There is something wrong with every Christian denomination.

[MineralMan]

Last edited Mon Aug 21, 2017, 09:10 AM - Edit history (1)

Just ask any other denomination what is wrong with any other denomination.

The history of Christianity, from the very beginning, has been one of division and fragmentation. It continues to this day, with divisions within denominations and even within those divisions. Sectarianism means that there is no unified dogma nor unified voice that is accepted by all who profess that religion.

Simply identifying as Christian says almost nothing of what you believe, nor how you live your life. For non-Christians, this is a huge stumbling block.

[Angry Dragon]

1. for a lot of christians they are hard pressed to understtand what they believe

[MineralMan]

3. That is true, no doubt.

There is also little uniformity of teachings beyond the very basics. However, many can tell you what is wrong with what others believe. For some it is that another denomination baptised infants or fails to use total immersion.

There are, you see, an infinite number of ways one denomination or sect can be wrong, from the perspective of another. It is the differences that become all important, often obscuring what is in common. That is the reason for all of the denominations abstracts.

[SHRED]

2. It's a patriarchal based religion

Therefore...pissing contests.

[MineralMan]

4. That is certainly part of it.

[SHRED]

5. "My father knows best"

[Mariana]

6. I think religion is as individual as fingerprints.

I'm convinced that no two Christians believe exactly the same things or practice Christianity exactly the same way. Every one picks and chooses which religious instructions to obey and which to ignore. Every one picks and chooses which Bible stories they believe tell of actual event and which are fiction. You can believe or disbelieve almost anything and still be some flavor of Christian. The same must be true of other religions, as well.

[Angry Dragon]

8. I said that very same thing to one just the other day

[Eko]

7. I agree with what you are saying

and I hate to be the grammar police here but shouldn't it be "There is something wrong with every Christian denomination". Denomination being singular?
Thanks MineralMan!

[edhopper]

9. You are right

it would be something wrong with ALL Christian denominations.

Or EVERY denomination.

And yeah, Christians can't agree on what a Christian is. And they all use the same bible to prove they are right.

[MineralMan]

10. Absolutely correct, and thanks.

I posted on my little tablet, and missed that. I appreciate the correction.

[Pendrench]

11. Hi MineralMan - Thank you for posting your comments.

As a Christian (Catholic) I understand and appreciate what you are saying.

In my opinion, that division and fragmentation COULD be positive if it were used to promote diversity of belief and a realization that none of us who profess to be Christians have a monopoly on truth (or even what the definition of "truth" should be).

Unfortunately, many Christians (myself included) tend to be more worried about defending our faith rather than expanding our faith to include beliefs that are not part of the official canon. I would like to believe that I am open to other beliefs (as well as those who do not believe the same as I do) - but I'm sure that I fall short more times than I would like to admit.

In any event, thank you again for beginning this discussion.

Tim

[MineralMan]

12. Thanks. There is a central core to Christianity, of course.

From that core, different denominations and sects extract what is useful to them and fits into their overall interpretation. And then they argue about those differences.

My wife's family is Lutheran, although my wife is a non-believer. The Lutheran Church is a prime example of splitting, of course, with Martin Luther abandoning Catholicism over doctrinal issues. In fact, it's sort of the archetype of the process. Still, even that church has split into multiple sects, each of which will be happy to point out the errors in the other branches of Lutheranism. It's amusing, and makes for interesting conversation, but it's not reassuring.

The process extends on and on, with even small sub-denominations splitting into even smaller ones over niceties of doctrine and dogma. The more you look at the process, the more you see that there is a natural trend at work.

You're a Roman Catholic, which represents the largest single denomination of Christianity. But even it is a spin-off of earlier Christian churches, with the Coptic Church and the various Orthodox denominations having developed in parallel to it. It's a fascinating thing to study, really.

Even the Canon of the Scriptures varies from denomination to denomination. Fascinating.

[Pendrench]

13. I agree...I'm sure that you've probably seen this from Monty Python's Life of Brian:

Tim

[MineralMan]

14. Oh, yes. I've posted that here many times, as well.

Thanks!

[Pendrench]

15. You're very welcome.

Best to you!

Tim

[guillaumeb]

16. Islam is also divided into sects, as is Buddhism.

And humanity is divided by nationality and nations are divided by political parties and factions.

What are we to conclude from this?

[trotsky]

17. That there are no gods, and religion is simply an idea like any other? n/t

[guillaumeb]

18. One interpretation. But there are others that suggest themselves.

Are you open to them, or locked into a binary view of the world?

[trotsky]

19. Can you discuss the issue, or are you going to fling insults?

Show me. You can start by apologizing for the insult you just used.

[guillaumeb]

20. I asked a question.

I did not suggest anything about you directly. Interesting how these exchanges develop.

[trotsky]

21. Thanks for confirming what a good Christian you are. n/t

[guillaumeb]

22. I ask again,

Humanity is divided by nationality and nations are divided by political parties and factions.

What are we to conclude from this?

[trotsky]

23. First, convince me you're sincere.

Apologize for the insult.

[guillaumeb]

24. A false accusation.

You are presuming that insult was intended.

I stated that no insult was intended.

[trotsky]

25. Then you shall receive the response you deserve.

None.

