what is the name of that nominally christian group who...

[beeinmygarden]

They only seem to have one firm belief, that jesus is not the son of god, they still meet on sundays at 11am, service structured like a church service, singing and a sermon, but basically you can come along and believe anything or nothing and it doesn't really matter. it's driving me mad! I went to a few of their services years back.

Quakers?

No not quakers, they have proper services, rather than sitting in silence.

Unitarians?

Christian Scientists?

Its unitarians, I've remembered!

(the denomination, not just Christians who are scientists!)

Thanks Errol, you were right!

'Christian scientists' are arguably Christian but really not scientists.

@beeinmygarden did you mean to say that Unitarians only believe that Jesus is not the son of God? That seems weird for a Christian denomination.

It makes them a sect not a denomination.

To be a christian there are three core beliefs and after that everything is debatable.

So they are:
Belief in the trinity.
Belief that Jesus is God
Belief in the cross and Resurrection.

That is why JW, Morman's and a few others aren't denominations.

did you mean to say that Unitarians only believe that Jesus is not the son of God? That seems weird for a Christian denomination.

They're unitarians not Trinitarians. Afaik they believe in Jesus as a saviour and teacher but not as God incarnate.

It makes them a sect not a denomination.
*
To be a christian there are three core beliefs and after that everything is debatable.
*
Says who? It was all debatable in the first few centuries AD - the doctrine of the Trinity took quite a long time to evolve. (And I doubt many Christians have seriously grappled with the concepts involved!)

@ErrolTheDragon you are going to start a discussion about homoousious now aren't you? 😁

Or modalism maybe?

To be a christian there are three core beliefs and after that everything is debatable.

I agree with this, being a Christian has to have some meaning.

It always irritates me when sects like Baptists and URC claim to be Christian because they diverge from the teachings of the early church on core issues such as the sacraments.

It always irritates me when sects like Baptists and URC claim to be Christian because they diverge from the teachings of the early church on core issues such as the sacraments.

Seriously?
Of course, the Roman Catholics think they're the only true church . But their teachings (like every other sect/denomination) diverge in some way or another from the earliest forms of Christianity.

You might have more grounds to say only Baptists are properly Christian as there is really no biblical justification whatever for infant baptism and quite a bit for adult baptism.

When I grew up we were very firmly told that Roman Catholics were not Christians. That makes at least as much sense as the claim that Baptists and URC are not Christian. Ffs

I think that to be a Christian that Jesus has to be at the core of it.

From there on, we live now with the consequences of all the debatable things that have caused so many divisions and that has created so many denominations.

It's one of the parts of human nature to want to be unique and special and the only 'pure' reflection of God and that in itself is the blind spot and the red flag.

When Jesus prayed for believers - he prayed for Unity. Why would he do that unless division and discord were going to be the main issues they would face?

If Unitarians blow your mind try “Jews for Jesus”.

Small subset of Judaism (or not!, depending on your views).

The first few hundred years post JC were a huge free for all. Distancing themselves from Judaism. Jews didn’t want them, Rome thought they were a weird subset like the Essenes or political movement. Doctrinal issues ie Orthodox / Oriental break a ways - arguing the toss over Aramaic, Greek, Hebrew, Latin translations of v important words! Books in / out of ‘The Bible’. Then the dominance of the Latin Church.

So why do we accept the doctrinal ‘correctness’ of one type of Christianity over another? I don’t remember Jesus saying he was actually God or specifically The Son of. Maybe ‘A’ son of - as in, we all God’s children. V political answer.

And don’t get me started on Paul - the original spin doctor.

I don’t remember Jesus saying he was actually God or specifically The Son of. Maybe ‘A’ son of - as in, we all God’s children.

The question 'how Jesus became God' (and when)is quite fascinating - the evolution from 'son of man' through to a son of god , Son of God, to 'God incarnate, from everlasting to everlasting' or whatever - and what these terms might of might not have meant in their own time. 'Sons of god' and gods/demigods were not exactly unusual in Greek and Roman religions. And the earliest and most reliable historical sources make the least claim.

Can't you simply ask god which is the right one? :)

Jews for Jesus

You mean Christians?

www.jewsforjesus.org.uk/about

Fascinating

The interesting bit about JfJ, is the divergence of early Christianity (or niche Judaism) away from Jewish religious practices becoming a completely separate entity.
Why did Christians give up kosher practices? To make themselves different but how do you square the circle theologically? God make’s a new covenant with His people (the death of Jesus). Just like He did with Noah and the flood, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Each time adding on a new bit to the ‘you’re my special people’ promise.
But then why do JfJ still cling onto old Judaic practises? Because Jesus was a Jew and never claimed to be starting a new religion.

The Romans were especially good at absorbing Greek, Egyptian etc... gods and rituals. The Jews were a problem for various conquerors as they were (are) monotheistic; God is the king (which is why the Romans calling Jesus the King of the Jews was an added insult) and we’re a tribal people with a common god.
Which is why Jews had their own Temple money. So there was no Emperor’s head on the coins - as the Emperors were also gods. No other god allowed in the Jewish Temple. See, they were an oddity of they day!

Hellenism brought a truckload of problematic theological ideas - souls, angels, heaven for Jews.
Given that the biggest numbers of Christian converts came from Roman slaves and citizens who didn’t have a problem with theses pagan ideas, maybe this is how Christianity became differentiated from then mainstream Judaism. After all, there was still God & Jesus & Mary - so the ideas of a god, a son of god and mother of god were transferable and relatable to your average pagan. There was even a Roman temple in London to Mary/Isis.

I’ll stop waffling now