Relative Objectivity?

It seems to be a common phenomena that two people can agree on the Bible as the supreme source of truth and yet come to opposite conclusions on a wide variety of issues. Some examples are:

• Age of the earth/Genesis flood
• Modern application of the Old Testament laws
• Moral issues such as alcohol, abortion, gambling, dancing
• The correct content for a Gospel presentation
• Role of women in the Church
• Speaking in tongues
• Style and content of corporate worship
• Method of observing Christian "Holidays"
• Mode of baptism
• End times events and timing
• The ultimate hope of the Christian
• And much, much more...

Pose these questions to 10 well-read Christians (people who are not Biblically illiterate) and I'm sure there will be anywhere from 2-10 different answers. What's more, in many cases, there will be bitter animosity and suspicion towards those who hold opposing views.

In response, the counsel I hear most often from respected Leaders is:

In Christianity, there are essential and non-essential beliefs. In the spirit of unity, we should not divide over non-essentials.

So the essentials are undeniable, right? Well, most mainstream Christian Churches express generally similar beliefs about the Trinity, Resurrection, Bible, and Eternity, but even here there is some variation (Grace, BBC, Saddleback) and a lot of subjects are not addressed.

But assuming that the essentials are basically similar, the net effect is that almost all of Christian faith and practice is defined by the individual. This isn't quite relativism (because Christians generally that truth is objective), but for all practical purposes, it is very wishy-washy. At the end of the day, it seems that everyone is pretty much on their own.

There have been selected times in the past when believers were more unified, but perhaps, this is the way things are meant to be at this time. Each person is accountable to God for their actions. Yet, the chaos seems to be somewhat unsatisfying.