Who is a Christian?

What does it mean to be a Christian? What is required? In America, this debate is often framed by conservative fundamentalists who seem overly concerned with who is in and who is out. Do you believe the “right,” things? If not, you’re not a true Christian. Christians like me — those with liberal, progressive and modern ideas of faith and justice — tend to be excluded by their definitions. Atheists are happy to jump into the argument as well. They like to exclude me from their Christian definitions because a Christian who supports gender identity, LGBTQA+ rights and income equality doesn’t fit their narrative that all Christians are secretly evil and out to turn the world into a medieval theocracy.

Let me say right off the bat that no one gets to decide if you are a Christian or not. That is between you and Christ. They can decide if you are a member of their church or denomination, but that’s not what matters to Christ. Most attempts at such a definition are really just illogical identity politics disguised as theology. Years ago, I taught logic to pre-law students preparing to take the LSAT. We would discuss logical fallacies and the common fallacies that come up when trying to define a Christian are broadly defined as fallacies of definition.

Fallacies of Definition

When you try to define who is in or out of Christianity, you almost always fall into a logical fallacy of some kind. The most common is circular reasoning. The basic argument goes something like, “Christianity is belief in Christian teaching.” The phrase, “Christian teaching,” is a pretty big bucket that often includes very particular dogma about seemingly random ideas. I hear Christians say that Joe Biden is not a real Christian because he supports women’s health. They made the same argument about President Obama even though he is a long-time faithful member of the United Church of Christ. Again, identity politics are drawing these boundaries. Regardless of what you put in your teachings bucket, the real problem here is that the argument doesn’t really present two different objects by way of definition, so the argument is circular. There isn’t a clear enough distinction between your unique definition of Christianity and your unique definition of Christian teaching, one is really just a synonym for the other. Besides, no two people have ever fully agreed on what constitutes “Christian teaching,” in the last 2,000 years. Peter, Paul and James couldn’t agree just three years after Jesus’ resurrection. Coherence is not going to suddenly happen tomorrow.

So, people then like to move the goalposts to define Christianity so that it fits their desire to show that their type of people are in, and others are out. More identity politics. But shouldn’t Christianity be defined by traditional Christian orthodoxy? I can’t possibly imagine why. Who gets to define what that orthodoxy is? This branches into many different types of fallacies:

• Bandwagon fallacy: Christians throughout history have believed in the virgin birth, so unless you believe this is literally true you cannot be a Christian. But just because a lot of people believe in something doesn’t make it true. Insert your favorite orthodoxy into this fallacy: transubstantiation, believers’ baptism, biblical inerrancy, and anything else you want to force into the definition.
• False alternatives: You cannot be born a Christian; you must be born again. Most Christian believers were born into Christian families and that’s probably what really makes them Christian. Christianity is as much a culture, language and history as it is a set of beliefs.
• Appeal to authority: My church defines what a Christian is. Fine, then who decided your church gets the final say? If anything, it seems like Catholics are the only ones who come to rights and that would really irritate a lot of fundamentalists who are the loudest about who they think are true Christians. I even dare to say you cannot appeal to the Bible as the absolute sole and final authority because it is ancient, ambiguous and often contradicts itself. At some point you have to make some choices about these contradictions and other people will make different choices than you.

The Problems with Defining Christianity

The real problem with defining Christianity is that the religion itself is extremely complex. It has developed through multiple cultures, languages and many theological arguments over centuries. This is why you cannot claim to appeal to Biblical authority, because it’s impossible to agree on exact meanings and how to apply ancient ideas to our modern world. Our faith goes back at least 3,000 years but formative mythologies that influenced our faith go back much further. Which of these many moving parts are you most going to identify with? There is such a diversity of beliefs that Christians face a vast array of denominations and scriptural interpretation. What is essential?

Speaking on a personal level, my faith journey is a moving target. It is unique to me, so I don’t know how someone else’s definition of Christianity even matters to me individually. I’m a Christian because I am a Jesus freak. I just love everything about Jesus, and I have a deep mystical and personal experience of Christ and God. But other people have a more intellectual approach. Some people are cultural Christians who don’t have a personal belief or connection but still think Jesus’ words matter. My path tends to swing back and forth throughout a variety of ideas. Beyond mysticism and Jesus, Christianity holds me because of its deep history of seeking and practice, not because of dogma. Christianity encompasses an enormous and ever-widening spectrum of belief with which to connect. I can explore many different ideas and practices within this long tradition of faithful God-seekers. As my faith evolves – as I mature – does that mean I am more or less Christian than I was in the past?

This complexity keeps me in the faith. It’s not some simple formulation of faith. I love being a part of a 3,000-year-old tradition that includes liturgy, history, prayer, mysticism, science, faithful service, charity and more. Christianity is a kind of Baskin-Robbins of faith, you get at least 31 flavors to suit your needs plus some toppings and I’m that weirdo who prefers a cup to a cone.

But What of the Romans Road?

I credit a book on Romans I read at that age of 11 with a very real and powerful conversion experience. It was the moment I considered myself fully born again, embraced by Christ’s love. I still have so much gratitude and joy in the moment I decided to follow Christ. But I also believe I got Romans mostly wrong, as most 11-year-old boys might. Yet, I was definitely saved by giving my life to Christ, not because that was some sort of action required of me but because a life of faith has opened me to the eternal right here and now.

The Romans Road goes something like this: We’ve all sinned, and the consequences of sin are death, but if you accept and claim Jesus you will be saved.

There is so much to here to unpack — and deconstruct— I can’t even scratch the surface. Many books have been written on this topic and I won’t be able to address nearly any of this as it deserves within a single blog post. But I’ve come to believe this is a misread of what Paul is saying in Romans.

Apropos of our discussion here, Romans is really trying to define who is in and out of the family — who is a Christian, although there was no word for Christian back then as we were all Jews. Yes, Paul believed that Jesus defeated our death sentence. But what Paul is saying in Romans is that gentiles are part of the family now and that is hard for Jews to swallow. Confessing Jesus as lord makes you one of the family. Who gets to be in? Anyone who says Jesus is lord counts. This isn’t some kind of exclusive claim that prevents others from being in as well. It’s also not a formula to get you into Heaven. Instead, it is meant to show that following Jewish law was one way to be in the family, but now you have another way. You can call yourself a Jesus follower and not follow the law and be part of God’s family.

I think – just my opinion here though it is backed with some study – that the point is not we need to have faith in Jesus to escape Hell. I don’t believe in Hell I believe in universal salvation, so what you believe or confess doesn’t give you a golden ticket into Heaven. I think that God and Jesus have shown faith in us. That is closer to the reading of Romans I’m suggesting, not our faith in Jesus, Jesus’ faith in us. The best translation is probably that we are saved by “the faith of Jesus Christ,” not “faith in.”  The Law revealed God’s faithfulness and Paul very creatively pulls from Old Testament passages to show how maybe these old passages were really about God’s plan for including all of us gentiles through Jesus. You see, we’re already saved we just don’t know it, but Jesus’ faithfulness all the way to death shows us our salvation. We know this because of the resurrection. Death is defeated, Rome is defeated, we’re all one big family, go spread that good news.

Again that is a lot to unpack and I’m not going to do any of that here. But my belief is that what Romans is really saying that the Law, or Jewish faith, is a revelation of God for Jews and now Jesus’ life, death and resurrection is a revelation of God for everyone else. It’s not about you doing the right thing or confessing the right words, your belief in Jesus is simply the sudden world-shattering realization that the God of all creation loved and believed in you all along. God has already saved you. That’s the faith of Jesus.

Here’s a thought about a famous Romans Road passage:

Romans 10:12-13

For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all and is generous to all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

Often evangelicals like to pull just Romans 10:13, the last sentence of the phrase above, to say that for you to be saved you must call on the name of the Lord. Again, I think Paul is referencing older scripture here to show that gentiles (Greeks) are saved, are part of the family (Jews), because of Jesus. Your salvation is not based on what you claim or what you do, that is a free gift of God to everyone. Why should we let gentiles in at our tables when they don’t follow the law? Because they call on the name of Jesus, and if you look at these old scriptures, it says that anyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved, Jesus is Lord, so they’re welcome now too. It’s not how they get into Heaven. If Jesus is Lord we can all get along now — there is no more Greek or Jew. It’s a way in, not necessarily the only way. If you follow Jesus, it’s the same as if you’re following Adonai and the law, so have a seat.

The World Council of Churches Basis

Because Christianity is so diverse, The World Council of Churches was founded as an organization to promote Christian unity. How do we bring Jesus’ passion for justice, peace, love and service into our common witness even though we have so many theological disagreements? It’s an organization dedicated to interfaith dialogue amongst Christians and boasts something like 350 different member denominations. They include most Mainline Christians like Lutherans, Methodists, United Church of Christ, Disciples of Christ and many others.

How do they define who is a member – and thus in a way, who is a Christian? They’ve agreed on a basis.

“The World Council of Churches is a fellowship of churches which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour according to the scriptures, and therefore seek to fulfill together their common calling to the glory of the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”

I like this a lot, but again, there is more to unwind. It would be tempting to read that as an evangelical and say, “see you need to confess Jesus as God and Savior just like it says in Romans 10:13.” But as I’ve only hinted at above, confessing Jesus as God and savior can mean a multitude of things to different people. Reading Paul is complex. It’s also worth noting that the early church didn’t have a fully formed notion of the trinity, yet the WCC includes belief in the Trinity as part of their basis. Would Paul even be accepted in this basis? Fun discussions to be had all around.

Where I’ve Landed

I do think it’s more than just gate-keeping to find a basic definition of what it means to be Christian. You don’t have to look very hard to find people who do a lot of harm in the name of the Christian church. False prophets abound.

To me, calling yourself a Christian is basically saying you take Jesus as your primary understanding of God and are willing to follow Him.

I think it’s more about what you do than what you believe or say. It’s about following Christ. Love God and neighbor.

John 13:34-35

I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”

I also think Matthew 25 has a decent formulation for what it means to be a Christian:

Matthew 25:34-36

Then the king will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world, for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.’