jump to last post 1-12 of 12 discussions (94 posts)

Are Christians Embarrassed of Their Faith?

  1. 0
    Emile Rposted 5 years ago


    I keep running across posts on this site where Christians refuse to admit what sect they are affiliated with.  The general comments include 'I'm not religious, I'm Christian. 'I don't belong to any religious denomination. I'm Christian.' 'I'm not Catholic or Protestant, I'm Christian. '

    Why do many Christians, not all of course, but mostly fundamentalist/literalist/Bible Thumpers refuse to share what denomination they are affiliated with?

    1. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I think that's because you can be a Christian without being a member of a church. You can be a Christian without embracing "organized" religion. I'm a Christian, but I don't attend church regularly. I do, however, pray, read the Bible, and try (sometimes not very well) to follow the teachings of Christ. I'm not ashamed to say that I was reared as a Presbyterian, and when I do attend church, I go to a Presbyterian church. I like their views on tolerance, moderation, and acceptance.

      1. 0
        Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I've read many of your posts. I understand how someone such as yourself, who doesn't judge, thump a Bible or scream that the world is headed to hell in a hand basket can make a statement like that.

        But the firmly religious right attends church regularly; yet refuses to say what sect's church they frequent. I find it oddly evasive.

        1. vox vocis profile image93
          vox vocisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          What do you assume under sect's church?

          1. 0
            Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I'm afraid I don't understand your question.

      2. Jesus was a hippy profile image59
        Jesus was a hippyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        In england religion is in such decline that old churches are on the market all the time. I almost bought one last month. Its a shame I missed out on it, it was a fantastic building.

        I personally think that any unfounded belief is one that is not worth having. I've read the bible and I have to say, there are so many things in that book that I just cannot believe.

    2. TMMason profile image75
      TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Simply because, I am no denomination.

      I was baptised at birth Protestant, my mother was one, my father and his family were strict Catholic... I am niether.

      I believe in Christ as my Saviour and the Son of God.

      That does not require a denomination.

      1. 0
        Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Are you saying you do not attend church?

        1. TMMason profile image75
          TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          No, I do not.

          The last time I set foot in a church was 25 or 30 years or more ago. I am 43 now... so...

          And the last time I was in a chirch was for my nieces Christining, not a mass.

          I have no use for organized religion.

          1. 0
            Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Thanks for clarifying that. No offense, but I honestly didn't think such a hard take on the thing was possible from individual reflection, or even study. I'm going to have to revamp my take on the religious right if you are the norm. This has gotten more interesting. Thanks for answering my questions. smile

            1. TMMason profile image75
              TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              You're welcome, Emile.

          2. A Troubled Man profile image59
            A Troubled Manposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            It’s true that the church did not officially start until the Day of Pentecost, but since the church is based on the person and work of Christ, it really began with Jesus. He is the one who is “calling out” people who will call upon Him for salvation. All who do so are automatically members of the body of Christ through the baptism of the Holy Spirit (see 1 Corinthians 12:13).

            When it comes to the church, there is the church invisible, comprised by all those who have trusted Jesus as Savior and Lord. And there is the visible church, comprised of those who gather together. Not all members of the visible church belong to the body of Christ, and not all who belong to the body of Christ gather physically in a church.

            The bottom line is the church belongs to Jesus Christ (He says so in Matthew 16:18), and if we belong to Jesus, we are part of that invisible church. Of course, the visible church is important as well, because that’s where we worship the Lord, participate in the Sacraments (baptism, communion, marriage), learn about God’s Word, and engage in the church’s mission to the world. It’s also where we exercise our spiritual gifts as given to each believer by the Holy Spirit (see 1 Corinthians 12).

            http://christianity101online.com/blog/2 … by-church/

            1. 0
              Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              So, I guess you posted that saying you agree that the mark of a Christian is faith in Christ. And they don't have to all agree or follow the Bible. Good to know. Thanks for sharing. smile

              1. A Troubled Man profile image59
                A Troubled Manposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                I won't ask you again to stop putting words in my mouth. Thanks.

                1. 0
                  Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm not putting words in your mouth. I'm reading your post and commenting. If you haven't gotten the point across you meant to; that would be your inability to communicate effectively. Not mine.

                  1. A Troubled Man profile image59
                    A Troubled Manposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Really? Then, show me exactly where I said that? If you can't, I expect an apology for both posts.

    3. Jarn profile image85
      Jarnposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I am not embarrased of my faith, or of my denomination. I was raised Catholic and still enjoy the pomp and ceremony, however I believe neither is necessary for worship or being saved and do not follow any one doctrine wholly.

      I am mostly embarrased by other Christians, who feel the need to shout, froth at the mouth, speak in tongues, shake, quake, and witness at all times and in all venues. They are also loud-mouthed, pushy, intolerant, and hateful toward other people's beliefs while frequently taking Biblical passages out of context and failing to do the research necessary to fully understand the message they try to foist on others. Bible-thumpers with their pocket-God have bound up the works of medical science which rightly could've saved many lives and constantly seek to enviegle their way into government and public schools. Such ignorant people are what the world thinks of when they think "Christian" and it saddens me to no end because it need not be that way.

      I have many Christian friends, some of whom base their lives around their belief in God. They accept all people, refuse to judge, worship wherever and whenever it suits them, and respect other peoples' beliefs. I personally envy them their depth of faith and wish all Christians were so devout in obeying the SPIRIT of Christ's message as opposed to getting hung up on the LETTER of the law, so to speak.

      1. 0
        Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        That's an excellent response. I've sometimes wondered if the thumpers don't share their sect because they know their behavior is embarrassing and don't want to be called out for it by others who practise their religion in a more civilized manner and affiliate with the same sect.

        1. Jarn profile image85
          Jarnposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Meh. Perhaps. But that would suggest a greater self-awareness on the part of the thumpers than I believe they're capable of. To be so hard-headed and single-minded, you have to be shuttered to who you yourself really are as well. As such, I think you're giving them too much credit.

    4. Greek One profile image80
      Greek Oneposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I am Greek Orthodox...  same as Jesus smile

    5. kess profile image60
      kessposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Because of the authoritative and in a way verifiable historic foundations of christianity, a christian have full confidence in his belief which gives them a certain  level of boldness.

      8ut on the otherhand the hyocrisy within christianity which is caused by the very same authoritative verifiable foundation has caused it to split into varios sects/ denominations...

      Now each have a very good reason to cast blame for the problems within christianity.... it now become a game where  it is not I/Us with the problem but...... it is  You/Them..

      Each being ashamed of his brother not realising they are all from the same stock......for none would ever deny their original foundation.

      Also they will never accept that christianity is and has always been a subset of the false religion..... and the only TRUE religion is LIFE.

      1. Jerami profile image78
        Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Very true!

        ALL denominations of Christianity are daughters of Catholicism

        1. Greek One profile image80
          Greek Oneposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          No... all Christian denominations are sons of Greek Orthodoxy.. hence the name "Orthodoxy"

          Bless you smile

        2. kess profile image60
          kessposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          If  you mean all christians are then catholics....then you may understand what i mean.

          All catholics are christians but not all christians are catholics...

          the problem is with christians which catholics are a subset.

          christuanity find problems with each other within their own rules...
          and I say the problems arise because of the very presence of the rules itself.

          1. Jerami profile image78
            Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I think that Jesus said as much to the Phasasees;  "Why are you making up all them rules that you do not even keep?". 
                or   ...  something like that!

            1. 0
              Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Sounds like a fair interpretation.

        3. 0
          Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I don't agree with that.
          Supposedly Catholicism is based on the Apostle Peter's teachings.  Well, Peter's teachings followed Christ's teachings of course.  And those teachings were about knowing God in Spirit and not about rituals.   The bread and wine that Jesus said were His body and blood....well, Peter knew that those were not literally His blood and His body!  Yet...I'm told that's what the Catholic Church's leaders believe...  And Peter knew that Christ's "church" is a spiritual one, not confined to a particular building or ritualistic doctrine, and that Jesus is the only mediator between God and man.    I'm not sure at what point Catholicism was put in place, but I'm told that "catholic" originally referred to the whole body of Believers in whatever Country or City they lived in.  The Apostles preached that "whosoever" could be saved and follow Christ; so there were many converts to Christ who didn't become Roman Catholics....  There are many different groups of Believers whose Churches never originated from the established Roman Catholic Church.  Such as some of the Baptist Churches, etc.....

          Lutheran may have originated there, because Martin Luther did protest against the already-established Catholic Church.   

          But simple Christianity didn't result from the Catholic Church.  Kinda like the "invisible" church that A Troubled Man referred to earlier....
          It originated from the "catholic" word perhaps, meaning "universal"? as in followers of Christ............but not from the established Roman Catholic Church....
          And that's one reason I always hesitate to even be labeled a "Protestant".  Because that word would seem to define people who were first in the RCC and then left it, protested against it.

          1. Jerami profile image78
            Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I am sorry for the delay in commenting.
            Just now saw this.

               It is my understanding that the Catholic church originated in 326 AD. And
            Protestants and Lutherans did break off from their mother church.
              The organized churches continued to break away, They changed some of the doctrines each time while keeping the foundational beliefs.

