Protestants: What are the "Basics" that all Non-Catholic Christians agree on? And who determines what the "basics" are?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ComeHome2Rome
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
PRmerger said:
Please give me the correct number of Protestant denominations, and I’d be happy to consider using this number. Of course, you must provide the statistics to back up your correct assessment.
Click to expand...
See post # 39. My answer is the same as your’s.

My source is the information given me by Catholics in this forum. I am not going to correct your error any longer - I am going to use it against you.

By your own trust in a flawed source of info, if you believe it is true and trustworthy then you must believe there are many Catholic denominations as well - that’s what your source for “33,000” claims!

So answer my question and you will have the answer to your’s!!! I know your answer because we’ve had this conversation before. 😉

Ginger
 
Hi dear Joe,

Going back to post 34–
Oh, okay, I think I understand better what you were looking for, and why my reference to Romans 14 doesn’t seem to fit the bill for you. And you’re right—if you are looking for a place where a list of essentials vs. non-essentials is explicitly given in the Bible, dividing things into those two categories, I don’t know of any single such place.

But…I’m looking at it from the place of “Are there examples in the Bible or the records of the early Church Fathers that show the principle of 'In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity ’ being worked out in practice? And can we infer the existence of the principle from the practice, as approved by an Apostle?”

I believe we can…with Romans 14 being such an example.

Here is a Catholic commentary on Romans 14: haydock1859.tripod.com. (and then scroll down to Romans 14)

Now, please read that and try to put yourself in the shoes, to the limited extent possible, of an early Jewish disciple of Christ. I think in this day we tend to read Romans 14 and not realize what an anguish-producing controversy this was, regarding the keeping of special days or not. This controversy–should all us Jews, as we’ve been taught from the holy Torah all our lives, give up our Torah observance?—was of HUGE import to them.

Yet, Paul urged them in love to follow each his own conscience, as he didn’t hold Jewish-observance vs non-observance to be an essential, even for Jews. And please, try to put yourself in their place to some degree to understand the power of what Paul was advocating. I’ll go look for a link to explain this controversy better, as it’s not quite the same as the controversy that set in motion the Council of Jerusalem.
 
Dear Joe,

I found a pretty good article that may help us put in context the significance of Romans 14. ( And I’m sorry if you are already familiar with all this, since I don’t know you.)

This article isn’t specifically on whether the early Jewish Christians should have had the right, or even the obligation, to continue their Jewish practices, but gives a bit of background on why many of them legitimately believed they should.
balashon.com/2010/09/olam.html

The article centers around the word “olam” and its evolving meanings—and that’s significant here because Moses told Israel at least 24 times that their ordinances were to be kept “olam”—commonly translated as “forever” or something similar, but which in reality may not quite mean forever in the way we tend to think of it. Nevertheless, perhaps you can understand a little why the early Jewish Christians had a genuine controversy among themselves as to whether or not Torah observance for Jewish disciples was an essential vs non-essential, permissible vs obligatory. ( I’m not going to go into how the early Gentile Christians soon forbade Jewish Christians the freedom to keep their holy days. That’s way off the topic)

Can you do that exercise of trying to understand the early Jewish Christians–putting yourself in their place to a small degree–to see why I’m thinking this is an significant example of essentials vs non-essentials in action, approved by the Apostle Paul?
 
Ginger2 said:
The source is Catholics on this Forum.

I did the math -according to Catholics - and this year your statistics claim approximately 175,000 Protestant denominations…

(Of course, but Protestant denominations you also include non-Christian religions and cults)

So, according to Barrett and Catholic math, there are currently over 2,178 Catholic denominations. (6,300 Orthodox denominations)

When you answer the question: Why so many Catholic denominations, you will also have my answer to your question? You will also have my answer!

And then after pondering this post, consider how silly this line of debate is and you will have the answer as to why we keep going round and round in circles in our discussions.

Ginger
Click to expand...
Ginger, you usually just ignore me but I will ask anyway:

Could you please provide the site that provides a valid list of all non-Catholic churches?

