What should we call ourselves? "Christian", or "Christ follower"? Or... ???

[Saint Steven]

As controversial as it may be, if anyone were to ask, I would refer to myself as a Catholic Universalist and leave it at that.

Leave it at that?
I'm imagining the puzzled and inquiring looks. "And... ???"

Beyond that, if one wants to use a term other than "Christian", perhaps "Christocentricist"? Too many syllables, maybe; wouldn't want to try saying that after a few drinks.

LOL - Now that's funny. I would like to see the outtakes on that one. Oh my. "Krisco what? Hendrix???" (it's a slippery slope)

That's it, Krisco-Hendrix. (Slippery Hip anyone?

Actually "Christocentricist" would get their attention. And explaining it would sidestep the negatives of the other handles.
I could see that conversation going well. Good idea. It also describes your relationship with God/Christ, rather than naming a group. (tribalism)

But I've gotten to the point where it's pretty much impossible to stuff oneself - or God - into a box, which is likely one reason why the struggle with terminology in this case is real. No words really do one's spirituality any justice, especially as time, and growth, go on...

Exactly!
I seem to play it by ear, as the saying goes. Be sensitive to the person(s) you are speaking with.
At that point, listening is probably more important than talking. I let them direct the discussion. (somewhat)
But I am actually turning the conversation over to God. If it is a divine encounter, God will have been working on them prior. (sneaky)
They will have burning questions that are more important than any long-winded spiel I could recite. (at 90 MPH)

 

[Rajni]

Leave it at that?
I'm imagining the puzzled and inquiring looks. "And... ???"

Oh I'm sure it would raise eyebrows, or at the very least spark curiosity. If the person really needed further explanation, and I had the time and inclination to provide one, I would. As it is, my reasons for getting closer to Jesus again are unusual in and of themselves, having more to do with otherworldly jazz than what might be the norm. It wouldn't be a short story to tell in casual conversation (though I posted a blog entry explaining the basics here on CF back in July).

I've read that something called hopeful-universalism is allowed in Catholicism. But as one Catholic Universalist on another online platform said, "there's nothing which says your hope can't be 99.999999% confidence". I mean, when it comes to religion/spirituality in general, it's all going on faith anyway, so yeah, "hopeful" would be about right. My motto is "I could be wrong". But I do have a general sense that, as Mother Julian of Norwich once said, "All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well".

 

[John Caldwell]

"Christian" worked for the Christians mentioned in Acts (first in Antioch), and it has been fine until now. And throughout history many have looked negative on "Christians".

I see no need to alter the name. The point is it directs focus to Christ (which is offensive to the World).

 

[Saint Steven]

"Christian" worked for the Christians mentioned in Acts (first in Antioch), and it has been fine until now. And throughout history many have looked negative on "Christians".

I see no need to alter the name. The point is it directs focus to Christ (which is offensive to the World).

Certainly the most easily understood, and the most easily misunderstood. Hard to beat. - LOL

 

[Soyeong]

The title "Christian" seems to carry with it many bad connotations.
Many have abandoned the title preferring "Christ follower".

I'm not sure I am totally comfortable with "Christ follower" either.
Because...
Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did. - 1 John 2:6 NIV

Which means what?
Leave everything behind to join a group of homeless people that travel from
town to town healing the sick, casting out demons, and raising the dead?

What to do, what to do... ???

"Christian" means "Christ follower", so that is not a meaningful distinction other than the connotation. The purpose using a label to refer to ourselves is to quickly convey information about who we are, so the problem is when someone considers themselves to be a Christ follower, but using that label to describe themselves would convey false information about who they are because other people have significantly different ideas about what it means to be a Christ follower. For example, someone calling themselves a Christ follower would indicate to the average person that they are not someone who follows the Torah even though Christ lived in obedience to the Torah and as his followers, we are told that we must live as he did (1 John 2:6). Likewise, in 1 Peter 2:21-22, we are told to follow Christ's example, however, someone who is following Christ's example of obedience to the Torah can't refer to themselves as a Christ follower without conveying false information to the average person about who they are.

