Replies

In defense of the "only the Bible" people: "Those who most strongly adhered to believing “only the Bible” tended to become the, most factious, divisive, and combative of Christians."

Yes, perhaps, but on the other hand, the "only the Bible" folks don't have much a history of killing off their opponents. Maybe that's because there's always a "leveling" going on due to disputation. It's more democratic, which increases open disagreement, but also reduces the power of any one group.

In my own experience, I have seen church splits (which are not as common as some would paint), but why, when it comes down to it, is that inherently bad? We are still one in Christ and still pray and care for one another and would die for each others right to their opinion.

What the more heavily church-organization-oriented denominations have going for them is that they tend not to be very interactive within their congregations. If you don't have discussions, you avoid disagreements and therefore schisms. But unity in Christ is about the hearts, the souls, the other person, not about organizational charts, or bricks and mortar.

There is actually an awful lot of cooperation that happens between evangelical churches in my city. Some of them "split" organizationally in time past, and most maintain some aspect of their distinction. But differentness does not inherently divide.

You have to attend where the basics are adhered to, but also where you can best contribute and best receive. And that varies from place to place. Father Bernstein made his choice, and that is good, so long as he does not put his organization ahead of Christ. That's where things can get really ugly.

In my own experience, I have seen church splits (which are not as common as some would paint), but why, when it comes down to it, is that inherently bad?

Because these church splits create the illusion that the Truth handed down to us by our Lord, Jesus Christ is relative, up for grabs, and can be decided by human democratic vote. Without perhaps intending to, it says, "Our Lord taught us whatever we say He taught us, just because we collectively say so." You can get just as much human democratic agreement on "global warming", but that doesn't make it true.

It's one thing for churches to split based on arguments over division of administration, but yet another thing for it to split based on differences in theology. What if both sides are wrong in a theological debate? Then you are left with just more promotions of heresy that beget more misery in a world that already has enough misery.