30 thousand denominations?

[Sellers1]

Or people who get kicked out against their will, like Martin Luther.

Good point and very true as well.

 

[Sellers1]

Baptists, Lutherans, Methodists, Assemblies of God, Chruch of Christ, Epsicopalian, Presbyterians, Mennonites, Amish, Quakers, Pentecostals
I could go on, but I already surpassed your claim of 8 denominations

What you did was to name many denominations in which they can be included in or associated with one of a few mainline Protestant churches. Assemblies of God churches are in direct association with Pentecostals etc. etc. Methodists split directly from Episcopalians. Your whole premise is really pointless.

 

[4Squarebaby]

What you did was to name many denominations in which they can be included in or associated with one of a few mainline Protestant churches. Assemblies of God churches are in direct association with Pentecostals etc. etc. Methodists split directly from Episcopalians. Your whole premise is really pointless.

If there is a doctrinal difference between the Foursquare Church and the Assemblies of God I have no ideal what it might be,

 

[Peter_J]

I was just thinking: perhaps it would help this thread if we could provide quotes from good Catholic scholars and/or apologists, that utilize the 30,000 denomination statistic.

The only one I can think of off the top of my head is from Scott Hahn:

Ever since the Reformation, over twenty-five thousand different Protestant denominations have come into existence, and experts say there are presently five new ones being formed every week. Every single one of them claims to be following the Holy Spirit and the plain meaning of Scripture. God knows we must need something more.
…

He then goes on to an analogy with the United States. If you have a copy of Rome Sweet Home, this is on page 73, continuing onto page 74.

Anyone else have a quote like that?

(Note: I apologize to anyone who’s tired of hearing about Dr. Hahn. I’m not obsessed with him or anything. Really. :ehh

 

[happilycatholic]

I was just thinking: perhaps it would help this thread if we could provide quotes from good Catholic scholars and/or apologists, that utilize the 30,000 denomination statistic.

The only one I can think of off the top of my head is from Scott Hahn:

He then goes on to an analogy with the United States. If you have a copy of Rome Sweet Home, this is on page 73, continuing onto page 74.

Anyone else have a quote like that?

(Note: I apologize to anyone who’s tired of hearing about Dr. Hahn. I’m not obsessed with him or anything. Really. :ehh

Is “denomination” defined by the Church? I wonder if we can consider say, the “Reformed Seventh Day Adventists” a different denomination from the mainstream SDA, according to the way the Church defines it. I’m not picking on SDA’s, that’s just the newest breakoff of a mainstream denomination I’ve noticed lately. (maybe because I’m indirectly involved in an SDA ministry right now)

…I’m taking questions on that one

 

[happilycatholic]

I was just thinking: perhaps it would help this thread if we could provide quotes from good Catholic scholars and/or apologists, that utilize the 30,000 denomination statistic.

The only one I can think of off the top of my head is from Scott Hahn:

He then goes on to an analogy with the United States. If you have a copy of Rome Sweet Home, this is on page 73, continuing onto page 74.

Anyone else have a quote like that?

(Note: I apologize to anyone who’s tired of hearing about Dr. Hahn. I’m not obsessed with him or anything. Really. :ehh

I am. I wish he were better looking though…I’M JUST KIDDING!!

 

[happilycatholic]

If all churches were going to be united under one single doctrine, what should that be?

Whatever the answer to that is, then that should be the answer to which church is ‘the’ Church of Christ.

The answer to this may not be as simple as Baptism, think about it.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

If all churches were going to be united under one single doctrine, what should that be?

Whatever the answer to that is, then that should be the answer to which church is ‘the’ Church of Christ.

The answer to this may not be as simple as Baptism, think about it.

The doctrine of Jesus Christ and Him crucified.

 

[Peter_J]

If all churches were going to be united under one single doctrine, what should that be?

What do you mean by “united under one single doctrine”?

 

[happilycatholic]

What do you mean by “united under one single doctrine”?

