Posted: Apr 25, 2017 5:14 pm
proudfootz wrote: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 even asked again this morning, and it hangs there like a fart in a still room. Why would that be? 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
Did Jones and his followers believe in Jesus as some kind of messiah?
That would seem to me to be an essential dogma.
Here's an article about Jones and his career - looks like things started out pretty much mainstream christian:The Peoples Temple was for the last 15 years of its existence a part of the Christian church (Disciples of Christ), a large mainstream Christian denomination. In the 1960s it was hailed by liberal Protestants for its social activism. Within the loose structure of the Christian church, however, it developed a unique internal life.
The Peoples Temple was founded in Indianapolis, Indiana, in 1955 by a youthful Jim Jones as an independent congregation. He eventually brought the congregation into fellowship with the Disciples of Christ and he was ordained as a minister in that church in 1965.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/people/phil ... /jim-jones
:yes:
How many grains of sand does it take to make a beach? How many (recognizing some have more weight than others) criteria does a person need to accept in order to be a "true christian?" The whole "true scotsman" fallacy exists precisely as a result of this sort of debate.
I'm still inclined to go by dictionary definitions, which reflect the defacto standard and the evolutionary fluctuations leading to it. That is about as close as we can hope to get to "objectivity" and a definitive authority. Even that isn't perfect.