Protestants: how do you know that your interpretation of the Bible is the right one?

[elvisman]

You simply refuse to accept facts as proof when facts contradict your theology.
I am not going to go through all these points again as they have already been thoroughly covered, but I will repeat a couple,…

Ginger

On another thread about the canon of Scripture, you made the following claim:
“I believe Catholics added these books as a counter measure against the split caused by Martin Luther.”
You implied that the Deuterocanonicals were never part of the Catholic Bible until Luther. Can you provide proof for this false claim?

Also - don’t Protestants usually cling to 2 Tim. 3:16 to support their belief in the false doctrine Sola Scriptura?
Here are 15 quotes from the New Testament that support the use of the Greek translation – as used by the very authors of the quotes:

Heb 11:35**, “…Others were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might find a better resurrection.” **
The only place in the O.T. that you will find reference to that is** 2 Macc 7:1-29****. The first half of Heb 11:35 is found in 1 Kings 17:23 and 2 Kings 4:36.**

Heb 11:38, "They wandered in deserts and mountains…"
This is found in 1 Macc 2:28-30 and 2 Macc 5:27.

Jn 10:22**, “Now there took place at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication…” The inauguration of this feast is found in 1Macc 4:36 & 52-59.**

Jn 14:23**, “…If anyone love Me, he will keep My word…” This is in Sir 2:18.**

Rom 9:21**, " is not the potter master of his clay…" Found in Wis 15:7**

1Pet 1:6-7**, “…gold which is tried by fire…” See Wis 3:5-6**

Rom 1:20-23**, “For since the creation of the world…” Found in Wis 13:1-7**

Mt 7:12, Lk 6:31**, “…all that you wish men to do to you, even so do you also to them…” Extension of **Tob 4:15

Lk 25 35-36**, “I was hungry and you gave me food…I needed clothes and you clothed me.” Based on Tob 4:16.**

Rev 21:18**, “And the material of its wall was jasper; but the city itself was pure gold, like pure glass.” See Tob 13 end.**

Mt 13:43**, “Then the just will shine forth…” Found in Wis 3:7**

Mt 27:42**, “…if He is the King of Israel, let Him come down now from the cross…” See Wis 2:18-20****.**

Lk 24:4**, “…two men stood by them in dazzling raiment.” Found in 2 Macc 3:26.**

Rom 11:33**, “…How inscrutable are His judgments and how unsearchable are His ways.” Found in Judith 8:14.**

1 Cor 10:20, “…they sacrifice to demons, not to God…” Found in Baruch 4:7.

 

[Ginger2]

**What this comes down to is – which canon do you believe? **

The earliest canons which went undisputed in their day.

Two from the first century and one in the second century.

I believe these as they are all exactly the same. No list that differed from these exists before nor during the same time period.

Three witnesses!

 

[elvisman]

The earliest canons which went undisputed in their day.

Two from the first century and one in the second century.

I believe these as they are all exactly the same. No list that differed from these exists before nor during the same time period.

Three witnesses!

And these were . . .?

 

[orange_man]

Dear Protestants,

Whence do you have authority to interpret the Bible as you do, since it is certainly a text which requires interpretation (Acts viii, 31), and it does not admit private interpretation (II Peter i, 20)? Do you believe that you are right as a “holy man of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit” (ibid., 21), and if so, why? How do you know that your interpretation is the right one, above that of the other several thousand denominations equally assured of the veracity of theirs, which they in contradiction to all the others?

don’t you guys have any new material??? Golly this one is so old (it’s a shame you can’t come up with better reasons to be Catholic beyond we’ve been around for longer)

 

[Always_For_Him]

don’t you guys have any new material??? Golly this one is so old (it’s a shame you can’t come up with better reasons to be Catholic beyond we’ve been around for longer)

It’s all how you look at it. The newer, less than 500 year old protestant churches don’t have any Apostolic Authority and are not part of the Apostolic Church. When they split from the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church during the Reformation, they Split from Christ’s Church. The ONLY thing that matter is Christ’s Church. We talk about it’s age because it IS Christ’s Church. Every other church is newer and divided from Christ’s Church teaching their own self interpreted understanding and feelings of what they think and feel Sacred Scripture is saying. The NT Scripture IS Catholic teaching written down. So, in this case, the fact that the Catholic Church has been around longer and has retained the pure contextual Deposit of Faith by Christ, IS everything. Everything else is of man.

