Christianity: A Summary

[Subduction Zone]

So you keep asserting, with no evidence, quotes, or history. This is just your opinion. You have not supported it.

Unlike you I can support my claims with evidence. What parts did you not understand?

 

[Lionel Refson]

I have been a student of Christian history and the Bible for over 45 years. My goal here is to offer a simple summary and historical consensus of the Christian faith. I will try to avoid denominational issues or cultural influences, and concentrate on the central elements of historical, biblical Christianity. Many of the terms will be of classical usage, and might carry ambiguity for some. I will try to clarify if there is confusion.

Christianity has been the caretaker of a worldview, concerning the nature of God, man, and the universe.

God
God is infinite, eternal, omnipotent, and omnipresent. He created all things with a word. He is everywhere, and has no constraints of time and space. He is perfect, without flaw, gender, or limitations common to the creation.

Man
Man was created as a perfect being, and enjoyed open communion with God. God created man in His image, and shares traits with the creature. Man was created as an eternal soul, that transcends his material being.

The Universe
The universe was created in purity and perfection, and will be restored to that state when the fallen era ends. The order and majesty of God is reflected in the material universe.

The Fall
Evil and discord entered the universe when an angelic being rebelled against God, and corrupted the perfection of God's creation. Death and suffering became part of the experience of all living creatures. Man joined in that rebellion, where lies, murder, and human corruption ran rampant. Both the material and spiritual realms are in discord, in this cosmos of rebellion and enmity toward God.

Redemption
God made provision for the rebellion of man. Even though man's sins and corruption were contrary to the standard and nature of God, He provided a Way of escape from the coming reckoning. He became a man, Himself, and took the penalty for all of man's sins, if they will receive it. God appeared in the person of Jesus, and revealed the nature of God. He outlined the process of redemption, for those who would accept it. It is a spiritual transaction that has been likened to rebirth, or going from darkness to light. It is a quickening of the soul, where the lost human is awakened to the perception of spiritual reality. It usually involves acknowledging God and the atonement of Jesus, repentance for past wrongs, and the reception of God's Spirit into the redeemed soul. It is a very personal transaction, and transforms the life of the recipient.

Citizenship
The redeemed souls are now God's people. They have been likened to the children of God, His beloved bride, and a home for His dwelling. They are no longer of this fallen world, even though they still live in it. Their primary loyalties are to God and His government, not to any earthly institution of man.

Deception
This world is under the influence of a great deceiver. His goal is to kill and destroy, and to bring confusion to man so he cannot understand the redemption process, and be reconciled to God.

Restoration
The evils, suffering, and deceptions of this world are temporary, and will end when Jesus returns to make all things right. The universe will change, and God's kingdom and rule will be absolute and complete. Sin, death, and evil will no longer define the cosmos, but a restoration will take place, and make all things new.

My goal here is to present a concise summary of the basic, historical Christian faith. I feel that footnotes and proof texts would detract from this goal, but i would be happy to elaborate on any point. My perspective here is one of a 20th century American, but i have tried to avoid temporal or regional biases in this summary. This is, however, my perspective of the basic consensus of Christian belief and teaching, over the last 2000 years.

There are many more nuances and expanded points of science, empiricism, miracles, eternity, destiny, and origins that can be examined in greater detail, if there is interest. But i hope this provides a basic framework for better understanding of the Christian faith.[/QUOTE]

 

[Lionel Refson]

Christianity is the hardest Abrahamic religion to reject, because of its peaceful loving nature, in the main, but is has one major issue, the idea of Jesus as the Messiah
This idea alienates Jews and Muslims and for that reason it is divisive and cannot be the true path to God
Once Christianity moves on this idea, then I think it could do wonders to unite humanity.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Christianity is the hardest Abrahamic religion to reject, because of its peaceful loving nature, in the main, but is has one major issue, the idea of Jesus as the Messiah
This idea alienates Jews and Muslims and for that reason it is divisive and cannot be the true path to God
Once Christianity moves on this idea, then I think it could do wonders to unite humanity.

I have heard Muslims claim almost exactly the same thing. Pointing to the extremists in their religion does not help since the Christian religion has almost 1,700 years of oppression and extremism in their own history (until the Roman Empire recognized Christianity it did not have enough power to impose their beliefs upon others, otherwise I would have said almost 2,000 years).

 

[sojourner]

Well, since our 'discussion' seems to consist of me posting historical quotes and rational arguments , and you responding with unevidenced dismissal, ad hom, and assertions, i see no point in continuing. My wimpy summary is congruent with most creeds, statements, and summaries throughout xtian history, beginning with the earliest ones. You have not refuted that.

