Definition of the word Christian这个词的定义基督教 中文 - Zhong Wen

There are at least two very different ideas of what a "Christian" is.至少有两个非常不同的“基督教”是什么想法。Before proceeding very far in studying Christianity, it is necessary to understand the situation.在开始学习基督教很远，这是必要的了解情况。This presentation will attempt to clarify the waters.本报告将试图澄清水域。

First, any word has no "meaning" unless it has been somehow "defined".首先，任何字没有“意义”，除非它已以某种方式“定义”。Consider the word "dog".考虑“狗”字。We all have a general idea of what that word means.我们每个人都有这个词意味着什么总体思路。Even though a housecat generally resembles a small dog, very few people would try to call that animal a "dog".即使一个housecat通常类似于一个小的狗，很少有人会尝试调用该动物的“狗”。Just the fact that there are four legs, a tail, paws, a face with eyes, nose and mouth, ears, fur, etc, does NOT make an animal a dog!有四条腿，一条尾巴，爪子，眼睛，鼻子和嘴的脸，耳朵，皮毛等，只是实际上并不能使动物的狗！When the word dog was first defined, it could have been defined to include all such animals, and in that case they would all now be called "dogs".当定义的第一个字的狗，它可能已被定义为包括所有这些动物，在这种情况下，他们现在都被称为“狗”。But someone defined a different word for that (quadruped).但有人定义一个不同的单词（四足）。

There are animals that seem to very closely resemble dogs, such as wolves.有动物，似乎非常酷似狗，如狼。But the definition of the word dog is specific enough to exclude such animals, even though they are sometimes mistaken for each other.但字犬的定义是不够具体，排除这种动物，即使他们有时会误以为对方。

A similar situation exists regarding the word "Christian" Very early followers of Jesus did not actually have any "name" for themselves and an opponent was apparently the first person to use the word "Christian" to refer to them.存在类似的情况有关的“基督教”一词很早就耶稣的追随者实际上并未有任何“名称”为自己和对手显然是第一人称使用“基督教”一词来称呼它们。 The name stuck, and around the Fourth Century, a strict definition was given to the word.卡的名称，以及第四世纪左右，是一个严格的定义字。The definition was needed then because many groups with very different beliefs were all referring to themselves as Christians.定义是必要的，因为许多非常不同的信仰群体都指以自己作为基督徒。The definition settled on was basically the contents of the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed.结算的定义，基本上是使徒信经和尼西亚信经的内容。Neither of these two Creeds is actually from the Bible's text, but they are each considered to be closely based on it, which is the basis for their credibility.都不是这两个信条实际上是从“圣经”的文本，但他们均认为是密切以它为基础，这是自己的信誉的基础。In this discussion, we will refer to this as the NARROW definition.在这次讨论中，我们将把这个作为狭义的定义。

A common attitude among the modern public is that anyone who "believes in" Jesus is a Christian.一个现代大众的共同态度是，耶稣是谁，一个基督徒“相信”的人。That certainly sounds nice!这当然听起来不错！Let's refer to that from now on as the BROAD definition of the word.让我们参考，从现在起的这个词的广泛定义。It is not actually supported in a strict sense, but it is so widely believed that it must be considered.实际上它不是一个严格意义上的支持，但它是如此普遍认为，它必须考虑。

Given this environment, we will attempt to proceed!鉴于这种环境下，我们将尝试进行！

And, in early Christianity, it was.而且，在早期的基督教，它是。For this reason, a large number of the world's leading Christian scholars got together in Nicaea in 325 AD.出于这个原因，大量世界领先的基督教学者在公元325年在尼西亚了。For better or for worse, they decided on a very sharply defined definition of Christianity, that was meant to be used world-wide.为了更好或更坏，他们决定就非常清晰明确的定义，那是意味着要使用世界各地的基督教。Their "Nicene Creed" lists a variety of very specific concepts that a "Christian" must necessarily believe in. We are calling this the NARROW definition here.他们的“尼西亚信经”列出了各种非常具体的概念，“基督教”必须相信英寸我们呼吁这狭隘的定义。

For a moment, let's jump forward to today.对于一个时刻，让我们的跳跃式前进到今天。If this NARROW definition is used, a LOT of people who think they are "Christians" are NOT!如果使用这种狭隘的定义，很多的人认为他们是“基督徒”都没有！Mormons (Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints) do not qualify, for several reasons.摩门教（耶稣基督后期圣徒教会）不符合，有以下几个原因。Unitarians do not because they do not believe in the Trinity.一神论做不是因为他们不相信三位一体。MANY other groups would be excluded if the NARROW definition is used.如果狭义的定义是用于其它许多团体将被排除在外。If, instead, the BROAD definition is used, then they all are very definitely "Christians"!相反，如果使用广义的定义是，他们都非常肯定“基督徒”！