Could you please provide the site that provides a valid list of all Catholic churches, not in communion with the bishop of Rome. There are 22 Rites, all of which are in full communion with the bishop of Rome?
Code: 
Armenian (Eastern-rite Catholic)
Bulgarian (Byzantine rite)
Chaldean (Eastern Syrian rite)
Coptic (Alexandrian rite)
Ethiopic (Alexandrian rite)
Greek (Byzantine rite)
Hungarian (Byzantine rite)
Italo-Albanian (Byzantine rite)
Jurisdiction for both Latin-rite and Eastern-rite Catholics
Latin-rite Catholic
Malankara (Syro-Antiochian
Maronite (Syro-Antiochian, Western Syrian)
Melkite (Byzantine, Greek Catholic; Arabic-speaking)
Romanian Byzantine rite
Russian (Byzantine rite)
Ruthenian (Byzantine rite)
Slovak (Byzantine rite)
Syro-Malabarese (Eastern Syrian)
Syrian, Syriac-speaking (Syro-Antiochian, West Syrian)
Ukrainian Byzantine rite
Perhaps the following link is accurate:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_by_number_of_members
 
joe370 said:
Ginger, you usually just ignore me but I will ask anyway:

Could you please provide the site that provides a valid list of all non-Catholic churches?

Could you please provide the site that provides a valid list of all Catholic churches, not in communion with the bishop of Rome. There are 22 Rites, all of which are in full communion with the bishop of Rome?
Code: 
Armenian (Eastern-rite Catholic)
Bulgarian (Byzantine rite)
Chaldean (Eastern Syrian rite)
Coptic (Alexandrian rite)
Ethiopic (Alexandrian rite)
Greek (Byzantine rite)
Hungarian (Byzantine rite)
Italo-Albanian (Byzantine rite)
Jurisdiction for both Latin-rite and Eastern-rite Catholics
Latin-rite Catholic
Malankara (Syro-Antiochian
Maronite (Syro-Antiochian, Western Syrian)
Melkite (Byzantine, Greek Catholic; Arabic-speaking)
Romanian Byzantine rite
Russian (Byzantine rite)
Ruthenian (Byzantine rite)
Slovak (Byzantine rite)
Syro-Malabarese (Eastern Syrian)
Syrian, Syriac-speaking (Syro-Antiochian, West Syrian)
Ukrainian Byzantine rite
Perhaps the following link is accurate:
Click to expand...
The source that Catholics use (Barrett) states these are denominations. And according to Catholics this source is a valid and trust-worthy source, And according to Catholic math as members of this site have told me, that number has grown to over 2,178.

I personally don’t believe it because Barretts numbers about “protestant” denominations are so extremely flawed. But since Catholics believe Barrett is right on the money about “protestant” denominations, I expect you must also then accept his numbers on Catholic denominations.

🙂
 
Pfaffenhoffen said:
I say what I was told by a Protestat member: “I do not care for unity!”.
And for me it is quite a difficult task, as I see only a way: conversion or acceptance of the Pope. Acceptance of the Pope is difficult for Protestant Churches so I see only the personal conversions.

My opinion, I do not force anyonw to have the same opinio.
Click to expand...
Good evening (here) Pfaffenhoffen—I live in the middle of Pennsylvania German country, and I’m half German myself, but of all the many German surnames around here, I’ve never heard the name Pfaffenhoffen. I’m curious as to if it would have a meaning in English?

Okay, you’re going on another Protestants saying they don’t want unity. I wonder if you still, offhand, remember the thread where that was said?

I posted that link to the conference of churches within my county, though, as evidence that we do care and are actively working for unity—we are trying to be obedient to Christ in all the considerable areas where we do agree, and hoping by that obedience to get to know each other better, and thereby perhaps increase some of our ecclesiastical unity.

I will say, without annoyance, that it appears to me that Catholics here have a belief that Protestants are always splintering and bickering that is just as inaccurate as the belief of some Protestants that Catholics worship Mary.
 
Ginger2 said:
The source that Catholics use (Barrett) states these are denominations. And according to Catholics this source is a valid and trust-worthy source, And according to Catholic math as members of this site have told me, that number has grown to over 2,178.

I personally don’t believe it because Barretts numbers about “protestant” denominations are so extremely flawed. But since Catholics believe Barrett is right on the money about “protestant” denominations, I expect you must also then accept his numbers on Catholic denominations.

🙂
Click to expand...
I have never even viewed Barrett’s numbers about “protestant” denominations. I’ll check it out and let you know. :)👍
 
ComeHome2Rome said:
btw - I’ve never met a non-Catholic who believes in any creeds. A creed is considered way “too Catholic” by the non-Catholics I’ve met.
Click to expand...
:newidea: Then may I introduce myslef?
My name is Zooey:curtsey:, & not only do I believe in the creeds, but just a couple of weeks ago, in my (UMC) church’s Bible study, my pastor said that “the basis of all Christian belief is contained most succinctly in the creeds”.:aok:
cooterhein said:
Non-Catholic Christians covers every Christian who’s not a Catholic, and this could conceivably include every type of marginal Christian or cult that no one wants to agree with. However, speaking for Evangelical Protestantism, you can start with the Nicene Creed and the Five Solas for your basic doctrinal framework. Of course, there are some theologically liberal people that are Protestants in name only but not in belief or practice. In that regard, they are just like theologically liberal Catholics that are Catholic in name only but not in belief or practice.

