Is a person a Christian if...

[Daisies4me]

Could one not use the same argument for Islam though?

(quote)
In the symbolism of Revelation, the entity spoken of as 'Babylon the Great', (Revelation 18:2-5) been identified as the world empire of false religion. The major player being Christendom, IMO, but it also encompasses all religions whose teachings and practices do not conform to the true worship of 'the Only True God', as Jesus calls His God and Father, Jehovah. (John 17:3)

Following the flood of Noah's day, false religion had its beginning at Babel. (later known as Babylon)
In time, Babylonish religious beliefs and practices spread to many lands. So Babylon the Great became a fitting name for false religion as a whole.
reference Genesis 10:8-10; & 11:4-9.

read the Bible online at
New World Translation (2013 Revision) | Published by Jehovah’s Witnesses

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

(quote)
In the symbolism of Revelation, the entity spoken of as 'Babylon the Great', (Revelation 18:2-5) been identified as the world empire of false religion. The major player being Christendom, IMO, but it also encompasses all religions whose teachings and practices do not conform to the true worship of 'the Only True God', as Jesus calls His God and Father, Jehovah. (John 17:3)

Following the flood of Noah's day, false religion had its beginning at Babel. (later known as Babylon)
In time, Babylonish religious beliefs and practices spread to many lands. So Babylon the Great became a fitting name for false religion as a whole.
reference Genesis 10:8-10; & 11:4-9.

read the Bible online at
New World Translation (2013 Revision) | Published by Jehovah’s Witnesses

Not impressed.

Islam has a much more clear explanation for why Christianity is false.

Do you have any good arguments that cannot be used by other religions?

 

[Daisies4me]

Neither of these are teachings in the RCC.

(quote)
Hi Metis

If you noticed at the beginning of the post you are responding to, I prefaced the information with this:

found this online, from a church out of oklahoma. NOT JW article. But this part of their page is true.
"Ancient Babylonian Triad, Truine, Trinity"
---------------
The referencing of the ancient triads that were worshiped in the history of the religions of the world.. I should have not included the last sentence but it was quoted as their statement, not mine.
sorry for the confusion ..

 

[Daisies4me]

Not impressed.

Islam has a much more clear explanation for why Christianity is false.

Do you have any good arguments that cannot be used by other religions?

(quote)

ok, shania..lol... 'didn't impress me much', eh? <smile> You are probably way too young to get my humor...

Having had many conversations with several Muslims from Sudan, and other African nations, independent of each other, (and also knowing some from Iran who are now JW's,) who became my friends during our association at the time. Their main objection initially, against 'Christianity', was that in their beliefs, God didn't have a son, as that would've indicated that God resorted to the act of procreation, and that would defile the Holy God. They did, however, agree that Jesus was a Prophet of God. And we reasoned that , if the Qu'ran calls Jesus a Prophet of God, and if Jesus was a true prophet---then what Jesus said would have to be true, right?

They thought Jehovah to be an ancient God of war, at first. We did have some very interesting conversations. Friendly conversations. They are very hospitable and generous people, as I have found the majority to be. However, I don't initially think of people according to the faith they adhere to. My comments were directed at the Bible teachings on the matter. As I see in the Bible, there is only 'One God', and 'one Lord' to those who follow the Bible teachings. To me, that 'one God' is Jehovah, and the 'one Lord' , is Jehovah's Only-begotten Son, who came to be named Jesus in his human form.
Obviously, others don't always agree with me. But as in noted in Revelation 18, 2-5, not all 'faiths' expressed today can be correct. The majority has been notoriously in error, historically.

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

(quote)

ok, shania..lol... 'didn't impress me much', eh? <smile> You are probably way too young to get my humor...

