Why so many Protestant denominations

[estesbob]

There are many different protestant denomination because the Bible allows for freed of worship. We are free to choose how we want to worship God. Some chose a more traditional way and others a more contemporary way. Morst Protestant church agree on the main tenants of the faith. On other things there is great freedom. Please do not think that just because there are different denomination that we all disagree on what is important.

So its not important that there is great differences on what it takes to be saved? Or that what is a sin varies substantialy from Denomination to Denomination? How about disgreements on the nature of Christ, the number of people that can be saved(is it really just 144,000?) or whether our salvation is a one time event or not?

 

[SyCarl]

’

OK-I went to a JW, Mormon, Lutheran and Baptisty Church-they all had substatial differences on what they say about Christ and Scripture. i also went to two different Episcopal Churches. one told me that Scripture did not forbid homosexuality or Priestesses, the other told me it most certainly did. The Evangelical church down the street told me once I was Saved I was always saved while the Methodist Church told me that was not true. And nearly every one of them had a different view on the nature of the Eucahrist. How do we reconcle this-or is God the author of confusion?

Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons certainly are not Protestant. I would not even consider them Christian.

 

[SyCarl]

’

OK-I went to a JW, Mormon, Lutheran and Baptisty Church-they all had substatial differences on what they say about Christ and Scripture. i also went to two different Episcopal Churches. one told me that Scripture did not forbid homosexuality or Priestesses, the other told me it most certainly did. The Evangelical church down the street told me once I was Saved I was always saved while the Methodist Church told me that was not true. And nearly every one of them had a different view on the nature of the Eucahrist. How do we reconcle this-or is God the author of confusion?

I find it quite interesting that my Presbyterian Church has no difficulty in having Menonite, Lutheran or Anglican ministers preaching from our pulpit or ours from theirs. The differences are not really as great as you seem to think among the major denominations.

 

[estesbob]

Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons certainly are not Protestant. I would not even consider them Christian.

So your premise is correct only if you get to exclude anyone you dont consider to be a Christain? Andf how about the other examoples i gave. Are Methodists Chrisitans? Lutherans? Evangelicals? Baptists?Episcopaleans?

 

[estesbob]

I find it quite interesting that my Presbyterian Church has no difficulty in having Menonite, Lutheran or Anglican ministers preaching from our pulpit or ours from theirs. The differences are not really as great as you seem to think among the major denominations.

I listed a whole series of major differences-you ignored them. If there are no major differences why the need ofr different denominations? Why dont the Mennonites, Lutherans , Pesbyterians and Anglicans unify?

Do Baptists preach from you pulpit? Christian Scientists? Seventh Day Adventists? Catholics? Church Of Christ?

 

[SyCarl]

So your premise is correct only if you get to exclude anyone you dont consider to be a Christain? Andf how about the other examoples i gave. Are Methodists Chrisitans? Lutherans? Evangelicals? Baptists?Episcopaleans?

All the ones you listed as Christians as are Catholics and Orthodox. I also think that if you ask any of those listed groups they would not consider the Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormons as Protestant or Christian.

 

[SyCarl]

I listed a whole series of major differences-you ignored them. If there are no major differences why the need ofr different denominations? Why dont the Mennonites, Lutherans , Pesbyterians and Anglicans unify?

Do Baptists preach from you pulpit? Christian Scientists? Seventh Day Adventists? Catholics? Church Of Christ?

First it should be noted that a number of major Protestant denominations are uniting. This is most common among Methodists, Presbyterians and Congregationalists.

As for differences if you look at them from a practical view they are not really that significant.

For eample, one major difference is paedobaptism versus credobaptism. However if you do not believe that water baptism is necessary for salvation, then when the timing of baptism is of reduced significance.

A number of the differences you listed such as women ministers can be looked at as a matter of what Catholics would call discipline. In such areas there is not total unity between the Latin Rite and the Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church.

 

[estesbob]

First it should be noted that a number of major Protestant denominations are uniting. This is most common among Methodists, Presbyterians and Congregationalists.

As for differences if you look at them from a practical view they are not really that significant.

For eample, one major difference is paedobaptism versus credobaptism. However if you do not believe that water baptism is necessary for salvation, then when the timing of baptism is of reduced significance.

A number of the differences you listed such as women ministers can be looked at as a matter of what Catholics would call discipline. In such areas there is not total unity between the Latin Rite and the Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church.

How about fundamental differences on how one is saved? How do you reconcile an act beng a sin in one denomonation and an act of love in another. One simply can not gloss over the glaring differences in theologybetween the thousands of Proetestant denoiminations. the ONLY real unifying factor is Jesus although there are serious disagreement even on him.

 

[SyCarl]

How about fundamental differences on how one is saved? How do you reconcile an act beng a sin in one denomonation and an act of love in another. One simply can not gloss over the glaring differences in theologybetween the thousands of Proetestant denoiminations. the ONLY real unifying factor is Jesus although there are serious disagreement even on him.

Again if you look at the practical differences between Armineans and Calvinists, they are not really that great. For example with respect to election the Calvinists say “once saved always saved”. However there is no way of knowing who is elect until they actually persevere. So there is not a lot of difference between the Armineans who say that you must persevere.

I believe that so many of the differences between various churches are man-made as a result of trying to understand or know too much. We feel that we have a right and need to know everything. Yet it is impossible for mankind to fully understand God’s plans. Christianity started among the poor and uneducated. Would they be expected to understand all the subtelties and nuances that we have introduced? Is it necessary to know exactly how Christ’s sacrifice saves us (penal substitution vs sacrifical satisfaction, imputed vs infused righteousness, etc.)

Similarly if we all profess that those who believe should perform good works, are everyday Christians to understand all the subtelties between “faith alone” and “faith with works”?

Christianity is meant to be simple. Paul expressed the concern that the church would depart from the simplicity of devotion to Christ.

But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.
(2 Corinthians 11:3 NASB)

I believe that all churches, Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant have departed from this simplicity by insisting in our pride that we can and must understand everything we think we should know. That is where most of our differences come from.

 

[BrianH]

I listed a whole series of major differences-you ignored them. If there are no major differences why the need ofr different denominations? Why dont the Mennonites, Lutherans , Pesbyterians and Anglicans unify?

Do Baptists preach from you pulpit? Christian Scientists? Seventh Day Adventists? Catholics? Church Of Christ?

Christian Scientists do not have preachers, just readers

 

[BrianH]

How about fundamental differences on how one is saved? How do you reconcile an act beng a sin in one denomonation and an act of love in another. One simply can not gloss over the glaring differences in theologybetween the thousands of Proetestant denoiminations. the ONLY real unifying factor is Jesus although there are serious disagreement even on him.

There is not a fundamental difference in the groups you listed.
All profess Christ and all baptize. Huge strawman you are trying to create.
When one gets out of the large groups that comprise the vast majority of Christianity there are always exceptions. Heck, I have listed several smaller Catholic groups that have broken off the Catholic Church as well.

 

[Cincy]

Why are many of the storefront churches headed by bishops and have names similar to the second unity church of christians

 

[SyCarl]

I think we make too much of the differences rather than, in reality how close we are.

For example on salvation I think that distinctions are rather subtle, and to a degree a matter of semantics. We must remember to deal with what our churches teach and not what individuals say since there will be both Protestants and Catholics who do not follow what their church teaches.

The first thing to note is that Jesus and Paul seem to mean different things by the word faith, at least on some occasions. Jesus specifies that the work of God is to believe in Jesus. John 6:27. So as Jesus speaks here, faith is indeed a work. Paul seems to speak as if faith is not a work. Abraham was not justified by works before God. He was justified by his faith. Romans 4:1-3 Here Paul seems to draw a distinction between faith and works. He does the same thing in Ephesians 2:8-9 where he says we are saved by grace through faith, not by works. This would seem to exclude faith as a work as well.

Protestants and Catholics both agree that we are saved by grace through faith. The catch is the role of works and what is meant by faith. Protestants would include repentance as being part of a saving faith, not as a separate action. Works in love are seen as an essential result and evidence of this saving faith. Catholics seem to limit faith to mere intellectual consent, which most Protestants would agree does not save as is set out in James 2.

The main difference is whether our works merit anything. Protestants say that our works don’t merit salvation although those who have the chance to do them will have them. The Catholic Church says our works can merit an increase in grace and salavation but it also teaches that because of the great difference between God and man that we cannot really merit anything from God.

I really think that we are closer than we think and would question if God really expects us to understand all the subtle minutae of his plans.

 

[BrianH]

There is not much difference between Presbyterians, Methodists, Anglicans, Congregationalists, Mennonites and such. Even when you add Baptists and Assemblies of God, all believe in professing Christ and baptizing,

 

[BrianH]

Why are many of the storefront churches headed by bishops and have names similar to the second unity church of christians

I do not understand the last part of this.

 

[BrianH]

So your premise is correct only if you get to exclude anyone you dont consider to be a Christain? Andf how about the other examoples i gave. Are Methodists Chrisitans? Lutherans? Evangelicals? Baptists?Episcopaleans?

Catholicism considers them such and so do I

 

[DebChris]

In some ways, there are denominations in Roman Catholicism just as there are denominations in Protestant Christianity. That is, there are groups that differ in beliefs about non-essential doctrines who are still members of the church because they still agree on the essential doctrines of the faith.

What St. Augustine said holds true for both Catholics and Protestants, i think:

“In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, love.”

This is a good place to clarify terms using the American Heritage Dictionary:

denomination–an organized group of religious congregations.
The Charismatic Renewal within the Catholic Church does not fit this definition. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are expressed by members of various denominations.

sect–a religious body that has separated from a larger denomination.

order–group of persons living under a religious rule.
Within the Catholic Church there are a number of religious orders. Each order contributes its gifts or charisms for the benefit of the Church as a whole. Franciscans, for instance, claim a charism of holy poverty. The Esteuceans claim a teaching charism while Dominicans are known for their preaching. The Benedictines are credited for establishing a monastic lifestyle.
The lives of the saints depict how individuals lived uniquely while adhering to the tenets of the Faith as taught by the Catholic Church.

Catholic worship centers around the Eucharist.
CCC1324 The Eucharist is “the source and summit of the Christian life”…
CCC1326 by the Eucharistic celebration we already unite ourselves with the heavenly liturgy and anticipate eternal life, when God will be all in all.
CCC1327 the Eucharist is the sum and summary of our faith: "Our way of thinking is attuned to the Eucharist, and the Eucharist in turn confirms our way of thinking:
The bond among [Catholics]is not ethnicity, political preference, economic status or like-mindedness. It is the Lord (Little Blue Book)

The inability to receive the Eucharist causes major distress for Catholics. It is outside Mass that each of us develops a spiritual life fitting our individual personalities. Many pray the Liturgy of the Hours while others pray the rosary daily. A Catholic may attend Eucharistic Adoration or simply sit in the back of the church “looking at Christ while Christ looks back” from the crucifix. The prayers and acts of piety in which a Catholic participates reflect the culture in which that Catholic lives. The Mass, however, is constant in its essentials, wherever I may be.

 

[jmcrae]

Your answer is that you do not have a problem with a Roman Catholic believing in the perpetuity of the spiritual gifts. My next question, if you will be so good as to answer it, is this: If a Roman Catholic believed that certain spiritual gifts, such as speaking in tongues, ceased with the closing of the cannon of Scripture, would you divide over that issue? By divide, i mean, would you consider that person to not be a Roman Catholic, because she does not believe as you do?

No, of course not - I would simply show him the place in the Catechism that teaches us about the spiritual gifts, and he would be corrected in his understanding of what it is that the Church teaches. He could also speak to any priest or Catechism teacher about this subject, and receive the same information.

 

[jmcrae]

Yes, absolutely! I feel the same way.

Even though i do not personally speak in tongues and have not made up my mind as to whether it is a legitimate work of the Holy Spirit, i would not divide over the issue. I would consider both a Baptist (who believes speaking in tongues to be of the devil) and a Pentecostal (who believes a person is not a Christian until she speaks in tongues) to both be Christians if they believed in the same essential doctrines of the faith.

What you are overlooking is the fact that the official teaching of the Baptist Catechism is that “Speaking in tongues is from the Devil,” and the official teaching of the Pentecostal Catechism is that “Speaking in tongues is the sign by which we are known to be Christians.” So, there is no way that you could have a discussion with either one on the subject, because their official teachings are in contradiction, on this issue - and in the case of the Pentecostal, you cannot say that it is “non-essential” since it is the only method of knowing whether you are, in fact, a Christian, or not - unless you think it is “non-essential” to be able to know whether or not you are a Christian?

 

[mozart-250]

What you are overlooking is the fact that the official teaching of the Baptist Catechism is that “Speaking in tongues is from the Devil,” and the official teaching of the Pentecostal Catechism is that “Speaking in tongues is the sign by which we are known to be Christians.” So, there is no way that you could have a discussion with either one on the subject, because their official teachings are in contradiction, on this issue - and in the case of the Pentecostal, you cannot say that it is “non-essential” since it is the only method of knowing whether you are, in fact, a Christian, or not - unless you think it is “non-essential” to be able to know whether or not you are a Christian?

Fact Check.

With the exception of the United Pentecostals (which aren’t trinitarian) your mainline Pentecostals (Assemblies of God for example) do not believe that speaking in tongues is the sign by which we are known to be Christians. Therefore to mainline Pentecostals, speaking in tongues is not an essential with respect to salvation.

Carry on.