Jedi Council wrote:Andechs-Sisebut wrote:The point is that Blaatschapen is not a Christian, as far as I know, and his definition contradicts Christianity’s teachings. Therefore, his opinion is wrong.
Well it depends on what kind of "good" we are discussing.
Menassa argued that a "good" Christian needs only to follow Mark 16:16.
I disagreed because a strict adherence to Mark 16:16 opens the door to all sorts of immorality and terrible things.
We realized we were discussing different versions of good, theirs from a scriptural perspective, and mine from a moral, admittedly my moral, standpoint.
However, combining the two issues, it begs the question over one can be a good Christian, but a bad person. But I digress.
In any case, if your conception of "good" is different from mine, or Blaatschapen's, then you will obviously consider both of our views to be wrong.
I think Nakena makes a good point, in that, ‘good’ here means ‘is what it is supposed to be’. What is a ‘good Christian’? A person that does as he is supposed to do as a Christian. All other definitions, seem to me, are a distraction.