James White on Lk 1:28 and Kecharitomene

[rpavich]

Steve B,

Just so that you know, If one is divided from the Catholic Church they aren’t Catholic…by definition

See the previous post for the source.

And the same goes for the supposed Protestant denominations…

Now who’s gonna call Steve Ray and Tim Staples and tell them that nobody’s gonna use that source anymore…?

 

[Tram_Is_the_Way]

“World Christian Encyclopedia”

Not a very credible source since it is full of errors.

And given that each denominational is a denomination unto itself, there are now millions and millions of denominations.

 

[Tram_Is_the_Way]

I would respect James White if he opened his blogs to commments. He is nothing more then a coward in that aspect.

Take Jimmy Akins blog? Open to the public for comments.

 

[PhilVaz]

steveb << your source? Just so that you know, If one is divided from the Catholic Church they aren’t Catholic…by definition >>

Not to get off topic, but I did an article on the Barrett World Christian Encyclopedia and the “242 Roman Catholic denominations.” There are 242 (or 245) countries according to Barrett’s stats from 2000, and he places the RCC in each country as a separate “denomination.” It is a strange way of counting.

For the unique number of Protestant denoms, we must remove those duplicated in each country by Barrett. I went through the stats available online at "World Christian Database" here:

The Facts and Stats on 33,000 Denominations

A List of 5000+ Protestant Denominations

Phil P

 

[rpavich]

Not a very credible source since it is full of errors.

Then for the love of Pete…can we, you, CA, Steve Ray, Tim Staples** QUIT SITING IT?**

And I guess underlying it all is the idea that somehow if one is not totally unified then it’s the fault of “Sola Scriptura”…

As I pointed out…if there is not JUST ONE unified RCC church, (and there is not) then it’s the fault of the Magisterium…

And you can see what a leap in logic that was…so flip it over and it doesn’t get any more logical…

 

[Tram_Is_the_Way]

%between%

A List of 5000+ Protestant Denominations

And that is just the named ones. It does include each individual non-denominational church in which there are millions and millions.

Just in my small town there are over a hundred. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry think they are being called by God to preach a different Gospel…

 

[wmscott]

First, James White’s position requires less faith, rather than more. It is belief in less, rather than more. It shows a belief in a grossly simpliifed Gospel, a “New Gospel” if you will. It demonstrates a belief in a God who has been fashioned for the preferences of men, rather than the reverse. It reveals a strict purpose of being against God’s revealed truth of the ages. It is based on a selected use of language, while ignoring the greater context of the complete Gospel message. It denies the entire history of the Church, as well as the beliefs and teachings of the greatest theologians, Saints, martyrs and other leaders in Christian faith. It is a viewpoint that has, at its very basis, a negativity toward established doctrine.

Mr. White clearly holds himself to be superior in intellect, reasoning ability,and prophetic gift, if not in faith, to each and every one of these early Church fathers:

Alexander of Alexandria [SAINT]
Alexander of Lycopolis
Ambrose (340-397) [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
Aphrahat/Aphraates (c. 280-367)
Archelaus
Aristides the Philosopher
Arnobius
Athanasius [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
Athenagoras
Augustine of Hippo [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
Bardesanes (154-222)
Barnabas [SAINT]
Basil the Great [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
Caius
Clement of Alexandria [SAINT]
Clement of Rome [SAINT]
Commodianus
Cyprian of Carthage [SAINT]
Cyril of Jerusalem [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
Dionysius of Rome [SAINT]
Dionysius the Great
Ephraim the Syrian (306-373) [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 265-c. 340)
Gennadius of Marseilles
Gregory the Great, Pope (c. 540-604) [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
Gregory Nazianzen [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
Gregory of Nyssa [SAINT]
Gregory Thaumaturgus [SAINT]
Hermas
Hilary of Poitiers [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
Hippolytus [SAINT]
Ignatius of Antioch [SAINT]
Irenaeus of Lyons [SAINT]
Jerome [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
John of Damascus [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
John Cassian (c. 360-c. 435)
John Chrysostom [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
Julius Africanus
Justin Martyr [SAINT]
Lactantius
Leo the Great, Pope (c. 395-461) [SAINT] [DOCTOR]
Malchion
Mar Jacob (452-521)
Mathetes
Methodius
Minucius Felix
Moses of Chorene (c. 400-c. 490)
Novatian
Origen
Pamphilus [SAINT]
Papias [SAINT]
Peter of Alexandria [SAINT]
Polycarp [SAINT]
Rufinus
Socrates Scholasticus (c. 379-c. 450)
Sozomen (c. 375-c. 447)
Sulpitius Severus (c. 363-c. 420)
Tatian
Tertullian
Theodoret
Theodotus
Theophilus
Venantius
Victorinus [SAINT]
Vincent of Lérins (d. c. 450) [SAINT]

Each of these was absolutely convinced of the truth of the Church - but not James White.

