Is it wrong to demand evidence?

[TillICollapse]

No I'm not suggesting Jesus used the word Christian, but that he invited people to follow Him, and this is the definition of the word Christian used in Acts.

Jesus was referred to as Christ by all NT bible writers as far as I know and the definition is Messiah. The Jews at that time mostly spoke spoke koine Greek and Mashiach is simply the Jewish term ( Hebrew into English I think ), that also means Messiah or Annointed One. So yes He was refered to as Christ from the time He revealed Himself to John the Baptist, onwards imo. Would it matter if Jews use Masciach, anyway ?

I don't know if it would matter or not, names seem to be important in the scriptures however.

Ok, I won't comment on my impression of your behaviour, then.

Okay I guess *shrugs*

 

[TillICollapse]

Jesus also says that not every claimed Christian will be saved.

Where do you see Jesus says that ?

 

[RDKirk]

Where do you see Jesus says that ?

That's probably a reference to Matthew 7:23.

 

[TillICollapse]

That's probably a reference to Matthew 7:23.

I was thinking those verses, but I don't see where Jesus is addressing "claimed Christians" specifically in them.

 

[Aldebaran]

I was thinking those verses, but I don't see where Jesus is addressing "claimed Christians" specifically in them.

Start with verse 21:

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

 

[RDKirk]

I was thinking those verses, but I don't see where Jesus is addressing "claimed Christians" specifically in them.

If they're operating in Christ's name, as they claimed to be, then they're claiming to be Christians.

That time and place was not much different from operating in a Muslim country today--if a person claims to be operating "in the name of Jesus," then he's claiming to be committed.

 

[spiritfilledjm]

In Christianity we call that apologetics right?

 

[agua]

If they're operating in Christ's name, as they claimed to be, then they're claiming to be Christians.

That time and place was not much different from operating in a Muslim country today--if a person claims to be operating "in the name of Jesus," then he's claiming to be committed.

This is a sobering thought considering we have ~ 2 Billion ( very rough figure ) people who claim to be Christian, today.

 

[TillICollapse]

Start with verse 21:

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

I still don't see Jesus saying directly, "Not every claimed Christian will be saved." I see what appears to be Jesus addressing those who:

1) Say to Him, "Lord, Lord," or call him "Lord" arguably.
2) It is those people who are saying they did such and such in His name.

If they're operating in Christ's name, as they claimed to be, then they're claiming to be Christians.

That time and place was not much different from operating in a Muslim country today--if a person claims to be operating "in the name of Jesus," then he's claiming to be committed.

You made a good point I think, however I don't see it as synonymous that a person claiming to operate in Jesus' name, etc ... is at the same time claiming to be a Christian. That's essentially saying that anyone who operates "in Jesus' name" is claiming to be a Christian ... what if they say they are not Christian but continue to do so regardless ? Also, at the time Christ said that, the term Christian wasn't in use, right ?

Many years ago in my teenage days, I took a date to a local psychic for fun. This psychic claimed to believe in Jesus and do things in Jesus' name, etc. She did the tarot cards, told me she got her gift from either God appearing to her or Jesus appearing to her (I can't remember exactly), but IIRC she also claimed to be a Wiccan or something to that effect. I know she probably covered the spectrum in order to market to as many clients as possible, however she was in business for many years (where her reading house was, was easily seen from a major highway in a trendy part of town so it was kind of a place you would see frequently). Now, whether or not she specifically also called herself a Christian, I don't know ... but my point is that claiming to operate in Jesus' name isn't necessarily one and the same as claiming to be a Christian. I just read a post in another thread where a man (who uses the icon, etc) claimed he is not part of the Christian religion: he is a follower of Jesus Christ, and God has been speaking to him and giving him an idea to start a new church, etc.

I realize that through the eyes of the way we use the term "Christian" today that it is basically saying the same thing, however that's because of the way we use the term today. In the Southern US, everything that comes in a soda can is a "Coke". "You want a Coke ?" "Yeah sure, what kind you want ?" "I'll take a Sprite." But Sprite is not Coke lol. It's vastly different from Coke. Similarly, I don't know about others, but I've always called tissues "Kleenex". "I need a Kleenex, can you hand me one ?" I don't call them tissue papers, or tissues, etc. But Kleenex is a brand that makes tissues. Just because it may have become synonymous with "tissue" to me, doesn't mean they are one and the same. Kleenex is one type, not the originator of tissues. LEGO would be another example. I've been corrected before on calling some off brand "LEGOs". They aren't LEGOs. I've been corrected on using the term "LEGOs" before even: interesting fact, did you know that LEGO encourages others to use the term "LEGO bricks" when talking about LEGO in plural ? IIRC it's actually company policy in official documents, etc, to not use the term "LEGOs". They don't like the term "LEGOs". I've read before that one of the reasons is because they want to make sure that their brand isn't diluted, to where when a person sees a bunch of LEGO and off brand, they just call them all "Legos" and group them together. LEGO bricks is what they want to encourage the use of.

