Bible Question

[RedSoxFan]

I would like to pose a question based on several other ongoing threads about the Bible.

There are literally thousands of versions of the Bible printed, from what I’ve read. Let’s keep it to round numbers and say 1000 for argument’s sake. Let’s also assume that 90% of them do not have any material differences. For example, one uses the word “spake” instead of “spoke”. So they are essentially the same.

That leaves 100 Bibles with material differences. Actually, that leaves 1 true Bible, and 99 heretical copies.

How do you decide which Bible is the one true Bible? As a Catholic, I have an easy and guaranteed way to the One, but I’m interested in what others have to say.

I don’t believe there is one true bible. The bible with the NIHIL OBSTAT and the IMPRIMATUR are the ones that I use for devotion. The one with these both that you read must be the perfect one, if only for you!

~RedSoxFan

 

[clmowry]

600 if you included Roman Catholics and Orthodox Catholics, then you separated the Protestants groups in the same way. but this data seem only useful for propaganda Protestants are not nearly as divided as Roman Catholics (in general) make it sound.

I don’t think using the 32,000 number is “necessary” or useful.

Then again, I also think 2 is one too many.

Chuck

 

[JTBT]

I don’t think using the 32,000 number is “necessary” or useful.

Then again, I also think 2 is one too many.

Chuck

**1 Cor. 11:19 **

 

[clmowry]

**1 Cor. 11:19 **

You are not suggesting Paul thinks factions are a good thing are you?

17 But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. 18* For, in the first place, when you assemble as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you; and I partly believe it, 19 for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. 20 When you meet together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat. 21 For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal, and one is hungry and another is drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not.

 

[JTBT]

You are not suggesting Paul thinks factions are a good thing are you?

no just making the point that factions are nothing new

 

[Ne_OrangeKnight]

no just making the point that factions are nothing new

But what is that supposed to prove? Idolatry, adultery, murder: these have also been around for a long time. Shall we embrace them, too? I’m sorry, but I just don’t understand the point you were trying to make.

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight

 

[CentralFLJames]

who compiles the data?

The book authors Barrett, Kurian, Johnson collected the data from many different sources.

We Catholics consider most non-Catholics generally as “Protestants” except for what the book calls - “Marginal Christians”. These other groups include such Johnny Come Latelys like: Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, various “Arian” or pseudo-Christian cults, some Christian science or “mind science” cults, some Unitarian/Universalist groups, and tiny numbers of so-called Christian or Catholic “Gnostics.” There are about 16,000 of these.

To tie this into the OP let me say that since core Protestantism boasts doctrinal unity, if not ecclesiastical unity and equivalence, around the concept of “protest” and the 5 solas then it is only fair to lump them all together by their own standard. Hence any “ecclesiastical community” that uses the traditional Protestant Bibles (e.g. KJV) are related through (what Catholics consider a grave theological error) Sola Scriptura. So these can all rightly be considered together as just different variants of that same core cultish “protest” principal.

To wit: We have about 9,000 core Protestant sects if we don’t consider the independents. This includes the following sects:
Adventist ,Baptist, Christian Brethren (Plymouth Brethren, Open only) , Congregational, Congregationalist Disciple, Restorationist, Restorationist Baptist, Christian Dunker (Tunker), Dipper, German Baptist, Brethren Exclusive Brethren (Plymouth Brethren, Closed, Strict) ,Anglican Evangelical, Independent Evangelical Fundamentalist , Holiness (Conservative Methodist, Wesleyan, Free Methodist) , Lutheran / Reformed united church or joint mission, Lutheran, Mennonite, Anabaptist (Left Wing or Radical Reformation) , Methodist (mainline Methodist, United Methodist) ,Moravian (Continental Pietist) , Nondenominational (no church or anti-church groups) , Oneness-Pentecostal or Unitarian-Pentecostal: Jesus Only , Baptistic-Pentecostal or Keswick-Pentecostal , Holiness-Pentecostal: 3-crisis-experience
Apostolic, or Pentecostal Apostolic (living apostles) , Pentecostal (Protestant; Classical Pentecostal) , Friends (Quaker), Reformed, Presbyterian , Salvationist (Salvation Army) , United church (union of bodies of different traditions) , Waldensian community church or union congregation,