James White also apparently believes that he is superior to each of the following Doctors of the Church:

St. Albert
St. Alphonsus Liguori
St. Anselm
St. Anthony of Padua
St. Augustine
St. Bede, the Venerable
St. Bernard of Clairvaux
St. Bonaventure
St. Catherine of Siena
St. Cyril of Alexandria
St. Francis de Sales
St. Isidore
St. John of the Cross
St. Lawrence of Brindisi
St. Peter Canisius
St. Peter Chrysologus
St. Peter Damian
St. Robert Bellarmine
St. Teresa of Avila
St. Therese of Lisieux
St. Thomas Aquinas

Each of these was absolutely convinced of the truth of the Church - but not James White.

Rather, why don’t you consider that the oldest organization on earth might just have it right? Why must the Church which Christ founded always be wrong? Do you think this is our private Church? Do you think this is a competition? No! It is Christ’s desire for us to be in Him. He gave a Church to the entire world, for all remaining time. We have joined her after being convinced of her truth, and after coming to faith through the grace of the Lord.

:clapping::clapping::clapping:

po18guy, when I grow up I want to be as good as you

 

[Tram_Is_the_Way]

Then for the love of Pete…can we, you, CA, Steve Ray, Tim Staples** QUIT SITING IT?**

And I guess underlying it all is the idea that somehow if one is not totally unified then it’s the fault of “Sola Scriptura”…

As I pointed out…if there is not JUST ONE unified RCC church, (and there is not) then it’s the fault of the Magisterium…

And you can see what a leap in logic that was…so flip it over and it doesn’t get any more logical…

Are they still stating it presently? If so, are they just doing so just to give a conservative(lower then reality) estimate?

And I think you meant: QUIT CITING IT? (QUIT -]SITING/-] IT?)

 

[WilliamAlbrecht]

CM says:

“Coming after” doesn’t intone that its a title. You are merely assuming that it does.

**This is quite true, but the way the Angel Greets Mary shows that the form is being used as a titular one. **

Chaire KECHARITOMENE

CM says:

“Rather, it means “favored one” and is a greeting stating that Mary has found favor in God’s eyes”

**There is really nothing in the text that can indicate that this merely means “FAVORED one”

In fact, the Greeting is best translated “HAVING BEEN GRACED”, later in verse 30 is the actual place that we are told that Mary has found “FAVOR”/“Grace”/“Gratia” in the eyes of GOD.**

**Verse 30 reads

CHARIN PARA TO THEO

Obviously CHARIN(xarin) is from the Greek Charis(Xaris) and I think a more viable way to translate it would be “grace”.

Though this does not preclude that Mary did not have Grace before the Angel greeted her. **

CM says:“Actually, I’m the one who’s accepting it as it’s written and not complicating it with appeals to terms/greetings becoming “titles.” There is a boatload of assumption going on when one reads into the text that it’s a “title” and then, subsequently, claims that many persons were called by their names, but Mary by her “title””

There are loads of Fathers and Ancient Inscriptions that indeed recognized this as titular. It is indeed suspect when we have a modern day Protestant battling the significance of this greeting by trying to point out to all these other locations that this word appears. The Early Fathers(boatloads) viewed this as a titular address and viewed the significance of this address to Mary.

 

[steve_b]

steveb << your source? Just so that you know, If one is divided from the Catholic Church they aren’t Catholic…by definition >>

Not to get off topic, but I did an article on the Barrett World Christian Encyclopedia and the “242 Roman Catholic denominations.” There are 242 (or 245) countries according to Barrett’s stats from 2000, and he places the RCC in each country as a separate “denomination.” It is a strange way of counting.

Not just strange, …his work is ignorant

 

[steve_b]

And the same goes for the supposed Protestant denominations…

Protestants are divided so fully with each other, that each individual group is it’s own seperate organization. The Catholic Church + rites are by definition all fully in union with the Pope and all that the Catholic Church teaches. If one is NOT united this way they are NOT Catholic.

Let’s not get sidetracked.

Could you respond to the following
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5503179&postcount=91

 

[PhilVaz]

steveb << Not just strange, …his work is ignorant >>

I wouldn’t call them ignorant. The editors were definitely professional staticians. The 2001 edition is a follow up to the 1982 edition. The World Christian Encyclopedia is a unique book, actually 2 very thick volumes. The first volume contains all you need to know about the "33,000" Christian denominations (separated into mega-blocs Protestants, Independents, Marginals, Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans). The second is about all other religions in the world. From a review on my page:

“Never has there been such a thorough reference as the two large volumes, running 1,699 pages, of the World Christian Encyclopedia, published by Oxford University Press. Barrett has doggedly visited most of the lands in person, collecting raw material, including national census figures and United Nations data, and recruiting the 444 specialists who feed him material. Among them: Vatican missions librarian Willi Henkel and editor J. Gordon Melton of the Encyclopedia of American Religions. Barrett’s encyclopedia sought to count each human being in each religion and religious subcategory in each country as of 1900, 1970, 1990, 1995 and 2000, with projections to 2025.”

