2 ms·

> so why be surprised when some people behave according to the incentive structure we put around them? I guess a basic level of self-respect? It's one thing t

> so why be surprised when some people behave according to the incentive structure we put around them? I guess a basic level of self-respect? It's one thing to be criticized, but one could say "that's not who I am". And it's not like Jesus didn't warn them they'd be prosecuted for him; there are many, many verses about this very thing. But once they start performing destructive behaviors themselves, suddenly: that is who they are.

throwaway894345 6y ago
Jesus also said there would be a lot of people who called themselves Christian but few who actually lived the life. As far as political polls go, they are happy to consider anyone a Christian irrespective of whether they practice any of the traditions or aspire toward the ethics, so we probably shouldn't expect generalizations about "Christians" to be very useful or intuitive. Anyway, I try not to criticize the bullied for how they manifest their scars--it doesn't help them and anyone whose opinion matters is only going to think less of me for it.
- mcphage 6y ago
  I’m not aware of any tests that distinguish “true” Christians from those merely claiming to be Christians.
  - throwaway894345 6y ago
    I’m just saying that you oughtn’t be surprised that a lot of “Christians” don’t exhibit the ethics when you define “Christian” in such a way that it includes people who don’t try to adhere to the ethics.
    - mcphage 6y ago
      > when you define “Christian” in such a way that it includes people who don’t try to adhere to the ethics. There is no other way to define “Christian”.
      - throwaway894345 6y ago
        Of course there is. The obvious counter example is "people who try to adhere to the ethics". But that's hardly important, the important thing is that you now understand why "Christians" don't behave according to Christian ethics--notably because you're defining "Christians" in such a way that it includes a lot of people who don't practice Christian ethics. Mystery solved.

throwaway894345 6y ago

Jesus also said there would be a lot of people who called themselves Christian but few who actually lived the life. As far as political polls go, they are happy to consider anyone a Christian irrespective of whether they practice any of the traditions or aspire toward the ethics, so we probably shouldn't expect generalizations about "Christians" to be very useful or intuitive. Anyway, I try not to criticize the bullied for how they manifest their scars--it doesn't help them and anyone whose opinion matters is only going to think less of me for it.

mcphage 6y ago
I’m not aware of any tests that distinguish “true” Christians from those merely claiming to be Christians.
- throwaway894345 6y ago
  I’m just saying that you oughtn’t be surprised that a lot of “Christians” don’t exhibit the ethics when you define “Christian” in such a way that it includes people who don’t try to adhere to the ethics.
  - mcphage 6y ago
    > when you define “Christian” in such a way that it includes people who don’t try to adhere to the ethics. There is no other way to define “Christian”.
    - throwaway894345 6y ago
      Of course there is. The obvious counter example is "people who try to adhere to the ethics". But that's hardly important, the important thing is that you now understand why "Christians" don't behave according to Christian ethics--notably because you're defining "Christians" in such a way that it includes a lot of people who don't practice Christian ethics. Mystery solved.