Tuesday, April 18, 2017

Does It Make Sense?

Joe does not believe in holding elections, but instead advocates rule by a hereditary king. Does it make sense for Joe to claim that he is a democrat? Sally advocates war as a means of both settling international differences and as an effective means of limiting population growth. Is she also right to claim that she is a pacifist?

In most areas of life we recognize that if a person denies the fundamental claims associated with a given name, that person no right to the name they are claiming. But when it comes to the faith, this reasonable assumption is contradicted. According to some people, we should accept anyone and everyone who claims to be a Christian, even if a person denies the fundamental teachings of Christianity. According to these same people, we should accept anyone who went to school and received a degree in science as a scientist, even if he spins theories that demonstrate a clear rejection of the scientific method.

Sorry to be non-PC, but I believe in calling things, and people, what they are. Those who deny the fundamental teachings of Christianity (things like the deity of Christ and his resurrection) are not Christians. Those who spin theories unsupported by actual scientific evidence are not scientists.

As long as these people do not claim to be Christians (in the one case) or scientists (in the other) I do not have a big problem with them. But when someone wants to have it both ways, when someone claims to be a Christian while denying fundamental Christian teachings, or someone wants respect as a scientist while demanding adherence to theories that cannot be proven, it is time to break out different labels. Such people are imposters. They are liars. These are not labels that should be used lightly, but are words that must be used when they clearly apply.

No comments: