Why are there 33,839 different Christian denominations?

[Zzyzx]

If Christianity is based upon the Bible, and if the Bible is “the infallible word of god” (or even the fallible word of god) why are 33,830 different Christian denominations recognized by the World Christian Encyclopedia?

Supposedly these denominations are all worshiping the same god from the same (or similar) ancient text. How can one god be “infallibly correct” in 33,830 different ways?

If there are at least 33,000 different “interpretations” of “god’s word”, it seems as though any interpretation can be just as valid as any other and words can be “redefined” to mean exactly the opposite of their common meaning.

[Confused]

i already presented 2 peter 1:20-21 .
this does the talking for a believer.
this tells you the Holy Spirit doesn't have private intrepretations.

i did mention that genuine believers are not the wittiest with the book all the time .
i did mention that titus 3:10 well determine if they really are a believer then.

1 corinthians 8:2 to support my statement made.
again titus 3:10 to support my statement made.
also 2 peter 1:20-21 to support my statement made.

if you looking for something other than the book anywhere correctly you messing with the wrong guy im not a self righteous moralist only a believer.

tonytony:

I am sorry, did any of your last post actually answer my questions? It still appears to me as if you are using the "True Christian" argument. But tell me, if the Holy Spirit will not allow any "believer" to misinterpret His meaning, then I have to ask again, why so many denominations? Which is the true one. Only Baptist?

Out of wishing to avoid pointing out the major issues I have with this and your previous post, I think I would prefer to stick with Bikers presentation. No offense but if you require posting reduncancies and vagueness in an attempt to explain more redundancies, vagueness, and regurgitation, then I will have to stick with the KISS principle.

[MagusYanam]

Sorry - double post

[MagusYanam]

To many self righteous moralists that feel Christianity is a philosophy religion to a certain extinct once you get the 10 commandments and the teaching on grace out the way.

As a moralist and a philosopher (who happens to be religious and tries his hardest not to be self-righteous), I have to point out that the teaching on grace is indeed a philosophy, or at least gives rise to many cosmological, teleological and ethical questions.

A believer knows the Holy Spirit doesn't make believers disagree on what truth is with any bible verse.

What the Holy Spirit or the Word of God says to one believer it says to all believers correctly.

Then why is it so many believers (myself included, in this case) disagree on what the Word of God says, whether or not it is infallible or merely inspired, what parts are of greater importance, et cetera?

Or perhaps it doesn't really matter in the end. I've always taken the Schleiermacher route, and the words of Jesus Christ when he told us the greatest Commandment of all is to love, both our neighbours and God with all our being.

I believe in the spirit of revelation but the spirit of revelation does not excuse believers from disagreeing on what truth is with any bible verse.

I've always thought of truth as something to strive towards, as a direction rather than a state of being, or something you 'get' and then you 'have it'. After all, it does make sense when Jesus affirms himself to be 'the Way, the Truth and the Life'. And a disagreement made from where we stand now becomes simply that - doesn't mean we're moving in the wrong direction.

Only label Jesus has is Christian and Baptist.

Excuse me? Jesus had many labels: 'Son of God', 'Son of Man', 'the Christ' - all meaning 'Messiah'. He was a Jewish Rabbi, a carpenter and a revolutionary. But he was also God. He was baptised by John, but that doesn't make him a 'Baptist', at least not the way we use the term now. And he had many followers, but himself was not a follower; he was a leader and a healer.

Personally, I think 'Messiah', 'Rabbi', 'carpenter', 'revolutionary', 'healer' have little meaning in and of themselves. What matters is his life's ministry, his death and resurrection, and what it all means - that message of grace that you mentioned earlier. What matters is the Gospel.

[Biker]

If Christianity is based upon the Bible, and if the Bible is “the infallible word of god” (or even the fallible word of god) why are 33,830 different Christian denominations recognized by the World Christian Encyclopedia?

Supposedly these denominations are all worshiping the same god from the same (or similar) ancient text. How can one god be “infallibly correct” in 33,830 different ways?

If there are at least 33,000 different “interpretations” of “god’s word”, it seems as though any interpretation can be just as valid as any other and words can be “redefined” to mean exactly the opposite of their common meaning.

Zzyzx,
I suppose one could interpret 33,000+ corporate groupings of Christians as a negative, if one wanted to. As a violation of inerrant "Scripture" according to ones interpretation.
OR
I happen to think it is an indication of the incredible diversity of peoples who express faith in God through Jesus Christ, and that is a good thing, not bad.
The Bible does not lay down a dictatorial edict on how to worship God corporately, but leaves much to the particular groups interpretation or expression as to how they do it, that is a good thing, not bad.
Some people interpret diversity as bad, such as the problems with racial diversity in the world, and prejudice because of racial prejudice, and how people group according to race, and don't like to mix. One can celebrate it and embrace it or one can resist it and be a racist. I happen to think that the diversity of Christianity is a good thing.
The central tenants of the faith are shared by the overwhelming majority of the groups though.
That being Jesus Christ, virgin birth, sinless life, ministry, death on a cross, burial in a tomb, raising from the dead, showing Himself to over 500 individuals, and His coming again.
Its all about Jesus Christ of Nazareth.
Its not so much how. It is more if, and who. The who is Jesus Christ Son of God, the if is, belief, faith, in His birth, life, death, and resurrection.

Biker

[katiej49]

If there are at least 33,000 different “interpretations” of “god’s word”, it seems as though any interpretation can be just as valid as any other and words can be “redefined” to mean exactly the opposite of their common meaning.[/quote]

Zzyzx,
I suppose one could interpret 33,000+ corporate groupings of Christians as a negative, if one wanted to. As a violation of inerrant "Scripture" according to ones interpretation.
OR
I happen to think it is an indication of the incredible diversity of peoples who express faith in God through Jesus Christ, and that is a good thing, not bad.
The Bible does not lay down a dictatorial edict on how to worship God corporately, but leaves much to the particular groups interpretation or expression as to how they do it, that is a good thing, not bad.
Some people interpret diversity as bad, such as the problems with racial diversity in the world, and prejudice because of racial prejudice, and how people group according to race, and don't like to mix. One can celebrate it and embrace it or one can resist it and be a racist. I happen to think that the diversity of Christianity is a good thing.
The central tenants of the faith are shared by the overwhelming majority of the groups though.
That being Jesus Christ, virgin birth, sinless life, ministry, death on a cross, burial in a tomb, raising from the dead, showing Himself to over 500 individuals, and His coming again.
Its all about Jesus Christ of Nazareth.
Its not so much how. It is more if, and who. The who is Jesus Christ Son of God, the if is, belief, faith, in His birth, life, death, and resurrection.

Biker[/quote]

well said. I love my Vineyard churches contemporary service, worshiping with raised hands, lively music, wearing my flip flops to church ...my best friend loves her little Church of Christ....very traditional, no musical instruments, quiet......its a personal preference...how dull it would be if we were all alike....God made us all different and it shows up in our worship......He wants worship to come from the heart, the outward style isnt as important..

[Goat]

If there are at least 33,000 different “interpretations” of “god’s word”, it seems as though any interpretation can be just as valid as any other and words can be “redefined” to mean exactly the opposite of their common meaning.

Zzyzx,
I suppose one could interpret 33,000+ corporate groupings of Christians as a negative, if one wanted to. As a violation of inerrant "Scripture" according to ones interpretation.
OR
I happen to think it is an indication of the incredible diversity of peoples who express faith in God through Jesus Christ, and that is a good thing, not bad.
The Bible does not lay down a dictatorial edict on how to worship God corporately, but leaves much to the particular groups interpretation or expression as to how they do it, that is a good thing, not bad.
Some people interpret diversity as bad, such as the problems with racial diversity in the world, and prejudice because of racial prejudice, and how people group according to race, and don't like to mix. One can celebrate it and embrace it or one can resist it and be a racist. I happen to think that the diversity of Christianity is a good thing.
The central tenants of the faith are shared by the overwhelming majority of the groups though.
That being Jesus Christ, virgin birth, sinless life, ministry, death on a cross, burial in a tomb, raising from the dead, showing Himself to over 500 individuals, and His coming again.
Its all about Jesus Christ of Nazareth.
Its not so much how. It is more if, and who. The who is Jesus Christ Son of God, the if is, belief, faith, in His birth, life, death, and resurrection.

Biker[/quote]

well said. I love my Vineyard churches contemporary service, worshiping with raised hands, lively music, wearing my flip flops to church ...my best friend loves her little Church of Christ....very traditional, no musical instruments, quiet......its a personal preference...how dull it would be if we were all alike....God made us all different and it shows up in our worship......He wants worship to come from the heart, the outward style isnt as important..[/quote]

So you feel that the Arian Catholics ,and the JW's are just as christian as you are?

