@divegeester saidIt's so lazy to have a phrase that makes you seem to know what you're talking about and you can fall back on it like a soft, reassuring pillow.
Says you, a true Scotsman/woman
@divegeester saidDo you really think this is the church that Jesus had in mind?
The no true Scotsman (you float here) is in full play in your country where corporate Christianity rules the airwaves blowing it trumpet of corporate greed, tax evasion and with it own brand of mega rich mouthpieces.
@suzianne said"No True Scotsman" is the name of one the most common informal fallacies that people use instead of proper arguments. If anything it is a "reassuring pillow" for someone wanting to say stuff but doesn't want to converse in good faith. In this case, that is you, because to claim "there is no such thing as corporate Christianity" is simply obtuse.
It's so lazy to have a phrase that makes you seem to know what you're talking about and you can fall back on it like a soft, reassuring pillow.
03 Apr 23
@suzianne saidCorporate Christianity exists regardless of what "Jesus had in mind". Jesus was a a Jew and said not one word about setting up "Christianity".
Do you really think this is the church that Jesus had in mind?
Corporate Christianity therefore comprises a set of a manmade groups that come in tens of thousands of forms and sizes as a result of people's collective efforts to define and organize how they approach following Jesus.
03 Apr 23
@suzianne saidThe phrase nicely describes what you are doing in this thread, which is avoiding the premise in the OP by deploying the “no true Scotsman” type of logical fallacy as an attempt to moot it.
It's so lazy to have a phrase that makes you seem to know what you're talking about and you can fall back on it like a soft, reassuring pillow.
You may be correct you may not be correct, but either way floating this idea that “unless a church is set up as Jesus would set it up, then it’s not “Christian”” is just a lazy attempt to dodge the point.
@divegeester saidBear in mind that, according to Suzianne's personal litmus test, it's impossible to follow Jesus and vote Republican in the U.S.
You may be correct you may not be correct, but either way floating this idea that “unless a church is set up as Jesus would set it up, then it’s not “Christian”” is just a lazy attempt to dodge the point.
@fmf saidAnd it often works. Except with religion. Christianity, especially. It either is, or it isn't. Your "corporate Christianity" schtick is a simplistic put-down that fails on the face of it. It is NOT Christianity, it is a mockery. Go ask Jesus.
"No True Scotsman" is the name of one the most common informal fallacies that people use instead of proper arguments. If anything it is a "reassuring pillow" for someone wanting to say stuff but doesn't want to converse in good faith. In this case, that is you, because to claim "there is no such thing as corporate Christianity" is simply obtuse.
@fmf saidYour point?
Bear in mind that, according to Suzianne's personal litmus test, it's impossible to follow Jesus and vote Republican in the U.S.
I think Jesus would agree. We have enough testimony from him and his ministry that bears out what I'm saying. One canNOT serve God and Mammon.
@suzianne saidIf Jesus is the one who takes away the sins of the world and who He is and why He was sent were by divine nature and decree how could it be anything other divine intervention?
And it often works. Except with religion. Christianity, especially. It either is, or it isn't. Your "corporate Christianity" schtick is a simplistic put-down that fails on the face of it. It is NOT Christianity, it is a mockery. Go ask Jesus.
@divegeester said"Corporate Christianity" is, in no way, Christianity, and cannot be thought of as such. Do you deny this? Just because some churches, and plenty of individuals, follow that model, doesn't make it right, nor do they follow Jesus. One cannot follow that model and follow Jesus. I'd have thought that point would be obvious, even to the most casual observer.
The phrase nicely describes what you are doing in this thread, which is avoiding the premise in the OP by deploying the “no true Scotsman” type of logical fallacy as an attempt to moot it.
You may be correct you may not be correct, but either way floating this idea that “unless a church is set up as Jesus would set it up, then it’s not “Christian”” is just a lazy attempt to dodge the point.
@suzianne saidThe term "corporate Christianity" just means formally organized Christian groups and denominations.
"Corporate Christianity" is, in no way, Christianity, and cannot be thought of as such. Do you deny this? Just because some churches, and plenty of individuals, follow that model, doesn't make it right, nor do they follow Jesus. One cannot follow that model and follow Jesus. I'd have thought that point would be obvious, even to the most casual observer.