ummm, believing in Christ?

pretty simple.

There are many deriviations of Christianity all the way from Catholic to the new "Christian" churches. Each church/derivation may or may not have different answers to every question you've listed. But you can be a question even if you answered yes to each and every question you raised.

Can you be a Christian if you support the death penalty (obvious contradiction to the pro-life movement).

Actually for one who is pro-life and also supports the death penalty I don't see the contradiction at all. One side has squandered their life and needs to be punished for it and the other has their whole life ahead of them. Two totally separate things.

Ok, thanks, thats what I summed up.

Actually for one who is pro-life and also supports the death penalty I don't see the contradiction at all. One side has squandered their life and needs to be punished for it and the other has their whole life ahead of them. Two totally separate things.


I don't feel like getting into another religious argument, but who are we to be doing the punishing? Isn't that God's job?

---

____________
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." John Rogers

but who are we to be doing the punishing? Isn't that God's job?

So we should rely on God for all of our punishments?

I think that would lead to anarchy pretty quickly.

I'm not going to get into the argument either. That's a topic solely reserved for the arguing masters of this board.

John 3:16 pretty much sums up Christianity.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

I just think it a bit hypocritical--the "all life is sacred anti abortion/Terry Shiavo" crowd & the pro-death penalty crowd seem to share the same meeting rooms.

Personally, I don't have a problem with the death penalty, as long as the evidence is pretty irrefutable. Texas doesn't seem to believe that though, based on recent exposes--thankfully the Supremes have been bitch slapping them a bit lately.

---

____________
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." John Rogers

I just think it a bit hypocritical--the "all life is sacred anti abortion/Terry Shiavo" crowd & the pro-death penalty crowd seem to share the same meeting rooms.

As do I. Not to start another huge debate, but the Schiavo case should have been solely based upon what the courts had shown to be her wishes. Which were to not be kept alive. She made the choice then let the husband put those wishes into motion.

I also don't think all life is sacred. I think everyone should be given their chance to live a life, but once you throw it away it's no longer sacred.

Oh and the extremes of Texas death penalty law shouldn't be applied to everyone who thinks the death penalty has a place in society.

"Can you be a Christian if you support the death penalty (obvious contradiction to the pro-life movement)."

Despite Pope John Paul II's personal feelings on the issue, the Catholic Catechism explains that the death penalty is morally justifiable. The differentiation from abortion being that babies are innocent and murderers and rapists are not. However, some Christians could justifiably argue or disagree about the cost effectiveness, need, standards of proof, frequency, etc., of the death penalty and be on one side or the other of the argument and still be good Christians.

However, some Christians could justifiably argue or disagree about the cost effectiveness, need, standards of proof, frequency, etc., of the death penalty and be on one side or the other of the argument and still be good Christians.

Just to be specific shouldn't the word Christian be replaced with Catholic as the pope does not speak for Christianity as a whole.

I'd also like to know who can decide who is a christian and who isn't. It's not like there is a test besides accepting Christ, is there?

---

"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do."

In the context of my answer, since "Catholic" and "Christian" are not mutually exclusive, then no, Christian stands.

Just for the record, as Catholics we believe the Pope, when speaking ex cathedra, does speak for the whole Christian church. Look up the word "catholic," it means universal, i.e., one church.

We Lutherans have something to say to that... I'll be nailing my comments on your door tonight ;)

---

_______________________________________________

"Can you be a .........."

There is a term called "cafeteria Catholic" which means that many people take what suits them and ignore the rest. This is probably 90% of western society Catholics. I've known people who are pro-choice, use birth control and/or divorced and still consider themselves devout Catholics.

This same principle coulod be applied to any denomination or other religion. It's always open to personal interpretation.

You gotta love the irony of pro death penalty christians....wasn't Christ executed?

---

----------------------------------------------------------
"A society is defined not only by what it creates, but by what it refuses to destroy."
John Sawhill

Just for the record, as Catholics we believe the Pope, when speaking ex cathedra, does speak for the whole Christian church

You should probably check with the myriad of other Christian religions to see if they think the Catholic Pope speaks for them.