The largest of these out of 318 million total Protestants (year 1995 numbers for members, year 2000 numbers for denominations) are the Lutherans (61 million members, 253 denominations), next are Baptistic-Pentecostal/Keswick (49 million members, 396 denominations), followed by Baptists (48 million members, 322 denominations), Reformed/Presbyterian (44 million members, 300 denominations), Methodists (23 million members, 123 denominations), United church (22 million members, 54 denominations), Lutheran/Reformed united (15 million members, 24 denominations), and various Adventist groups (11 million members, 218 denominations). From these are formed nearly 9000 Protestant Christian denominations. Someone might complain about the “Oneness” groups being included since they reject the Holy Trinity (one God in three distinct Persons) and the historic Creeds, but that’s how Barrett’s Encyclopedia categorizes them, for whatever reason.

**If you count the “mega-bloc” of “Protestants” only it is 9000 / 33000 or 27% of the total. However, if you combine Protestants with Independents and Anglicans ( [22000 + 9000 + 168] / 33000) it is 94% of the total or 31,000+ . **

The bottom line is that the only thing each of these protestant sects really have in common is their KJVs (or other similar protestant bibles), baptism (most with water), “protest” against Catholicism, and factionalism. None will claim equivalence with the other and each think they are the One True Church.

**None of these various Protestant secs have a legitimate and traceable apostolic succession; none of them have valid priestly orders; and none of them have any divine given authority to exist outside of a human interpretation of the Bible handed down to them from the Catholic Church. All these Protestant sects were started by individual men conjuring up a new private interpretation of scripture and not one of them ever new a single original apostle of Christ or early Christian personally. **

James

 

[JTBT]

The book authors Barrett, Kurian, Johnson collected the data from many different sources.

We Catholics consider most non-Catholics generally as “Protestants” except for what the book calls - “Marginal Christians”. These other groups include such Johnny Come Latelys like: Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, various “Arian” or pseudo-Christian cults, some Christian science or “mind science” cults, some Unitarian/Universalist groups, and tiny numbers of so-called Christian or Catholic “Gnostics.” There are about 16,000 of these.

To tie this into the OP let me say that since core Protestantism boasts doctrinal unity, if not ecclesiastical unity and equivalence, around the concept of “protest” and the 5 solas then it is only fair to lump them all together by their own standard. Hence any “ecclesiastical community” that uses the traditional Protestant Bibles (e.g. KJV) are related through (what Catholics consider a grave theological error) Sola Scriptura. So these can all rightly be considered together as just different variants of that same core cultish “protest” principal.

To wit: We have about 9,000 core Protestant sects if we don’t consider the independents. This includes the following sects:
Adventist ,Baptist, Christian Brethren (Plymouth Brethren, Open only) , Congregational, Congregationalist Disciple, Restorationist, Restorationist Baptist, Christian Dunker (Tunker), Dipper, German Baptist, Brethren Exclusive Brethren (Plymouth Brethren, Closed, Strict) ,Anglican Evangelical, Independent Evangelical Fundamentalist , Holiness (Conservative Methodist, Wesleyan, Free Methodist) , Lutheran / Reformed united church or joint mission, Lutheran, Mennonite, Anabaptist (Left Wing or Radical Reformation) , Methodist (mainline Methodist, United Methodist) ,Moravian (Continental Pietist) , Nondenominational (no church or anti-church groups) , Oneness-Pentecostal or Unitarian-Pentecostal: Jesus Only , Baptistic-Pentecostal or Keswick-Pentecostal , Holiness-Pentecostal: 3-crisis-experience
Apostolic, or Pentecostal Apostolic (living apostles) , Pentecostal (Protestant; Classical Pentecostal) , Friends (Quaker), Reformed, Presbyterian , Salvationist (Salvation Army) , United church (union of bodies of different traditions) , Waldensian community church or union congregation,

The largest of these out of 318 million total Protestants (year 1995 numbers for members, year 2000 numbers for denominations) are the Lutherans (61 million members, 253 denominations), next are Baptistic-Pentecostal/Keswick (49 million members, 396 denominations), followed by Baptists (48 million members, 322 denominations), Reformed/Presbyterian (44 million members, 300 denominations), Methodists (23 million members, 123 denominations), United church (22 million members, 54 denominations), Lutheran/Reformed united (15 million members, 24 denominations), and various Adventist groups (11 million members, 218 denominations). From these are formed nearly 9000 Protestant Christian denominations. Someone might complain about the “Oneness” groups being included since they reject the Holy Trinity (one God in three distinct Persons) and the historic Creeds, but that’s how Barrett’s Encyclopedia categorizes them, for whatever reason.

