What is Christianity, Who is Jesus?

[RubySera_Martin]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Actually, if you look at the collective of my posts the past three years, you might find, I'd be the "sheriff" who tried to stop the burning of a wise and inquisitive man. My only "beef" with "him" personally, would be his penchant for "humanism", but I'm certain I would have gotten over it (I seem to do so now...).

v/r

Q

What's your problem with humanism? I think Jesus was a humanist if ever there was one. I'm talking about what is sometimes referred to as secular humanism where it is believed (proven by psychology I would say) that nurturing the soul or self makes a stronger person to stand the wear and tear of life. What Jesus teaches seems to be the end results of humanism. Maybe this requires a separate thread???

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by RubySera_Martin

What's your problem with humanism? I think Jesus was a humanist if ever there was one. I'm talking about what is sometimes referred to as secular humanism where it is believed (proven by psychology I would say) that nurturing the soul or self makes a stronger person to stand the wear and tear of life. What Jesus teaches seems to be the end results of humanism. Maybe this requires a separate thread???

No, He wasn't Ruby. There was nothing "self" about Jesus. Nothing about self, makes self stronger (not in the classical Christian thought). Strength is drawn from the relationship with God, with Jesus in Christian terms. Yes a human has strength, but nothing compared to what is available and waiting for man. However, this has nothing really to do with the Trinity of Christianity, does it?

v/r

Q

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by RubySera_Martin

...What Jesus teaches seems to be the end results of humanism. Maybe this requires a separate thread???

I suppose one could be started, in the Liberal Christianity Forum, or in the Belief and Spirituality main Forum, or even Comparitive Studies Forum as this does sound like an interesting study on the teachings of Christ...

v/r

Q

[kenod]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Actually, if you look at the collective of my posts the past three years, you might find, I'd be the "sheriff" who tried to stop the burning of a wise and inquisitive man. My only "beef" with "him" personally, would be his penchant for "humanism", but I'm certain I would have gotten over it (I seem to do so now...).
v/r
Q

Humanism, as I understand it (which is probably very little) has more to do with the source of our beliefs, than the beliefs themselves ... at least as far as "our neighbour" is concerned: rationality v. revelation.

My impression, on reading the bio on Servetus, was that he relied very much on Scripture as divinely revealed truth, and even used some of the church fathers, especially Irenaeus, to support his teaching on the Trinity. Perhaps you meant something else ...

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by kenod

Humanism, as I understand it (which is probably very little) has more to do with the source of our beliefs, than the beliefs themselves ... at least as far as "our neighbour" is concerned: rationality v. revelation.

My impression, on reading the bio on Servetus, was that he relied very much on Scripture as divinely revealed truth, and even used some of the church fathers, especially Irenaeus, to support his teaching on the Trinity. Perhaps you meant something else ...

What you've pointed out my friend is the contradiction of terms.

The true Humanist has only one God...himself. There is no room for the supernatural, there is no tolerance for a "being" that determines what will be for an individual, save for the individual themself. To a Humanist, "God" is dead, long live the new god...

Morality, indeed salvation of the soul, is up to the individual soul.

"Humanism entails a commitment to the search for truth and morality through human means in support of human interests. In focusing on the capacity for self-determination, humanism rejects transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on faith, the supernatural, or divinely revealed texts. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality of human nature, suggesting that solutions to our social and cultural problems cannot be parochial."

In short, there is no room for God, because man considers himself to be God. In one way man who believes in this form of religion, is worse than Lucifer. At least Lucifer knew there was God, and he aspired to be equal to that God. Humanism states that man is God, and nothing is above or equal to himself.

v/r

Q

[RubySera_Martin]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

The true Humanist has only one God...himself. There is no room for the supernatural, there is no tolerance for a "being" that determines what will be for an individual, save for the individual themself. To a Humanist, "God" is dead, long live the new god...

Here you can see other ideas on the topic, plus references to more information.

