3 ms·
The original statement went for "most Christian churches", not "most Christians" (what you'd get with your "weighting"). Maybe a useless metric but the one chos
by pgeorgi 5y ago
The original statement went for "most Christian churches", not "most Christians" (what you'd get with your "weighting"). Maybe a useless metric but the one chosen up-thread.
Going from there to implicitly weighting by membership seems rather arbitrary: I could also claim to weigh by readership (or hours of reading, or any other metric that includes actually working with the text) which might give a pretty different result, given how the idea of individually reading and interpreting the Bible is a major raison d'être of Protestantism.
- froh 5y agothere are hundreds of denominations and thousands of "independent" churches. we can argue in which way we weigh their voices, but not ignore their sizes completely.
- pgeorgi 5y agoA perfectly good case to make (I'm not quite convinced by "most churches" as a metric), but doing so is different from moving goalposts and calling it "weighting".