Christianity question

[Strings]

Ok... this is going to sound odd, but bear with me...

For the Christians of the forum: what is the basic tenet that defines Christianity (of whatever sect or flavor)?

I'll explain why I'm asking for this later in the week: don't want to color the responses. Trust me, I think many of you will have a headshake over it...

[grampster]

Answer is simple:  The divinity of Jesus!!

Any and all words in addition to the above have been compiled into a saga called The Bible.  The continuing argument about...well....just about everything that is Christian is a secondary revelation, important and arguable, but secondary and not foundational.

jesus is Lord.  Then there is everything else.

[Gowen]

In a nutshell, you are a sinner and Jesus died on a cross for your sins.  You just have to accept His free gift to go to Heaven.

[brimic]

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:16

[roo_ster]

The Apostles' & Nicene Creeds cover all the basics for small-o orthodox Christianity, even the non-creedal sects.

There is no telling with the heterodox sects or liberal thoelogians.

Apostles' Creed
I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
Maker of heaven and earth,

and in Jesus Christ,
His only Son, our Lord:
Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended into hell.
On the third day He rose again from the dead.
He ascended into heaven
and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty,
from there He shall come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Holy Christian Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting.
Amen.
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=3355

Nicene Creed
I believe in one God,
the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth
and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only-begotten Son of God,
begotten of His Father before all worlds,
God of God, Light of Light,
very God of very God,
begotten, not made,
being of one substance with the Father;
by whom all things were made;
who for us men and for our salvation
came down from heaven,
and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary
and was made man;
and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate.
He suffered and was buried.
And the third day He rose again
according to the Scriptures
and ascended into heaven
and sits at the right hand of the Father.
And He will come again with glory to judge
both the living and the dead,
whose kingdom will have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Lord and giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son together
is worshiped and glorified,
who spoke by the prophets.

And I believe in one holy Christian and apostolic Church.
I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins,
and I look for the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=3356


The Bonus Round includes the Athanasian Creed, which is a bit more wordy than those above, but is still small-o orthodox Christianity.

Athanasian Creed
Whoever will be saved shall, above all else,
hold the catholic faith.
Which faith, except everyone keeps whole and undefiled,
without doubt he will perish eternally.
And the catholic faith is this,
that we worship one God in three persons
and three persons in one God,
neither confusing the persons
nor dividing the substance.
For there is one person of the Father,
another of the Son,
and another of the Holy Spirit.
But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one:
the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.
Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.
The Father uncreated,
the Son uncreated,
and the Holy Spirit uncreated.
The Father incomprehensible,
the Son incomprehensible,
and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.
The Father eternal,
the Son eternal,
and the Holy Spirit eternal.
And yet there are not three eternals
but one eternal.
As there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensibles
but one uncreated and one incomprehensible.
So likewise the Father is almighty,
the Son almighty,
and the Holy Spirit almighty.
And yet they are not three almighties
but one almighty.
So the Father is God,
the Son is God,
and the Holy Spirit is God.
And yet there are not three gods;
but one God.
So likewise the Father is Lord,
the Son Lord,
and the Holy Spirit Lord.
And yet they are not three lords
but one Lord.
For as we are compelled by the Christian truth to acknowledge every person by himself
to be both God and Lord,
So we cannot by the catholic faith
say that there are three Gods or three Lords.
The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten.
The Son is of the Father alone, not made nor created;
but begotten.
The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son, neither made nor created nor begotten
but proceeding.
So there is one Father, not three Fathers;
one Son, not three Sons;
one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits.
And in this trinity none is before or after another;
none is greater or less than another;
But the whole three persons
are coeternal together and coequal,
so that in all things, as is aforesaid,
the Unity in Trinity
and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshiped..
He, therefore, that will be saved is compelled thus to think of the Trinity.
Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation
that he also believe faithfully the incarnation
of our Lord Jesus Christ.
For the right faith is
that we believe and confess
that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God,
is God and man;
God of the substance of the Father,
begotten before the worlds;
and man of the substance of his mother,
born in the world;
Perfect God and perfect man,
of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
Equal to the Father as touching his Godhead,
and inferior to the Father as touching his manhood;
Who, although he is God and man,
yet he is not two but one Christ.
One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh,
but by taking the manhood into God;.
One altogether,
not by confusion of substance,
but by unity of person.
For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man,
so God and man is one Christ;
Who suffered for our salvation;
descended into hell;
rose again the third day from the dead.
He ascended into heaven;
he sits at the right hand of the Father, God Almighty,
from whence he will come to judge the living and the dead.
At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies
and will give an account of their own works.
And they that have done good will go into life everlasting;
and they that have done evil,
into everlasting fire.
This is the catholic faith which
except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=3357

[zahc]

It's all about Jesus.

[lupinus]

My Pastor teaches the children to say it in five easy words using their fingers- Jesus died for my sins.