 

[Saint Steven]

"Christian" means "Christ follower", so that is not a meaningful distinction other than the connotation. The purpose using a label to refer to ourselves is to quickly convey information about who we are, so the problem is when someone considers themselves to be a Christ follower, but using that label to describe themselves would convey false information about who they are because other people have significantly different ideas about what it means to be a Christ follower. For example, someone calling themselves a Christ follower would indicate to the average person that they are not someone who follows the Torah even though Christ lived in obedience to the Torah and as his followers, we are told that we must live as he did (1 John 2:6). Likewise, in 1 Peter 2:21-22, we are told to follow Christ's example, however, so someone who is following Christ's example of obedience to the Torah can't refer to themselves as a Christ follower without conveying false information to the average person about who they are.

That's an interesting perspective, thanks.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The title "Christian" seems to carry with it many bad connotations.
Many have abandoned the title preferring "Christ follower".

I'm not sure I am totally comfortable with "Christ follower" either.
Because...
Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did. - 1 John 2:6 NIV

Which means what?
Leave everything behind to join a group of homeless people that travel from
town to town healing the sick, casting out demons, and raising the dead?

What to do, what to do... ???

The thing though is that they literally mean the same thing. "Christ follower" is just a clunkier way of saying "Christian", which literally means "someone [of] Christ". It probably originated as an insult, "Those 'Christ people' over there" (and possibly had a double meaning as an insult by insinuating "oily ones"); but as adopted by Christians themselves became a badge: We are Christ's people, we are the followers of Jesus who is the Christ, our Lord and THE Lord.

I don't think anything is fixed by saying "Christ follower". That's not going to make non-Christians more receptive or think, "Ohh, he must be one of those good Christians rather than one of the bad ones". Because if you look around you'll see Christians who have used that "Christ follower" moniker also say a lot of the same stuff with the same sorts of baggage that gets the name "Christian" a bad rep anyway. So it's just taking the long way to reach the same destination as far as that is concerned.

Instead I think we need to own the name Christian. Even with all the bad baggage it may have. Owning the good and the bad. And then taking the bad with us to repentance, and praying for the power and work of the Holy Spirit in our lives to be fruitful in our works of charity toward others. That is, taking the name Christian and making it mean something our lives.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

Yup.

Notice it says "the disciples were called Christians". Not what they called themselves. It was actually a term of mockery, as I understand it. Like calling them "little Christs".

I did a deep dive on this question once and this is what I found:

---

The Greek word christianos is derived from christos (anointed one) with an adjectival ending -ianus borrowed from Latin to denote adhering to or even belonging to, such as in slave ownership. "All these Greek terms formed with the Latin suffix -ianus, exactly as the Latin words of the same derivation, express the idea that the men or things referred to belong to the person to whose name the suffix is added," Bickerman explains. "In Greek, as in Latin, the suffix -ianus is a substitute for the possessive genitive." [1] Thus, Christians are oi tou christou, such that they belong to Christ "as bought by him, delivered by him, and possessed by him." [2]

[1] Elias J. Bickerman, Studies in Jewish and Christian History (Boston: Brill Academic, 1986), 3:147.

[2] John Eadie, A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1869), 426.​

---

Consequently, I am happy to call myself a Christian.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

I did a deep dive on this question once and this is what I found:

​

---

The Greek word christianos is derived from christos (anointed one) with an adjectival ending -ianus borrowed from Latin to denote adhering to or even belonging to, such as in slave ownership. "All these Greek terms formed with the Latin suffix -ianus, exactly as the Latin words of the same derivation, express the idea that the men or things referred to belong to the person to whose name the suffix is added," Bickerman explains. "In Greek, as in Latin, the suffix -ianus is a substitute for the possessive genitive." [1] Thus, Christians are oi tou christou, such that they belong to Christ "as bought by him, delivered by him, and possessed by him." [2]​

​

[1] Elias J. Bickerman, Studies in Jewish and Christian History (Boston: Brill Academic, 1986), 3:147.​

​

[2] John Eadie, A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1869), 426.​

---

Consequently, I am happy to call myself a Christian.

Thanks for the research !

 

[Saint Steven]

... Instead I think we need to own the name Christian. Even with all the bad baggage it may have. ...

I agree.
I'm warming up to the idea again.

This has been a good discussion.
I have seen at least two of my former Pastors make a point about dropping the title "Christian" in favor of "Christ Follower".
But I have never been comfortable with it.

Thanks for ALL your valuable input. Always appreciated.

