Actually I was bored and eating my breakfast and the board was pretty dead. It seems all your compadres had abandoned the thread.
I am a Christian, loud and proud. And you know it.
I know you are not. Not by any traditional or orthodox definition of the term. You believe in a Jesus who was once the spirit brother of Lucifer. The Jesus of Christianity is the CREATOR of Lucifer (and everything else).
Yes, poor Ghandi. A great man, good and righteous as any other mortal, damned to Hell because... well, because the cruel, unloving God worshiped by the mean-spirited, disgraceful, self-proclaimed Christians of whom we speak says so.
He rejected Christ. He claimed that Christ was simply a "Good teacher" and not God Incarate. He denied that Christ died for his sins. He denied that Jesus is the only way, the only truth and the only life. He rejected the teachings of Jesus and rejected his mission. The Bible says that such people will die in their sins. Jesus said that such people would suffer hell and eternal damnation where the worm dieth not and there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Gentle Jesus, meek and mild...
If you believe that Ghandi, by his good works, was made righteous before God, then you deny the Gospel of Christ.
Narrow is the way, and the narrow way does not include adherence to the polytheistic-Christ-denying Hinduism of Ghandi.
~”I know you are not. Not by any traditional or orthodox definition of the term.”~
See, that’s where you err. The “traditional or orthodox definition of the term” to which you refer is itself a bastardization of the term. Men have, over the centuries, redefined what it means to be a Christian. A Christian used to be one who follows Christ. That’s the sort of person the Romans fed to the lions. Over the centuries, Christianity has embraced falsehood after falsehood, then gotten together and said, “If you don’t believe our falsehoods, then you aren’t a Christian. Certainly not by the traditional or orthodox definition of the term.” This is one of the two things that I mean by the phrase “taking the Christ out of Christian.”
Well, the tradition is wrong. So, I proclaim that I’m not a traditional Christian, because then I would be wrong too. But, try as you might, you cannot effectively redefine what it really means to be Christian, because there is only One who is charge of that particular definition.
~”Jesus said that such people would suffer hell and eternal damnation where the worm dieth not and there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.”~
Your Jesus, perhaps. Mine actually has charity and love of mankind. That’s why He gives them every opportunity to accept Him - even beyond this life. Your Jesus doesn’t seem to be powerful enough to save the ignorant, little children, or the innocent. My Jesus can.
If you are insistent that we worship different Christs, fine, I’ll stick with my Jesus, thanks. I don’t want anything to do with the vengeful, wrathful, spiteful, weakened recasting of Him that your faith has invented over the centuries.
~”If you believe that Ghandi, by his good works, was made righteous before God, then you deny the Gospel of Christ.”~
Of course not. Grace comes by faith. But you abrogate to yourself Christ’s authority to judge. You are no one to proclaim that Ghandi will burn in Hell, and you are no one to proclaim that Christ will not save me.