayer and fasting? I think you need to bring some clarity to what you are saying because it just sounds like the wide road to hell version of Christianity I have been talking about the entire time.

 

[MadAsAHatter]

I would argue the specific set of motions was laid out by Christ through his words and actions, during his time on earth. Scripture backs that. The life of Christ supports prayer, fasting, self denial. Accepting him as Lord and Savior is only the first step, not the sum total of Christian life. "Saved" in the past tense is not scriptural.

Even if Christ laid out those motions, do you think he holds them above all or that his message is what's most important?

The book of Matthew says many false christs will arise. So how do you know which one is the true son of God? How is the standard established?

If you're taking that route, how do you know the first Christ was the true Christ and not a false prophet? It sounds like you're talking more physical person than holy spirit; almost like you're wanting to establish a set of human characteristics for God to prove he is God. I think Christians have an understanding of who God/Christ is as the Holy Trinity without having a set of bullet points to identify him.

You've contradicted yourself here. You say "to accept Christ and his teachings into your life" makes a true Christian. So what are the teachings? You think a true christian would marry same sex couples? Deny the trinity? Reject prayer and fasting? I think you need to bring some clarity to what you are saying because it just sounds like the wide road to hell version of Christianity I have been talking about the entire time.

No contradiction. The base teaching of any Christian church are accept God/Christ into your life and live the golden rule. It doesn't get down to core faith more than that. Accepting Christ into your life automatically rules out deny the trinity as a valid point. Accepting Christ automatically means you accept the trinity as far a Christianity s concerned. As for your other points; Do you think a person who lived their life in Christ, but didn't fast, or accepted a gay couple, or skipped a few Sunday masses should be denied entry into the kingdom of heaven?



This conversation reminds me of that one South Park scene...

 

[JDs Couch]

Even if Christ laid out those motions, do you think he holds them above all or that his message is what's most important?


If you're taking that route, how do you know the first Christ was the true Christ and not a false prophet? It sounds like you're talking more physical person than holy spirit; almost like you're wanting to establish a set of human characteristics for God to prove he is God. I think Christians have an understanding of who God/Christ is as the Holy Trinity without having a set of bullet points to identify him.


No contradiction. The base teaching of any Christian church are accept God/Christ into your life and live the golden rule. It doesn't get down to core faith more than that. Accepting Christ into your life automatically rules out deny the trinity as a valid point. Accepting Christ automatically means you accept the trinity as far a Christianity s concerned. As for your other points; Do you think a person who lived their life in Christ, but didn't fast, or accepted a gay couple, or skipped a few Sunday masses should be denied entry into the kingdom of heaven?



This conversation reminds me of that one South Park scene...

Lol, imagine any MAGA supporter proclaiming the Golden Rule.

 

[MadAsAHatter]

@VonBonfire
I'm about to head home and start my weekend. I have a couple projects to work on so I'll be busy with that and probably won't be on RT much through the weekend. I'm finally getting the chance to build a couple of headshells for the project amp I'll be working on. We can pick this up later on. Have a good weekend.

 

[VonBonfire]

Even if Christ laid out those motions, do you think he holds them above all or that his message is what's most important?

John 6:53

If you're taking that route, how do you know the first Christ was the true Christ and not a false prophet? It sounds like you're talking more physical person than holy spirit; almost like you're wanting to establish a set of human characteristics for God to prove he is God. I think Christians have an understanding of who God/Christ is as the Holy Trinity without having a set of bullet points to identify him.

Because he fulfilled every OT prophecy about the messiah. He promised to empower his disciples, 50 days after passover at pentecost the church was born with the outpouring of the holy spirit (Acts 2)

No contradiction. The base teaching of any Christian church are accept God/Christ into your life and live the golden rule. It doesn't get down to core faith more than that. Accepting Christ into your life automatically rules out deny the trinity as a valid point. Accepting Christ automatically means you accept the trinity as far a Christianity s concerned. As for your other points; Do you think a person who lived their life in Christ, but didn't fast, or accepted a gay couple, or skipped a few Sunday masses should be denied entry into the kingdom of heaven?

