NationStates Jolt Archive

Now I know this thread could open up some wounds and bring up some heated arguments, but I think its a good thing to discuss. I just believe that Christianity as a whole would be so much stronger as a single Church.

So here is the question: Do you think there should at least be an effort made to re-unite the Christian Church?

P.S. I am not looking for a feasibilty study here. I just wanna know whether it is something we should move towards. Just because something is difficult (or near impossible) doesn't mean you shouldn't try for it.

I'm all for uniting the Church so long as we're not compromising vital truths to do so. Salvation through faith, divine inspiration of Scripture, etc.

No. There are so many offshoots of Christianity with differing beliefs that pulling them together will be impossible. In Britain our monarch switched stance so often that we don't have a clearly defined idea of what constitutes the 'right' religion these days. Same basic thing happened in the US post-civil war with the romantic movement et al. even though there has been a polarisation towards christianity. Look at the split that homosexuality is causing - there are so many backing gay marriages/ordinations that they won't just stand down on their convictions and rejoin what they see as a backwards way of thinking.

For every tolerant vicar happy to embrace new ideas you have another David Chick writing the usual stuff about Dungeons and Dragons sending you to hell. Christianity has ceased to be a unified religion and has become a collection of differing beliefs, and that is how it should stay, because only by challenging deep seated beliefs can fundamentalism be held in check (there are of course Christian fundamentalists, but the problem isn't as big as it is with Islam). Well, not always, but it can be good way to do so.

EDIT: Robbopolis, that is exactly what I mean. What do you mean, 'truths'? Has it been proven? Those are beliefs, not neccessarily truths, and you need to recognise that. However, you are content to say to others that they are truths, rather than killing others who disagree with you, which is how it should be, and I ask no more of people.

How do you mean re-united? Are you talking about the current Anglo-Christian church divide over Gay marrage blessings and Gay clergy members, or do you mean Protestants and Catholics?

Not likely since people started breaking off from the early Church which is splintered into the many different sects.

Divide and conquer.

Unified Christian Church sounds fun. But..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations
There is no way all of those branches could ever been united. Perhaps the bonds between Communions could be stronger, but I really don't think a fully ecumenical Church will ever exist.

Edit: God would probably approve :P

How do you mean re-united? Are you talking about the current Anglo-Christian church divide over Gay marrage blessings and Gay clergy members, or do you mean Protestants and Catholics?

I mean united as one catholic Church.

And Dont jump down my Roman Catholic throat! I mean catholic in its original meaning, ie: one, universal, all encompasing.

P.S. And dont forget the Orthodox Churches.

Divide and conquer.

Yeah if anything the church should be more divided until people can actually attend taylor made versions of Chritianity to suit their own likes/dislikes. Meaning that if you happen to like sex before marrage then you go to a faction that tell's you that it's okay...McChristianity is thy name!

In theory, it would be nice because it would resolve a lot of conflict. In reality I think it would create far more.

However you view the Bible - as directly dictate from God, as written by mortal men inspired by God or whatever else, the ultimate reality is that the Bible is uses written language that we as humans find open to interpretation. As long as people will interpret what is written in the Bible differently there will always be separation.

Divide and conquer.
:)
He. Christianity is hardly being conquered now, imagine how strong we would be united?

EDIT: Robbopolis, that is exactly what I mean. What do you mean, 'truths'? Has it been proven? Those are beliefs, not neccessarily truths, and you need to recognise that. However, you are content to say to others that they are truths, rather than killing others who disagree with you, which is how it should be, and I ask no more of people.

This is probably getting off topic, but oh well. I can't resist.

The things that I am talking about are statements about the outside world, not just what I think. I freely admit that it is possible for me to be wrong, but it is more than just opinion.

As for proof, the only things that can be "proven" are the fact that I exist and the truths of math and logic. I can't even "prove" that you exist. I know that I exist, and you know that you exist, but neither of us know that the other exists. Anywho, this is what I get for taking a logic class.

And no worries. Shooting people who won't agree with me is about as bright as turning in my english homework in math class. Completely counterproductive, not to mention wrong.

:)
He. Christianity is hardly being conquered now, imagine how strong we would be united?
If christianity is not being conquered, would you please state which is the fastest growing religion at the moment?

And as for unification... there is one thing that all the christians believe in. Why not focus all of your efforts on that instead of arguing over who got it perfect?

This is probably getting off topic, but oh well. I can't resist.

The things that I am talking about are statements about the outside world, not just what I think. I freely admit that it is possible for me to be wrong, but it is more than just opinion.

As for proof, the only things that can be "proven" are the fact that I exist and the truths of math and logic. I can't even "prove" that you exist. I know that I exist, and you know that you exist, but neither of us know that the other exists. Anywho, this is what I get for taking a logic class.

And no worries. Shooting people who won't agree with me is about as bright as turning in my english homework in math class. Completely counterproductive, not to mention wrong.

Don't you dare make this a proof debate! We have enough of those in those bloody evolution threads

And as for unification... there is one thing that all the christians believe in. Why not focus all of your efforts on that instead of arguing over who got it perfect?

That would be nice, but the difficult thing about religion is that the "devil is in the detail" so to speak.

Nice dodging of my main point...

Needs less Jesus and more jihad.

Nice dodging of my main point...
:) Cheers.

Yes, Christianity should be unified. I would LOVE to watch it disintegrate first-hand.

yes i do believe they should.of course itll split 5 minutes later.but we can cut out about half the demoninations in that 5 minutes,makeing it a little less confuseing.

im not a christian,but i think people shouldnt bicker over small things.the most importent facet of any religion should be love thy neighbor.everything else,is small stuff.

Does anyone really think that people like the pope, his cardinals, or any other head of a christian "sect" (may it be protestant, orthdox or whatever) would give up his position of power just like this *snips finger* in order to form something like a united christian church?

Who would lead it? Hmm? A council maybe?

If I recall history correctly, then all those "spin-off" groups appeared because some people were pissed off with the way the catholic church ran things. Take Luther, one of the best examples.

Unite them? Maybe for a short time, but they'd soon bash each other's heads in. There will always be people in their ranks who'll strive for power, it's impossible to make sure those aren't in it.

Also I think it's pretty much impossible to unite them all anyway. How'd that work? Sure, they all somewhat believe in the same thing (then again, Jesus appears in the Islam too, so why not go a step further and unite Jews, Christians and Moslems? Or even better, make some universal-religion for everyone), but it's the way they put it, which seperates them, also they tend to have different stances on not so religious topics every now and then. Also when you take Austria for example, which had the highest number of people leaving the catholic church ever last year, who'd want to unite with them when people are running away from them?

It's not about believes, it's about power, always has been, otherwise the catholic church wouldn't have introduced the baptism of children (which the early Christians didn't do). The more people you have believing in your interpretation, the more powerful you are, it's that simple.

I don't see a united christian church any time in the future.

Not that I really care, I'm not christian, but I'm usually amused about what some of their high ranking members say every now and then about issues that so aren't their business.

Islam is the correct answer, BTW...

When has Christianity ever been united? I mean the bible shows the first discussion over what should/should not be considered doctrine, not to mention the books and texts that never made it into the compilation known as the bible because they were against what the largest/most powerful group had declared as biblical truth...

Divide et Impera

I hope they never get united. They're enough of a pain in the ass right now, trying to tell everybody how to live.

Does anyone really think that people like the pope, his cardinals, or any other head of a christian "sect" (may it be protestant, orthdox or whatever) would give up his position of power just like this *snips finger* in order to form something like a united christian church?

Who would lead it? Hmm? A council maybe?

If I recall history correctly, then all those "spin-off" groups appeared because some people were pissed off with the way the catholic church ran things. Take Luther, one of the best examples.

Unite them? Maybe for a short time, but they'd soon bash each other's heads in. There will always be people in their ranks who'll strive for power, it's impossible to make sure those aren't in it.

Also I think it's pretty much impossible to unite them all anyway. How'd that work? Sure, they all somewhat believe in the same thing (then again, Jesus appears in the Islam too, so why not go a step further and unite Jews, Christians and Moslems? Or even better, make some universal-religion for everyone), but it's the way they put it, which seperates them, also they tend to have different stances on not so religious topics every now and then. Also when you take Austria for example, which had the highest number of people leaving the catholic church ever last year, who'd want to unite with them when people are running away from them?

