So, this person:
Succeeded in multiple genocides.
Instituted and enforced laws about slavery.
Was very lenient in human rights issues, such as rape.
Slaughtered his own people.
Was a murderer.
Practiced magic.
Would you say this person:
1. Was no true Christian (even if (s)he claimed to be)?
2. Was no true Jew (Judaist), (even if (s)he claimed to be)?
3. Was no true Catholic, (even if (s)he claimed to be)?
4. Was no true atheist, (even if (s)he claimed to be - just for completeness)?
5. Was no true Muslim, (even if (s)he claimed to be)?
6. Any other "no true," application?
Answer "why/why not?" with your answers. Could they be one and not a subset of the other, for example, a true Presbyterian, but not a true Christian, for example, just an example, not picking on Presbyterians...
Putting a little reversal on the old question, answering it first as it were -
Not a true XXXX (Scotsman)
Moderator: Moderators
-
Bust Nak
- Savant
- Posts: 9856
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
- Location: Planet Earth
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 266 times
Re: Not a true XXXX (Scotsman)
Post #2Don't know enough to answer. I need to know this person's belief on:Willum wrote: Would you say this person [was no true...]
1. The nature of Jesus resurrection and whether he is the son of God
2. Abraham's God
3. On Papal authority
4. the existence of God
5. Muhammad as the prophet of God
6. Or any other relevant beliefs
-
Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Re: Not a true XXXX (Scotsman)
Post #3Bust Nak wrote:Don't know enough to answer. I need to know this person's belief on:Willum wrote: Would you say this person [was no true...]
1. The nature of Jesus resurrection and whether he is the son of God, If they were Christian, yes.
2. Abraham's God If they were Judaic, yes, if Jewish, not necessarily.
3. On Papal authority If they were Catholic, yes.
4. the existence of God If they were atheist, no.
5. Muhammad as the prophet of God If they were Muslim, yes.
6. Or any other relevant beliefs.Whatever comes to mind.
-
Tcg
- Savant
- Posts: 8494
- Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
- Location: Third Stone
- Has thanked: 2147 times
- Been thanked: 2295 times
Re: Not a true XXXX (Scotsman)
Post #4[Replying to post 1 by Willum]
I suspect a trick question. It sounds like a true description of Bible God to me.
Tcg
I suspect a trick question. It sounds like a true description of Bible God to me.
Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.
- American Atheists
Not believing isn't the same as believing not.
- wiploc
I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.
- Irvin D. Yalom
- American Atheists
Not believing isn't the same as believing not.
- wiploc
I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.
- Irvin D. Yalom
-
OnceConvinced
- Savant
- Posts: 8969
- Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:22 pm
- Location: New Zealand
- Has thanked: 50 times
- Been thanked: 66 times
- Contact:
Post #5
Answer to all:
We can't possibly know. Only God knows. For all we know guys like Hitler could be in Heaven right now.
God is supposedly graceful and forgiving.
His will is that none should perish, so how weak willed would he be if so many people ended up in Hell? He wouldn't be much of a god, would he, if his will failed to make a dent in the souls of so many people.
We can't possibly know. Only God knows. For all we know guys like Hitler could be in Heaven right now.
God is supposedly graceful and forgiving.
His will is that none should perish, so how weak willed would he be if so many people ended up in Hell? He wouldn't be much of a god, would he, if his will failed to make a dent in the souls of so many people.
Society and its morals evolve and will continue to evolve. The bible however remains the same and just requires more and more apologetics and claims of "metaphors" and "symbolism" to justify it.
Prayer is like rubbing an old bottle and hoping that a genie will pop out and grant you three wishes.
There is much about this world that is mind boggling and impressive, but I see no need whatsoever to put it down to magical super powered beings.
Check out my website: Recker's World
-
Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Post #6
OMG, this site! Usually everyone is all over themselves, saying how this person or that could be no true Christian or Jew or Judaist or whatever...
But make it a topic, suddenly everyone is wearing plague-gloves!
1. Christian: Prima facia, I'd say that no true Christian could murder someone in the face of God, knowing what they've done and sneakily think God will be fooled because they apologize later. God, if we assume he existed, should be no fool.
Verdict: This person could be not true Christian.
2. Jew/Judaist: NA on the Jew - it has become a question of what does "Jew" mean. Leaving Judaist: The OT gives a pass on 1-5, leaving practicing magic, verdict: This person could be not true Judaist.
3. Catholic, as with Christianity, except Catholicism has a much more profound history of murder, with bishops and Popes murdering, and presumably, forgiven for it:
Verdict: A true Catholic this person could be.
4. Of course, atheism has nothing to do with any of these, so he could be a true atheist.
5. Unilaterally, this person could be no true Muslim.
6. Jainist, perhaps...? Could not do the genocide or murder, therefore this person could be no true Jainist.
That wasn't so hard now was it?
But make it a topic, suddenly everyone is wearing plague-gloves!
1. Christian: Prima facia, I'd say that no true Christian could murder someone in the face of God, knowing what they've done and sneakily think God will be fooled because they apologize later. God, if we assume he existed, should be no fool.
Verdict: This person could be not true Christian.
2. Jew/Judaist: NA on the Jew - it has become a question of what does "Jew" mean. Leaving Judaist: The OT gives a pass on 1-5, leaving practicing magic, verdict: This person could be not true Judaist.
3. Catholic, as with Christianity, except Catholicism has a much more profound history of murder, with bishops and Popes murdering, and presumably, forgiven for it:
Verdict: A true Catholic this person could be.
4. Of course, atheism has nothing to do with any of these, so he could be a true atheist.
5. Unilaterally, this person could be no true Muslim.
6. Jainist, perhaps...? Could not do the genocide or murder, therefore this person could be no true Jainist.
That wasn't so hard now was it?
-
Bust Nak
- Savant
- Posts: 9856
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
- Location: Planet Earth
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 266 times
Post #7
Everyone?Willum wrote: OMG, this site! Usually everyone is all over themselves, saying how this person or that could be no true Christian or Jew or Judaist or whatever...
Wait you are encouraging people to commit the no true Scotsman fallacy?That wasn't so hard now was it?
Christians, Jews (Judaists), Catholics, atheists and Muslims are defined by what they believe, not how moral they are.
-
Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Post #8
[Replying to post 7 by Bust Nak]
No.
I am asking it be applied appropriately, based on the constraints of the religion and those given.
For example, if a further constraint was that this person worshiped Zeus, you could safely say, he could only fall into the “other category,� as not true Christian, Judaist, Catholic or Muslim, as “no true one of those worship Zeus.�
The “no true Scotsman� isn’t always a fallacy.
No.
I am asking it be applied appropriately, based on the constraints of the religion and those given.
For example, if a further constraint was that this person worshiped Zeus, you could safely say, he could only fall into the “other category,� as not true Christian, Judaist, Catholic or Muslim, as “no true one of those worship Zeus.�
The “no true Scotsman� isn’t always a fallacy.
-
Bust Nak
- Savant
- Posts: 9856
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
- Location: Planet Earth
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 266 times
Post #9
The constrain for Christianity is that they believe Jesus died and was resurrected, and that believing in him as the son of God will clear you of your sins. Ruling a Christian out as not a true Christian because he is horribly immoral would be a fallacy.Willum wrote: No.
I am asking it be applied appropriately, based on the constraints of the religion and those given...
The “no true Scotsman� isn’t always a fallacy.
Ditto for Jews, Catholics, atheists and Muslim (replace with relevant beliefs.)
-
Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Post #10
[Replying to post 9 by Bust Nak]
So to answer the question, none of the religious people your mention, would perform the actions mentioned in the OP. That person would be no true Christian Jew Judaist Catholic Atheist, Muslim?
The religious I get, but the atheist?
So to answer the question, none of the religious people your mention, would perform the actions mentioned in the OP. That person would be no true Christian Jew Judaist Catholic Atheist, Muslim?
The religious I get, but the atheist?