 

[josie_L]

I have bothered, here is the proof you demand though I still advise you to not take my word for it but to actually read the book and the encyclopaedia.
but wait… he also says there are 19 Geopolitico-religious blocs. (Check Global Diagram 2!) And some other designated families and groups I wont bother to go into for this post.

So we have:
6 major ecclesiastico-cultural megablocs
19 Geopolitico-religious blocs
300 different ecclesiaastical traditions
33,820 distinct Christian Denominations

What do those MEAN? That is the big question so lets look at the book outlining all this:
World Christian Trends, Ad 30-Ad 2200
By David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, Christopher Guidry, Peter Crossing

In Table 6-7 “Definitions of key terms in the denominationalist/postdenominationalist analysis” we see that:
Interesting… so that means that EVERY country a linked congregation is found in will be counted as an individual denomination. Thats not only when referring to Catholics or only any group but a general definition applied to the whole study. Read the definition of denomination again. it does not say how they are linked, I will cover that in a bit for now lets say they are linked. Lets say we have 4 congregations A, B, C, and D. All four believe exactly the same doctrines. They just got tired of driving so far to church every time the doors opened. It could be Baptist or Catholic or even Followers of David Koresh for all we know. all we know atm is that they are all exactly the same except A&B are in Mexico and C&D just over the US border in El Paso, Texas. By this definition we have 2 denominations. Lets here you Catholics yell, “But anything more than ONE is TOO MANY!” Yeah, I hear you. Good thing they agree on everything in Doctrine except for where they live and I dont think that is a doctrine.

Does anyone here really want to keep that country division thing in the definition for apologetics debates? Cause if you do… there are a minimum of 242 Catholic Denominations in there. (Barrett actually lists WAY more Catholic Denominations in there 2k+ but I will only mention that in passing, I had a thread on it a long while back if you care much). I doubt you all want to claim that much division and none of us have that definition as required for Christianity so lets adjust it more fairly.

denomination: a grouping or network of linked churches or congregations

Using just this part of the study definition alone, lets calculate a little:
33,820 distinct Christian Denominations Divided by the 242 countries that the site freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1956752/posts(I will hereafter refer to it as markomalley) claims the study covers, equals (Simple math here thus is only an approximation) = 139.752066116 Lets round up all the way to 600 jsut for fairness sake cause surely not all the denominations are not in all the countries. (Id have said 200, but people who like the 33,000 number seem to like drama so Im trying to help)

So I will say we are now down to less than 600 Denominations including Catholics and protestants and other Christianlike people too. But we still dont know what Barrett defines as Linked or Distinct. Lets look in his Book:

Now what about the claim that Catholics are really one cause of that dividing line being removed and Protestants are still fragmented immeasurably?
the 6 megablocs easch is listed as one Megabloc. and is said about them that “Each has regarded itself as the true Church, the truest expression of Christianity, a genuine restoring the original and genuine faith of Christ to the world.”** In other words each got equal number listed here as one. Catholics can now rejoice Barrett got it right on this part and put you all together as one, but watch out, protestants can say the same thing**.
* Independent
* Protestant
* Marginal Christianity
* Orthodox
* Roman Catholic
* Anglicans

Then each megabloc was not immediately divided to denominations as markomalley would have you believe. No each of those was subdivided into 300 “families”. and those families are divided to “Denominations”

Lets look at some of those (I grabbed 3 at random)
**# 644 Latin American pentecostal

805 single autonomous congregations​

813 White-led pentecostal**​

**I’m really expected to believe that there are 813 different denominations that have multiple linked congregations calling themselves “White-led Pentecostal”? lets google that for fun. If there are 813 then I’m sure to find the beliefs of one of them.**right?

At least one?
But no.
on googling that I did not find any denominations claiming that as their name. I did find a bunch of links to info on Barretts study as well as some other studies that covered race and churches. Where are the 813 denominations? You should by now have the clue that these are NOT the sort of denominations you mean and I mean when we say “What denomination of Christian are you?” answers to that would be “Baptist” or “Lutheran” not “Yeah I’m a Chinese Charismatic who disagrees with all those Filipino Charismatics!”