In my mind, the term Christian came later ... like Coke, Kleenex, etc. It doesn't have a monopoly on all who claim to operate or know Jesus, yes ? And I would think, similar to LEGO (not the best analogy, but still), that the person of Jesus would have the ultimate say in what He would want His followers to be called or not called, and I don't remember seeing him endorse the use of the term "Christian" specifically, or address what a real one would be or not specifically, etc. Nor do I see where a person claiming to operate or know Jesus, is necessarily claiming to be "Christian" in the same breath.

 

[juvenissun]

I still don't see Jesus saying directly, "Not every claimed Christian will be saved." I see what appears to be Jesus addressing those who:

1) Say to Him, "Lord, Lord," or call him "Lord" arguably.
2) It is those people who are saying they did such and such in His name.

How do you call these people: "... everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ ..."?

Christians, right?

So, no more argument is needed.

 

[WoundedDeep]

I still don't see Jesus saying directly, "Not every claimed Christian will be saved." I see what appears to be Jesus addressing those who:

1) Say to Him, "Lord, Lord," or call him "Lord" arguably.
2) It is those people who are saying they did such and such in His name.

Who are the group of people who will do things in Jesus' Name? Its professing Christians. Is this not obvious?

 

[Albion]

In my mind, the term Christian came later ... like Coke, Kleenex, etc. It doesn't have a monopoly on all who claim to operate or know Jesus, yes ? And I would think, similar to LEGO (not the best analogy, but still), that the person of Jesus would have the ultimate say in what He would want His followers to be called or not called, and I don't remember seeing him endorse the use of the term "Christian" specifically, or address what a real one would be or not specifically, etc. Nor do I see where a person claiming to operate or know Jesus, is necessarily claiming to be "Christian" in the same breath.

On the other hand, the Bible itself says that the disciples were called by that term very early in church history, so if the Word of God uses it in an approving way and if it is almost as old as the church itself, it's pretty hard to argue successfully that Jesus doesn't want it to be used for his followers or that it developed only much later in time.

 

[TillICollapse]

How do you call these people: "... everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ ..."?

Christians, right?

A claimed Christian is often a person who does this (arguably a majority), but I don't see where it's an exclusive term for those who say, 'Lord, Lord,' only. You said, "Jesus also says that not every claimed Christian will be saved." I don't see where Jesus ever uses that term specifically, or addresses the use of the term specifically for that matter.

Who are the group of people who will do things in Jesus' Name? Its professing Christians. Is this not obvious?

It's obvious that people who profess to be Christians do this. What's not obvious is Jesus ever saying what juvenissun said that Jesus said concerning Christians specifically.

 

[TillICollapse]

On the other hand, the Bible itself says that the disciples were called by that term very early in church history, so if the Word of God uses it in an approving way and if it is almost as old as the church itself, it's pretty hard to argue successfully that Jesus doesn't want it to be used for his followers or that it developed only much later in time.

* The Book of Acts does seem to say when the term was first used
* From what I understand, the word itself is only used three times in the NT.
* there are other terms that pre-date the use of the word "Christian" which are still claimed today (Nazarene, etc). For example the "followers of the Way" is used 3 times as well (maybe more ?).
* I don't recall stating that it was developed much later. In fact, I recall a post previously in another thread where I agreed that it was NOT "much" later.

Appealing to the idea that since it's in the Bible, or was used early on in the history of the religion, therefore it's in the Word of God, seen to be used in an approving way, and therefore it's hard to argue that Jesus doesn't want it to be used for His followers ... that type of reasoning leads back down the rabbit holes of "But it's in the Bible and this is what it means," rationalizing, which then leads to the obvious. I could connect some dots and turn around and say that Jesus was referring only to Jews or some such, or only those who claim to be "followers of the Way", or only to those whom He was speaking to in that very moment, or "the true disciple" and that even those who say ,"Lord, Lord" are not referring to Christians because when they use the term "Lord" they are actually referring to some other idol, and on and on (I'm not doing any of this, just stating examples). I realize the poster I questioned didn't say that "Jesus says," and then attempt to quote him verbatim, however.

 

[TillICollapse]

In Christianity we call that apologetics right?

Have we fallen into apologetics in this thread lol ?

 

[WoundedDeep]

A claimed Christian is often a person who does this (arguably a majority), but I don't see where it's an exclusive term for those who say, 'Lord, Lord,' only. You said, "Jesus also says that not every claimed Christian will be saved." I don't see where Jesus ever uses that term specifically, or addresses the use of the term specifically for that matter.

It's obvious that people who profess to be Christians do this. What's not obvious is Jesus ever saying what juvenissun said that Jesus said concerning Christians specifically.

How could people not professing to be Christians be using Jesus' Name actively? There is only one group that fits the description, and they are professing Christians, that is what juvenissun meant.

 

[TillICollapse]

How could people not professing to be Christians be using Jesus' Name actively? There is only one group that fits the description, and they are professing Christians, that is what juvenissun meant.

