Just to clarify, the title isn’t my question. My question is:
Can one be a bad person and yet a good Christian or a good Jew, for example?
I’ve heard the phrase, “That’s not a Christian thing to do” and it invariably seems a comment on the subject’s immoral action.
Are there religions which say you must be a kind person or you are a bad follower of that religion?
Opinions please… 
NB MODS: I wasn’t sure to place here or in religion section so please feel free to move if necessary, thanks
Are you kidding me ? Of course.
That is not say that all christians are bad people but, of course !
You must have not read the bible.
Jainism?
The mexican druglords are very religious. Id say they fit into this category
If you are a Christian, no one can be a “bad person” in the first place.
If you are a Judist, one cannot be a bad person and also a good Jew.
If you are Muslim, one cannot be a bad person and also a good Muslim unless he is family.
So it all depends on your measure of “bad person”.
Well that seems rather flawed. If you believe Jesus was the son of God, your behavior doesn’t matter?
I didn’t say there is no “bad behavior”.
Behavior is “spirit”.
There is certainly bad spirit.
Just no bad people.
Is an apple rolling down the wrong hill a “bad apple” or merely an apple behaving in a bad way?
Is the person who goes down the hill to collect the apples behaving badly for not blaming the apples for the direction they fell?
“All are born in sin”, accidentally falling in a bad direction for whatever reason. That doesn’t make any of them bad people.
If you are a christian, then everyone IS a bad person.
Sinful nature and all…
So what?
You ignore the posts that you don’t like to read?
Apples that rape and kill people in the name of God are bad apples.
What post did I ignore ? 
Im struggling a little with your analogies…
An apple isn’t sentient and cannot roll down a hill without something causing the motion and the apple cannot choose or decide - and doesn’t even have the illusion of free will.
Catholics go to confess their sins, clearly implying they are capable of sinning in life. If I was to tell you that by “bad” I mean ‘sinful’, what say you then?
A follow-up question…
If somebody is a devout Christian yet seemingly deeply immoral, would it be fair for me to think of that person as a “bad Christian” [‘bad’, in this case not meaning immoral/sinful] ?
My apologies, I am acustum to people being aware of the old metaphor of a “bad apple”, meaning an “unacceptable person” or “the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree”, meaning that a son isn’t very much different than his father (whether true or not).
So you are distinguishing a person with an uncaused will from a person with caused or deterministic will.
All of the Abramic religions; Judaism, Christianity, and Mohammedanism, believe in determinism. I said that the religions do. Of course you can always find people within a designated group who misunderstand their own group fundamentals. Science is no different. Most people who believe in Science (Science followers), misunderstand it and believe in things that are not at all scientific. Thus the distinction that you make doesn’t actually apply to those religions. God being the ever-present cause of all things.
Then I would say that you are free to redefine any word you want… if you don’t care to be understood properly.
In Christianity, “bad” doesn’t refer to being sinful, but rather the sin itself.
A “sinful person” has “bad” within him (“full of sin”), often called a “demon spirit”, literally meaning, a bad behavior/habit within.
Well, you told me what your new definition for bad doesn’t mean, but not what it does mean. So I can’t give you a conclusive answer.
If you mean “bad” as “not very good at something”, then you could use that word and say that a particular Christian is bad at being a Christian, or a “bad Christian”. Again, it all depends on how much you want to be understood and in what way.
Playing with words is the most common way to confound the masses into weakness and submission.
Second to religion, maybe.
No. In fact, some religions, most notably the occult (hidden) are built almost entirely on word perversions so as to confound. That IS their religion. The other religions merely say things that might or might not be accepted. How can you blame them for merely voicing their opinion?
What is a religion but a shared opinion?
Some religions demand good works, others demand legal observance; that’s religion-specific. And something as large-scale as “Christian” says fairly little when it comes to doctrine - the Catholics and the Calvinists have an awful lot of fundamental differences in what constitutes goodness and counts towards admission to heaven.
More fundamental to your question: some religions demand that you do things that other religions call bad. A Christian might call a good Hindu a bad person, or vice versa. Whose definition of “bad person” are you taking - someone from within the religion, outside the religion… or is there a universal standard to be used?
I’m not sure about that. Most seem to believe that God endowed man with free will. If anything, they probably subscribe to a sort of compatiblism. I doubt the common theist even understands what determinism really means.
There is so much more to religion than opinion. I’ve never seen a group of people worship or pray to “word perversions”. Where do you come up with this shit?
Well, if you can find it in their scriptures, let me know. How confused anyone has become isn’t really relevant else every conversation is meaningless.
Compatiblism actually fits. It is “compatible”.
What it is compatible with is both determinism and the understanding that “free-will” doesn’t mean “uncaused will”.
Such as?
Interesting. I have never seen anything else.
Ask any Christian what it means to be “a god”, distinguished from “The God”.
If he can answer that (very atypical), then ask him, with that in mind, what “The God” is.
At least 90% of the time, they won’t be able to give a coherent answer and will instead merely give their programmed response, “God is the creator of the universe”, having no idea what that really means.
People using words that imply meanings that are mostly misunderstood, is just about the only thing that people do.
When they say, “Jesus is Lord”, they wouldn’t know Jesus if he was sitting on their lap, much less talking to him online. The same is true of Einstein. Nor do they have much idea of what a “Lord” really is. They just agree that whatever a “lord” is, some guy named Jesus must be it.
All they do is share their opinions of what they believe and thus agree or disagree.
What else is there?
By watching you.
I think these things are implied in scripture but never expressly stated. Again, I doubt the average ‘believer’ would even know what determinism really means.
Compatiblism isn’t strict determinism either.
Dogma, for one. Dogma isn’t a matter of opinion, though people do have opinions about dogma.
They can’t answer because, to them, “a God” and “the God” are synonymous. They are Monotheists after all.
It means he created the universe. Not that complicated.
People eat, shit, sleep, and sneeze.
A look in a dictionary will tell you what a lord is. And, yeah, I agree, most people probably wouldn’t recognize Jesus in a crowd. Would you?
A preacher in a pulpit is not giving you his opinion. He believes he’s preaching the word of God, and the audience believes they are hearing it.
Buddhism stresses compassion. I would say Christianity, and certainly many Christians, though there are, cough cough, exceptions. Bhakti versions of Hinduism where the stress is on loving God including the God in others. I am sure there are others.