“What About all Those Denominations?” A reply.


Many denominations could suggest that Christianity is rooted in many different cultures and that the personalities and idiosyncrasies of each of these cultures causes them to worship in different manners and forms. A church in Fiji would probably worship and emphasis certain practices differently to say a church in England, or in underground China.

Denominations may also suggest that many Christians have thought extremely hard about their faith and have come to different conclusions about certain doctrinal issues. The Christian could argue that disagreement in interpretation does not necessarily show that a proposition is false; rather it shows that they simply disagree on that proposition.

Thirdly, according to biblical theology humans are fallible creatures and one could expect mistakes in interpretation to crop up. However, it wouldn’t follow that because Christians misinterpret doctrine that it means it is false.

Fourthly, the Christian could note that there are a number of beliefs that all Christians must affirm in order to be a Christian irrespective of disagreement. For instance, belief in God’s existence, the deity of Christ, sin, the fall, and salvation, among other essentials would need to be embraced by the consistent Christian. One cannot be a Christian if they deny the existence of God, or the hypostatic union of Jesus. So whether one is a Baptist, Catholic, Methodist, or Protestant these things are affirmed unanimously, only on other secondary beliefs do they disagree with each other.


7 responses to ““What About all Those Denominations?” A reply.

  1. There is a problem with your argument: it’s just an argument. You seem to have defended the Christian faith without evidence belief. The trouble is that if it is the one true faith Christians should be able to convince the many millions of people that want to believe in the one true god that the Christian god is that god. When your arguments are able to convince believers of gods who are not yours then I will sit up and take notice. Till then you’re just peddling one more god in a long line of pedallers of gods and other ideas that have no credible evidence or reasoned argument.

    • I think you may have missed the point here. The author is merely pointing out the reasons why using an argument that says Christianity isn’t true due to all of the denominations isn’t valid. Think about it – every denomination has the same Bible – they just choose to interpret it differently. My experience has been that often the reason why someone belongs to a particular denomination is because they don’t like what the Bible says about something, so they join a denomination full of other people who don’t like that same thing. This doesn’t prove Christianity isn’t true – it only proves that people often don’t want to accept what’s in front of them.

      If you’re truly searching for truth, I’d suggest you read the last statement of your reply. You imply that there is no credible evidence for Christianity in spite of the fact that the evidence for Christianity is rather conclusive. So let me ask — what would you consider to be credible evidence? I don’t know you, and I don’t want to come off as insulting (and I hope you don’t take this that way), but given the sheer volume of evidence that exists for Christianity when approached from any possible angle, when you still say there’s no credible evidence I have to ask that question — what would you consider to be credible evidence? And would you look at said evidence objectively if it were presented to you? And if it contradicted your preconceived notions would you continue to follow it to wherever it leads, or would you dismiss it away? I ask this because I’ve talked with many people who, at the end of the day, couldn’t refute the evidences they were presented with, yet still would not believe – not because it wasn’t true, but because they didn’t WANT it to be true.

      I hope you’ll ask yourself the question of whether or not evidence would really change your mind – and do so honestly. If so, there’s so many solid books out there on apologetics that you would have to make a conscious effort to avoid them to not find rock-solid evidences. If it wouldn’t, then, frankly, the problem here is not one of evidence.

  2. This article conveniently omits a very important aspect of Christianity – the Holy Spirit’s role in biblical interpretation.

    It also fails to mention that Catholics reject the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura, and ironically one reason for that is due to the many different Protestant denominations.

    I also noticed that the article tries to gloss over significant differences as being only secondary beliefs. For example Catholics believe in purgatory which suggests that the sacrifice of Jesus isn’t fully sufficient to enter heaven. This is obviously a primary difference regarding salvation. Another example is that Catholics believe in praying for the salvation of the dead.

    • The Grace won for us by Jesus’ sacrifice is sufficient. The difference is that most Protestants don’t really believe that sanctification is necessary (a good idea, yes, but not necessary). Every Christian in Purgatory is saved and WILL enter heaven. Purgatory is simply the process necessary to complete any sanctification left incomplete in this life. Remember, nothing impure will enter heaven (Rev 21:27) and most if not all people die with attachment to sin and impurity. Purgatory is the mudroom at the entrance of heaven. The process may happen in a painful instance – “though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire” (1 Cor. 15), or it might take a perceptual amount of time, I don’t know; but it must happen.

      • Thanks for illustrating my point.

        AFAIK protestants believe that Jesus has paid the price in full, but Catholics believe that further sanctification is required in purgatory. Why hasn’t God clarified this issue yet?

  3. Reblogged this on quirkywritingcorner and commented:
    When I was little there were three main groups: Catholic, Jewish, and Protestant. Christian was under Protestant, but it wasn’t a term used much. You were either Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian and so on. I prefer to tell people that I’m a Born-again Christian which differentiates me from those that believe you can buy or work your way into heaven. Great article. Thank you.

  4. Pingback: Part #1 – A Refutation of ‘Godless Cranium.’ | Historical Jesus studies.·

Let me know your thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s