Bad News For Evangelicals

[GrandizerII]

I believe this topic is about the tenets of Christian faith, not all the minor doctrines or full knowledge of scripture, certainly not church history

Yes, and I reject your unwarranted argument that for a Christian to be truly a Christian they have to be as familiar with the tenets of the Christian faith as you claim to be. Let me ask you a question: what does it mean when the Christian doctrine says that Jesus is God? Is he the whole of God, or is he fully divine in nature but still just a part of God? And what about salvation? What does it mean to be saved through faith in Jesus Christ? Is salvation the way Ephesians describes it: by grace through faith, with good works prepared by God himself for Christians in salvation? Or shall we listen to James instead and remind ourselves that faith isn't just a belief but has to be completed by one's own good works in order to be justified? Who's got it right, and who's got it wrong? What exactly is the mainstream Christian teaching? Hell, what exactly is the mainstream Evangelical teaching in terms of major doctrines? It's difficult to tell, because there isn't just one unified mainstream set of teachings, it's a bunch of them each considered to be mainstream in their own right ...

[Angrboda]

Fascinating analogy. Unfortunately, typical people such as those polled don't simply embrace their religious beliefs at Easter or Christmas. Given what I know of evangelicals in general, that would seem to be as far from the case as possible. Nor would they be described as not loving and caring about their faith.

As Hume has noted, in so far as an analogy departs in the specifics of how the things are similar, it loses credibility until the point at which it is no longer a credible argument. I think you've reached that point.

The point was not the once a year attendance, it was lack of understanding to what is supposed to be of great importance in one's life

So your analogy was that people who don't fully understand something are like people who don't fully understand something because they don't fully understand something? Beyond gutting any possibility of using it as an argument, you're essentially circling round to begging the question with what is essentially a No True Scotsman argument that no longer cares what actually does or does not make a true Scotsman.

Congratulations for completely eviscerating your own point and thinking you've made a constructive step. I'm gonna guess you are yet one more of the ignoramuses like those exposed in this survey.

[Dr H]

In the bible, the church refers to the laity, not the priests and elites.  So if one is criticizing the church, it is indeed legitimate to sample the rank and file.  That's what defines a religion.  Not the specific views of a minority.

Interesting to speculate whether "the church" would continue to exist were the Vatican to cease to exist, but the laity remain. Or vice-versa, for that matter.