Skip to main content

Should we blame God for this situation?

Look at the growth in the number of Christian denominations over the past 2,000 years.

◊ 33 CE – 1
◊ 1800 – 500
◊ 1900 - 1,900
◊ 1970 – 18,800
◊ 2000 – 33,800
◊ 2007 – 39,000
◊ 2025 - 55,000 (projected)[i]

Are you getting the picture? It seems that about all it takes to create a new Christian denomination these days is find some followers and a few Scriptures to base it on. The facts make it very clear that just about anyone can create a new Christian denomination in America, as well as in other parts of the world, today.

How did a single Jewish sect -- led by the Jewish Jesus -- become a universal Gentile religion with approximately 40,000 denominations today? Prior to the founding of America the number was less than 100, so the real question is what happened in America.

My thoughts on the subject are these. First, America provided an environment of freedom that individuals had never experienced before. This environment included freedoms of speech, the press, religion, economic opportunities and expression.  Many Americans shared what they thought in the public arena.

Second, in the 1,700s some of the new denominations introduced a new conversion ritual – an emotion based experience. The new method was based on creating guilt and a corresponding feeling of helplessness. The convert must have had a personal religious experience of overpowering emotions rooted in a specific time and place.  Their meetings were often characterized by seizures, convulsions, and uncontrollable weeping. Prior to this, potential converts were required to undergo a period of instruction that taught the basic doctrines of the religion and rituals. Instructions or emotions?

Third, a new belief introduced by Martin Luther to counter the authority of the Roman Church made a Bible the ultimate Christian authority, but every individual, it held, would have the true meanings divinely revealed to him or her. In the new environment of American freedom, many shared their understanding of what the words of their Bibles meant. The problem, however, was that they also declared their version to be “the Word of God.” Their “Word of God” declarations conflicted and contradicted each other in numerous cases.

Fourth, what has happens when members of a church hold opposing beliefs – it splits into two separate churches. At first there was 1, then 2, then 4, then 8, then 16, then 32, then 64, then 128 . . . and now 40,000.

Here are a few questions for you to ponder.

(1) What do you think the Jewish Jesus would say about this – after all it is all being done in “his name”?

(2) How many of the thousands of denominations that exist today teach the same message that the historical Jesus taught?

(3) How many Christians, or members of other religions, have ever done any accurate research about the histories of their religions?

(4) Do you think established religious institutions will change or relinquish any of their power if they are proven to be wrong?

(5) What effect does your religion have on life on earth today?

(6) Do you believe that God values “right beliefs” over “right action?”

What do you think? If someone is going to be a believer, don’t you think they should be an “informed” believer?


Popular posts from this blog

Why did they lay their coats at Saul's feet?

The witnesses, laying their coats at the feet of Saul, were the men that would cast the first stones at Stephen in Acts 7. Why did they all lay their coats at Saul’s feet? The Talmud contains a very interesting account of the act of stoning that may provide the answer.
“When the trial was over, they take him [the condemned person] out to be stoned. The place of stoning was at a distance from the court, as it is said, ‘Take out the one who has cursed.’[i] A man stands at the entrance of the court; in his hand is a signaling flag [Hebrewsudarin = sudar, ‘scarf, sweater’]. A horseman was stationed far away but within sight of him. If one [of the judges] says, ‘I have something [more] to say in his favor,’ he [the signaler] waves thesudarin, and the horseman runs and stops them [from stoning him]. Even if [the condemned person] himself says, ‘I have something to say in my favor,’ they bring him back, even four of five times, only provided that there is some substance to what he is saying.…

Madison's Warnings About Creating Political Parties

While doing some research today I came across the "Federalists No. 10" written by James Madison on Thursday, November 22, 1787. Madison warned his readers about the dangers of the formation of political parties and allowing them to become involved in government. 
When the Constitution was written in 1787, the founders thought of political parties as "factions," acting only for their own selfish interests rather than the public good. The founders saw instances in history when factions resorted to assassination and civil war if they failed to get their way. The writers of the Constitution believed that political parties would play no formal role in the new government. The Constitution made no mention of them.

Even in electing the president, the founders assumed the absence of political parties. The Constitution established an Electoral College, which called for a small number of electors—elected or appointed in the states— to meet, deliberate, and choose the best perso…

What does the word “religion” mean?

I just began reading Karen Armstrong’s book Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence (Anchor Books; New York, NY). Her introduction provides a tremendous amount of very important historical insights. Below is an excerpt from pages 4-5. I divided it into additional paragraphs and underlined portions because it is packed with so much.
For about fifty years now it has been clear in the academy that there is no universal way to define religion. In the West we see “religion” as a coherent system of obligatory beliefs, institutions, and rituals, centering on a supernatural God, whose          practice is essentially private and hermetically sealed off from all “secular” activities. But words in other languages that we translate as “religion” almost invariably refer to something larger, vaguer, and more encompassing.
The Arabic din signifies an entire way of life. The Sanskrit dharma is also “a ‘total’ concept, untranslatable, which covers law, justice, morals and social life.”