....

No, the definition christianity is not governed by the majority(in my opinion), however the majority agrees that you have to accept jesus christ as your personal savior, and accept him as god to be christian.

How is that not a contradiction?

The majority doesn't decide what a Christian is, but the majority agrees that you have to believe this to be a Christian.

How is that a contradiction?

They simply agree that the bible states you have to believe that to be a christian, the majority didn't create the bible, nor did they create the definition, they are just in agreement that this is the way it is.

Its like the majority looking at a picture of a frog, and agreeing that it is a frog, just because they agree it is a frog, doesn't make the fact that it is a frog, they are just observing it.

In my opinion, there are parts the bible not open to interpretation, these parts are the backbone of the whole belief system, and I've already stated what they are.

Are we just going to go in circles? Why don't you stop being condescending and just tell me your point.

I don't even understand what you two are arguing about anymore.

Neither do I .

Quote from Ash

I wonder what Jeremy has to say about the word "misinterpretation" as applied to this. Aren't all interpretations equally valid?

Except the retarded ones.

Quote from Steyene

Holy shit rawgreen, you really are an idiot. Yes there is stuff in the bible against homosexuals, but it is no worse then any other sin..

Just because it's no different than any other sin, does that mean that we(as in the people) should still do it? Absolutely Not!

EDIT: wait a minute....this is also the same as a verse in the Bible....

@RawGreen: the old testament does forbid homosexuality. It also forbids eating shellfish and wearing certain types of clothes. Christians tend to ignore almost all the commands in the old testament (I'm thinking of the dietary restrictions primarily) except the ones that they need to be homophobic.

@ Steyene: So God holds mass murder to be on the same level as looking at pornography? This seems a little rash in my opinion.

@ Jeremy and Ash: I believe you are discussing how you define someone as Christian. Jeremy, you appear to contradict yourself; you say that the majority isn't what makes the decision, but also that the definitions of Christianity are decided by the majority. Ash's question (as I understand it) is this:

If there was a group of people who followed the new testament to the letter and believed every word of it literally, but who held the additional belief that Jesus was, in fact, an alien who had been implanted into Mary's womb rather than through immaculate conception, would that sect be Christian?

Quote from Zed

@ Jeremy and Ash: I believe you are discussing how you define someone as Christian. Jeremy, you appear to contradict yourself; you say that the majority isn't what makes the decision, but also that the definitions of Christianity are decided by the majority. Ash's question (as I understand it) is this:

I'm not saying the majority defines christianity, I'm saying they agree on the already set definition, of the small number of things already defined in the bible that you need to believe to be christian.

Quote from Zed

If there was a group of people who followed the new testament to the letter and believed every word of it literally, but who held the additional belief that Jesus was, in fact, an alien who had been implanted into Mary's womb rather than through immaculate conception, would that sect be Christian?

In my opinion, no, as I think this is one of the things that needs to be believed one way to be considered a christian.

So the definition exists - it is an actual, definite, imutable truth - and the majority have worked out what it is?

In my opinion, and in the context of the religion, you need to accept Jesus Christ as your savior and accept him as your lord god, to be considered a christian. The majority seems to understand this, and accept it.

In my opinion its the backbone of the whole belief system, and you cannot technically be a christian without believing those things.

Lol, Ive said in my opinion like 30 million times. But I get the feeling you guys are going to try and use it against me if I don't.

I think I understand it now, and it's a perfectly reasonable position to adopt. I, personally, will not argue against that belief as being a prerequisite to Christianity.

I'll still argue like hell against the belief being correct though.

I'm not going to defend it being correct, nor do I believe it to be correct, that said I don't think its wrong either.

[swf=http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/m5t19KWmx8U]height=244 width=290[/swf]

@Zed. By that he means, that you can either be perfect or not. If you don't accept Jesus, then you have to be perfect otherwise God will effectively ignore you. Think of it perfection being equal to 100%, and that screw ups range from ridiculously small to 50%. Even if you do something that only makes your perfection percent = 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% you still aren't 100%