|
|
|
|
|
|
by schoen
222 days ago
|
|
|
I forgot who formulated the idea that difficult-to-understand and difficult-to-believe doctrines tend to have a unifying force for religious communities because they tend to require members of those communities to be more serious about their commitments, or a way for them to show how seriously they take them, by asserting to doctrines that are difficult. This article says that Nicene Christianity is more difficult to believe and more illogical than some of the heresies. If so, that difficulty may have been a challenge for orthodox Christian believers that allowed them to feel, or demonstrate, more unity with their fellow believers! It may have created a firmer distinction between Christians and non-Christians or near-Christians, for one thing. Edit: one search found the theory of Laurence R. Iannaccone (which is about different churches within Christianity) who argued that churches that impose more or stronger doctrinal requirements tend to receive more loyalty and commitment from their members. I'm not sure if that was the version that I was originally thinking of, but it seems closely related. |
|
|
I would also venture that this leads to many members having different interpretations and assuming everyone shares their own. Of the Wittgenstein ilk.
But, this theory may conflict with your Edit addendum.