If there were one single doctrine that made us all apart of the same Church, what would that be?

 

[happilycatholic]

The doctrine of Jesus Christ and Him crucified.

Hi Richard!

This is a beautiful statement but how is it doctrine? Are you saying that all who believe Christ died for us are part of one Church? That cannot be so because even the dark one knows and believes Christ lived and then died to save us from hell.

This is a fact, but not a doctrine.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Hi Richard!

This is a beautiful statement but how is it doctrine? Are you saying that all who believe Christ died for us are part of one Church? That cannot be so because even the dark one knows and believes Christ lived and then died to save us from hell.

This is a fact, but not a doctrine.

I was not saying that all who believe in Christ are part of one church I was merely answering your question and I believe that your question was:

If all churches were going to be united under one single doctrine, what should that be?

If you do not think that Jesus Christ and Him crucified is a doctrine then you probably need to define doctrine.

 

[happilycatholic]

If you do not think that Jesus Christ and Him crucified is a doctrine then you probably need to define doctrine

This is the way doctrine is defined:

1.a particular principle, position, or policy taught or advocated, as of a religion or government.2.something that is taught; teachings collectively: *religious doctrine. *3.a body or system of teachings relating to a particular subject

That is why I asked you if you meant the belief that Christ died. (Edited to clarify) That is not something that is negotiable, it is fact. It happened and you may consider it a doctrine, but I do not. A doctrine is a formed position. In other words, open to interpretation.

As a matter of history, whether you are Christian or not, one can know that Christ lived and died. The fact that he died to save us from sin is a doctrine, but not the mere fact that he lived and died and the manner of his death. Jews know all of that, but do not hold the same doctrine that we do as Christians.

We hold to the doctrine of salvation through Christ because that is what Christ taught us. That was a doctrine that was taught through the Apostles.

Is that what you mean? When you say, “Jesus Christ and Him Crucified”. You are making a statement, but not stating a doctrine. It’s not even a complete statement (??)

I’m not trying to mince words here, I’m just trying to get down to the one single thing that protestants believe makes them a part of a universal church.

If I go on the face of what you last posted, Mormon doctrine and catholic doctrine are the same. They are DEFINITELY not.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

This is the way doctrine is defined:

1.a particular principle, position, or policy taught or advocated, as of a religion or government.2.something that is taught; teachings collectively: *religious doctrine. *3.a body or system of teachings relating to a particular subject

That is why I asked you if you meant the belief that Christ died. (Edited to clarify) That is not something that is negotiable, it is fact. It happened and you may consider it a doctrine, but I do not. A doctrine is a formed position. In other words, open to interpretation.

As a matter of history, whether you are Christian or not, one can know that Christ lived and died. The fact that he died to save us from sin is a doctrine, but not the mere fact that he lived and died and the manner of his death. Jews know all of that, but do not hold the same doctrine that we do as Christians.

We hold to the doctrine of salvation through Christ because that is what Christ taught us. That was a doctrine that was taught through the Apostles.

Is that what you mean? When you say, “Jesus Christ and Him Crucified”. You are making a statement, but not stating a doctrine. It’s not even a complete statement (??)

I’m not trying to mince words here, I’m just trying to get down to the one single thing that protestants believe makes them a part of a universal church.

If I go on the face of what you last posted, Mormon doctrine and catholic doctrine are the same. They are DEFINITELY not.

Well, It was never my intention to get into a protracted debate over what doctine is. I was merely answering your question.

If all churches were going to be united under one single doctrine, what should that be?

I assumned that you would include in “Christ and Him crucified” everything that that implies. I can see that I was wrong, however my answer stands. I believe that believing in Jesus Christ and Him crucified (for our sins) is all it takes to be in Christ’s church. And that is all that matters to me.

 

[happilycatholic]

*"

I was not saying that all who believe in Christ are part of one church I was merely answering your question…"

"I believe that believing in Jesus Christ and Him crucified (for our sins) is all it takes to be in Christ’s church. And that is all that matters to me.

