> Unfortunatly, something vaguely related to Christ is NOT better than nothing.
Says you, but says Christ? Did He not say to his disciples “...Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.”? (Luke 9:50)
How does that square with what you’ve just said?
Totally out of context. Just because someone does not worship the devil or burn believers at the stake does not make them Christian.
Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.”? (Luke 9:50)
____________________________________________________
Nice try...
But the discipiles were complaining that the others from another congregation were casing devils out in the name of Jesus ...
Not putting up basphemeous billboards about His mother and His birth...
Mormonism teaches that “god” came down and had sex with Mary...
But not Christianity...
Says you, but says Christ? [DieHard the Hunter]
Yes, says Jesus...he told one church in the book of Revelation that he preferred them either hot or cold -- not lukewarm -- something about being "spewable" I might add.
Did He not say to his disciples “...Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.”? (Luke 9:50) How does that square with what you’ve just said? [DieHard the Hunter to TalonDJ]
Well, rather than say "vaguely related to Christ" as TalonDJ phrased it -- and which I covered above with Revelation passage -- I think the MAJOR issue with cultists like JWs, Lds, & others is that they are related to a "vague" christ...what the apostle Paul described as "another Christ" (2 Cor. 11:4).
In the Bible, a name is identity. The Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, say that Jesus is a son of God -- not the Son of God -- and that this Jesus is an angel, a human being, and a sort of "semi-god." I'm sorry, but to attach the identity of a semi-god to Jesus is not elevating "His Name".
It's like "relating" to someone online who you think is one thing ID-wise, and then to find out you never really knew them at all because they were so different from their online personality. In those cases, no matter how much you think you are relating to that individual, you really haven't.
The context, Diehard, for Luke 9 is v. 49 -- a man who drove out demons in Jesus' name. He was doing this action in the identity of Jesus...Jesus said nothing that this man was distorting who Jesus' own identity was...unlike the JWs & Mormons (Mormons say Jesus is the elder brother of Lucifer -- and did not create Lucifer).