Are they Christians?

Question

I have church-going Protestant friends who maintain that you don't have to believe in a literal interpretation of the Virgin Birth and the Ascension in order to be a Christian. They say those events are metaphorical or symbolic. It seems to me that if you don't accept these two critically important events literally, then you don't believe in the divinity of Christ. Without the divinity of Christ there can be no Christian religion. Help me out here.

Answer 1

Well those beliefs is the reason the council of Nicea took place. Those uninspired men appointed by a pagan emperor decided on several things, among those things was the virgin birth, the divinity of Jesus and the accenscension.

Not to worry they are average modern Christians. The average Christian will say that baptism is not necessary and that it is only a symbol and not to be taken as we actually have to be baptized. If they reject baptism is it really surprising they reject other important doctrine?

The average Christian will proclaim that all you have to do is say the sinners prayer, ask Jesus into your heart and believe.

That is not even hinted at in scripture. Paul did have an opinion of people who preached another gospel than what is found in the bible Galatians 1:8,9

Answer 2

Interesting question. I think Christians need to accept both the humanity and divinity of Christ. Sometimes, some Christians get too caught up in his divinity to recognize his humanity. I wonder if these friends can still accept the divinity of Christ without believing in the virgin birth or the ascension. In other words, could Christ still be divine without these two events having occurred? I am inclined to say, "yes," but I'm not exactly sure. I think that we too frequently put restrictions on Christ on the events that supposedly surrounded him. For instance, if this didn't happen, then he can't be God. I think our finite nature as humans restricts our thinking.

Have you asked them if they still consider Christ to be divine without these two events? That might give a better insight.

God's Child, by the way, gave a very intersting answer, though I don't think it addressed the question exactly. If he's not a teacher, he should be. Thanks to him for that.

Answer 3

Protestants being thus impious enough to make liars of Jesus Christ, of the Holy Ghost, and of the Apostles, need we wonder if they continually slander Catholics, telling and believing worse absurdities about them than the heathens did? What is more absurd than to preach that Catholics worship stocks and stones for gods; set up pictures of Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and other saints, to pray to them, and put their confidence in them; that they adore a god of bread and wine; that their sins are forgiven by the priest, without repentance and amendment of life; that the pope or any other person can give leave to commit sin, or that for a sum of money the forgiveness of sins can be obtained ? To these and similar absurdities and slanders, we simply answer: "Cursed is he who believes in such absurdities and falsehoods, with which Protestants impiously charge the children of the Catholic Church. All those grievous transgressions are another source of their reprobation."

"But what faith can we learn from these false teachers when, in consequence of separating from the Church, they have no rule of faith? ... How often Calvin changed his opinions! And, during his life, Luther was constantly contradicting himself: on the single article of the Eucharist, he fell into thirty-three contradictions! A single contradiction is enough to show that they did not have the Spirit of God. "He cannot deny Himself" (II Timothy 2:13). In a word, take away the authority of the Church, and neither Divine Revelation nor natural reason itself is of any use, for each of them may be interpreted by every individual according to his own caprice ... Do they not see that from this accursed liberty of conscience has arisen the immense variety of heretical and atheistic sects? ... I repeat: if you take away obedience to the Church, there is no error which will not be embraced.

Source(s):

Against the Reformers
Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible online

Additional Reading

St Alphonsus Mary De Liguori (1696-1787)
Bishop and Doctor of the Church

Answer 4

The Bible is very clear. Jesus is God's son, NOT God himself.
Almighty God has no beginning. He is the one that had dealings with Abraham [ Exodus 6;3]
Jesus, though, DID have a beginning.
As the very FIRST of God's creations. Proverbs 8; 22-31
Before even the universe, angels [ including the one that rebelled. Satan] the earth, dinosaurs or man.
Jesus can be classed as divine in that he had a heavenly start. Long before he was SENT to earth for us.
Almighty God created everything FOR Jesus and even THROUGH Jesus , because Jesus was ALONGSIDE his Father during the creation. But Jesus is not the primary instigator of creation. His Father is.

As to 'virgin birth'. Mary was Jesus' mother. Jesus had NO human Father. As the record/Bible states, Mary was told she would give birth. Even she questioned this as she had had no intercourse with any man. It was miraculous from our point of view. But it was literal, not symbolic or metaphorical.

Answer 5

I always was led to believe that the definition of a Christian was someone who believes Jesus Christ was literally born on earth as told in the bible, i.e. the immaculate birth, and died for humanity's sins on the cross. I did a quick little search and this is what Wikipedia has to say on the subject:

"A Christian is a follower of Jesus of Nazareth, referred to as the Christ. Christians believe Jesus to be the Son of God, who lived a life befitting that of the creator of the universe, free of sin and full of love, who at the end of his earthly life was crucified, and then on the third day, rose from the dead, and later ascended into heaven."

From what I have been taught and from the teachings of the Bible, I can assume a Christian must believe the birth and death of Christ must be taken literally. I hope this information helps in your confusion.

Answer 6

I agree with you. If we start saying that the Bible is just metaphors and symbols then all we have is a book with some good things to live by and not a guide to salvation. Also, who among us is equipped to determined what parts of the Bible are simply nice stories and which are truth. No, the whole thing is the divine inspired word of God.

Answer 7

If anyone tells you that Jesus was not born of a virgin, then he is talking about a different Jesus, then the one in the Bible. There are lots of folks out there trying to discredit the Word of God. Stick to your guns, trust the Word and not people, even friends. By the way, Protestants, do believe in the virgin birth, I have been one for 50 yrs.

Answer 8

I believe whole heartedly in the virgin birth and the ascention of Christ. My translation of a Christian is believing these things but many different beliefs and denominations call themselves Christians all I know is what I believe and you can call me whatever you want I have Christ in my heart and that is what matters.

Answer 9

I agree that is certainly not the believe of most Protestants maybe they are from some odd cult. unless you accept Jesus is God and was born to pay for our sin you are not Christian of course there is More involved like being willing to give your life to him. acceptance and repentance are only the start of a long Jernny but with out those you are not going to be forgiven.

Answer 10

In my 17 years experience as a minister, I've found that for every teaching that IS in the Bible, there's a dozen other beliefs out there that disagree, even though they have no real basis. People could claim to have found ancient scrolls saying that Adam and Eve were androids and I wouldn't be surprised. Stick to what you know is true (as supported by scripture), but be open to people who can show you new teachings, as long as they can show you from the Bible.