How do Christians possibly rationalize these things?

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas wrote:

A Christian is someone who finds value in the teachings of Jesus. That's the only definition that accounts for all Christians.

That can't be right. A Christian at minimum also has to accept the divinity of Jesus. Is it possible to be a Christian and reject Jesus' divinity? And his divinity must be accepted over other God concepts. For instance Muslims regard Jesus as having been a prophet, but that doesn't make them Christians.

@Aedes,

Aedes wrote:

That can't be right. A Christian at minimum also has to accept the divinity of Jesus. Is it possible to be a Christian and reject Jesus' divinity? And his divinity must be accepted over other God concepts. For instance Muslims regard Jesus as having been a prophet, but that doesn't make them Christians.

Yeah, I always thought that you must regard Jesus to a higher level, so to say. You must believe he is the divine one and reject other notions of God, as you point out. However, perhaps there is a denomination of Christianity that does not? And if one exists, wouldn't it make things a bit confusing? I mean, the whole point of applying this label is to allow categorization, and to hold the beliefs that are related to the religion. Otherwise, why label yourself such?

The only thing I can think of is perhaps the label itself brings people comfort, regardless if they actually practice said religion, even at all.

@Martin Cothran,

Martin Cothran wrote:

Wouldn't it be just as logical to ask, "How do non-Christians possibly condemn these things?"

Yes I wonder how rape, genocide, extermination, religious killing, witch-burning, slavery, human sacrifice, murder, and animal sacrifice is possibly wrong.

@Mephistopheles phil,

Mephistopheles wrote:

Yes I wonder how rape, genocide, extermination, religious killing, witch-burning, slavery, human sacrifice, murder, and animal sacrifice is possibly wrong.

I think you may have been saying that sarcastically, but no, I think you should actually wonder why you think it's wrong. Self exploration is key.

@Zetherin,

Zetherin wrote:

I think you may have been saying that sarcastically, but no, I think you should actually wonder why you think it's wrong. Self exploration is key.

http://www.philosophyforum.com/forum/social-philosophy-human-relations/1526-will-purpose.html
http://www.philosophyforum.com/forum/ethics/1531-murder-not-wrong.html

@Mephistopheles phil,

Mephistopheles wrote:

http://www.philosophyforum.com/forum/social-philosophy-human-relations/1526-will-purpose.html
http://www.philosophyforum.com/forum/ethics/1531-murder-not-wrong.html

Very good, my friend.

@Zetherin,

Quote:

That can't be right. A Christian at minimum also has to accept the divinity of Jesus. Is it possible to be a Christian and reject Jesus' divinity? And his divinity must be accepted over other God concepts. For instance Muslims regard Jesus as having been a prophet, but that doesn't make them Christians.

Early Christians especially held a wide variety of views on the nature of Jesus.

Christology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A Muslim, I imagine, would be someone with a particular degree of reverence for the prophet Muhammad.

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas wrote:

Early Christians especially held a wide variety of views on the nature of Jesus.

Yes, I know. But they were not Christians if they didn't have some prioritized regard for the divinity of Jesus himself, of his story (at least allegorically) or at least the divinity of his teaching. I doubt even a an early Christian would describe himself as such if he didn't believe that the story and teaching of Jesus were more important than any other religious story.

Quote:

A Muslim, I imagine, would be someone with a particular degree of reverence for the prophet Muhammad.

Mohammed was a prophet, but God (Allah) is God, as conceived in Muslim theology. Muslims regard both Jesus and Mohammed as prophets (whereas in Christianity Jesus is not a prophet, he's an element of God). Thus, they find "value" in their teachings. But in the case of Islam the teachings of Mohammed are held superior to those of other prophets in the Abrahamic tradition.

@Aedes,

Quote:

Yes, I know. But they were not Christians if they didn't have some prioritized regard for the divinity of Jesus himself, of his story (at least allegorically) or at least the divinity of his teaching. I doubt even a an early Christian would describe himself as such if he didn't believe that the story and teaching of Jesus were more important than any other religious story.

To call ones self a Christian would be an expression of that priority in religious teaching, I would imagine.

As for importance, important to who? For example, if the teachings of Jesus are most important to me, would I have to demand that everyone else recognize supreme importance of those teachings in order to rightly call myself a Christian? I can't imagine that demanding such a thing from others is a necessary condition for being a Christian.

@Didymos Thomas,

:)The one qualifying statement I have heard across the board from Christians is, if you do not believe that Jesus is the son of god, you are NOT a Christian. You have to get passed the large absurdites before sitting down to dine at a banquet of absurdites. Be embarrassed for them, for they know not what they do---------from the book of Boagnarian wisdom!!:p volume #47

@boagie,

Quote:

:)The one qualifying statement I have heard across the board from Christians is, if you do not believe that Jesus is the son of god, you are NOT a Christian. You have to get passed the large absurdites before sitting down to dine at a banquet of absurdites. Be embarrassed for them, for they know not what they do---------from the book of Boagnarian wisdom!!:p volume #47

Going for a third, Boagie?

Many Christians claim many things. Some churches have very particular beliefs regarding the nature of Jesus, but not all churches share the same beliefs - much less all Christians.

Of course Jesus is the son of God, the real question is what does son of God mean. Some believe Jesus is the 'only begotten Son of God', others say that we are all the children of God.

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas wrote:

Going for a third, Boagie?

Many Christians claim many things. Some churches have very particular beliefs regarding the nature of Jesus, but not all churches share the same beliefs - much less all Christians.
Of course Jesus is the son of God, the real question is what does son of God mean. Some believe Jesus is the 'only begotten Son of God', others say that we are all the children of God.

Thomas:)

Mentally ill organized even on an individual level, is this your argument for not holding Christianity accountable for what is done in the name of Christianity, we are all so confused we can't be held responsiable? As has been said in the past, when Christians start taking care of business reguarding their faith, other people can direct their attention elsewhere.

@boagie,

Quote:

Mentally ill organized even on an individual level, is this your argument for not holding Christianity accountable for what is done in the name of Christianity, we are all so confused we can't be held responsiable?

No.

I do not hold people responsible for things they do not do. No Christian alive today is in any way responsible for the Crusades, so I do not hold any Christian alive today responsible for the Crusades.

Talk of mental illness is certainly out of place. People having different views is not mental illness.

@boagie,

boagie wrote:

Thomas:)

Mentally ill organized even on an individual level, is this your argument for not holding Christianity accountable for what is done in the name of Christianity, we are all so confused we can't be held responsiable? As has been said in the past, when Christians start taking care of business reguarding their faith, other people can direct their attention elsewhere.

What do you think of people with something with, say, schizophrenia?

@Mephistopheles phil,

Mephistopheles wrote:

What do you think of people with something with, say, schizophrenia?

If mentally ill organized, means mental ill to you people, I'll not protest--for I fear you protest to much!:rolleyes:

:)Schizophrenia is indeed a mental affliction, interesting add on, they were and even are at present in some places, the holymen/women of the tribe. It is from these select few that the myth becomes manifest in the world.:eek:

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas wrote:

No.

I do not hold people responsible for things they do not do. No Christian alive today is in any way responsible for the Crusades, so I do not hold any Christian alive today responsible for the Crusades.

Talk of mental illness is certainly out of place. People having different views is not mental illness.

Thomas,

I am going to stop responding to your posts unless you take time to understand what you read.

@boagie,

boagie wrote:

If mentally ill organized, means mental ill to you people, I'll not protest--for I fear you protest to much!:rolleyes:

:)Schizophrenia is indeed a mental affliction, interesting add on, they were and even are at present in some places, the holymen/women of the tribe. It is from these select few that the myth becomes manifest in the world.:eek:

I'm just curious. I have schizophrenia, I just wanted to know what you thought about it.

@Mephistopheles phil,

Mephistopheles wrote:

I'm just curious. I have schizophrenia, I just wanted to know what you thought about it.

Mephistopheles, Smile

Schizophrenia is not fully understood I believe, difficult to say what I think of it, it remains somewhat obsure to me. It does not seem to limit ones intellegence and in earlier cultures they were revered as holymen/women. It has often been said that the myths of peoples arise from the common folk, this is not true, they arise from these shaman/Schizophrenics, they just seem to be on a different wave length from the general population.

@boagie,

Quote:

I am going to stop responding to your posts unless you take time to understand what you read.

You asked me if your assumptions about my argument were correct and I told you that your assumptions were not correct.

We can toss around 'you just don't get it' all day long and not get anywhere, boagie. I have tried again and again to engage these subjects with you, but if you'd prefer to leave them alone, that's fine with me.

But if you expect me to ignore your attempts to stereotype and ridicule any faith tradition, you will be disappointed.

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas wrote:

You asked me if your assumptions about my argument were correct and I told you that your assumptions were not correct.
We can toss around 'you just don't get it' all day long and not get anywhere, boagie. I have tried again and again to engage these subjects with you, but if you'd prefer to leave them alone, that's fine with me.

But if you expect me to ignore your attempts to stereotype and ridicule any faith tradition, you will be disappointed.

Thomas,

I do not have to sterotype Christianity, it sterotypes itself in what it does in its own name.

Thomas, does ill organized still to you mean mental illness, again, take the time to understand what you read----you sound like you are declaring war Thomas-------let the games begin!!:p

Philosophy Forum

How do Christians possibly rationalize these things?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know