               Imagine for a moment that every prophesy were to be fulfilled exactly as you believe they are going to. With one exception.
               The 1000 year reign of Christ is not on earth but in heaven.
              John was in heaven and saw the dead souls who were killed for the word of God, they are in heaven before the throne with Jesus where they will reign with Christ.  IN Heaven.

               Now life continues here on earth.
               A couple hundred years pass and a New religion is established on the foundation of the promise of these "OLD" prophesy having not happened yet.

               I think that this is what happened in 326 AD.

            1. 0
              Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Could be, as far as I know.
              I've never really studied it enough to know.  I've heard people talk about the millinial reign that claim there will be a mixture of the saved souls (actually their spirits or spirit bodies) along with the unsaved during that time, but on earth (well, the "new" earth).....and the saved will be witnessing to the unsaved.  I'm inclined to think that's silly for spirits to live among physical bodies.   And we know that's not gonna happen in Heaven.

              If what occurred as we're talkin' about was in 326 A.D.,  that sounds more sensible actually, Jerami.   But I'm sorry, it's just rather confusing for me.   And for many scholars, etc.!   Because they haven't "figured it all out" yet either.

              1. Jerami profile image78
                Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                I don't want to sound egotistical or  Rude or Nuttin else,  but I do suggest ......
                really thinking about the "importance" of understanding  "the importance" of there being a timeframe   concerning when we are supposed to  (figurative speaking)  run and hide from the tiger!

                   I came in here two years ago with this concept.

                   Time frame in prophesy   sixty two weeks =  approx 568 years in prophesy.
                             Daniel 9:23
                                "    :26
                   God told Gabriel to give this message to Daniel (according to the bible)!
                   Almost a direct quote from God ??

                   And then the disciples were adlibbing that which they honestly thought Jesus would want them to say.

                   Which one should we validate to be the foundation of our belief system?

                   Daniel  or   the Disciples  ....   which spoke first?   
                   The second speaker would have to be in agreement with the first, or one of them would have to be false!    Jesus even said as much when he adressed himself as having to ulfill that which was spoken of OLD.
                           Right ?    or wrong  ?

                    If we attempt to interpret their message  we should understand Daniel first   Then Jesus (words in read)   And  Then  interpret that which the disciples in such a way as to agree with Jesus and the prophets of OLD
                   Not the other way around!

                  Goina come out the other end, in a different place, either way that we do it.

              2. lone77star profile image90
                lone77starposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Good points, Brenda, but why "silly?" Couldn't the saved true selves also inhabit physical bodies as the Nazarene teacher did? And we have spirits currently living in physical bodies, unsaved or saved.

                And about Heaven, the founder said that the kingdom of Heaven is within us. I'm struggling to understand this all, too. But it seems that this might mean that Heaven is not really a "physical" location, but a spiritual one. And as long as our true self (soul, spirit) is associated with a physical body, that kingdom of Heaven is associated with it, too.  But I also agree with the notion that taking a physical body along with the spirit to a non-physical place is not going to happen.

                1. Jerami profile image78
                  Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  I can agree with this,

                2. 0
                  Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm thinking that when Jesus said the Kingdom was "within" them, it either meant that He himself was among them (within their group) or that, yes, the Kingdom is in our hearts/souls.   I agree with both of those!

                  I also agree with the idea that Heaven is a spiritual place, not a physical one.
                  I've always thought so.

                  My assessment of "silliness" was because the people who proposed that idea meant that there would be a city or place of residence where saved humans in spirit bodies would co-exist alongside unsaved humans and that there would be childbirth there, etc....And seeing as how I equate the millinial reign with heaven for the most part, I don't think there would be human activity like childbirth and death in that arena.

    6. Dave Mathews profile image61
      Dave Mathewsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      First and fore-most I am a "CHRISTIAN" I believe and place my "FAITH" in christianity and the teachings of Jesus Christ. My parents brought me up in the Roman Catholic Church, but, I am not Roman, nor do I believe and accept all of the teachings of the church I was raised in. Therefore I am a "CHRISTIAN". I hope you understand where I'm coming from here. I could go deeper but you probably wouldn't understand.

      1. 0
        Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I get what you're saying. I think the reason I asked was that most people who claim to be Christian and unaffiliated with organized religion seem somewhat mellow and accepting of others. Church goers tend to be a little more insistent that their beliefs are right. I assumed it was due to the experience of hanging out with like minds every Sunday.

        I like to understand where people are coming from and why. Anytime I ask what sect someone is affiliated with, if they don't immediately cut and run, they give an evasive answer. I found that odd.

