-5

This question already has an answer here:

Since there is such a massive difference between Traditional Catholicism and Biblical Christianity, would it not make more sense to separate into two StackExchange sites? Maybe even 3 (Catholicism, Protestantism, Other)... Jehovah's Witness, 7th Day Adventest, and Mormonism, for example, are not Christian religions, yet questions regarding them regularly show up here.

I understand the confusion as all of these recognize the Bible as one of their religious texts, but they are all different. Mormons, for example, have historically distanced themselves from Christianity (though in recent years have started to identify as a Christian denomination).

I just think that the current system of lumping them all together is confusing and makes finding a relevant answer, or even asking a relevant question, very difficult.

marked as duplicate by Peter Turner Jun 6 '18 at 13:02

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • I'd love to have another site and I've tried at least 3 times to do it, but the community managers have absolutely no interest in starting another religion site within Christianity. – Peter Turner Jun 6 '18 at 13:04
  • 1
    @Peter I think you could point to these repeated Meta discussions and they might be persuaded to let you try again. But the requirements for Area 51 recently became much harder and few proposals will succeed now. – curiousdannii Jun 6 '18 at 15:01
4

They are split.

All questions are required to have some sort of scope and be directed at a specific tradition. If you are looking for something inside a particular tradition you can search for in inside the corresponding tag.

Separate sites would be more confusing (and less useful to people wanting to ask about differences between traditions) than having a categorized system like we have.

This would be the equivalent of splitting Stack Overflow up into separate sites for every programming language. That would make sense if you were trying to build a community, but not so much sense if you are trying to get a question answered.

  • I don't buy the "splitting up Stack Overflow" analogy. Catholicism, as far as I know, has an answer for absolutely everything. American Protestants (which are my only counter example) say if it's not spelled out in the Bible go figure it out for yourself. This is because Catholics believe in a Natural Moral Law and they believe their church is the interpreter of that law. So a Catholicism site should be more like the Mi Yodea than Christianity.SE. Which is why it was such a bummer when they shut down my Catholic Culture proposal (which actually got a moderate amount of traction) – Peter Turner Jun 6 '18 at 13:14
  • 1
    My point is Catholicism is NOT Christianity. Jehovah's Witness is NOT Christianity. Mormonism is NOT Christianity. And yet they are all lumped into this category as though they are. I think that is far more confusing and deceptive. – Zephyr Jun 6 '18 at 13:26
  • 3
    @Zephyr Who gets to define what is "Christianity"? There are a lot more groups to think about here, and the lines are not easy to draw if we start voting groups off the island. Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy, Hyper-Calvinism, Calvinism, Arminianism, Open Theism, Liberalism, and the list goes on and on. Please see: Christianity.SE vs. Survivor – Nathaniel Jun 6 '18 at 17:24
  • 3
    @Peter I'm pretty sure Catholicism is Java. Ubiquitous and with libraries for days but never … I'll stop while I'm ahead. – Caleb Jun 6 '18 at 17:49
  • ..and former Java programmers are probably one of the highest growing demographics in the USA. – Peter Turner Jun 6 '18 at 18:14
  • @Nathaniel - I think it is actually fairly simple: if a faith disagrees with all or part of the Bible, as canonized by the early church (specifically Athanasius in ca. 367 AD), they can not be considered an orthodox Christian faith. That excludes those religions I listed. – Zephyr Jun 6 '18 at 19:21
  • @Caleb - I am not sure why you feel the need to openly mock someone you would call a brother, but that isn't helpful. I believe I am making a valid case and expected a respectful discussion. – Zephyr Jun 6 '18 at 19:22
  • 2
    @Zephyr Did the early church include the apocraphya? That's debatable. Does the Bible teach "salvation by faith alone"? Some say yes, some say no. Does it teach infant baptism? Does it teach a six-literal-day creation? Does it teach pacifism? The answers to these questions are highly debatable, even among people you would probably call "Christians." Who gets to decide what the Bible teaches? – Nathaniel Jun 6 '18 at 22:24
  • @Nathaniel - the Bible is clear on "salvation by faith and faith alone." Baptism, pacifism, and creation account, while important, are not essential issues; they are adiopheron. Disagreement on those issues would not cause you to be labeled a heretic. The brilliance of the Bible allows true Christians to disagree on those issues. The essentials, however, are non-negotiable and always have been. – Zephyr Jun 6 '18 at 22:28

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .