Posted: Apr 25, 2017 4:41 pm
theropod wrote:Thomas Eshuis wrote:theropod wrote:So, I am obligated to provide a defintion of a true Christian when all I have ever said that some things exclude one from being able to claim Christianity? Huh.
RS
You're not obligated to do anything.
I am just saying that, without a rigourous definition of what is Truely Christian, how could you objectively claim, what is not Truely Christian?
As soon as someone, indeed anyone, will address the question I raised earlier in this thread regarding whether Jim Jones' brand of insanity can be considered Christianity I might feel more inclinded to offer my opinions in this regard.
I can't say I am familiar wiht Jim Jones, let alone his brand of Christianty, never mind what he bases it on.
theropod wrote: I even asked again this morning, and it hangs there like a fart in a still room.
It's seems a rather anecdotal question to ask.
theropod wrote: Why would that be?
As I said, in my case, I don't really know who Jim Jones is.
theropod wrote:Could it be that if one responds either way the whole point of this thread grinds to a halt? If his batshit crazy "faith" is Christianity then anything and everything can be considered Christianity and the word has no meaning whatsoever. If his real world death cult is not Christianity I rest my case, and have demonstrated that there are exclusions to what can be reasonably considered Christianity.
RS
Again, I agree in essence with your point. I am just saying it's hard to give a rigourous line between True and Non True Christianity.