You can believe whatever you want. You can invent your own version of Christianity, and start your own cult. You can revise history, and relabel heresies as orthodoxy. But it does not change the original Message, that Jesus brought to a dying world. It is THAT message, that is the focus of this thread.

Your quotes seem to cobble together disparate comments from historic figures, but then those comments get twisted into Reformed Calvinistic nonsense whose flavor has little if anything to do with early Xy. Your statements appear to be “congruent” as they stand alone, but then they become “mush gospel,” like some cobbled-together Frankenstein’s monster and presented as Orthodoxy.

There’s no need to refute what, apparently, everyone but you already knows. Not going to waste my time. But I will say that you don’t get to usurp orthodoxy, change it into Calvinism, and then claim that real orthodoxy is “inventing our own brand of Xy.”

You want the “original message?” Here it is: “Turn your lives around; God’s Rule has come near.” That’s it. All the substitutionary atonement shinola piled on top of that is superfluous and not cogent to the original message.

 

[sojourner]

So you keep asserting, with no evidence, quotes, or history. This is just your opinion. You have not supported it.

Neither have you supported yours.

 

[sojourner]

Believe whatever you want..
Im just defining historical Christianity, here

You’re defining Calvinism.

 

[usfan]

Christianity is the hardest Abrahamic religion to reject, because of its peaceful loving nature, in the main, but is has one major issue, the idea of Jesus as the Messiah
This idea alienates Jews and Muslims and for that reason it is divisive and cannot be the true path to God
Once Christianity moves on this idea, then I think it could do wonders to unite humanity.

There are 3 possibilities for this idea..
1. Jesus WAS & IS, the Messiah.. the unique Son of God, the Saviour of mankind.
2. He is/was a deceiver.. a false prophet like many before. The Messiah is yet to come, or there is no such person.
3. He is/was a madman, who sincerely thought Himself God, and convinced others of the same.

This is called the 'trilemma', in classical Christian scholarship. Those are the possibilities. IF.. He truly is/was 'The Messiah,' THEN... why or how could mere man 'change!' that idea for some speculative improvement of 'unity!'?

 

[usfan]

Your quotes seem to cobble together disparate comments from historic figures

Conclude what you will. I have presented the evidence.

Neither have you supported yours.

I have, of course, you just reject it.

You’re defining Calvinism.

So you believe and assert, without evidence.

 

[usfan]

the Christian religion has almost 1,700 years of oppression and extremism in their own history

Fortunately, you have false narratives and anti-christian talking points readily at hand to smear the competition..

 

[Lionel Refson]

There are 3 possibilities for this idea..
1. Jesus WAS & IS, the Messiah.. the unique Son of God, the Saviour of mankind.
2. He is/was a deceiver.. a false prophet like many before. The Messiah is yet to come, or there is no such person.
3. He is/was a madman, who sincerely thought Himself God, and convinced others of the same.

This is called the 'trilemma', in classical Christian scholarship. Those are the possibilities. IF.. He truly is/was 'The Messiah,' THEN... why or how could mere man 'change!' that idea for some speculative improvement of 'unity!'?

Jesus was a rabbi a very wise one and one that I love, a son of God as we all are . He gave you a real clue imo in how to find God ie in Matthew 18 2-4
You have to forget your rational mind and become like a child, naive, wondering etc.
Then start at Genesis 1 and you will find what I did ie Am I Wrong To Think That There Is A God, But Not Operating In This World
and I was raised an orthodox jew .....lol

 

[usfan]

Jesus was a rabbi a very wise one and one that I love, a son of God as we all are

..not according to Jesus Himself, and His disciples.

He was the 'only begotten Son', of God.. God in the flesh, not merely a man.

You can certainly disbelieve Him. But He never claimed to be just another Rabbi. So that makes Him either a liar, a madman, or the Saviour of humanity. You pick.

 

[usfan]

More on the trilemma:

Christ either [1] deceived mankind by conscious fraud, or [2] He was Himself deluded and self-deceived, or [3] He was Divine. There is no getting out of this trilemma. It is inexorable. ~ John Duncan (1796-1870)

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.. ~ C. S. Lewis, 1942

 

[sojourner]

So you believe and assert, without evidence

Your post is the evidence. If you had posted, “Women need to be beat down and controlled,” that post would, on its own, be an example of misogyny. No further evidence needed. Someone would say, “That’s misogyny,” and you’d say, “you have no evidence to that effect.” It is what it is.

