What is a good Christian?

[Godular]

When you spoke of the Popes.

Ah, so I did. 'Tis late.

You'll pardon me that I do not recall being sufficiently 'corrected' on the matter. But discussion of such would be better suited to the megathread.

[Neutraligon]

And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. Truly I tell you, they already have their full reward. But when you pray, go into your inner room, shut your door, and pray to your Father, who is unseen. And your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you

Yeah, being on a forum and commenting on how you worship God ain’t the same thing as that lmao.

I would think stating she is Catholic would be sufficient for that.

[The Alma Mater]

What is needed to be considered part of the set of Christians. For instance a prime number is the set of whole numbers greater than 1 that are only divisible by itself and one.

The Nicene Creed is a good start for the basics. That is what it was made for.

However, there's a bit more to it for being a Catholic in good standing. Especially since there is a standing Latae Sentientiae Excommunication order for people who procure or advocate for abortion. Which is to say, a Catholic who advocates for abortion is automatically excommunicated. Which is a bad place to be.

While a tangent better suited for the abortion thread perhaps - why does this order exist ? What is the scriptural justification; or is a more a matter of "we are Catholics, we say so" ?

[Joohan]

Again, every statement for you is a no true scotsman statement.

For those Christians whom are part of a church that does have an objective measurement though, we do have a basis for defining Christian like behavior.

The funny thing is your definition is fluid and changes. I daresay that christian from 2000 years ago would not consider any of the people here christians.

Probably, but that's because the Church has had 2000 years of history to figure out what it means to be Christian. The gospels didn't change, but our interpretation has through the centuries, as the church faced new challenges and questions which couldn't have been accounted for during the days of the early church. Nothing in the bible speaks of modern abortion, nor could the people's of the 30 A.D. probably conceived the notion - thus, a changing church looks back upon the teachings of the gospel and the holy traditions in order to find an answer most in line with God's plan.

So no, we're not the same church we were 2000 years ago, we've been better defined by adversity through the centuries.

[South Odreria 2]

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/04/opinion/sunday/what-religion-would-jesus-belong-to.html

This articulates my argument best.

This article comes dangerously close to denying the divinity of Christ.

[Neutraligon]

The Nicene Creed is a good start for the basics. That is what it was made for.

However, there's a bit more to it for being a Catholic in good standing. Especially since there is a standing Latae Sentientiae Excommunication order for people who procure or advocate for abortion. Which is to say, a Catholic who advocates for abortion is automatically excommunicated. Which is a bad place to be.

While a tangent better suited for the abortion thread perhaps - why does this order exist ? What is the scriptural justification; or is a more a matter of "we are Catholics, we say so" ?

There are also plenty of people who have some disagreement with some part of the Catholic Church. I mean a great many Catholics support the use of contraceptives.

[Godular]

The Nicene Creed is a good start for the basics. That is what it was made for.

However, there's a bit more to it for being a Catholic in good standing. Especially since there is a standing Latae Sentientiae Excommunication order for people who procure or advocate for abortion. Which is to say, a Catholic who advocates for abortion is automatically excommunicated. Which is a bad place to be.

While a tangent better suited for the abortion thread perhaps - why does this order exist ? What is the scriptural justification; or is a more a matter of "we are Catholics, we say so" ?

*bibbidy boop*

[FelrikTheDeleted]

When you spoke of the Popes.

Ah, so I did. 'Tis late.

You'll pardon me that I do not recall being sufficiently 'corrected' on the matter. But discussion of such would be better suited to the megathread.

It was a long time ago, so I wouldn’t expect you to remember it

[FelrikTheDeleted]

Yeah, being on a forum and commenting on how you worship God ain’t the same thing as that lmao.

I would think stating she is Catholic would be sufficient for that.

Hmmmmm, fair point I suppose.

[Joohan]

Different strokes for different folks. No one should be prevented from their evangelism though.

I dunno. That guy that went to an island filled with primitive natives and got filled with sharp pointy things while at the same time posing a health risk to said natives perhaps should have been stopped at a slightly earlier stage of his evangelism.

Most evangelism usually consists of soup kitchens and going to new neighborhoods. That dude was probably an exception to the rule - just for the health risk he posed to the natives.

[Jedi Council]

The funny thing is your definition is fluid and changes. I daresay that christian from 2000 years ago would not consider any of the people here christians.

Probably, but that's because the Church has had 2000 years of history to figure out what it means to be Christian. The gospels didn't change, but our interpretation has through the centuries, as the church faced new challenges and questions which couldn't have been accounted for during the days of the early church. Nothing in the bible speaks of modern abortion, nor could the people's of the 30 A.D. probably conceived the notion - thus, a changing church looks back upon the teachings of the gospel and the holy traditions in order to find an answer most in line with God's plan.

So no, we're not the same church we were 2000 years ago, we've been better defined by adversity through the centuries.

But who is to say early Christians for would agree with this further definition?

[Salus Maior]

The Nicene Creed is a good start for the basics. That is what it was made for.

However, there's a bit more to it for being a Catholic in good standing. Especially since there is a standing Latae Sentientiae Excommunication order for people who procure or advocate for abortion. Which is to say, a Catholic who advocates for abortion is automatically excommunicated. Which is a bad place to be.

