What deism has done for the world

[discipulus]

In what way do you mean?

You cannot take the actions of a few adherents to a particular religion whose said actions are contrary to the tenets of said religion and hold them up and say: Aha! Got ya, this religion is evil because these particular adherents have committed said acts.

You cannot justifiably do that. For one you ignore the fact that said acts are CONTRARY to the tenets of said religion. Two, you reason incorrectly that the acts of a few are representative of the acts of all. This is fallacious.

Do you understand?

Because I think it comes down to whether or not a person can be called a Christian if he is committing such acts, or condoning them in some way. If you are saying that a person cannot be a Christian and still commit such acts, then it's the No True Scotsman fallacy. If you are saying otherwise, then we must determine where you are drawing the line. Or you may simply leave the question hanging.

The word "Christian" can be used to express several different ideas. The word does not have only one meaning.

Is that theist a True Theist?

A true theist is one who believes in the existence of God or gods. This is a generic dictionary definition. If a person calls themselves a theist and does not actually believe in the existence of God or gods, then in what way could they be said to be a theist? The term theist, it appears to me, can have only meaning. The term "Christian" however, can be used in several ways. In fact, upon referencing the term, in one dictionary, there existed roughly twelve different definitions. For our discussion suffice it to say there there are two main definitions. One, to denote someone who has confessed that they have been born of God and seeks to imitate Christ's life of selfless love and self-denial (this is how the New Testament writers used the term). Two, to denote one who affiliates themselves with the organized religion known as Christianity.

I will briefly highlight the difference in the two. If you ask a person if they are a Christian and they say yes and then proceed to ask them why they are, their answers will give you a clue as to which sense they can be called a Christian. If you were to ask me why I was a Christian, I would say that I have been born of God and that as a result of the new birth and relationship with God, I seek to live a life worthy of His Name.

If you were to ask a person you met at a particular church one day if they were a Christian and they said yes and then you asked them why and they said something like: "Well, uhh, I was raised in a Christian home, and I uhh...go to church every Sunday and pay my tithes....and uhh....I like to read the bible a lot." You can then ask them this question: "Have you been born again? If they say: "What's that? or, "Oh...goodness no! I just go to church and try to pay my tithes and stuff like that because thats how I was raised. That old stuff about being born again is just a way of saying we should try to live a certain way."

In the first instance the word Christian is used in the first sense I gave. In the second instance the word Christian is used in the second sense. So from this it is evident that sense one entails sense two (in the sense one affiliates themselves with the organized religion), but sense two does not entail sense one.

A person can be a member of a church but not be born again nor seek to live a life of Christlike love and self-denial. But if a person has been born again then they will automatically be a Christian in a sense that they are affiliated with a church.

One entails two, but two does not entail one.

The distinction is crucial Tonus and unless rightly understood will lead to much confusion.