(Devil's Tower, which somehow seems appropriate)
"Are you a Christian?"
Someone asked me this on the forums this very morning. It wasn't a friendly, good-natured inquiry.
My profile identifies me as a Christian, I've accumulated some 400 posts and more than a dozen blog entries, including a lengthy one that is my testimony, and yet someone still asked me this. It struck me as a bit odd, but I understood the point he was trying to make:
"No, bub, you're no Christian."
I asked this individual to define a Christian for me. I said we'd then discuss why he thought he was in a position to define what one is. He referred me to a "lexicon" (dictionary) and left it at that.
Is it really that simple? If it were, why would Christendom be as fantastically, dismayingly fragmented as it is? Why would believers who certainly think they're Christians be told in no uncertain terms that they aren't by other believers who likewise think they're Christians?
I suggested to my inquisitor that what he was really looking for was someone whose beliefs were a mirror image of his own or at least fell within the range of what he deemed acceptable. "Someone like me" – uh-huh, that's pretty much the definition of a Christian for most of us.
Stray too far outside those parameters and you're simply "not a Christian." Or at least not a "real" or "true" Christian, as I've also been told - which always brings to mind the "No True Scotsman" fallacy:
No True Scotsman Fallacy | Definition & Examples
The no true Scotsman fallacy is the attempt to defend a generalization by denying the validity of any counterexamples given. By changing the definition of
www.scribbr.com
Early in my Christian walk, as I describe in my testimony, I touched all the bases. I had a startling conversion experience at age 20; was duly baptized in a Southern Baptist church; became a student leader with Campus Crusade for Christ; and attended a Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary on the recommendation of a bevy of pastors and after surviving the requisite psychological tests and interviews.
No one on these forums or elsewhere would have asked the O'Darby of 50 years ago, "Are you a Christian?" If the Once Saved Always Saved doctrine of eternal security is true – which I don't happen to believe it is – I'm still rock-solid.
I've mentioned one forum where, if you self-identify as a Christian, then you simply are. It's strictly forbidden to say, "You aren't a Christian." Saying this will get you banned in a heartbeat. We can point out that your beliefs are far outside the mainstream or contrary to some well-established doctrine, but we can't cross the line into questioning whether you're a Christian. You can be a Christian even if you don't believe Jesus ever existed!
Christianity Board likewise has a rule, "Do not state or imply that another member or group of members who have identified themselves as Christian are not Christians." It seems to be honored in the breach, as the saying goes. I would think the inquiry I got this morning was on the edge, but since it provided useful fodder for my blog I can live with it.
What do we even mean by the question, "Are you a Christian?" Are we asking whether you self-identify as a Christian, whether you satisfy our personal standard, or do we actually think there is some objective standard (the "lexicon") upon which we can all agree?
I believe my inquisitor was asking all three questions. Yes, I self-identify as a Christian. No, I seriously doubt I satisfy his personal standard. No, the fragmentation and feuding within Christendom shows there is no agreed-upon objective standard.
To ask someone else whether he or she is a Christian thus is pretty meaningless. The reality is, whether I self-identify as a Christian will be irrelevant if I don't satisfy my inquisitor's personal criteria. It's just a silly game, an exercise in attempted one-upsmanship. The implication of the question is almost always, "No, you're not."
Here at the one-member Church of What O'Darby believes, we think only God determines who is and isn't a Christian, what this means, and what the consequences will be. We follow our own understanding, do our best to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling, and leave it to you to do the same.
More than this, we think only God determines who is fit to enter His eternal kingdom and that this, rather than "Are you a Christian?", should be the real concern. Perhaps it's everyone or perhaps it isn't. Perhaps it has nothing to do with labels or believing 25 correct doctrines or perhaps it does. Perhaps Jesus being the Way has some meaning we don't fully grasp or perhaps it means exactly what the most rigid fundamentalists say.
Perhaps the essential question is not, "Are you a Christian?" but "Are you a follower of Jesus?" But what might this mean? Does following Jesus require labels and doctrines? Perhaps, perhaps not.
I thus believe that whether I'm a Christian is strictly between me and God. Whether you're a Christian is likewise between you and God. We can discuss what we each think this means – if it has any relevancy at all – but there must be a recognition that only God will decide who is fit to enter His eternal kingdom.
In short, some 50 years after being the sort of Christian of which my inquisitor presumably would have approved I am quite possibly "not a Christian at all" as he narrowly understands the term. And guess what: I don't care at all. What I am and whether I am fit for God's eternal kingdom is strictly up to God. I no longer insist that I or anyone else must fit into some "Christian" mold that is entirely manmade. As I've said elsewhere, I have grave doubts as to whether this mold has produced a Christianity that bears any resemblance to what Jesus was talking about or had in mind. Perhaps it does, perhaps it doesn't.
From the narrow definition that I myself would have applied 50 years ago and that I'm sure my inquisitor had in mind, I've evolved to a much more broad and flexible understanding. Tell me what you believe and why, and I will tell you what I believe and why … tell me how you self-identify and why, and I will tell you how I self-identify and why … but we will leave it up to God to decide what the criteria for entering His eternal kingdom actually are and who makes the grade.
Does this mean I think the Bible, the various Christian creeds and statements of faith, and all the volumes of theology and apologetics are irrelevant? Do I think there is no significance to the core Christian doctrines that all branches of the faith pretty much share? No, of course not. All of this helps inform my own faith and my understanding of what it means to be a follower of Jesus. I simply accept that in all of this there is far more mystery, ambiguity and uncertainty than those who insist on narrow "definitional Christianity" are willing to acknowledge. I accept that ultimately God, not me, will do the defining.
Am I a Christian? Possibly!
(My use of the term inquisitor brought to mind the wonderful chapter in Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov called "The Grand Inquisitor." You can read it here: The Project Gutenberg E-text of The Grand Inquisitor, by Feodor Dostoevsky. Jesus Himself returns at the height of the Spanish Inquisition. He's a nuisance and is imprisoned and sentenced to die. The Grand Inquisitor visits Him in His cell and tells Him, "Look, we don't need you. We have things well in hand. We give the people what they want, which isn't you." He allows Jesus to survive, provided He goes away and never shows His face again. Apropos to this blog entry? Possibly!
)
