How many non-denominations in the US and what causes this?

[paarsurrey]

I’m sorry but I don’t think Jesus wanted 30,000 denominations, but He wanted one church. One. Not 30,000 with contradictory beliefs.

Hi

I think the only hurdle is that every denomination considers itself to be “the only true Christian” and won’t even listen to the arguments of the others.

I think our friends here are disappointed that the holy spirit would ever unite them in one Christendom. Am I write?

I love Jesus and Mary as I do love Buddha and Krishna

Thanks

 

[ralphinal]

The Salvation Army does have its own theology and means of Baptising, so it is a denominaiton. However, most people never come into contact with that part of it.

I do not accept the 33,000 figure. I tend to see it as closer to 30 or so main branches with probably 200 or so sub-catagories.

Non-denominational is a coward’s way out. Instead of saying up front what they accept, they cloak it in a way so as to atract those who dislike another form of Christianity. By being without a denominaiton, they are a denomination.

There are no minor issues. If there were minor theological issues, the Church would not fracture. Every issue is major to someone.

 

[ChristianKnight]

You can’t even find two Protestants that agree on baptism (also mentioned in the verse I cited).

No need to lie.

 

[ChristianKnight]

Non-denominational is a coward’s way out. Instead of saying up front what they accept, they cloak it in a way so as to atract those who dislike another form of Christianity. By being without a denominaiton, they are a denomination.

hate you too, brother in christ

 

[Peter_J]

every denomination considers itself to be “the only true Christian”

Not every denomination. Some of them are in full communion with one or more other denominations.

Also, some denominations accept some form of “branch theory”.

 

[Peter_J]

hate you too, brother in christ

Be nice, CK. :tsktsk:

 

[paarsurrey]

Not every denomination. Some of them are in full communion with one or more other denominations.

Also, some denominations accept some form of “branch theory”.

Hi

Thank you and that would naturally reduce the number from 32000+. Can you make a guess then; ultimately how many would remain without budging or yielding to Unity?

Regards

 

[Peter_J]

Hi

Thank you and that would naturally reduce the number from 32000+. Can you make a guess then; ultimately how many would remain without budging or yielding to Unity?

Regards

To me, the whole “how many denominations are there?” question doesn’t really make a lot of sense.

Consider: let’s say that there a denomination with 1000 congregations, each having 100 members (so 100,000 total in the denomination). If it split into 2 denominations with 500 congregations each, that would mean the total number of denominations in the world would increase by 1, right? But suppose it kept spliting, until finally every one of those 1000 congregations was completely independent of the others. Does that mean you would decrease the number of denominations? Or would you count those 1000 congregations as 1000 different denominations?

Ralphinal’s statement makes more sense to me:

I do not accept the 33,000 figure. I tend to see it as closer to 30 or so main branches with probably 200 or so sub-catagories.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Jesus started a nonDenominational church

this is the answer. this kind of believe.

:bowdown2: :byzsoc:

 

[ralphinal]

Be nice, CK. :tsktsk:

CK was joking. I know it and so does he.

If you re-read what I said, the cowards are not the people in the pews but the church itself. Instead of being up-front and saying “This is where we stand,” they hide within a term that makes it seem that they hold no hard and fast doctrine, save Jesus is God. The uninitiated would think that a CAtholic would be as welcome as a Baptist who would be as welcome as a CoGiC. In fact, this is not the case.

To those who said that Jesus founded a non-denominational church, you are wrong. He founded a Church that had no denominations. There is a huge differance.

 

[khutcheson]

The Salvation Army does have its own theology and means of Baptising, so it is a denominaiton. However, most people never come into contact with that part of it.

I do not accept the 33,000 figure. I tend to see it as closer to 30 or so main branches with probably 200 or so sub-catagories.

Non-denominational is a coward’s way out. Instead of saying up front what they accept, they cloak it in a way so as to atract those who dislike another form of Christianity. By being without a denominaiton, they are a denomination.

There are no minor issues. If there were minor theological issues, the Church would not fracture. Every issue is major to someone.

I think you are saying that the divisions in Protestantism can’t be based on “minor” theological issues. I don’t think that’s correct.

I think that the divisions in Protestantism are as much about authority as theology. Protestants by and large feel that our authority is Christ acting through the Holy Spirit, not acting through the Church. We can each go directly to the source. Hence, there is less need for denominational structure, and little harm in separating from a denomination. Exceptions exist (conservative Presbyterians).

If we can go directly to Christ, why do we need the authority of a Church?

No authority, no unified theology.