Oh and catholic does mean one church, but it isn't taken to then mean that the Catholic church is the one and only. It's kind of like saying the First Church of Christ was literally the first church that was in existence. Being raised Catholic I understand how the Catholic Church thinks they are the end all be all, but in reality the other Christian churches would disagree with you.

Christian encompasses all of the Christian religions of which Catholicism is one of them.

Christian encompasses all of the Christian religions of which Catholicism is one of them.

That's what I thought it meant....and I'll just take whenever someone throws the "I'm a Christian" defense up that it literally could mean anything pertaining to faith/JC/God/religion (not being an ass on this but meaning that everyone is going to have their own definition).

---

____________
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." John Rogers

Just for the record, as Catholics we believe the Pope, when speaking ex cathedra, does speak for the whole Christian church. Look up the word "catholic," it means universal, i.e., one church.

Respectfully ... Just because Catholics believe that they speak for the whole Christian Church does not make it so. The Pope does not speak for me, and I personally find the idea of having a pope as being "very unnecesary". If a person can read the Gospels, they should know what is expected out of them in terms of spirituality and behavior.

---

=======================
-- Every morning brings opportunity;
Each evening offers judgement. --

Can you be a Christian if you are pro-choice?

Technically, yes. It is difficult for me to think that simultaneously Christians could think of life as being "God's gift" and "mankinds decision" on whether to end it or not. It all comes down whether one views abortion as murder or not, and when life actually begins. This is a political/societal issue and not necessarily a religous one.

Can you be a Christian if you are anti-religion in school?

Of course. One could make the argument that God would want the church and state seperate. God wants people to CHOOSE God ... not have God be their only choice. IMO, it's God's greatest act of love ... freedom.

Can you be a Christian if you don't go to church?

Sure. Brian286 has already summarized what is required for Christianity (belief that Jesus is the Son of God, acceptance as personal savior, etc). But, along with that admission are actions that are closely assocaited ... such as following Jesus's example and teachings. Worshiping together may not be "mandatory" but it is encouraged.


Can you be a Christian if you support the death penalty (obvious contradiction to the pro-life movement).

Depends if you view murder as "giving up their right to life" (Eye for an Eye, etc). Jesus did not seem to be the type that would be for the death penalty.

There is a verse that goes something like "those that shed blood, by man shall their blood be shed". I have seen Christians use this as support of the death penalty.

These are tough calls. But, IMO, they are not issues where one's "salvation" hangs in the balance. Love God with all your heart, love your neighbor as you love yourself ... and everything else should fall into place.

---

=======================
-- Every morning brings opportunity;
Each evening offers judgement. --

It is an interesting question, isn't it? Especially given that, in my experience, you can get more than 10 opinions on what it means to be Christian by asking fewer than 10 Christians.

<<ummm, believing in Christ?

pretty simple. >>

I think its clear that it is not nearly as 'simple' as that. There was a man named Jesus of Nazareth, most people know that. His name was not 'Christ', that is a title meaning "messiah" given by his followers in later centuries. Jesus never referred to himself as "Christ", and the evidence that Jesus claimed himself to be the one true prophesised messiah is surprisingly scant (given its centrality to the religion that took his name). (Yes, I'm aware of the main Biblical references.)
Many people who think that Jesus was inspiring, spiritual or holy (and some who call themselves Christian) do not believe that he was God/son of God.

Many Christians that I have spoken to do not think that it is necessary to believe the 'supernatural' components of the religion (let alone the dogma that the Church promotes today that Jesus had nothing to say about), they think that Christianity is about following Jesus' example of how to live a good life. Other Christians have told me that this is completely false, and Christianity is entirely about accepting that Jesus was the son of God and is the only way to 'salvation' with God.

My conclusion is that you can only really say that someone is a Christian if that is what they sincerely believe themselves to be. (That's all the statisticians require).

Starting with that wide definition, we know a few simple things:

1. Jesus was NOT a Christian. He was a Jew who hoped to bring people back to the Jewish faith, while at the same time reforming that faith which he saw as drifting from its proper doctrines.

