Religion- Read first post please

[stormiecub]

There is really only one Christianity and various ways of practicing it.

How do you know this is so? What makes this statement true? Why aren't other statements about what christianity consists of true instead?

Because of the definition of Christianity. As a spirituality, a faith, a religion the term refers to a religious belief in the deity of Jesus Christ. Each of the individual denominations practices Christianity differently (and may shout for the damnation of those who disagree with their practices) but ultimately Christianity itself has a single definition.

It's a complicated thing, this division of churches and doctrines, because it divides rather than bringing people together under one Church (which is what I believe Jesus intended for His people).

Anyway, what I mean to say is that Christianity is one religion. The "religions" that call themselves Christian are sects under the blanket definition or name of "Christian" and are tied together by a common belief in the deity of Jesus Christ.

I can dig out some of my theology textbooks if I absolutely have to but I'd rather not. I'm on a one-semester break from school lol

[TxCat]

...but that's mot necessarily true either. I just mentioned in a previous post two forms of Christianity which do NOT look on Jesus as savior or deity.

I'd define Christianity as any religious practice which seeks to know God as defined in their Bible.

The various Bibles, by the way, are regional myths which Alexander the Great ordered codified into a single book as the "official" Bible. Scholars compared regional stories about the Christ and other Biblical incidents and then took those which were kost common/most popular.

It may interest you to know, Cass, that the veracity of many of those myths habe been proven or shown plausible with modern archaeology, including some of the cities mentioned. Like all other myths, the stories do have a basis in fact.

[Cassowary]

Oh, I know, Dead Sea Scrolls and whatnot, bits of history. It's only a basis though, they aren't fact themselves.

So, what then of christians who don't generally acknowledge the bible? Those who are more "spiritual"?

[stormiecub]

...but that's mot necessarily true either. I just mentioned in a previous post two forms of Christianity which do NOT look on Jesus as savior or deity.

It's hard to say what I'm about to say without appearing to be disrespectful. I grew up Catholic and for that reason know what it's like to be dismissed as being on the outskirts of Christianity (even though I never believed in Catholicism). I've not read the entire thread (since that would probably take me days) so please bear with me a little bit here.

The majority of Christian sects don't accept "spiritual Christianity" and dismiss Catholicism and Mormonism (assuming those were the two that you were talking about) out of hand as not being Christian in the first place. Having been raised Catholic, I was always taught salvation through Christ, so I can't necessarily agree with that. I know little about Mormonism other than the biased lessons that I've personally been taught, so I won't go there.

Can you clarify which Christian religions don't fit the template so that I can further clarify my own point?

Recently I got into a terrible argument with a good friend about politics. It got bad for a moment because the people arguing against my points told me that I wasn't allowed to use sources except those from their approved list of sources. Their approved list of sources were all biased media sources, that supported their arguments and not mine, but I wasn't permitted to use sources that supported my viewpoint because they considered those sources to be biased and refused to see the bias in their own sources.

My point here being that regardless of how well-made an argument is and no matter how good the resources, most sources are biased in one way or another unless there is some factual definition for the term. In this case, I don't know the term "Christian" to have been used in the scriptures or even until later on after Christ's death. I could be wrong on that and if I am, would appreciate the source being pointed out to me so that I can review it. Sometimes these things get mixed up in translation as well. I don't particularly believe that any version of the Bible is "approved" unless it's the original text, so there's room for interpretation to a certain extent.

[Niverdia]

I grew up Catholic and for that reason know what it's like to be dismissed as being on the outskirts of Christianity (even though I never believed in Catholicism).

This is of no contribution to the discussion at hand, but I find it curious how in America Catholicism is considered to be quite distinct from the rest of what you have there/not-Christianity.

Perhaps it is so because I live in a country which, due to its geographical location and history has about equal presence of Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant beliefs as a whole, with shift towards one or the other depending on where in the country you are. And all that with a general tendency to flirt with local pagan traditions as well.

ETA: OK, the proportion is actually something like 7: 5 : 3,7 , for Lutheran, Catholic and Orthodox church members, but, as you can see, the reformed/unreformed church ratio is still pretty similar.

[1anioh]

Can you clarify which Christian religions don't fit the template so that I can further clarify my own point?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontrinitarianism is a good starting point to go through, it has a list of what all the different types of non-standard branches are generally called.

It's strange to me that you would say Catholics are on the edge as well, where I come from a good chunk of the town is Catholic and are therefore considered more mainstream than, say the Mormons. It's the same for any town though I guess as where my uncle lives most everyone is Mormon, and so it is actually strange to be anything else.

[Cassowary]

Also, anyone familiar with LaVeyan satanism? How vital is the magic stuff to it? It sounds like an interesting philosophy (plus I'd find it hilarious if I could call myself a Satanist).

[stormiecub]

I lost an entire lengthy post in here somewhere. This keeps happening to me and I think that it's mostly just me being scatterbrained, which makes it all the more annoying.

I'm reading the Wikipedia article right now. What I'm getting from it though is that these religions are not traditionally what one would refer to as "Christian" but are based on the stories of the Bible. But again, nobody speaks without bias, and that is my personal bias based on my understanding of the definition of "Christian." I hope that makes some sense.

As far as Catholicism is concerned, I went from a Catholic elementary school to a public school (as a pagan at the time) and was constantly reminded (for lack of a better term) that Catholics aren't actually Christians. Nobody ever substantiated that belief, but as I understand it from my husband and other Baptist-raised Christians it has something to do with the fact that Catholic dogma implies that one must "buy" his or her way into Heaven. That isn't my understanding of their doctrine, but that's bias again.

[GrowlingCupcake]

I'm not Christian and I don't know a lot of facts. This is entirely my personal opinion but since it was brought up:

I do also follow the idea that there is one Christianity and just many denominations. Christianity to me is the monotheistic, Abrahamic religion largely based on Jesus and the Abrahamic God and the Bible. Catholics, Mormons, Protestants, etc. are all Christian to me but are just different denominations. Isn't that why there are also non-denominational churches? They're still churches of Christianity, just for all denominations. That kind of makes me think that Christianity is just one religion with many sects.

There are many similar breakdowns in Hinduism or Islam or many other religions. They're all still Hindu/Islam/etc. they just worship and believe in a different way.

[TxCat]

GrowlingCupcake: I would agree. Not only that but, contrary to some of the opinions tendered, each sect believes it is the correct one (that is, the one with the most direct line to God's wishes). Nothing requires them to recognize one another as valid interpretations or traditions.

FYI, stormiecub, there's a gap in your knowledge you may wish to remedy. Before there was Catholicism, there was Christian Gnosticism, and before that several small mystery traditions dealing with the stories of the Christos or Christ. Christain Gnosticism is probably the earliest traceable origin of all Christian sects.

Cass, while I am not a practicing Satanist, I have read LaVay and do keep some of his tenets, most of which are contained in his Satanic Bible (which is only a bible in that it is a basic philosophical and religious guide). I would consider it more a life philosophy than a religion which often dovetails with ceremonial magick and other pagan practices.

When I get to my library this evening, I could post the nine tenets if you like.