I don’t know any true Christians who are MAGA or racists or even bigots. But with the commonly used definition that if someone says something is bad they automatically are seen as hating the people doing it many people arguing in communities like that would be called haters or bigots and possibly be banned here on lemmy.world. Even though most true Christians don’t like MAGA and hardline rights they might feel the need to create communities like r/TrueChristian oad r/AskAChristian on exploding-heads.com or similar servers because they might think that their opinions are tolerated there. What do you think?

  • berkeleyblue@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    1 year ago

    True Christians rings in a very bad way. You basically are begging for people to call you out for making a „no true scotsman“ falacy:

    https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/no-true-scotsman

    Also, telling people that they will be tortured for etwrnity (hell) or should be outright executed (botht things religious people have done repeatedly) is ultimately bigoted and hateful. If I keep telling you that you will burn for etirnity for who you are, that is nothing short of hate.

    So, should these groups be allowed to exist? Sure, I‘m all for bad arguments being publicly shared so that they can be properly scrutinized and discussed.

    Just don’t expect that people will not call you out for the hateful and bigited things your holy book advocates for.

    • vaseltarp@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      02·
      1 year ago

      Your link has a very shallow definition of the “No true Scotsman” fallacy.

      A better definition is on Wikipedia:

      No true Scotsman, or appeal to purity, is an informal fallacy in which one attempts to protect their generalized statement from a falsifying counterexample by excluding the counterexample improperly. Rather than abandoning the falsified universal generalization or providing evidence that would disqualify the falsifying counterexample, a slightly modified generalization is constructed ad-hoc to definitionally exclude the undesirable specific case and similar counterexamples by appeal to rhetoric.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

      But I can argue that the definition of Cristian comes from the behavior and teaching of Jesus and the new testament and thus excludes bigotry hate and racism.

      Also, telling people that they will be tortured for etwrnity (hell) […] is ultimately bigoted and hateful.

      Unless that is really true. Then it would be unloving to not warn people.

      • confluence@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        1 year ago

        Unless that is really true. Then it would be unloving to not warn people.

        Absolutely. Just make sure it’s true and bring the evidence before you do it though. Otherwise you may be using fear-based emotional manipulation to coerce an opinion, even if that’s not your intention.