Beyond that in a more encompassing adult answer- That Jesus is true God come into the world born of the Holy Spirit by the Virgin Mary and was made man. He lived a sinless life to be the perfect sacrificial lamb and died on the cross for our sins.

The already posted creeds give more detail on this, that's the nutshell version. Anything beyond that is differences in theological interpretation between the various denominations. In these you of course find the different beliefs on salvation, baptism, piety, etc. Personally I attend an LCMS Lutheran church.

[Perd Hapley]

Donuts and coffee on Sunday mornings?  

It seems that a lot of people that are hostile to Christianity seem to think it is defined by judgment and condemnation.  But that's just something Christianity has in common with many other religions.  The distinctive of our religion is that God shares in the suffering of our sins, and has sacrificed Himself for His enemies (us) so that anyone can be forgiven.

[roo_ster]

Donuts and coffee on Sunday mornings?  

In the name of economy, our church has ixnayed the onutdays.  We rely on pastry donations, nowadays.  I fear that now puts us outside the mainstream of practice.

[lupinus]

In the name of economy, our church has ixnayed the onutdays.  We rely on pastry donations, nowadays.  I fear that now puts us outside the mainstream of practice.

We're Lutheran. Church service is not completed with the benediction. It is completed when the coffee pot in the fellowship hall runs dry 

In the same way as we have those who agree to do readings, donate flowers, etc. one family a month donates their time and money to making the coffee and putting out tasty little things for after church fellowship. I'm wouldn't be surprised if one of these days we have a budget meeting and coffee is in there...

Until then "coffee hour" remains an official donation listing right up there with the alter flowers and reader.

[Perd Hapley]

In the name of economy, our church has ixnayed the onutdays.  We rely on pastry donations, nowadays.  I fear that now puts us outside the mainstream of practice.

I hope this won't spark any inquisitions against us, but at the weird little church to which I belong, our "denomination" believes that eating food at church (other than comm. wafers) contradicts Biblical teaching. 

1Cr 11:20-22 KJV - When ye come together therefore into one place, [this] is not to eat the Lord's supper.  For in eating every one taketh before  his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise [you] not.

Clearly, that means you're not supposed to eat in church.  Granted, it was cheaper to build our church without a kitchen or dining room, but then we do stupid things like renting very expensive tents just to have a "social."   

[lupinus]

Fisty,

I believe that passage speaks more to greed and unworthy reception then eating a meal together in fellowship.

[Balog]

Communion was originally a meal eaten together. The whole cracker and apple juice thing is a recent development. Your church is a KJV only isn't it Fisty?

[One of Many]

The scripture clearly condemns taking common meals at the worship location.

The church I attend will have one member invite others to their home for a shared meal (pot luck where each person brings a dish), and the members rotate the privilege among themselves. This is not done every time we meet, but once a month or two, so that members who drive a long distance can socialize with those who live closer to the assembly hall. We have a small congregation, so it is not too much of a problem to meet in a members home. In fact, for a while the actual worship was held in the home of a member.

I have worshiped in congregations that did not own a building, and rented whatever facility was available. The facilities that did have kitchens, were not used for the purpose of preparing or eating a common meal. Worship is worship, and socializing with other Christians is something else. Both are necessary parts of fulfilling the teachings of Christ.

[Balog]

You have a strange definition of "clearly" there OoM.

[One of Many]

Communion was originally a meal eaten together. The whole cracker and apple juice thing is a recent development. Your church is a KJV only isn't it Fisty?

Communion as instituted by Christ was done after the passover meal had been completed. It was not a part of the passover meal that Christ and the Apostles partook together. It involved the use of Unleavened Bread, and Unfermented grape juice, because that was what was available due to the passover requirement of having no leavening agents in the building.

The passage in 1st Corinthians clearly indicates that what the members of that congregation were doing, was eating a common meal that they brought themselves, and some were feasting while others starved for lack of any food to eat. Note that the command was not for the wealthy to feed the poor while at the worship, it was for them to take their common meals at their own homes, and to properly observe the communion as Christ instituted it.

[lupinus]

Communion as instituted by Christ was done after the passover meal had been completed.

Actually it was part of the passover meal.

Unfermented grape juice

Actually, it was wine.

And if you actually read the whole thing and take it in context it has nothing to do with eating in the church building it has to do with unworthy reception of the Lords supper and greed.

[lee n. field]

what is the basic tenet that defines Christianity

Centrally, that Jesus of Nazareth was crucified, died, was buried and then rose, and the meaning that this event has.

Clearly, that means you're not supposed to eat in church.

No, you're not supposed to turn the Lord's Supper into a wild party.

I have read that it was the custom at the time in the Greco-Roman world, when you gave a party, to have a main table where all the good stuff was.  That's where all the "in" people got invited to.  Everybody else, random members of the public, wannabes, are elsewhere in the house, eating not as well, envious.  Lots of social status stuff going on.  The "in crowd" eats well, socializes with themselves, get drunk.  This is what Paul was complaining about.

