Jesus also said there would be a lot of people who called themselves Christian but few who actually lived the life. As far as political polls go, they are happy to consider anyone a Christian irrespective of whether they practice any of the traditions or aspire toward the ethics, so we probably shouldn't expect generalizations about "Christians" to be very useful or intuitive. Anyway, I try not to criticize the bullied for how they manifest their scars--it doesn't help them and anyone whose opinion matters is only going to think less of me for it.

I’m not aware of any tests that distinguish “true” Christians from those merely claiming to be Christians.

I’m just saying that you oughtn’t be surprised that a lot of “Christians” don’t exhibit the ethics when you define “Christian” in such a way that it includes people who don’t try to adhere to the ethics.

> when you define “Christian” in such a way that it includes people who don’t try to adhere to the ethics.

There is no other way to define “Christian”.

Of course there is. The obvious counter example is "people who try to adhere to the ethics". But that's hardly important, the important thing is that you now understand why "Christians" don't behave according to Christian ethics--notably because you're defining "Christians" in such a way that it includes a lot of people who don't practice Christian ethics. Mystery solved.