Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Comments on Denominations? Put a number on it!

Post

Denominations? Put a number on it! [closed]

+1
−1

Closed as too generic by qohelet‭ on Feb 2, 2026 at 05:01

This post contains multiple questions or has many possible indistinguishable correct answers or requires extraordinary long answers.

This question was closed; new answers can no longer be added. Users with the Vote on Holds ability may vote to reopen this question if it has been improved or closed incorrectly.

A common internal clarion call clamoring for "unity" inside Protestant Christianity and I could almost be certain inside of Catholicism too, has been because of the albatross of innumerable denominations.

A number I have seen thrown around has been 45,000. This is a garbage number and its roundness and rotundness tip the hat to having been pulled from thin air. Yet, we can see in medium and large size cities in America that there is a spattering of different branches, from "Christian Science Reading Rooms" to non-denomination full gospel home groups; very disparate entities with profound belief differences.

What, in your opinion, AI's calculation or Pew Research's junk science statistical surveys--is a more realistic number which only reflects profound theological difference?

I would hope unavoidable factors such as: Language and nationality have been factored out. If I cannot speak the language, I certainly would not 'live attend' a service for a sermon I wouldn't understand.

History

1 comment thread

Too broad (4 comments)
Too broad
qohelet‭ wrote 8 months ago

Welcome deleted user . This answer is too difficult to answer for this site given the almost limitless scope and lack of consensus on what groups are considered "Christian", so I've closed it.

deleted user wrote 8 months ago

This question was shut down for being "too broad/generic" and "too difficult/complicated"?

If questions and activity are shut down for "Not being the right question" then you'll have an audience of 1.

It's almost as if this is meant to become a quiz site. If I knew the answer already, then I wouldn't need to ask the question.

For the record, the link that you furbished defines for you and this site, precisely which groups are considered "Christian".
I'm not asking the question from my own perspective, but rather a better, agreed upon metric which factors out unavoidable differences such as location and language and concentrates only on measurable differences is belief.

Getting a picture why this is an extremely low traffic site. Sadly, I don't think there's any fix for it.

qohelet‭ wrote 8 months ago · edited 8 months ago

I encourage you to read our site scope. A question trying to quantify all Christians is too broad, but by all means ask specific questions about specified groups within Christianity. The article listing various Christian groups simply lists many of the options, but makes no judgment on who is "Christian." The site scope explicitly states, "For the purposes of this site, any group or individual that identifies as Christian is considered within our scope." Such a definition is too broad to meaningfully quantify. If someone were to undertake this, it could be an entire publication of its own.

deleted user wrote 8 months ago

I appreciate your welcome and your efforts to reform my knuckle-dragging ways, yet I fear it's for naught.
If the 4 questions can be asked by little ones at our Seders I thought I could manage to ask a question. I'm sorry my rambling ways offend the sensibilities of this site.

Echo chambers aren't really my thing, I'm more of a conversational model learner. I get a feel for what people know, and relish how they express themselves. Hammering out a common language is part of the fun, but when it must fit a robotic style syntax? It's really sucked the enjoyment out.

This model makes sense for "How do I fix the carburetor on a 78 Datsun Sport zz10?" but with religion? I don't need someone to teach me subjects that I can go to the library or wikipedia and learn for myself. There used to be a site, googlethatforme, and this seems to be that model. I will delete the account and you all can do business as usual.
One last note, Messianic Jews are not part of 7th Day Adventism.