Confused??!困惑？！

THAT'S the problem!这就是问题所在！The two common definitions are rather different from each other.这两个共同的定义，而彼此不同。It becomes EXTREMELY important to know WHICH of the two definitions is being used.知道正在使用的两个定义，就显得极为重要。 Without that, people begin to argue and fight.否则，人们开始争论和斗争。

This situation is why, universally, ALL Christian scholars use the NARROW definition when discussing Christianity.这种情况是普遍，为什么，所有的基督教学者用狭隘的定义，讨论基督教时 。

Doctrine has very little to do with it. We accept the concept "red" because the majority of society has chosen to describe certain things as being that color. 学说已经很少用它做 ，我们接受“红色”的概念，因为社会上大多数人选择了这种颜色来形容某些事情。When I approach an intersection and the top light is lit, I don't think "the blue light is lit" or "the gzrwkkg light is lit".当我接近一个十字路口，顶部的灯亮起，我不认为“上火”或“gzrwkkg灯亮起蓝色的光芒”。In compliance with a very broadly held (NARROW) definition of the concept red, I think that the red light is lit, and I drive accordingly. It has absolutely nothing to do with the understanding of the temperature of a filament in a light bulb, or a filter, or electricity, or anything. Whatever "red" actually IS is irrelevant.在遵守一个非常广泛的（狭义的）红的概念的定义，我认为，红灯亮起时，我和相应的驱动器，它绝对没有任何一个灯泡的灯丝温度的理解， 或一个过滤器，或电力，或任何东西 ，什么“红”实际上是不相关的。The WORD "red" has no meaning whatever except due to a generalized agreement as to a definition.单词“红”，除了由于作为一个定义广义协议的任何意义。THAT is essentially what EVERY definition actually is.基本上是每一个定义，实际上是什么。The WORD "Christian" is the same.的“基督教”一词是相同的。The BROAD definition is an extremely ill-defined interpretation of that word.广义的定义是这个词的定义不清的解释。Scholars, by necessity, choose to use the much more precisely defined (NARROW) understanding of the word.学者根据需要，选择使用更精确的定义（狭义的）这个词的理解。Whatever we happen to think about or see regarding the traffic light doesn't change it's actual essence.无论我们忽然想到或看到有关的交通灯不改变它的实际本质。We could choose to call it blue, but it is still what it is, and it is unchanged.我们可以选择它称为蓝色，但它仍然是它是什么，这是不变的。It's intrinsic essence is unchanged, no matter what you call it.它的内在本质是不变的，不管你叫什么。

One could call some group of Christians "Buddhists" or "tax collectors", because the name does not change who they are or what they believe.人们可以调用一些基督徒“佛教徒”或“收税”的组，因为他们是谁或他们认为这个名字不会改变。It would just make your conversations with anyone else very difficult.它只是使你的谈话，与其他人非常困难。It is irrelevant if a person PRIVATELY chooses to use a loose definition for the word in question.这是无关紧要的，如果一个人私下选择使用一个疑问词的宽松定义。But problems would certainly occur when trying to communicate with someone from a different background.但是，问题一定会发生时，试图与来自不同背景的人沟通。A group of Mormons talking can confidently refer to themselves as Christians (BROAD) and they all agree on that!A组谈摩门教可以放心地把自己作为基督徒（广义），他们都同意这一点！But should they say those same things to a non-Mormon, who happens to understand the NARROW definition, that person might violently disagree!但是，如果他们说，这些同样的事情，一个非摩门教徒，谁发生理解的狭义的定义，那人可能会剧烈地不同意！Same sentences, but the listeners take them VERY differently!相同的句子，但听众非常不同！

Because of the way BELIEVE is structured, we chose to nearly universally use the "scholarly" (NARROW) definitions of as many terms as is possible, and that included the word "Christian".由于认为是结构性的方式的，我们选择了几乎普遍使用的“学术”（狭义的）的许多条款的定义是可能，并包括“基督教”一词。 The many hundreds of authors (all scholars) of the many works included in BELIEVE certainly always use that NARROW definition, because it is so sharply defined.作者的数以百计，包括在许多作品（所有的学者），相信一定总是用狭隘的定义，因为它是如此分明。

We certainly have no intention of trying to make any Christians adopt some different way of Worshipping Jesus, if they already have a method they feel is appropriate.当然，我们无意试图作出任何基督徒采取一些不同的方式崇拜耶稣，如果他们已经有一个方法，他们认为合适的。

