There are many branches on the tree of US Christianity.

[MineralMan]

It's not just one religion with a commonly-held set of standards when it comes to social issues. Not by a long shot.

A majority of US Christians supported and voted for Donald J. Trump as President. In some Christian denominations, that majority was huge. Southern Baptists, the largest Protestant denomination, voted for him and support him by a large majority. Here on DU, we do not support him, even though many DUers are Christians.

Christianity isn't just one thing. Its followers represent a multitude of ideas, and Christians believe different things regarding both their religion and how people should be treated by the government and by the people, as well.

Some Christian denominations are strong supporters of human rights, but by no means all denominations. Both the Roman Catholic Church and the Southern Baptists, the two largest denominations of Christianity, reject the idea that women should have full control over their reproductive lives. In fact, both believe that using contraception goes against God's will, and abortion is a terrible sin. In other respects, too, women are treated as second class humans by both of those denominations.

The Southern Baptist denomination was formed specifically to support slavery in the southern states. That mindset still persists, and civil rights seekers have found enemies within that denomination.

Other denominations, although smaller, are more compatible with human rights and social justice movements. However, a majority of Christians in the United States still voted for Donald Trump, so there is that to consider.

I know many people who wear the label of Christianity. I'm selective of my friends, so most of them are solidly in the Democratic tradition, although I do have some family members who have racist and sexist tendencies. I have learned not to make any assumptions about people based on their declaration of being Christians, since over half of Christians in this country voted for Donald Trump, exposing their prejudices and ignorance.

So, I don't condemn Christians in general. Instead, I treat them as I treat everyone else. I wait to learn how they think, what they support, and what they believe on an individual basis. That seems the best way, I think.

[c-rational]

1. I find with more experience (and hopefully wisdom), feeling sorry for many who call themselves

Christians. They look outside for guidance and help and all too many I know who do practice religion, do so only in word and habit, not action. Regarding your last paragraph, I may actually be more 'on guard' with those who profess to be a Christian, as they are less likely to be open minded and open to discourse and loving of all fellow humans, nature, things and no-things.

[MineralMan]

2. Well, since most people I encounter are nominal Christians,

I try not to prejudge people until I've known them long enough to see how they are. Normally, I don't inquire about religious belief at all. Some people volunteer that information, but most never mention it. It's a matter of very little interest to me with regard to people I know or meet.

I do know that those who quickly volunteer that they are Christians are generally not people I end up associating with very often. That's because they are too focused on that aspect of their lives and are generally boring, overall.

[PJMcK]

6. !!! (n/t)

[safeinOhio]

3. Each one is different...

according to the World Christian Encyclopedia there are at least 33,000 Christian denominations in the United States.

Some are a little better than the other. Most think all the others are headed for hell. Our Founders were aware of all the sectarian wars in Europe, so they separated church a state for good reasons.

[MineralMan]

4. That's true, which makes them hard to sort out.

Some of the minor Christian denominations, though, are the most interesting of all. However, who has time to explore at that level of detail?

One of my favorite small (almost vanishingly small) denominations is the Two-Seed-in-the-Spirit Predestinarian Baptists. You can learn about them here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Seed-in-the-Spirit_Predestinarian_Baptists

[safeinOhio]

8. In the small town in Ohio I lived in, there was

a Primitive Baptists – also known as Hard Shell Baptists or Old School Baptists. Interesting.

[MineralMan]

9. They are related in a way.

I've never met anyone from any of those denominations, though.

[PJMcK]

5. It's interesting to me that each denomination uses a different "Bible"

There are so many different translations and they all purport to be "the Word of God."

How can that be?

One church I attended long ago used the King James Version but in the pew racks next to the hymnals was "Good News For Modern Man," a translation of the New Testament in modern English. The two books contradict one another in numerous ways. I never did a get a clear explanation for that.

The New International Version, the Revised Standard Version, the English Revised Version, the American Standard Version, and the New American Standard Version(!) are also used by many churches and each has different forms of English (or other languages) including conflicting versions and translations of the same stories.

Words change over time. Their meanings can morph from one thing to its opposite. For example, if I were to quickly glance over a document, in modern parlance I would be scanning it. This is backwards. Scanning, like the computer device, looks at something in great detail. If you read a document quickly, it's called skimming, like skimming the cream off the top of the milk. And yet, people say scanning when they mean its opposite.

How can one have confidence, then, in all of these translations upon translations over two thousand years? Biblical believers have said to me that God inspired the translators to maintain the integrity of his words. How does that work? Do the translators hear voices? It's very confusing to me.

Another issue, slightly off-topic, is the manner in which the books were chosen and assembled. In the mid-1500s, the Council of Trent codified the Christian Bible and assembled the texts pretty much in their current form in Latin. But there were many other texts from the early days of Christianity that were tossed aside. In my collection of religious writings, I have a book called the Gnostic Bible which contains many of the texts that were rejected at Trent. It's fascinating reading and there's a partial Gospel According to Mary Magdalen; curiously, half of it is missing, if I recall correctly.

The Bible has lots of fascinating stuff and has inspired all kinds of creations.

Personally, I prefer science.

[MineralMan]

7. Well, there are far more denominations than translations of the Bible.

you're right, though, that there have long been disputes about the Bible, which has led to a multiplicity of translations, each with a slightly different way of writing about things.

It's an interesting thing to look at, but takes a great deal of time to understand, so not many people investigate it closely.

Translation is both an art and a science. Those two things are more or less incompatible with each other, so the results of Bible translations vary widely.

[PJMcK]

10. Unrelated post regarding MineralMan

Hey, MineralMan!

Were you able to fly home or did you have to drive?

Please give us an update on your travel experience. Your post a few days ago sounded as if you expected great difficulties due to the shut-down.

Hope you're well!

[MineralMan]

12. I'm at LAX right now, waiting for my flight.

Last edited Tue Jan 8, 2019, 04:49 PM - Edit history (1)

Very easy security screening. I thanked a couple of TSA people for showing up with no assurance of being paid. "That's my job," one guy said. Thanks for asking.

[Act_of_Reparation]

11. All those branches have at least one thing in common:

They all rely on a the same anachronistic and unreliable method: faith.

In fact, that unreliability is why there are so many branches to begin with.

[MineralMan]

13. Exactly. There is no clarity of message,

Because no truth underlies it. Interpretation can go in any direction, as we see in history and today.