smacl wrote: » If I was looking to find out what it meant to be Christian in a majority Christian country I'd tend start by looking at what the majority of Christians believe. No offence, but at 1.5% of the population, Evangelicals are hardly representative of Christianity in Ireland now are they? While you might not consider the vast majority of Christians to be Christian using your terms of reference that amounts to little more than sectarianism.
ChrisJ84 wrote: » Apologies, maybe I misunderstood what you were saying. Jesus is of course fully human, but also fully God. The fact that he is God means that he has absolute authority over the demons, and they have no choice but to do what and go where he commands. Not sure what you mean by proven, the Bible doesn't have much to say on the topic. Personally, I like the idea of there being animals, and would love to be reunited with dearly loved pets etc., but again we don't have much data to go on. Either way, I don't think anyone will be bored in the new heavens and the new earth.
theological wrote: » If one is interested in following after an atheistic worldview without consideration from the words of Jesus then those people are secularists.
- Separation of religious institutions from state institutions and a public sphere where religion may participate, but not dominate. - Freedom to practice one's faith or belief without harming others, or to change it or not have one, according to one's own conscience. - Equality so that our religious beliefs or lack of them doesn't put any of us at an advantage or a disadvantage.
theological wrote: » The problem is the question - what is a Christian? If someone is not interested in following the teachings of the Catholic Church how much can one say they are a Catholic. If someone is not interested in Biblical Christianity as an evangelical or a Protestant how much can one say they are a Protestant. If one isn't interested in hearing and obeying what Jesus says how much can we say they are a Christian.
With respect to religion, the fallacy is well used, often even overused. Religious apologists will repeatedly try to use NTS to distance themselves from more extreme or fundamentalist groups (and vice versa), but this does not prevent such extremists actually being religious — they themselves would certainly argue otherwise. Moderate Muslim leaders, for example, are well known for declaring Islamic extremists as "not true Muslims" as Islam is a "Religion of Peace." Similarly, moderate Christians, such as those in Europe, are sometimes aghast when viewing their fundamentalist counterparts in the US, immediately declaring them "not True Christians™," even though they believe in the same God and get their belief system from the same book. Many of these statements stating that the extremists are not true believers are often used as a reaction against Guilt by Association. The NTS fallacy likewise occurs when believers attribute any and all good fortune to divine intervention on their behalf, yet insist that the same can never be true when things go awry. The NTS fallacy can also run the other way when it comes to extremism. Extremists will make a religious statement and when someone points out that there are many believers who don't believe the extremist's viewpoint, the moderates are deemed to be not true believers (i.e., Christians who support gay marriage or accept evolution as fact are not "real Christians" or Muslims who support women's rights are not "real Muslims").
smacl wrote: » The alternative to secularism is theocracy, where the only active theocracies that come to mind are Islamic states that impose Sharia law. Perhaps, given the above, you could explain what you find objectionable about secularism?
smacl wrote: » You might want to re-visit the 'No true Scotsman' fallacy there, which is so overused is religious debate
ChrisJ84 wrote: » You are starting with the assertion that Ireland is a majority Christian country, and using that to define what a Christian is. But that's nonsense, you need to look at it the other way around. So, what is a Christian, and how do you know if you are one?
smacl wrote: » It is a fair question. To my mind if somebody tells me they're a Christian I wouldn't consider it my business to tell them otherwise. So while they might not meet your criteria for being a Christian, neither might you meet theirs. I'm not a Christian but do have a number of devout friends and family members who to my mind are most definitely Christian. They consider themselves Christian and practise their religion. At the same time are very much secularist and have not great interest in foisting their religion on others.
auspicious wrote: » "For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other, and they all have but one spirit, so that there is no superiority of the man over the beast; for all is vanity.” (Ecclesiastes 3:19)
ChrisJ84 wrote: » Fair enough, and whether any individual is a Christian or not is ultimately between them and the Lord. Neither my criteria nor anyone elses is important, but there has to be some criteria. Scripture does clearly outline marks that distinguish a Christian and these have also been affirmed by Christians throughout the ages. The most basic is belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. Without that it makes no more sense for someone to call themselves a Christian than for me to call myself an atheist even though I believe in God. Words have to mean something, they can't be endlessly malleable.
theological wrote: » For the record, we all want "the right thing for humanity at large". Some of this terminology you're presenting isn't helpful. We all want "the right thing for humanity". What we believe Scripturally is that accepting Jesus Christ, His life, death and saving resurrection is "the right thing for humanity". Even more than that it is the best way for humanity. We hold that out because we love our world and want others to know the truth and trust in Christ while the opportunity is still there. If people think that "the right thing for humanity" is something else that is up to them but it is a departure from orthodox Christianity.
highdef wrote: » If all pigs are demons, does that make every human who has eaten bacon a demon too? Would be kinda disappointed to hear that I myself am a demon especially as I consider myself to have excellent moral values.