 

[paarsurrey]

Protestants by and large feel that our authority is Christ acting through the Holy Spirit, not acting through the Church.

Hi

But how do the Protestants know that they are in direct communion with the Holy Spirit, which is not available to the Catholics? Aren’t the Catholics also in direct communication/consultation with the Holy Spirit?

Thanks

 

[JonNC]

I think you are saying that the divisions in Protestantism can’t be based on “minor” theological issues. I don’t think that’s correct.

I think that the divisions in Protestantism are as much about authority as theology. Protestants by and large feel that our authority is Christ acting through the Holy Spirit, not acting through the Church. We can each go directly to the source. Hence, there is less need for denominational structure, and little harm in separating from a denomination. Exceptions exist (conservative Presbyterians).

If we can go directly to Christ, why do we need the authority of a Church?

No authority, no unified theology.

As a Lutheran, I would argue that there is definitely a need for a church with authority (and at times I believe my own church, LCMS, is too congregational in structure, and not hierarchical enough). While it is true that each of us can go directly to Him in prayer, the church is there to provide the means of grace - word and sacrament. An ecclesial structure, too, is the work of the Holy Spirit.

Jon

 

[khutcheson]

Hi

But how do the Protestants know that they are in direct communion with the Holy Spirit, which is not available to the Catholics? Aren’t the Catholics also in direct communication/consultation with the Holy Spirit?

Thanks

A. Faith
B. I don’t think the difference between Catholics and Protestants on this point is in our access to the Holy Spirit, it’s on the authority of the Church. Catholics (I have no doubt) pray through the Holy Spirit, but also acknowledge (in theory) the authority of the Church. Hence, (as I understand it) the magisterium of the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit has more authority than the individual Catholics personal interpretation as guided by the Holy Spirit whereas your typical Protestant is less likely to regard the teaching/doctrines of his or her Church as being more authoritative than his or her personal interpretation.

 

[khutcheson]

As a Lutheran, I would argue that there is definitely a need for a church with authority (and at times I believe my own church, LCMS, is too congregational in structure, and not hierarchical enough). While it is true that each of us can go directly to Him in prayer, the church is there to provide the means of grace - word and sacrament. An ecclesial structure, too, is the work of the Holy Spirit.

Jon

Jon,

I’m not sure I disagree with you. However, I think it’s fair to say that the recognition of ecclesial authority in Protestantism is by and large on the wane and the authority that does exist has in many cases become downright cowardly compared to the Catholics for example. (It’s my observation that many denominations nowadys waffle on moral issues like homosexuality and abortion whereas the Catholic Bishops, to their eternal credit have stood fast).

I tend to think that the waffling in many Protestant denominations can only serve to weaken what athority is left.

 

[Syele]

you asked for a source i gave a source. for myself i can look around the city of 40,000 people i live in and if you take those numbers and then look around the my town they are comparable. 3 catholic churches ( all in communion with one another). then the fun begins there are church of Christ, disciples of of Christ, 5 or 6 different baptist. 4 different Methodist, 2 different Presbyterians. Church of God assemblies of God, SDA, LDS reform, i am forgetting some and not even going to list the independent and non denoms.

Ok sorry, I expected a reasonable source. Are you really trying to say you can count 28,000 Denominations in your city of 40,000 people? I hope not. And Denominations of what? Cause LDS arent even considered Christians by hardly anyone but themselves.

Hi

I think the only hurdle is that every denomination considers itself to be “the only true Christian” and won’t even listen to the arguments of the others.

I dont think there are many denominations that believe that.

The Salvation Army does have its own theology and means of Baptising, so it is a denominaiton. However, most people never come into contact with that part of it.

My friends in the Salvation Army said that they do not Baptize or have communion and that to become an officer they needed membership in another church so they would have access to those things. I understand its hearsay, so I could be wrong, but why would they have to show another church membership if they baptize?

I do not accept the 33,000 figure. I tend to see it as closer to 30 or so main branches with probably 200 or so sub-catagories.

That is pretty reasonable.

Non-denominational is a coward’s way out. Instead of saying up front what they accept, they cloak it in a way so as to atract those who dislike another form of Christianity. By being without a denominaiton, they are a denomination.

while I think non-denominationalism is sort of a denominaiton (they fall short of the definition cause they dont have central authority) I dont think they are cowards. I think they have a genuine desire for unity, but go about it in a wrong way.

There are no minor issues. If there were minor theological issues, the Church would not fracture. Every issue is major to someone.