We don't think that He would find fault in EITHER group!我们不认为他会发现在任一组的故障！HOWEVER!但是！We think He would look at the HEART of each individual member of a Congregation.我们认为他会看在每一个人的一众成员心脏。 If that person was Devout at Worshipping Him, then we believe that He would be Pleased!如果该人是虔诚崇拜他，那么我们相信他会很高兴！

Notice that this definition is NOT Denomination-specific or Church-specific.请注意，这个定义是不面额特定或特定教会。Whether that Devout Christian attended a Catholic Church or a Pentecostal Church or a Mormon Church or any other Church that attempted to Teach Christianity, that Devout Congregagation member would definitely Please Jesus and therefore be a Christian by our (new) definition.是否虔诚的基督徒参加了天主教教会或五旬节派教会或摩门教教会或任何其他教会试图教基督教，虔诚的Congregagation成员一定会请耶稣，因此我们的（新）定义的基督徒。 The person sitting right next to him/her, who attends that Church for OTHER reasons, and who is NOT Devout, would not necessarily Please Jesus and therefore would not be a Christian by this (new) definition.坐在他旁边的人/她，谁出席其他原因，教会，和谁不是虔诚的，不一定能请耶稣，因此不会被（新）定义一个基督徒。

You might note that this (new) definition is entirely individual.您可能会注意到，这（新）的定义是完全个人的。Only that person (and Jesus) would be able to determine whether or not he/she was actually a Christian.只有这个人（耶稣）将能够确定是否他/她实际上是一个基督教。Because of this, our (new) definition is entirely useless for scholarly purposes!正因为如此，我们的（新）的定义是完全无用的学术用途！

In my personal view, most "official" Christian Churches have a LOT of "non-Christians" attending every week as Congregation members.我个人认为，最“官方”的基督教教堂有很多“非基督徒”的身份出席毕业典礼成员每星期。And, even though I am a Protestant Pastor, I am tempted to think that the impressive Devotion of many Mormon Church members might mean that they have "more actual Christians by percentage" than nearly any Protestant Church.而且，即使我是新教牧师，我倾向于认为许多摩门教教会的成员令人印象深刻的奉献，可能意味着他们有“更多的实际基督徒按百分比”比几乎任何新教。 Rather amazing, since the Mormon Church is "officially" NOT Christian (by the NARROW definition)!相当惊人的，因为摩门教“正式”不是基督教（狭义的定义）！

This is a truly odd circumstance!这是一个真正奇怪的情况下！A LOT of very Devout Christians attending a non-Christian Church.很多非常虔诚出席一个非基督教教会的基督徒。This isn't an intentional conclusion!这是不是故意的结论！It is arrived at by attempting to imagine how Jesus would evaluate individual 'Congregation members' (VERY Pleased!) and 'Church' (mis-directed in several ways and possibly worthy of His censure).这是抵达试图想像耶稣会如何评价个人的“众成员（很高兴！）和”教会“（误定向在几个方面，可能值得他谴责）。

As it happens, this same situation would have applied to the Branch Davidians a few years back.碰巧的是，这将有同样的情况适用于大卫教几年前。David Koresh was clearly sin-filled and extremely mis-directed, particularly in selfish ways.考雷什显然犯罪填充和极其错误定向的，尤其是自私的方式。But the several dozen followers who died in that fire had chosen to follow him because he had convinced them that he WAS Jesus!但在那场大火中死亡的数十名追随者选择了跟随他，因为他说服了他们，他是耶稣！In following the publicity of that tragedy, it was very clear that many of the followers were extremely Devout Christians.在下面的那场悲剧的宣传，这是很清楚，许多信徒是非常虔诚的基督徒。Most people say that it is tragic that they chose to follow a wrong Path, and they are all now in Hell!大多数人说，这是悲惨的，他们选择走一条错误的道路，他们现在都在地狱！I personally believe that most or all of them are now in Heaven with Jesus, but Koresh is definitely not there!我个人认为，其中的大部分或全部是在天堂与耶稣，但考雷什是绝对没有！Again, an example of a non-Christian "Church" having very Devout Christian followers.同样，一个非基督教的“教会”的例子非常虔诚的基督教信徒。My assumption here is that each person would be judged on personal Devotion to the Lord, even if he/she had been Taught some incorrect things.在这里，我的假设是，每个人都将在主的个人奉献判断，即使他/她已教了一些不正确的东西。

None of us will ever know, while we are still here.我们没有人会知道，而我们仍然在这里。But it just seems that Jesus, being infinitely Compassionate, seeing those Devout followers of His outside the Gates of Heaven, would have some procedure such that they weren't turned away, just for having chosen to follow a psychotic or mis-informed leader.但它似乎只是耶稣，无限慈悲，天坛盖茨外看到他的那些虔诚的信徒，将有一定的程序，他们没有转身就走，只是有选择遵循一个精神病或MIS知情领导人。