Beyond that, there is a common heritage of spiritual freedom and equality. While this is certainly not exclusive to Protestantism, it is something that unites us and it’s a little different from what Catholics have.

Another area of non-doctrinal agreement includes the 66-book canon. I know you’re about to tell me there are some old Lutheran bibles that have the apocryphal books lifted from their place in the order of the Septuagint and placed between the Testaments in a section that is appropriately entitled “Apocrypha,” and I’m about to remind you of the difference between “Apocryphal” and “Deutero-canonical.” And then I’m going to ask you to take a look inside a Greek Catholic Bible and see if you count an extra 3 books plus an extra psalm. (You will). Lest I misrepresent Greek Catholics by omission, they affirm the same canon as you but they include all the material that’s in the Greek canon without calling all of it canonical.

These are some of the basic beliefs and principles of Evangelical Protestantism. You either have them or you don’t. I know this is kind of a short post, but the Nicene Creed and the Five Solas covers a lot of ground.
Click to expand...
To the bolded: :nope:Nope. Not me.
Actually, I have for years referred to the 66-book canon as “the Reader’s Digest Condensed Version”.
 
Zooey said:
:newidea: Then may I introduce myslef?
My name is Zooey:curtsey:, & not only do I believe in the creeds, but just a couple of weeks ago, in my (UMC) church’s Bible study, my pastor said that “the basis of all Christian belief is contained most succinctly in the creeds”.:aok:
Click to expand...
Pleased to meet you Zooey. 😃

What do non-Catholics mean when you say, "We (all non-Catholics) all believe in the “basics”?

All, but one non-Catholic Christian I’ve met 😉 , don’t believe in any creed - so the creed can’t be what you guys mean when you say that.
 
ComeHome2Rome said:
Pleased to meet you Zooey. 😃

What do non-Catholics mean when you say, "We (all non-Catholics) all believe in the “basics”?

All, but one non-Catholic Christian I’ve met 😉 , don’t believe in any creed - so the creed can’t be what you guys mean when you say that.
Click to expand...
I ;)suspect that what they mean is “all the truths taught in the creeds of the church”, but don’t care to admit it…😛
 
joe370 said:
There are 22 Rites, all of which are in full communion with the bishop of Rome?
Code: 
Armenian (Eastern-rite Catholic)
Bulgarian (Byzantine rite)
Chaldean (Eastern Syrian rite)
Coptic (Alexandrian rite)
Ethiopic (Alexandrian rite)
Greek (Byzantine rite)
Hungarian (Byzantine rite)
Italo-Albanian (Byzantine rite)
Jurisdiction for both Latin-rite and Eastern-rite Catholics
Latin-rite Catholic
Malankara (Syro-Antiochian
Maronite (Syro-Antiochian, Western Syrian)
Melkite (Byzantine, Greek Catholic; Arabic-speaking)
Romanian Byzantine rite
Russian (Byzantine rite)
Ruthenian (Byzantine rite)
Slovak (Byzantine rite)
Syro-Malabarese (Eastern Syrian)
Syrian, Syriac-speaking (Syro-Antiochian, West Syrian)
Ukrainian Byzantine rite
Perhaps the following link is accurate:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_by_number_of_members
Click to expand...
Thank you for providing the list of all the Catholic Rites!!!

The Roman Rite part of the Latin Rite, right?
Or is the Latin Rite those who only attend the Latin Masses?
joe370 said:
Could you please provide the site that provides a valid list of all Catholic churches, not in communion with the bishop of Rome.
Click to expand...
I don’t have a site and am not sure if this information is accurate, but I have heard that there are two groups that consider themselves Catholic that are Not in communion with Rome currently: Old Catholics & SSPX. It looks like the SSPX may be in communion with Rome again soon with ex-communications recently lifted, but I haven’t heard anything at all lately about the Old Catholics.
 
I am confused as to what are basics. They differ on baptism. Once saved, always saved. The bodily resurrection of Jesus. Whether or not abortion is a sin. Some major denominations were formed to support slavery.
What are the basics then?
 
AmateurPianist said:
And you wonder why many of us think your apologetics are a joke.
Click to expand...
You know, this comment has been on my mind all day today.

Even though I have known you since you were NotTooSmart (simmer down, folks, that’s AmateurPianist’s own unfortunate choice of a screenname originally), we’ve had very few interactions. In my >10,000 posts I doubt that even 1% of my comments were even addressed to you.

