Death of a Scotsman (Re: the "no true Scotsman" fallacy)

I guess I have to disagree. To be a Scot is to embrace a national identity: our Scotsman might well, as many have, choose to become an American. While he did not choose to be born a Scotsman, he does implicitly choose to remain a Scotsman. Similarly, it is often by the circumstances of birth--national, familial--that one embraces a Christian identity, and then one chooses to remain a Christian or not. One cannot choose one's origins, but one does, day by day, choose one's identity.The NTS fallacy is usually cited in response to a no-true-Christian defense. Some criticism is made of past or current behavior by a self-proclaimed Christian individual or organization. Irrelevant, someone replies: if they did that, they are no true Christian. By this logic, the only true Christians are those that behave in Christ-like ways, by which criterion no one here at Evc (as far as I can see) has the right to claim to be a Christian. So any examination of the consequences of Christianity in the world becomes impossible, which, in the midst of debate, one cannot help but suspect is the point of the NTC defense.One might reasonably propose that the issue is an internal matter for Christianity. If there are folks falsely claiming to be Christians for ulterior motives, who better than true Christians to detect and denounce the falsehood? But that is not generally what one sees: instead, one sees a general reluctance to accept any criticsm of folks and institutions claiming to be Christian, whatever their behavior, unless it is beyond a large sectarian boundary.Protestants may denouce Catholocism as anti-Christian; Catholics may return the favor. One independent church may assert that another's doctrine or practice concerning, say, baptism, falls short of the true Christian bar. But we rarely hear a Christian observe that the jihadists are no true Muslims, or that virulently Palestinian-hating Israeli's are not true Jews, or that a corrupt Democratic official is no true liberal. Evangelicals never seem to denounce another evangelical, though we have seen that more than a few deserved denunciation.For an external perspective, all this seems like a distraction. If we call Christianity to account for its impact on the world, should we not include all that is done in Christianity's name, including the true flock and the wolves they allow amongst them?

---

"Dost thou think because thou art virtuous there shall be no more cakes and ale?"
-Sir Toby Belch, Twelfth Night Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

I see that you added choice to the possible ways one can be a Scotsman. Wasn't that your original distinction (Scotsman by birth, Christian by choice), and then doesn't that invalidate your original argument? Could you help me out here? I don't understand the point of this.First you say: Then you say: and If a person falls short of your behavioral criteria, does that mean they never accepted Christ? Can Christians not sin after they have been saved? Does one's identity as a Christian switch on and off, depending whether one is most recently forgiven or most recently sinful?Bottom line, rR, is this:Christianity claims to make people better in many ways, though it does not claim to make them perfect.Yet when an outside observer asks about a Christian individual or Christian institution that seems to exhibit less than ideal behavior by Christian standards, that outsider is assured that individual or institution must not be a Christian.Yet we know, by Christianity's own tenets, that even saved Christians sin, yes?And when the observer objects to the all-too-seamless quality of this spotless Christian robe, we begin to hear accusations of Christian-hating bias.You can call it No True Scotsman, Special Pleading, Appeal to Adverse Consequences, or plain old hypocritical baloney. The high horse that some Christians ride has feet of clay, just like everyone else's, and you can't wave that away by hiding True Christianity in the unknowable heart or by dropping sinful Christians from the rolls.

---

"Dost thou think because thou art virtuous there shall be no more cakes and ale?"
-Sir Toby Belch, Twelfth Night Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

Even assuming you are right about the NTS fallacy (and I don't think you are)...while the Christian heart is unknowable by another, the critic's heart is wide open, and you can discern falsehood rather than error?This message has been edited by Omnivorous, 02-16-2006 12:47 PM

---

"Dost thou think because thou art virtuous there shall be no more cakes and ale?"
-Sir Toby Belch, Twelfth Night Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

This is a bit off-topic, too, but since it is an argument by analogy, I suppose it is fair game.Before I start, let me also point out that the OP claimed that the NTS fallacy could not apply to Christianity. I don't see how to contest that without addressing Christianity, and, for that reason alone, I don't see how doing so could possibly be off-topic.Blame the entire U.S. military?Why, of course not, Phat. We all know, because we have been told, that it was only 7 bad apples, and they didn't spoil the whole bunch. There was no direction from the President, or the Secretary of Defense, or the Attorney General, or the commanding officers, to engage in this kind of inhumane... Oh. Wait. There was. So we have a command structure that has encouraged and justified torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners. So the entire military can't be literally blamed--in the sense of every soldier--but the problem is demonstrably pervasive.Any member of the military was obliged both to refuse to obey unlawful orders to engage in this behavior and to report any instances of it.Of course, we know that largely didn't happen. Still, I do not blame the entire U.S. military for it, but I do think the entire U.S. military is obliged to examine its values--its culture, if you will--to determine what went wrong.I think your analogy with organized Christianity is excellent. What is unpopular, Phat, at least with me, is not so much the claim to know an absolute truth, but rather the claim to be both an imperfect vessel of that absolute and to be qualified to rule in or out others who claim that same relationship with the absolute.You know that absolute truth in your heart; Faith knows it in hers.Do either of you know it about the other's heart? How? By behavior? By words typed into the Internet? Even though none are free of sin, any Christian can determine when a particular sin disqualifies another from being a Christian? Can one be imperfect in one's very being, but perfect in one's judgments about others' relationship with that absolute?This is the crux of the matter when the NTS fallacy is used by self-identified Christians and when it is argued that it cannot apply because the truth of faith is hidden in the heart, because the "not a true Christian" disqualification is made based on acts--not words, not claims, and not an esoteric ability to see God in another's heart.This message has been edited by Omnivorous, 02-16-2006 02:38 PM

---

"Dost thou think because thou art virtuous there shall be no more cakes and ale?"
-Sir Toby Belch, Twelfth Night Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

Here's how I think that script usually plays out here:Christian fundamentalist:
"This was a better nation when it was truly a Christian nation, with prayer and Bibles in the schools. We are working to return America to those days."Skeptic:
"Wasn't that the same nation that waged wars of imperial conquest, owned slaves, and allowed Robber Baron capitalism to run amok?"Christian fundamentalist:
"The people who did that weren't true Christians."Skeptic:
"That's the No True Scotsman fallacy--claiming the good and disowning the bad."

---

"Dost thou think because thou art virtuous there shall be no more cakes and ale?"
-Sir Toby Belch, Twelfth Night Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

No. That position is usually taken by the Christian fundamentalists, but it is not mine.

---

"Dost thou think because thou art virtuous there shall be no more cakes and ale?"
-Sir Toby Belch, Twelfth Night Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

I never thought of Christianity as a progressivist philosophy.Does this mean that a ture Christian just keeps getting better, every day in every way? There are no slip-ups or backslides?If that's the criterion, your ranks are thinning rapidly, and there aren't enough true Christians in the world to matter.

---

"Dost thou think because thou art virtuous there shall be no more cakes and ale?"
-Sir Toby Belch, Twelfth Night Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------