2. Christianity today encompasses a staggeringly wide array of beliefs, including beliefs blended from other religions and practices. Remember that what appears as a range of Christian views and practices in the USA is only a small fraction of those represented worldwide.

3. Many Christians object to any interpretation or definition of Christianity that differs from their own, and they don't like that some objectionable people are described as Christian (e.g. Hitler and Mussolini were quite devout Christians - at least they certainly described themselves as Christian.) This often leads to what is sometimes known as the "not a true Scotsman" fallacy of reasoning (as in: "All Scotsmen eat porridge!" 'Really? My grandfather was Scots and he hated porridge' "Well, then, he wasn't a true Scotsman!") Better to reject the example that doesn't fit than to change the prejudice. Many people who call themselves Christian will say that another who calls him/herself Christian is not a "true" Christian.

For mine, I'll take people's word for it. They are Christian if they say so, and mean it. Nonetheless, I'm bemused by people (and I know many) who tell me that they are, say, Catholic, yet they also tell me that they reject virtually every single piece of doctrine that defines Catholicism. They say that they are still Catholic because they fundamentally believe in being a good person. Sorry. So do secular humanists, Buddhists, Baha'i, Taoists, Sikhs and everyone else. Identity is defined by what distinguishes one group from another, not by what it has in common. Still, whatever... I'll accept that people are what they say they are, whatever that means to them.
Prejudice and judgementalism about putative or actual beliefs is about the scariest thing happening in the world, so I'm going to try not to slip into it myself.

RE: The Death Penalty and Christianity I think it’s important to recognize that Paul – in Romans 13 (below) – specifically acknowledged that the state government (an appointed vice-regent of God) has reserved to itself the power of the sword, which reasonably includes the power to put people to death (i.e., the analogy of the “sword” isn’t just for shavin’). Since Paul gives his accent for the government’s use of the death penalty (i.e., the “sword”) in the state government’s penalogical order, I think that believing in the state government’s ability to penalize (even unto death) is in full compliance with Biblical doctrine. Remember that Jesus Himself submitted to this authority when he was crucified – however unjustly – by the Roman Government. Clearly Jesus was innocent. Clearly the Roman government was not acknowledging God as it’s basis of authority. So, just because the government might be wrong or might not be a “God-centered” government is no reason to disobey its laws (where they don’t directly require one to break God’s laws) even unto death. Romans 13 Submission to the Authorities

1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. 7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

An interesting, related op-ed from today's NYT:

Op-Ed Contributor

Onward, Moderate Christian Soldiers

By JOHN C. DANFORTH

Published: June 17, 2005

St. Louis

IT would be an oversimplification to say that America's culture wars are now between people of faith and nonbelievers. People of faith are not of one mind, whether on specific issues like stem cell research and government intervention in the case of Terri Schiavo, or the more general issue of how religion relates to politics. In recent years, conservative Christians have presented themselves as representing the one authentic Christian perspective on politics. With due respect for our conservative friends, equally devout Christians come to very different conclusions.

[/url]It is important for those of us who are sometimes called moderates to make the case that we, too, have strongly held Christian convictions, that we speak from the depths of our beliefs, and that our approach to politics is at least as faithful as that of those who are more conservative. Our difference concerns the extent to which government should, or even can, translate religious beliefs into the laws of the state.

People of faith have the right, and perhaps the obligation, to bring their values to bear in politics. Many conservative Christians approach politics with a certainty that they know God's truth, and that they can advance the kingdom of God through governmental action. So they have developed a political agenda that they believe advances God's kingdom, one that includes efforts to "put God back" into the public square and to pass a constitutional amendment intended to protect marriage from the perceived threat of homosexuality.

Moderate Christians are less certain about when and how our beliefs can be translated into statutory form, not because of a lack of faith in God but because of a healthy acknowledgement of the limitations of human beings. Like conservative Christians, we attend church, read the Bible and say our prayers.

