Are Christians being logically fallacious?

[Nunovalente]

We often hear Christians dismissing terrorist movements in Africa such as the "Lord's Resistance Army" as not real Christians. This is a No True Scotsman fallacy. Why are they being logically fallacious?

Jesus cites the mark of a christian. Not by what they call themselves, or even what they call God or Jesus.
"Why do you call me Lord, and do not do they things I say?"

The christian is known by their fruit. Not their titles, 'Lords Resistance Army" or otherwise.

[lapwing]

Christans need to persevere for their faith to be effectual:

Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. 1 Cor 15:1-2 NIV

[RichardChad]

We often hear Christians dismissing terrorist movements in Africa such as the "Lord's Resistance Army" as not real Christians. This is a No True Scotsman fallacy. Why are they being logically fallacious?

Christianity has a specific criteria for inclusion, the indwelling Holy Spirit.
If you have it, you are a Christian.
If you don't you are not.

It is extremely unlikely that there are members of the "Lord's Resistance Army" that have the indwelling Holy Spirit, that being said the more accurate thing to say is that the members of the "Lord's Resistance Army" are certainly not acting as if they do.

[Rostos]

We often hear Christians dismissing terrorist movements in Africa such as the "Lord's Resistance Army" as not real Christians. This is a No True Scotsman fallacy. Why are they being logically fallacious?

I am looking for that passage in the bible where Jesus commands his followers to commit terrorist attacks...I cant seem to find it...maybe you can help?

[alex1212]

Let's define it as follower of Christ... that's how I am defining it. Clearly, Stalin was not a Christian under that definition

I hate to ask this, but how do you define "follower of Christ".  Someone who liked some things he said, or someone who follows everything he said to the letter ?  If the latter, then I think there are few to none real Christians.

I doubt you hate asking. A follower of Christ is someone who strives to follow what he said. Liking his teachings is too broad because that would include Buddhists, Hindus, etc.

[Rostos]

I really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really dont know why Atheists look at the actions of "believers" as opposed to what scripture says when judging a philosophy/religion.

One of the greatest mysteries of mankind.

[Kalamity]

I agree with jbiemans. And if the means by which one determines true faith (and thus a "real" Christian) is perseverance until death, then one cannot even determine the genuineness of one's own faith.

[bdsimon]

I agree with jbiemans. And if the means by which one determines true faith (and thus a "real" Christian) is perseverance until death, then one cannot even determine the genuineness of one's own faith.

This seems to be a bit contradictory to the confidence of 1 John. Unless of course you are Calvinist, then a systematic approach would tell you that you cannot know if you are saved (which isn't really the question here).

I embrace both the perseverance that lapwing noted and the drawing of John 6. Which also includes a passage that many draw upon for once saved always saved. I don't see an either or dichotomy. I embrace it all.

[Questions11]

Maybe there's a difference between 'knowing' you are saved, and being able to 'know' someone else is.

[Johan Biemans (jbiemans)]

I really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really dont know why Atheists look at the actions of "believers" as opposed to what scripture says when judging a philosophy/religion.

One of the greatest mysteries of mankind.

Really ??

Matthew 7:16-20King James Version (KJV)

16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

[igr]

You know that you are saved in the same way that any believer of any other religion knows that they will achieve the stated goal of their religion.  In all cases it is no more than belief.  You don't get an elephant stamp when you have arrived.

[Questions11]

That sense of knowledge/belief applies to pretty much all positive claims.

[Johan Biemans (jbiemans)]

I agree with jbiemans. And if the means by which one determines true faith (and thus a "real" Christian) is perseverance until death, then one cannot even determine the genuineness of one's own faith.

This seems to be a bit contradictory to the confidence of 1 John. Unless of course you are Calvinist, then a systematic approach would tell you that you cannot know if you are saved (which isn't really the question here).

I embrace both the perseverance that lapwing noted and the drawing of John 6. Which also includes a passage that many draw upon for once saved always saved. I don't see an either or dichotomy. I embrace it all.

It sounds like "true Christian" doesn't really hold any meaning to you at all then. If "once saved always saved" is true, then what does it matter if someone lost their faith ?  Of course, then you could say "well, they were never really saved then if they left the faith".  In which case, we are back to the original problem of knowing who is "saved" and who isn't.  We are back to the definitional problem again.

There are also people who believed themselves to be saved and then lost their faith.  What would you say about them?  And if it can happen to them, how can you be sure it won't happen to you.

[igr]

So does this mean that it isn't enough just to be baptised?  Is there a list of achievements that need to be satisfied in order to be saved?  Do all versions of Christianity agree on this?

[Johan Biemans (jbiemans)]

No igr, some groups believe in grace alone, some believe in faith alone, some believe in faith + works, etc.