How can a Christian reject part of the Bible and still call themselves a Christian?

[Esquilax]

Ooo, I know this one.

A claim is defined as as assertion that something is true. A belief is defined as an acceptance that something is true. One is an internal matter, the other looks outwards.

Break it down further, assert is defined as "to state a fact of belief confidently and forcefully." Acceptance is defined as "the process or fact of being received as adequate, valid or suitable.

So whilst I can't speak for frodo I hold the same position. I would not state God as a fact forcefully or confidently. But I do hold it as a belief which, for me, is adequate, valid and suitable.

Does that make sense?

Yeah, it makes sense, I just don't understand the functional distinction as it applies to the burden of proof. If one were to ask about your belief in a god, say, as part of a discussion forum designed around debating that very belief, you'd have to say you accept that he exists, just to remain truthful, right? That's making the claim, regardless of how softly you do it. To say that this absolves you of the burden of proof... well, perhaps it means you aren't interested in shouldering it, but it's still there.

And if you're content to merely believe in a god yet not claim it... why sign up to an atheist forum in the first place?