Nicaea just happens to be a previously agreed to basis for a definition. It is actually irrelevant whether ANY of the statements agreed to in Nicaea were even true or not! Even if they all eventually turn out to be erroneous, the strict (NARROW) definition of the word "Christian" is defined based on those statements.尼西亚恰好是先前商定的定义的基础上。任何声明是否同意在尼西亚，甚至是真还是假！即使他们最终都变成是错误的，它实际上是无关紧要的，严格的定义（狭义的）字的“基督教”的定义是基于这些语句。 IF it should be that there really IS no Trinity (and I wrote an essay that even somewhat suggests that possibility), belief and acceptance of the concept of the Trinity IS one of the "conditions" of the definition of "Christian".如果它真的有没有三位一体的（我写了一篇文章，甚至有点表明这种可能性），信仰和接受三位一体的概念，是对“基督教”的定义的“条件”的之一。

This has been wonderful for researchers, as during the past 200 years, there have been massive efforts to compare the exact wording of different Manuscripts of the same Original text, where in some cases, hundreds of Manuscripts have been compared.这为研究人员在过去200年来，一直精彩，也出现了巨大努力，以比较不同的手稿相同的原始文本，在某些情况下，数以百计的手稿进行了比较确切的措辞。 The result is that in recent years, many very minor Scribe-copying flaws have been discovered and corrected, and some of the very most recent Bibles are translations of the best Original texts ever known.其结果是，近年来，许多非常轻微的抄写员抄写的缺陷被发现和纠正，和一些非常最近的“圣经”是有史以来最知名的原文翻译。

Regarding the Jewish policies of copying the Old Testament Books, it has always been very different.关于复制旧约书籍犹太人的政策，它一直非常不同的。A Scribe must be just as careful, and if possible, even moreso, because once a Scribe makes a copy of a Jewish Manuscript, the original Manuscript is destroyed.抄写员必须小心，如果可能的话，更应如此，因为一旦一个抄写一个犹太手稿的副本，原稿被销毁。This has the effect of making sure that there is only one possible Manuscript to rely on, but it adds great importance to the care of the Scribes, since there is no obvious way to confirm their accuracy of copying.这确保只有一个可能的稿子依靠的效果，但它增加了照顾文士重视，因为没有明显的方法，以确认其复制的准确性。

In any case, by around 400 years after Jesus, it was commonly known that there were many terrible copies going around the Christian world.在任何情况下，由大约400年后，耶稣，它通常是已知有很多世界各地的基督教会的可怕的副本。Saint Jerome spent much of his life in examining all Manuscripts that then existed, and comparing them, in order to create a new Bible which he translated into Latin (since the Holy Roman Empire was then based in Rome where everyone spoke and understood Latin and not Greek or Ancient Hebrew.)圣杰罗姆在检查所有存在的手稿和比较，以创建一个新的圣经，他翻译成拉丁文（因为神圣罗马帝国当时总部设在罗马，每个人都发言和理解拉丁美洲和他的生活花费古希腊或希伯来文。）

In the following ten Centuries or so, society broke down and many of those Scribal copies of Bible Manuscripts were lost.在下面的十个世纪左右的时间里，社会崩溃了，许多圣经手稿抄写副本丢失。 If it had not been for the efforts of Arabic scholars to want to try to preserve all of ancient knowledge, much of the Bible might have become permanently lost!如果它没有被阿拉伯学者的努力，要尽量保留所有古代知识，许多“圣经”有可能成为永久丢失！As well as the works of Aristotle, Plato and many other ancient Greeks!以及亚里士多德，柏拉图和许多其他古希腊人的作品！

The history lesson is near the end!历史的教训是接近尾声！Throughout all of this, the written Manuscripts recorded the Bible (and all other texts) in a way which we might see as peculiar.通过这一切，写的手稿，我们可能会看到奇特的方式记录在“圣经”（和所有其他文本）。There were no divisions between Chapters or Verses.章节或诗句之间没有分歧。There were not even any divisions between sentences, and no punctuation and no capitalization.有没有甚至句子之间的任何部门，并没有标点符号，没有资本。This system is referred to as scriptua continua .这个系统被称为scriptua连续 。In addition to all of this, the vowels were not written down, only the consonants!除了这一切，元音没有写下来，只有辅音！

"Reading" such a Manuscript was extremely difficult to do!“读书”这样的手稿是极难做到的！Gradually, improvements were made, such as the addition of spaces, punctuation and capitalization, apparently around a thousand years ago; and Chapter and Verse numbering, apparently around 800 years ago.渐渐地，作了改进，如空格，标点符号和大小写此外，显然是围绕着两千年前，章及诗歌编号，显然是约800年前。

