|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Posted on 11/13/2014 6:49:41 PM PST by Heart-Rest
How Many Protestant Denominations Are There?
Partial List of 5000+ Protestant Denominations by Name
How Many Protestant Denominations Are There? The 20,000 / 30,000 numbers and David Barrett's statistics
"The Facts and Stats on "33,000 Denominations" The 20,000 / 30,000 numbers and David Barrett's statistics
Part II
(Above links derived from here) ===> ("How Many Protestant Denominations Are There?")
⛪⛪⛪⛪⛪⛪⛪⛪⛪⛪
There are many, many more Protestant denominations out there, not just those reflected in the links above. How many? Well, nobody really knows for sure exactly how many Protestant denominations exist at any given point in time, because after you get done counting the first forty or fifty thousand, several thousand more new ones pop up here and there all over the place, like popping pop corn! :-)
We Catholics love all our Protestant brothers and sisters (no matter how many denominations or "non-denominations" they belong to), and we simply want to share the fullness of the truth with them, so that they can find the precious jewel (the "pearl of great price") that we have already found (by the Grace of God). With that in mind, the following song is dedicated to all our beloved Protestant brothers and sisters, and their ever-increasing number of distinct and ever-changing denominations with contradictory, mutually-exclusive, incompatible teachings. (And, no, that is not a bunch of cardinals singing that song!)
☺
(Song -- "Bless 'em All!")
(This song is a tribute to all our beloved Protestant brothers and sisters, no matter what denomination -- or "non-denomination" -- they are currently in.)
"I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment." (1 Corinthians 1:10)
That's a little peculiar...Bible doesn't say to examine others...It says to examine yourself...
Talk about hypocrisy...How many times do you submit a post of link after link after link to other sites and blogs???
Let us know when that happens.
"It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." ---Jesus Christ
Imagine a pope, fitting your description, who was elected by cardinals who themselves were elected by previous popes, and all of them hold each other to be Catholic.
The Sedevacantist Catholic Church welcomes you, NKP_Vet.
Interesting that the laity can condemn as *not Catholic* a pope that they don't like who was elected by the college of cardinals.
So it's *every man his own pope* time, eh?
Catholic deciding what is *real* Catholicism? And based on what?
So now we have here your own personal interpretation of Catholicism* - YOPIOC.
1.2 billion separate varieties of Catholcism.
Wow! What a thing to say about your vicar of Christ in the unbroken chain of those who sit in the seat of Peter.
A better question, perhaps, is has the Roman church authorized this “ministry”?
“Can. 678 §1 In matters concerning the care of souls, the public exercise of divine worship and other works of the apostolate, religious are subject to the authority of the Bishops, whom they are bound to treat with sincere obedience and reverence.
§2 In the exercise of an apostolate towards persons outside the institute, religious are also subject to their own Superiors and must remain faithful to the discipline of the institute. If the need arises, Bishops themselves are not to fail to insist on this obligation.
§3 In directing the apostolic works of religious, diocesan Bishops and religious Superiors must proceed by way of mutual consultation.”
http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P28.HTM
Indeed, but you need to go back further in this history of this "church" that settles the problem of conflicting teaching .
“We furthermore forbid any lay person to engage in dispute, either private or public, concerning the Catholic Faith. Whosoever shall act contrary to this decree, let him be bound in the fetters of excommunication. — Pope Alexander IV (1254-1261) in “Sextus Decretalium”,
And which if not now, was still in force at the time when the (my source) Catholic Encyclopedia was written [http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Religious_Discussions], which adds,
“This law, like all penal laws, must be very narrowly construed. The terms Catholic Faith and dispute have a technical signification. The former term refers to questions purely theological; the latter to disputations more or less formal, and engrossing the attention of the public. But when there is a question of dogmatic or moral theology, every intelligent layman will concede the propriety of leaving the exposition and defence of it to the clergy.” [who themselves needed due authorization]. - www.newadvent.org/cathen/05034a.htm
Likewise,
Quinisext Ecumenical Council, Canon 64: That a layman must not publicly make a speech or teach, thus investing himself with the dignity of a teacher, but, instead, must submit to the ordinance handed down by the Lord, and to open his ear wide to them who have received the grace of teaching ability, and to be taught by them the divine facts thoroughly.
