Oh yes they do. Every single human being who has ever been part of any social group does. It's a fact of being human, just as much as every human alive has breathed air to live. Those that fail to participate in this consensus reality are cast out as outsiders. That your group espouses a more "universal" truth, is itself a consensus reality that its members have chosen to participate within.
My objection stands. The bottom line is you are now making a vague generalization that does not address the question
Do you welcome those who say, "No! Only we are right and everyone else is going to hell!"? No? You either seek to correct them, or you reject them if that fails to persuade a change of view in them. That's because that idea is contrary to what you hold collectively as true. But if that same thing were said in an exclusivist group, that person would fit right into their consensus reality.
This does not change the fact that Biblically, Doctrine, and Dogma Christianity in one way or anther is an exclusivist group.
You don't think Christian throught has evolved at all during that time? Even modern day "fundamentalists" are not what the first Christians were. It's impossible for them to be that, because the world itself has changed. It is only the superficial things you are looking at. Those are just basic frameworks, but how individuals and groups within those have seen and translated the world through those is anything but the same. It has and continues to evolve as people and groups do.
The foundation beliefs, doctrines, and dogma of the Roman, Orthodox, and mainline Protestant churches that represent over 90% of Christianity have not evolved. In fact in many ways they have become more extremely entrenched. There have been many many smaller diverse and different churches that have evolved to try make things fit their own view. Others like the Later Day churches like JW and Seventh Day Adventists retreat to what they claim as the more pure original literal Bible traditions.
Universalists are just a modern example of that evolution of newer and higher consensus truths.
To vague to respond to.
How it has functioned historically is to dumb down the higher truths into pablum bites to feed to the masses. How it has functioned, is not the measure of Truth itself.
This does not address the issues I presented.
Last edited: