- Yes i do
- No i dont. Im fine with them
It was unified when it was Jewish. Mainly. Both.
Only from an outsider’s perspective. I suspect more than a few Pharisees and Saducees are spinning in their graves at your thought of lumping them all together.
I was under the impression that there were many sects of Judaism during and before Jesus’ time. Is that not the case?
Me too. So the earliest and Jewish church reflected that I’m sure, but they all had something in common now. Jesus. [They were all communists after all.]
For many cases, I believe that the diversity is intended as ideally we can reflect a somewhat more specialized take on God’s character. There is ofc a lot of bullshit and brokenness, but this diversity allows us to connect with God where we are at and meet others too.
I mean if everyone wants to begin going to the congregations I go to and realize we are right I think that’s fantastic lol.
In memetic as in biological evolution, there is no intent.
Maybe we should ask from the head of the global church, Jesus. What would He say?
Sure. The attitude that splits the believers. Common to most of us, so I’m not against the writer or the congregations. I guess we are on the same side, even if there would be minor disagreements about the interpretation of the biblical texts.
Dont know. But i would like the church to be one again
Jesus prayed for his followers, asking that they would be one.
The believers were known among others that they showed love, especially towards other christians.
So, I have to agree with our Head and pray that believers would unite and show love and respect toward others.
At the same time, I assume that selfishness, cultural differences and disagreements about the interpretation of biblical texts keep believers divided, unless something radical happens.
Hard persecution has been one driver towards unity. When believers are persecuted, those who stand feel more united, even if they would belong to different churches. I hope that we don’t need persecutions to change our attitudes.
Welcome to Sola Scripture and an army of private interpretations where congregations split over the color of the carpet. The diversity strongly pushes me towards the RCC. The diversity also indicates an incorrect model of inspiration and hermeneutic for interpreting scripture.
It would be nice if the church would unify but I am a pessimist here. This will never happen though there have been strides as of late to bring Christians together.
It was a joke but pointing out the reality of what it would mean. What creates denominations is the belief that that this or that denomination is more right than the other. The doctrinal views for example to cause a movement like the Church of Christ and Baptists would mean major doctrinal changes to one or the other. Same for catholics and Protestants. Lots of major doctrinal changes for one of them for them to become one with the other.
So by all means I do wish that all the denominations went away snd that there was just one unified group of congregations. But if I follow that thought down to the end what that means is that all denominations would have to interpret the Bible now closely to how I do it and collectively closer to how the congregations I attend do. Instead what I realize is that since that won’t ever happen I have core doctrinal views related to salvation and if other denominations believe that then in my eyes they are also part of the body. One thing I do realize and experience is that I am sometimes wrong and that is usually pointed out in discussions with someone who belongs to another denomination. Though it may not change core views it may change secondary views.
Unify around what is the question. We could probably get most to agree that unity around the color of the carpet probably isn’t important, and that in fact; insistence on unity to that kind of degree is dangerous and is the very thing that leads to disunity.
[the ‘color of the carpet’ being metaphorical for all our doctrinal minutia - none of which is minutia in our own eyes - and all of which must be insisted upon right down to the color of the carpet.]
I don’t agree with the way the question is phrased. It implies that the various denominations are divided against each other. They aren’t. Many are simply national churches in Europe that were brought to the USA for the people of those ethnicities (like the Anglicans, the Dutch Reformed, etc.) Others are organizations of churches to help each other. Just because churches are not organized in one formal organization doesn’t mean that they are opposed to each other.
I think it could be argued that Christianity today is much more of a monoculture than it was at the very start of the Christian church. Some of the earliest schisms in the church were caused by very different theological beliefs that would dwarf the schism between Catholics and Protestants. From what I can see, the modern church is more unified than it was in the first few centuries AD.
4000 different denominations? I wouldnt say unified
I didn’t say unified. I said more unified than it was in the frst few centuries of the church.
This is absolutely correct. Splitting a congregation because half believe in foot washing during the Eucharist and half don’t pales in comparison to the diversity in the early church. Protestants generally have some strong core believe running through their denominations.
Though personally I reject any association of my “Christianity” with “fundamentalist Christianity.” We may agree on a few creeds facts but that isn’t a valid litmus test for me and interpretation of things is so radically different from theirs it very much rivals some major differences in the early Church. You can theoretically and artificially find some unity in a host of diverse beliefs if you make your net’s mesh size big enough. I mean all Christ followers thought Jesus was a cool being sent by God who spoke with authority in some form or other. Unless you start getting real hypothetical and reconstructing original layers of Q or Thomas and offer a very skeptical view of Christian origins.
I don’t think fundamentalists are unsaved or anything like that. I don’t judge anyone’s salvation ever. That’s beyond my puny abilities. But I can’t associate myself with something that seriously attempts to justify rape, mass murder, genocide, ethnic cleansing, misogyny and the idea that 90% (or whatever high number it is) of people will be tortured for an eternity in heaven. I have to state unequivocally that I do not believe in that God and I never could again. As far as I am concerned, many fundamentalist doctrines can be further from the truth than Muslim doctrine. Spiritually I think these people seek Jesus. I know many strong conservatives who are not their ideology. They are wonderful followers of Jesus. But I can’t intellectually associate myself with certain things.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.