**If you count the “mega-bloc” of “Protestants” only it is 9000 / 33000 or 27% of the total. However, if you combine Protestants with Independents and Anglicans ( [22000 + 9000 + 168] / 33000) it is 94% of the total or 31,000+ . **

The bottom line is that the only thing each of these protestant sects really have in common is their KJVs (or other similar protestant bibles), baptism (most with water), “protest” against Catholicism, and factionalism. None will claim equivalence with the other and each think they are the One True Church.

**None of these various Protestant secs have a legitimate and traceable apostolic succession; none of them have valid priestly orders; and none of them have any divine given authority to exist outside of a human interpretation of the Bible handed down to them from the Catholic Church. All these Protestant sects were started by individual men conjuring up a new private interpretation of scripture and not one of them ever new a single original apostle of Christ or early Christian personally. **

James

this is pure propaganda, I wonder how many sects I could come up with if I started dividing the Roman Church in this manner into pre Vatican II, Post Vatican II, Jesuits, etc .
and to link Protestants by the KJV (which is a good translation) without looking into doctrine is at best rude and deceptive.

 

[JTBT]

But what is that supposed to prove? Idolatry, adultery, murder: these have also been around for a long time. Shall we embrace them, too? I’m sorry, but I just don’t understand the point you were trying to make.

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight

that’s a bit dramatic. the point is the early church did not divide over small stuff.

 

[mercygate]

that’s a bit dramatic. the point is the early church did not divide over small stuff.

The question becomes, who decides what is “small?”

 

[JTBT]

The question becomes, who decides what is “small?”

well people can be divided on almost any issue. It is a much harder thing to stay together among differences of opinion and say we agree to disagree. personally I think the reason the early Church was so unified is they were too busy trying to stay alive and lead people to Christ. So didn’t have time to squabble with each other.

 

[mercygate]

well people can be divided on almost any issue. It is a much harder thing to stay together among differences of opinion and say we agree to disagree. personally I think the reason the early Church was so unified is they were too busy trying to stay alive and lead people to Christ. So didn’t have time to squabble with each other.

You can say THAT again. Also, in the Apostolic and sub-Apostolic Church they were concentrated on “details” like the Resurrection. Moreover, the immediate connection to the Apostolic-eyewitness teaching was closer. Everybody could point directly to the person they learned something from: Paul, James, Peter, John . . . It was ALL about: WHO told you that? And the answer was close to the bone. But with the advent of sophisticated heresies, the ante went up, and Apostolic succession was put on the grill and forced to hammer out nuanced definitions of doctrine that never would have occured in the first days of the Church.

 

[CentralFLJames]

this is pure propaganda, I wonder how many sects I could come up with if I started dividing the Roman Church in this manner into pre Vatican II, Post Vatican II, Jesuits, etc .
and to link Protestants by the KJV (which is a good translation) without looking into doctrine is at best rude and deceptive.

You can make the charge of propaganda but the facts are objective and speak for themselves. I suppose somone could call Jesus’ condemnation of the Pharisees, scribes and lawyers propaganda too - but it was actually His duty to warn of sin, appeal to reason and present an invitation to repent. Is is every Christian’s obligation to speak out when they know somone is in grave error.

You will not find a single sect within Catholicism by dividing The Church around pre and post Vatican or by religious orders. Any person or subgroup not in full communion with Rome and Catholic Teaching is automatically seperated and not part of us. There are no seperate independent churches within The Catholic Church. In fact anyone who commits a mortal sin is automatically outside of The Church until they repent. Therefor the Catholic Church by matter of cannon law never has any internal schisms. Those that don’t repent simply seperate themselves from us or are free to leave us and go create a new protestant sect or some sort of pseudo Catholic church. The latter are not “Catholic” even if they put up a sign that says “Catholic” since they are not obedient to the Bishops or Rome.