The Apostles' & Nicene Creeds cover all the basics for small-o orthodox Christianity, even the non-creedal sects.

There is no telling with the heterodox sects or liberal thoelogians.

The ecumenical creeds are a good filter.

[grampster]

Strings,

The specific answer to your specific question is the divinity and mission of Jesus.

You can already see in this thread the picking at nits that also defines the various parts of the body of His church.  That picking is the reason for the necessity of Jesus among us.
If not for Jesus and what he accomplished there would be no salvation as the continuing argument about how to receive it or even if salvation was real, would still be undecided and argued about.  If a sect or body of people do not accept Jesus as Lord, they are not Christian, period.  He is the Alpha and Omega.

[Balog]

A lot of teetotalers try desperately to negate the fact that Jesus drank wine and had no problem with others doing so as well. It's a highly dishonest tactic, corrupting the words of the Bible to conform to your own little world view. The Greek words used for the "do not be drunk with wine" passages are the exact same as in the "water to wine" etc passages.

[Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas]

For the Christians of the forum: what is the basic tenet that defines Christianity (of whatever sect or flavor)?

Nitpicking, if this thread is any evidence. 

As Grampster mentioned, the divinity of Christ is key. He was not a prophet, but the son of God. Came to earth, died for sinners*, was raised again, will return.

*You can nitpick exactly what sinners Jesus died to save. Calvinists versus... I don't know what they call the non-Limited Atonement crowd (Baptists?  ).

I hope this won't spark any inquisitions against us, but at the weird little church to which I belong, our "denomination" believes that eating food at church (other than comm. wafers) contradicts Biblical teaching.

What denomination is that?
My notion is that the Corinthians were treating the Lord's Supper (LS) proper as a buffet line, probably due to past experience with Greek/Roman religious feasts. Wasn't intended as a place for you to stuff yourself to the gills (or as a place to get drunk ) - like Baptism wasn't invented as a place for you to wash your armpits or shave your legs.

[lee n. field]

I don't know what they call the non-Limited Atonement crowd (Baptists?  Tongue).

Universalists.

[lupinus]

A lot of teetotalers try desperately to negate the fact that Jesus drank wine and had no problem with others doing so as well. It's a highly dishonest tactic, corrupting the words of the Bible to conform to your own little world view. The Greek words used for the "do not be drunk with wine" passages are the exact same as in the "water to wine" etc passages.

Quite correct. We know from both history and context that the drink was wine. The simple fact was that in those days anything but freshly extracted juice was fermented. Without pasteurization natural wild yeast and other bacterias either caused fermentation or spoilage very quickly. So arguing fruit of the vine or not translation is a moot point. Also we know that Christ instituted the Last Supper during the passover (you'll have to excuse me, I forget exactly which drinking, the third IIRC) the drink was wine as that is part of the passover meal. It's like arguing they were not eating roasted lamb.

Nitpicking, if this thread is any evidence.

We Christians are rather good at debating the differences  So long as we remember why we are Christians first and your preferred denomination second all is well with it IMO.

I don't know what they call the non-Limited Atonement crowd

Depends on exactly how you define limited atonement. The belief died for just a select few is actually a rather contrary belief to most Christians outside of hard core Calvinists.

My notion is that the Corinthians were treating the Lord's Supper (LS) proper as a buffet line, probably due to past experience with Greek/Roman religious feasts. Wasn't intended as a place for you to stuff yourself to the gills (or as a place to get drunk shocked) - like Baptism wasn't invented as a place for you to wash your armpits or shave your legs.

Like so many things context is everything. When reading and picking out just that verse it can be argued it condemns any eating inside the church building. When reading the whole thing it puts it right into context however.

[Strings]

Ok, I think there have been enough replies for me to clear things up (and quiet down the nitpickers).

We normally do our Thanksgiving dinner the sunday after, so my father in law can be there. We had a guest this year, who tried arguing that there are Christians who don't believe in the divinity of Christ.

Which kinda threw me for a loop. But her argument was that there are other messianic faiths that don't recognize Christ as the Messiah, but they're still Christian.

My understanding has always been that THE core belief was the divinity of Christ, and his sacrifice. Not believing in Christ, but calling yourself Christian, seems to defeat the idea. But she was VERY adamant about it...

Personally, I think her problem stems from the feeling that so many pagans have, that words can have whatever meaning you ascribe to them. She also falls into one of the other big "pagan traps", of trying to find the "pagan roots" of every current religion (even argued that Islam is more pagan than other faiths)... 

So... thanks for all the replies!

[grampster]

Your guest suffers from a clearly human malady of one kind or another:  rationionalization or intellectualism which I think the two of which forms the basis for humanism, a distinctly unChristian religion.