Are you are Christian? No, I mean a real Christian.
Can you tell me which is the 34th book of the Old Testament? Are you able to recite the full text of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed? Do you assent to all of the 39 articles? If the answer in any of these instances is no, I regret to inform you that you are clearly not the real deal and should stop pretending otherwise.
I satirise, but only for effect.
Research for the newly-formed Richard Dawkins Foundation for Science and Reason has revealed (drum role) that not all UK Christians are really Christian.
The study, conducted by Ipsos/ MORI found that fewer than three in 10 (28%) people who called themselves Christian in the 2011 Census say they are so "because they believe in the teachings of Christianity", and only half have attended a church service (outside special occasions) in the previous 12 months.
In other words, there are a lot of nominal Christians in Britain. Who would have thought it?
The research itself is massive and fascinating, for which we owe Professor Dawkins much thanks, but it is far from a clear-cut. For example, many people might be surprised to hear that 44% of 'Census Christians' believe that Jesus was "the Son of God, the Saviour of Mankind", that a third believe he was physically resurrected, and that four in ten have read the Bible, independently and from personal choice, in the last a year?
Specific findings aside, however, the business of pronouncing who is and who is not a 'real' Christian is a hazardous one. The Dawkins' press release pushes strongly the idea belief and practice are the only reliable criteria for determining the validity of an individual's faith. However, while there is little doubt that those who believe little, do nothing and know even less about the religion they profess are not really very religious (a very small number, it should be stressed), it is doubtful whether the other element, what you choose to call yourself, is as insignificant as all that.
A number of years ago now, I conducted a series of in-depth interviews with people who did not practice the Christian faith and, as it turned out, knew precious little about it. In other words, the respondents all fell into Dawkins 'not real' category.
Half of them, however, had ticked the Christian box in the 2001 Census, while the other half had not - and the difference was palpable. The former group were vague and hesitant about their beliefs but nonetheless genuinely sympathetic and supportive towards Christianity. By contrast, the latter were angry to point of venomous in their criticisms of it. In other words, nominal attachment did not mean everything but it certainly meant something.
We should bear this in mind when we seek to pronounce on how many real Christians there are in Britain, advice that, incidentally, applies just as much to Christians who try to inflate the figure and its significance just as much as atheists who try to minimise it.
Ironically, given the context of this particular news story, one of the major themes of the gospels is Jesus' running battle with the Pharisees, as they diligently policed the national, religious boundaries, casting out all those who worked on the Sabbath, disobeyed laws on cleanliness and were generally not as punctilious as themselves in obeying the law.
The fact that Jesus redrew the lines so as to include those left out in the cold, and cast out those who judged themselves safely pious and incensed the Pharisees serves as a salutary warning. We should be very careful before we pronounce on who is, and who isn't, the real thing.
Follow Nick Spencer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/theosnick
Christopher Lane: Two Ways Of Thinking About Agnosticism: Hitchens Vs. Dawkins
William Turvill: Cameron vs Dawkins: Who Doesn't Get it?
Vlad Chituc: Richard Dawkins' Concession Not Quite Revelatory
Christopher Lane: Religious Self-Definition a Major Issue in Dawkins's Poor Debate Performance
Welcome - The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science
RDF Banners - The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and ...
Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science - Wikipedia ...
The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science (Official ...
Perhaps they were lumping "unaffiliated" together.
One can get the whole Bible as a free download on the internet.
Jesus indicated His followers should know all the important directives in the Scriptures, but I don't recall Him saying one would have to even remember where all the names of the books of the Bible would be or remember how they were worded exactly in the original language or any modern translation. Matthew 4:4.
As far as listening to any man made creeds at John 10:5 He said "a strangers voice they will not listen to"
At Revelation 21:27 there is an indication that even continuing lies can keep one's name out of "The Lamb's Book of Life".
Does one have to be in "The Lamb's Book of Life" to be considered a "Christian" by Jesus?
Well, hell. Neither are the Americans. But they are a voracious lot! lol.
"In other words, there are a lot of nominal Christians in Britain. Who would have thought it?"
Whodathunkit, indeed. Lots of "nominals" here in the states as well, but they are really good at tossing out random scripture quotations and espousing how much god "wuvs you."
I consider this to be more than suitably careful:
Question #1) Do you believe an all powerful all knowing supreme being who created the entire universe and controls your eternal fate... exists?
If you answer "yes"...
Question #2)Have you read the ONE SINGLE BOOK that is supposed to be the general instruction manual this entity supposedly provided on how to live your life?
If you answer no, then either you don't really believe #1, or you're insane. The end. Take your pick which you'd like me to believe about you.
If you answer yes:
Question #3) Do you SERIOUSLY try to do what it tells you to do?
If you answer no, see outcome of answering no to question 2. If you answer yes, ***and are actually being honest***, then I can believe you're serious about your belief and I'll call you a "real" Christian.
I'd put the number of people who make it through those three basic criteria at below 1% based on personal experience.
Way below.
The rest say they're Christian because they were raised to say so, or it's socially expedient, or they identify with it culturally, or whatever...
The key learning from this poll is that the bishops who are demanding that the government give their faith special treatment because there are so many Christians don't have a leg to stand on. They can't claim a broad base of support for their teachings, because we now know that most "Christians" don't even know what they are. That's the lesson here.
But what does it say? The WORD is near you, on your lips(MOUTH) and in your HEART; that is the word of faith which we preach.
Because if you acknowledge and CONFESS with your MOUTH, that Jesus is Lord and in your HEART BELIEVE, that God raised Him from the dead, you will be SAVED.
For with the HEART a person BELIEVES and so is JUSTIFIED, and with the MOUTH he or she CONFESSES and CONFIRMS his salvation.
www.deathandlife.org/salvation.html
Visit the link below for more clarification.
Um, no. The heart pumps blood.
The brain is what is convinced, or unconvinced, of things.
If someone is convinced, by definition, they believe.
If they are not convinced, by definition, they do not believe.
Belief is not a choice any more than a heart is capable of thought.
http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/12/religious-faith-children
Paraphrasing...
"...I was approached by a group of young men who demanded to know whether I was a Catholic or a Protestant. When I told them I was an Atheist, one of the young men, with a confused look on his face, said to me..."
"A Catholic Atheist or a Protestant Atheist?"
lol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06wJgJaYJ0w