Originally posted by divegeester Please explain how either being a Christian, or not being a Christian is a false dichotomy?
With all the conflicting opinions on what "being a Christian" actually entails as well as on what the Bible actually says, you can't understand how someone may not know whether or not he is a Christian?
Originally posted by divegeester He means that it is possible to be both Christian and non-Christian at the same time and that therefore I am asking you an unreasonable question.
Edit: no matter what his explaination is, I predict that you will like it.
He means that it is possible to be both Christian and non-Christian at the same time and that therefore I am asking you an unreasonable question.
Your reading comprehension is poor. Perhaps it'd be better if you refrain from pretending that you know what other people mean.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne With all the conflicting opinions on what "being a Christian" actually entails as well as on what the Bible actually says, you can't understand how someone may not know whether or not he is a Christian?
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne [b]He means that it is possible to be both Christian and non-Christian at the same time and that therefore I am asking you an unreasonable question.
Your reading comprehension is poor. Perhaps it'd be better if you refrain from pretending that you know what other people mean.[/b]
Please explain (precisely) how my reading comprehension is poor.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne I know you did. The answer is contained in my response. Perhaps if your reading comprehension were better, you'd figure it out.
No, your post contained a generalised premise that there are varying perceptions about what a Christian is by a large population; it does not account for what chaney3 as an individual within that population, and who can decide for himself what a Christian is, or is not, thinks about the validity of his own Christianity. He must know, based on his own understanding of what Christianity is to him, whether he is one or not.
Originally posted by divegeester No, your post contained a generalised premise that there are varying perceptions about what a Christian is by a large population; it does not account for what chaney3 as an individual within that population, and who can decide for himself what a Christian is, or is not, thinks about the validity of his own Christianity. He must know, based on his own un ...[text shortened]... g of what Christianity is to him, whether he is one or not.
Are you a Christian, ThinkOfOne?
He can't "decide for himself" that "with all the conflicting opinions on what 'being a Christian' actually entails as well as on what the Bible actually says", that he doesn't know? That he doesn't feel that he has enough non-conflicting information on which to base that determination?
Just because you feel that you have enough non-conflicting information to make that determination, doesn't mean that he does.
Originally posted by divegeester I refer to my reply above.
And when you pretended to know what I meant, it STILL wasn't what I meant at all. I'm thinking I'm in a better position to know what I meant - even if you STILL don't.
DG can't seem to wrap his mind around the fact that "I don't know" can be a perfectly valid answer to the question "Are you a Christian?" - depending on the individual.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne DG can't seem to wrap his mind around the fact that "I don't know" can be a perfectly valid answer to the question "Are you a Christian?" - depending on the individual.
You ether are, or you are not. There is no in between.