        1. Dave Mathews profile image61
          Dave Mathewsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Emile R: My mind is not like any other you will ever come across. As a "CHRISTIAN" I am uniquely unlike any other person. I am very Blunt Speaking,and Straight-Forward. I do not pull my punches and I will not sugar-coat the truth. With me what you see is exactly what you get, like it or not. I am not out here to win any popularity contests, but I am here to win souls for Almighty God.

        2. grinnin1 profile image83
          grinnin1posted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I think we live in a world where "spirituality" is what we all strive for, and goes along with the tolerance, no judgment , no right or wrong, taught in schools for the past 20 years.
          When you indicate any affilliation with a church, the "religious right" and all of it's negative associations immediately come to mind for many people in the United States. You are thought of as judgemental, narrow-minded, ignorant or not as enlightened as the "spiritual" people.
          As Christians, we know we are supposed to be light in this world, and spread God's word. How can we do that if we are immediately pidgeon-holed because we say we are baptist, methodist etc.
          I'm not saying that Christians aren't in large part to blame for this bias, they are, and the press has made sure that the world knows every hypocrite, criminal, adulterer, etc. that has been borne of the church. But the thing is, that's who Jesus said the church was for. Not the perfect people. Not the "spiritually enlightened "people - the Pharisees of bible days. 
          Anyway, for what it's worth I'm a Lutheran and proud of it because  I believe that Luther got it right. He was a Christian in the best sense of the word, risked his life and set an example that we have fallen short of.

          1. 0
            Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Thanks for the input. And, I really don't know anything about Luther. I'll have to read up on him. He sounds inspirational.

            1. Timothy Donnelly profile image42
              Timothy Donnellyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Take a few minutes to watch this informative short video on The 400th Anniversary of the KJV Bible, which includes an account of Mr. Luther:

              1. 0
                Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                That was a Mormon video.

                1. Timothy Donnelly profile image42
                  Timothy Donnellyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Cool, ay?

                  1. 0
                    Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Well, not that there's anything wrong with being Mormon, but the video didn't have anything to do with the KJV, nor did it reference Luther. Methinks thou sent me on a wild goose chase. smile

      2. Jarn profile image85
        Jarnposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Dave, I'm curious. I notice lots of folks tend to repeat themselves with simple religious statements like, "I am a CHRISTIAN". And then there's the constant use of full caps. I'm not trying to be antagonistic, I'm really just curious. Why do you think people tend to do that?

        From a psychological standpoint, I learned in my training that repetition of basic statements with emphasis on a particular word is a self-hypnotic reinforcement tool. The speaker is trying to convince him/herself of a statement's veracity to bolster his/her own confidence. Do you agree? Disagree? What's your take on that? I notice it alot of religious forums.

        1. Dave Mathews profile image61
          Dave Mathewsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Jarn: Truly it is none of my business so I give it no attention.

    7. skye2day profile image84
      skye2dayposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      emily I am a Christian I go to Foothills Bible Church. The Church is a body of Believers in the son of God, Jesus Christ. Father Son and Holy Spirit. We study the Bible. we worship God the Father son and holy spirit with music. We are not a religious denomination. We believe Christ came to save the world from sin. When we study the word of God that is all we study. Bible Study. Verse by Verse. Chapter by Chapter with nothing changed or twisted. No one half use of scripture. We believe in the Bible the written word of God. We go by Gods word not mans doctrine. Religion has doctrine they follow. I can not tell you I am in a religious denomination because I am not.

      I am a Christian, Born Again, Spirit Filled Christian that Loves Jesus Christ and I am Led by the Holy Spirit of God that was manifested in me when I was 'saved' or 'born again' into the family of God. I am a Child of God. The house of God is where we worship and study the written word of God. The Bible. If I went to church or not I am saved. But I want to go to church and worship God but I love God and Jesus all the time. I serve Jesus Christ. I study my Bible outside of church. I am a Christian. 'Faith comes by hearing the word of God and hearing comes by thR word.' ROMANS 8;28

      Some Christians do go to a religion church or belong to a denominational church say Catholic Lutheran Presbyterian Baptist so on this is not to say they are not believers or that they do not teach the truth of Jesus Christ. Christian believe in Jesus Christ the son of God. I pray they do teach as God instructs. Undefiled and spot free, blemish free. (James 1:27) Whch means No twists or turns or false teaching or ignoring what is God given inspiration in both the old and new testements.

      I love Jesus I am going to Heaven. Jesus is the way to Heaven. Christians share salvation throgh Jesus Christ the Son of God who was sent to the world to save us from our sin and died for us and rose again. John 3:16. It was the best decision I ever made in my life to Love Jesus Christ. Amen. Much Love and Blessings to you.