[McCulloch]

I love my Vineyard churches contemporary service, worshiping with raised hands, lively music, wearing my flip flops to church ...my best friend loves her little Church of Christ....very traditional, no musical instruments, quiet......its a personal preference...how dull it would be if we were all alike....God made us all different and it shows up in our worship......He wants worship to come from the heart, the outward style isnt as important..

The differences between the many different denominations of Christianity are not simply a matter of style.

[tonytony]

Believers esteem all the bible verses alike for the good while their preparing for heaven. Jesus did mention the 2 greatest commandments which I think everybody know here. Love thy neighbor as thy self. Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, mind and soul. If we apply the moral teaching in these two it would help a believer cover any moral commandment in this book. That's the only reason why they are particularly esteemed over the rest.

Matthew 5:19-20 is the bible verse to support my statement made.

Yes Jesus or God has many titles and roles. Son of God. King of Kings. Lord of Lords. I am that I am, etc. Titles and roles in the bible don't give a believer a legal reason to divide bible truth somewhere and conflict other bible truth in another place. One teaching on bible truth doesn't conflict other bible teaching on truth.

1 Corinthians 14:33 will support my statement made.
2 Peter 1:20-21 will support my statement made as well.


As far as labels go they normally confuse people and lead them astray from bible truth. The 33,000 or so labels you mention are self righteous moralists with their philosophy Christianity made up. Labels normally are much different than titles and roles I mentioned. We got the word Christian from the book of Acts when the people we're in Antioch and called officially Christians for the first time. We got the word Baptist from the phrase John the Baptist who baptized people like Jesus in the wilderness. It's no different than saying Steve the Dentist. It's just a title or occupation describing what somebody is doing. Followers of Pharisee are called Pharisees with their righteousness or doctrine. It's one example of self righteous philsophy Christianity. Followers of the Jews are called people with the Jewish religion or Jewish faith. Just another example of self righteous philosophy Christianity. Christians and labeled Baptist get their teaching labels from Jesus only. If your a follower of Jesus you are legally labeled with his last name Christ and have the label and title Christian. If your baptizing people and being baptized to fulfill all righteousness like Jesus said then you legally get the label and title Baptist. The 33,000 or so labels outside of the 2 I mention are inspired by man only. No bible support for labels like Lutheran, Methodist, Seven Day Adventist, Amosh, Catholic, Protestant, Quaker, Apostolic, Mormon, Pentecostal, Episcopalian, etc. Made up words invented by man to promote man only. All these are a current form of self righteous philosophy Christianity. Pharisees, etc. are the old forms of self righteous philosophy Christianity. Man made religious movements. Man made religion. Didn't Paul freak out when people had the mentality of saying I'm of Apollos your of Paul, etc. Paul just wanted to promote the teaching and way of Jesus only. He wasn't after a religion label from his name. Coming from 1 Corinthians 1.

Got Matthew 5:19-20 to support my statements made.

To many self righteous moralists that feel Christianity is a philosophy religion to a certain extinct once you get the 10 commandments and the teaching on grace out the way.

As a moralist and a philosopher (who happens to be religious and tries his hardest not to be self-righteous), I have to point out that the teaching on grace is indeed a philosophy, or at least gives rise to many cosmological, teleological and ethical questions.

A believer knows the Holy Spirit doesn't make believers disagree on what truth is with any bible verse.

What the Holy Spirit or the Word of God says to one believer it says to all believers correctly.

Then why is it so many believers (myself included, in this case) disagree on what the Word of God says, whether or not it is infallible or merely inspired, what parts are of greater importance, et cetera?

Or perhaps it doesn't really matter in the end. I've always taken the Schleiermacher route, and the words of Jesus Christ when he told us the greatest Commandment of all is to love, both our neighbours and God with all our being.

I believe in the spirit of revelation but the spirit of revelation does not excuse believers from disagreeing on what truth is with any bible verse.

I've always thought of truth as something to strive towards, as a direction rather than a state of being, or something you 'get' and then you 'have it'. After all, it does make sense when Jesus affirms himself to be 'the Way, the Truth and the Life'. And a disagreement made from where we stand now becomes simply that - doesn't mean we're moving in the wrong direction.

Only label Jesus has is Christian and Baptist.