 

[chevyontheriver]

This has been a good discussion.
I have seen at least two of my former Pastors make a point about dropping the title "Christian" in favor of "Christ Follower".
But I have never been comfortable with it.

To me it’s too much jargon. It’s like what are we going to call ourselves when the woke mobs declare the word ‘Christian’ is forbidden? Silliness.

 

[Saint Steven]

To me it’s too much jargon. It’s like what are we going to call ourselves when the woke mobs declare the word ‘Christian’ is forbidden? Silliness.

Agreed.
And in practice, what you say AFTER you tell someone you are a Christian is what REALLY matters anyway.
The broad label "Christian" begs many questions immediately. "What kind of Christian?", "Where do you go to church?"...

 

[chevyontheriver]

Agreed.
And in practice, what you say AFTER you tell someone you are a Christian is what REALLY matters anyway.
The broad label "Christian" begs many questions immediately. "What kind of Christian?", "Where do you go to church?"...

It is a kind of vacuous word because all sorts of people use it in all sorts of ways.

 

[Dah'veed]

Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did. - 1 John 2:6 NIV

Which means what?

That our citizenship is in heaven. Phil 3:20 Hebrews 12:23

 

[setst777]

The title "Christian" seems to carry with it many bad connotations.
Many have abandoned the title preferring "Christ follower".

I'm not sure I am totally comfortable with "Christ follower" either.
Because...
Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did. - 1 John 2:6 NIV

Which means what?
Leave everything behind to join a group of homeless people that travel from
town to town healing the sick, casting out demons, and raising the dead?

What to do, what to do... ???

To be a Christian is to be a disciple (follower) of Lord Jesus.

Matthew 28:19-20 (NIV) 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.

Acts 11:26 (WEB) The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch. [Matthew 28:19-20]

Romans 1:5 (NIV) 5 Through him we received grace and apostleship to call all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith for His name’s sake.

What do we do?

Basically, the Christian follows Christ by:

Firstly, denying, putting away, die to, or crucify the old master we used to follow, which consists of living for the passions of the flesh (wealth, status, power, sex, addictions to food, drugs, etc.), or whatever other passion that you slave for as your idol as part of this world.

Lastly, the Christian is admonished to live a sanctified life onto God by following Lord Jesus into a life of righteousness and love.

Galatians 5:22-24 (WEB) 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness 23 gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ have crucified the flesh with its passions and lusts.

If a "Christian" has not put to death the old master in his life (your idols whom you serve and live for), then he cannot truly follow Lord Jesus into a sanctified life of righteousness and love. A Christian is one who follows Lord Jesus into a sanctified life of righteousness and love.

1 Thessalonians 4:3-8 (WEB) 3 For this is the will of God: your sanctification, that you [the believer] abstain from sexual immorality, 4 that each one of you know how to control his own body in sanctification and honor, 5 not in the passion of lust, even as the Gentiles who don’t know God, 6 that no one should take advantage of and wrong a brother or sister in this matter; because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as also we forewarned you and testified. 7 For God called us not for uncleanness, but in sanctification. 8 Therefore he who rejects this doesn’t reject man, but God, who has also given his Holy Spirit to you.

1 Peter 1:13-21 (WEB) 13 Therefore prepare your minds for action. Be sober, and set your hope fully on the grace that will be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ— 14 as children of obedience, not conforming yourselves according to your former lusts as in your ignorance, 15 but just as he who called you is holy, you yourselves also be holy in all of your behavior; 16 because it is written, “You shall be holy; for I am holy.” [Leviticus 11:44-45] 17 If you call on him as Father, who without respect of persons judges according to each man’s work, pass the time of your living as foreigners here in reverent fear, 18 knowing that you were redeemed, not with corruptible things, with silver or gold, from the useless way of life handed down from your fathers, 19 but with precious blood, as of a lamb without blemish or spot, the blood of Christ

 

[setst777]

Well, 'Islam' literally means 'submission' as in submission to God. So, you could technically call yourself an Islamic man without following the Islamic religion.

Why compare Islam with Christianity?

However:

In Islam, submission to all that Muhammad commanded is submission to Allah.

In Christianity, submission to all that Lord Jesus commanded is submission to God the Father.

 

[Carl Emerson]

How about "a follower of Jesus"

 

[Carl Emerson]

The most significant biblical title I held onto during my years of restoration was that I was a "Child of the Promise"