Christianity.SE vs. Survivor

Question

We've had a couple of questions in the format "Are members of $sect_or_subgroup_or_movement really Christian?", and a few more that are asking that exact question, but trying to couch it in terms that sound more reasonable.

Now, I realize that some of you may be reality TV fans, so you might think that you can vote people out of Christianity. (What does that mean? Revoke their license to pray? Ban them from purchasing Bibles? Issue restraining orders against Jesus? How is this productive?) The thing is... once you start voting people off the island, you've given up on the site. There will always be a least popular contestant. If we vote whatever sect we like least this week off the island, soon there will not be enough people to sustain the site. Not to mention, this isn't Baptists.SE, Catholics.SE, Lutherans.SE, and so on – it's Christians.SE.

It's certainly true that the various Christian sects think the other sects are doing something wrong, else they wouldn't be separate. However, there is one Christianity.SE, and in order for it to be useful to anyone, it must be respectful of everyone. Pointing out who doesn't think $group are real Christians doesn't do anything to share expertise (what we are supposed to be doing here), it only creates drama and conflict.

TLDR;

Christianity Stack Exchange is not a game show. We aren't here to vote people off the island. For the purpose of this site, please assume that the answer to "is X Christian?" is always the same as "does X self-identify as Christian?" It's the only way a group with such diverse cultures and beliefs can get along and do something productive.

All posts asking for the site to pass judgement on some person or group (as opposed to describing a belief system, examining an idea, explaining history, and so on) are off-topic and will be closed/deleted.

Answer 1

I support the direction this site is taking (or I wouldn't be here) and appreciate your efforts to keep the train on the rails. Your wording here is both funny and to the point.

I would just like to suggest a few extra considerations. These are MY views and reflect how I intend to behave here. I will listen to feedback and try to adjust to the community, so please anybody chime in if you think there are things that can be improved.

1. Christianity.SE is not here to either dictate or define the views of it's users. My answers will always reflect my views. In so far as my views line up with some major corpus of professing Christians I don't think it's too difficult to mingle. However, this site should not mandate that I hold a certain position or even censor my stating said view so long as long as it is identified as my view.

   For example, I do not consider either the LDS of JW faiths to be Christian (In return I understand that they do not consider me to be Christian). I used the word faith instead of tradition on purpose. My answers will reflect this view. That does not mean I will not welcome LDS and JWs on to this site. I just tried to help a user edit an LDS question so that it might be on-topic, it would be nice if it could get a real LDS member to answer. I would never advocate a ban or safe zone to isolate US from THEM. I think questions ABOUT and and answers FROM them are on topic and welcome. I will up-vote them per the normal guidelines as long as they are clearly identified. If I see JW views in an answer that does not identify that faith's unique view is being represented, that will get a down-vote an objection comment from me.

   While I expect to see a huge diversity of viewpoints here, I do not want to see the views of my particular tradition mis-represented. Which brings us to the next point...

2. The history of Christianity is full of boundary-setting. It's what we do. From the Old Testament where the chosen people were to set themselves apart from the other nations to today's Church with more flavors than Baskin-Robbins. I think that if this site is going to survive it must do so by recognizing, respecting, and allowing these boundaries, not ignoring or glossing them over.

   "Is X Christian?" questions may be off-topic because "Christian" as defined here is not in itself a meaningful boundary and the site cannot mandate a definition for that term. However in answering questions and identifying their views, users should be free use define their own boundaries and refer to other traditions and their views using whatever guidelines their own traditions provide. Again, I think this only works when POVs are honestly identified. It has to be done respectfully, but it shouldn't be taboo.

Answer 2

I think the question "Is X Christian?" is underspecified. The OP should provide the criteria for it, otherwise it is not answerable. Let me give an example:

Is Luther a Christian?

This is a bad question, it is not constructive, it is too subjective and depends on people's subjective opinion about who can be considered a Christian. Now one can ask the OP to be more specific and provide the criteria for the judgment, e.g.:

What are the current views of Catholic church about Luther? Do they consider him a Christian?

This is much better and can be answered (hopefully objectively). I don't think Catholics and Protestants would differ on the views of Catholic church about the matter. The same thing applies to similar questions, debate and disagreement can be avoided if the question is specific enough to make it answerable objectively without a debate and without appealing to personal opinions.

Answer 3

This probably belongs as a comment rather than an answer, but it's too long... and furthermore, the original question isn't really a question, any way.

I would like to point out that asking "Are members of X-Movement Christian" is a rather different question than "Is X-Movement a Christian movement." Or rephrased "Do members of X identify themselves as Christian?" is different than "Does X identify itself as Christian?"

I agree we should not be in the business of "voting people off the island."

As an example, "Is X a Christian Rock band?" Some or even all of the members may identify as Christians, making X "a Rock band of Christians", but unless the band identifies itself as a Christian band, the answer to the original question would still be "No." There are many bands I can think of that would match this scenario.

I think the same distinction exists with many movements and other organizations.

This may not be an important distinction to make when deciding which questions are on- or off-topic, except that we may choose to allow questions asking "Does X identify itself as Christian?"

---

Edit

Case in point: This very web. It is comprised largely/mainly of Christians, but the web site does not identify itself as Christian. See here.

Answer 4

I'm more so asking for a clarification here, because it seems there is some vagueness in what is or is not a Christian. This may be off topic, if so, just let me know, lol.

I would guess that a Christian would be defined as anyone who follows the teachings of Jesus and/or follows the doctrines of Paul about the divinity of Jesus. This would include the Ebionites, sometimes called "the Jewish Christians" who deeply influenced Islam's beliefs on Jesus (Isa), and is, as far as modern scholarship can tell, the closest belief-system to the actually beliefs and doctrines of Jesus and His disciples (see Tabor's or Ehrman's or many others work). It would also include the followers of Arius (Arianism) who taught that Jesus was separate from the Father (based on John 14: 28 - "The Father is greater than I"), sects that believe Jesus is only human like the Socianists (which, I have heard would include the modern day Unitarians and Jehovah's Witnesses), and those that believe Jesus was a wholly spiritual being (like some Gnostic sects, and docetists). But it would also include all miaphysite, monophysite, dyophysite, modalist, unitarian, trinitarian, ascetic, adoptionist, Orthodox, Catholic, manichaean, and gnostic, as well as personal, understandings of Jesus. Most of these groups have been labelled "heresies" throughout the ages and are still strongly debated.

I bring this up, mainly, because I would be curious as to how one would classify Theosophists, the various magical societies, especially the Ascended Masters oriented ones, and other such occult and esoteric groups. Most of those groups, at least most of the people from those groups I've met or come across, do not "self-identify" as Christian, but they still make use of Christ and/or Jesus as an object of reverence, aspiration, and even worship. This would also include Voodoo, Voudun, Hoodoo, Candomble and the orisha religions, like Yoruba, which have been heavily influenced by Catholicism and often times are syncretic versions of Christianity and African- or Afro-Caribbean- religions or Mexica religion based syncretic belief systems. How would these be classified? Many of the people that practice these systems worship Jesus, and especially Mary the Mother of Jesus, as Holy and/or Divine beings. However, most of the belief systems could not be remotely described as monotheistic (maybe henotheistic), and is quite a grey-zone, I would think. Plenty of these people, at least the ones I have met or come across, DO self-identify as Christians, at least in public. Also, some Japanese shrines have images of Jesus within them. I'm not sure if they are Buddhist or Shinto, but my friend from Japan sent me a picture of one because he was astonished by this, lol. Also, within Hinduism, considering Jesus as an avatar of Vishnu (or another aspect of God) would be acceptable to most forms of Hinduism. Even some Buddhists consider Jesus as a buddha (see Thich Nhat Hanh's work on the subject, like Going Home, Living Buddha, Living Christ, or others), even though most forms of their religion are agnostic.

So, can one by a polytheistic Christian? This sounds like a contradiction of terms to me. Or an agnostic Christian? So while I do whole-heartedly agree "Is X Christian?" or similar questions are in bad taste, I would personally like some clarification as to the scope of possible questions. Like, would asking, "What are the Voodoo understandings of Jesus?" or "Would Hinduism consider Jesus the Son of God?" be appropriate for this site?

I'm sorry this was so long, I was just looking for clarification and didn't quite find it appropriate for its own question. If you guys think it should be removed, I will happily. I would have just asked it in a comment if I wasn't such a verbose fool, lol. Thank you for your responses!

Edit Upon consideration, I'm thinking this may be best as a separate question, but I will leave it up until someone tells me to remove and/or move it.

Answer 5

1. Proposed Rewording:

Christianity.SE is an academic site for studying groups that self-identify as "Christian".

And, it is perfectly valid to challenge a sect's "Christianity" - though, strictly under definitions based on Biblical bases.

---

2. "Self-Identifying" as "Christian" is Insufficient for Organizations:

Why is this framed as a doctrinal statement?

... please assume that the answer to "is X Christian?" is always the same as "does X self-identify as Christian?

This site should have no business in this territory, (which can understandably be perceived as an "anti-Christ", (Mark 17:21) and a misrepresentation of Christianity.

Technically, Islam "Self-Identifies" as Being Compatible with Christianity:

Muhsin Khan, Surah 57:29 - O you who believe [in Musa (Moses) (i.e. Jews) and 'Iesa (Jesus) (i.e. Christians)]! Fear Allah, and believe too in His Messenger (Muhammad SAW), He will give you a double portion of His Mercy, and He will give you a light by which you shall walk (straight), and He will forgive you. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

---

3. Equivocating on What "Christian" Means - is a Misrepresentation of Christianity :

Unbelievers and even Jews know exactly What "Christians" are - or are supposed to be : "Disciples of Christ".

I suggest that challenging whether denominations are actually "Christian" - under the Biblical definitions - should be freely discussed here.

Plausibly, great discussions could occur, challenging: Mormonism - if their doctrines of salvation were not based in Scripture; or perhaps challenging "Pentecostal Holiness" - if they hold that Salvation is contingent on believing in the "Oneness" doctrine, rather than "Trinity"; or perhaps challenging the Christian Church/Church of Christ - if they teach doctrines to disobey commandments to pursue Spiritual gifts, etc.

From the Earliest Christian Histories - Baptism into the Christian faith was a very clear declaration - and to suggest "Christian is an ambiguous term" is grossly inconsistent, and dishonors what those Christians died for.

Mamrim 2:1 - A person who does not acknowledge validity of the Oral Law is not the rebellious elder mentioned in the Torah. Instead, he is one of the heretics and he should be put to death by any person.

And - because the Commandments of Jesus are held to be more authoritative than "oral law" and "traditions of men" - Christian Jews, Karaites, Sadducees, etc, were persecuted for it.

---

4. So - What is a Biblical Definition of "Christian"? :

Challenging the "Christianity" of a sect - defining Christianity as the imitation of Christ - is an extremely valid and necessary component of Christianity, (*and a commandment of Jesus itself, (Eph. 4:14, etc. *).

NASB, Matthew 28:19-20 - Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

Following the commandments of Jesus, (being Christian) - can arguably be a fulfillment of the prophecy regarding, "the New Covenant":

NASB, Jeremiah 31:31 - “Behold, days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah,

And What is it to Fulfill the Commandments of Jesus?

To love as Christ loved (John 13:34): advocating for one another unconditionally, (Luke 23:34), bearing each other's burdens (Galatians 6:2) - because: love covers a multitude of sins (1 Peter 4:8), and mercy triumphs over judgment, (James 2:13).

Note: Jesus and the Apostles gave many commandments illustrating how to fulfill this "law of Christ".

---

5. To What Degree Should Individuals be Accepted as Christian? :

NASB, 1 Timothy 1:16 - Yet for this reason I [formerly a murderer] found mercy : so that in me as the foremost [sinner], Jesus Christ might demonstrate His perfect patience as an example for those who would believe in Him for eternal life.

Even Paul Did Not Judge Schismatics and Traditions as "Unchristian":

1 Corinthians 1:12-13 - Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, “I am of Paul,” and “I of Apollos,” and “I of Cephas,” and “I of Christ.” 13 Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

But - Even Paul Denounced those Who Set Aside the Commandments of Jesus for Other Commandments:

NASB, Galatians 4:21 - Tell me, you who want to be under law ...

Galatians 5:1 - It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.

2 Behold I, Paul, say to you ... Christ will be of no benefit to you. 3 And I testify again to every man who [accepts Jewish Tradition/circumcision, etc], that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. 4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

NASB, Galatians 5:13 - For you were called to freedom, brethren, (John 8:36, Isaiah 42:7, et al);