Nate: First of all, let me say that I see and agree with your point about Jehovah's Witnesses. To them, they are following Christ, yet they are not Christians. Referring to Mrs. Rice, specifically, though, I believe that the New Testament gives ample justification to the idea that following Christ entails being part of a community of believers: the church (the Body of Christ). Mrs. Rice seems to be saying that she isn't happy with certain things (I don't think she says that the church doesn't hold/teach the truth, just that she is unhappy with it), so she's "out."
Nate-o (post: 1417719) wrote:She can follow Christ without being a Christian, just like I said. You state "following Christ is a necessary AND sufficient condition for being a Christian." Yes, I agree 100%. Writing is a necessary AND sufficient condition for being a writer. Never heard of a writer who didn't write. But you can still write, and not be a writer.
Actually, writing is only a necessary condition for being a writer. All writers write, but not all who happen to write are writers. If writing were both necessary and sufficient, then anyone who wrote would automatically be a writer. This, as you pointed out, is just not so.
Nathaniel wrote:You can follow Christ without being Christian. The Jehovah's Witnesses are an excellent example of people who follow Christ but have beliefs that make it impossible for them to be Christian. Thus, we can safely conclude being Christian is not a requirement for following Christ. As such, it is easy to see how one can refuse to carry the label but still be a follower.
I guess all I can say on this point is whether Jehovah's Witnesses are truly following Christ (not only in word) is an open question.
Natenschaft wrote:You can do that. Why can't you? I will move my own chess piece so you cannot move any of your pieces without your king being taken, and thus put you in schachmatt. There, I did it without using the label. And before you say "That's just German for checkmate!" I ask you this...which language existed first, German or English? Clearly, the answer is German. Thus, "checkmate" is just English for "schachmatt."
Oh goody...language games...
You've had a philosophy course or two, no?
Whether its checkmate or schachmatt, these signs refer to the same concept.
The following is not an argument]Language changes and evolves as time goes by. Try going up to a black person today and calling them a negro or colored. You will probably get punched in the face. But 50 years ago, if you had called a black person that, it would have been totally fine. It is not fine today, however. The words gained negative connotations, language evolved, now they're taken as a bit insulting.[/quote]If you are truly comparing the term negro to the term Christian...then I cannot touch that. I don't think that is a fair comparison.
Nate-tional Lampoon wrote:It is completely simple to quit being a Christian and still follow Christ.
I totaly understand what you are saying, but I have no idea if Mrs. Rice means this or not. As has been pointed out, her statements are fairly vague.