Anything that runs counter to what Christ lived or taught is anti-christ. So marrying homosexuals, denying fasting as a christian practice, denial of the trinity, or suggesting to others that avoiding liturgy is acceptable falls into that category. Several denominations are part of those things or specifically endorse them in their statement of faith.

You are asking me to judge a specific person who does those things. I can't do that because the judgement seat isn't where I sit. I can say the bible teaches that those people risk being numbered among those who showed up to the wedding without a garment, and were bound hand and foot and cast into the outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. Matthew 22 11-14 "for many are invited, but few are chosen".

 

[JDs Couch]

It's so hard to tell what's real and what's fake.

On one hand, nearly every doctor and scientist says the vaccine worked well.

But on the other hand, a bunch of people who are still trying to work out if the earth is flat or round said the vaccine kills people.

Just no way of telling which group of people to believe...

 

[Robostyle]

nearly every doctor and scientist says the vaccine worked well.

This has not been my experience.

 

[JamesTiberiusKirk]

This has not been my experience.

Ad: "9 out of 10 dentists recommend flossing"
Joe Rogan sees ad: "that 10th guy must be on to something, get him on the show".

 

[Monkey Man]

It's not-complicated and nor is it meant to be. There's no need for "gatekeeping" by any denomination. Why?

'Cause God knows what's in your heart.

As for getting the "right" Jesus, if he's part of the Holy Trinity and created the universe and all that's in it... and his name is Jesus, I'm tippin' that the chances you've got the "wrong guy" are slim to none.

Happy for everyone to disagree with me 'cause it's just MHO and we all know everyone's got one.

 

[MadAsAHatter]

It's not-complicated and nor is it meant to be. There's no need for "gatekeeping" by any denomination. Why?

'Cause God knows what's in your heart.

As for getting the "right" Jesus, if he's part of the Holy Trinity and created the universe and all that's in it... and his name is Jesus, I'm tippin' that the chances you've got the "wrong guy" are slim to none.

Happy for everyone to disagree with me 'cause it's just MHO and we all know everyone's got one.

This is basically what I was getting at. You said it more succinctly than I did.

I would put one addition on this, which is just personal belief. Even if you don't "accept" Jesus, but have a good heart there's still the opportunity to gain eternal happiness. I put accept in quotes to account for all the non-Christian religions. In my mind if a person has a genuinely good heart, why should they automatically be denied because the belief system they were raised in didn't incorporate Jesus as the son of God or have never heard the Christian teachings (like those remote tribes you mentioned earlier).

I'd take this a step further to say If God is an all loving God that even an atheist has an opportunity at eternal life/happiness. If they lived their life with good in their heart, died, stood before the gates of heaven, and said "well shit God is real. I fucked that one up big time. Pease forgive me for my big mistake". I think an all loving God; knowing we are not infallible, could give an atheist a pass.

 

[Robostyle]

Ad: "9 out of 10 dentists recommend flossing"
Joe Rogan sees ad: "that 10th guy must be on to something, get him on the show".

My experience has nothing to do with Joe Rogan.

 

[VonBonfire]

It's not-complicated and nor is it meant to be. There's no need for "gatekeeping" by any denomination. Why?

"Small is the gate, and narrow is the way that leads to eternal life and few there be that find it." Matthrew 7:14

You guys are preaching something that doesn't align with scripture.

 

[VonBonfire]

I'd take this a step further to say If God is an all loving God that even an atheist has an opportunity at eternal life/happiness. If they lived their life with good in their heart, died, stood before the gates of heaven, and said "well shit God is real. I fucked that one up big time. Pease forgive me for my big mistake". I think an all loving God; knowing we are not infallible, could give an atheist a pass.

There is no repentance after death.