Having had many conversations with several Muslims from Sudan, and other African nations, independent of each other, (and also knowing some from Iran who are now JW's,) who became my friends during our association at the time. Their main objection initially, against 'Christianity', was that in their beliefs, God didn't have a son, as that would've indicated that God resorted to the act of procreation, and that would defile the Holy God. They did, however, agree that Jesus was a Prophet of God. And we reasoned that , if the Qu'ran calls Jesus a Prophet of God, and if Jesus was a true prophet---then what Jesus said would have to be true, right?

They thought Jehovah to be an ancient God of war, at first. We did have some very interesting conversations. Friendly conversations. They are very hospitable and generous people, as I have found the majority to be. However, I don't initially think of people according to the faith they adhere to. My comments were directed at the Bible teachings on the matter. As I see in the Bible, there is only 'One God', and 'one Lord' to those who follow the Bible teachings. To me, that 'one God' is Jehovah, and the 'one Lord' , is Jehovah's Only-begotten Son, who came to be named Jesus in his human form.
Obviously, others don't always agree with me. But as in noted in Revelation 18, 2-5, not all 'faiths' expressed today can be correct. The majority has been notoriously in error, historically.

I said Islam not Muslims.

 

[Daisies4me]

I said Islam not Muslims.

(quote)
Hi CP
Many that are of the Islamic faith, refer to themselves as Muslims. think Muhammad Ali, for example. As did those I spoke with who attended the Islamic Mosque....
If you have a different opinion, please do correct my ignorance, and expound on the differences.

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

(quote)
Hi CP
Many that are of the Islamic faith, refer to themselves as Muslims. think Muhammad Ali, for example. As did those I spoke with who attended the Islamic Mosque....
If you have a different opinion, please do correct my ignorance, and expound on the differences.

That's not what I was meaning.

I said that Islam has a better explanation for Christianity than Christianity has for Islam.

I did not say that the average Muslim has a better explanation for Christianity than you do for Islam.

 

[RESOLUTION]

By non Biblical doctrines not practiced by the Apostolic church. Infant baptism, purgatory, worshiping and praying to saints, exalting Mary to high status she never wanted or deserved, priestly intercession and forgiveness of sin, which is Christ's responsibility alone, penances, indulgences, ex cathedra speaking of the pope, etc, etc

The promises of God both OT and NT were for believers and their children.

Due to the high mortality rates of the deaths of children in infancy they baptised babies with water. Because the believer and their household (including their children) would be saved as part of the promises of God to believers.


King James Bible
For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.

Deuteronomy 4:40
40 Thou shalt keep therefore his statutes, and his commandments, which I command thee this day, that it may go well with thee, and with thy children after thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days upon the earth, which the Lord thy God giveth thee, for ever.

Acts 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Some beliefs are based in faith in truth. Some not seen immediately but can be seen in the truth God taught.

Praying for the saints is praying for all the church here and now. There is sometimes a throw back to praying for saints who have died. Another debate.
Mary is not to be worshiped but comes from the old Roman pagan religion of the black Madonna and child. When the Romans tried to hijack the Church they brought their own relgions
into it, seizing the faith as if a way of ruling the world in a way the Roman Empire no longer could. So the Roman Catholic Church is really based on ruling people using Christ and their old
religions such as the Black Madonna. God is the only person who omnipresent in all places at all times. They mis use the teachings of Christ telling Peter and the others that if they forgive someone
their sins they are forgiven but if they don't they are not forgiven. All truth shows those who believe in Christ already have their sins forgiven. If when Peter or anyone preach Christ and people do not hear them, how can their sins be forgiven if they do not accept the truth?

In truth the believers are all saints and a royal priesthood.

7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
1 Peter 2:9-10
9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.



No more sacrifices or high priests needed because Christ has become the high priest by which everyone has their sins forgiven.

Mary cannot hear prayers and more importantly she cannot answer them.

 

[metis]

(quote)
Hi Metis

If you noticed at the beginning of the post you are responding to, I prefaced the information with this:

found this online, from a church out of oklahoma. NOT JW article. But this part of their page is true.
"Ancient Babylonian Triad, Truine, Trinity"
---------------
The referencing of the ancient triads that were worshiped in the history of the religions of the world.. I should have not included the last sentence but it was quoted as their statement, not mine.
sorry for the confusion ..