Iliana Cold Mayonnaise wrote: » You seem to have a low expectation of what a Christian looks and behaves like if you are looking to the mainline denominations. If I asked anyone I worked with where they. Christians they'd say they were and then swear at me using Jesus name as a curse word to prove it! To say you love Him and not do what it says proves you're not a Christian despite being sprinked when a baby and told you were.
Peregrinus wrote: » . . . but maybe not great powers of analysis or reasoning. There is nothing in the scriptural story to suggest that all pigs are demons.
smacl wrote: » being a Christian means can vary widely from one Christian to the next. It would certainly seem that the majority in this country eschew biblical literalism and heavy handed orthodoxy but it seems disingenuous to suggest they are lesser Christians on that basis.
smacl wrote: » What seems to be a common source of strife within Christianity is one group of Christians denouncing another group based on differing understandings of what it means to be Christian. As an outsider, to me this seems no more than sectarianism.
smacl wrote: » I don't have any expectations of what Christians are, or are not for that matter. If someone tells me they're a Christian, I take them at their word.
ChrisJ84 wrote: » I think this is the crux of the matter - you seem to be emptying Christianity of any objective content, and leave it up to each individual to create their own reality. That is quite alien to the way the bible sees things, and to the history of Christianity over the last 2000 years. Christianity makes objective and unchanging claims about Jesus, about us, and about our need for salvation in him.
smacl wrote: » That being the case, let me ask you a simple question. Do you consider all those people that consider themselves Christian who voted in favour of repealing the 8th amendment and those in favour of allowing gay marriage, against the direct instructions of their church hierarchy, to genuinely be Christians?
ChrisJ84 wrote: » This just brings us back to the question, "What is a Christian?", and I've given my answer to that already. If someone believes in Jesus as lord and saviour, and is seeking to follow Him and live as Jesus commanded us to live, then they are a Christian. If I want to know if someone is a Christian, I will ask them what they think about Jesus, not how they voted in a referendum. That being said, faith in Jesus has implications for how we live and think about everything else. If we really believe in Jesus, then we will love God and will want to listen to what he says in his word; we will subsequently take the bible seriously. The bible is clear in affirming the value and essential humanity of the unborn, and is also clear in the definition and place of marriage. I imagine there were Christians who voted on both sides in each referendum. That doesn't mean that those on one side are Christians and those on the other aren't; but I would suggest that one group are voting in way that is more consistent with their profession of faith. In any case, the important question is "What is a Christian?" I'm still curious to know what your answer to that is.
highdef wrote: » smacl asked a simple question, one that is suited to a simple Yes or No answer yet you were unable (or were unwilling) to do so. I will now ask: Please answer yes or no to the following - Do you consider all those people that consider themselves Christian who voted in favour of repealing the 8th amendment and those in favour of allowing gay marriage, against the direct instructions of their church hierarchy, to genuinely be Christians? To ensure there is no confusion, the answer is either Yes or No. The question was structured in a way that would result in either Yes or No being the answer and not a long winded political response.
ChrisJ84 wrote: » In any case, the important question is "What is a Christian?" I'm still curious to know what your answer to that is.
smacl wrote: » Sorry, thought I'd already been clear on that. In my opinion if someone honestly identifies as a Christian, they're a Christian. Given the vast majority of Christians in this country are Roman Catholics, this will typically also mean they been Christened, gone through confirmation and are considered to be members of their church by their church. I would imagine many of them don't pay that much heed to their religion on a day to day basis, or consider themselves particularly religious, yet they still consider themselves part of that tradition as does their church.
ChrisJ84 wrote: » No, they probably aren't. It depends whether they have faith in Jesus or not.
NCS wrote: » There are plenty of references to and warnings of 'Christians in name only' in the New Testament, the most damning of them being "And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’". Appropriating a label and demonstrating love and compassion are not in themselves enough to be biblically Christian.
