And that comes from misunderstanding of the scriptures my friend. Jesus is God from Genesis to Revolutions. At some points referred to as "God" other's "Lord God", but again that would be in for consideration of context and the reason the "titles" were used.

And when one references "Jesus" or "God" could very well be the same again depending that context of the verse us in why/how it's said the way it's said by surrounding verses.

Why do people think there are so many denominations in Christian churches? Catholics, Lutherans, Baptists, Church of Christ, the list goes on. Because they can't agree on certain things in the Bibke because of interpretation

Basically yes, taking the context/meaning of the verse(s) in question to fit their purpose.

It's about taking the bible/scriptures as a whole and not specifically different instances.

FWIW, the Southern Baptist Convention, by its own admission, came into existence in order to permit slave owners to be foreign missionaries.

The African Methodist Episcopalian denomination came into existence because of racial prejudice.

The Salvation Army (Yes, it is a church denomination) became a denomination because of the way that snooty rich people treated poor people.

Anyway, back to the topic.

Yeah I wasn't speaking of just one. I was referring to all

I forgot to add that the Anglican Church became a denomination separate from the Roman Catholic Church because the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church refused to give England's King Henry VIII a marriage annulment.

Anyway, yellowrose10 is correct when she says that a disagreement on how to interpret Bible verses has led to the formation of new denominations.

Well I can tell you why Martin Luther did. That he considered himself a Catholic and really wasn't trying to break away and form Lutheranism but that he saw some problems in church at that time and was hoping the catholic church would listen and address those issues
most time its a difference in doctrin and theology

Some also focus on their own methods. Examples: fire and brimestone preachers vs those that preach God's love. Those that force religion in other's faces vs those that will speak and try to spread the word but know when to dust the sand off of their sandals

Some differ on the Truine God and taking of bread/wine for communion and what it signifies

As well as baptisms

Yep and how much emphasis they put on evangelisim and missionary work

In a roundabout way, yes...but wasn't he also judged and accused wrongly because he helped people on the sabbath, associated with sinners, gained a following, etc...
Sometimes, i think condemning him of blasphemy was more of a scapegoat because the religious leaders of that time felt threatened of losing the people's support (aka. contributions and offerings) and not because of any real conviction about God....that's why he was passed off to roman judgement by way of instilling fear of revolt, but even Pilate saw no cause to convict him, but was ultimately crucified because the people were paid off to let Barabas free instead....

Revolutions? Doe Neo know about this?

I am confused about Shia, Sunni, Sharia, and Shi'ite....

Can someone shed some light on this...in proper context...

Islam has 2 main sects : Sunni islam which represents the major sect ( it is usually the sect of the jihadi radical organizations ), and Shia sect which represents the minor one ( islam consists of almost 85 % sunni and 15 % shia ) , these tow sects have been in a historical conflict for almost 1400 years , this conflict turned in many cases to be the reason of bloody sectarian wars and massacres where these tow sects are in contact (like Iraq , Pakistan )
Shi'ite is the follower of Shia sect
Sharia , or Shariaa law is the Islamic law based on quraan (islamic holy book ) and what mohammad said during his life ( hadiths )

Knew i could count on you ..long time no see.

From what ive been reading up on the matter...sunni seem to be more literal and deliberate in interpreting the contents of the quran, whereas shia is more contextual and adaptive...

actually both sects agree on the same interpreting of the major content of quraan (there are some exceptions though ) , while they disagree on some historical events about who had the right to lead Muslims after Mohammad died , Shia wanted (Ali) Mohammad's cousin to lead Muslims as they believed the leader of Muslims should be one of Mohammad's relatives while Sunna wanted ( Abu Bakr ) one of Mohammads companions to be the leader ... Abu Bakr took the leadership eventually and the conflict have risen since then .

And he wanted light.....and light it is..tee hee... :flowers...

Well yes, historically speaking... But a figurehead can only be as good as the ideas he present, and the acceptability of his ideas.
Im pretty sure there is something/s in muslim doctrine that caused the divide and the continuing escalation of the conflict...especially since it encompasses not only religious rites and traditions but also the politico-legal sentiment...