For the record the Jesuits, Franciscans, Carmelites, Dominicans etc. are not seperate churches within The Catholic Church. Some Protestants don’t understand this. These are just specific Holy Orders within the One Church but are 100% in FULL communion with The Church. These orders are specific disciplines with very advanced forms of devotion, prayer, austere lifestyles and spiritual advancement styles that permit one to attain higher levels of Christian service and devotion. There are even secular orders of these that the laity may join.

This is what is really the wonderful thing about Catholicism - everyone can find a way to advance in holiness through common shared worship or through selecting from the many diverse religious disciplines that are all consistently in agreement with the One Universal Teaching. Even those Catholics who are outside the predominant Latin Rite have a wonderful set of ecclesiastical traditions that all integrate and add to the amazing diversity of The Catholic Church. Some focus on charity, others on mercy, some on prayer, some on teaching etc.

We here in the US are all part of the Western church (the Latin Rite). But there are also 22 Eastern Catholic churches, divided into 2,782 jurisdictional areas around the world. But we are all the same people who proudly call ourselves Catholic and are obedient the Christ’s apostolic successor in Rome.

This differs substantially from the Protestant splits. None of the hundreds or thousands (depending on how you want to categorize them) of different Protestant sects ever boast or pretend that they are all united under one teaching and belief outside of their own particular sect. And some sects vary in teaching from church to church, city to city and state to state. Clearly none of these are “universal” churches.

James

 

[mercygate]

You can make the charge of propaganda but the facts are objective and speak for themselves. I suppose somone could call Jesus’ condemnation of the Pharisees, scribes and lawyers propaganda too - but it was actually His duty to warn of sin, appeal to reason and present an invitation to repent. Is is every Christian’s obligation to speak out when they know somone is in grave error.

You will not find a single sect within Catholicism by dividing The Church around pre and post Vatican or by religious orders. Any person or subgroup not in full communion with Rome and Catholic Teaching is automatically seperated and not part of us. There are no seperate independent churches within The Catholic Church. In fact anyone who commits a mortal sin is automatically outside of The Church until they repent. Therefor the Catholic Church by matter of cannon law never has any internal schisms. Those that don’t repent simply seperate themselves from us or are free to leave us and go create a new protestant sect or some sort of pseudo Catholic church. The latter are not “Catholic” even if they put up a sign that says “Catholic” since they are not obedient to the Bishops or Rome.

For the record the Jesuits, Franciscans, Carmelites, Dominicans etc. are not seperate churches within The Catholic Church. Some Protestants don’t understand this. These are just specific Holy Orders within the One Church but are 100% in FULL communion with The Church. These orders are specific disciplines with very advanced forms of devotion, prayer, austere lifestyles and spiritual advancement styles that permit one to attain higher levels of Christian service and devotion. There are even secular orders of these that the laity may join.

This is what is really the wonderful thing about Catholicism - everyone can find a way to advance in holiness through common shared worship or through selecting from the many diverse religious disciplines that are all consistently in agreement with the One Universal Teaching. Even those Catholics who are outside the predominant Latin Rite have a wonderful set of ecclesiastical traditions that all integrate and add to the amazing diversity of The Catholic Church. Some focus on charity, others on mercy, some on prayer, some on teaching etc.

We here in the US are all part of the Western church (the Latin Rite). But there are also 22 Eastern Catholic churches, divided into 2,782 jurisdictional areas around the world. But we are all the same people who proudly call ourselves Catholic and are obedient the Christ’s apostolic successor in Rome.

This differs substantially from the Protestant splits. None of the hundreds or thousands (depending on how you want to categorize them) of different Protestant sects ever boast or pretend that they are all united under one teaching and belief outside of their own particular sect. And some sects vary in teaching from church to church, city to city and state to state. Clearly none of these are “universal” churches.