The numbers were generated with the best precision and procedures they had no doubt. It is a commonly cited source for “numbers of denominations” and religion stats. The problem is when one wants truly “unique” denominations, you must subtract those duplicated in each country. I did that and came up with 5000+ Protestant denominations.

Phil P

 

[po18guy]

Fair enough…
No

Thank you.

This was IN ANSWER TO THE "Sola Scriptura is responsible for the split and denominations" argument that keeps getting tossed about here. I was MERELY POINTING OUT how that logic was fallacious.

Your opinion is noted. Until 1054, there was one united Church, just as Jesus founded it. The Orthodox split over political, doctrinal differences regarding the Holy Spirit, and the authority of the Bishop of Rome - the two Churches are essentially identical to this day. Come the 1,500s and BOOM! Sola scriptura is put forth by Luther. Such a doctrine has never been seen before in human history. Is it a mere coincidence that there began an acceleration in denominations? Calvin from Luther. Zwingli from the others and on and on to today. Today, we have innumerable Protestant denominations, who use different translations of the bible all disagreeing with one another? Shoot, even those using the KJV cannot agree. Please explain how we got from 2 (still unacceptable) in 1054, to 3 in the 1,500s to thousands today? The ONLY common factor in this explosion is the Protestant doctrine of SS.

1.) You have not proven that SS has done that; it’s a logic leap. 2.) If that’s the road the poster wants to go down then what causes all of the Catholic splits??? The Magisterium??

OK, How about you give a better explanation for the fracturing of Protestantism. As to those who diverge from Catholic (universal) belief: Disobedience causes it. A failure to deny oneself. Period. Jesus taught us to deny ourselves. On the contrary, SS is the indulgence of self - that’s not what Jesus taught. Many also walked away from Christ as recorded in John 6. Does that mean Jesus is a failure, or His doctrines were wrong? No! Those who left were exercising free will that manifested itself in disobedience.

No…of course not; you’d see that as an unwarrented leap of logic…I was merely illustrating it. Hence; I said “dispense with this bad argument” PS: I understand what you’re saying about the “inflated number due to heretics”…but to be fair; Steve Ray, Tim Staples, and others site the Protestant figure without a twinge in their conscience, even though evidently everyone knows about the inflated numbers…

Here’s the deal: Why should we believe your opinions, when Methodists believe differently from you? Who is correct? Or Anabaptists, or Adventists, or Presbyterians, or Episcopals? No one knows who is 100% right or who actually has the truth. Salvation is not a lottery with the winner finding that one faith that is 100% correct. The Holy Spirit has perpetually guarded the one Church founded by Christ - just as Jesus promised.

amazon.com/World-Christian-Encyclopedia-Comparative-Religions/dp/0195079639/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1248901068&sr=8-1

Now which one of you is going to tell Steve Ray and Tim Staples to quit quoting that number?

I would contact the “World Evangelization Research Center” and tell them. The number comes from them.

I used the same source that Steve Ray and Tim Staples, and other’s do…the “World Christian Encyclopedia” However, I agree with you…LET’S ALL quit siting those numbers, shall we?

I am guessing that some of the Catholic “denominations” they cite are actually only different rites within the one Church. Each of the Catholic rites, while appearing different in language, culture, and liturgical celebration, is in union with Rome on beliefs. Now, this may also apply to many of the Protestant denominations, but not to the thousands of them! Protestant belief today is all over the map. The Holy Spirit is NOT responsible for that.

 

[po18guy]

Then for the love of Pete…can we, you, CA, Steve Ray, Tim Staples** QUIT SITING IT?**

And I guess underlying it all is the idea that somehow if one is not totally unified then it’s the fault of “Sola Scriptura”…

As I pointed out…if there is not JUST ONE unified RCC church, (and there is not) then it’s the fault of the Magisterium…

And you can see what a leap in logic that was…so flip it over and it doesn’t get any more logical…

It remains the elephant in the Protestant living room. Any number over “1” is unacceptable. Unity will only come about through millions of persons denying themselves and coming to obedience. As much as we seek this goal, it is now quite unlikely.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

No, being Ex-Catholic, I’ve had one.

I found them to be light on actual scriptural substance, and heavy on assertions.

Well, perhaps you would like to start another thread where you allow people to reference the footnotes for the passages of the CCC; and look for the base scriptural passages that the councils cite? I know from my reading that one has to dig around in the paragraphs cited to find how these passages are related to scripture; but I’m patient enough to do that.

