Different Groups Of Protestant Denominations

[hopeful1]

but then again, it's the debate table


anyways, i have a question about the different groups of protestant denominations. My understanding is that while some don't always share the same beliefs (and most are broken down further), most fit under 3 (or 4) different categories: liturgical, Fundamentalist, Evangelical, (and if you count this one: quasi-christian, although please tell me if this is the wrong term). My understanding if when you group some of the basic ones together, you got:


Liturgical: Lutherans and Episcopalian/Anglican, Greek Orthodox

Fundamentalists: Baptists

Evangelical: most nondenominational churches

Quasi-Christian: Mormons, 7th Day Adventist, Jehovah's Witnesses


however, is there a difference between Fundamentalists and Evangelicals, or are they synonimous? If there is a difference, what is it?

What category do Methodists (are they semi-liturical?), presbyterians, and pentecostals fit in? have i forgotten any other major groups?


Not asking to attack, just trying to learn the difference. thank you.

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='hopeful1' date='May 30 2004, 01:12 AM'] anyways, i have a question about the different groups of protestant denominations.  My understanding is that while some don't always share the same beliefs (and most are broken down further), most fit under 3 (or 4) different categories: liturgical, Fundamentalist, Evangelical, (and if you count this one: quasi-christian, although please tell me if this is the wrong term). [/quote]
Hi hopeful1,

The groups you listed that Protestants can fall under sounds right to me. I would have added one more, perhaps, to that list, and that would be Pentecostal.

[quote]My understanding if when you group some of the basic ones together, you got:

Liturgical: Lutherans and Episcopalian/Anglican, Greek Orthodox[/quote]

You are quite right about the first two, but I must correct you about the Greek Orthodox. Eastern Orthodox Christians (i.e., Greek Orthodox Christians, Russian Orthodox Christians, Antiochian Orthodox Christians, etc.) are not Protestants. They actually have Apostolic Succession and valid Sacraments, including a valid Eucharist. The Eastern Orthodox Churches are very close to Catholicism in terms of belief, although there are some differences.

[quote]Fundamentalists: Baptists
[/quote]

I'm not sure it that's entirely correct. I'm sure there are Fundamentalist Baptists, but I wouldn't go so far to say that all Baptists are Fundamentalists. Fundamentalist Christians can come from any Protestant denomination, I suppose.

[quote]Evangelical: most nondenominational churches[/quote]

Sounds about right, but Evangelicalism can be found in any Protestant denomination. I would guess that "non-denominational" Christians tend to be more evangelistic, as that is sort of how it seems to me.

[quote]Quasi-Christian: Mormons, 7th Day Adventist, Jehovah's Witnesses
[/quote]

Mormons, I think, call themselves Christians, but the Catholic Church does not recognize them as so. They do not adhere to many of the fundamental beliefs of Christianity, such as the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus Christ. I don't think the Catholic Church recognizes Jehovah's Witnesses as Christians, either. I'm not sure how the Catholic Church classifies 7th Day Adventists.

[quote]however, is there a difference between Fundamentalists and Evangelicals, or are they synonimous? If there is a difference, what is it?
[/quote]

From a Catholic perspective, Fundamentalists are those who tend to be virulently anti-Catholic. They're often uneducated in their beliefs, and they have a limited knowledge of both biblical exegesis and history. They often take literal interpretations of Bible passages way too far (but not far enough when it comes to the Eucharist ). For example, some of them will call the Catholic Church the Whore of Babylon. A Fundamentalist writer named Loraine Boettner wrote a (poorly researched) book on Catholicism called, [i]Roman Catholicism[/i], and this book is a perfect example of Fundamentalism. You can read about some of the ridiculous things Boettner wrote (as well as the Catholic refutations of these accusations) [url="http://www.catholic.com/library/The_Anti_Catholic_Bible.asp"]here[/url]. These people tend also to be intolerant of anyone who doesn't belong to their religious group. (Another example of a Fundamentalist would be Jack Chick.)

Evangelicals, on the other hand, are the zealous folks you often see on TV. They go on mission trips, and they basically try to evangelize others. Many Protestants who are tolerant of Catholicism tend to be evangelical, although it is indeed possible that a person can be both Fundamentalist and Evangelical. Evangelicals usually have a better knowledge of the Bible than do Fundamentalists, and Church history isn't entirely alien to them. Sometimes, though, Fundamentalism and Evangelicism overlap.

[quote]What category do Methodists (are they semi-liturical?), presbyterians, and pentecostals fit in? have i forgotten any other major groups?
[/quote]

I would say that Methodists are semi-liturgical, but there are probably Evangelical Methodists and Fundamentalist Methodists. I would guess and say that they are mostly Evangelical, though. Presbyterians, or Calvinists, tend to run along Fundamentalist lines, although many of them can be classified as Evangelical in the sense that they're eager to spread their faith.

