Perry wrote: > David, "as I have defined it" is the way moral > relativists justify sin.
But what does the term "Christian" have to do with morality? When you are ready to exclude Roman Catholicism and United Pentecostals from Christianity, then maybe we can talk more about your definition. Perry wrote: > It sounds like you have defined it that way > to make non-Christians sound like Christians > so they are more approachable. Then, the gap > between where they are, and where you think > they should be if they really were a Christian > (my definition) does not appear as large as it is. No, that's not it at all. Remember that I preach. I make it very clear that they are HYPOCRITE Christians who are headed to hell if they do not repent. I tell them it is shameful that they come out on Friday night to get drunk and fornicate, then show up in church Sunday morning. If I were to say that they were not Christians, then I could hardly claim that they are hypocrite Christians. Do you understand where I am coming from? Perry wrote: > But, if the word "Christian" under your definition "does > not lose all meaning", then doesn't that also mean it loses > some of it's meaning? Not really, because basically I do not make the term "Christian" an issue. I only put to rest the fact that I am trying to persuade them to join Christianity. I am not representing religion to them. I am representing Jesus Christ, and religion often gets in the way of that. They have all these preconceived notions about what Christianity is. That's fine. I don't want to deal with that. I am representing the will and mind of Christ to them. I let them figure out how that fits into "Christianity" or "Judaism" or "Islam" or "Paganism" or whatever other religion they embrace. Some of them will have to leave their religions when they believe upon Christ, but that is between them and God. Perry wrote: > Could you possibly be encouraging people who are > not Christians (my definition), but think that they are > saved because under your definition they already are > "Christian". How many people do you think you have > encouraged to travel the broad path by telling them > they are Christian (your definition) when they are > not (my definition)? I don't think there have been any. You seem to think that I try and get people to join a religion like Christianity. I don't. That is not what the Lord sends me to do. I don't tell people that they are a Christian. They might tell me that, but that means very little to me. I ask them if they are a believer in Jesus Christ. I ask them what their testimony is about Christ. If I perceive them to be my brother or sister in Christ, I might acknowledge them as my brother, my sister, or my fellow believer. If I ever do refer to someone as a Christian, that means that he professes to be a follower of Christ, but it says nothing about my judgment of whether or not he truly is following Christ. Only if I called him my brother or sister in Christ is there any judgment being expressed that I accept his profession of faith. Kevin wrote: > David do you also use this approach on Sodomites? > If a Sodomite claims to follow Jesus is he a Christian? > If you tell him so don't you give him a False Hope? > That is the problem with your False definition. I have never had any misunderstanding with the sodomites. I once attended Bible Studies on campus put on by the Metropolitan Community Church. I attended as a "Christian" and said that I heard that they were Christians and so was I. They affirmed that they were and I did not challenge that assertion. What I did challenge was how they could continue to practice homosexuality when the Bible condemned it. Of course, they tried to twist the Scriptures to say that it was homosexual prostitution that was condemned and not homosexuality per se, but by the third study, the group was no more. I would say that it was because I took them at their word that they were Christian, and used that as my right to instruct them in God's Word, that caused this group to disband their Christian activities. If I had spent my time trying to argue that they could not be Christian, I do not think I would have had the success I did in getting them to realize their hypocrisy. I also have had homosexuals attend my Bible studies. I never challenged whether or not they were Christians. They heard the unadulterated Word of God, and some of them continued for years in our studies and came out of the sin of homosexuality. I even had a brother in Christ call me once to help a man who he said was a Christian brother who was losing his mind. He was a co-worker of his and was howling like a wolf on the job. I told him to bring him over to my house. I did not challenge whether or not he was a Christian. He claimed to be a Christian. Fine. That tells me that he wants to follow Christ. As I began to rebuke the devil in him, a spirit spoke through him, saying that his name was "Grunge." I don't know what language that might be or what it means. The spirit boasted of being a homosexual spirit and that he had a right to be in this man. I cast him out. Was this man a "Christian" having had a spirit of homosexuality in him? It depends upon how you define the word Christian. I don't believe the man was saved, but he previously had made a profession of faith in Christ. Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
