That explains your defensiveness… Struck a nerve.
Maybe a little more comprehension behind your reading is required then if you don’t know the stark theological differences between Mormonism and Catholicism and Christianity.
Check this out. Jesus never once uttered the word Christian.
Which nerve is that? Tell me, what’s the basis of my religious belief, if any?
No duh… He referred to his followers… “Christian” is a descriptive word for that.
His followers can’t believe teachings that are in direct conflict with his teachings while still maintaining themselves as his followers.
Deuteronomy 12:32 does say not to take from or add to gods words.
So who are you to discern what a Christian is or isn’t? Jesus wasn’t about any organized religion.
His teachings are recorded… So anyone who follows his teaching is Christian… Anyone who holds beliefs that are in direct conflict with his teachings are not Christians… There really isn’t any discernment on my part… If a group of people hold beliefs that don’t align to the gospel… They are not Christian.
Who is to say what is the start and end of God’s words? God didn’t create the Bible. The Nicean council did. They decided what writings are to be in the Bible and what writings were too contradictory to be omitted.
Also, there were 61 books of the existing Bible written after Deuteronomy. Am I to discard the rest of the Bible and live like a Jew slaughtering bulls to account for my sin?
And on what basis have you made that the deciding factor as to your definition?
Are you retarded?
Would you like to offer an alternative version of what a follower of a very specific set of teachings is?
His teachings were not recorded.
The works we have are of hearsay written three decades after his death.
His teaching were directly recorded by his disciples… First hand accounts.
Failure to even acknowledge this exposes your ignorance of this whole topic of conversation.
People really need more empathy. I’m not even a Christian. And I understand what banker is saying. You don’t have to agree. Understanding is enough.
Pretty sure he never uttered seventh day adventist either.
Watching Obama lip-sync the Oath of Office, and
then watching Bounce-y lip-sync the National Anthem,
I could only think, “Four more years of this? God help us!”
Then, on second thought, I had to admit that, if I were God, I would probably say,
[B]"Are you kidding me?
You people couldn’t even get off the couch, get to the polls, and vote this guy out of office.
And now you want me to do what? — Strike him dead with a lightning bolt? — I don’t think so!
You people have made your bed. Now lie in it."[/B]
Not a single section of the New Testament was written by anyone that knew Jesus first hand. At best Luke knew people that knew him, and Paul saw him far after his death.
If you really want to have this discussion,
Ok I’m going to steer us back to the original topic here…
Christ’s teaching are recorded in the gospel… People who follow the teachings as recorded in the gospel are “Christians” (followers of Christ)… People who also call themselves “Christians” but who also hold beliefs that are fundamentally in conflict with those recorded teachings are not followers of the original teachings, and therefore are not “Christians”, no matter how badly that makes them feel.
No I’m not going to waste time listing the fundamental differences between Christ’s teaching and the fundamental beliefs of Mormons and the fundamental beliefs and traditions of Catholics… It is, however, impossible to reconcile them and consider them the same.
There is nothing to argue here… No judgement calls… It is what it is.
I’ll have to call you on the carpet for that one…let’s see…hmmm, how about
- Simon (Peter)
- Matthew (Levi the tax collector)
- John (wrote John, 1st, 2nD,3rd John, AND Revelation)
- Jude
- James (brother of John)
- Paul (see below)
You are referring to Mark and Luke. Paul (Saul) is defendable, because Jesus appeared to him, causing him to turn 180* from persecuting to preaching.
Of course he didn’t. Why point out that one?
It is largely held in theological circles that those were essentially ghost writers of the apostles. The writings date between 30-60 years after Christ died.
The logic behind it was that early Christians believed that Jesus was returning soon. They even left open shelves in the tombs that they lay the dead so they could rise easily after their own resurrection.
When it was determined that Jesus wasn’t coming around anytime soon, books were written to preserve the story.
A lot of the early section of the New Testament is even attributed to be in forgeries. Not separate accounts of the same story, but the same story rewritten.
No one really knows, but my money goes with the guys that dedicate their lives to the study.
By no means does that mean Jesus was not who he said he was, it just wasn’t recorded at the time he was around saying it. At least writings that we haven’t found yet, that is.