    8. Repairguy47 profile image61
      Repairguy47posted 5 years ago in reply to this


    9. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I'm a Christian.
      Born-again, Blood-bought, totally unashamed.
      Raised simply a Christian in a Separate Baptist church.  Visited other denominations, Pentecostal, Christian, Methodist, Apostolic, Quaker, Baptist, worshipped with some of those.  Still hold mostly to Separate Baptist teachings as far as denomination, but now attend mostly a nondenominational Church.

      Christ is not necessarily IN a specific Church;  Christians take Christ into a Church with them!

      You might try defining "Bible thumpers" and "literalist" to clear up any confusion by yourself or others. 
      'Cause yeah I'm a Bible thumper sometimes and a literalist about some Scriptures.   Whereas you seem to say those terms like they're always a bad thing?....

      1. 0
        Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks for the answer. smile

        As to your suggestion. I guess I could try to define the terms, but I'm not sure there is any confusion.

        1. 0
          Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I think there is much confusion.  Many anti-Christian activists here and there have become quite adept at repeatedly re-defining and/or misspelling good words like the word "Christian" even.  And their intent is obviously to do the very thing you're asking about---to place a label of embarrassment or shame upon those words and the people in those categories.   But nothing will make a true Christian ashamed of their Faith.
          And whatever.
          You're welcome.

          1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
            MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Oh, there are quite a few things that will make a Christian ashamed of their faith... Generally, other Christians.

      2. livelonger profile image90
        livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        (Emphasis mine)

        I'm glad you're being honest about that, Brenda!

        I will defend you against any accusation that you're a fundamentalist, because you sure can cherry-pick like the rest of 'em!

        1. 0
          Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Emile R's definition of fundamentalist wasn't in question from me.  It was the terms Bible thumper and literalist that were in question.   So save that defense for someone else! 

          And I seriously have huge doubts if you'd ever "defend" me from ....anything at all.  Swoop down and try to offend me, yes, that's obvious time after time.  But defend?   I don't hold my breath for that, no matter what situation I'm in.....
          I think you dislike Christians.  Especially those who consistently prove they're not embarrassed.  You just can't figure us out, can you?

          1. livelonger profile image90
            livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I have no issue with Christians...well, good Christians, that is. Those that follow the word and sentiment of Jesus Christ.

            I don't like bad Christians (those who choose to respect the condemnatory parts of the Bible as they apply to other people), or Christianists (right-wing partisans wearing Christian garb).

            To "Christians" like you, I would say: stick to a consistent interpretation (either all Law, or all Fruits of the Spirit) of the Bible, and be a good Christian. I know it might be difficult or contrary to your very nature, but try.

          2. MelissaBarrett profile image60
            MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I never got a sense of dislike from LL. He's never been anything but polite to me.

            1. livelonger profile image90
              livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              You're a good Christian. smile

              But, seriously, she thinks that being for gay marriage means you hate heterosexuals (her term is "heterophobe")...so there are all sorts of "definition" problems for her. (So many heterosexual heterophobes out there...and their numbers continue to grow!)

              1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                I despise my husband.  He's so heterosexual and stuff.  Our marriage would work so much better if he was a gay man.  Then we could be heterophobes together.

                1. livelonger profile image90
                  livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  That's funny you mention that... most of the gay marriage-supporters I know are married heterosexual couples, too. Had NO idea most of them hated themselves and wished their partners were the opposite sex. See, you learn something new every day. lol

                  1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                    MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    ewww... as a bisexual I absolutely must object to that statement.  He's written a couple articles on here as Bruce Barrett.  Take a look at him an tell me what you think he would look like as a woman.  Geez man, I have some standards (and they were much higher in the women I dated) I said I wish he was a Gay man.

                2. earnestshub profile image88
                  earnestshubposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Most women I know would rather go shopping with their gay male friend, I know that for sure!

                  All hetro males should be chefs........ all our taste is in our mouth! smile

                  We hetro males just don't look the part on main street in steel capped work boots either.

                  If you wanna see raw terror on the face of a hetro male, just drag him into a dress shop.

                  1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                    MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    I have a more horrible torture for my husband.  Bed Bath and Beyond....

          3. 0
            Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Brenda I didn't mean to cause a rift. I simply put the three down to try to encompass all evangelicals. Maybe I just should have used that word, but I get the impression that some of the posters I hoped to hear from don't identify themselves as evangelical.

