Hi ben,
Understand. Sometimes I let folks have their way and say the number is actually millions per some definitions, even as I think about what they said Luther or he about himself, each man is his own "pope’’. It is not solo scriptura that is to be blamed, but that rascally and even abused but so necessary personal, irrespector of persons, divine revelation.
You bring up Luther and each man being his own ‘pope’ and that Sola Scriptura is not to be blamed?
(The Great) Protestant Theologian Alister McGrath tell us:
“The idea that lay at the heart of the sixteenth-century Reformation, which brought about Anglicanism and the other Protestant churches into being, was that **the Bible is capable of being understood by all Christian believers – and that they all have the right to interpret it **and to insist upon their perspectives being taken seriously. Yet **this powerful affirmation of spiritual democracy ended up unleashing forces that threatened to destabalize the church, eventually leading to fissure and the formation of breakaway groups. **Anglicanism may yet follow the pattern of other Protestant groups and become a “family” of denominations, each with its own way of reading and applying the Bible.
**The dangerous new idea, firmly embodied at the heart of the Protestant revolution, was that all Christians have a right to interpret the Bible for themselves. However, it ultimately proved uncontrollable, spawning developments that few at the time could have envisaged or predicted. The great convulsion of the early sixteenth century that historians now call “the Reformation” introduced into the history of Christianity a dangerous new idea that gave rise to an unparalleled degree of creativity and growth, on the one hand, while on the other causing new tensions and debates that, by their very nature, probably lie beyond resolution. **The development of Protestantism as a major religious force in the world has been shaped decisively by the creative tensions emerging from this principal.
The Dangerous Idea
……Yet from it’s outset, the movement was seen by its opponents as a menacing development, opening the way to religious mayhem, social disintegration, and political chaos. It was not simply that Protestantism seemed to revise, corrupt, or abandon some of the traditional beliefs and practices of the Christian faith. Something far more significant – and ultimately much more dangerous – lay beneath the surface of the Protestantism criticisms of the medieval church.** At its heart, the emergence and growth of Protestantism concerned one of the most fundamental questions that can confront any religion: Who has the authority to define its faith? Institutions or individuals? Who has the right to interpret its foundational document, the Bible?**”
“Protestantism took its stand on the right of individuals to interpret the Bible for themselves rather than be forced to submit to “official” interpretations handed down by popes or other or other centralized religious authorities. ** For Martin Luther, perhaps the most significant of the first generation of Protestant leaders, the traditional authority of clerical institutions had led to the degradation and distortion of the Christian faith. Renewal and reformation were urgently needed. And if the medieval church would not put its own house in order, reform would have to come from its grass roots – from the laity. Luther’s radical doctrine of the “priesthood of all believers” empowered individual believers. It was a radical, dangerous idea that bypassed the idea that a centralized authority had the right to interpret the Bible. There was no centralized authority, no clerical monopoly on biblical interpretation. A radical reshaping of Christianity was inevitable, precisely because the restraints on change had suddenly – seemingly irreversibly – been removed. **
The outbreak of the Peasants’ War in 1525 brought home to Luther that this new approach was dangerous and ultimately uncontrollable. If each individual was able to interpret the Bible as he pleased, the outcome could only be anarchy and radical religious individualism. Too late, Luther tried to rein in the movement by emphasizing the importance of authorized religious leaders, such as himself, and institutions in the interpretation of the Bible. But who, his critics asked, had “authorized” these “so-called” authorities? Was not the essence of Luther’s dangerous new idea that there was no such centralized authority? That all Christians had the right to interpret the Bible as they saw fit?”, McGrath, “Christianity’s Dangerous Idea”, p. 2-4
Ben, here we see one of the world’s best Protestant Theologians make the direct connection between Luther, Sola Scriptura, and ‘the formation of breakaway groups’, which by the way are the denominations that we have been speaking of. Whether there are 30,000 or 35,000 or some other horrendous number is not the point. The fact that nobody knows or can agree even on the ballpark number is as telling as it is damning.
The more important question is what it was that ‘caused’ this 16th century explosion of denominalization. In the above we see McGrath making the direct connection between Luther, the ‘right to interpret’, and denominalization. If you would like to suggest that someone or something other than the ‘right to interrpet’ is responsible then please do so.
God Bless You ben, Topper
), I thought your forum name was lritenour. And I was like, what!!! Lee Ritenour is posting on CAF! And then I noticed the “j” 
. Lee is one of my favorite jazz guitarists!