In a recent volume defending the authenticity of the Book of Mormon, we see the “33,000 denominations” argument being revived:
Barrett, et. A. “The Word
Christian Encyclopedia” (2nd Ed.) identified over 33,000 Christian
denominations. Each denomination claims that they are the True Church or part
of it and justify their independence from the others using biblical interpretation
and authority claims. The problem lies in how they can show their
interpretation is correct while the interpretations of tens of thousands of
other Christian denominations are wrong. (Edward K. Watson, Empirical
Evidence for the Book of Mormon: Proof of Deliberate Design Within a
Dictated-From-Imagination Book [Brainey Press, 2021], 100 n. 1)
While Watson is a smart fellow, he is just wrong on this point. As
I note in Not
By Scripture Alone: A Latter-day Saint Refutation of Sola Scriptura:
30,000+ Protestant Denominations?
Many critics of sola scriptura often claim that there are
30,000 denominations, or some related figure.
This line of argument should be abandoned by critics of this
false and rather pernicious doctrine, as it is just wrong.
Protestant apologist, Eric D. Svendsen, wrote a book
entitled, Upon this Slippery Rock: Countering Roman Catholic Claims to Authority (Amityville, N.Y.: Calvary Press, 2002), and one of the
chapters contained therein examines this claim, as presented by Tim Staples
(Catholic) and others who employ this lousy apologetic--the chapter can be
found online via archive.org here.
I hope that Latter-day Saints, wishing to uphold intellectual
integrity, will retire this argument, or, at the very least, modify the
argument and use the proper figure of Protestant denominations, too--in
reality, the issue of denominationalism is due to poor ecclesiology, not
epistemology per se, within the broad spectrum of Protestantism.
Notwithstanding, there is a valid way to argue against
Protestantism on the topic of the various denominations therein. Firstly, while
Svendsen and other Evangelicals are correct that many critics of Protestantism
exaggerate the number of Protestant denominations, all the talk of there being
"only" 9,000 or a related figure is, ultimately, a smokescreen. The
truth is, if there is more than one denomination, there are too many--if one
departs from the one true Church (and there can only be one true Church), one
is not in full communion with God and the true Gospel.
Secondly, notwithstanding the repeated claim that
the differences between the various denominations within Evangelical
Protestantism pertain to minor issues and are not important doctrinal
differences, such begs an important question—how are we to adequately answer how we know what is and what is not an important
doctrinal disagreement? Furthermore, we know for a fact that this is false;
there are many doctrinal disagreements among various Protestant groups
that are salvific in nature, not secondary or even tertiary, such as church
leadership or exclusive psalmody. Such differences include baptismal
regeneration, infant baptism, the nature of the Eucharist (the magisterial
Reformers debated one another on this, viewing it as a salvific issue), the
nature of justification, the nature of sanctification, the nature of righteousness
in justification, eternal security, the nature of the atonement, the intention
of the atonement and Christ’s highly priestly intercession, the nature of
original sin, whether man has a free-will to accept the gospel, etc. –None—of
these, and many other doctrines, are “minor” disagreements; they represent
fundamental, salvific differences among Protestants, both historically and in
modern times. For instance, if Lutherans are incorrect in teaching baptismal
regeneration, are they not guilty, like the Judaizers, guilty of perverting the
gospel (cf. Gal 1:6-9)?
Some may charge that LDS have their differences too; yes, that is true, but
these differences are not salvific (e.g., whether the
translation of the Book of Mormon was “tight” or “loose”); furthermore, at
least we have a mechanism to intervene on any theological debate and
give authoritative answers—the formal doctrine of Protestantism, sola
scriptura, does not help in such issues as the biblical texts are
passive and have to be interpreted, and such has, in part, led to the inability
of Protestants for almost 500 years, to definitively answer these issues.
Here is a partial listing of the differences between Protestant denominations,
many of which affect salvation itself:
· Baptismal regeneration
· Mode of baptism
· Infant Baptism
· Eternal Security
· Nature of the Eucharist (e.g.,
consubstantiation vs. spiritual presence view vs. purely symbolic view)
· The nature of sola fide
· The nature of “saving faith”
· The intent of the atonement (limited
vs. universal vs. hypothetical universal views)
· Nature of predestination
· Whether God is active or passive in
reprobation (supralapsarian vs. infra/sublapsarian perspectives)
· If God’s saving grace can be resisted
· Whether repentance is necessary for
salvation
· Nature of justification
· Nature of sanctification
· Nature of “righteousness” in
justification
· Whether Christ has one will or two
wills
· The nature and limits of sola
scriptura itself
Interestingly, in the 1979 publication, Missionary Discussions
for the Jewish People(*), we are told that there are hundreds, not thousands,
of "rival churches" (denominations):
Missionary: After the days of the
Apostles, revelation from heaven to the Church of Jesus Christ ceased, and
divine authority was taken from the earth. This was the beginning of the false
Christianity that has now multiplied into hundreds of rival
churches . . . (Missionary Discussions for the Jewish People, page JC-15,
as cited by Jerald Tanner and Sandra Tanner, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality?
[5th ed.; Salt Lake City: Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1987, 2008], 4-A, emphasis
added).
There are better arguments against the false doctrine of Sola
Scriptura. The “33,000 [or any other inflated figure]denominations”
argument should be retired.
(*) As an aside, I would be very interested in acquiring a copy of
“Missionary Discussions for the Jewish People” (1979), even if it is in a
scanned PDF format. If anyone can help, let me know at
ScripturalMormonismATgmailDOTcom
