/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>731494

If you follow the teachings of the Bible and Christ then why wouldn't you be baptized and live in fellowship with other Christians?

>>731498

That's besides the point. One could have many reasons to not participate in mainstream christianity. I'll give you an example: small town, everybody claims to be christian and yet their lives and actions show otherwise. Would it be unreasonable to avoid living in fellowship with them?

>>731503

>everybody claims to be christian and yet their lives and actions show otherwise

Are you sinless?

>Would it be unreasonable to avoid living in fellowship with them?

It really depends on what they're doing. But are you saying all the churches in your area are bad? All of them? Or are you just struggling with your own pride?

>>731503

I know that you meant this post to be a EXAMPLE, but I can't help but point out the theological flaw.

Yes(sorta), and no.

Yes(sorta), because having friendships which such people can be bad, depending on how evil they are. This is what the bible recommends, actually.

And no, because this is the advice Jesus Christ gives on hypocritical people is this: Matthew 23 1-4: Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.

You see now that just because someone is hypocritical, that doesn't change what God has said. If a hypocritical person says that the law is good, but breaks it, will you conclude that the law is bad?

>>731509

>If a hypocritical person says that the law is good, but breaks it, will you conclude that the law is bad?

Of course not. If a hypocritical person says that the law is good, but breaks it on a regular basis, brags about it and pretends to not be a sinner at all, I want no business with them. I'll respect the law by myself.

>>731494

as many have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

truly I tell you unless you are born of the water and the spirit, you will not see the kingdom of heaven (ie baptism).

no salvation outside the church, ect.

>>731515

Why do I have a feeling that this statement implies more than you let on?

>If a hypocritical person says that the law is good, but breaks it, will you conclude that the law is bad?

>Of course not

But you attach this at the end of the post

>I'll respect the law by myself.

I might be wrong, but this sounds suspiciously like a "no, but basically yes".

>>731522

English is not my first language, so I'm not sure I'm understanding the nuance you're getting. What I meant to say is that I don't want business with the people that preach the law and don't practice it. But I'll preach and practice the same laws they preach. So the law is not bad

>>731498

>If you follow the teachings of the Bible and Christ then why wouldn't you be baptized and live in fellowship with other Christians?

To me, it depends on what is meant by fellowship. I fellowship with any individuals I can. But I won't bother with many "designated" churches because of the 501c3. They took a bribe (who else was known for taking bribes: I tell you, he was the true "fake Christian", and was removed from the list of the Apostles). Not everyone in the congregation is this way, but the people in charge have brought trouble on themselves.

>>731550

Not that I agree with 501c3, but I don't think a church refraining from publicly or officially endorsing a political campaign or candidate is the same as being a Judas. Obviously politics isn't the way it should be, but what are they supposed to do? Either they follow the state guidelines and keep their money or they don't and have their money go to wars and abortions.

>>731494

"Whoever gathers without me scatters".

Anyone who dies outside of communion with the Orthodox Church goes to Hell, except if they were intending to join Orthodoxy but death prevented them to.

If the hypothetical person in the OP were actually trying their best to be a good Christian, God's grace would have led them to the Orthodox Church. As it is now, they're not baptized and not Orthodox so they will necessarily go to Hell if they die now.

>>731494

>Do you think this person is a true christian

I would say that a true Christian is someone who is born again, and one can be born again without going to church and without being physically baptized. And I say "physically baptized", because the physical baptism is a symbolic act. This symbolic act doesn't save us, the thing it symbolizes does.

>>731563

I'm not going to tell you how to think here. But personally, if our early brothers and sisters suffered and were tortured for teaching the truth to the State, then this is the least I could do.

When the age of Martyrs died down, even the rise of Monasticism recognized the virtue in being away from the State. The early Desert Fathers and Mothers lamented that they lived in an age unlike the martyrs… so they sought the next best thing and removed themselves from the world and suffered in the flesh a different way. I think we should follow such examples.

>>731569

I have nothing but the utmost respect for martyrs of all stripes, but 'some are made for this, others for that.' Not everyone is called for martyrdom.

Those of us who live in the world have to submit ourselves to the governing authorities, which is the cross we bear. Our duty in politics is to sanctify it to the extent possible given our limitations and to advance the Kingdom in the society by preaching the Gospel and setting a living moral example.

>>731575

Submitting to authorities doesn't mean compromising God's words though. He's the ultimate authority. Sometimes you have to draw the line.