**I can’t understand your reasoning. **

P.S. If you look at Roman Catholic denominations it was erroneously stated as 246, not the 2k you refer to. Even Ginger posted the same amount I did.

 

[Hisalone]

It’s all how you look at it. The newer, less than 500 year old protestant churches don’t have any Apostolic Authority and are not part of the Apostolic Church. **The Catholic Church sold its apostolic authority as cheaply as Esau sold his birthright (see Simony).**When they split from the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church during the Reformation, they Split from Christ’s Church. **At the time of the reformation the RCC was neither One nor Holy.**The ONLY thing that matter is Christ’s Church. We talk about it’s age because it IS Christ’s Church. Every other church is newer and divided from Christ’s Church teaching their own self interpreted understanding and feelings of what they think and feel Sacred Scripture is saying. **If the RCC hadnt strayed from the sriptures then maybe there would have been no need for a Reformation.**The NT Scripture IS Catholic teaching written down. So, in this case, the fact that the Catholic Church has been around longer and has retained the pure contextual Deposit of Faith by Christ, IS everything. Everything else is of man.Yes like Papal infalibility, Marion doctrine, purgatory etc etc

 

[christian1]

First of all - you didn’t read my response. If you had, you would have noticed that much of the proof is in the Scriptures I quoted. (By the way, I typed 1 Tim. 3:25 - it’s actually 1 Tim. 3:15).

Of course I read your response. How else would I know you misquoted the last scripture???

Secondly, your beliefs render Jesus a liar. He promised that not even the gates of hell would prevail against his Church (Matt. 16:19

And it hasn’t. Did you read the many scriptures I sited about what **‘the church’ **actually is according to your authority and the Popes authority, Paul?

The gates of hell **will not **win over Christs church, bearing in mind what Paul interpreted ‘the church’ to constitute, which is the body of Christ, which are all those who are saved by calling upon His name.

Just because people enter the church and bring wickedness into it, leading many astray, does not mean hell has prevailed and indeed the scriptures are right in saying it will not. Because those who follow Christ do so in word and deed. The Word of God was given to ensure that all would have every opportunity and be without excuse. Those who study it dutifully and prayerfully, seeking God’s will and not their own, the Spirit will lead, guide and keep. The Catholic Church teaches that one cannot attain this outside the Catholic Church except by ignorance of the Catholic Church
.
). Whenever I hear or read a Protestant speak of how the Church became corrupt and apostate or was “hijacked” I see a lack of faith in the Word of God.

It’s hardly the entire body of Christ that is the problem, but those who have placed themselves in infallable authority, that have allowed error in. Why does error in the church surprise you friend? Did not your authority Paul declare it would be so? Did he not warn of such things to come? Why warn of such things if they would not come? But, the gates of hell will not prevail, for the truth cannot be hidden and your popes are subject to their authority, Christ and His Holy Word. No, your right, it is not Bible only. It is the word of God, and the collective body of Christ, those who believe and obey the word, not the doctrines of man that nullify it. For the Catholic Church, perhaps ignorantly, has set itself above the Holy Word of God in denying access to souls unless they belong to their organization. But as you should have learned, the church is not limited to an organization but belongs to Christ, it’s head and the popes are to serve under Him, and under His Holy Word.

**We don’t adhere to sola Scriptura because sola Scriptura is UN-Biblical

I’ve heard this term often here. Of course God has not chosen the Bible only. He has indeed chosen a church, this we do not disagree on. And as I have stated before, I have no problem with the Catholic Church as the first and true church. My problem lies in those who have used their position in Christ to do exactly what Christ their King warned them not to. ‘Create doctrines of men that nullify the word of God’ trying to prevent those who have the right to call upon the name of the Lord and be saved in or out of the church.

**. It is found NOWHERE in Scripture.
The Authority of the Catholic Church and its Traditions, on the other hand ARE supported. Here are a few examples:

Matt. 16:15-19
Mat 16:15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
Mat 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Mat 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Matt. 18:15-18
John 16:13-15:
2 Thess. 2:15
2 Tim. 1:13-14
2 Tim. 2:12

I’m particularly surprised that you used this scripture since it tells us that we are to study the word of God and rightly divide it. Why should I study if I am not qualified to interpret as your popes declare?

1 Cor. 11:2
Acts 2:42

**Also - show me some dogmas of the Catholic Church that are in direct contradiction **with the word of God, as you assert.

now we’re getting to something. Let’s deal with this one first.
Your dogma on salvation. What is required for one to be saved?