But for us, the only absolute standard of behavior is the commandment to love our neighbors as ourselves. Repeatedly in the Gospels, we find that the Love Commandment takes precedence when it conflicts with laws. We struggle to follow that commandment as we face the realities of everyday living, and we do not agree that our responsibility to live as Christians can be codified by legislators.

When, on television, we see a person in a persistent vegetative state, one who will never recover, we believe that allowing the natural and merciful end to her ordeal is more loving than imposing government power to keep her hooked up to a feeding tube.

When we see an opportunity to save our neighbors' lives through stem cell research, we believe that it is our duty to pursue that research, and to oppose legislation that would impede us from doing so.

We think that efforts to haul references of God into the public square, into schools and courthouses, are far more apt to divide Americans than to advance faith.

Following a Lord who reached out in compassion to all human beings, we oppose amending the Constitution in a way that would humiliate homosexuals.

For us, living the Love Commandment may be at odds with efforts to encapsulate Christianity in a political agenda. We strongly support the separation of church and state, both because that principle is essential to holding together a diverse country, and because the policies of the state always fall short of the demands of faith. Aware that even our most passionate ventures into politics are efforts to carry the treasure of religion in the earthen vessel of government, we proceed in a spirit of humility lacking in our conservative colleagues.

In the decade since I left the Senate, American politics has been characterized by two phenomena: the increased activism of the Christian right, especially in the Republican Party, and the collapse of bipartisan collegiality. I do not think it is a stretch to suggest a relationship between the two. To assert that I am on God's side and you are not, that I know God's will and you do not, and that I will use the power of government to advance my understanding of God's kingdom is certain to produce hostility.

By contrast, moderate Christians see ourselves, literally, as moderators. Far from claiming to possess God's truth, we claim only to be imperfect seekers of the truth. We reject the notion that religion should present a series of wedge issues useful at election time for energizing a political base. We believe it is God's work to practice humility, to wear tolerance on our sleeves, to reach out to those with whom we disagree, and to overcome the meanness we see in today's politics.

For us, religion should be inclusive, and it should seek to bridge the differences that separate people. We do not exclude from worship those whose opinions differ from ours. Following a Lord who sat at the table with tax collectors and sinners, we welcome to the Lord's table all who would come. Following a Lord who cited love of God and love of neighbor as encompassing all the commandments, we reject a political agenda that displaces that love. Christians who hold these convictions ought to add their clear voice of moderation to the debate on religion in politics.

John C. Danforth is an Episcopal minister and former Republican senator from Missouri.

---

_________
kangaroo -- please do not read or respond to any of my posts

Can you be a Christian if you support the death penalty (obvious contradiction to the pro-life movement).

Where's the contradiction?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

You gotta love the irony of pro death penalty christians....wasn't Christ executed?

Yep. But I don't remember Him doing any whining about it. Or more seriously, I don't remember Him ever saying that the death penalty itself is wrong, or that, for instance, it wasn't a just penalty for the two mopes executed with Him.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

"I don't remember Him ......"

Well it was a long time ago. Didn't realize you were actually there Vitus. :)

I am a baptized Christian - however, I’m part of the "United Church of Canada." From my understanding, being part of the United Church means (or at least in my congregation) we are:

- Pro-choice (support the beliefs and rights of the mother - don't get me started in a Woman's right debate)

- Sexually diverse (one of our minister's is lesbian)

- Do not necessarily believe in the Literal Phrasing of the bible

- Believe in religious freedom (i.e. don't try to convert others to "our/the right path"), and embrace other cultures

- Politically Liberal (that's what we call it here in Canada - guess that means democrat in the States?)

- Generally nice people who like almost everybody :o)

I attend church on the Big Two (Christmas, Easter) and any other occasion when our fabulous choir belts out a concert in the middle of a service.

I would label myself Christian, but make an obvious effort to separate myself and my wing of the Church from the Baptist Christians etc. (of which my mother's side of the family are hard-core - my cousin was a Missionary in Africa attempting to convert the "heathens" -- YIKES!)

Just my 2 cents…

Cheers, Jane