I gave a couple of quick examples in a previous post. A psychic I remember who prayed in Jesus' name. I can't remember if she specifically claimed to be a Christian or not though. I had some friends who became Messianic Jews, stopped calling themselves Christian, yet still prayed in the name of Jesus. I'm not overly familiar with Messianic Judaism, only slightly (I attended a couple of services to see what it was about). And I have friends who believe in Jesus, pray using His name, but do not claim to be Christian or associate with the religion directly. So there are some examples right there. Furthermore, I could point to the people whom Jesus was addressing lol ... He would later give some of them authority to do the very things he was addressing (drive out demons in His name, etc) and He specifically told them to go to the "lost sheep of Israel". Not to the Gentiles, or any town of the Samaritans. So right there you have people actively doing such things, but not claiming to be "Christian" ... the term wasn't even invented yet. Perhaps those whom Jesus gave that authority at that time would have considered themselves Jewish at the time still. Or perhaps just his "disciples" and nothing more. Idk. But they were actively using His name nonetheless apparently.

 

[WoundedDeep]

I gave a couple of quick examples in a previous post. A psychic I remember who prayed in Jesus' name. I can't remember if she specifically claimed to be a Christian or not though. I had some friends who became Messianic Jews, stopped calling themselves Christian, yet still prayed in the name of Jesus. I'm not overly familiar with Messianic Judaism, only slightly (I attended a couple of services to see what it was about). And I have friends who believe in Jesus, pray using His name, but do not claim to be Christian or associate with the religion directly. So there are some examples right there. Furthermore, I could point to the people whom Jesus was addressing lol ... He would later give some of them authority to do the very things he was addressing (drive out demons in His name, etc) and He specifically told them to go to the "lost sheep of Israel". Not to the Gentiles, or any town of the Samaritans. So right there you have people actively doing such things, but not claiming to be "Christian" ... the term wasn't even invented yet. Perhaps those whom Jesus gave that authority at that time would have considered themselves Jewish at the time still. Or perhaps just his "disciples" and nothing more. Idk. But they were actively using His name nonetheless apparently.

In that case, a better term would be self professing followers/disciples of Jesus Christ. I believe this group will form all if not the majority of whom Jesus will be addressing.

 

[TillICollapse]

In that case, a better term would be self professing followers/disciples of Jesus Christ. I believe this group will form all if not the majority of whom Jesus will be addressing.

Hmm ... perhaps. Idk. That may still be taking it an extra step.

The verse which I presume is still being referred to, quotes that Jesus says, "Not everyone who says to me 'Lord, Lord,' ... so not adding a single identifier to that, it is those who say, "Lord, Lord" to Him. Do people who claim to be Christians do this today ? Yes. Did they do it early on, starting in Antioch ? Apparently according to Acts. But it still doesn't mean Jesus is addressing Christians only in that verse. He then goes on to say what those people will claim ... they will say "Lord, Lord" as well, and they will claim to have done things in His name. Jesus then does seem to give these specific people an identifying attribute further: evildoers. And He says that He never knew them. So these "evildoers" ... I don't see where they are exclusively Christians being addressed, nor does Jesus say the evildoers are exclusively Christians. Again, that term hadn't even come about yet. If such people would claim to be disciples of His, or followers of His ... perhaps. Idk. I'm betting there is someone out there who attempts to do things in the name of Jesus, yet wouldn't claim to be His disciple or follower lol. In fact, don't paranormal investigators and those who have interests in such things sometimes "pray in the name of Jesus" while never claiming to even be one of His disciples or followers ? (I think I remember them doing this on the few episodes I saw of "Paranormal State" a couple of years ago). I'm even thinking of the psychic again I referenced earlier.

But anyways, we may be reaching the exhaustive point of the dissection lol.

 

[ananda]

I gave a couple of quick examples in a previous post. A psychic I remember who prayed in Jesus' name. I can't remember if she specifically claimed to be a Christian or not though. I had some friends who became Messianic Jews, stopped calling themselves Christian, yet still prayed in the name of Jesus. I'm not overly familiar with Messianic Judaism, only slightly (I attended a couple of services to see what it was about). And I have friends who believe in Jesus, pray using His name, but do not claim to be Christian or associate with the religion directly. So there are some examples right there. Furthermore, I could point to the people whom Jesus was addressing lol ... He would later give some of them authority to do the very things he was addressing (drive out demons in His name, etc) and He specifically told them to go to the "lost sheep of Israel". Not to the Gentiles, or any town of the Samaritans. So right there you have people actively doing such things, but not claiming to be "Christian" ... the term wasn't even invented yet. Perhaps those whom Jesus gave that authority at that time would have considered themselves Jewish at the time still. Or perhaps just his "disciples" and nothing more. Idk. But they were actively using His name nonetheless apparently.

If someone believes Matthew 28:16-20 to be authentic, after his resurrection, Jesus did send his 11 apostles to evangelize the Gentile world.