Quote:
Why is unanimity of interpretation so important? You frequently state that as if it's dispositive, but in some ways disagreement can be a feature, not a bug.
On the whole, I heartily agree with this. Some of the things that separate denominations or individual churches seems very minor to me on the grand scale. For example, in the Didache they talk about the preference of baptizing with living cold water. However, there are multiple allowances made for other types of baptism. But this exact difference in method separates denominations and churches today, whereas early Christians didn't think it was that big of a deal.
OTOH, you have to draw a line somewhere. Arianism is a good example. If Jesus was created and not eternal, then there is nothing stopping God from creating another Son just like he did Jesus. More practically, there is nothing stopping patriarchs or emperors from claiming that they are on the same level as Christ. IMHO, this is why Arians where so easily converted to Islam. If Jesus wasn't singular, then he could be equaled or supplanted. So it seems clear that Arianism is an entirely different animal from Christianity, and history has borne that out.
As an outsider, I really don't understand why each of the Catholic, Orthodox, Assyrian, Oriental, and Coptic churches aren't in communion with each other. Same for the Baptists, Methodists, Lutherans and Pentecostals. I could see a liturgical versus protestant branches being considered so dissimilar as to be different religions, but within those categories I don't think anyone can say that. In my cynical mind, the people drawing the dividing lines have impure, earthly motives, and it's just a reflection of us all being fallen.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full
Medical Disclaimer.