It's not about believes, it's about power, always has been, otherwise the catholic church wouldn't have introduced the baptism of children (which the early Christians didn't do). The more people you have believing in your interpretation, the more powerful you are, it's that simple.

I don't see a united christian church any time in the future.

Not that I really care, I'm not christian, but I'm usually amused about what some of their high ranking members say every now and then about issues that so aren't their business.

Mate, the Catholic Church has changed a significant amount since the reformation. There were some, even many, popes that have treated it like that but nowdays the pope is more a moral leader of the Church than the semi-ruler of the world. Besides, it is one of the Catholic Churches goals to move towards a united church since the Second Vatican Council

It's not necessary. All churches have a right to praise God in their own way.

When has Christianity ever been united? I mean the bible shows the first discussion over what should/should not be considered doctrine, not to mention the books and texts that never made it into the compilation known as the bible because they were against what the largest/most powerful group had declared as biblical truth...

Those books and texts were not put into the Bible not because the current relgious rulers didn't agree but because they completely contradicted the rest of the Bible and the entire of the Old Testament. They were also clearly shown to be writen much later than the rest of the Bible.

Those books and texts were not put into the Bible not because the current relgious rulers didn't agree but because they completely contradicted the rest of the Bible and the entire of the Old Testament. They were also clearly shown to be writen much later than the rest of the Bible.

Some are written within the first century AD. And all before the compilation of the cannonical texts.

At the time there was no 'bible' for them to contradict - only the Jewish documents which are known to Christians as the Old Testament. The earliest point of contention is clearly alluded in the accepted bible - as to what extent Christian converts are expected to honor and follow Jewish traditions and laws and to what extent Christianity was born of Judaism as opposed to Christianity being wholly separate from Judaism. What was decided by either a majority or the leaders in power is what became known as Christianity.

The fact that the different texts exist points out that the early Christians didn't agree. Just because after the compilation of the accepted texts into canon and the people following/believing the excluded texts were considered heretics/non-Christians does not mean that the writers and the followers of them did not consider themselves followers of Christ.

Christianity doesn't need to unite. It would be like trying to unite wet toilet paper.

All the churches have compromised their principles to such a degree in order to try and retain a modicum of popularity that theres nothing really left than can be called a 'church' let alone christian.

I say tear down the whole shebang and build it up from the bottom, old style. Or even better, make peace with Islam and let them run things while christians become a minority sect of the People of the Book.

Considering that, in effect, Islam, Christianity and Judaism (from newest to oldest), are also derived from the same roots, I don't see any more chance for a unification of, say, Protestants and Catholics than for the unification of Islam and Christianity.

There is no real purpose in unifying religion. They split for a reason - they didn't agree with each other. Bringing them together only increases the tension, and we end up with another violent split soon.

In fact, the smaller the splinters, the more often people will be exposed to views contrary to their own. That can only be a good thing in my opinion.

mmmmmmmmmmmmm.......mother Church

ssssooooooooo eccumenicaly good

Essentially I think it's impossible.

The Roman Catholics and other more conservative branches would not stand for some of the measures, interpreations and practices in some other Christian churches (e.g. would they accept women priests as in the Church of Sweden and many others). And the opposite is equally true, would the more liberal churches accept going backwards and becoming more conservative in order to reunite with the Roman Catholics and other dominations? I doubt it.

Now I know this thread could open up some wounds and bring up some heated arguments, but I think its a good thing to discuss. I just believe that Christianity as a whole would be so much stronger as a single Church.

So here is the question: Do you think there should at least be an effort made to re-unite the Christian Church?

P.S. I am not looking for a feasibilty study here. I just wanna know whether it is something we should move towards. Just because something is difficult (or near impossible) doesn't mean you shouldn't try for it.
Christian Church should be destroyed and the further spread of the Israelite lie be stopped.