I know that it takes quite a bit of guts to go onto a board where the majority are against what you are thinking, and that when people get the adrenaline flowing that the temptation to just shout back comes easily. I don’t enjoy it myself; and I know that it is easy to throw up ones hands in frustration. (Unfortunately I have OCD and can’t let go once the adrenaline kicks in whether I walk away or not.)

But I would encourage you to start a thread, and perhaps list out the arguments you aren’t interested in hearing and the arguments you are. I have found that some people on the board can hold a long, intelligent conversation on scripture; show how it harmonizes with their beliefs – and the boundaries that dogma places on them – without caring about “winning” all the time.

With respect to this thread, and the passage on the perfect participle; what particularly bothers you still about grammar, part of speech, and the differences between J.W.'s counter-examples which I have explained my interpretation of?
I think people have demonstrated this much:

1. There is at least a connection between the word and the idea of sinlessness.
2. That the word is not Mary’s given name, but a name change and/or title.
3. That the perfect tense applied to the passages J.W. can be interpreted in such a way as to not support his point.

At this time, is it merely that you disagree – or is it that you see a fallacy in the three points demonstrated?

Peace.
–Andrew.

 

[steve_b]

steveb << Not just strange, …his work is ignorant >>

I wouldn’t call them ignorant. The editors were definitely professional staticians. The 2001 edition is a follow up to the 1982 edition. The World Christian Encyclopedia is a unique book, actually 2 very thick volumes. The first volume contains all you need to know about the "33,000" Christian denominations (separated into mega-blocs Protestants, Independents, Marginals, Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans). The second is about all other religions in the world. From a review on my page:

“Never has there been such a thorough reference as the two large volumes, running 1,699 pages, of the World Christian Encyclopedia, published by Oxford University Press. Barrett has doggedly visited most of the lands in person, collecting raw material, including national census figures and United Nations data, and recruiting the 444 specialists who feed him material. Among them: Vatican missions librarian Willi Henkel and editor J. Gordon Melton of the Encyclopedia of American Religions. Barrett’s encyclopedia sought to count each human being in each religion and religious subcategory in each country as of 1900, 1970, 1990, 1995 and 2000, with projections to 2025.”

The numbers were generated with the best precision and procedures they had no doubt. It is a commonly cited source for “numbers of denominations” and religion stats. The problem is when one wants truly “unique” denominations, you must subtract those duplicated in each country. I did that and came up with 5000+ Protestant denominations.

Phil P

I don’t want to get us off track but they’re wrong when they call the Catholic Church a denomination.
msnbc.msn.com/id/19692094/

 

[uther]

No, being Ex-Catholic, I’ve had one.

I found them to be light on actual scriptural substance, and heavy on assertions.

I just had a look at the index of my copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Just a rough count, mind you, but I came up with about 2400 citations from the New Testament and about 950 from the Old Testament for a total of about 3350 Scritpture citations. That is in a book of 570 pages. If you run those numbers that works out to an average of 5.87 Scripture citations per page.

I’ll guarantee you Loraine Boettner in his anti-Catholic Catechism doesn’t come close, nor does James White, on average.

 

[PhilVaz]

steveb << I don’t want to get us off track but they’re wrong when they call the Catholic Church a denomination. >>

True, I agree. But at the same time they seem to make the Catholic Church an exception here:

“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)

Remember, Barrett is an Anglican. In one sense I can see what they are doing. They were trying to organize their stats as best they could, so the encyclopedia separates denoms by country. This does create “duplicates” by country when you are trying to count “unique” denoms in the world. The United States of America (for example) is found on page 783 of Volume 1. How many “Roman Catholic” denominations are in the U.S. according to them? One. How many in Canada? One. How many in any other country? One. They admit the RCC is one Church worldwide.

Phil P

 

[po18guy]

True, I agree. But at the same time they seem to make the Catholic Church an exception here:

“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)

Remember, Barrett is an Anglican. In one sense I can see what they are doing. They were trying to organize their stats as best they could, so the encyclopedia separates denoms by country. This does create “duplicates” by country when you are trying to count “unique” denoms in the world. The United States of America (for example) is found on page 783 of Volume 1. How many “Roman Catholic” denominations are in the U.S. according to them? One. How many in Canada? One. How many in any other country? One. They admit the RCC is one Church worldwide.

Phil P

Clearly, their primary purpose is not to document the fragmentation of Christ’s body, but rather to assemble a massive tome that is research oriented. As a practical matter, you or I can go to any Catholic Church in the world, or across town and agree with the teaching there. Say you are a Mennonite traveling to Senegal. How do you find a Mennonite church there? And, which Mennonites? They split over the use of buttons on clothing! And, such sola scriptura “diversity” is something to be proud of? I’ll bet that even John Stossel, who is Jewish, would say “Give me a break!”

 

[walker_p]

Amen.:thumbsup: