Christian?

[ChristIsTheWay]

If they are sincerely convinced that they are believing what Christ taught and the Apostles believed, then no matter how insane their beliefs are, they don’t become non-Christians as a result.

They are conscious of leaving Christianity and repudiating their former Christian beliefs at the time that they do this - this is the big difference. They’ve made a conscious and deliberate decision to stop following Christ and the teachings of the Apostles - that’s what apostasy is.

I’m glad to be of service.

What if a Christian sincerely believes the Gospel message means they should become a Bahai? As far as I know, the Bahai believe all religions are the same religion, just different stages in a progressive revelation. If a baptized Christian comes to sincerely believe that and becomes a Bahai, it wouldn’t be like a formal apostasy, would it? They don’t think they’re leaving Christ or renouncing Him.

 

[jmcrae]

What if a Christian sincerely believes the Gospel message means they should become a Bahai?

As far as I know, the Bahai believe all religions are the same religion, just different stages in a progressive revelation. If a baptized Christian comes to sincerely believe that and becomes a Bahai, it wouldn’t be like a formal apostasy, would it? They don’t think they’re leaving Christ or renouncing Him.

I don’t know enough about the Bahai religion to be able to comment. Do they see themselves as followers of Christ?

 

[Contarini]

How does the Church decide when a group or an individual is a Christian, despite not being part of the Catholic Church? Are there some basic beliefs required, some specific beliefs that would automatically disqualify, etc? I know the Church accepts most baptisms done in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, but I don’t know anything beyond that.

I think that’s essentially it. From the Catholic perspective, if you are baptized in the name of the Trinity (denoting by the Trinity one eternal God, which is why Mormons don’t qualify even though they use the Trinitarian formula), you are a Christian.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

I’ll confess that I’m a bit rusty on which creed says what, but at some point the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost ceased to be 3 different people (for lack a better term) and become one shapeless formless thing.

That was a major departure from the teachings of the Bible.

No, it wasn’t.

Edwin

 

[ChristIsTheWay]

I don’t know enough about the Bahai religion to be able to comment. Do they see themselves as followers of Christ?

As far as I know, they see themselves as followers of Christ but the Bahai Faith is a different religion. But a baptized Christian might genuinely believe that the Gospel message compels them to join this faith, just as John Shelby Spong believes the Gospel message compels him to reject the divinity of Christ, the saving nature of Christ’s sacrifice, Christ’s bodily resurrection, etc, and create a “new Christianity.”

Here is the Bahai view on Christ: bahai.us/Jesus-Christ

 

[teancum79]

We are made in the image of God, yes, but this does not mean that God the Father has a human body. God the Father did not become incarnate; his only Son became Incarnate.

I don’t know where you’re getting the idea that God is shapeless/formless or a bit mist thing. This is not what is taught by traditional Christianity.

Well the Bible I read says that God made us in his image and that Christ was in the express image of the father. The only other opinions I’ve had shared with me by “traditional Christians” are that God does not have a human form or is shapeless.

If those are wrong please feel free to provided better info.

 

[ralphinal]

Well the Bible I read says that God made us in his image and that Christ was in the express image of the father. The only other opinions I’ve had shared with me by “traditional Christians” are that God does not have a human form or is shapeless.

If those are wrong please feel free to provided better info.

What makes us in the image and likeness of God whne the rest of creation is not? Well, it could be that we have two arms and two legs and two eyes, etc. Wait, so do monkies and other primates. That must not be it.

It could be that we have intellect and will. We can learn and choose to alter our environment. Wait, so can monkies and other primates.

It could be that we have an immortal soul and the ability to think on a plane higher than base instinct. We can see right and wrong and we are able to distinguish. Wait, monkies and primates DO NOT have those qualities.

To be in the image and likeness of God is to have an immortal soul and be able to reason right and wrong.

 

[teancum79]

I agree that we have those higher qualities, but what in the Bible would tell us that we don’t look like God.

 

[Stephen168]

Why is it that a creed that was created way after the Bible by non apostles is considered a needed belief to be a Christian?

The Creed was written at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD.

Athanasius, who was Bishop of Alexandria, wrote an Easter letter to be read in the churches in Egypt. His letter, written in 367, provides the oldest list of the New Testament canon that we have.

The Nicene Creed was put together before the New Testament.

 

[ralphinal]

I agree that we have those higher qualities, but what in the Bible would tell us that we don’t look like God.

Let me try this: what makes us look like God? Eye color? Hair Color? Skin color? Body shape? These things are all different amongst all people, so there are issues. Monkies look a lot like us. Are they in the image of God? It does not say visual image, just image and likeness. That can mean more than look like God. It can mean that we share traits that God has that creation as a whole does not.

 

[teancum79]

Let me try this: what makes us look like God? Eye color? Hair Color? Skin color? Body shape? These things are all different amongst all people, so there are issues. Monkies look a lot like us. Are they in the image of God? It does not say visual image, just image and likeness. That can mean more than look like God. It can mean that we share traits that God has that creation as a whole does not.

So than why have those who have seen God not commented on his looking odd?

Yes there some things we have in common with apes, but I’ve never had to downer if someone was a person or an ape. People are consistent after a fashion. The term Image strongly indicates appearance. Not to mention that things look like their parents.

 

[ralphinal]

So than why have those who have seen God not commented on his looking odd?

Yes there some things we have in common with apes, but I’ve never had to downer if someone was a person or an ape. People are consistent after a fashion. The term Image strongly indicates appearance. Not to mention that things look like their parents.

Who has seen the face of God?

What does God look like? Does he look like an African? Or a Mongolian? Or a Norseman? Or a Ancient Hebrew? THere is so much variation in human apperance that we cannot all look like God. God is the Father of all creation, yet all creation cannot look like God.

 

[teancum79]

Who has seen the face of God?

What does God look like? Does he look like an African? Or a Mongolian? Or a Norseman? Or a Ancient Hebrew? THere is so much variation in human apperance that we cannot all look like God. God is the Father of all creation, yet all creation cannot look like God.

Moses comes to mind. We are not all 100% alike so its true we can’t look like God’s twin, but that does not mean that God does not look a whole lot like us.

 

[ralphinal]

Moses comes to mind. We are not all 100% alike so its true we can’t look like God’s twin, but that does not mean that God does not look a whole lot like us.

Moses saw God in the Burning Bush. He saw God in the Cloud of His Glory, and finally, he saw the Body of God, but not his face. God showed himself in three forms. How can we saw that one of these is his normal form?

What is more important, having the spiritual and mental qualities of God (immortal soul, ability to judge right and wrong, capacity for love and putting others above ourselve) or looking like God?

 

[teancum79]

Moses saw God in the Burning Bush. He saw God in the Cloud of His Glory, and finally, he saw the Body of God, but not his face. God showed himself in three forms. How can we saw that one of these is his normal form?

What is more important, having the spiritual and mental qualities of God (immortal soul, ability to judge right and wrong, capacity for love and putting others above ourselve) or looking like God?

Ex. 33: 11
11 And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.

Dang it I hate when the Bible is wrong all the time.

 

[The_GreyPilgrim]

Ex. 33: 11
11 And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.

Dang it I hate when the Bible is wrong all the time.

You’re taking the scripture out of context:

Exodus 33:
[8] Whenever Moses went out to the tent, all the people rose up, and every man stood at his tent door, and looked after Moses, until he had gone into the tent.
[9] When Moses entered the tent, the **pillar of cloud **would descend and stand at the door of the tent, and the LORD would speak with Moses.
[10] And when all the people saw **the pillar of cloud **standing at the door of the tent, all the people would rise up and worship, every man at his tent door.

And from the very same chapter of Exodus:
[18] Moses said, “I pray thee, show me thy glory.”
[19] And he said, “I will make all my goodness pass before you, and will proclaim before you my name `The LORD’; and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.
[20] But,” he said, “**you cannot see my face; for man shall not see me and live.” **
[21] And the LORD said, “Behold, there is a place by me where you shall stand upon the rock;
[22] and while my glory passes by I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by;
[23] then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back; **but my face shall not be seen.” **

The “shekinah”, or the cloud of God’s glory, was what Moses saw.

How do you explain this considering that it is obvious that whoever wrote Exodus 33:11 also wrote v. 8-10 & v.18-23?

 

[ralphinal]

You’re taking the scripture out of context:

Exodus 33:
[8] Whenever Moses went out to the tent, all the people rose up, and every man stood at his tent door, and looked after Moses, until he had gone into the tent.
[9] When Moses entered the tent, the **pillar of cloud **would descend and stand at the door of the tent, and the LORD would speak with Moses.
[10] And when all the people saw **the pillar of cloud **standing at the door of the tent, all the people would rise up and worship, every man at his tent door.

And from the very same chapter of Exodus:
[18] Moses said, “I pray thee, show me thy glory.”
[19] And he said, “I will make all my goodness pass before you, and will proclaim before you my name `The LORD’; and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.
[20] But,” he said, “**you cannot see my face; for man shall not see me and live.” **
[21] And the LORD said, “Behold, there is a place by me where you shall stand upon the rock;
[22] and while my glory passes by I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by;
[23] then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back; **but my face shall not be seen.” **

The “shekinah”, or the cloud of God’s glory, was what Moses saw.

How do you explain this considering that it is obvious that whoever wrote Exodus 33:11 also wrote v. 8-10 & v.18-23?

You beat me to this.

God and Moses conversed, unlike God and Muhammed, but Moses was not allowed to see the “Face” of God.

 

[teancum79]

You’re taking the scripture out of context:

Exodus 33:
[8] Whenever Moses went out to the tent, all the people rose up, and every man stood at his tent door, and looked after Moses, until he had gone into the tent.
[9] When Moses entered the tent, the **pillar of cloud **would descend and stand at the door of the tent, and the LORD would speak with Moses.
[10] And when all the people saw **the pillar of cloud **standing at the door of the tent, all the people would rise up and worship, every man at his tent door.

And from the very same chapter of Exodus:
[18] Moses said, “I pray thee, show me thy glory.”
[19] And he said, “I will make all my goodness pass before you, and will proclaim before you my name `The LORD’; and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.
[20] But,” he said, “**you cannot see my face; for man shall not see me and live.” **
[21] And the LORD said, “Behold, there is a place by me where you shall stand upon the rock;
[22] and while my glory passes by I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by;
[23] then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back; **but my face shall not be seen.” **

The “shekinah”, or the cloud of God’s glory, was what Moses saw.

How do you explain this considering that it is obvious that whoever wrote Exodus 33:11 also wrote v. 8-10 & v.18-23?

It one time God choose to show his face and another time not.

 

[ralphinal]

It one time God choose to show his face and another time not.

I saw “face to face” in that verse you used (that translation of that verse) as meaning no intermediary. There was not an angel speaking for God to Moses. That is how GOd always spoke to Moses: in His own voice.

 

[Verisimilitude]

How do you explain this considering that it is obvious that whoever wrote Exodus 33:11 also wrote v. 8-10 & v.18-23?

If you continue to use facts, logic and reasoning there will be no need of feelings to make some believe what they want to despite it. You are a danger to untruth, or would that be a non-threat to truth? Either way I am never surprised at how truth and logic go together in support of God rather than the other way around.