In case anyone doesn't know.....the Catholic Church is the one true Church established by Christ. It is the only Church that can be traced throughout all of history back to the first pope, St. Peter, who was made pope and leader of the Church by Christ himself. All other religions (besides the Jewish and pagan religions) can be traced back through its origins to the Catholic Church. Martin Luther broke away from the Catholic Church, as did the Protestant-Christians in England when the Catholics there protested against the Catholic Church (hence the name "Protestant"). I'm not quite sure as to how exactly all of the other religions broke off from the Church, or from religions that began with the Church. But, in most churches, they teach their members reasons to hate Catholics. Many of the other religion took some of the teachings of the Catholic Church when they broke away, made them their own, and followed them. I think most religion still follow some today. *shrugs* Just adding my $.02 into the thread.

I am an aetheist but I think that if you believe in something then you shouldn't need a church in the first place as he/she/it would hear u, u don't need no person there to "redirect your calls" thus making the question irrevelant, do you know that near enough all wars have commenced due to religion and the fervour of the establishments, in the distant past the church was no better than terrorists.

:)
He. Christianity is hardly being conquered now, imagine how strong we would be united?

You mistake the United States with the rest of the world. The only place on earth where religion is not on the decline is the United States and they make up a very small minority of the world.

You mistake the United States with the rest of the world. The only place on earth where religion is not on the decline is the United States and they make up a very small minority of the world.
I'm relatively sure that Christianity is growing HUGELY in China. The government doesn't recognise most of the converts as Christian, as most of them are not the state church (the "Three-Self Patriotic Church"); it's the house-church networks that're growing in this way.
However, the trend is well-documented by both Christian and secular analysts; current estimates are of about 100 million Christians in China.

I see the ecumincalist movement as little more than attempt to consolidate power for the power hungry (incidentally, this is very un-Christlike/un-Christian IMO). Those who "Worship in Spirit and Truth", will be bound together naturally by that truth which is based on a true knowledge of God an scripture. Anything else sets us up to re-live the "Dark Ages" on an even bigger scale. It sets the stage for religous discrimination and persecution the likes of which this world would be far better off without.

two questions:

why would they need to be?

and:

how far up the tree do you want to go?

do you want to just do the outer branches, and unite the protestant churches?

do you want to unite the protestant churches with the Roman cathiolic church, from which they split off of?

do you want to unite the protestants, and roman cathiolics with the orthodox churches, from which they split off of?

do you want to unite the protestants, roman cathiolics and orthodox christians with the jews, from whom they split off of?

do you want to unite the protestants, roman cathiolics, orthodox christians and jews with the muslims, who they split from?

that last one is going all the way back to the sons of abraham, where (legend says) the son ishmael he had with a servant girl, and when the second son, isaac, was born of his actual wife, ishmael was disowned.

ishmael supposedly went off to begin the islamic religion, where isaac continued in his father's wishes and began the jewish faith.

so when you say 'unite' how far back are we talking about?

You mistake the United States with the rest of the world. The only place on earth where religion is not on the decline is the United States and they make up a very small minority of the world.

Gee.. Thats nice, but you missed two things:
a) I am an Aussie, never been to the US and
b) Christianity is the biggest religion in the world by a significant margin. just under 2 BILLION people are christian, more than any other religion.

I think in theory it's a great idea but i'm not quite sure how well it would work... :rolleyes:

As a Christian. No!

I see neither how it could be done nor why it would be desirable.

You'd be trying to cram people who probably have sets of beliefs that are in the minutiae greater than some of the gulfs between other major religions into the same label, and that just won't work.

Islam is the correct answer, BTW...

how is that pertinant.. most of those new followers arn't being converted.. but born in.. Islam afterall is most prevalent in the most impoverished nations of the world. While christianity thrives in the most afluent ones... and of course the afluent nations face population decline while the impoverished one suffer over population.

I dont see how any of this shows christianity being conqured... Afterall.. christianity largely enjoys the power of a single voice the pulpit... while islam, is so splintered defining its true nature is nearly impossible, as every nation of islam practicies it in a totally differing manner, interpreteing the same texts in vastly different ways.

In fact.. Lacking the power of one voice, I would say Islam is weakened as it grows, as its many splinter groups of differing interpretations only grows (less and less cohesion between every side). Plus it is far easier for Islam to be hijacked by extermistis then it is for Christianity to be.