 

[oberyn3]

*"

 

[jpaul1953]

I used to be a Protestant, and although I’m a Catholic, I don’t care much for the claim of “infallibility” even though I understand it’s only been invoked twice. Christ’s statement to Peter, on which the Papal seat rests, is that what he / his office “binds will be bound in heaven, and what you loose will be loosed in heaven.” Christ was giving His church authority to bind and loose.

I disagree with the church’s ruling on the contraceptive pill for example. I think it was actually God’s idea, given at the very time population pressures were becoming a real problem in some places. Already over a billion people go to bed hungry each day according to the UN, and what’s the Church’s answer? Have more kids you can’t afford to feed. As my old Protestant pastor commented, “The church can be pretty stupid at times.”

But since the Church has made a ruling on this, it is binding, not only on earth, but also in heaven ergo. where does a Catholic woman or couple stand who used the pill but did not confess it?

However the church can also reverse this ruling, and thus loose it in heaven as well as on earth. And I just wish it would come to its senses and get the job done.

However I remember the same old Protestant pastor making the comment “When it comes to theology, Protestants couldn’t agree how far to spit.”

Dear Bob Crowley,

As Jesus said himself : “There will always be the poor.” If we learn to live the way Christ has taught us and don’t break the rules too many times, there would not be an influx of poor children. It’s from those who do not know Jesus and/or his methods for leading a good, decent life on earth.

Remember, Jesus said the rich have already received their rewards. Don’t you think that maybe the poor haven’t. When looking at life, I believe we must look beyond our life to eternity, being that eternity is forever and physical life is so truly short even though when we suffer life passes slowly.

The Church does seems old fashion, but I believe that whatever Jesus left us with is the correct way to live. For instance : If you keep your eyes focused on the Lord, He will keep you in perfect peace." or “If you delight in the Lord, He will give you the desires of your heart. To receive the greatest affect of these verses, you must do it perfectly. But, we can’t. So it is something to strive for with perfection always one step ahead of us. He also told us: " My yoke is even and my burden is light” He tells us that as long as we ask and obey , He’ll help us get through anything.

Padre Pio said that we receive much suffering in our lives Christ loves us more. Basically saying that the more Jesus loves us the more suffering we will receive. All this makes me think that our Church is right on target with Christ, as strange as that may sound.

May God always guide us.

jpaul1953

 

[Peter_J]

Then can you accept that others are not catholic because they don’t see more of catholicism in the Scriptures than in any other denomination? You seem to be reserving the right of choice and interpretation for yourself but denying it for others simply because they choose and/or interpret differently.

Interesting question. I don’t claim to speak for happilycatholic (even though I am happily catholic) but I would at least like to point out that the post you responded to said (emphasis added):

Another reason why I am catholic. I see more catholicism in the Scriptures than any other religious denomination in the entire world.

 

[Peter_J]

What I’m getting at is this, there has to be at least one doctrine held by those in a group by which they can be identified as members of that group without question. To most catholics, this is the Church. The doctrine that the Church is the authority on interpreting God’s Word and upholding Traditions handed down by Christ and his Apostles regarding faith and morals. That must come first because how would we know how to live in the Word? How else would they have known what to write in Scripture? If we do not believe this, then no matter what we profess, we are not catholic. It doesn’t mean we have to like it, it means we just surrender to the fact that it’s correct. Heck, I’m having trouble with the annument process myself. I, for the life of me don’t understand why I have to do it. But I digress.

Hi happilycatholic,

What reference(s) or citation(s) can you give us that say that the doctrine that the Church is the authority on interpreting God’s Word and upholding Traditions handed down by Christ and his Apostles regarding faith and morals “must come first”?

 

[Sellers1]

If there is a doctrinal difference between the Foursquare Church and the Assemblies of God I have no ideal what it might be,

If you are like I am, you probably don’t care either.