30,000 denominations?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mick_Taylor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
totally << I wonder where did Barret manage to count 200+ Catholic ‘denominations’. Is he a Catholic himself and does he knows about Catholic’s Faith, otherwise where did the 200 denomination appears when we share exactly same belief in America, Africa, Europe, Asia and Australia? >>

As I’ve mentioned here and in previous threads on this "33,000 denominations" topic, Barrett is “counting by country.” So the “Roman Catholic Church” in the U.S.A. is a different “denomination” than the RCC in Canada, etc. There are 242 countries in Barrett’s 2-volume encyclopedia, therefore there are 242 “Catholic” denominations. Barrett is an Anglican. There are also groups that claim to be (in some sense) “Catholic” in Barrett’s encyclopedia among the “Independents” (about 3% of these) and “Marginals” (a couple of these). I lay it all out here:

Facts and Stats on 33,000 Denominations

But he does admit that the (Roman) Catholic Church is one group worldwide:

“As a statistical unit in this Encyclopedia, a ‘denomination’ always refers to one single country. Thus the Roman Catholic Church, although a single organization, is described here as consisting of 236 denominations in the world’s 238 countries.” (Barrett, et al, World Christian Encyclopedia, volume 1, page 27, in the “Glossary” under definition for “Denomination” [later updated to 242], emphasis added)

And for the record, No, I don’t attribute all the differences and denominations among Protestants to Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone privately interpreted), but many of the splits, major and minor, are indeed due to differences of interpretation of the Bible. What Protestants hold in common with Catholics and Orthodox are the ancient creeds and councils (Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon) and in that sense you can have “orthodox” Protestant denominations. Otherwise “orthodox” doesn’t have much meaning in Protestantism.

I have a new evangelical DVD (The Marks of a Cult: A Biblical Analysis) on the “cults” from “Apologetics Group” (hosted by Eric Holmberg of the anti-rock “Hells Bells” fame) featuring James White, E. Calvin Beisner, and others and it is funny how many times they refer to the “ancient Church”, “historical” Christianity or the “historic” Christian Church, or historical / historic “Christian doctrine”, or the historical / historic or “orthodox” Creeds and Councils of the Church, as their standard for what is true Christianity (as opposed to the “cults”). The DVD doesn’t appeal to the Bible alone as such (although it claims to give a “Biblical Analysis”), but to the ancient Orthodox Catholic creeds and councils of the first 5 centuries. That is indeed the benchmark for true orthodox Christianity, but that “Christianity” was thoroughly Catholic as well (on the sacraments, Baptism, Eucharist, Confession, ministerial priesthood, Liturgy/Mass, prayers for the dead / purgatory, prayers with / to the saints, Papacy, Marian doctrines, etc). Unfortunately they don’t tell you that in the DVD. :rolleyes: Did I get enough links in? 👍

Phil P
 
Wrong, only one book claims to be inspired in the NT, Revelations…How do we know Mark wrote Mark? How do we know for sure the auther of Acts is the same author as Hebrews or Romans??..In fact many scholars believe the author of Hebrews is unkown and not Paul, hence the writing styles from Acts to Romans to Hebrews is very different .Paul tells timothy that scripture is inspired and profitable for teaching, but he is talking about the OT…even then what books of the OT is Paul referring too???.. The book of Wicca claims to be inspired so does the Koran, and much others. …On what authority do we say the Christian bible is inspired, vs all others??? Who does the Holy Spirit speak too, the individual interepreter,??? dont think so!
You might have misunderstood what I meant by “self-testify”. I wasn’t suggesting that a manuscript becomes self-testifying (that it is God-breathed) merely by stating that it is God-breathed. What I mean by “self-testify” is that Scripture by nature, is utterly unique–spiritually set apart from all writings that are non-inspired. Since spiritual things are spiritually discerned, it follows that the unregenerate (unspiritual) as a general rule, have no possibility of recognizing writings that are of divine origin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top