While a tangent better suited for the abortion thread perhaps - why does this order exist ? What is the scriptural justification; or is a more a matter of "we are Catholics, we say so" ?

Because abortion is a severe violation of Catholic principles, simply put. And, practically speaking, it likely exists for that in particular (as opposed to other forms of murder) because it's such a high profile issue in our modern world.

[Katganistan]

My question still hasn't been answered, so I'll ask again. Wouldn't this question be better asked in the CDT? I feel like it would at least be more "civil" there.

Why? The people who are being least civil are some holding themselves up as the examples of good Christians.

[Salus Maior]

While a tangent better suited for the abortion thread perhaps - why does this order exist ? What is the scriptural justification; or is a more a matter of "we are Catholics, we say so" ?

There are also plenty of people who have some disagreement with some part of the Catholic Church. I mean a great many Catholics support the use of contraceptives.

They can disagree all they want, sure. They're not going to be in good standing, though.

I mean, you can ignore the fact that you're automatically excommunicated. That doesn't make you not in a state of excommunication.

[The Alma Mater]

Nothing in the bible speaks of modern abortion, nor could the people's of the 30 A.D. probably conceived the notion

As mentioned, the Bible contains verses on accidentally causing a miscarriage (optional fine if the husband deems it necessasry) as well as descriptions of brews that can be given to a woman to let the fruit depart (perfectly ok). And numerous accounts of how it is fine to slaughter possibly pregnant women for many different reasons.

People back then knew perfectly well what pregnancies were and how to terminate them.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

My question still hasn't been answered, so I'll ask again. Wouldn't this question be better asked in the CDT? I feel like it would at least be more "civil" there.

Why? The people who are being least civil are some holding themselves up as the examples of good Christians.

We aren’t, but I doubt you’d fucking care lmao

[Jedi Council]

There are also plenty of people who have some disagreement with some part of the Catholic Church. I mean a great many Catholics support the use of contraceptives.

They can disagree all they want, sure. They're not going to be in good standing, though.

I mean, you can ignore the fact that you're automatically excommunicated. That doesn't make you not-excommunicated.

Would a kind, merciful, and benevolent God really be as judgmental and selective as your seemingly strict expectations are?

It seems to be that a being who is as intelligent, is as loving, is as great as the supposed creator of the universe might be a little more flexible, particularly having created humans with free will.

[The Alma Mater]

My question still hasn't been answered, so I'll ask again. Wouldn't this question be better asked in the CDT? I feel like it would at least be more "civil" there.

The CDT is an echo chamber. So if with civil you mean "everyone would agree with me" - yes, it would be more civil.

[Jedi Council]

Why? The people who are being least civil are some holding themselves up as the examples of good Christians.

We aren’t, but I doubt you’d fucking care lmao

Kat has been very, very civil considering the barrage of criticism she has come under in the last few pages.

[Salus Maior]

Nothing in the bible speaks of modern abortion, nor could the people's of the 30 A.D. probably conceived the notion

As mentioned, the Bible contains verses on accidentally causing a miscarriage (optional fine if the husband deems it necessasry) as well as descriptions of brews that can be given to a woman to let the fruit depart (perfectly ok). And numerous accounts of how it is fine to slaughter possibly pregnant women for many different reasons.

People back then knew perfectly well what pregnancies were and how to terminate them.

That's not an accurate description of what's in the Bible.

I've already written why I think the "bitter drink" thing is a weak justification for abortion, but so is the fine for that matter. It's not seen in a positive light what happens, and it's an act of violence against a pregnant woman. Wartime violence is also a laughably weak justification, and it borders on admitting that abortion is murder or a war crime.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

We aren’t, but I doubt you’d fucking care lmao

Kat has been very, very civil considering the barrage of criticism she has come under in the last few pages.

Nibba, can you not read lmao. Fucking hell this place tries my patience, well has tried considering I’ve been pushed to being uncivil.

[Jedi Council]

Kat has been very, very civil considering the barrage of criticism she has come under in the last few pages.

Nibba, can you not read lmao. Fucking hell this place tries my patience.

Perhaps if it is too taxing for you you should lie down.

[Aeritai]

My question still hasn't been answered, so I'll ask again. Wouldn't this question be better asked in the CDT? I feel like it would at least be more "civil" there.

Why? The people who are being least civil are some holding themselves up as the examples of good Christians.

I was just curious I thought threads that talked about Christianity merge with the CDT?

[Nakena]

My question still hasn't been answered, so I'll ask again. Wouldn't this question be better asked in the CDT? I feel like it would at least be more "civil" there.

tbh this thread should be merged into the CDT for good measure.

[Godular]

Ah, so I did. 'Tis late.

You'll pardon me that I do not recall being sufficiently 'corrected' on the matter. But discussion of such would be better suited to the megathread.

It was a long time ago, so I wouldn’t expect you to remember it

I can generally recall all the arguments that have been thrown at me in the various iterations of the thread. I remember somebody called me a lunatic once in the most recently locked iteration, I think that was Hakons...

But not that. Did they invite me over to the CDT in order to 'eviscerate' my position? Generally if I bring up any kind of thing for Christianity it is specifically for the purpose of pointing out historical inconsistencies when folks say 'IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THIS WAY' when in all actually it was not.

In a similar vein, perceptions of what makes a 'Good Christian' change over time, though some people are more resistant to change than others.