Is it religiously correct to call someone a Non- Christian?

[pwb]

Someone said it to me in conversation today when we were talking about Fox News ownership.

[XemaSab]

1. I think the correct term is hellbound sinner.

:P

[bridgit]

5. heh-heh

:spray:

[Bluebear]

2. No. In that case I am also non-Muslim, non-Asian, non-Belgian, non-blonde...

[Skittles]

9. non-straight

:rofl:

[Cleita]

3. So could you call someone a non-Buddhist, or a non-Pagan or a non-Jew?

It really makes no sense unless you are into an us and them mentality. The problem with Christians is that they also have an us and them mentality among themselves. So exactly where do you draw the line?

[customerserviceguy]

16. While all of that is true

it's usually used to distinguish someone who differs from a predominant or majority status. In Israel, I'd be referred to properly as a non-Jew, etc.

In a country where the most are at least nominally Christian, identifying someone as a non-Christian can be sociologically useful.

[kestrel91316]

4. the only time I refer to anybody as non-christian is when I am comparing them

to christians and need a handy label to differentiate the two.

[hlthe2b]

6. As longas you are referring to RW fundamentalist Xians...

[dark forest]

7. Well, if

they're not, why not?

Is this some new bigoted term that I haven't learned about yet? Is there a contextual component to it?

[dmr]

8. Some would say that's a double negative.

I'm a non-Martian, myself.

[vixengrl]

10. Technically, I suppose it's not sillier than calling someone an atheist--

which is how I self-identify ("a"= not, "theist"=believer, so, not a Christian), but the usage generally indicates something along the lines of "I don't care how they self-identify, I know Christian, and they aren't it." Insofar as that is the case, I think it would be inaccurate. I don't claim Jesus Christ as my lord and saviour or belong to any church, even though I hold certain moral precepts in common and think that the character of Jesus represented in the New Testament was not necessarily a bad guy--so "non-Christian" would define me as handily as "non-brown-eyed person" or "non-millionaire." However, if someone professes they are saved by Jesus and are allied with a Christian demonination, I suppose they are Christian however they may behave. Although I'm sure that only pertains to individuals--not establishments, unless those establishments are churches or some other uniquely religiously-themed fellowship.

FOX News ownership seems to act in the capacity of the, erm, "souless corporation." Alas, a theological argument altogether separate from the purview of SCOTUS' deliberations on corporate personhood. Or they might have more generally noticed that the only actual "interest" of a corporation is profit (not air, water, education, the good of the community, or any other thing a physical entity would actually rely on in real, not metaphorical, life, as expressed by the entities we generally think of as being "ensouled", or persons. If a state terminates a corporate charter for something like non-payment of taxes, is that a murder?) But some of the board may be professing Christians. And nearly all of the anchors. As a corporation--it can't be Christian. As a group of people they may be Christian, but their business in running FOX might have nothing to do with Christianity, in the way one doesn't bake "Christian bread" or launder "Christian clothes".

Could they be a mess of lying hypocrites, regardless of religious affiliation? Oh, HELLS YEAH!

[pwb]

31. Appreciate your thoughtful response.

I do not post on d.u. very often. My thoughts are seldom represented on the message boards. i do read most of the posts but seldom sign in.
Good to know there are others who stay off to the side of the herd.

[demwing]

11. It could be correct, if all those in the conversation were Christian

but in mixed comapny it would be silly.

[jtuck004]

12. You could suggest "infidel", if that would flow better. n/t

[Ozymanithrax]

13. I'm Jewish, and therefore a non-Christian.

Now, if the person were talking about Catholics, strict protestant doctrine defines Catholics as non-Christian, though Catholics disagree.

But what conceivable link does Fox have to religion?

[SidDithers]

14. Sure. Most of the world is non-Christian...nt

Sid

[babydollhead]

15. my church-of-christ father-in-law call us, "Pre-Christians"

[Walk away]

17. I might be offended yet I am so proud not to believe in that christian drivel...

I accept the label.

[PerfectSage]

18. Since most christians are pharisee christians: christian on the outside but rotten to the core

on the inside.

It would be more apt to call a non christian a non pharisee christian.

Yeah I'd call Rupert a pharisee non christian or a sociopathic money loving piece of baby boomer shit.

[pwb]

21. We were talking about the saudi prince ownership of fox news,

But as you point out, if both shoes fit Fox should be made to ware them. The saudi terrorist have a strong voice in America. No surprise Fox news is so anti-climate change if this terrorist prince has a controlling interest and apparently can and does influence their programming.

[guruoo]

19. Recovering Christian. n/t

[Zoeisright]

20. How about 'smart'?

That fits.

[MineralMan]

22. Sure, it's OK. It's not a pejorative, just a statement of fact.

If you are not a Christian, you are a non-Christian. That says nothing except that you don't profess Christianity. That some people use it as a pejorative doesn't mean they're right.

I've been a non-Christian since I gave up Christianity for Lent in 1966.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

23. It's just as correct to call everyone "atheist"

Since everyone in the world is atheist regarding at least one deity (christians don't believe in Zeus, etc).

Personally I don't have a problem with the term non-christian, but there are probably some who may take offense.

[madokie]

24. I consider myself as non-religious

A reformed Christian if you will.

[Love Bug]

25. That makes Christianity the baseline for comparison.

If that is your intention, then yes, that would be correct.

[seabeyond]

26. are you a christian? if not, then there is no insult seeing how you arent. nt

[Jennicut]

27. Why is Christianity held to be the best religion? Kind of ridiculous.

[ThomWV]

28. Sure, and there are Non-vegitarians, and there are Non-lefthanders, and there are Non-idiots too

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

29. Depends on the context of the discussion

As someone pointed out up thread, you'd have to call me a non-Muslim, non-Jewish, non-Hindu, non-(insert every other faith group), in order to be precise.

But if the discussion is about Christian as opposed to other faith groups, than non-Christian would be an appropriate term.

[joeybee12]

30. No, because it implies Christian is the standard by which all else

is measured...you don't call someone non-Muslin, non-Atheist...it was an arrogant and ignorant comment to make.