At that time, the Bible existed in roughly the form we now know it, except that it was not in English.当时，“圣经”中存在的大致形式，我们现在知道它，但它是不是英文。Most Bibles in Western Europe were in Latin, based on Jerome's Vulgate (Latin translation) Bible, but some Bibles such as the Catholic, sometimes also included some text from the Greek or Aramaic (older) texts.在西欧的大部分“圣经”在拉丁语中，杰罗姆的武加大（拉丁文译本）圣经的基础上，但一些诸如天主教的“圣经”，有时还包括一些从希腊或阿拉姆语（旧）文本的文本。 Orthodox Bibles are not based on the Vulgate at all, and are all based on Greek and other Eastern language Manuscripts of the Bible.东正教“圣经”是没有根据武加大，都是“圣经”的希腊和其他东欧语言手稿为基础。

The point of this history lesson is that ALL modern Bibles were translated into English from essentially the EXACT SAME SOURCE TEXTS.这个历史的教训来看，是所有的现代“圣经”翻译成英文，从本质上是相同的源文本。The English Translations definitely have some differences, as is obvious in reading any Chapter in the King James (KJAV) and the NIV.英文翻译肯定有一定的差异，作为明显的是在阅读任何国王詹姆斯（KJAV）和“为证：”一章。 The THEMES are generally the same, but the exact wording, and sometimes slight differences in meaning, can sometimes be different.的主题是相同的，但确切的措辞，有时在含义上的细微差异，有时可以是不同的。

OK.确定。There are around 330,000 Churches in the United States.大约有33万在美国的教会。Most of them are associated with one or another of around a thousand Denominations, but some are Independent and sometimes Non-Denominational.他们大多是与周围的千元面额中的一个或另一个，但有些是独立的，有时非宗派的。

Bottom Line: These very many Churches (generally) Teach at least 98% or 99% of the exact same things!底线：这些很多的教堂（一般）教至少98％或99％完全相同的东西！They used the same Bible to first establish their beliefs.他们用同样的圣经，先建立自己的信念。HOWEVER, each Denomination and each Church tended to ADD IN a few distinct beliefs.不过，每种面额，每个教会往往添加在几个不同的信仰。In general, this occured because each Denomination leaders and each Church leaders INTERPRETED certain Verses of the Bible in specific ways.在一般情况下，发生这种情况，因为每种面额的领导人和各教会领袖以特定的方式解释圣经某些经文。

An obvious example is that many Churches DEMAND that Baptism be performed by Immersion of the entire body under the water.一个明显的例子是，许多教堂的需求洗礼下的水进行浸泡整个身体。 Other Churches ONLY allow Affusion, the Pouring of water over the person to be Baptized.其他教会只允许注水，浇在接受洗礼的人。Yet other Churches believe in Sprinkling water for Baptism.然而，其他教会认为，在喷洒水的洗礼。Yet other Churches recognize any two or all three of these Procedures as being valid.然而，其他教会承认任何两个或三个所有的这些程序作为有效。There are some Churches which Baptize in the Name of Jesus, but others which demand that Baptisms be in the Name of all Three of the Trinity.有一些教会在耶稣的名施洗，但其他的需求，在所有三个三位一体的名称洗礼。There are Some Churches which do a Baptism THREE TIMES, once in each Name (called Trine Baptism).有一些教堂做三次洗礼，一次在每个名字（称为特里尼洗礼）。

It turns out that the Bible hardly even ever mentions Baptism, and certainly never provides any specifics of how it is to be Performed!原来，“圣经”很难甚至曾经提到洗礼，当然，从来没有提供它是如何进行任何细节！So it is not the Bible which defined each of those many variants, but the INTERPRETATION of what the words of the Bible says, made by the people who first started that Denomination or Church!所以它不是圣经定义那些许多变种，但解释什么“圣经”的话称，刚开始，面额或教会的人！However, each Church is incredibly adamant that only their method of Baptism is valid!然而，每一个教会是令人难以置信的坚决认为，只有他们的洗礼的方法是有效的！They each even claim that they know that from the Bible itself!他们每人甚至声称，他们知道，从“圣经”本身！And they each even Cite Verses in the Bible which they claim provide the proof! ，他们甚至引用“圣经”中的诗句他们声称提供的证明！However, when those Verses are read, especially in the Original Greek, all such claims greatly fade.然而，当这些经文，尤其是在希腊原文，读，所有这类索赔大大褪色。

These Churches, and the Christians who attend them, often refer to all the other Churches which use a different form of Baptism as being un-Christian!这些教会，并参加他们的基督徒，经常提及的所有其他使用不同形式的洗礼，作为联合国基督教的教会！Each often claims that ONLY THEY can Teach their Members to be able to enter Heaven!每个经常声称只有他们自己可以教给他们的成员能够进入天堂！(they are probably wrong about that!)（他们可能是错误的！）

So, based on something as singular as the method used to perform Baptisms, many Churches and their Members consider ALL OTHERS TO NOT BE CHRISTIANS!因此，基于方法用于执行洗礼奇异的东西，许多教堂和其成员考虑所有其他人是基督徒！

There are assorted other subjects they tend to use to make such claims.有各类其他科目，他们往往使用，使这种索赔。The majority of the common ones have to do with either Baptism or the Eucharist.大多数常见的有做要么洗礼或圣餐。There are ferocious divisions between Christian Churches regarding what happens when a person swallows a Eucharist wafer or a sip of Eucharist wine.有凶猛部门之间基督教教会就发生了什么，当一个人不小心吞食了的圣体的晶圆或圣体的酒抿。Again, the Churches simply assume that all the others are un-Christian.同样，教会简单地假设所有其他联合国基督教。But again, there is NOTHING in the Bible that supports ANY of the intensely held positions, and all those positions exist only because specific individuals, such as Luther or Calvin or Zwingli or the Pope, had strongly held personal beliefs.但再次，是在圣经中，它支持任何激烈的职位，而所有这些职位只存在于具体的个人，如路德或加尔文，茨温利或教皇，因为强烈的个人信念。

So there are many Christians who believe that NO ONE is a Christian, except for the people who happen to attend their own Church!因此，有许多人相信，没有人是基督徒，除了碰巧参加他们自己的教会的人，基督徒！The sad part is that they do not realize that the basis for such claims is NOT from the Bible but rather from INDIVIDUALS having made PERSONAL CONCLUSIONS based on their own INTERPRETATIONS of what some wording in the Bible says.不幸的是，他们没有意识到，对这类索赔的依据是不从“圣经”，而是从个人的基础上，什么“圣经”中的一些措辞说自己的理解，个人结论。

It is amazing at how extensive this is, and the many very specific narrow issues on which Churches and their Members base such (discrimination).令人吃惊的是，这是多么广泛，和许多狭窄的问题非常具体的教会及其成员的基地等（歧视）。For example, many modern Churches demand the use of some specific English Translation of the Bible, as they insist that ONLY THAT BIBLE contains everything PRECISELY as the Original texts read, INCLUDING THE PUNCTUATION.例如，许多现代教会的需求使用一些特定的“圣经”的英语翻译，因为他们坚持，只有圣经包含一切正是阅读原文，包括标点符号。 I always find that humorous to hear a Minister make that Absolute Claim, as he clearly is ignorant of the fact that for a thousand years, the Bible Manuscripts had no punctuation at all, and that was ADDED IN only around a thousand years ago!我总是发现，幽默的，听到的一位部长，绝对算得，因为他显然是无知的事实，一千年，“圣经”手稿在所有没有标点符号，而且只在大约一千年前增加！

Other Churches, such as Pentecostals and Assembly of God, DEMAND that a Member have to regularly demonstrate the Gift of Tongues, as the ONLY possible proof of having been Saved.如其他教会，五旬节和神大会，要求会员定期展示方言的恩赐，被保存作为唯一可能的证明。Their Churches Teach MOST of the same things that all other Christian Churches Teach, with the exception of just a few things, particularly that if a person does NOT regularly demonstrate Speaking in Tongues, they tend to get publicly humiliated as not being Christian!他们的教会教同样的事情，其他所有的基督教教堂教，除了短短几年的事情，特别是如果一个人没有定期证明说方言，他们往往不被基督教公开羞辱！

It turns out that SOME Churches choose that 2% of unique beliefs to be so unusual that they are seen by outsiders as being a Cult.事实证明，一些教会选择，独特的信仰的2％，如此不同寻常，他们是被外人视为邪教。So even though some group such as the Branch Davidians believed and were Taught 98% of solid Christianity, the remaining 2% which included believing that David Koresh was Jesus Returned, was seen by the rest of the world as outrageous.因此，即使一些如大卫教组认为，教坚实的基督教，98％，其余2％，其中包括相信，大卫考雷什是耶稣返回，被世界视为大逆不道的休息。 The FOLLOWERS really believed they were Christians, because they USED THE BIBLE and they DID get that 98% of core Christianity.信徒真的相信他们是基督徒，因为他们所用的圣经，他们确实得到98％的核心基督教。How could anyone convince them that they were not Christians?如何任何人都可以说服他们，他们不是基督徒？

