Cheryl
Posts:
27
Registered:
1/1/10
|
|
Re: The perpetual calendar
Posted:
Feb 28, 2010 5:49 AM
|
|
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Feb 27, 4:58 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 12:48:14 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
>> <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in
>> <news:02dc31c7-bbee-4dd6-8c8f-f915da3acdab@g7g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>
>> in
>> sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english:
>>
>>> On Feb 27, 1:40 pm, "sjdevn...@yahoo.com" <sjdevn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>>> Until you offer a definition of "Christian" with an
>>>> explanation and evidence as to why it's superior to
>>>> those generally accepted by lexicographers, there's not
>>>> really much left to discuss.-
>>> Again I point out, as a linguist, that lexicographers have
>>> no special handle on truth, especially as concerns
>>> technical terminology.
>> But 'Christian' is very far from being exclusively a
>> technical term.
>
> When it concerns Christians' official definitions of what constitutes
> a Christian, it certainly is.
Some Christians take the view that the final determination of whether
someone is or is not a Christian will take place at some later date,
when the sheep are separated from the goats by Christ Himself.
Therefore, any official definitions in the here and now are of
distinctly secondary importance.
I know, I know, a lot of others can't let go of the desire to know Right
Now, and particularly want to know whether or not that really irritating
neighbour is In or Out. And some people who aren't Christians by any
definition of the word like to know for some reason or other, probably
ranging from simple curiosity to the wish to identify a group to study
or poll, who is and is not Christian.
--
Cheryl
|
|
