I agree cookies. I just want to clarify doing those things you mention at the bottom are not things done to become christian. They are things christians do. If you understand the minor wording, but big differences.

I didn't mean for the things I listed at the bottom were things you have to do to become a Christian. I meant, (as I said, but would be easily missed,) that they are things that are must-haves in the Christian way of life. If you are truly a Christian, then you will naturally be compelled to do those things, and therefore will almost always do them.

I agree. I wanted to make sure for those who are non christians were aware of the difference. Most christians are aware.

I thought I'd bump this thread, as it seems sometimes unclear, or maybe a question that just pops up, but no quick answer. I figured since some people have said I make it look as if only a certain number of christians exist. The best way to respond to that for me is to say, I think there is only one who has followed the bible perfectly. Not even 5, just 1. And that's Jesus. Where I go with that, is Jesus Christ, is my savior, and my God. That's why I'm a christian. For some, it may appear I'm perfect, and making claims of it. For those in the know, (and particularly the ones who live with me, my family) know I'm not perfect. I raise my voice in anger at times, I'm impatient at times, I don't always read the bible every day, etc(yes, the list can go on)

But where it comes a factor is, I'm not a "real" christian when I stop raising my voice. I'm not a "real" christian when I have conquered being impatient. I am a christian as soon as I accept I'm a sinner, (not perfect), and accept Jesus died for me for my sins, and that I will folow Jesus. That's when I became a Christian. I didn't become one when a friend called me christian, or when I was baptized.  It makes sense I did not know or even understand the bible as I do now, as I did years ago.

But still, God has given us his word, and we are to follow that. I may or may not know more than someone who has been folowing for a year, or two, but we are accountable to God. Even when both of us Christians have a different knowledge of God's word, we are still expected to follow. We both can help each other learn more about that Word, and God.  Just as I would like to learn more of God's word, so does the other christian. It is not harmful in any manner what so ever to hear God's word, and explaining what God has said. If I tell a Christian that God says not to look with lust on another if that person is not your spouse, there is zero harm to the christian in hearing it. Teaching anyone something that God has said cannot be harmful. It can only be helpful.

I agree with everything but that last statement.

Jesus has a message, but the method his message is passed on is very important.  Thats why Jesus came as the son of a carpenter, not as a member of royalty.  I've seen plenty of people who have excellent advice, but the way they deliver it makes me not want to follow it JUST because of how it was delivered.  Jesus didn't reference the Torah nine times out of ten when preaching, and he showed incredible tact when dealing with people.

Are you sure Jesus didn't upset people by telling the truth of God's word?

Which people were the ones who got upset? The ones who followed Jesus, or the ones who didn't?
This message was last edited by the GM at 15:23, Tue 28 Dec 2004.

Yes, he upset some people, mostly the people in power.  But the vast majority of the time, he went out and talked with people drawing on what they already knew.  He talked about managing farms and fishing, not about 'the Torah says...'

He talked to people on their level, and he approached them as an equal, the son of a carpenter.

That's not entirely true. He did use the Word to correct. Specifically when questioned what was truth, he did use scripture. He used scripture as defense against satan himself.

Thought of another way to look at that. It sort of comes across that Jesus is the ultimate teacher, which he is. But does that mean unless the message comes across as the same as Jesus would have taught, should anyone who does not sound like Jesus be quiet?

Let me rephrase that. Do only the most learned of Christians have the ability to teach? Can only someone who emulates Jesus have the right to teach?

When Jesus was tempted by the Devil in the wilderness three times all three times he answered by quoting the OT scripture.

100%

Jesus used the OT quite often.

I agree with Paulos on this one.  I have read the Bible front to back and I read it very often.  I am not Christian, I do not consider myself Christian.  I accept the teachings of Jesus because I see his teachings as neccessary.  Why?  They teach people to be better people and how to go about doing that.

I know that Jesus refered to the OT on several accounts, especially when he spoke to those in power.  It was to show he knows what he is talking about.  He himself was a rabbi (if I remember correctly) and was expected to know the OT.  To back up his teachings he would have to have some form of reference, correct?  To make himself more believeable and his argument stronger, he had to refer to the OT to support him.  Simple logic.

God spoke through him and many people did not want to accept this.  Jesus threatened their way of life.  However, by referencing the OT as he did he made his argument believeable and stronger.

And now I have realized I am repeating myself and going off topic.
This message was last edited by the player at 17:12, Tue 28 Dec 2004.

But he used the OT when talking with people who knew the OT.  The Pharisees, the devil, etc.  Thats because he's talking on their level.

When he gave the sermon on the mountain, it wasn't about the Old Testament.  When he broke the fishes and the loaves, he didn't talk about the OT.  His audience wasn't biblical scholars, and so he didn't reference what they weren't studying.

I didn't say he NEVER used the OT, I'm saying he used it with people who already knew it, and didn't when the people hadn't studied it or didn't care.  He was on the same level as his audience.  I'm not saying that people who aren't great orators shouldn't ever try to talk about their religion (although, truth be told, I believe God has made us each with certain skills and incompetencies.  I consider myself well educated and well spoken, but I'm a mighty poor carpenter.  I'm more likely to talk about what I believe in and argue it with others than try to build houses for the poor.  I've tried my hand at both, and one I feel I do a lot better at than the other.)

That's verbatim and misleading.

I almost feel there is something missing from that. I need to think on that and see what rings a bell. As it is, Jesus taught as Jesus could, which means a lot. No one else is Jesus however, and no one will be able to replace Jesus. There are other styles of teaching people which are still correct.

Let's looking at eating the meat used for sacrifices. Some people thought it was ok, and others thought it was not ok.  Yet neither were wrong. Following God allows for christians to disagree but both still follow God.

Because it's out of context:

But the vast majority of the time , he went out and talked with people drawing on what they already knew.  He talked about managing farms and fishing, not about 'the Torah says...'

From what I read, I believe he spent far, far more time talking with the 'common folk' then the pharisees and the devil, and most of the examples of his talking with farmers and fishermen, the biblical references are kept to a minimum.

I think what might direct the topic into focus, is, is it wrong to use the word of God for non christians?

I did intend for the question I asked earlier mostly for Katisara since it was in reply to me.



To me, majority of the time, does not mean a certain way is now wrong.

To answer your question, it's not wrong for someone to teach even if they're poor at it, however it may not be the best use of their time (and may end up being even counterproductive!)  I'm not a carpenter, it's silly for me to go out and build houses for poor people, because they're going to be bad houses (and if one collapses in on the inhabitants, my good intentions haven't done a lot for them.)  If I'm not an orator, I need to choose the method of sharing Jesus' word that works best for me.  In most cases, I think that's simply living it.  Examples speak very loudly.

As for your first question... "is, is it wrong to use the word of God for non christians?"

It's certainly not morally wrong, the question is, is it prudent.  And I think the best way to ask this, is to open it up to the non-Christians in the group.

Do you people feel Christians sharing their beliefs are most effective then they are:
a)  demonstrating almost exclusively through example without explaining the why's and how's
b)  giving ethical, logical justifications for their actions that can stand up on their own without saying 'the bible says so'
c)  quoting the bible to you

The answer is obvious. All three are right some of the time depending on person and circumstances.

Yes, that means it changes from timing and person. what works right now on Billy, may not work on Jane, but next week, month,year is right for Jane then.

Examples work, but not always for everyone and at every moment. God has used his enemies to make someone a christian. I'm not saying we have to be bad to help. I'm saying we can all help. Whether we're new, talented, experienced, or ready.

It's not wrong, so how can it be prudent?

It's not wrong for me to tie my shoe laces together, or put them on the wrong feet.  But it's imprudent to do so.  It's inefficient.  It's imprudent for me to use a screw driver where I need a hammer.

It's also imprudent to speak when I need to act.

Your analogies are a comparison to prudence, not to God's word.

Personally, I find actions speak louder than words.  It's insulting sometimes when someone preaches me or quotes from the Bible, telling me that my way is wrong and that there is only one true way.  It makes me not listen because they're in my face.  When they practice what they preach it enlightens me.  I attend church on some days just because of this.  I feel that goodness and it never goes away.  Getting a lecture never helped me and explanation as to why they do what they do never does either.

There is a secondary purpose in these question Chaos. I think there is a reference to myself, or perhaps others who use scripture on this forum.  In reference to that, I do want to point out people were asking questions about the bible.

Sorry, I guess I misread it.

No, no. It's ok. Your opinion still counts. The point is still valid. I was just being sure that the reason it was brought up in the first place was pointed out as well.