I believe humanism and Christianity fit together perfectly, but I know that many conservative Christians say I'm flat-out wrong. In my mind, there is very little difference between the ethos of humanism and of humane. It just means being decent and respectful of all life, including humanity. I believe God can help one do this, as also can Jesus.

[RubySera_Martin]

This post is in response to questions Cyberpi raised about the Trinity on the thread "is the Bible corrupted." I apologize for not having read the entire thread. Just didn't think I should start a new thread on this topic because it looks like it addresses the same questions.

Cyberpi, regarding your questions around Jesus and God being one and the same. Let's look at some variations:

a) Jesus is God.
b) Jesus and God are one.
c) Jesus is the same as God.

In my mind, B is the only correct statement. I don't think I came across A before I was on the internet and interacted with Christians from other parts of the world. (FYI, I am in Ontario. That little triangle of land between the Great Lakes.) The first statement seems to me like idolatry because it makes the Son into the Supreme God.

I was raised with the idea that each of the Three Persons of the Godhead have their own specific roles in the life of the church and in relationship to the individual Christian, and that they are ranked from highest authority to lesser authority in this order: Father, Son, Holy Ghost.

d) Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one.
e) Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are the same.
f) Father, Son, and Holy Ghost make up/constitute the godhead.

In this set of statements, I consider E to be the only incorrect statement. As stated, each has a specific role but they operate in unison for the same goals i.e. the salvation of humanity in this life and beyond. I may be the only person on the face of the earth and in all of history to hold to these specific ideas but I think my mother taught me to think of it like this.


Cyberpi, if after reading this thread you still don't understand, maybe we can try it again.

[kenod]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

"Humanism entails a commitment to the search for truth and morality through human means in support of human interests. In focusing on the capacity for self-determination, humanism rejects transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on faith, the supernatural, or divinely revealed texts. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality of human nature, suggesting that solutions to our social and cultural problems cannot be parochial."

Uh oh, now I can see why I don't do too well over in the CS forum

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by RubySera_Martin

I don't know my history well enough to answer your question. I am sure if you read up on Christian Church History you can find the answer. What you post is quite normal for non-Trinitarians to think. It's basically making fun of beliefs one does not understand or accept.

If the author was someone other than God (swt) or Christ (pbuh), then I do NOT consider it Christianity. For me, Christianity means the teaching from Jesus Christ (pbuh). What does it mean to you? Church history reveals the mistakes of men and I read that it's teaching has often been 180 degrees away from Christ (pbuh). I may not be a good Christian by the majority, nor a good Muslim, but I will pray in a mosque on Friday and attend church on Sunday. Do you know many who will? What church do you attend? I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit... albeit with a sprinkle and not the dunk. My children were baptized. Yet, I can easily reject the Trinity as commonly expressed. So if you know what I understand and accept, is that by my post alone?

You know what I find truly sad? There is no open confession of sin at the baptisms in the churches that I have seen, as described in Matthew 3:6 and Mark 1:5. It scares away the masses. Why? Do you know a church that combines confession of sins and baptism? I see that confession and repentance is the most important part. Don't you? At least the RC has confession somewhere, albeit wrongly hidden away in a dark and secretive closet. Can you show me where in the bible it teaches to confess a sin in a closet?

If I may combine with your other comment that I did not reply to:
The Return of an unfamiliar Jesus?

Originally Posted by RubySera_Martin

Cyberpi, it sounds like you are unfamiliar with the Christian mindset. Saltmeister says "in my view," so I think these are Saltmeister's own views on the matter. I think a Christian posting personal views on a public forum does not constitute "teaching." If this Christian posts the same view on many different forums over a long period of time it would be understood as a "teaching." NOTE: I am referring to them as "a veiw" or "ideas," rather than "beliefs" because I suspect that is what they are.

But a first and only post of a particular idea is not considered a "teaching." Of course, I have not been following Saltmeister so I don't know if these views have been repeatedly posted around the internet, but the way they are stated makes me believe this is the first time Saltmeister posted these ideas.