 

[josie_L]

As per your interpretation, HisAlone.

 

[elvisman]

now we’re getting to something. Let’s deal with this one first.
Your dogma on salvation. What is required for one to be saved?

I’ll tell you when you answer me - I asked you first.
Show me some dogmas of the Catholic Church that are in direct contradiction with the word of God, as you assert.

PS - I’m going to PM you about how to post responses - since you’re new.

 

[Syele]

**I can’t understand your reasoning. **

P.S. If you look at Roman Catholic denominations it was erroneously stated as 246, not the 2k you refer to. Even Ginger posted the same amount I did.

Did you read the Book? Its available online for free under google books if you didnt. The reasoning is that the 242 is not erroneously stated because by the definition given, there ARE 242 for that category of “Catholics” the OTHER category of Catholics has 2,942 denominations of Catholics. Yet another category had like 6 I think (not sure on the 6 number Id have to look it up again).
And about the Denomination I googled… that was listed as having 813 denominations called that. But there are not 813 actual denominations called that in the sense of the word as we would use it.

Point being that what Barrett said are “Denominations” are not what we would call a denomination. and his purpose in creating his groups he called denominations was not the same as your purpose for bringing up denominations in this thread. If it was the same then what he said about all of the denominations (Not only Catholics) would be lies. Luckily, he explained himself in detail, so if you read the book and the encyclopaedia it becomes clear that he is not saying there are 33,000 denominations of Protestantism at all. and what he does list as denominations are not what wed call a denomination.

Wether its linked churched or linked congregations its still not a “Denomination” as you want it to be because its not based on historical or doctrinal issues! Its divided based on location, race, musical styles, and service formats! If you want to argue the ONE TRUE CHURCH with these numbers then you need to tell me which Catholic Denomination is right the one one with black people or Asian people or white people?

Its completely unreasonable to say welllll the Catholics are exempt from the study cause we dont want to be divided that way but we can divide the Protestants however we like!

 

[Syele]

I understand your sentiment. And I, as a Catholic, do not subscribe to the account of so many protestant denominations. I also do not discount the Holy Spirit guiding us to Christ (the Truth), nor do any Catholics I know.

I didnt mean to say Catholics dont believe in the Holy Spirit, But I often see posts on this board mocking protestants who believe in the guidance of the Holy Spirit in a way I think is disrespectful to Him, even if they dont mean it. (This is not directed to you but a general observance)

But I also do not subscribe to the idea that all of Christianity is reduced to belief in Christ, the Bible, and a hope that we’re doing the things He desires of those of us who love Him. The notion that we’re all here on earth trying to make sense of it all, resting on the idea that our only sure guidance is the Bible and the Holy Spirit within each person individually (because man teaches us all sorts of conflicting things), reduces so much of what Christ came to do. Mind you, it certainly doesn’t reduce His sacrifice and atoning death for us. But I can’t imagine that Christ took great measures to choose and annoint specific men to walk with Him, breathe the Holy Spirit into them, send them out into all the nations…just so that ultimately today, we discredit the human teaching, and all we’re left with is this notion that the Holy Spirit can be breathed into us, and “maybe” we’ll receive the truths about salvation if we live long enough in faith, reading our Bibles under the guidance of people who may not be protected from error by the Holy Spirit.

I agree with you to a point. Receiving Truth from the Holy Spirit is not a “maybe” for sincere Christians though. It is a Promise to us. The question is not WILL the Holy Spirit Guide, or even Can the Holy Spirit Guide but are we willing to be Guided?

The Bible is written to us from the apostles, and is inspired by God Himself. Its not really your average book in that way. Further if I give instructions for something in detail and its written down, does that make the instruction less taught by me? no. While a one-on-one in person teaching of something is often very helpful It is not always better than the written word. Having it printed keeps it just how it is, removing as many possibilities of error. Ever play telephone? Now if you want to say that some particular human is guarded from error in certain situations to combat that, go ahead, but you still have to have an strong element of faith to believe that. So, in the end I can just as easily ask you how you are 100% sure YOU are right. That doesnt negate the need to devote ourselves to knowing what God wants. It does mean that we wont know ALL of it till we get the heaven!