Even the Catholic Church has issues that are undefined and you are not allowed to quarrel over them, IMO that is a defined minor issue. Another minor issue (THat would have been counted seperately in Barretts study) is style of worship and type of people attending. there are some churched populated with mostly elderly people who sing Hymns at church. A church down the street with identical theology but sings other songs and has familys with children should not be a seperate denomination. While those two churches would benefit form joining together IMO, they are not two seperate denominations.

 

[ralphinal]

I think you are saying that the divisions in Protestantism can’t be based on “minor” theological issues. I don’t think that’s correct.

I think that the divisions in Protestantism are as much about authority as theology. Protestants by and large feel that our authority is Christ acting through the Holy Spirit, not acting through the Church. We can each go directly to the source. Hence, there is less need for denominational structure, and little harm in separating from a denomination. Exceptions exist (conservative Presbyterians).

If we can go directly to Christ, why do we need the authority of a Church?

No authority, no unified theology.

No, I am saying that there are no minor issues. IF I am willing to leave over it, it is major to me. Authority is a major one to everyone.

 

[ralphinal]

My friends in the Salvation Army said that they do not Baptize or have communion and that to become an officer they needed membership in another church so they would have access to those things. I understand its hearsay, so I could be wrong, but why would they have to show another church membership if they baptize?

They have Articles of Faith and a list of Doctrines
salvationarmyusa.org/usn/www_usn_2.nsf/vw-dynamic-index/CE33D354A0544F368025732500314AF5?Opendocument

salvationarmyusa.org/usn/www_usn.nsf/vw-dynamic-index/85256DDC007274DF80256B7D004E8E3A?Opendocument

If you read it, it is clearly a Protestant mentality (no one would have denied that).

From the American Site

The Salvation Army’s membership consists of 3500 officers, 60,000 employees, 113,000 soldiers, 430,000 adherents , and more than 3.5 million volunteers. Adherents are people who have elected not to be enrolled as soldiers but consider The Salvation Army to be their place of worship. Soldiers are those who have signed a declaration of faith and practice known as A Soldiers’ Covenant and worship and serve through a local corps. Employees are personnel hired to perform specialized duties in fields such as social services, youth service, accounting, development, law, and property. Volunteers are those who give freely of their time, enabling The Salvation Army to meet far more community needs than otherwise possible.

Officers are the clergy of The Salvation Army. They have either completed training as cadets or auxiliary captains and have been ordained and commissioned to officership. All officers are engaged in continuing education. With its Christian heritage and motivation, The Salvation Army continues its unique service to all people in the name of Christ.

If you have folks who worship through them and clergy, they are a denomination.

That is pretty reasonable.

Thanks. I think you were part of that thread where we came up with that.

while I think non-denominationalism is sort of a denominaiton (they fall short of the definition cause they dont have central authority) I dont think they are cowards. I think they have a genuine desire for unity, but go about it in a wrong way.

The people are not cowards, the way they present themselves is cowardly. All too often, non-denominational means anti-Catholic. At least in Alabama it does.

Even the Catholic Church has issues that are undefined and you are not allowed to quarrel over them, IMO that is a defined minor issue. Another minor issue (THat would have been counted seperately in Barretts study) is style of worship and type of people attending. there are some churched populated with mostly elderly people who sing Hymns at church. A church down the street with identical theology but sings other songs and has familys with children should not be a seperate denomination. While those two churches would benefit form joining together IMO, they are not two seperate denominations.

I agree. I want to point out that what I am saying is that to the person who leaves, the devisive issue is not minor.

 

[khutcheson]

No, I am saying that there are no minor issues. IF I am willing to leave over it, it is major to me. Authority is a major one to everyone.

My point is that in my experience, Protestants don’t leave over doctrine, we leave over convenience. (moving, friends, schedule) The minor differences in doctrine between many Protestant Churches arise because we don’t have a unified theology, not because a group of people decided to leave their current Church and start a new one over a doctrinal issue.

(I’m focusing on today, not 400 years ago).

 

[ralphinal]

My point is that in my experience, Protestants don’t leave over doctrine, we leave over convenience. (moving, friends, schedule) The minor differences in doctrine between many Protestant Churches arise because we don’t have a unified theology, not because a group of people decided to leave their current Church and start a new one over a doctrinal issue.

(I’m focusing on today, not 400 years ago).

I won’t disagree. My own personal experiance says that a Protestant is more likely to change denominations over politics or preferance of style than substance.

I know of a baptist church that split into two over retaining a pastor.

However, if doctrine was so minor, why does anyone complain about infant baptism? Why do baptists re-baptize?