Mere Christianity or Degraded Christianity?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by DistantStar

I can't tell if this is the genetic fallacy or the ad hominem fallacy (perhaps both). The purpose of that book, and Lewis's belief in the "Mere Christianity" in general, is precisely to give a defense of ALL of Christianity and not just Anglicanism. That's his whole point: to transcend the divisions. He sees them as inevitable and necessary, yet still part of a greater whole.

That is what Paul said. The divisions are necessary. If it wasn't for the divisions we wouldn't see as clearly that some stuff is "minor stuff" on which we disagree, but not nearly as important as the major stuff which makes us one.

[DistantStar]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

That is what Paul said. The divisions are necessary. If it wasn't for the divisions we wouldn't see as clearly that some stuff is "minor stuff" on which we disagree, but not nearly as important as the major stuff which makes us one.

You have a very good point.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

That is what Paul said. The divisions are necessary. If it wasn't for the divisions we wouldn't see as clearly that some stuff is "minor stuff" on which we disagree, but not nearly as important as the major stuff which makes us one.

I believe it is "were necessary", not "are necessary". Mergers and acquisitions happen all the time in the commercial world. I wonder why it doesn't happen with denominations. Why 500 year old denominations continue to exist, they should have joined the newer improved ones years ago. There's no real difference between Lutheran and Anglican, or Baptist and Presbyterian. I see no necessary division between them.