Admitting You're a Sinner

[Whateverist]

To all appearances xtians remain as prone to all those flaws as anyone else.  The big difference I see is that flawed atheists don't feel smugly that they're saved regardless.  An atheist dissatisfied with his life has a reason to get it together now in what for us is the only opportunity there will be.  For those planning on going to the pie in the sky place after death and content to call himself a sinner, why bother?

Sure, why wouldn't Christians be prone to those things? It is the human condition. My point is that a Christian should be working (or should want to work) with God on changing his/her heart so that these things are not struggles (not simply avoid the behavior). It seems your point in your last sentence is based on a poor understanding of Christianity, not based on any actual reasons from the belief system itself.

So Jeffrey Dalmer can be as good a xtian as any of you and you'd be happy to have him sitting next to you in church .. so long as God is working on his heart. Who knows, maybe one day his tastes for human flesh will change.

[drfuzzy]

---

Sure, why wouldn't Christians be prone to those things? It is the human condition. My point is that a Christian should be working (or should want to work) with God on changing his/her heart so that these things are not struggles (not simply avoid the behavior). It seems your point in your last sentence is based on a poor understanding of Christianity, not based on any actual reasons from the belief system itself.

---

So Jeffrey Dalmer can be as good a xtian as any of you and you'd be happy to have him sitting next to you in church .. so long as God is working on his heart.  Who knows, maybe one day his tastes for human flesh will change.

[Catholic_Lady]

Has anyone ever actually claimed that Dahmer is in Heaven? I see this come up quite often here, yet have never seen any Christian actually say they believe he is. Seems a bit strawman.

[drfuzzy]

Well, actually, I don't believe there IS a heaven.  
And when I did, I didn't think that - - evil impulses or even a memory of sin would exist there.  
I was taught that everything was purified.  My parents believed that they would see each other, and recognize each other, in heaven,
but would not be husband and wife, male and female.  (They made me study Matthew 22, where Jesus disagrees with them, but I 
knew better than to argue the point.  Not safe.)  But stories of deathbed conversions do seem . . . unfair.

[John V]

But stories of deathbed conversions do seem . . . unfair.

Salvation is a function of grace and mercy. It's by nature unjust.

[Angrboda]

I would say that Christian are on average more moral than atheists...IF you remove all nominal and cultural Christians from the comparison. The reason being that if a heart change is a result of salvation, then I would question a person's salvation if there is no heart change (or at least a desire). Of course this will bring up the No True Scotsman fallacy, but I don't think it applies because the definition of being a Christian is not ad hoc--it is clearly defined in the foundational documents--the NT. 

So, salvation changes hearts. This is demonstrated by the change of heart by all those who are saved. Those whose hearts aren't changed are excluded because they obviously aren't saved. Leaving only those whose hearts have changed. Which is proof that salvation changes hearts.

Hooboy. What a ridiculous and self-serving bit of illogic.

[KevinM1]

So, if nominal and cultural Christians don't count, then why does Steve, whenever prompted, bring up the billions of people who self-identify as being Christian when he attempts to claim that the religion's popularity is a sign of it's veracity?

Can't have it both ways, buddy.

[SteveII]

I would say that Christian are on average more moral than atheists...IF you remove all nominal and cultural Christians from the comparison. The reason being that if a heart change is a result of salvation, then I would question a person's salvation if there is no heart change (or at least a desire). Of course this will bring up the No True Scotsman fallacy, but I don't think it applies because the definition of being a Christian is not ad hoc--it is clearly defined in the foundational documents--the NT. 

So, salvation changes hearts.  This is demonstrated by the change of heart by all those who are saved.  Those whose hearts aren't changed are excluded because they obviously aren't saved.  Leaving only those whose hearts have changed.  Which is proof that salvation changes hearts.

Hooboy.  What a ridiculous and self-serving bit of illogic.

Then I will clarify. I think salvation itself changes some things in the heart but leaves a vast number of things that still need to be worked on. For example, perhaps upon salvation, there is an immediate positive change of heart about pride or contentment, but the person continues to really struggles with anger over the smallest things. 

I would expect a desire for change is fairly universal.  So that is the reason why I put the phrase "or at least a desire" in my response. While individual results may very, chances are a large group of people who have experienced some change and desire to improve morally as a clearly delineated goal in their worldview will be more moral than a group of people without the same or similar impetus. Logic restored.

[Whateverist]

So, if nominal and cultural Christians don't count, then why does Steve, whenever prompted, bring up the billions of people who self-identify as being Christian when he attempts to claim that the religion's popularity is a sign of it's veracity?

Can't have it both ways, buddy.

Yeah, the number of true xtians has got be South of one by Steve's standard.  He can't help it though.  He drinks the kool aid every day to help maintain the stone wall of his beliefs.

[SteveII]

So, if nominal and cultural Christians don't count, then why does Steve, whenever prompted, bring up the billions of people who self-identify as being Christian when he attempts to claim that the religion's popularity is a sign of it's veracity?

Can't have it both ways, buddy.

Excellent point. The answer would be that nominal and cultural Christians still believe there is a God and that Christianity (as far as they understand it) is probably the best interpretation. Although a low bar, it still has meaning when discussing world trends/comparisons/histories because there have been nominal and cultural Christians for a thousand years and they have an effect on the culture at large. When discussing things like doctrine, morality, and christian living, we necessarily have to restrict it to those with specific experiences and/or knowledge.