WinePusher wrote:I've read some posts over the past few days where Christians, whom I've noticed never/rarely argue in favor of Christianity and defend Christian Beliefs and generally argue against strongly held Christian convictions, claim to be representatives of the faith and claim to speak for the Christian community. They, of course, get back up from the atheists and non-theists on this forum who support them as the "thoughtful representatives of Christianity" and earn the title "Thinking Theist" from individuals belonging to that group (as an interesting point, the support system amoung the liberals/atheists/non-theists on this forum does work quite well. Rarely are you able to debate with a lib/atheist/non-theist without one of their friends jumping in and helping them out.
Well, I may be on of those who is "not being named" here, so perhaps I will offer some thoughts. If my assumption is incorrect, that is certainly fine as well.
However, I don't label myself as a "liberal Christian." I am both a former Catholic and a former atheist, and now worship weekly at a non-denominational church in the evangelical tradition.
Without naming names, they do not and never will represent my Christianity. Thus, I've come to the conclusion that distinctions need to be drawn within the Christian Faith.
In my view, while each of us who is a professed Christian is in some way a representative of Christianity, I certainly have no desire to represent anyone else's beliefs, and do not seek to do so. As Paul writes, we are all responsible to our own masters.
Winepusher wrote:I stand by my previous belief that a person who accepts Jesus Christ as their lord and savior qualifies as a Minimal Christian.
Going into specifics, a Christian who goes on further to accept the five fundamentals of Christianity qualify as a Believing/Fundamentalist Christian.
And one who defends the five fundamentals of Christianity, along with other Christian Convictions, qualify as Christian Apologists.
Do other Christians on this forum agree or disagree?
Each believer can characterize their own faith as they see fit.
However, I personally consider myself every bit a 'believing Christian' as winepusher or any other CHristian. I don't consider myself a fundamentalist, but I reject the notion that only fundamentalists should be considered 'believing Christians.'
What winepusher is doing here is what I would call posturing. Trying to claim some kind of moral or other superiority for oneself or one's group using rhetorical techniques, including as in this case what I would call equivocation.
I will note that Paul writes that anyone who believes in and confesses Jesus and the resurrection is saved. There are not other requirements in my view, and I think you could even make the case that these are not totally necessary, but I'll leave that discussion for a later post.
Certainly I am not sure the five fundamentals, however they are defined, are all necessary to be a Christian. To pick out one in particular, belief in inerrancy of the Bible is definitely not required, and barely has any justification at all, even in the Bible.
Now, winepusher might say I am not defending the faith in some of what I am saying here, but I reject that notion. I am not defending
his faith but I am definitely defending my faith and faith in Christ and God in general. Most of the positions I take on the forum are grounded in that faith to at least some extent. Even those that are grounded elsewhere, for example in science, are informed and, in my view reconciled to the extent I can with that faith.
Drawing distinctions is fine if a person is doing it for oneself or for ones on voluntarily subscribed to church or group.
However, I will point out it is not really Biblical to try and claim authority for defining the faith for all believers. See Romans chapter 14. THus, to the extent that winepusher seeks to make distinctions in the faith, and either enforce those disctinctions or make a claim of superiority for one of the groups being distinguished between, he is engaging in what I think is an endeavor counter to a pretty central Biblical teaching.
" . . . the line separating good and evil passes, not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either, but right through every human heart . . . ." Alexander Solzhenitsyn
) Without naming names, they do not and never will represent my Christianity. Thus, I've come to the conclusion that distinctions need to be drawn within the Christian Faith.
