Tuesday
Aug162005
A matter of definitions...
Tuesday, August 16, 2005 at 2:56PM
Whilst reading around on ye olde Interweb, I came across a discussion between folks, many of whom believe that there are soooooooooo many Christians around that a Christian shouldn't feel as if he or she is in the minority with respect to beliefs. A particular website was used to contribute to the discussion: Religions by Adherants.
There are two issues here. First, in general, Christians are definately NOT the majority. Maybe statisticly in the US we are, but not in the world.
Second - and here's where it gets messy - I'm not so sure that everyone in that 33% are really Christians. This measure comes solely from people's answers on census questionaires and the like, rather than the observed qualification based on a set of criteria. Now I don't, and won't completely know whether anybody claiming to be a Christian really fits the bill, as it were, but I just need to lay down some thoughts, because one of the most difficult issues in the lives of Christians is the misconception of what Christianity is. So here goes:
The very word, "Christian," comes from a Greek word that essentially means, "little Christ." In the vernacular, that's come to be generally defined as one who follows Christ, or Christ's teachings. Most scholars and pedestrians would agree that this refers to THE Christ, or the historical Jesus figure - whether or not you believe He exists.
So where do we find descriptions of Christ and His teachings? The Bible. Yeah, I know lots of people don't believe it's true/accurate/spiritual/etc. (though I do). Even so, that's THE source that our world has to go on for descriptions of Christ's character and teachings. What's my point? Well I think that at the least, if you reject any of the teachings or character of Christ as presented by the Bible, it would be pretty hard to call yourself a Christian honestly. Notice I didn't say if you fail to keep His teachings...that's another topic entirely.
I say this because we have to, as a communicating society, keep our definitions straight. You can't call somebody a vegitarian when he/she eats eggs and fish. People try to, but it doesn't really make sense. Eggs and fish are forms of meat - they're animal products at least. The idea is that you cannot pick and choose which parts of a definition you want to believe or accept. If you believe that Christ says to love your neighbor, but you ignore Him when He says that He's the only way to salvation, that's not following, that's alternating direction.
I know that life is not black-and-white, but some parts of it are. They have to be in order for us to understand each other. You wouldn't have me give you five dollars when I owe you a hundred, would you? In a like manner, when we define things, we need to adhere to such definitions, lest the word/group/practice lose its meaning.
There are two issues here. First, in general, Christians are definately NOT the majority. Maybe statisticly in the US we are, but not in the world.
Second - and here's where it gets messy - I'm not so sure that everyone in that 33% are really Christians. This measure comes solely from people's answers on census questionaires and the like, rather than the observed qualification based on a set of criteria. Now I don't, and won't completely know whether anybody claiming to be a Christian really fits the bill, as it were, but I just need to lay down some thoughts, because one of the most difficult issues in the lives of Christians is the misconception of what Christianity is. So here goes:
The very word, "Christian," comes from a Greek word that essentially means, "little Christ." In the vernacular, that's come to be generally defined as one who follows Christ, or Christ's teachings. Most scholars and pedestrians would agree that this refers to THE Christ, or the historical Jesus figure - whether or not you believe He exists.
So where do we find descriptions of Christ and His teachings? The Bible. Yeah, I know lots of people don't believe it's true/accurate/spiritual/etc. (though I do). Even so, that's THE source that our world has to go on for descriptions of Christ's character and teachings. What's my point? Well I think that at the least, if you reject any of the teachings or character of Christ as presented by the Bible, it would be pretty hard to call yourself a Christian honestly. Notice I didn't say if you fail to keep His teachings...that's another topic entirely.
I say this because we have to, as a communicating society, keep our definitions straight. You can't call somebody a vegitarian when he/she eats eggs and fish. People try to, but it doesn't really make sense. Eggs and fish are forms of meat - they're animal products at least. The idea is that you cannot pick and choose which parts of a definition you want to believe or accept. If you believe that Christ says to love your neighbor, but you ignore Him when He says that He's the only way to salvation, that's not following, that's alternating direction.
I know that life is not black-and-white, but some parts of it are. They have to be in order for us to understand each other. You wouldn't have me give you five dollars when I owe you a hundred, would you? In a like manner, when we define things, we need to adhere to such definitions, lest the word/group/practice lose its meaning.
tagged Religious
Religious
Reader Comments