"Do not converse with heretics even for the sake of defending the faith, for fear lest their words instil their poison in your mind". Bl. Isaias Boner of Krakow (Polish, Augustinian priest, theologian, professor of Scripture, d. 1471)
You are really exposing the flank here. You listed quite a few who corrupted scriptures as much as or worse than Rome did.
Considering some of those popes in that *unbroken* chain, I suppose this one should be no surprise.
Prove it? At least provide some objective evidence:)
I didn’t even recognize some of those people posted.
It is a bit odd, they seemed to put a high fence around the table. But the point is even though I am not a Baptist, the admitted me to the table
Its not my blog madam, and the attribution which preceded the color formatted section, and the link just before it, sends you to the source.
And you can hardly complain about links without being a hypocrite, but at least mine are usually supplementary, not in lieu of my own argument.
Making you??? He simply informs about where to get more information if one desires and you see it as "making us"??
My response does have coherence (although no paragraphs), in the sense that I was picking at pictures of alleged Protestant leaders who are all described in this way.
“______________is the final biblical interpretive authority for many Protestants.”
Although all of these people remain influential in varying degrees, few of them can be considered “the final biblical interpretative authority” for anyone.
The OP’s point was that there are thousands of Protestant denominations, and then posted the pictures to show some of the denominational “founders.” Some of these never founded a separate denomination (e.g. Charles G. Finney), and some were not, strictly speaking, Protestant (Christian Science.) My point about Henry VIII is that, while he gave the OK for the Church of England to split from Rome, he is in no way any kind of “final biblical interpretative authority” for Anglicans or anyone else. And while Charles Wesley can be considered a founder of Methodism, it was John Wesley who was the brains and force behind the movement. He is the one who remains a theological influence. Charles just wrote the soundtrack. He is not “a final interpretative authority.”
To provide contrast to the thousands of Protestant denominations, the OP then added a post that there is one Church, founded by Jesus Christ, and that is the Catholic Church, with a unity of doctrine and one final interpretative authority.
I don’t have a problem with how first-century people followed itinerate preachers based on the power of their message. That is a fact. I do have a problem with the claim that the Church of Rome is the One, True Church founded by Jesus Christ, and that everyone not a Catholic is out in the dark. I also have a problem with the idea that on one hand there are Catholics and on the other hand there is “everybody else” and that those in the “everybody else” category who are not Eastern Orthodox are Protestants. They are not.
As you point out, “the primary distinctive of the Reformation was that of holding Scripture as supreme as the accurate wholly inspired word of God, not the assured veracity of men as in Rome.” But all of the original Reformers also maintained a continuity of doctrine and practice with historic Christianity. They held onto core doctrines that could be substantiated by Scripture. They continued the to observe the sacraments/ordinances of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. There are some identified on the photo list as “Protestants” who did not maintain that continuity. I would say that they cannot be called Protestants if the term has any true historical meaning.
So to make a long story longer, my problem with the original post is that it was making a point by misrepresenting history. And, I was actually taking your side, even though my incoherence and lack of paragraphs might have led you to believe otherwise. ;)
Those are great questions, especially if Revelation was authored after 64AD, when Peter was martyred. I doubt you'll get much argument on that point.
Ah, from your phrasing I really did not understand what you were getting at. You yourself could be civil and respond with better clarity. If I didn’t want to answer, I wouldn’t have asked. It’s up to you.
Similar experience. Recently retired from the Army 25 years.
Been deployed a lot so have attended chaplain services a good deal. My observations are such. You have the Roman Catholics and to some degree the Protestants who worship as they do attend one Mass service. Then the Lutherans and Reformed are the Main Line services. For many years all Protestant and Evangelicals attended that one service. For the past ten years there are offered Evangelical/Baptist services and in some cases a Gospel service for Pentecostals and Black churches.
It does depend on the Chaplains available. At least when I was last deployed there were a plethora of Evangelical and Baptist Chaplains and the Reformed joined in joyfully.
For Roman Catholics Mass was very difficult if you were not on a large FOB. The Catholic priests would travel much to various sites and if time permitting did a full mass or if not a communion service. The population of Catholic Army Chaplains is small.
But back to the point. Reformed, Baptist, Lutheran, Evangelical had no issues with fellowship and worship.
This really should be posted in the blog category if it is a vanity thread.
Well, then answer the question as you phrased it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.