The same was true of Jim Jones and the Cult that he ran that was fairly completely Christian except for the fact that they all believed that Jones could decide ALL things for them, including drinking poisoned Koolaid where a thousand of them then died.相同的是琼斯和邪教的真实，他跑了，这是相当彻底，除了基督教的事实，他们都认为，琼斯可以决定他们的一切事物，包括饮用水中毒Koolaid千他们就死了。

The same is true of The Way International, which Teaches the 98% of core Christianity, but includes the beliefs that their leaders decide WHO they Marry and all other major decisions in their lives.同样是真实的，但国际的方式，教98％的核心基督教的信念，他们的领导人决定谁结婚，和所有其他重大决策，在他们的生活。 Again, the followers THINK they are Christians, because they certainly are Taught MOST of what Christianity is about.同样，信徒认为他们是基督徒，因为他们肯定是教导基督教。It is that 2% of additional beliefs where the conflict lies.它是2％额外的信仰冲突所在。

Mormons use the Bible to learn from, and their Church even includes Jesus Christ in its name!摩门教使用圣经学习，和他们的教会，甚至包括在其名称中耶稣基督！And again, 98% of what they are Taught is exactly in line with what traditional Protestant Christianity believes.再次，98％是什么教他们正是在与传统的基督教新教认为。However, Mormons are Taught that they will EACH become gods after death, and just a few other beliefs which are entirely opposed to what Christianity Teaches.然而，摩门教徒被教导，他们将成为神死后，只是这是完全反对基督教教导其他一些信仰。So even though Mormons are Taught 98% of Christianity (and very well, by the way!), any traditional standard of Christianity would say they are not Christians!因此，即使摩门教教导基督教的98％（很好的方式！），任何传统的标准基督教会说他们不是基督徒！

Some Southern Baptist Churches still impose massive rules on the public behaviors of all Members.一些美南浸信会教堂仍然对大量的规则，对所有会员国的公共行为。Women are EXAMINED before being allowed into the Church, regarding makeup, lipstick, jewelry, length of skirt, hair treatment, and they can be sent home if their appearance does not comply with what the leadership of that Church demands.妇女被允许进入教会之前，检查，化妆，口红，首饰，裙长，头发护理方面，他们可以送回家，如果其外观不符合什么样的领导，教会要求。 Since this occurs in public, in front of all of her friends and neighbors, it is generally very humiliating AND IT IS INTENDED TO BE!因为这发生在公共场合，在所有她的朋友和邻居面前，它一般是很丢脸，并拟！Such Churches WANT women to know that they WILL be humiliated unless they strictly obey every detail of what they demand.这种教会希望女人知道，他们将被羞辱，除非他们严格遵守每一个细节，他们需要什么。

Does that qualify as a Cult?这是否有资格作为一个邪教吗？Some people think it might.有些人认为它可能。

The list of such things is endless, when you are considering 330,000 Churches in the United States!这样的事情的名单是无止境的，当你在考虑33在美国的教会！In fact, OUR tiny Church chose to add in a specific belief which is not specificed in the Bible!事实上，我们的小教会的选择中添加一个特定的信念，这是不是在“圣经”specificed！We choose to have an extreme focus on Teaching about the BEHAVIOR of Jesus.我们选择有一个关于耶稣的行为教学的极端重点。The majority of Churches tend to focus on His Words.大多数的教会往往把重点放在他的话。We certainly recognize the importance of His Words, but we feel that many times His Actions expressed powerful Lessons.当然，我们承认他的话的重要性，但我们觉得，很多时候，他的行动表示了强大的经验教训。For example, the very fact that Jesus was nearly always willing to sit down with any SINGLE person, to LISTEN to their story of difficulty, and then to have a conversation about it.例如，张女士耶稣是几乎总是愿意坐下来与任何单个的人，倾听他们的困难的故事，然后有一个关于它的谈话。In the modern world, that approach would be considered too time consuming!在现代世界中，这种做法会被认为太费时！Preachers choose to give speeches before 40,000 people in a Stadium, and they virtually always tell any individual that "they are too busy to talk"!传教士选择放弃发言之前，在体育场内的40000人，他们几乎总是告诉任何人，说：“他们都太忙讲”！I know because I have TESTED more than a hundred Ministers in this way, and only two even indicated a willingness to talk, but then they told me to contact their Secretary to make an Appointment!我知道，因为我已经测试了一百多部长以这种方式，和只有两个，甚至表示愿意谈，但后来他们告诉我接​​触他们的秘书预约！ What if the subject I wanted to discuss was urgent?如果我想讨论的主题是急吗？What if I was a teenage girl who just discovered that she was pregnant and she was afraid to confront her own parents?如果我是一个十几岁的女孩，刚刚发现自己怀孕了，她害怕面对自己的父母吗？Who does she have available to talk to?她有交谈吗？Isn't a Minister supposed to be that person?是不是应该是这个人的部长吗？Is SHE likely to be willing to call a Secretary to make an Appointment for a few weeks later?她可能愿意称之为局长作出了几个星期后任命吗？No. In fact, she might then start seriously thinking about suicide or other terrible possibilities.事实上号，然后，她可能会自杀或其他可怕的可能性的思想开始认真。Wouldn't she NEED and DESERVE a PERSONAL CONVERSATION with Jesus?她需要和应该得到一个与耶稣的个人对话吗？He certainly would have thought so.他肯定会是这么认为的。What modern Church shares that attitude of individuality and of potential urgency?现代教会股的个性和潜力的紧迫性态度？Not many, from our Church's view.不是很多，从我们的教会的看法。So we feel it necessary to both Teach about Jesus' Behaviors as well as His Words, and also attempt to DEMONSTRATE such behaviors as best as we can.因此，我们觉得有必要教导耶稣的行为，以及他的话，还试图证明等行为最好的，我们可以。

