Generalizations about Christians?

Question: WHY do people make generalizations about Christians and Christianity based on the minority and not the majority? Do many people stop to think what they are doing?

REASON: ALL the time I see non-Christians defend Catholics when other Christian groups say Catholics aren't Christians.- GREAT!
YET, these same groups turn around and make generalizations about Christianity that are based on a minority and not the majority - WHY?
Do they not realize it? Are they just bigoted or over zealous? Are they ignorant?

Catholicism makes up 2/3rds of Christianity worldwide. Or roughly 1.2 billion or the estimated 2.0 billion Christians. THEREFORE, statistically, whatever the Catholic church believes or does is by defacto standard what "MOST" Christians do. Pure statistics.

I'm sorry to say but if Catholics believe that the moon is made out of Cheese...then by sheer statistics.. MOST Christians believe the moon is made of cheese.

But WHY do people generally do the opposite and assume whatever non-Catholics believe is what the Majority think?? It makes very little sense.
Does it make sense to base assumptions, generalizations and stereotypes on the 1/3 minority OR the 2/3rds Majority?

2009-10-27T14:34:40Z

For example: That ALL Christians believe in the bible only - NOT TRUE, Catholics don't

That ALL Christians reject Evolution - NOT TRUE, Catholics don't

That ALL Christians believe that you ONLY have to have faith in Jesus to be saved - NOT TRUE, Catholics don't

That ALL Christians believe that you automatically go to hell if you aren't Christian - NOT TRUE, Catholicism doesn't teach this

That ALL Christians take the bible completely literally - NOT TRUE, Catholicism doesn't, well, actually, people mis-use the word literal, what they often times means is "literalist" not literal - 2 different things, but I digress.

And amongst the other 1/3rd minority - ALL the other thousands of denominations that remain.. MANY of them agree with the Catholic church on smaller issues like Evolution, need for action, the Saints, Religious Artwork, etc.
OF the remaining 1/3rd, there are the Coptic churches, The Anglican, the Lutheran, the Presbyterian Churches, etc. etc. Which share many doctrine

Dear Dogma2009-10-27T14:43:09Z

Favorite Answer

Simply put, it's much easier to argue against the minority opinion than the Church.

Joe S2009-10-27T18:53:43Z

It is easier to condemn something you do not understand than it is to take the time to really study what you disagree with?

Few want to admit that the Roman Catholic Church is the first Church of Jesus Christ and the only church that can trace itself back to Saint Peter, Rome and the martyrdom of that rock upon which all truth is built?

Many do not wish to submit themselves to revealed truth, but instead want to pick and choose what they believe. Is it much of a stretch to ignore the primacy and importance of the Roman Catholic Church when such individuals already foolishly imagine that they can be the arbiter of all truth?

Finally, that the majority of Christians should be ignored and the wisdom of the Roman Catholic Church teaching through the ages held to be of no value, does that not sound to you like how our Lord Himself was treated? Should we be so surprised?

speedkilla2009-10-27T15:03:58Z

For example: That ALL Christians believe in the bible only - NOT TRUE, Mormons don't

That ALL Christians reject Evolution - NOT TRUE, Mormons don't... well not exactly.. we believe in progression of the body and spirit

That ALL Christians believe that you ONLY have to have faith in Jesus to be saved - NOT TRUE, Mormons don't

That ALL Christians believe that you automatically go to hell if you aren't Christian - NOT TRUE, Mormonism doesn't teach this

GOOD POINT ABOUT NOT ALL CHRISITAN RELIGIONS BEING THE SAME... NOT SURE WHY YOU MADE IT THO...

Anonymous2016-10-14T02:55:36Z

i assume i'm a sort of human beings on party. If believers see the Bible as a brilliant ethical code or the inspired word of God it is cool, I rather can't disprove the resurrection of Jesus. yet fundamentalism is equated with literalism, and it does get my hackles up once I see human beings ignoring overwhelming info that the introduction fantasy in Genesis impossible. it is not merely the super quantity of exact info being disregarded (in spite of the undeniable fact that it is the main element), the fossil checklist, the cost of continental choose the flow etc. it is likewise the reality that Genesis a million & 2 are not even unique. Gen.a million the place God separated the the mild from the dark, the heavens from the Earth, the water from the land etc, is a topic of introduction fantasy named "separation of the primordial chaos". And grew to become into borrowed from the lots older Babylonian Enuma Elish. Gen.2 grew to become into additionally a borrowed motif from the older Epic of Gilgamesh. the place a conversing snake suckered Gilgamesh out of the "tree of eternal adolescents". consistent with possibility it is no longer truthful, and that i do no longer see fundamentalists as undesirable human beings. yet I do see literalism as willful lack of information. And willful lack of information to such huge quantities of opposite records in specific circumstances brings out a bent to paint in huge strokes.

ʌ_ʍ ʍr.smile2009-10-27T14:51:55Z

one thing before i finish reading that: we don't defend catholics, we just point out their mistake that catholics are not christians.

generalizations are usually based on the most popular issue. it can be based on the minority or otherwise.

Show more answers (9)