How about something more like the above?
I'm in a picture posting mood for some reason
To be fair:
The problem with the often used (yet cringe-worthy IMO) Catholic apologetic of “there are X thousand Protestant denominations” is that it’s all ultimately based on self-identification surveys and/or the definition of “denomination” being simply a different congregation (as in the statistics you cite) not actually different *churches*. (Or lack of a church see below)
Indeed the very source you cite (and really any source any erstwhile Catholic may cite) also says there are “ 24,000 are Catholic and Orthodox churches” (in the US).
So what are we to conclude from that? That there are 24,000 “Catholic denominations”? Heaven forbid!
No, the problem is as I mentioned earlier: these surveys and studies play fast and loose with the definition of “church”. We Catholics (correctly) state that to be a true church, it must have apostolic succession (valid Holy Orders). Which limits the number from thousands to a handful. But the statisticians don’t take that into account in their studies, because such a definition is too limiting for their (usual) purposes since it eliminates all Protestants (statisticians are just interested usually in simple demographic comparison not proper theology).
So there is no true source that “proves” the apologetic. IMO we Catholics should avoid using it for this reason because ultimately it’s distracting from the real message that is: Protestants don’t have unity where it counts, which is on core dogmas, such as the existence of free will for example.
The unity Christians have is in this.....
John 1:10-13 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 3:14-18 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
John 5:24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.
John 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
John 11:25-26 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
Acts 16:27-31 When the jailer woke and saw that the prison doors were open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, supposing that the prisoners had escaped. But Paul cried with a loud voice, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here.” And the jailer called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas. Then he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”
Romans 10:9-13 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
Ephesians 2:1-10And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.
But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
Yeah, it's a lot of Scripture but the unity is of salvation by faith in Christ, but believing in His name.
There are areas that Paul refers to as *disputable matters*, areas where opinion varies but is not a salvation issue.
And Catholicism certainly has those areas where there's latitude, not only based on church teaching, but also on what we see here on the RF.
Not every Catholic here agrees on everything with each other, much less the church.
The unity Christians have is in this.....
Also, here are links to the statements of faith of various denominations and I don't see them varying significantly in any area.
Assemblies of God
http://ag.org/top/Beliefs/Position_Papers/index.cfm#
Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church
http://arpchurch.org/documents/confession-of-faith/
Calvary Chapel
http://calvarychapel.com/home/about/
The Christian and Missionary Alliance
http://www.cmalliance.org/about/history/
Elim Fellowship Churches
http://www.elimfellowship.org/about-us/statement-of-faith/
The Father's House
http://tfhny.org/the-house/what-we-believe/
Osais LA
http://www.oasisla.org/about/what-we-believe/
Presbyterian Church in Americahttp://www.pcaac.org/resources/wcf/
United Reformed church in North America https://www.urcna.org/sysfiles/site_uploads/custom_public/custom2642.pdf
Westside Christian Fellowship
http://westsidechristianfellowship.org/about-wcf/statement-of-faith/
It's there for anyone to read if they choose.
I am only pinging a bunch of others to this comment as a matter of courtesy. I don't know much about the denominational affiliation of most of them nor do I care. They are brothers and sisters in Christ, united together by faith in HIM not what church or denomination we attend.
I know it seems rather vague and nebulous, but our identity is in Christ, not the label hanging out front of the building we worship in.
If I attended a Baptist church, I would not consider myself a Baptist. I would consider myself a follower of Christ first and foremost, who happens at the moment to attend a Baptist church for preaching, teaching, fellowship, encouragement, support, etc.
My salvation is not tied to what church I attend or even the fact of attending church.
How about something more like the above?
I'm in a picture posting mood for some reason
If I said I love Pope Francis a torrent rains down.
If I say I hate Pope Francis, same thing. I am sick and tired of being censored most especially by conservatives. I have friends on this site, I met my husband on this site, I love this site, but there are days when I could just say the hell with the whole thing. Ya know?
The Gospel Message is where it counts....those who know Jesus Christ within all denominations, and not, are UNITED IN HIM through Him..."The Fellowship of 'Believers'.
"Dogma" is a meaningless endeavor apart from the above.......and all denominstions are full of Dogma "students" who have entirely missed the message of 'Christ in You.'
Your commendable attempt to be fair brings you into conflict with the normal use of the term by your brethren, and the problem is not self-identification surveys, as Rome treats (in life and in death) most all who ID with her as members, but that RCs simply use Protestant based upon the simple aspect that they are not Catholic but claim to be Christian, a definition of which is so wide you can drive a Unitarian Scientology Swedenborgian 747 thru it. But which broadness they would never tolerate for "Catholic," even stating that the EOS are not.
Instead of being like atheists who assert Hitler was a Christian, a term needs to be based upon basic defining aspects, and for the Reformers this meant affirming core Truths such as the apostles Creed state, as well as the supremacy and sufficiency (material or formal) of Scripture as literally being the wholly inspired Word of God, and salvation from Hell to Heaven being by grace thru faith, not earned by the holiness of man.
Which sets them apart from not only Catholicism but liberal Protestantism as well as cults, the latter of whom also operate out of her sola ecclesia model (the church via its leaders are effectively the supreme authority), out of which the most damnable heresies are seen. Whenever Scripture is not the supreme authoritative source of Truth, both the souls and bodies of men are in danger.
Protestants don’t have unity where it counts, which is on core dogmas,...
That requires the same loose definition of "Protestant" as your brethren need for arguing that the fruit of SS is moral liberalism and doctrinal anarchy, as in reality, those who hold most strongly to the supremacy of Scripture as literally being the wholly inspired Word of God are far more unified in basic Biblical beliefs than the fruit of Rome whom she treats as members.
such as the existence of free will for example.
All believe in free will, but what "free" really means is subject to interpretation. Can man believe on the Lord Jesus without God motivating and enabling Him? Catholic theology holds on the one hand that the efficacious grace given for the performance of an action obtains man's consent and that action takes place; on the other hand that in so acting, man is free. Hence the question: How can these two -the infallible result and liberty- be harmonized?
And thus the fervent theological controversy regarding divine grace that arose between the Dominicans and the Jesuits towards the close of the sixteenth century. And despite the promotion about RC unity and the magisterium settling disputes, this was not settled, for
after twenty years of discussion public and private, and eighty-five conferences in the presence of the popes, the question was not solved but an end was put to the disputes. The pope's decree communicated on 5 September 1607 to both Dominicans and Jesuits, allowed each party to defend its own doctrine, enjoined each from censoring or condemning the opposite opinion, and commanded them to await, as loyal sons of the Church, the final decision of the Apostolic See.
That decision, however, has not been reached, and both orders, consequently, could maintain their respective theories, just as any other theological opinion is held. The long controversy has aroused considerable feeling, and the pope, aiming at the restoration of peace and charity between the religious orders, forbade by a decree of the Inquisition (1 December 1611) the publication of any book concerning efficacious grace until further action by the Holy See. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congregatio_de_Auxiliis
We Catholics (correctly) state that to be a true church, it must have apostolic succession (valid Holy Orders)
The veracity of this doctrine rests upon the premise of the assured veracity of Rome, based upon tradition, and her interpretation that sees apostolic succession in Scripture based on a solitary example, by a non-political method Rome has never used, and none for the martyred James, (Acts 12:1,2) or any manifest preparation for any papal successor, and in contrast to the requirements for elders.
Meanwhile, the EOs reject the papacy of Rome based upon the same sources Rome invokes for hers.
Don't know what propaganda machine has gotten to you, but the Romanist organization is so conflicted on "core" dogmas that it no longer has any idea what it believes. Augustine fought Pelagian and won, but the Roman cult now understands semi-pelagianism to be one of its central doctrines...go look, read and despair.