Now, there can be Christians who might interpret this ADDITION that our Church intentionally made to the Bible's Lessons to be undesirable and unacceptable!现在，可以有基督徒可能解释这除了我们的教会故意“圣经”的教训，是不可取的和不可接受的！They might therefore feel that our Church is a Cult, because we Teach something that does not seem to be Taught elsewhere.因此，他们可能会觉得我们的教会是邪教，因为我们教的东西，似乎没有教到别处。Are they right?是他们的权利？ We like to think not!我们认为不是！

But the point is that ALL Churches have a FEW unique beliefs, usually mixed in along with a vast majority of solid Christian beliefs and Lessons.但问题是，所有的教会有一些独特的信仰，通常混合一起了坚实的基督教信仰和经验的绝大多数。How can anyone claim to be in a position to determine WHICH such added beliefs are acceptable and which are not?如何任何人都可以声称自己是在一个位置，以确定这些增加的信念是可以接受的，哪些不是？Nearly all Christians would agree that when David Koresh Taught his followers that he was Jesus, and that therefore he was allowed to father all the children of all the women and girls in his Commune, that was NOT Christian.几乎所有的基督徒都会同意，当大卫考雷什教导他的追随者，他是耶稣，因此他被允许到父亲的所有妇女和女孩在他的公社，所有的孩子，是不是基督徒。 Nearly everyone agrees that a Southern Baptist Church should be allowed to have a Dress Code for entering their Church.几乎每个人都同意应该允许，进入他们的教会有一个着装，美南浸信会教堂。But exactly who is in a position to make such determinations?但究竟是谁在做出这样的决定呢？None of us!没有我们！Only the Lord is in a position to make such Judgments!只有主是在一个位置，做出这样的判断！

And so we feel that our suggestion of having two SEPARATE definitions of Christianity can be very useful.因此，我们觉得，我们有两个单独的定义基督教的建议是非常有用的。But that when EITHER such definition is used, it should be identified as being either Narrow or Broad!但是，这样的定义是用来当任，应认定为狭义的还是广义的！

I suggest defining an entirely separate term "Believer in Christ" and imbue it with the BROAD definition.我建议定义“在基督信徒”一个完全独立的长期灌输广义的定义。No problem there.没问题的。 Then, many individuals and groups that are automatically "excluded" by the "strict" (NARROW) definition of the word "Christian" would be included by the new term.然后，许多人会自动排除“的”严“字”基督教（狭义的）“的定义组将包含的新名词。The alternative would be to convince the entire world community to alter the NARROW definition of "Christian".另一种方法是将说服整个国际社会改变“基督教”的狭隘定义。That may or may not be appropriate (depending on one's attitude), but it seems impossible, because 1700 years of fairly consistent usage has ingrained the current Nicaean definition with the term.可能会或可能不会适当的（一个人的态度而定），但它似乎是不可能的，因为1700年的相当一致的使用已根深蒂固的当前与长远Nicaean定义。 Given that the (NARROW) word "Christian" has its various definitional aspects (all Nicaean), whether one likes it or not, it figures to remain as it is.鉴于（狭义的）“基督教”一词有其不同的定义方面（所有Nicaean），一个人是否喜欢与否，它的数字保持，因为它是。

Pastor Carl Johnson卡尔约翰逊牧师
A Christ Walk Church基督步行教会
Editor, BELIEVE Religious Information Source web-site编辑器，相信宗教信息来源网站

This subject presentation in the original English language这在原来的主题演讲， 英语