(October 24, 2015 at 1:35 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Just stop. The differences are wide and important...to say that they aren't is to say that the message of salvation and the means of salvation and any differences any two sects have on that count are unimportant. It trivializes the entire affair, and anyone who cares to delve into the issue will realize that you're bullshitting them the minute they hit the google button.
It's clearly a severe enough problem for christians to have been killing each other the world over for their differing interpretations from the very moment we have a history of the cult, and up to the present day. In your case, perhaps not...but have you ever wondered -why- "christianity" put on a monolith given it's long history of predation and oppression on the basis of doctrine and schism?
Because the numbers weren't looking good. It became clear, in the past few decades, that they would have to fly the same banner if they wished to hold onto the social purchase they'd individually built, but which they had all been collectively eroding with their constant bickering and bigotry.
I've heard the myth repeated as if it were a religious mantra. But not once has it been substantiated. In your case, it's flat-out misunderstood. How can I simplify the claim so you can understand it? Let me try.
That there are apparent wide and important differences is not being denied. What is being denied is that these are differences of core doctrine. Rather they are differences in peripheral doctrine or practice.
That some like to worship God with ethnic instruments and others do so with electric guitars might appear to be a wide and important difference, but it's merely one of peripheral doctrine or practice. It's not a difference of core doctrine. Even the difference between "God wants us to be poor"-ism and prosperity preaching might appear to be a big difference, but it's not a difference in core doctrine.
And yes, this applies even to the wars of religion in Europe. For example the Catholic-Protestant conflict in Northern Ireland was not fought over religious doctrine, but over issues like home rule, where the division along sectarian lines was predicated on the fact that most Protestants feared Catholic-majority rule, and thus resisted Irish home rule.
So what's the upshot? Two things: (a) Differences that appear to be important in terms of cultural behavior or preferences are not significant doctrinally, and (b) a lot of the conflict being pinned to Christianity in particular does not involve Christianity or Christian beliefs but rather cultural and historical associations, of which members who call themselves Catholic or Protestant have no idea what their religion teaches. Not to mention © your whole story about holding onto social purchase is total atheistic fiction for which no independent evidence exists.
So what you're arguing is, in fact, hot air.
Intellectually-serious atheists beware.
