But who is the Christian's neighbor?

But who is the Christian's neighbor? — baker

The story of the good Samaritan provides an answer, but it is evident that it is not one that most Christians live by.

Luke and Romans clearly show that love of your neighbor means concern for your neighbors well being. Nothing is said about spreading the "good news". — Fooloso4

Good try.

However, well-being includes spiritual well-being and that is achieved by following the teachings of the Gospels.

You seem to forget that true Christians believe that we have a soul.

But he answered, "It is written, 'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.'"

Hence hearing the Gospels is central to Christianity, that's why they're called "Gospels" i.e. "good news or message".

You seem to forget that true Christians believe that we have a soul. — Apollodorus

"Have a soul"? Not are a soul?

So if you have a soul, so that you and your soul are two separate things, who burns in hell for all eternity? You or your soul?

So if you have a soul, so that you and your soul are two separate things, who burns in hell for all eternity? You or your soul? — baker

You're joking, right? When we say "we", we normally mean the whole human being, i.e. body and soul.

As such, we "have a soul". If we were a disembodied soul, then we'd say "I am a soul".

You're joking, right? — Apollodorus

Not at all. The Bible is quite inconsistent in its use: sometimes, the soul is something to have, and other times, it's something one is.
Search it for how the term "soul" is used.

I have to go now.

However, well-being includes spiritual well-being and that is achieved by following the teachings of the Gospels. — Apollodorus

This is not what you said in your earlier post:

This suggests that an essential aspect of Christian love is not as some might assume having an attitude of affection, etc. toward our neighbor or even concern for his material wellbeing, but primarily concern for his or her spiritual salvation. — Apollodorus

Your claim was that material well-being is not an essential aspect, You excluded material well-being, but the passages I quote show that it cannot be excluded.

I am not claiming that proclaiming the good news is not part of Christianity. I am, however, claiming that the passages cited are about material well-being. They say nothing about proselytizing.

The passages do not say anything about the teachings of the Gospels either. The teaching is summed up in the passages cited as well as others that contain the same message: 1) Love God 2) Love your neighbor. It is typical Christian chauvinism to take the teachings of a Jewish rabbi and make them into something they are not. But that is, after all, what the term Christian is all about.

Your claim was that material well-being is not an essential aspect, You excluded material well-being, but the passages I quote show that it cannot be excluded. — Fooloso4

You're making that up, aren't you? I never excluded anything. What my whole statement means is that the primary concern is for his or her spiritual salvation. "Primary" means of the first importance, fundamental, first in a series, etc, not exclusive. Are you well?

It is typical Christian chauvinism to take the teachings of a Jewish rabbi and make them into something they are not. But that is, after all, what the term Christian is all about. — Fooloso4

Well, Christianity is a different religion, isn't it? It isn't my fault that you don't like Christians.

And what "Jewish rabbi" are you talking about anyway?

Plus, nobody was talking about "presenting Christianity to atheists and agnostics". — Apollodorus

So... what were you thinking of, when you spake of "reversing the declining of Christianity?" Making the Christians more Christian than they are? I don't believe that. I believe you were talking proselytization. So... whom do you want to proselytize, if not the heathen? That is the question.

I doubt there would be any need for that as many seem to have already been lobotomized by Covid-19 and by reading too many Marxist fairy tales. The number of Christians in Marxist societies like China is certainly growing by the day. — Apollodorus

If they had been lobotomized, then and only then it is understandable that Christians grow in numbers. You just proved my point: Steps to take, in this order: 1. Lobotomize communists. 2. Convert them to Christianity.

You're making that up, aren't you? — Apollodorus

Once again, a direct quote:

This suggests that an essential aspect of Christian love is not as some might assume having an attitude of affection, etc. toward our neighbor or even concern for his material wellbeing,

You say what is not an essential aspect of Christian love. The last thing that is not essential is material well-being. Your words not mine.

not exclusive. — Apollodorus

When you say "not X" you exclude X.

What my whole statement means ... — Apollodorus

As Alice was told in Wonderland: Say what you mean or mean what you say.

Well, Christianity is a different religion, isn't it? — Apollodorus

Yes, but these are supposed to be the words of Jesus. Jesus was not a Christian. His disciples certainly would not have understood it that way. This was a major reason why Paul and his followers split off from the disciples. Paul tells us all about it. Or at least his side of the story.

