(October 6, 2011 at 8:15 pm)GLORYTOGOD!!! Wrote:(October 6, 2011 at 7:54 pm)Cinjin Wrote:(October 6, 2011 at 7:46 pm)GLORYTOGOD!!! Wrote: I am not trying to decide who is a christian and who is not, i am sorry if it came of that way.
Min's point is that they are not christians only by YOUR definition, and you are not the one who gets to decide what defines a christian on this planet. Those christians who do not fit your definition will simply say that you yourself are the one who is not a true christian according to THEIR definition.
I believe that all christians would agree the definition of a christian is universall, and if not could you give me the exception? I understand that some people interpret the bible differently, but it is very clear about this part, once again do you know of any interpretations that differ this? I understand your point that anyone who says they are a christian is not going to like being told otherwise, but if they say they are, and there is a universal definition of what it takes to come to salvation through christ. then they must be bound by everything that christ says.
See, you're kind of actually arguing Min's side of the argument now. In fact his point was that if you believe that christ rose from the dead, than you are a Christian regardless of your other agendas and/or interpretations. It was you who said contrary. Your original contention was that people who use god to hate are not true christians -hence Min's "No True Scotsman" point. As far as I can see, you are now arguing Min's side.