The Infinite Why :
Usually, there’s a context behind the statement. In my case, I use that distinction when I’m speaking to people who have left Christianity because of the confusion they’ve encountered within it: different denominations with different interpretations of the same Bible, false pastors, false brethren, false practices, false teachings, and conflicting interpretations of Scripture.
For that particular audience, what they commonly understand as “religion” is essentially a system of practices, rules, rituals, and institutions that can become disconnected from genuinely knowing God. That isn’t necessarily my preferred definition of the word “religion.” I’m using the distinction at the level of understanding they already have.
So when I tell them to consider Christianity as a relationship with God rather than merely “religion,” I’m trying to shift their perspective away from the version of Christianity they encountered that was reduced to rules, rituals, and religious performance.
I’m not disputing your definition of “religion.” It may very well be correct in its broader or technical sense. My question is whether that is actually how the average person in my audience understands and uses the word.
When communicating, I think there’s value in starting with the language people already understand and then using that understanding to lead them toward a more accurate concept.
So in this case, I’m not necessarily redefining Christianity. I’m meeting people at their existing understanding of the word and using that starting point to help them reconsider what Christianity actually is.
2026-09-21 04:39:53