The proof is in the putting, man. Look at what happened to the world especially after this "hush money" took root. The church is a lame duck. Politics and culture have gone to hell.

The same goes for other areas. So I'm not just focused on the US. As much as I admire the Orthodox, they're a bigger lame duck than anyone. The Christians in Turkey aren't even allowed to build churches.. and in some cases, banned from existing ones. Let alone forbidden from preaching the gospel in the streets. Yet turkey has built a whopping 9000 mosques just since 2005. Would you say it's good to submit to these authorities? No! I say to defy them and, perhaps by suffering, you can show the world the injustice. But this takes courage and strong faith.

Btw, this same Orthodox Patriarchate has just caused a giant rift in the church as well, breaking relations with the Russian church. A lot of it revolves around compromises with Muslims and the Turkish State. Just LOOK at the damage the relationship of a hostile State against a Church can cause. We're looking at another Great Schism looming because of it.

So it's not just America I speak about. It's everywhere (although America has more Jewey and insidious compromises in comparison to Muslims).

Das rite

>>731503

Are you in such situation? I doubt it.

>follows the bible

>isn't baptized and doesn't go to church

Pick one buddy

>>731503

It's very prideful to think youre without sin while everyone else is unworthy of fellowship with you.

Jesus commands us to be in fellowship with other christians and to be baptised. Anyone who doesnt is not living a christian life.

>>731494

>>731503

Unless bound by restriction the statement of a person doing what the bible says and believing in God yet not going to church and/or be baptized is paradoxical.

If you believe in God, and in the Scriptures, then you WILL go to church and get baptized.

No excuses unless you're a literal nomad or living in a no-man's land.

They would go to hell.

Following the teachings of Christ implies following everything. Not just the parts that I want to.

Why don't they go to church? Is it because all the churches in their area have doctrines that they see as in conflict with the bible? Then to them there are no churches in their area to go to.

>>731811

>>731850

>>731856

Christ never said you "need to be baptized to be saved".

There are instances of Christ saying that those who believe in him will be saved, while those who don't believe won't be.

He said we need to be reborn of water and the Spirit, and while many argue that the "water" here refers to baptism, it's ridiculous to argue that mere man can promote any sort of rebirth.

>>731494

A fake christian is someone who claims or even believes that they are christian, yet they deny the divinity of Christ (broadly, and specifically do not swear by the Creed. As sated in the rules of this board.)

>>731907

Agreed. Technically, there are many "real" Christians, but they are either in a state of apostasy or heresy or schism.

>>731494

>don't go to any sort of church

Why anon? Because people there are bad? You go to church for God, not because of the people there.

The only time you're not going to a church is when it's leadership is corrupted (Transgender pastor, feel good message only, etc). But then find a different one and I doubt all the churches in your area are all megachurches or having corrupted leadership

>Not being baptized

Assuming you're talking about water baptism, no that's not necessary. Examples are the centurion and the thief. All you need is to confess your sins and accept and believe that Christ died for us on the cross, and was resurrected 3 days later

In my opinion, a fake christian is someone who claims to be but doesn't believe in his heart, and never accepted the gift of salvation of Jesus Christ

>>731494

>How do you see a person that follows the Bible, the teachings of Christ and tries their best to be a good christian, BUT they don't go to any sort of church, they're not baptized and so on.

Then he isn't following the teachings of Christ since Christ said to get baptized and to gather together and do certain things in his name. Christianity is not a single player video game.

>>731884

>universally believed from the apostles to the 16th century

>even after, believed by 95% of christendom

but pastor jim says baptism is just a symbol and has no real effect, so Im sure he's got it right.

>There are instances of Christ saying that those who believe in him will be saved, while those who don't believe won't be.

Yo can we get a check on what he actually said?

Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. - Mark 16:16

Huh. Did you forget the part where Jesus said "and is baptised"?

>>732063

"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God." - John 3:18

What's the difference between being saved and not being condemned? Legit question, I can't find much about it

>>731884

>Christ never said you "need to be baptized to be saved".

Neither did he say that raping a 5yo girl is bad, but I'll go safe and not do that.

The BIBLE a.k.a. WORD OF GOD says that believers need to be baptized, so if you really believe in what it says you get yourself baptized unless it's not possible.

>>732169

He did say against sexual immorality.

>BIBLE a.k.a. WORD OF GOD says that believers need to be baptized

Can you find a quote? Pro tip: you can't

>>732169

>Neither did he say that raping a 5yo girl is bad, but I'll go safe and not do that.

>this fallacy

>>732233

<Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost