Am I Christian? Says who?

2006-02-16T22:49:00.000-08:00

So there is a whole bunch of people who call themselves "Christian". I would try to tell you what "Christian" means, but then there's this problem of trying to get everybody to agree on what that means. But that is beside the point—the point of this paragraph is that there are a whole bunch of people who all believe slightly different things, but who all claim to be "Christian". So, who owns the rights to categorize someone as "Christian"? Or who has the right to categorize a particular doctrine as "Christian"? (If you do, you should start collecting licensing fees or something—you'd be a gajillionaire.) Okay, now I'm going to dive into a philosophical argument to explain why nobody owns these rights. With some natural phenomenon, we can to some degree authoritatively categorize things—things that we can define and measure. For instance, two people may have slightly different opinions about what should constitute the color "red", but if we can agree to define "red" light as that having a wavelength between 670 and 690 nanometers, then we can authoritatively declare some observed light as "red" or "not red", within the limits of our equipment to measure it.

But who defines what "red" is? Who gets to decide that the wavelength of "red" light is between 670 and 690 nanometers, and not 675 to 691? Nobody, really. In fact, anybody can come up with their own classification. That's what I did when I picked 670 to 690—I looked up an internet site that said that "red" light had a wavelength of 680 nm and made up a range around it. And the people who wrote that site did a similar thing—they either looked up someone else's decision, or they did their own research and picked their own spot for "red" on the wavelength continuum. And if that isn't tricky enough, who says what a nanometer is? For many "scientific" or business endeavors, it is advantageous and even critical to all agree on some things—for instance, who says what a nanometer is? Or how much a kilogram is? We've all decided to agree on many systems of measurement, and the benefits are profound. Interestingly, nobody can claim "authority" to decide how long a nanometer is—it was something that somebody or some group came up with, and the rest of us have just agreed to go along with it. If I wanted to, I could claim that a "nanometer" is as long as my little finger, but the measurement of nanometer has been agreed upon by literally everyone who deals with measuring nanometers for so long that people would just laugh at me. And I could say that a kilogram weighs as much as the water I can hold in my cupped hands, but if I tried to sell something in units of my "kilograms", the department of commerce would have a word to say with me. Via the District Attorney.

So, what if there was some measurement that nobody could agree on what it meant? It would be fairly useless. I could say that I have a piece of string one nanometer long, but if there were different groups of people who had different definitions of "nanometer", it would be pretty useless. You could still use the term "nanometer", sort of, depending on how well you understood the differences between what people thought a nanometer was. For instance, if Joe says his string is one nanometer in length, but I know his nanometers are about the same length as four of my centimeters, then I have the general idea of how long his string is. The key here is being able to know how the two measurements relate to one another.

So, back to "Christian". Who is "Christian"? What makes someone "Christian"? There are many groups, large and small, that have come up with definitions, but none are quite the same—not everybody agrees. Of course, nearly everyone thinks that a "Christian" is a person who believes something about a person named Jesus Christ (hence the term "CHRISTian"), and that He has something to do with Deity*. For instance, I would call myself a Christian, because I believe that:

Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
God the Father sent his Son Jesus Christ to the Earth to atone for our sins.
Only through Christ's Atonement can we be saved.
Christ's atonement is a free gift to all people.

However, I know that there are other people who call themselves Christian who don't quite agree with me. Can we understand each other? It depends on if we know how our definitions relate. For instance, Joe and I might both say we believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, but just exactly what does that mean to each of us? What exactly does it mean that Christ atoned for our sins? What does "saved" mean? When you start digging down, even these "common" Christian beliefs mean different things to different people. Even two people who have united themselves with the same group of "Christian" worshippers are likely to have slightly different views about these things, perhaps without even knowing it. So, what is a "Christian"? The answer is "there is no consensus". While philosophically correct, this is too loose to be practical, so most people tighten that definition down to "a person that believes something about Jesus Christ having something to do with being Deity", which eliminates insane or daft people who think that a "Christian" is a car part. You can continue to draw the definition in, tighter and tighter, but the tighter you pull it in, the more people who proclaim to be "Christian" you leave out of the circle. And since nobody has the right to "officially" define how tight the circle is and where the lines go, I do not see the point of squabbling over who is "Christian" or who is not. This is all just an extreeeeeemely long-winded way of saying that one can say the words, "Dan is not Christian", but really you have only said "Dan does not fit my definition of Christian". And I can say back, "Oh, yeah? I am Christian! So there!", but really all I'm saying is "Oh yeah? I do fit my definition of Christian. So there!" When you see what these declarations really mean, you realize how silly it starts to look when people start squabbling over this. So, if you want to discuss the differences between your beliefs, that would really be a lot more direct. And if you want to squabble or fight about them, at least you're being honest about what you're fighting about. However, while it can be productive, fun, or bonding for people to share their beliefs (differing or not), I really find it wrong to fight about, not to mention distasteful. I honestly believe that the not-a-member-of-my-faith Pastor in our neighborhood does not have the true authority from God to baptize people, but I do understand that he believes he does, and I'm not going to pick on him or call him out as a deceiver—I believe that he is doing his best, and I think he likely thinks the same about me. I still don't agree with him, but I cannot find fault with him for that, because I believe that all people should be allowed to worship God according to the "dictates of their own conscience." In fact, my particular church espouses this belief as scripture in one of thirteen "Articles of Faith": "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may." That, along with "My claim of being Christian is as valid as yours because nobody owns that term and there is no consensus" is really all I wanted to say. Thanks for listening. *Of course, there could be people who claim that "a Christian" is a part of a car, and those same people are as likely to say that the sky is red and that Al Gore is a space alien. The rest of us agree that those people generally need treatment of some kind, and since those people are also generally very bad at providing for themselves, we consider them "broken". But they have as much right to call a spark plug a "Christian" as I have to call myself one. I wouldn't squabble with such a person, but for some reason, groups of "sane" people squabble about it all the time. Hmmm... I wonder who gets to define what "sane" means... Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! The irony is killing me.

I love my sweetheart

2006-01-08T20:50:00.000-08:00

She has taken such good care of me while I've been sick. I feel so loved.

Another bug

2005-10-30T16:29:00.000-08:00

Surprise, surprise--another one. So my friend Sean left a comment on the previous post. I never knew he did, though--I didn't get an email about it, and underneath the post still says "0 comments". (yes, I refreshed the page.) Hrmph. I wouldn't be half surprised if it goes away after I post this and my blog gets republished. But if it does go away, you'll believe me, won't you? Won't you? You don't think I'm nuts, do you? C'mon, tell me the truth.

Blogger has some bugs

2005-10-18T08:49:00.000-07:00

Blogger has some bugs. I know, I know--not big news. Practically all software has bugs. I'm not trying to rag on them. I'm just saying. The funny thing is, I can't find any way to report bugs to them, unless I have a blogger account. So, I signed up for this one. There you have it. Kind of a waste of a blog, but what else can I do? Oh, you wanted to know what the bug is? It seems that blogger has some problems with host headers or agent strings or something, because when I try to view a certain blog or atom feed in some browsers (like FireFox 1.5 beta 1, or SharpReader 0.9.6.0), I see a blog or feed for a completely different blog. Totally bizarro. It's not on blogger's known issues list, so I guess they don't know about it. So, someone should tell them, right? I don't know if you can see it in the picture below, but I'm supposed to be looking at http://daringyoungmom.blogspot.com, but I'm actually seeing http://designsponge.blogspot.com. Crazy.

Daring Young Dad

Am I Christian? Says who?

I love my sweetheart

Another bug

Blogger has some bugs