[hrmjustin]

27. Lol this pattern is so predictable at times.

[guillaumeb]

28. One must always remain "on script".

And in any movie, there must be an identifiable villain.

[hrmjustin]

29. Some people enjoy playing the victim in this room.

Maybe he can apply for an academy award.

[guillaumeb]

30. I am still waiting for an explanation of the response. eom

[hrmjustin]

26. Do you have the ability to point out where he insulted you or

are you going to go on with this pretend outrage?

[AtheistCrusader]

45. Are you familair with the term 'false bifurcation'?

"Are you open to them, or locked into a binary view of the world?"

That's one.

[Lordquinton]

46. Isn't that a binary view of a situation?

[AtheistCrusader]

47. Let me review it and get back to you.

[Lordquinton]

48. Ok, I'll just wait here

Take your time, no need to rush on my account.

[AtheistCrusader]

43. I wait for credible evidence of any of them.

Until there is, sorry, not interested.

[guillaumeb]

49. It apparently works for you.

[MineralMan]

36. That religion is a human construct entirely,

and is created by cultures and societies to reflect their values. Where necessary, deities are created to provide a "prime mover" for the religion. Buddhism skips that step, pretty much.

[guillaumeb]

37. The forms of religion are indeed constructed by humans.

But division by whatever method is also an enduring feature of humanity.

[MineralMan]

38. OK. I don't disagree.

I believe that all religion is a human construct. That includes the deities as well. I am far from alone in that. You might disagree.

[guillaumeb]

39. We might, but we can do so in an agreable fashion.

A well titled post.

[MineralMan]

40. I try not to be disagreeable.

I sometimes fail in that, I'm sure.

[trotsky]

42. That's akin to saying that the books of Harry Potter are fiction,

but Hogwarts is a real school for real wizards and witches.

[guillaumeb]

50. Have books of fiction ever been written about real characters?

If so, apply that.

[trotsky]

58. Oh, ok, sure. So where's your original historical documentation proving your god character is real?

You can't use your religious text, because you just admitted it was a work of fiction.

Please proceed.

[AtheistCrusader]

44. Not as enduring as you think...

[guillaumeb]

51. True, believers comprise no more than 85% or so of the population.

The erosion of believers might be faster than the erosion of sandstone.

[trotsky]

59. Argumentum ad populum fallacy.

Just because a large group of people believes something, doesn't make it true.

Tell me, if 85% of the population were nonbelievers, would you accept that as proof that your god doesn't exist? Why or why not?

[AtheistCrusader]

60. That it's all bullshit.

[guillaumeb]

61. Succinct,

but your opinion is only that.

[AtheistCrusader]

62. It is trivial for me to observe many (not all) of the religions in mass play today are

mutually exclusive and cannot simultaneously all be true.

So sure, my opinion is that it's bullshit. But at the least it's invalid, or incorrect, if not actually bullshit.

[guillaumeb]

63. If every separate religion is a reflection of an aspect of the Creator,

that solves the problem. In my view.

[AtheistCrusader]

64. Most (not all) make truth claims about the nature or powers or desires of their favored form of

claimed god.

To the exclusion of other human claims of religion.

It doesn't matter what/how/why the god is, if it exists. The claims about it, cannot all be true at the same time.

[Mme. Defarge]

32. An interesting diagram.

[Voltaire2]

34. That is interesting but of course there was no "undivided church".

The factionalism was manifest before the end of the first century, that is to say it was present at or near the foundation of christianity. There are denominations today, coptics for example, that trace their history back to the beginnings of christianity and that split from the byzantine "orthodox" church much earlier than 1064 - the copts did it in 451.

In the first four centuries christians within the roman empire were fighting factional battles over absurd doctrinal nuances and frequently slaughtering each other.

There has never been an undivided church.

[MineralMan]

35. Thanks for that graphical representation!

[Act_of_Reparation]

41. An utterly nonsensical diagram.

No mention of the Marcionites (ca. 1st century CE) or the Gnostics (ca. 1st century CE) or the Copts (ca. 1st century CE) or even myriad theological conflicts between James and Paul, described in painful detail in Acts and the Epistles. No serious scholar of Christian history would claim an "undivided church" ever existed, much less in the earliest days of the religion. Rather, they would tell you orthodoxy was gradually built over time, finally solidifying in the 3rd - 4th centuries.

In fact, I'll go out on a limb here and wager a guess that this chart is the product of an Orthodox apologist looking to "prove" their church is One and True.

[sprinkleeninow]

33. no text, just

[YOHABLO]

52. Every sect or faction of Christianity, has to micro manage scripture and belief.

Many base their religion's belief system on fear. The fear of God, the fear of the Devil, the fear of being cast into hell for 'eternity', what ever that means.

[The Blue Flower]

53. The result of trying to create power structures from a mystical/spiritual teaching

The original message was about the radical transformation of individuals and their power structures. It was co-opted by those who desired to use it to dominate others. And those looking for an authoritarian system to tell them how to live their lives. It's fundamentally a mismatch between original intent and the human need to dominate others.

[Iggo]

54. I agree that there's something wrong with every christian denomination.

[Not Ruth]

55. Must be why people keep leaving

[wryter2000]

56. We Episcopalians are fairly humble

It's hard to take yourself too seriously when your church was founded so the king could get a divorce.

[MineralMan]

57. LOL!