 

[josie_L]

Did you read the Book? Its available online for free under google books if you didnt. The reasoning is that the 242 is not erroneously stated because by the definition given, there ARE 242 for that category of “Catholics” the OTHER category of Catholics has 2,942 denominations of Catholics. Yet another category had like 6 I think (not sure on the 6 number Id have to look it up again).
And about the Denomination I googled… that was listed as having 813 denominations called that. But there are not 813 actual denominations called that in the sense of the word as we would use it.

Point being that what Barrett said are “Denominations” are not what we would call a denomination. and his purpose in creating his groups he called denominations was not the same as your purpose for bringing up denominations in this thread. If it was the same then what he said about all of the denominations (Not only Catholics) would be lies. Luckily, he explained himself in detail, so if you read the book and the encyclopaedia it becomes clear that he is not saying there are 33,000 denominations of Protestantism at all. and what he does list as denominations are not what wed call a denomination.

Wether its linked churched or linked congregations its still not a “Denomination” as you want it to be because its not based on historical or doctrinal issues! Its divided based on location, race, musical styles, and service formats! If you want to argue the ONE TRUE CHURCH with these numbers then you need to tell me which Catholic Denomination is right the one one with black people or Asian people or white people?

Its completely unreasonable to say welllll the Catholics are exempt from the study cause we dont want to be divided that way but we can divide the Protestants however we like!

Syele there was a mistake made for the amount derived for the RC, and I explained what that mistake was, as for how you reasoned your response in your original post, it was confusing to say the least and still is. You are making many assumptions.

 

[Syele]

Syele there was a mistake made for the amount derived for the RC, and I explained what that mistake was, as for how you reasoned your response in your original post, it was confusing to say the least and still is. You are making many assumptions.

Please list my assumptions so I can explain them then. I was basing all I said on the Book written by Barrett that he wrote for the purpose of explaining the survey that is quoted in the encyclopaedia. How else would we go about explaining it if not by what the maker of the study said?

 

[josie_L]

Did you read the Book? Its available online for free under google books if you didnt. The reasoning is that the 242 is not erroneously stated because by the definition given, there ARE 242 for that category of “Catholics” the OTHER category of Catholics has 2,942 denominations of Catholics. Yet another category had like 6 I think (not sure on the 6 number Id have to look it up again).
And about the Denomination I googled… that was listed as having 813 denominations called that. But there are not 813 actual denominations called that in the sense of the word as we would use it.

Point being that what Barrett said are “Denominations” are not what we would call a denomination. and his purpose in creating his groups he called denominations was not the same as your purpose for bringing up denominations in this thread. If it was the same then what he said about all of the denominations (Not only Catholics) would be lies. Luckily, he explained himself in detail, so if you read the book and the encyclopaedia it becomes clear that he is not saying there are 33,000 denominations of Protestantism at all. and what he does list as denominations are not what wed call a denomination.

Wether its linked churched or linked congregations its still not a “Denomination” as you want it to be because its not based on historical or doctrinal issues! Its divided based on location, race, musical styles, and service formats! If you want to argue the ONE TRUE CHURCH with these numbers then you need to tell me which Catholic Denomination is right the one one with black people or Asian people or white people?

Its completely unreasonable to say welllll the Catholics are exempt from the study cause we dont want to be divided that way but we can divide the Protestants however we like!

I have found this Syele;

SOURCE: Global Christianity – Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary database

CHRISTIAN ORGANIZATIONS

Denominations in 1800 were 500, in 1900 -1900, in 1970 -18 800, mid 2000-33 800, mid 2007-39 000, projection for 2025-55 000 denominations.

Please read this:

Hello Ms. Brown,

Thank you for your inquiry. I can assure you that the figure of 39,000 is in no way inflated. This number represents our most current, up-to-date data. As we are constantly updating this figure, it is not published in print form. The figure of 33,800 from the year 2000 was printed in our book World Christian Trends, (Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library, 2001). Part 12 of World Christian Trends (WCT), Table 12-1 gives figures of denominational totals for all 238 countries of the world. These figures are also represented graphically in WCT on page 917, Global Map 14. The definition for denominations used in WCT, and also in our publication World Christian Encyclopedia (Oxford, 2001) is as follows:

“Any agency consisting of a number of congregations or churches voluntarily aligning themselves with it. As a statistical unit in this survey, 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.”