No worries.

 

[Daisies4me]

That's not what I was meaning.

I said that Islam has a better explanation for Christianity than Christianity has for Islam.

I did not say that the average Muslim has a better explanation for Christianity than you do for Islam.

(quote)

Hi CP
Would you care to give the difference between Islam and "the average Muslim" , since you have chosen to divide the two?
And perhaps you could then give us the 'better explanation' for Christianity that you say 'Islam' has? Just to clarify what it is that you meant to say?
Thanks

 

[Daisies4me]

The promises of God both OT and NT were for believers and their children.

Due to the high mortality rates of the deaths of children in infancy they baptised babies with water. Because the believer and their household (including their children) would be saved as part of the promises of God to believers.


King James Bible
For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.

Deuteronomy 4:40
40 Thou shalt keep therefore his statutes, and his commandments, which I command thee this day, that it may go well with thee, and with thy children after thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days upon the earth, which the Lord thy God giveth thee, for ever.

Acts 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

(quote)

D: How can an infant "believe" anything? none of those scriptures mention baptising infants, do they? A person has to be old enough to mentally grasp what they are choosing in order to be baptised. All water baptism is, in reality, is a public declaration of the hope within. The person first has to make the dedication to do the will of God prior to being immersed in water. simply sprinkling water on a baby does nothing for the eternal 'salvation' of the infant. But it makes money for the Priest who does the sprinkling, doesn't it?
The minor children are 'saved' through the demonstration of faith and obedience to God of the parents. That is what those Scriptures are saying. We all have to be able to reason in order to make a determination as to whom we choose to obey, or follow, as it were.
-------------

Some beliefs are based in faith in truth. Some not seen immediately but can be seen in the truth God taught.

Praying for the saints is praying for all the church here and now. There is sometimes a throw back to praying for saints who have died. Another debate.
Mary is not to be worshiped but comes from the old Roman pagan religion of the black Madonna and child. When the Romans tried to hijack the Church they brought their own relgions
into it, seizing the faith as if a way of ruling the world in a way the Roman Empire no longer could. So the Roman Catholic Church is really based on ruling people using Christ and their old
religions such as the Black Madonna. God is the only person who omnipresent in all places at all times. They mis use the teachings of Christ telling Peter and the others that if they forgive someone
their sins they are forgiven but if they don't they are not forgiven. All truth shows those who believe in Christ already have their sins forgiven. If when Peter or anyone preach Christ and people do not hear them, how can their sins be forgiven if they do not accept the truth?

In truth the believers are all saints and a royal priesthood.

7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
1 Peter 2:9-10
9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.



No more sacrifices or high priests needed because Christ has become the high priest by which everyone has their sins forgiven.

Mary cannot hear prayers and more importantly she cannot answer them.

 

[Daisies4me]

No worries.

(quote)

Thanks for being understanding. Hope your day is a good one.

 

[Desert Snake]

Would a person be considered a Christian if they wanted to follow Christ's teachings, but didn't exactly view him as God, but rather a prophet or messenger of God? Because technically they would be following Christ's path, just not believing that he himself was God or part of a trinity.

They might be considered a Christian, but they wouldnt be.

 

[Daisies4me]

They might be considered a Christian, but they wouldnt be.

(quote)

Now, what qualifications do you have to make that assessment?
Can we look at a couple of scriptures pertaining to the word "Christian", and where and when it originated?

Acts 11:26 After he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year they assembled with them in the congregation and taught quite a crowd, and it was first in Antioch that the disciples were by divine providence called Christians.

"By Divine Providence"

Acts 26:28 But A·gripʹpa said to Paul: “In a short time you would persuade me to become a Christian.”

