No such thing as a "true" Christian

[fr0d0]

You want me to prove the non-existence of divine powers?

You made the statement Strongbad. Own it and tell us all how you work it out. Or shut the fuck up.

I don't make the statement... but nice try at squirming.

You know what, fuckwit? You've just called me stupid twice in one post.

No tarzan... I called your act stupid, not you.

---

God is just: THEREFORE your scenario doesn't address Christianity.

It does frods, and that is the lamest rebuttal I've ever seen.

Is that your defense Badger: "it does"? Are you completely ignorant of Christianity... or are you suggesting that this opinion OF the Christian God contrary to the Christian understanding of the Christian God is what is accepted by any Christians?

So THE important thing is not what you do, but that you kiss gods arse.

So what you're saying here, is that you should be able to be a good upstanding member of society, but a right bastard, and God should forgive you. Or a murderer who deserves justice and God should punish you?

...ah yeah - you don't think God is just. <--- STRAW MAN!

[Zen Badger]

Correct me if I'm wrong Frods but as I understand it as long as you repent and ask for forgiveness you will get into heaven.

Yes or no?

---

...ah yeah - you don't think God is just. <--- STRAW MAN!

After reading the bible, no, I don't.

So I don't see how it's a strawman.

[Strongbad]

You made the statement Strongbad. Own it and tell us all how you work it out

Like I said, Cheeta, you made the assertion that divine powers exist. When you prove the existence of anything divine, I'll take your challenge.

Or shut the fuck up

Ah yes, spoken like a true christian - preach love, peace, understanding, forgiveness, etc. out of one side of your mouth and spew vitriol out of the other. After having this brief exchange with you, I can see why many members of this forum (especially the more intelligent ones) refuse to engage you seriously. I'll be joining their ranks.

[Watson]

The problems is that christianity allows you to be a complete arsehole your entire life and lets you off as long as long as you ask for forgiveness at the end.

And what's wrong with that?

On the other hand you can be a saint all your life, yet because you haven't asked for forgiveness from the big bully in the sky you're gonna burn for all eternity.

Somehow I don't think your hypothetical person is the saint you claim him or her to be.

[Gawdzilla]

I never claimed that there is such a thing outside of religious faith Gawd, as Strongbad has done of the opposite. I therefore do not attract the burden, where he does.

I was agreeing with you.

[Skipper]

Yeah, 'cause how dare we forgive people for the things they've done if they're truly sorry, right?

Really? Is that what you do? Oh yeah, you will forgive them, unless they dont believe what you believe, then you think they deserve to be tortured in fire for all eternity. So dont even try that one. Dont even try to water it down.

Yeah it kind of is what I do actually. I may not able to do it every single time but that's part of being an imperfect being. And where did I say if they don't believe what I believe they get 'tortured in fire for all eternity'? All I was saying is that forgiving someone is a good thing to do. Nothing more, nothing less.

But the religious doctrine you willingly subscribe to says they will burn forever.

However, a rapist or murderer will be allowed a after life of eternal pleasure if they just believe as all their sins will be forgiven...unless they insult the holy ghost that is...(What is that shit all about btw?)

[KichigaiNeko]

Oh yeah "I forgive you ...teeth clenched"

No you don't ...REVENGE is what humans are after. Don't give me the "holeier than thou" shit.

[theVOID]

I'm of the opinion that the "no true Scotsman" is one of the most misused logical fallacies in the history of critical thought, people who use it can often fall into the trap of some form of "guilt by association" or deem that the person defining themselves as x has some authority over the definition of x.

It entirely depends on the rigidity of the definition, not what a person believes they are or labels themselves as, but on whether or not they meet the criteria established.

In you define "Christian" as a person who believes in Jesus then any person who believes is a Christian, I'm not so sure that it's a good enough definition, for instance; A satanist who believes in Jesus but worships Satan and does not take as an authoritative moral source any of the content of the New Testament. Suppose for the sake of argument that a "Christian" is a person who not only believes in Jesus as the son of god, but also believes him to be a moral authority who's moral teachings are expressed in the New Testament - That I feel is a better definition. So a person who believes in Jesus and believes the NT is a source of moral authority may be justifiably called a Christian.

This is where the "No true Scotsman" may be applicable (if the definition is sufficient), suppose a person is a Christian but acts in a way that is contrary to the instructions present in the NT, would one be justified in saying he is not a "True Christian"(TC)? No, not if the definition of Christian is as I presented above.

This is why it seems some Christians believe that to be "Christian" is to be "Christ like" a definition that encompasses the aforementioned definition and requires that one behaves at all times as Jesus would given the same circumstance, it is not simply a matter of belief but one of action. Given this definition of "Christian" you would very much be justified in calling someone who behaves in a way that is not prescribed in the NT as "Not a true Christian".

That however also raises problem, or more frankly, an absurdity. Suppose someone is a Christian in the sense of the second definition, does their committing an act or series of acts that are forbidden in the NT make them a "False Christian" (FC) for the period of time in which they committed these acts? It seems bizarre to me that you could be TC up until a point in time where you coveted another mans car where you would become a FC, and then once you stop coveting his car you are a TC again.

Perhaps you are a FC until such point in time as you repent for your sins. Well suppose a TC is a pedophile, he rapes little altar boys and is therefore a FC, then asks for forgiveness and becomes a TC again, then rapes another altar boy and once again becomes an FC and so on and so forth, this juggling of TC and FC is not only bizarre but makes it clear that the Christians who insist on such a definition as "Christ like" do so in such a way that absolutely wreaks of intellectual spinelessness.

So for now I stand that a TC is a person who "Believes that Jesus is the son of god and that the NT is a source of moral authority", though it would be interesting to see what some of our Christian members think of these terms.

[KichigaiNeko]

I think it comes down to "Labels" VI0D...

Humans are very good at trying to put things into little boxes.

The same argument can be had with the word atheist. Look up "Evil Bible" for definitions on Atheism. Very confusing.

Any way ...the argument of "Oh...THEY (I'm not really fusssed as to who THEY are) are not 'TRUE' [insert religion of choice here] is just another way of saying...I am not ready to look at a world that will NOT fit into my own private little paradigm ?

[Zen Badger]

The problems is that christianity allows you to be a complete arsehole your entire life and lets you off as long as long as you ask for forgiveness at the end.

And what's wrong with that?

It means that Hitler(a catholic) got into heaven.

On the other hand you can be a saint all your life, yet because you haven't asked for forgiveness from the big bully in the sky you're gonna burn for all eternity.

Somehow I don't think your hypothetical person is the saint you claim him or her to be.

He's hypothectical, he can be whatever I want him to be( like god,when you think about it)
so this person lives a hypothetically perfect life and yet doesn't ask for redemption.

Yet Adolf, after all the actrocities he has committed, does ask for it.....

What then?