More precise listings of denominations can be found in the World Christian Encyclopedia, under the article for each country. These lists are not exhaustive, as there are too many small denominations to list separately, but they should help give a clearer picture. Furthermore, the Southern Baptist Convention has over 40,000 congregations in the US alone; not to mention the Baptist General Conference, Baptist Bible Fellowship International, etc. So we are definitely not counting each congregation as its own denomination. We are also not lumping all Baptists into a single denomination, but counting each organization separately. I hope this information helps.

Justin J. Evans
Research Assistant
Center for the Study of Global Christianity

Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary
130 Essex Street #228
South Hamilton, MA 01982 USA
E-mail: csgc@gcts.edu

www.WorldChristianDatabase.org
www.GlobalChristianity.org
www.GCTS.edu
World Christian Encyclopedia

 

[Syele]

I have found this Syele;

SOURCE: Global Christianity – Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary database

CHRISTIAN ORGANIZATIONS

                   1800      1900        1970       mid-2000       mid-2007       2025 projected

Denominations 500 1,900 8,800 33800 39,000 55 000

Please read this:

Hello Ms. Brown,

Thank you for your inquiry. I can assure you that the figure of 39,000 is in no way inflated. This number represents our most current, up-to-date data. As we are constantly updating this figure, it is not published in print form. The figure of 33,800 from the year 2000 was printed in our book World Christian Trends, (Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library, 2001). Part 12 of World Christian Trends (WCT), Table 12-1 gives figures of denominational totals for all 238 countries of the world. These figures are also represented graphically in WCT on page 917, Global Map 14. The definition for denominations used in WCT, and also in our publication World Christian Encyclopedia (Oxford, 2001) is as follows:

“Any agency consisting of a number of congregations or churches voluntarily aligning themselves with it. As a statistical unit in this survey, 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.”

More precise listings of denominations can be found in the World Christian Encyclopedia, under the article for each country. These lists are not exhaustive, as there are too many small denominations to list separately, but they should help give a clearer picture. Furthermore, the Southern Baptist Convention has over 40,000 congregations in the US alone; not to mention the Baptist General Conference, Baptist Bible Fellowship International, etc. So we are definitely not counting each congregation as its own denomination. We are also not lumping all Baptists into a single denomination, but counting each organization separately. I hope this information helps.

Justin J. Evans
Research Assistant
Center for the Study of Global Christianity

Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary
130 Essex Street #228
South Hamilton, MA 01982 USA
E-mail: <csgc@gcts.edu>

www.WorldChristianDatabase.org

So your contention is that Justin J. Evans of the Center for the Study of Global Christianity knows more about the study that Barrett did than Barrett himself?

The largest of these Independent Christians are “White-led charismatic” (17,478,000 members [year 1995], in 2856 separate denominations [year 2000]),

ok so you are dead set convinced that these are real denominations just like Baptist or Lutheran. If so then answering this should be easy for you: list for me two denominations that define themselves as “White-led charismatic” this should be simple since there are 2856 of them tallied in a chart. and let me know what their beliefs are that are different from one another that makes them the same type of belief system and still be different "White-led charismatic."denominations. I dont think you can. Why? Because “White-led charismatic” is a real grouping made up by Barrett for purposes of His study and NOT a “Denomination” based on Doctrine Differences!

 

[josie_L]

Please list my assumptions so I can explain them then. I was basing all I said on the Book written by Barrett that he wrote for the purpose of explaining the survey that is quoted in the encyclopaedia. How else would we go about explaining it if not by what the maker of the study said?

Syele, I understand what you mean when you refer to the definition Barrett, used, I am confused in how you are trying to explain and break it down. You seem to deny the numbers given, and the process by which you do this, makes it sound like you are jumping to conclusions. When you stated for example, googling white-led pentecostals, and could not find anything pertaining to this denomination/s, I believe this is because they are not a denomination but rather many denominations, regardless I got 11 200 hits when I keyed in these words (including the word denominations).

 

[josie_L]

So your contention is that Justin J. Evans of the Center for the Study of Global Christianity knows more about the study that Barrett did than Barrett himself?

ok so you are dead set convinced that these are real denominations just like Baptist or Lutheran. If so then answering this should be easy for you: list for me two denominations that define themselves as “White-led charismatic” this should be simple since there are 2856 of them tallied in a chart. and let me know what their beliefs are that are different from one another that makes them the same type of belief system and still be different "White-led charismatic."denominations. I dont think you can. Why? Because “White-led charismatic” is a real grouping made up by Barrett for purposes of His study and NOT a “Denomination” based on Doctrine Differences!

