Define Christianity

[Rival]

There is a thread on why does Christianity get so much hate Why do christianity get so much hate? This along with my Trinity thread Why So Much Trinity Bashing?

...has made me wonder how are people defining Christianity, since there are many on here who don't seem to take as an authority anything other than the Bible, but the Bible has no definition of or recognition of any religion called 'Christianity' or even a concept of 'religion'. So how would you define it?

For me, I'd go to the 3 creeds and if further questions were asked, Church councils.

What do you mean by Christianity?

 

[ChristineM]

The group of people who think they follow the word of christ as told in the NT

 

[Rival]

The group of people who think they follow the word of christ as told in the NT

This is a group of people though, not a religion.

 

[ChristineM]

This is a group of people though, not a religion.

You asked what i mean by Christianity.

 

[Rival]

You asked what i mean by Christianity.

Christianity, not Christians. How would you define the religion, what are its beliefs, its doctrines, its rules?

 

[ChristineM]

Christianity, not Christians. How would you define the religion, what are its beliefs, its doctrines, its rules?

That group of people make up the religion

 

[Ebionite]

What do you mean by Christianity?

You can get an idea of what it means by looking at the original language that describes it. Antioch was Hellenic, just as Paul was globalist in his ambition.

And when he had found [Paul], he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
Acts 11:26

 

[Starlight]

Christianity is based on this Bible verse: John 3:16
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I define it by the Nicene Creed. That's the baseline, for me.

 

[Eli G]

Christianity is the real corpus of followers of Jesus and the real teachings they believe and principles they practice (Acts 11:26). They emerged at the first century and they were united in the same beliefs and way they called the truth. They were one group with the same principles until by the second century the Way was hidden by apostates, just as the weeds cover and hide the wheat.

It had already been prophesied that this would happen, but that at the end of the human world system of things, the wheat and the weeds would be recognized and the harvest successfully accomplished (Matt. 13:24-30,36-43).

Paul had said that these apostates had not yet fully developed because there were still alive in his time some anointed with spirit from heaven who prevented their full development, so when the last of them died, the conditions that the Devil had expected were met. to develop that "apostate Christianity" that changed everything.

2 Thess. 2:3 Let no one lead you astray in any way, because it [the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him __ v.2] will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed, the son of destruction. 4 He stands in opposition and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he sits down in the temple of God, publicly showing himself to be a god. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you, I used to tell you these things?
6 And now you know what is acting as a restraint, so that he will be revealed in his own due time. 7 True, the mystery of this lawlessness is already at work, but only until the one who is right now acting as a restraint is out of the way. 8 Then, indeed, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence. 9 But the lawless one’s presence is by the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and wonders 10 and every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing, as a retribution because they did not accept the love of the truth in order that they might be saved. 11 That is why God lets a deceptive influence mislead them so that they may come to believe the lie, 12 in order that they all may be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness.

 

[Ebionite]

I define it by the Nicene Creed. That's the baseline, for me.

That's Roman Christianity. Original Christianity predates that and had a different theology. For example, the original Christians did not observe the Trinitarian baptismal formula of the Roman Church.

 

[LuisDantas]

Excellent question.

There isn't a clear, obvious, uncontroversial answer, and that is a considerable problem. People will have their own understandings and they may easily vary along time and circunstance, even to the point of logical incoherence.

One difficult hurdle is that there are people who insist on presenting themselves as Christian voices to the masses and the reaction to those claims is rather ambiguous. It has become commonplace to remind critics that they are not necessarily representative, but that is not a lot of help in establishing directions and responsibilities. We end up collectively having to deal with the (hefty) price for no benefit.

From a sociological perspective, "Christianity" as it currently exists in the mainstream is mainly a political, very antifragile rhizome with very disperse structure that only seeks some form of unity in rare occasions and only to project a perception of power and significance. Far more often it presents a pattern of internal, arguably unsolvable conflict. It has little interest in traditions and maintains its identity mainly by forming largely discrete groups with little mutual exchange and which revolve around certain values, vocabulary and local leaderships.

