Greedy fake Christian appoints greedy fake Christian
Trump’s preacher of choice goes too far for some evangelicals.
Don’t do that, these people are very much Christians. They are the worst the religion has to offer, and I won’t accept this “not real” Christian bullshit. Christians don’t get to brush away the shitty people within the religion and literally say they aren’t real. Yes they are, they are part of your religion, own it and fix it, don’t brush it away
I mean, yes and no.
This is the same logic as "don't do that, Fetterman is very much a real liberal" – like, self-attested membership of a group that is defined by a core set of beliefs while also denying that core set of beliefs is not a reflection on that core set of beliefs.
To pick another example, "don't do that, the DPRK is very much a democratic republic" – and yet...
Christianity is all about absolute dictatorship. Or is it coincidence that all the MAGAs are Christians? That the Pope is surrounded by gold while saying how we should treat the poor well?
Don’t do that, these people are very much Christians
I refer you to my answer to yesman making the same objection.
No True Scottsman was born and lived in France.
A Christian is anyone who says they are. Christianity is how those people conduct themselves. Prosperity gospel is valid doctrine, just like liberation theology. I don't wanna play True Scotsman with the believers.
I get what you're saying, and I agree with the basic principle BUT
A) Trump doesn't honestly self-identify as a Christian. Like almost all he does, its a grift for money, attention, and power. Nobody who's not part of the cult honestly believes that he's actually religious.
B) Prosperity gospel is by definition a grift. It's a religiously themed pyramid scheme and nothing else.
We can abstain from defining people's sincere beliefs on their behalf without pretending that obvious fraud is the real deal.
We can abstain from defining people’s sincere beliefs on their behalf without pretending that obvious fraud is the real deal.
This is a straw-person argument. Claiming two beliefs being valid is not the same as two beliefs that are equal.
You can prefer liberation theology to prosperity gospel. I do. But that's a question of politics, not theology. A non-believer taking such a side is making a mistake because doing so implies the following:
That's conceding that the Bible is a unique moral document, probably miraculous.
Calling other Christians heretics and fake is the most Christian thing there is.
And fuck no, there is no equivalence between Prosperity gospel and Liberation theology.
Don't let religious pluralism and tolerance get in the way of punching up. Their point is to keep people from punching down and oppressing religious minorities.
I'm an atheist who doesn't beleive in god and, also, a christian.
I politely contest the validity of prosperity doctrine. Does it not rather fly in the face of the whole "camel through a needle eye" metaphor? Not a theologian.
Showing a theological stance is contradicting their holy book isn't going to be any more convincing than showing contradictions between different parts of the book itself is going to convince them to stop being Christians. It's a dogma that starts with a conclusion and works backwards to find evidence confirming the conclusion.
Sure, but that's also why they're considered to be heretics and not heathens. They believe in the same god and most of the same doctrine, but differ on some key parts. Ergo, Christian heresy instead of just some heathen religion.