(Jews and Muslims are also welcome to offer their own views if they have any.) — Apollodorus

How about the way one particular Jew might have understood his own words and how he wanted them to be understood? One thing is certain: he died before the advent of Paul's Christianity.

It isn't my fault that you don't like Christians. — Apollodorus

No, it is your fault that you make false assumptions.

And what "Jewish rabbi" are you talking about anyway? — Apollodorus

Are you not familiar with Jesus of Nazareth? Or as you might call him, following Paul, Jesus Christ.

Are you not familiar with Jesus of Nazareth? Or as you might call him, following Paul, Jesus Christ.I — Fooloso4

Where does it say he was a "Jewish rabbi"??? First time I hear of that.

How about the way one particular Jew might have understood his own words and how he wanted them to be understood? One thing is certain: he died before the advent of Paul's Christianity. — Fooloso4

Well, if you're a Jew then tell us what tradition you're representing and what your position is. Then we can discuss. Not a problem for me at all, on the contrary, I tend to get on with Jews much better than with Marxists to be honest.

Where does it say he was a "Jewish rabbi"??? First time I hear of that. — Apollodorus

You need to increase your circle if acquaintances, or better yet, do some research.

Rabbi means teacher or leader. Do you believe that Jesus was a Jew? Do you believe he taught adherence to the Law? Put it together and you'll get your answer.

Rabbi means teacher or leader. Do you believe that Jesus was a Jew? Do you believe he taught adherence to the Law? Put it together and you'll get your answer. — Fooloso4

lol You do make me laugh. According to Christianity Jesus was the Son of God, the Word of God, etc.

Where are the sources that say "Jewish rabbi"??? You're making it up as usual, aren't you?

Even the Koran says he was a prophet.

Where are the sources that say "Jewish rabbi"??? You're making it up as usual, aren't you? — Apollodorus

Mark 9:5

Peter said to Jesus, “Rabbi, it is good for us to be here.

John 1:38

Turning around, Jesus saw them following and asked, “What do you want?”

They said, “Rabbi” (which means “Teacher”), “where are you staying?”

Even the Koran says he was a prophet. — Apollodorus

The Koran says Jesus was just a man and not the son of God so...

But yes, I was always taught in Christian school that Jesus was a Rabbi.

They said, “Rabbi” (which means “Teacher”), “where are you staying?”

Well, people addressed Jesus with the title of “Rabbi” as a sign of respect and because he was teaching them as part of his mission as instructed by God, not because he was a professional rabbi.

Christianity believes in Jesus as the Son of God. Islam believes in Jesus as a Prophet of God. Judaism has no teachings about Jesus. Therefore the idea that he was "a Jewish rabbi" is unsupported by the sources. You may believe whatever you want but people don't need to accept that.

The only thing that matters is the sources:

“Nathaniel answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God” – John 1:49.

As for "Jewish", the population of Roman Palestine was mixed. There were Greeks, Palestinians, Arabs, Egyptians, etc. Moses, Solomon and many others had non-Jewish wives. Jesus may have been partly Jewish through his mother but on the paternal side he surely was the Son of God.

The Christian Creed is:

I believe in God, the father almighty, creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.

I'm not surprised that Marxist-influenced “Christian” schools teach something else but that has nothing to do with the authentic teachings of the Christian Faith.

I believe you were talking proselytization. —

Your belief is one thing. Facts are another. I don't believe in "proselytization", whatever that is, at all. People convert to Christianity only if God wants them to. Jesus and the apostles told people about the word of God and that was it. What people did with the teachings was their problem.

Plus, most religions would accept the truth of the two commandments without needing to "convert" to anything. Jews and Muslims already accept them. So, you got it totally wrong, I'm afraid. And not for the first time.

Your belief is one thing. — Apollodorus

And your belief is just one other thing. Your belief is just a thing. Your thing. It has to do only with you. It's a thing, your belief is. Whether it's in God or whatever else, it's nothing but just a thing.

Plus, most religions would accept the truth of the two commandments without needing to "convert" to anything. — Apollodorus

So... is this going to strengthen Christianity? Let's not lose focus, when I spake of proselytization I referred directly to your idea, that had to do with the decline of Christianity. Here's the quote that I've been referring to all this time:

I think the decline of Christianity in the Western World can only be reversed by the correct "reinterpretation" or "reconsideration" of these two central commandments which together have always formed the very foundation of the Christian Faith. — Apollodorus

So... Muslims and Jews are strong supporters of Christianity, according to you, because they do accept the truth of the two commandments without needing to "Convert" to anything.