1 Peter 4:13 On the contrary, go on rejoicing over the extent to which you are sharers in the sufferings of the Christ, so that you may rejoice and be overjoyed also during the revelation of his glory. 14 If you are being reproached* for the name of Christ, you are happy,+because the spirit of glory, yes, the spirit of God, is resting upon you.15 However, let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or a wrongdoer or a busybody in other people’s matters.
16 But if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not feel ashamed, but let him keep on glorifying God while bearing this name.

So, can we really say that your opinion of who is or is not a Christian is just that--- YOUR opinion?

Thanks for listening

 

[metis]

Most theologians that I have read believe that "Christian" was a name assigned from the "outside" by those outside of "the Way", and that it was likely an insulting name at first. However, fairly early in the 2nd century it was used by those on the "inside" as the name for group, eventually giving way to the name "Catholic" later in the 2nd century. "Catholic" (universal) and "orthodox" (truth) were first used as descriptors of the apostolic church, but the former was mostly used by those in the church by the end of the 2nd century.

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

(quote)

Hi CP
Would you care to give the difference between Islam and "the average Muslim" , since you have chosen to divide the two?
And perhaps you could then give us the 'better explanation' for Christianity that you say 'Islam' has? Just to clarify what it is that you meant to say?
Thanks

Really?

Islam is a religion. The average Muslim would be the average follower of Islam.

According to Islam, Yeshua (called Isa) was a prophet that was killed by the Romans and Jews. Isa's teachings where corrupted by man to serve their own purposes including the idea of the trinity which the Muslims view as a form of polytheism.

 

[hughwatt]

(quote)
it has been my experience, when speaking with people on the matter, there are many differing definitions as to what the 'trinity' means to different persons who have stated that they believe the trinity doctrine. People don't agree even about what it means, and most will say that they don't have to be able to explain it, because it is a 'mystery'. They believe it because a religious leader or persons thereby inclined, told them to believe it. If I asked 6 people to define what the trinity means in their opinion, usually I would get as many definitions. Some would even argue with other trinitarians about the meaning of the trinity.

Allow me to use what you said and apply it to those I've spoken to about God and the many definitions as to what they mean. Would you say then a true definition of God does not exist because of all the other definitions? This is not good reasoning.

But let's look at how the WT take the definition of the Trinity as stated in the Athanasian Creed (they refer to), and how they deny it by applying a heresy called Modalism:

"IS GOD JESUS OR A TRINITY?

14 Who is this wonderful God? Some persons say his name is Jesus. Others say he is a Trinity, although the word “trinity” does not appear in the Bible. According to the teaching of the Trinity, there are three persons in one God, that is, there is “one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”

Many religious organizations teach this, even though they admit it is “a mystery.” Are such views of God correct?

15 Well, did Jesus ever say that he was God? No, he never did. Rather, in the Bible he is called “God’s Son.” And he said: “The Father is greater than I am.” (John 10:34-36; 14:28) Also, Jesus explained that there were some things that neither he nor the angels knew but that only God knew. (Mark 13:32) Further, on one occasion Jesus prayed to God, saying: “Let, not my will, but yours take place.” (Luke 22:42) If Jesus were the Almighty God, he would not have prayed to himself, would he? In fact, following Jesus’ death, the Scripture says: “This Jesus God resurrected.” (Acts2:32) Thus the Almighty God and Jesus are clearly two separate persons. Even after his death and resurrection and ascension to heaven, Jesus was still not equal to his Father.—1 Corinthians 11:3; 15:28. [Emphasis added] You Can Live Forever in Paradise On Earth, Chapter 4, p.39"​

Notice the WT quote in the first paragraph? "According to the teaching of the Trinity,." It goes on, "..there are three persons in one God, that is, there is “one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” They did not say, 'According to one teaching of the Trinity,.' but "According to the teaching of the Trinity,." So, the WT picks a specific definition of the Trinity to take issue with.

Now watch what they do to debunk this: "If Jesus were the Almighty God, he would not have prayed to himself, would he?" The WT quoted the definition of the Trinity as "..three persons in one God,." then on the same page just a few words down misrepresents and denies the Trinity based upon a fallacious argument.