Far as I can see, there isn't a lot of shared values or ideas among those groups either; some segments are fierce critics of certain others, to the point that there are solid if small fringe groups of very varied character - say, Sedevacantists at a certain corner; the considerably larger Charismatic movement interfacing with it in a complex, even contradictory way; the largely ethnic Orthodox Churches keeping their distance and diplomatic relations; and all around an enormous number of assorted so-called priests and whole churches that show no indications of having any real interest in anything connecting to Christian traditions beyond some optics and motivational words. I sincerely believe that many an influential "Priest", "Pastor" or even "Apostle" has never even bothered to learn of the Councils.

Also, there are levels of adherence to Christianity. There are those who will answer that they are Christians when asked and use the proper vocabulary without necessarily giving it much further thought. There are those who want to project significance from their self-identification as Christians. There is quite the middle ground, including a considerable contingent of syncretists with everything from Voodoo to Kardecist Spiritism to Islam to Hinduism to New Age beliefs.

In practice when I want to know what a Christian believes in I find it most useful if not necessary to notice how often and how emphatically the person mentions being a Christian in casual conversation. Even then there is a lot of ambiguity unless I decide to ask a few directed questions. There are even many who are Christians but want to be recognized as adherents of some form of Judaism "that does not neglect Jesus".

The one thing that I can consistently expect of Christianity and Christians is that they do not want to be mistaken for atheists - even when they happen to be atheists. Beyond that, I really would need some form of hint or context.

 

[Debater Slayer]

The belief that Jesus Christ is God or the son of God and following the teachings of the Bible as one's primary theological and moral doctrine.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The answers are going to vary a bit, but for the most part I will leave defining what a Christian is to Christians. I can only give a general description. Once one gets into dogma one is not just defining Christianity. One is defining personal Christianity that not all Christians will agree with. I am in no position to set the dogma of others.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Any religion whose foundation is the teachings of Jesus Christ as told in the Bible.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

That's Roman Christianity. Original Christianity predates that and had a different theology. For example, the original Christians did not observe the Trinitarian baptismal formula of the Roman Church.

Uh huh.

 

[Rival]

That's Roman Christianity. Original Christianity predates that and had a different theology. For example, the original Christians did not observe the Trinitarian baptismal formula of the Roman Church.

It's Orthodox, Anglican, Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Calvinist, Presbyterian...

If you have an issue with this creed, you are pretty much outside the faith as a whole.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's Orthodox, Anglican, Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Calvinist, Presbyterian...

If you have an issue with this creed, you are pretty much outside the faith as a whole.

This does bring up a problem that I knew the thread would run into, and it already has, there are plenty of Christians that will try to claim that other are not "True ChristiansTM. Ironically the Christians that do this also often bring up the size of the Christian religion as a whole to support it being "the truth". Yet by their own reasoning only most of them are terribly wrong. They want it both ways when they argue at times.

 

[Rival]

This does bring up a problem that I knew the thread would run into, and it already has, there are plenty of Christians that will try to claim that other are not "True ChristiansTM. Ironically the Christians that do this also often bring up the size of the Christian religion as a whole to support it being "the truth". Yet by their own reasoning only most of them are terribly wrong. They want it both ways when they argue at times.

It's more than that. This is how Christianity has been defined for at least a thousand years. So yes, I have no problem whatsoever saying those who reject the creeds are not orthodox Christians, they are heretical. The creeds were literally put together to define Christian orthodoxy and they have largely worked.

By what other metric is one to judge?

Otherwise you run into the problem of not being able to define it. That's what happens when you reject the orthodoxy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's more than that. This is how Christianity has been defined for at least a thousand years. So yes, I have no problem whatsoever saying those who reject the creeds are not orthodox Christians, they are heretical. The creeds were literally put together to define Christian orthodoxy and they have largely worked.

By what other metric is one to judge?

Otherwise you run into the problem of not being able to define it. That's what happens when you reject the orthodoxy.

I was not talking about just the creeds. I was talking about how Christians will interpret the scriptures in general and will often claim that those that do not agree with the interpretations of his or her own sect then they are not Christians. But since you mentioned the creeds if I remember correctly the Nicene creed is based largely on the writings of Paul. There are some Christians that largely reject him. There are other sects that will claim, as we have already seen, that the creeds are a Roman Catholic construction and that alone justifies rejecting them in the eyes of some. I do not personally agree with this since one can see bits and pieces of them in the NT and in other early church writings.

At any rate it gets to be a bit of a mess. Sometimes to such an extent that some of Europe's bloodiest wars were fought over this.