So I’m not sure what prompts such a rude comment.

I’m going to assume one of these things:
  • you’re having a bad day.
  • you’re confusing me with *another *poster whose “apologetics are a joke”.
  • you meant to say “your ‘statistics’ are a joke”.
  • you meant “you” as the royal “you”, and not “you” as in PRmerger.
If, however, the comment is meant that you actually find my apologetics to be laughable, then please address what apologetics I have offered that are ludicrous.
 
wondrousgnat said:
I am confused as to what are basics. They differ on baptism. Once saved, always saved. The bodily resurrection of Jesus. Whether or not abortion is a sin. Some major denominations were formed to support slavery.
What are the basics then?
Click to expand...
The “basics” or as some call them, the “essential” doctrines are what the Holy Scriptures say we MUST believe to be saved.

So, anyone who denies Jesus was resurected in the flesh are, by definition, not Christian.

OSAS is not real doctrine. It has simply been told so many times that even Protestants think it is.

Romans 1:
2 the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3 regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life was a descendant of David, 4 and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed the Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord. 5 Through him we received grace and apostleship to call all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith for his name’s sake. 6 And you also are among those Gentiles who are called to belong to Jesus Christ.

1 John 4:
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
 
joe370 said:
I have never even viewed Barrett’s numbers about “protestant” denominations. I’ll check it out and let you know. :)👍
Click to expand...
Barrett is the original source. The “math” comes from this site where posters have made claims about how fast the numbers are growing. I did the calculations to project those claims.

Barrett also included cults, aborigine in different countries and count them under the heading of protestant splits, and other non-christians as denominations.
 
Ginger2 said:
See post # 39. My answer is the same as your’s.
Click to expand...
I really don’t think so.

My answer to the question: How many Protestant denominations are there?

is…

wait for it…

wait for it…🙂

millions. (See Apologist John Martignoni’s analysis of this.)

So when I say here on the CAFs that it’s “tens of thousands” I am actually being quite conservative and restrained.

So I’m pretty sure your answer is NOT “the same as” mine.
 
Ginger2 said:
The “basics” or as some call them, the “essential” doctrines are what the Holy Scriptures say we MUST believe to be saved.

So, anyone who denies Jesus was resurected in the flesh are, by definition, not Christian.
Click to expand...
There is no verse in the Holy Scriptures that says this is an essential doctrine, Ginger.

Now, if you believe it’s an essential doctrine (and, of course, it is!) it’s because you agree with the Sacred Tradition of the Creed which declares it to be essential.

But you never read it in a single page of Scripture that “anyone who denies Jesus was resurrected in the flesh is not a Christian.”

Which brings up another interesting point.

Can one be a Christian and believe that there are multiple gods? Or is belief in One God an essential? And if so, what verse in Scripture says this is an essential?

And can one be a Christian and believe that Mary was not a virgin when she conceived Jesus? Or is belief in the virginity of Mary (at least until the birth of Jesus) an essential? And if so, what verse in Scripture says this is an essential?

And can one be a Christian and believe that one does not have to forgive others their trespasses? Or is that an essential to being a Christian? And if so, what verse in Scripture says that this is an essential?
:hmmm:
 
AbideWithMe said:
Good evening (here) Pfaffenhoffen—I live in the middle of Pennsylvania German country, and I’m half German myself, but of all the many German surnames around here, I’ve never heard the name Pfaffenhoffen. I’m curious as to if it would have a meaning in English?

Okay, you’re going on another Protestants saying they don’t want unity. I wonder if you still, offhand, remember the thread where that was said?

I posted that link to the conference of churches within my county, though, as evidence that we do care and are actively working for unity—we are trying to be obedient to Christ in all the considerable areas where we do agree, and hoping by that obedience to get to know each other better, and thereby perhaps increase some of our ecclesiastical unity.

I will say, without annoyance, that it appears to me that Catholics here have a belief that Protestants are always splintering and bickering that is just as inaccurate as the belief of some Protestants that Catholics worship Mary.
Click to expand...
There are several Pfaffenhofen, and the one where I live in in Pfaffehofen-an-der-Ilm, north of Munich.

The idea that the Protestant are plintering is given by the thousands of denomintions. One Protestant told me: “If you do not like the Pastor or the atmosphere you just change Church or create a new One”: I was dumbfounded.

The thing is that the only thing that matters in Unity id Obedience to the Pope. All the rest will come. But that seems to be a hard thing.

Meanwhile, I think that all the efforts to Ecumenism are valid and I think that you merit an aplause to do that. !!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top