By using simple logic any fair-minded person would answer; Jesus would not have prayed to Himself, that is correct, but to the Father, Who is another of the Three Persons in the Trinity.

To make matters even more confusing for its followers it added, "Thus the Almighty God and Jesus are clearly two separate persons."

Yes, they "..are clearly two separate persons." That's how the Trinity is defined and that's why Jesus would not have been "praying to Himself."

​

 

[Daisies4me]

Most theologians that I have read believe that "Christian" was a name assigned from the "outside" by those outside of "the Way", and that it was likely an insulting name at first. However, fairly early in the 2nd century it was used by those on the "inside" as the name for group, eventually giving way to the name "Catholic" later in the 2nd century. "Catholic" (universal) and "orthodox" (truth) were first used as descriptors of the apostolic church, but the former was mostly used by those in the church by the end of the 2nd century.

(quote)
Hello, Metis

It is true that following Jesus was called 'the Way'. We can find this at Acts 9: 2, which reads, "and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that he might bring bound to Jerusalem any whom he found who belonged to The Way, both men and women."--{ the account of Saul, when he was persecuting Christians, before his conversion and becoming the Apostle Paul }-- Why might they have been dubbed 'the Way'?

“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”—John 14:6.

Yes, Jesus was known to his followers as "the Way". Only through him is it possible to approach Jehovah God in prayer. Also, Jesus is the way for us to be reconciled to God. (John 16:23; Romans 5:8)
Hence, only through Jesus can we have an approved relationship with God.
As for what some 'theologians' may or may not say, I have no response, except to say that I have found it to be profitable to rely on Scripture first, whenever possible.
Anyone can say whatever they like. It is up to the individual to decide for themselves who/what they want to believe.

I simply present my own beliefs and the reasons why I have come to believe as such.
Peace

 

[Daisies4me]

Really?

Islam is a religion. The average Muslim would be the average follower of Islam.
--- D: pardon me, CP, but didn't you just tell me a couple of posts ago , when I replied about my conversations with Muslims, that you were only talking about Islam, and that Muslims were not the same as Islam?
Have you now reconciled your opinion to reflect that they are the same? That a Muslim is an Islamic worshiper of Allah, and follower of the Prophet Mohammad?
----------------

According to Islam, Yeshua (called Isa) was a prophet that was killed by the Romans and Jews. Isa's teachings where corrupted by man to serve their own purposes including the idea of the trinity which the Muslims view as a form of polytheism.

(quote)
According to the Bible, The Jewish religious leaders and the Roman rulers conspired to murder Jesus, and it had nothing to do with a 'trinity' doctrine that did not exist among early Christians, actually.
Do you know why the religious leader kept on making false allegations against Jesus, until they finally found an accusation that the Romans were interested in? Do you know what that charge was?

Luke 4:28 Now all those hearing these things in the synagogue became filled with anger, 29 and they rose up and rushed him outside the city, and they led him to the brow of the mountain on which their city had been built, in order to throw him down headlong. 30 But he went right through their midst and continued on his way.

Mark 15:1 Immediately at dawn, the chief priests with the elders and the scribes, indeed, the whole Sanʹhe·drin, consulted together, and they bound Jesus and led him off and handed him over to Pilate.

John 18:12 Then the soldiers and the military commander and the officers of the Jews seized Jesus and bound him.

Why do you think they did that? What was his 'crime'?

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

(quote)
According to the Bible, The Jewish religious leaders and the Roman rulers conspired to murder Jesus, and it had nothing to do with a 'trinity' doctrine that did not exist among early Christians, actually.
Do you know why the religious leader kept on making false allegations against Jesus, until they finally found an accusation that the Romans were interested in? Do you know what that charge was?

Do not try to change the topic when you cannot accept a point.

Islam can explain Christianity very clearly.

Now how can you disprove the other religions?