Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Often with good reason. There is no harm in pointing out the failures of other Christians when it comes to keeping the reputation of the Kingdom. It is the Father, not religion, we are defending.Hopefully not too many people will harshly judge other committed Christians because of this nut. Sadly, some will.. but I reckon most were already doing so anyways.
I don't think you or I could burst his twisted little bubble. He will have to do that on his own. He will have plenty of years to contemplate his little bubble in a State of Minnesota prison.No but he insinuates this is what Christianity is all about. Should we burst his misinformed bubble?
Who actually thinks he was following the will of the Father? Anybody but this one guy?Of course but even though today no one is interested in truth, only their opinions, it wouldn't mean he was following the will of the Father.
The question is... should Christians stand up and announce such thinking and behaviour is definitely un-Christian, or should we lamely defend it and further decrease people's opinions of Christianity, perhaps deservedly so.
This person is obviously mentally ill. So no judgment. It is the Christian who is not mentally ill who acts with hate that we should call out and pray for. IMHO.
Blessings
Often with good reason. There is no harm in pointing out the failures of other Christians when it comes to keeping the reputation of the Kingdom. It is the Father, not religion, we are defending.
Fair enough. I am going by his friends comments that said his actions are a shocking departure.Why should we readily assume he‘s mentally ill without a diagnosis? Was a condition mentioned in the media upon arrest? There are many people with mental challenges who don’t murder politicians. His behavior was calculated and well planned. Bad actions doesn’t always equal mental illness. Sometimes it’s simply evil.
~bella
Fair enough. I am going by his friends comments that said his actions are a shocking departure.
Quote:
Carlson mentioned that Boelter "kept things inside" and had been "kind of down," not as upbeat as usual. He expressed regret, saying he wished he could have seen the signs of duress and mental health struggles.
Sometimes a switch gets flipped later on in life. I personally know of boy who was normal until his 20's then had a complete breakdown and diagnosed with schizophrenia. Sometimes things just don't get caught right way.It’s a popular practice to assign mental health challenges to behavior we find unsettling. Once again, “keeping things inside or being down” doesn’t make one a murderer. Surely you can see the difference? Who hasn’t had a low moment or instance of the doldrums? But it didn’t drive you to kill someone you disagreed with. That comes from a different place and it doesn’t mean you’re crazy.
~bella
Very true. Same thing with my sister.Sometimes a switch gets flipped later on in life. I personally know of boy who was normal until his 20's then had a complete breakdown and diagnosed with schizophrenia. Sometimes things just don't get caught right way.
Thanks for sharing!
Be blessed.
The "no true Scotsman fallacy" is a logical fallacy where someone defends a generalization by dismissing counterexamples as not belonging to the group in question, rather than admitting the generalization might be flawed. It often involves changing the definition of the group or using subjective qualifiers like "true," "pure," or "real" to exclude problematic examples.What does that men ?
For one thing, that they have no knowledge of how Christ walked...or how we Christians are to walk.
Only if the perp professed to be Christian, as is true of this case.So if you say something like "No real Christian would act like that "
Some people accuse you of this fallacy
I thank you for going in depth on the Scotsman idea.The "no true Scotsman fallacy" is a logical fallacy where someone defends a generalization by dismissing counterexamples as not belonging to the group in question, rather than admitting the generalization might be flawed. It often involves changing the definition of the group or using subjective qualifiers like "true," "pure," or "real" to exclude problematic examples.
Here's a breakdown:
So if you say something like "No real Christian would act like that "
- Initial Claim:
A universal claim is made, like "No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge."- Counterexample:
Someone presents a counterexample, such as "But my uncle Angus is a Scotsman and he puts sugar on his porridge."- The Fallacy:
Instead of accepting the counterexample, the person argues, "No true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge," effectively excluding the example by adding a subjective qualifier.- Reasoning:
This fallacy avoids addressing the validity of the original claim by shifting the goalposts and redefining the group to exclude inconvenient examples.
Some people accuse you of this fallacy
To unbelievers they're all ChristiansI thank you for going in depth on the Scotsman idea.
But the true Christian is the only kind of real Christian.
All others are pretenders, whose works illustrate their lack of faith.
Right it is just a Hellenistic religion that has moved God further away from mankind. Stick to the Jesus movementTo unbelievers they're all Christians
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?