  2. Goodnex David profile image60
    Goodnex Davidposted 5 years ago

    Being a protestant, a catholic, baptist or even...pentecostal has nothing with being a christian.. I mean a true one. Neither am I saying you shouldn't belong to any.. but belonging to this denomination/sect is no receipt to having a true devoted relationship with God since He's a God that searches the heart and seeketh worshipper who worships Him in truth and in spirit not minding weather you attend or belong to any church. I do attend church and I am a pentecostal member of Assemblies of God.

  3. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 5 years ago

    My parents sent me to a southern Baptist church when I was very young.

      Didn't attend church again until I was in my 40s.   And this was a nondenominational church.      This prompted me to begin studying the bible.
      Didn't take long or me to see that they were not teaching the same things that I understood the bible to be saying.
      I quit going to church for a while but started going again thinking that I could share MY message.  This proved to be "Not true"

       When someone ask me if I am a Christian; I ask them what their definition of Christian is before I answer them.

       I believe in God and that Jesus was the Messiah spoken of in the OT.
    If that is the definition?  then I ARE one.

  4. bluejam2u profile image59
    bluejam2uposted 5 years ago

    I am not answering the question directly but adding some input into this discussion.

    Jesus, created an organized religion.  His first followers were, like himself, Jews who went to the temple and observed the special days such as Passover, Pentecost etc.  When Jesus was left behind after his family spent some time observing one of those special religious observations they returned to Jerusalem to find him at the temple involved in deep conversation with the religious leaders there. 

    The fact that Jesus' followers meet together regularly is underscored at Hebrews 10:24,25 where the apostle Paul said, "not forsaking the gathering of ourselves together".  At other times he referred to groups of Christian's that met at various private homes.  Later, such as at Acts 15 reference was made to "the congregations" Heb 15:4 "On arriving in Jerusalem they were kindly received by the congregation" Heb 15:41 "But he went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the congregations".  At that time saying you were a Christian identified you with one religious group.  This was not to remain the case though. 

    After the last Apostle John died, a foretold apostasy set in and began breaking Christians into sects.(2 Thessalonians 2:3)  The apostate 'christian' leaders eventually numbered those who were appointed or at least recognized by Constantine as the first official leaders of the newly sanctioned Roman church.  That church is now called the Roman Catholic Church.  Due to deflection from correct Bible teaching individuals such as Martin Luther and John Calvin , to name a few, broke off and started their own groups to teach a more accurate Bible truth. 

    In today's world there are literally thousands of nominal 'christian' denominations and sects. This has created conflict and confusion.  Many 'christian' groups large and small have caused real damage to the Christian faith and its stature in the minds of others.  Child abuse, mass suicide, killing of abortion doctors, taking sides in political conflicts, patriotism, things that Jesus would not have thought of allowing are done in the name of 'Christianity'.  Some of those examples are extreme and not common but the fact that they put the crazy or hypocrite stamp on the belief causes distortion and conflict. 

    It has been said that in America religion runs a mile wide and an inch deep.  In my opinion that represents many who tick the 'christian' box on questionnaires.  Ask them what is their belief and they say Christian.  In the first Century Christians were persecuted and died for their faith...their faith was deep.  Do you think that is the case today? 

    What if the government put a stiff tax on you personally for being Christian.  Would you change your lifestyle, perhaps selling your house or giving up some of your material possessions so that you could pay that tax and still openly call yourself a Christian?  What if you were given the choice of openly identifying yourself as a Christian or losing your job?  Would you stand up for your faith?  Or might you say, "Well, I am a Christian in my heart.  I don't need to identify with any organized religion as long as I am a christian at heart"?  What would the early followers of Christ do in your place?  History answers that.  Many died and were otherwise severely persecuted when all they had to do was renounce their belief in Christ.  They could have done that outwardly but inwardly still called themselves christian in their heart.  They refused to do that because their deep faith was real, alive and powerful.  However, many of them had the benefit of seeing Jesus raise the dead, heal the sick, and perform other miracles.  Or they knew someone who had seen these things and had been taught by Jesus or one of the many hundreds that were his disciples during his three and a half year ministry.  What about today?

    What about those today who are turned off by organized religion because they honestly see that the church is not teaching what the Bible actually says?  These honest people would go against their honest nature by identifying with an organization that was hypocritical and scandalous.   What about these honest people?  In my opinion the Creator will find them IF they are sincerely searching and have not actually given up.

    So back to the question are people embarrassed  - Yes.  I think a growing number are embarrassed to be identified with a specific church because a growing number of churches are nothing more that self-help communities that are christian as a Popsicle stick.  They openly defy the Bible's teachings or they use the Bible to justify their hate etc. 

    If Jesus is real and if he is the son of God he along with his father is fully aware of what it has all come to.  He is also fully aware of you and me.  Don't give up hope.  Keep searching.  In my opinion there is a true religion and it can be found.

  5. Cagsil profile image83
    Cagsilposted 5 years ago

    Are Christians embarrassed of their faith? Nope. Many have chosen ignorance over knowledge. When they actively made their choice and accepted it, then they would have no reason to be embarrassed about it. hmm

  6. 0
    Holmes221bposted 5 years ago

    I think for many Christians, the fact that they believe in Christ as their Lord and Saviour is more important than which denomination they belong to.  All Christians are supposed to believe in the same god, even if they interpret the Bible differently.

  7. AEvans profile image74
    AEvansposted 5 years ago

    I am affiliated with the Pentecostal affiliation of Christianity. smile We rock in church! :)But we still believe in the same Bible as everyone else and we do not play with snakes etc. lololo! We just praise the Lord. smile

  8. MelissaBarrett profile image60
    MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago


    I am a Unitarian Universalist.  I consider myself a Christian, because I find most of my spiritual growth came from the biblical teachings of Christ.  Other UU's consider themselves atheists, agnostics, pagans, humanists, Hindus, Jewish etc.  So I certainly don't speak for my religion... just my own personal faith.

    I believe that Jesus was the son of God.  In much the same way that we are all children of God (and my interpretation of what God is a bit different as well) I think the story of his life is inspirational.  Whether it is historically accurate or not is irrelevant.  The mystical stuff in the bible, I believe is largely metaphorical.  (The Jefferson Bible is kinda awesome for those who must have literal without all the virgin birth/rise from the dead metaphors)

    1. 0
      Holmes221bposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I agree that the Jefferson Bible is a good example of America's freedom of religious expression.  The founding fathers were not all theists, some seemed to be deists or even agnostics.  It is a shame that their ideal of separation of state and church should be so controversial in modern America, which in many ways is more religious than the America of the 18th century.  And there seem to be many Americans, who would rather that church and state should no longer be separate.  The ideals of the age of Enlightenment are much to be desired today.

      I am confused by what "Unitarian Universalist" is.  Is it a religion?  It would seem not, if there are atheists, humanists and pagans amongst them.

      1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
        MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        LOL, yes, it is a religion.  We've got churches and everything. 

        Since everyone else gets to quote their religion... here are the principals of mine.

        "There are seven principles which Unitarian Universalist congregations affirm and promote:

        The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
        Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
        Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
        A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
        The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
        The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
        Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part."

        "Unitarian Universalism (UU) draws from many sources:

        Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces which create and uphold life;
        Words and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion, and the transforming power of love;
        Wisdom from the world's religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life;
        Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God's love by loving our neighbors as ourselves;
        Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit;
        Spiritual teachings of earth-centered traditions which celebrate the sacred circle of life and instruct us to live in harmony with the rhythms of nature."

        I'm sure that will offend someone smile

    2. 0
      Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Thanks. That's the first time I've heard of the Jefferson Bible. I might check it out. Sounds like an interesting read.

      1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
        MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        It is still very dated Emile.  Just a warning.  But Jefferson was a realist (for his time)  Us U.U.s claim him as one of us.  Mainly because he didn't take stock in the trinity concept.

  9. schoolgirlforreal profile image77
    schoolgirlforrealposted 5 years ago

    I am a former Catholic. I am now what you call a bible believer. I hate the words baptist or even born again, mainly because my family bible thumped from that direction. I am now in a bible church, evangelical, which is one of the three bible believing churches I know of: evangelical, baptist and I think pentecostal.

    Anyways, I focus on the bible moreso now that all the Catholic rituals and rosaries and saints.

    We believe no one is better than the other and that we shouldn't pray to Mary or the saints but directly to God as He is God....

    No, I'm not ashamed and no I'm not a bible thumper!


  10. 0
    Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago

    Melissa, you and livelonger would be hilarious if you didn't both have such a nasty habit of trying to demean and harrass people you don't like.

    1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
      MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I can't speak for LL, but there are few people here that I actually dislike.  I sure as hell dislike your opinions and how you express them.  I dislike that you use Jesus as a tool as well. But as far as disliking you.. no.  I do have a distaste for your posts though.

    2. livelonger profile image90
      livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Don't leave yourself out, Brenda! I only chime in when you demean and harrass people you don't like. I'm just following your lead.

