What would it take to make you a Christian?

[cloudyday2]

Christ said He would come with a new name, a name only those that accept him will see.

I am curious where Christ said that. I know there must be a Bible verse that can be interpreted to say that, but nothing comes to mind and I have read most the books in the Bible a few times. It's just idle curiosity really, because I am not a Bible believer anyway.

 

[Robban]

I am curious where Christ said that. I know there must be a Bible verse that can be interpreted to say that, but nothing comes to mind and I have read most the books in the Bible a few times. It's just idle curiosity really, because I am not a Bible believer anyway.

Revelation 2:17?

 

[Tony Bristow-Stagg]

I am curious where Christ said that. I know there must be a Bible verse that can be interpreted to say that, but nothing comes to mind and I have read most the books in the Bible a few times. It's just idle curiosity really, because I am not a Bible believer anyway.

Revelation 2:17 "He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it."

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

Baha'u'llah means 'Glory of God' or Glory of the Lord'. This 'annointed name (Christ)' appears in all end of age prophecy.

Jerusalem means 'Abode of peace', note there will also be a new Jerusalem, a new 'Abode of Peace'. This has many spiritual meanings, but in the Material world Baha'u'llah, the Glory of God was exiled as a prisioner to Akka Israel, the Holy Land embraced the 'Glory of God' unknowingly. How else could a new Jerusalem become Haifa in the Material world? Isaiah 35:2 "It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon, they shall see the glory of the LORD, and the excellency of our God."

Regards Tony

 

[cloudyday2]

Revelation 2:17 "He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it."

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

When I read those verses, Jesus Christ seems to be saying that each loyal follower will get a new secret name. I don't see anything to suggest that Jesus will change his own name.

 

[Tony Bristow-Stagg]

When I read those verses, Jesus Christ seems to be saying that each loyal follower will get a new secret name. I don't see anything to suggest that Jesus will change his own name.

Sorry, can not see that in those passages at all.

What Christ said in 3:12 is very clear, I will write upon him my new name.

Type 'New Name Bible Passages' into Google.

P/S the new name is one God gives to His Messengers.

All the best, regards Tony

 

[cloudyday2]

Sorry, can not see that in those passages at all.

What Christ said in 3:12 is very clear, I will write upon him my new name.

Type 'New Name Bible Passages' into Google.

P/S the new name is one God gives to His Messengers.

All the best, regards Tony

Although I don't know Greek, I am 99.9% certain you are misunderstanding that passage. Greek is usually a precise language, so probably in Greek it is clearly one way or the other. We need to get a person who understands the Greek to say what the verse actually means. Since the Church has always understood it to mean that the loyal Christian is given a new name, and the Church once spoke the language of the NT, it seems that the traditional understanding is the correct one. But maybe not.

 

[cloudyday2]

@Tony Bristow-Stagg , here is a page summarizing different thoughts on Revelation 2:17. Most understand the name to be for the Christian who perseveres, but there is one thought that understands the name as you do. However the "best" theory matches my understanding

Another widely held explanation suggests that the white stone may be a translucent precious stone such as a diamond. The word translated “white” in Revelation 2:17 is leukos and can also mean “brilliant, bright.” This interpretation holds that on the stone is written the name of Christ, not the name of the believer. Revelation mentions that the name of Christ is written on the foreheads of the saints (Revelation 3:12; Revelation 14:1, and Revelation 14:20).

The best theory regarding the meaning of the white stone probably has to do with the ancient Roman custom of awarding white stones to the victors of athletic games. The winner of a contest was awarded a white stone with his name inscribed on it. This served as his “ticket” to a special awards banquet. According to this view, Jesus promises the overcomers entrance to the eternal victory celebration in heaven. The “new name” most likely refers to the Holy Spirit’s work of conforming believers to the holiness of Christ (see Romans 8:29; Colossians 3:10).

Why is God going to give us a white stone with a new name?

 

[Tony Bristow-Stagg]

@Tony Bristow-Stagg , here is a page summarizing different thoughts on Revelation 2:17. Most understand the name to be for the Christian who perseveres, but there is one thought that understands the name as you do. However the "best" theory matches my understanding

Why is God going to give us a white stone with a new name?

Christ has always rejected the 'Best theories'.

If that was the way God sent His Messengers, in a way that all the peoples expectations are fulfilled, then the Jews would have their Messiah, a material King sitting on the throne.

Consider all people wait the promised day, all have a popular way they expect this to happen.

Why is it, in all of history, all of Gods recorded Messages, that many are called, but few are chosen? Why did all the divines reject Abraham, Moses, Christ, Muhammad, Bab and Baha'u'llah. Why did many without preconceived ideas of Scripture embrace the new message and then also shared the suffering?

There is a lesson to be learned.

Regards Tony

 

[Tony Bristow-Stagg]

here is a page summarizing different thoughts on Revelation 2:17. Most

This is a great and most likely one IMHO.

