The Agora
Bible Editorials

Previous Index Next

Definitions and confusion

Abraham Lincoln was fond of asking visitors to the White House the following questions:

"How many legs does a dog have?"

To which the usual answer was, "Four."

And then the President asked the follow-up question:

"Now, let us say that a dog's tail is another leg. Now, how many legs does the dog have?"

If the visitor answered, "Five", then old Abe would smile and say, "No, he still has four legs. Because calling a tail a leg doesn't make it one!"


And thus to... religious "definitions"!

Are we Christadelphians "Christian"? Are we "orthodox"? Are we "evangelical"? Are we "pentecostal", even? What about "catholic"?

In every one of these cases, it all depends -- as one old brother once put it -- on "what you mean by what you say." And we can mean very different things by what we say. In fact, two peoples can mean ENORMOUSLY different things even if they are saying precisely the same thing. (Stop and think for a moment: how many things does "I love you?" mean? Unless we know the context, and the background, and the personalities involved, and their relationship, and -- especially -- HOW it is said, then we really have no idea what the words are intended to convey... or HOW MUCH they are intended to convey.)

Anyway, back to religous "definitions":


And there you are. For the time would fail me to speak of "Amended" and "Unamended", and "clean flesh", and "Andrewism" and "Stricklerism", and "immortal emergence", and "Adamic condemnation", and "eternal death", etc, etc... all of which may be defined differently -- very differently -- by this person or that... but that's another story! Or seventeen.

Meanwhile, we'll just go by the strictly-literal (and original) definitions, and call ourselves...

the Catholic Christian Evangelical Orthodox Pentecostal Church (the real one!). Right?



PS: NOW I'm in BIG trouble!

Previous Index Next