      1. 0
        Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Nah, you might as well own up to your actions, livelonger.
        I don't demean and harrass you personally.  Nor anyone else. And you know it.
        You just can't stand it when I speak out against the homosexual agenda and the act of homosexuality and you take it personally AND use your status on this site to get by with harrassment, knowing that I've decided (and verbalized openly) sometime back not to report anyone.   You have the upper hand, and so it goes.  Doesn't make you anything close to nice, nor even tolerant of Christianity.   What it makes you is an anti-Christian bully who expects tolerance from others but doesn't offer it to conservatives who speak out.

        As far as Melissa, it's she who's following YOUR lead.  Otherwise several of her harrassing rants would've been deemed totally inappropriate by the powers-that-be.  Which, let's not forget, you are one of.

        1. livelonger profile image90
          livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You bash gay people here regularly, but I'm not supposed to take that personally? (I laughed when you asked a couple of years ago, "DOES JASON WORK HERE? IS THIS A HOMOSEXUAL SITE?" That didn't seem to deter you from posting another 6,000 times!)

          And then when I'm clear that I dislike your variant of "Christianity" (quotes intentional; I don't consider a mishmash of diametrically-opposed conceptions of Christianity fused into one to be any cohesive faith), then you say I'm intolerant of Christianity. Never mind that I've never commented on your "Christian discussion" forum threads and other online devotionals, except to wonder (privately) why so little of that love that you sing the praises of ever seems to get internalized.

          But it's been 2 years of the same stuff. I don't imagine any changes will be coming. Shabbat shalom, Brenda.

          1. 0
            Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            No, I don't "bash" anyone.  That's what you'd like to see, isn't it?
            And sure I asked more about you, after someone pointed out your real name (in that particular thread!).    I didn't know the connection before that.

            And I dunno why you're bringing up the question of whether this is a homosexual site......I don't recall asking like that, but hey we could revive the old thread, couldn't we?

            I dunno what you mean by "that didn't deter" "me" "posting another 6,000 times" after that.  What DO you mean?  Why would I be deterred from posting?  Are you saying this IS a specifically homosexual site??!!

            At any rate, I think that IF HubPages IS specifically a homosexual site, there would be a disclaimer or profile page that all potential hubbers could read as they enter the site.   I've never seen any kind of article or notice like that.   So what's your beef?   Do YOU consider this site specifically homosexual or what?

            1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
              MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              You mean you didn't have to sign the papers and provide video proof?  I spent all day shooting that video... couldn't get the lighting right. 

              Don't be ridiculous Brenda.

              1. livelonger profile image90
                livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Oh, wait...I don't think she realizes that's a joke.

                1. 0
                  Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  What I realize, and what is perfectly obvious, is that you've been making a habit of hijacking threads by making personal insults.   You should stop doing so.  Because while I'm flattered that you take such notice of my posts that you jump on 'em quite regularly, it does have a way of hogging the conversation, doesn't it?  And God forbid that you'd make me feel flattered, right? lol
                  This thread is about Christians' Faith.  No one that I've seen brought up the subject of homosexuality until you did.  Sounds like a personal problem to me.

                  1. 0
                    Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Hey Brenda. This is page four of the thread. I think it's informal hub page forum policy that somewhere in page three we expand the conversation. smile

  11. rebekahELLE profile image92
    rebekahELLEposted 5 years ago

    I think this is very true. The extremists seem to define todays Christians, even though they are more a minority than the majority. I think mixing politics and religion make for a contradictory nature. 

    I don't know if they are embarrassed, but some of them should be, just as anyone with any belief who lives in contradiction to what they espouse.

  12. lone77star profile image90
    lone77starposted 5 years ago

    Emile, this is an interesting question, and frankly I've never run into this.

    I've known a lot of fundamentalists and they've had no problem telling me which church they went to. Such evasiveness is curious and makes me wonder if the ones you're talking about are being entirely honest.

    I was born Southern Baptist. In fact, my maternal grandfather was a minister in that church and former missionary to Nigeria. My father, on the other hand, liked to study Eastern mysticism. I guess I gave up on the Southern Baptist denomination at about age 9. I couldn't get enough of what my father was reading out loud to my mother.

    After studying Scientology, Buddhism, Taoism, Judaism, and Kabbalah, I've returned to Christianity in a denomination of one. I don't trust anyone else's interpretation. If I find someone else's interpretation on an isolated point enlightening, then it becomes my interpretation, too. But I don't fully trust my own interpretation, either. Like a good scientist, I don't hold onto any one idea too tightly -- humility in the search for answers. But even my level of humility varies from time to time. It's all a work in progress.

    I know there is so much hidden wisdom in the Bible and likely far more than I've already found.

    1. Evolution Guy profile image60
      Evolution Guyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Do sum mor majik.