"In ancient Greece, jury members would cast a white stone to signify an acquittal, whereas a black stone proclaimed the defendant guilty. The weakness of this interpretation is that the stones cast in the courts did not have names inscribed on them."

The weakness is that they have not considered the spiritual ramifications of the White stone with a new name.

Consider Christs name is on the white stone, it matters not what man thinks, Jesus Christ is sinless and innocent of all charges. But instead they gave Christ a black stone.

Now Christ returns, the New Name on the White Stone is the Bab. At his trial they also gave him a black stone, whreras His name is in Truth written upon the White stone. A name that no one sees but those that receive it.

This is also applicable to Baha'u'llah, who was also given the Black Stone, wheras Baha'u'llah's name is forever written upon the white stone.

Regards Tony

 

[awitch]

Hm...what would it take to make me a Christian?
How about one million dollars in US cash? Any takers want to buy my soul?

 

[Tony Bristow-Stagg]

Hm...what would it take to make me a Christian?
How about one million dollars in US cash? Any takers want to buy my soul?

Just a hint, that would not make you a Christain.

In fact, the want for anything this world has to offer, would nullify any such declaration.

But you are free to earn all you desire.

Regards Tony

 

[awitch]

Just a hint, that would not make you a Christain.

Why not? For a million dollars I'll ditch my religion and convert. Easy peasy diety appeasy.

 

[Sanoy]

The question is: "sufficient for what?" Maybe the gospels plus Josephus are sufficient to prove that there was a historical Jesus of Nazareth who was crucified. There is a huge jump to go from that to being a Christian.

On the mental illness explanation, people think that a mentally ill person is not going to be capable of teaching and leading disciples, but that shows an ignorance about mental illness. For several years I had some strange delusions. One of them was that I thought one of my best friends was secretly under some sort of mind control and trying to kill me. That delusion caused me a lot of stress whenever I interacted with my friend through emails, phone calls, or occasional visits, but it didn't prevent me from be totally functional otherwise.

Here is a quote about delusional disorder:

Delusional disorder - Wikipedia

There are other mental illnesses and psychological traits that can explain the behavior of people like David Koresh, Jim Jones. Those people all died for their cults just as Jesus died. No reason to believe they were inspired.

It is historically sufficient to establish those 4 things as facts to be used in an inference toward the resurrection. But yes, that doesn't make you a Christian, that is a choice a person makes.

Your mental illness example is exactly what I was trying to say to Tony. Either Jesus was who He said He was or He was mentally deranged. You can't syncretize a mentally deranged person into other religions, and if you take Him at His word He denies all other religions. As far as mentally deranged goes as an explanation for the rise of Christianity I think that such a hypothesis would be very Ad Hoc, with little explanatory power or historical substantiation. The most glaring lack in explanatory power is that it does nothing to explain Jesus's post mortem appearances.

 

[Sanoy]

Your right, God, being Love AND infinite is pretty subjective. But Love has a way of getting one there.

As to which religion I'm referring to, I call upon the Medieval Christian Mystic Marguerite Porete to explain. She wrote that there are two kinds of churches. The first she calls the "The Great Holy Church", which is the church of the Holy Spirit. The second she calls the Little Holy Church. That church preaches "empirical and scholastic church whose uncomprehending queries are more often placed on the laps of reason than are made to testify to Love or the Soul". The former church preaches Love the latter church preaches rules and law and order.

So to answer your question more directly, I belong to the Church that preaches Love.

It's interesting to note that Marguerite Porete was burned at the stake by the church that preaches rules and law and order. Which happens in other ways even today.

Hey...have you ever thrown your awareness into Jesus Christ to see what you see there?

Medieval Mysticism is itself an intellectual pursuit. You don't find love by transplanting your awareness into Christ to feel it, you find it by feeding the hungry and comforting the afflicted.

 

[dlamberth]

Medieval Mysticism is itself an intellectual pursuit.

Perhaps in the way you approach it that may be true. But it's not at all in line with the experiential approach towards the Medieval Mystics that others take.

For instance, going back to Porete's writings, it's not at all hard to discern the different experiences one takes from a Church steeped in Love compared to one that's focused on rules and law. The whole atmosphere inside of the two different Church, the preaching, the people, the fruits, everything will be different.

You don't find love by transplanting your awareness into Christ to feel it,...

I was just wondering about your spiritual awareness in Christ is why I asked. I'm taking it that your answer to my question is "NO".

you find it by feeding the hungry and comforting the afflicted.

Feeding the hungry and helping those in need is how Christ is made a reality for a person. I love this story as told by Mother Teresa of Calcutta about one of her sisters:
“During the mass,” I said, “you saw that the priest touched the body of Christ with great love and tenderness. When you touch the poor today, you too will be touching the body of Christ. Give them the same love and tenderness.” When they return several hours later, the new sister came up to me, her face shining with joy, “I have been touching the body of Christ of three hours,“ she said. I asked her what she had done, “Just as we arrived, the sister brought in a man covered with maggots. He had been picked up from drain. I have been taking care of him, I have been touching Christ. I know it was him,” she said.