There is one other way in which I don't think these views can be taken as a "teaching." The purpose of the thread, so far as I understand it, is to brainstorm on what the second coming might be like, whether or not it has already happened, etc. My understanding of brain-storming sessions is that anyone is allowed--encouraged--to put forth any idea that occurs without having to prove or support the idea.

Perhaps this is alien to a Muslim's way of thinking but from my observation it is normal, acceptable, and quite in line with regular Christian mental operations.

As far as I know, everyone can learn by reading, brain-storming, imagination, and making mistakes. But Christianity is by definition NOT defined by brain-storms or imagination. Christianity is defined by God (swt) and Jesus Christ (pbuh). Agreed?

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

Christianity is defined by God (swt) and Jesus Christ (pbuh). Agreed?

Actually I think that Christianity is defined by human experience of God, remembrance and worship of God, participation in God, and reasoning about God.

2 c,
lunamoth

[RubySera_Martin]

Cyberpi, I don't think I can provide answers that satisfy you. I am not a committed Christian but I was raised in the church and know a lot about Christianity. I don't think you get to define Christianity for the entire world; whether or not to identify as a Christian is a personal choice. Whether or not to acknowledge others as Christians who identify as Christians is also a personal choice. But be aware that you might be unfriendly responses if you call people by a different label that they don't like.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by RubySera_Martin

Here you can see other ideas on the topic, plus references to more information.

I believe humanism and Christianity fit together perfectly, but I know that many conservative Christians say I'm flat-out wrong. In my mind, there is very little difference between the ethos of humanism and of humane. It just means being decent and respectful of all life, including humanity. I believe God can help one do this, as also can Jesus.

I understand your belief on this issue, however it doesn't work in this particular thread, and has little to do with the origin of this thread which is The Trinity of Christianity. The there is no room for another "god" next to the existing Trinitarian concept of God.

That God helps them who help themselves, is without question (in my opinion). However the rest of the Humanistic philosophy contradicts the basics of Christianity. It takes Christ's divinity right out of the picture.

v/r

Q

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

Actually I think that Christianity is defined by human experience of God, remembrance and worship of God, participation in God, and reasoning about God.

2 c,
lunamoth

...which is not the same as an humanistic view of God.

v/r

Q

[JustifiedByFaith]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

...there is no room for another "god" next to the existing Trinitarian concept of God.

Amen Quahom1...

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

If the author was someone other than God (swt) or Christ (pbuh), then I do NOT consider it Christianity. For me, Christianity means the teaching from Jesus Christ (pbuh). What does it mean to you? Church history reveals the mistakes of men and I read that it's teaching has often been 180 degrees away from Christ (pbuh). I may not be a good Christian by the majority, nor a good Muslim, but I will pray in a mosque on Friday and attend church on Sunday. Do you know many who will? What church do you attend? I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit... albeit with a sprinkle and not the dunk. My children were baptized. Yet, I can easily reject the Trinity as commonly expressed. So if you know what I understand and accept, is that by my post alone?

You know what I find truly sad? There is no open confession of sin at the baptisms in the churches that I have seen, as described in Matthew 3:6 and Mark 1:5. It scares away the masses. Why? Do you know a church that combines confession of sins and baptism? I see that confession and repentance is the most important part. Don't you? At least the RC has confession somewhere, albeit wrongly hidden away in a dark and secretive closet. Can you show me where in the bible it teaches to confess a sin in a closet?

If the sin is against a man, then the one who sinned must go and make right (if possible) with that man. That is explicit in the Bible "leave your offering at the alter and go find and make peace with the one wronged" (para).

If the sin is against God, or a man that can not be made peace with, then bring it to God, (while the priest is witness).

The problem with publically expressing one's sins (for repentence and forgivenss), is not with the sinner, but with the rest of the witnesses (the congregation), as often that became fodder for gossip.

However, every day we are to pray to God, actually unceasingly (and confess sin if required), and that includes praying in secret...that too is biblical.

v/r

Q