No, I am stating that they have roughly the same amount of christian denominations that Barrett expounds in the World Christian Encyclopedia. This makes the case for Barrett more difficult to refute.

As for the denominations you keep refering to, the webster definition for a denomination is this:

“a religious organization uniting local congregations in a single legal and administrative body.” (like the CC)

For example, some Baptist congregations want nothing to do with the greater body of Baptists, due to the administrative structure of independence they crave or due in part to some doctrinal/practical issues (splits). These Baptists are therefore considered independent and classified a denomination.

P.S. There is a list I managed to find of Christian denominations, here it is: www.fact-archive.com/encyclopedia/Pentecostalism

 

[WarriorAngel]

don’t you guys have any new material??? Golly this one is so old (it’s a shame you can’t come up with better reasons to be Catholic beyond we’ve been around for longer)

SO what exactly keeps you in a modern church founded by one man’s interpretation who wasn’t a witness to Christ?

Didn’t Peter warn us Not to wrest the scriptures on our own?
And why did Philip have to be transported to the Eunich if man is supposed to interpret for themselves?

Peter’s words alone should be enough to realise - hey - the scriptures and the Epistles are not for us to fool with and decide what they mean.

Why can’t we? Because Jesus said …
AS THE FATHER HAS SENT ME, I send you…’ [in my place] to go out and baptize ALL nations.
HE was speaking to the Apostles - and to them alone. [and naturally their successors whom they ordained - or as scriptures say - laying hands]

The problem with many interpretations of the Bible - especially the NT - is that when ppl read it - its usually always out of context. People think the Bible is referring to the individual reading it, but it was never meant to be a personal book. It was a dialogue between the Bishops -aka- Apostles of the One Church they established and written to stamp out heresies that were popping up outside of what they were teaching.

Peter said not to ‘wrest them’ because** OBVIOUSLY ppl were and probably putting themselves in the place where the Apostles were referring to themselves as a teacher of the Church. Peter didnt say that for the heck of it. Ppl were interpretting it for themselves even then.**

The Bible was never meant to be a book sitting at home, because like the Tradition previously, it was always the Authority - the Jewish synagogue - who read them. And taught them. Just as to why the Church kept them.

Ppl think the best thing was the reform so ppl could have Bibles.

I got a question for you…

How do you feel when Joe Smoe in your congregation says he doesnt agree with the preacher - an argument breaks out and Joe starts his own church based on his own opinion?
It should be unsettling to say the least. But that’s how churches beget new churches. So many - if not all ppl claim to be able to interpret the scriptures because they are Spirit led. Probably 6 or 7 billions would have a different opinion if opinion was all God wanted from us.
BUT that’s NOT what He demands.
Obedience is what He demands.
He even demanded that of the ppl when He said to LISTEN AND OBEY the ones on the chair of Moses.
Well, then - is everyone Spirit led?

Does God give us all different interpretations???

Seriously?

 

[Syele]

Syele, I understand what you mean when you refer to the definition Barrett, used, I am confused in how you are trying to explain and break it down. You seem to deny the numbers given, and the process by which you do this, makes it sound like you are jumping to conclusions. When you stated for example, googling white-led pentecostals, and could not find anything pertaining to this denomination/s, I believe this is because they are not a denomination but rather many denominations, regardless I got 11 200 hits when I keyed in these words (including the word denominations).

well of course you got so many since you included Denominations. Google uses the OR search by default. search: “white-led pentecostals” and you will get 2 results.
this is trying to say there are 813 types of denominations that can be called “white-led pentecostals” first of all I dont think anyone is putting themseves in a catergory like “white-led pentecostals” expecially not 813 different denomoninations. also this implies that those 813 denominations are not part of any of the other groupings listed. that means none of these “white-led pentecostals” are also Charasmatic or other things. Even more, it implies that who leads these linked Churches HAS to be White people as a matter of Doctrine. Otherwise a simple change in Pastor would have their whole dnomination shift to a new category, that is very impractical for any classifying system!