Your stance re ‘I must be a “Christian” to define who is a Christian’ is very irrational and very unprecedented in a philosophical forum.
Within the intellectual, academic, legal, social, philosophy, all sort of people are qualify in defining ‘who is X’ as long as they observed the respective rules.
Do I need to be a scientist, politician, actor, carpenter, housewife, CEO, etc. to define who are these respective people?
I mentioned the first evidence of who is a Christian is that of baptism which are carried out on 90% of Christians.
I stated this is merely a form and ritual which do not carry a very strong weightage [say 10%] in deciding who is a Christian.
The more serious consideration of Who is a Christian is a person who genuinely believes in Jesus Christ as son and intermediary of God as imperative.
The above implies [based on supporting verses] the following essence of who is a Christian.
-
The person has surrendered to God via Jesus Christ.
-
The person has entered into a covenant [contract] with God [Jesus as intermediary] to obey and comply with the words of God as in the gospels in the NT supported by the Epistles, Acts and the OT.
There are many perspectives in defining who is a Christian and I believe my above approach which is philosophical-epistemological is the most effective.
There is no one absolute definition of who is a Christian. There are many perspectives in defining who is a Christian, e.g.
-
Personal definition - which you are insisting - the most subjective
-
Theological
-
By the respective Christian organizations, Church, etc.
-
Social- going to church, congregation meetings,
-
Legal - acceptable by a court
-
Scientific - this is possible in the future, based on brain activities when a person declares he is a Christian, read the Gospels, the Bible, exposed to images of Jesus Christs, etc.
-
Economics & Financial - defined re Charity exemptions, etc.
-
Empirical - by observing what the person is doing and speaking in relation to Christianity
-
Politics - as propounded by politicians for votes
-
Cultural
-
Philosophical - epistemological
I believe the most meaningful and effective meaning of “Who is a Christian” is 11 i.e. philosophical - epistemological.
The worst is no. 1 i.e. yours which the subjective opinion of the individual claiming to be a Christian.
The rest of the definition also has their weaknesses but should work within the rules of the framework. In the case of qualifying for charity exemption, and other government benefits, there would be some legal definition of ‘who is a Christian, thus Christians.’
The funny thing is that baptised people who ahve surrendered to God have done all sorts of atrocities. And who knows what they actually feel inside or even if they are good at introspection. Perhaps they honestly think they surrended to God, but did not, because they don’t know themselves well. People are certainly good at fooling themselves. His criteria seem meaningless to me and fruit of the poisoned tree. That tree being his unbelief.
The above is a strawman.
As I had stated “baptism” is merely a form and ritual which do not carry a high % of weight in defining who is a Christian.
The serious Christian is aware God is all powerful, omnipresent and will not dare to fake a surrender to God otherwise he knows he will not get to heaven with eternal life as promised by God [within the covenant/contract] for believing in God and obeying his words and commands.
This is the essential genuine surrender within a covenant with God that I am referring to re Who is a Christian, i.e. in God’s eyes and not in the public’s eye.
The critical point re Who is a Christian/Muslim/Judaist/Hindu in the impact on the real world is this;
Once the believer has entered into a covenant [contract] with God for a promise of heaven and eternal life in exchange to surrender and obey God’s words and command, then, [at the extreme]
if God’s words state, love all, then the believers must love all;
if God’s words state, kill all nons, then the believers must kill all nons.
The only provision within the covenant is one must do the maximum possible up to the best of one’s ability [depending on whatever handicap] and it is up to God to judge on Judgment Day.
When God commands to kill all nons as contracted, the most zealous of believers will strive hard to to kill all nons, if not as many as possible, to feel secure they are assured of a passage to paradise with eternal life. It is a psychological game that need to be exposed. This consequence of evil is so evident in real life as committed by SOME zealous believers.
All the above, especially the most evil are grounded on an illusion, i.e. the illusory God. This is why an effective definition of Who is a Christian, thus Muslim, Hindu, etc. is very critical to enable humanity to resolve whatever evils that had arisen and will arise in the future.