Good going, Apollodorus; strengthen Christianity by allowing the validity of the Jewish and Muslim faiths. They don't need converting. They are good enough Christians, these Jews and Muslims, without converting, with being devoted Muslims and Jews.

The hair stands on end hearing your insanely misapprocated, unrelentingly non-introceptive, and altogether parapleptocal arguments.

I think the only problem in this argumentation that you carry on is that you read only what others write, and not your own posts.

The hair stands on end hearing your insanely misapprocated, unrelentingly non-introceptive, and altogether parapleptocal arguments. — god must be atheist

What do these underlined words mean?

What do these underlined words mean? — Hanover

They are neologisms. They are the newest craze in literary, in philosophizing, and in literate philosophizing circles. Creating words that sound plausibly like semantically correct words, but are not. This is the newest trend in the literature of philosophy.

... not because he was a professional rabbi. — Apollodorus

"Professional" rabbi was at that time a meaningless term. I said he was a rabbi, a teacher of the Law, and you accused me of making it up. I provide textual examples and instead of simply admitting you were wrong, try to argue something else.

Christianity believes in Jesus as the Son of God. — Apollodorus

This is based on a misunderstanding of the term 'son of God' or 'sons of God'. No, I am not making it up. It is used several times in the Hebrew Bible. This time you can look it up yourself. It did not mean what it came to mean for most Christians.

There was a dispute in the early Church as to what 'son of God' meant. Arius rejected what came to be known as Homoousian Christology. Despite having the stronger hermeneutical argument, his side lost at the First Council of Nicaea, and he was labelled a heretic. Look it up.

Therefore the idea that he was "a Jewish rabbi" is unsupported by the sources. — Apollodorus

The fact that Christians believe he was the Son of God does not mean he was not a teacher of the Law. John 1:49 affirms that he was a rabbi. The fact that it also calls him the son of God does not mean John denied he was a rabbi.

As for "Jewish" ... — Apollodorus

Jesus taught strict adherence to the Jewish Law. His disciples followed the Law. Paul preached to the gentiles that they did not have to adhere to the written Law to be saved. Look it up.

... the authentic teachings of the Christian Faith. — Apollodorus

You really do not know your Christian history. You may take the Creed to be the authentic teaching but it was one of many in the early Jesus movement. Nowhere does Jesus teach that he was God's only son. This was a belief that developed later.

So... Muslims and Jews are strong supporters of Christianity, according to you, because they do accept the truth of the two commandments without needing to "Convert" to anything. — god must be atheist

I've no idea what you're talking about. I never said Muslims and Jews are strong supporters of Christianity, only that those I've spoken to agree with the injunctions to love God and to love our neighbor, like in the same way they believe in one God. What makes you think that's a problem?

I've no idea what you're talking about. — Apollodorus

Because you don't read your own posts. I do. And many others. More and more and more you contradict your own self, and you are oblivious to it because you don't know what you said just five minutes ago.

Read Fooloso4's last post. You completely destroyed your own arguments and your massive ignorance in the topic of your own faith was thrown in your face -- you are oblivious to it, because nothing can penetrate your ill logic. You are a bastion, and an impenetrable fortress by means of showing you logic and how you are wrong in most of your claims.

What makes you think that's a problem? — Apollodorus

So, I ask you: do you want to see Muslims and Jews converted to Christianity, or not?

(Beware, either way you answer, there is already quotes by you that deny this or that of your proposition if you answer this simple question.)

Nowhere does Jesus teach that he was God's only son. This was a belief that developed later. — Fooloso4

Really? How late is this then?

“Nathaniel answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God” – John 1:49.

They called him "Rabbi" AND "Son of God".

The Koran calls him a Prophet.

I'm sure even you can see that "Son of God" and "Prophet" is not the same as "rabbi" in the ordinary sense. Unless you're related to @god must be atheist which would tend to slightly change the situation, of course.

So, I ask you: do you want to see Muslims and Jews converted to Christianity, or not? — god must be atheist

They already believe in God and they agree with the two commandments. That's good enough to me.

What do these underlined words mean? — Hanover

You don't expect him/her to know that, do you?

“Nathaniel answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God” – John 1:49. — Apollodorus

That's what Nathaniel said, not Jesus. Your charge was that Jesus never spake of himself that he is the son of god. You said, that's wrong, and you quoted John 1:49. The keen observer, which you are not, will spot that this was not an utterance by Jesus. Your counter-argument fails.