Yes, you’ve gathered some quotes, but the people you quoted never put all the quotes together to create a “formula for the fall and subsequent salvation” in the way you present it.

..not according to Jesus Himself, and His disciples

Jesus allowed himself to be called “Rabbi,” and he acted like a Rabbi. They treated him like a Rabbi.

He was the 'only begotten Son', of God.. God in the flesh, not merely a man

Yet, when someone called him “good teacher,” he said, “No one is good but God alone.”

You can certainly disbelieve Him. But He never claimed to be just another Rabbi. So that makes Him either a liar, a madman, or the Saviour of humanity. You pick

That’s not what the poster claimed, though. Read it again.

 

[Lionel Refson]

..not according to Jesus Himself, and His disciples.

He was the 'only begotten Son', of God.. God in the flesh, not merely a man.

You can certainly disbelieve Him. But He never claimed to be just another Rabbi. So that makes Him either a liar, a madman, or the Saviour of humanity. You pick.

Given the choice I personally value the account of eg God's Blessing and Covenant in the OT over the new testament because the former is without human self-interest.
We cannot be sure as to whether all the accounts of Jesus saying , or having said he was "the only begotten son are actually true given the many revisions that happened eg Nicea etc
My point is it cannot be proven nor disproven exactly who Jesus was and that doubt is enough for me to take his advice and start again at Gen 1 like I was a 10 year old.
I cannot say what Jesus was, but he was and is not what he said he was to all of humanity and that concerned me.
I almost became a jesuit at one time, but turned away when I realized that any Messiah must unite. So I went back to the beginning again with a child-like mind.
Why don't you try it

Lionel

 

[Lionel Refson]

More on the trilemma:

Christ either [1] deceived mankind by conscious fraud, or [2] He was Himself deluded and self-deceived, or [3] He was Divine. There is no getting out of this trilemma. It is inexorable. ~ John Duncan (1796-1870)

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.. ~ C. S. Lewis, 1942

What authority does CS Lewis and John Duncan have on the subject any more than Rabbi Hillel or any of the other great rabbis. The point is that which divides cannot be from God
We have had 2000 years of this division and divisiveness . Until Jesus returns we can not answer your trilemma with any degree of certainty. So we must start again at the beginning of the books and re-read.

 

[usfan]

I cannot say what Jesus was, but he was and is not what he said he was to all of humanity and that concerned me.

One concludes what their spirit/soul/mind compels them. We cannot do otherwise.

What authority does CS Lewis and John Duncan have on the subject any more than Rabbi Hillel or any of the other great rabbis.

None. I presented reasoning, not claims of authority. The trilemma is historical and a rational examination of the possibilities of the man, Jesus.

Until Jesus returns we can not answer your trilemma with any degree of certainty.

How or why would He return, if he was just a man?

The point is that which divides cannot be from God

Truth divides, as well. Lies and distortions cannot peacefully coexist with Truth.

Matt10:34“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn
“ ‘a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
36a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’

 

[Subduction Zone]

There are 3 possibilities for this idea..
1. Jesus WAS & IS, the Messiah.. the unique Son of God, the Saviour of mankind.
2. He is/was a deceiver.. a false prophet like many before. The Messiah is yet to come, or there is no such person.
3. He is/was a madman, who sincerely thought Himself God, and convinced others of the same.

This is called the 'trilemma', in classical Christian scholarship. Those are the possibilities. IF.. He truly is/was 'The Messiah,' THEN... why or how could mere man 'change!' that idea for some speculative improvement of 'unity!'?

There are more possibilities than that if you think about it. He may never have even have claimed to be the messiah. That could be a myth that grew about him after he was crucified.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Fortunately, you have false narratives and anti-christian talking points readily at hand to smear the competition..

Nope, you appear to be projecting again. Correcting your false views of Christianity is not "anti-christian". You appear to be rather uneducated about the early history of Christianity. One view won out over the rest. That does not mean that was the "right" view. And your beliefs have their own spin on them.

Do you know how to support your claims? So far you have not been able to do so. I have not supported mine at all, but since you won't support yours my denials without any support are just as valid as anything that you have posted.

 

[usfan]

There are more possibilities than that if you think about it. He may never have even have claimed to be the messiah. That could be a myth that grew about him after he was crucified.

That is just an extension of the source. Whether it was Jesus or His followers, this account of the man Jesus is the only comprehensive record of His words and deeds. As presented, He can only be:
Liar
Lunatic
God

Redefining or reinventing Him has no historical basis. You are still rejecting the historical Jesus.