Excuse me? Jesus had many labels: 'Son of God', 'Son of Man', 'the Christ' - all meaning 'Messiah'. He was a Jewish Rabbi, a carpenter and a revolutionary. But he was also God. He was baptised by John, but that doesn't make him a 'Baptist', at least not the way we use the term now. And he had many followers, but himself was not a follower; he was a leader and a healer.

Personally, I think 'Messiah', 'Rabbi', 'carpenter', 'revolutionary', 'healer' have little meaning in and of themselves. What matters is his life's ministry, his death and resurrection, and what it all means - that message of grace that you mentioned earlier. What matters is the Gospel.

[MagusYanam]

Believers esteem all the bible verses alike for the good while their preparing for heaven.

Simply preparing for heaven and esteeming the Bible isn't enough - Jesus taught us instead to pray that God's will be done on earth. Remember the parable of the talents - how each of the master's good servants took his talents and went out into the world to multiply them, while the bad servant took his and essentially sat on it. Christianity is not just about sitting on your talents - it's about spreading the Gospel and doing good in the world.

Yes Jesus or God has many titles and roles. Son of God. King of Kings. Lord of Lords. I am that I am, etc. Titles and roles in the bible don't give a believer a legal reason to divide bible truth somewhere and conflict other bible truth in another place. One teaching on bible truth doesn't conflict other bible teaching on truth.

I never said they did. I was simply correcting the statement you made earlier about Jesus not having any titles or roles or labels other than 'Christian' and 'Baptist' - neither of which are mentioned as applying to Him in the Bible, interestingly enough, but rather a.) to his followers in the days after the fall of the Temple and b.) to John 'the Baptist', as you mention later.

The 33,000 or so labels outside of the 2 I mention are inspired by man only. No bible support for labels like Lutheran, Methodist, Seven Day Adventist, Amosh, Catholic, Protestant, Quaker, Apostolic, Mormon, Pentecostal, Episcopalian, etc. Made up words invented by man to promote man only.

More like 'made-up words invented by man to denigrate others who practise differently'. These labels were usually imposed by someone from the outside, who disagreed with their polity. Every denomination calls itself 'Christian'. The only two labels Quakers had for each other were 'Christian' and 'friend'. 'Quaker' was originally intended as an insult from a high Churchman regarding what he saw as their eccentric practise. The Albigensians called each other only 'Christian', but they were given the names 'Albigensian', 'Cathar' and worse by people from the outside. And in other cases - 'Lutheran' was a label given them by the Catholics when they described themselves as Christians trying to follow the Gospel. Likewise, the Amish, among each other, use the words 'Christian' and 'brother' - both of which you'll find support for in the Bible. It was only other Protestants who named them after their leader, Jakob Amman.

As to my opinion of how those 33,000 denominations came into being, I don't think it's a matter of differing beliefs but of differing polities - having more to do with how the church is organised and how it deals with issues of its day than with recognition of Scripture as authoritative and holy. Just look at the Church of England - it split with Rome over the issue of church land use and the King's political rights. And various groups split off from the Church of England (including the Baptists in all their various forms) because of differences in practise - in essence, should worship be plain or fancy? Should infants be baptised to welcome them into the community or should they wait until they are old enough to understand what Christianity is all about? Philosophy had nothing to do with it and morality had nothing to do with it. Doctrine only tangentially had something to do with it. But polity - polity's the big one.

The ones I personally think get closest to the actual message of Jesus Christ are the more liberal forms of what is now called Anabaptism. They hold community dear, and the way in which Jesus and his disciples lived. They are pacifist, and believe that love can overcome one's enemies where hatred and violence cannot. And they are socially active and have one of the best missionary networks in the world (though it is small and focussed more on ministry and basic aid than on proselytisation).

Pharisees, etc. are the old forms of self righteous philosophy Christianity.

Um, Pharisees weren't Christian. Christianity didn't exist at the time of the Pharisees. And they weren't philosophers, either - they were legalists, though self-righteous they certainly were.

[Biker]

I love my Vineyard churches contemporary service, worshiping with raised hands, lively music, wearing my flip flops to church ...my best friend loves her little Church of Christ....very traditional, no musical instruments, quiet......its a personal preference...how dull it would be if we were all alike....God made us all different and it shows up in our worship......He wants worship to come from the heart, the outward style isnt as important..

The differences between the many different denominations of Christianity are not simply a matter of style.

Some people look at a field of grass and see weeds, but some look and see a hundred different kind of wild flowers.

Biker