 

[cloudyday2]

As far as mentally deranged goes as an explanation for the rise of Christianity I think that such a hypothesis would be very Ad Hoc, with little explanatory power or historical substantiation. The most glaring lack in explanatory power is that it does nothing to explain Jesus's post mortem appearances.

It is very common to hallucinate a loved one after he/she dies. Furthermore, it seems that "seeing" Jesus after the Crucifixion gave a disciple more credibility in the movement. "I saw Jesus". "I saw Jesus before YOU saw Jesus, so that means I should be the leader." ... It is a bit like the pressure Pentecostals feel to speak in tongues be slain in the spirit and so on as evidence of their authenticity. ... Take Jim Jones as an example. Many of his followers eagerly drank poison. The "who would die for a lie" argument is obviously bad (not that you made that argument but many do).

 

[Sanoy]

Perhaps in the way you approach it that may be true. But it's not at all in line with the experiential approach towards the Medieval Mystics that others take.

For instance, going back to Porete's writings, it's not at all hard to discern the different experiences one takes from a Church steeped in Love compared to one that's focused on rules and law. The whole atmosphere inside of the two different Church, the preaching, the people, the fruits, everything will be different.


I was just wondering about your spiritual awareness in Christ is why I asked. I'm taking it that your answer to my question is "NO".


Feeding the hungry and helping those in need is how Christ is made a reality for a person. I love this story as told by Mother Teresa of Calcutta about one of her sisters:
“During the mass,” I said, “you saw that the priest touched the body of Christ with great love and tenderness. When you touch the poor today, you too will be touching the body of Christ. Give them the same love and tenderness.” When they return several hours later, the new sister came up to me, her face shining with joy, “I have been touching the body of Christ of three hours,“ she said. I asked her what she had done, “Just as we arrived, the sister brought in a man covered with maggots. He had been picked up from drain. I have been taking care of him, I have been touching Christ. I know it was him,” she said.

I like Porete's ideas division of the loving church vs the the knowledgeable church but I'm hesitant to embrace her because she has said some very disturbing things. For example "I am God, says Love, for Love is God and God is Love, and this Soul is God by the condition of Love. I am God by divine nature and this Soul is God by righteousness of Love. Thus this precious beloved of mine is taught and guided by me, without herself, for she is transformed into me, and such a perfect one, says Love, takes my nourishment." It's my understanding that we image God's nature, rather than have God's nature (Mark 10:18) In claiming God's nature for herself she identifies herself as also God. But God's nature is unique according to Jesus, and there is only one such God.

There are churches that value reason, and there are churches that value love. Both are wrong, and critically corrupted by the lack of the other. For we are to love the Lord with ALL our heart, ALL our soul, ALL our mind. It is just such a lack that has corrupted Porete's pursuit of love.

The idea of transplanting my awareness kind of sounds like an OOBE. The problem with OOBE's is we aren't in control and we don't know what we are doing. There are people pursued such things only to become possessed, and find that everything they saw and experienced was from the possessors.

 

[Sanoy]

It is very common to hallucinate a loved one after he/she dies. Furthermore, it seems that "seeing" Jesus after the Crucifixion gave a disciple more credibility in the movement. "I saw Jesus". "I saw Jesus before YOU saw Jesus, so that means I should be the leader." ... It is a bit like the pressure Pentecostals feel to speak in tongues be slain in the spirit and so on as evidence of their authenticity. ... Take Jim Jones as an example. Many of his followers eagerly drank poison. The "who would die for a lie" argument is obviously bad (not that you made that argument but many do).

That is correct, but they don't think the loved one has been resurrected right? And such an explanation wouldn't explain the 500 who saw Him at the same time. It wouldn't explain James, Jesus's brother, who didn't believe He was the son of God until after He died and was resurrected. It did give the disciple more credibility, but Jesus was just horrifically killed for being the leader of Christianity. It makes no sense to make up such a thing and become a leader that gets beaten from town to town, and will almost certainly die. You can't take what would normally be a motive for one scenario and apply it to another scenario where the natural motive is not to confess Jesus.

 

[cloudyday2]

That is correct, but they don't think the loved one has been resurrected right? And such an explanation wouldn't explain the 500 who saw Him at the same time. It wouldn't explain James, Jesus's brother, who didn't believe He was the son of God until after He died and was resurrected. It did give the disciple more credibility, but Jesus was just horrifically killed for being the leader of Christianity. It makes no sense to make up such a thing and become a leader that gets beaten from town to town, and will almost certainly die. You can't take what would normally be a motive for one scenario and apply it to another scenario where the natural motive is not to confess Jesus.

Well one motive might have been money and power. The early Christians gave all their money to the cult and then became completely dependent on the cult.

 

[Sanoy]

Well one motive might have been money and power. The early Christians gave all their money to the cult and then became completely dependent on the cult.

They were not giving their money to a leader to become wealthy, they gave it away to the community. I'm not sure what you mean by power. Power would be more easily found outside such a community, where you could amass your own possessions and wealth rather than give it away.