James

Actually, the Eastern Churches under the Bishop of Rome are “separate and independent” canonically, although not doctrinally, and they CERTAINLY do not qualify for the label, “denomination”

 

[clmowry]

well people can be divided on almost any issue. It is a much harder thing to stay together among differences of opinion and say we agree to disagree. personally I think the reason the early Church was so unified is they were too busy trying to stay alive and lead people to Christ. So didn’t have time to squabble with each other.

I think scripture and the writings of the Church Fathers indicate pretty clearly that even with Emperors feeding them to the lions Christian folks still found time to argue with each other.

I think one of the main reasons they remained (relatively) united in the Catholic Faith for the first 1,000 or so years of Christianity is the fact that Apostles (and their successors) were the foundation on which the church was based.

Despite the fact that we have scripture and records of other early Christian writings it is clear (at least to me) that early Christianity was not based on “writings” but on the church community and its leadership.

Frankly, I do not know how we could expect otherwise.

In the first few centuries after Christ’s death, very few people would have direct access to scripture. If someone wished to hear, the words of scripture he would need to go to the “church” where they could hear someone who could read proclaim the gospel to him.

I do not think anyone would estimate the literacy rate among early Christians at more than say 5-10%.

I also doubt that there would be more than a few copies of any given piece of scripture at any given local church.

If you wanted to be Christian, you “had” to remain part of the church.

For similar reasons I do not think you would see any dissension against Church teaching led by the lay population.

The “arguments” seem to be started by and be between various church leaders. (Anybody can make a mistake, but it takes an educated man to really mess things up!)

For example, I have a hard time thinking that large portions of the Church’s lay population actually put much thought into analyzing the theological complexities of adding the Filioque to the creed. They likely just followed their bishops’ (i.e. local Church community’s) lead.

Chuck

 

[CentralFLJames]

I did a little more research on the numbers in Barrett’s reference book. BTW there is one more reference:

According to United Nations there were over 23,000 competing and often contradictory denominations world-wide (World Census of Religious Activities ). This was cited in Frank Schaeffer’s book Dancing Alone (Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Press, 1994), p. 4. Schaeffer is Orthodox.

All that said though, some Catholic apologists are admitting that the categorization of “denominations” are organized around autonomy in jurisdiction rather than around doctrinal equivalence. So, the numbers of non-Catholic denominations while alarmingly large under Barret’s categorization methodology would be significantly smaller if re-grouped according to similarity of doctrine. Nonetheless, having more than One True Church calling itself “Christian” is a huge embarrassment to Christianity at large and NOT what Christ founded. Statistically this means that 99% of them are impostors with at best only fractional truths.

Protestants are the ones who seperated themselves from the Catholic Church. So no matter what the precise numbers really are (depending on counting method), all Protestants have a huge problem. None can biblically justify denominationalism and sectarianism nor resolve the internal causes of same. Most of us Catholics see the core problems that fragment and further distance our “seperated brothers” from The True Church to be: Sola Scriptura, private judgment, so-called “supremacy of conscience,” the sectarian and exclusivistic mindsets, anti-institutionalism, anti-sacerdotalism, rejection of a binding apostolic tradition and Church, and of apostolic succession, episcopacy, even American cultural individualism running rampant within American Protestantism, etc. Irrespective of the causes the fundamental question is how long will it take for individual Protestants to see the truth and come home to The Catholic Church.

James

 

[sodak]

… the KJV (which is a good translation)…

Convince me why the KJV is a good, inspired, and accurate translation.

That’s one of the main points of this thread!

 

[JTBT]

Convince me why the KJV is a good, inspired, and accurate translation.

That’s one of the main points of this thread!

do you think that the books in the KJV are not inspired? what are the matieral differences you would like to discuss?

 

[sodak]

I would like to know why you think it is inspired. How do you know that it is an accurate Bible? If someone is going to base a large part of their faith upon it, then I would assume that someone would assure themselves as to it’s accuracy.

 

[JTBT]

I would like to know why you think it is inspired. How do you know that it is an accurate Bible? If someone is going to base a large part of their faith upon it, then I would assume that someone would assure themselves as to it’s accuracy.

veritas.org/media/talks/530