Getting practical, can you be Christian Muslim, for example? The answer has to be, no. These two religions have mutually exclusive teachings. That's the major issue with people who say they are multiple religions, mutually exclusive teachings...
That's exactly right measuring by what you, and I, would, the statements on the nature of reality, how the world actually is, to be accepted (or not), as facts.
This doesn't seem to be the framework of thought in operation in such cases, and mostly that is where I am left stumped. I can't see how to leave out the "but is it true?" question and faced with incompatible accounts, apart from addressing fuzziness in language and concept on the outside change of complementarity applying, a smorgasboard approach seems a dire one, unless the operating factor is: "I like that, and this makes me feel good." But then, acting effectively as judge *over* texts and doctrines, yes,
... this person claiming to hold to multiple religions is himself the deity..
...having the right to rule and to choose. It wouldn't work so well in any other area: "Oh the law on speeding doesn't appeal... I'll leave that out of my world view."
Have you ever heard someone say, "I like to think of God as (fill in the blank)"? ... They either don't know the regions they claim to follow or they ignore the facts and create their new religion of me, me, me.
I hear it regularly, and while it may be a poorly thought-out individual, quite often this "fuzzy view" comes pre-packaged from an existing congregation or religion. Noting also the "itching ears" effect where, with increased ease of transport people have far more opportunity to find a church or congregation that "suits them".
But is "suiting people " the correct goal for a church anyway?
I minister I knew used to say "If lots of people walk out of your sermons you are doing it wrong. If no-one ever walks out of your sermons you are doing it wrong."
Chris.
