There are a huge variety of Christians. Heck, in this chart alone I list 19 different Christian theological categories that have multiple positions and there are more, of course. The permutations of these theological positions make for our plethora of flavors of Christianity — something for everyone. Don’t get me wrong, every religion splinters up like this and every religion has those who lament the process, only to ironically produce yet more sects.
With all these varieties of Christianity, it is impossible to generalize about Christianity. On this site I have slowly learned to be more careful about generalizing since anything I say about Christianity in general may be contradicted by some sect or other. I have become more careful to try and get agreed upon definitions to make progress in discussing religion.
To that end, let me experiment with the following definitions and see if any of my readers can imagine them useful:
Christian who care about doctrines. Christians who care about what they feel qualifies someone as a “real” or “true” Christian or follower of Jesus. Christians who care about what the Bible really says. From my experience, spanning progressives to conservatives, this category includes almost all the blogging Christians I know. These Christians tend to consider themselves systematic in their thinking.
These comprise the vast majority of my Christian friends, and a huge percent of the Christian populations. These Christians are casual, cultural or cafeteria Christians who don’t do systematic thinking about doctrine, the Bible, Jesus or God. Fortunately for me, these folks aren’t into doctrine and don’t believe much of what they confess.
Question for readers:
Given that definitions can be artificial, fuzzy and doomed to problems. And that they are just temporary agreements (usually implicit) to speed up conversation). What do you think? Are there too many problems with these categories to make them useful?