I would put Pentecostals in a group of their own. They put a high premium on speaking in tongues and on other outward acts of faith and emotionalism. You even get some who do not believe in the Trinity. They are called Oneness Pentecostals, and they adhere to tenets of the Modalism heresy. Modalism is the belief that God operates through three modes, i.e., that the Father is the Son and the Son is the Holy Spirit and so forth. An anology to explain this belief is that they believe that God is like water. Water can be either frozen, liquid, or air (as it is after boiling), but it can't be frozen, liquid, or air at the same time. Some Pentecostals adhere to something called the "Health and Wealth Gospel," which is the belief that those with faith can't get sick. Those that do, they believe, have little faith. Some of them also believe that if you pray for someone's physical healing, they will automatically get better.

I don't think you forgot any groups.

[quote]Not asking to attack, just trying to learn the difference. thank you.[/quote]

It's all good. And you're welcome. I hope this helps.

God bless,

Jennifer

[PedroX]

Hopeful,

Fundementalist Protestantism grew out of several converging movements in the 1920s and 30s. A list of "fundemental" doctrines was issued and adopted by congregations and denominations largely in reaction to the increasing liberalization of society and "mainline" denominations. These fundementals addressed the authority of scripture, the nature of God, and others. The largest fundemental group today is also the Pentecostal group (not just the denomination of the same name).

Evangelicalism grew out of the 40s and 50s in reaction to WWII and a softening of the harsh line of fundementalism. Fundementalists have an inate desire to withdraw while Evangelicals have an inate desire to engage and "evangelize". Both groups can be anti-Catholic, though the Fundementalists tend to be more overt about it. I have had many evangelical friends express shock at my conversion as they said "We've worked for years to lead Catholics to Christ".

As to your groupings, the only real liturgical denominations left are Anglicans (Episcopalians) and Lutherans. In fact, high-church Anglicans run better liturgy than many Catholic parishes do.

peace...

[Donna]

Concise.

I'm impressed!

[ICTHUS]

[quote name='Presbyterian apologist John Roberson']....let's cut Barrett's numbers and think about things that we can demonstrate. The Pentecostal/Charismatic movement as a whole denies Sola Scriptura, so putting them into the mix is like considering Protestantism a wayward faction of Rome. Much of the mainline and liberal groups reject Sola Scriptura as well by rejecting the Scripture's infallibility. So, that leaves us with some Lutherans, the Reformed, some Anglicans, some Presbyterians, and some Fundamentalists. Now, while there is ecclesiastical separation and there are some disagreements, I don't see why the Church must necessarily be completely unified geographically/ecclesiastically and there are even significant disagreements among Roman Catholics.

[b]So, we might say that there are a few main groups [/b](the weird fundies, the weird liturgical folks, etc.) in this. And, of course, I'm staring at fifteen books co-written by people from throughout these traditions, who are apparently unified enough to author literature together. They've written confessions together (e.g., the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy). They support the ministries of one another. So, the best you can get is really that there are maybe three or four distinct groups, which often interact favorably with each other. This doesn't provide the 30,000 fractions for which you were looking earlier.[/quote]

John then goes on to argue that these groups are untied by the fact that they support one another's ministries and are very closely united.

Your thoughts?

[Dusty Fro]

Methodists don't preach the Bible. They mostly talk about political issues in church.

Pentecostals would include Assembly of God and Foursquare denominations, I think, at least the Foursquare church I visited sure was pentecostal!

Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are considered cults by most Christians because they follow alternative doctrines such as the Book of Mormon and Pearl of Great Price for Mormons, and the Watchtower newsletter for Jehovah's Witnesses. I don't know a lot about 7th Day Adventists, because there aren't a lot of those in my area.

[Ellenita]

Seventh Day Aventists were always regarded as a cult by the protestant churches that I used to attend. If I remember rightly, the judgement that they, Mormons and JWs were cults rather than protestant denominations was based on the fact that there was some question in their beliefs concerning the Trinity or the Divine nature of Jesus.



[quote]John then goes on to argue that these groups are untied by the fact that they support one another's ministries and are very closely united. [/quote]

It might be fair to argue that there are some distinct groupings but they are very broad. It's also questionable how united they are in support of each other's ministries. Undoubtedly there is an ecumenical movement but churches which get involved with that tend to find they are asked to compromise on some of their personal denomination's interpretation of Christianity in order to accommodate each other - for some this is fine, they are willing to follow a more liberal agenda for the sake of unity while for others it's a step too far and that often results in another split/church being formed. Ecumenical services conducted by ministers from a variety of protestant churches always felt 'watered down' to me when I was a protestant, though I did have deep desire for unity......

[PedroX]

Dusty,

There are many Methodist Preachers who sincerely preach the scriptures. I am friends with several. (I know, wierd life)

I find your comments particularly disturbing given your apparent distate for "bashing" other religions.

peace...

[IcePrincessKRS]

Speaking of stinky fruit.....

[Oik]

[quote]Liturgical: Lutherans and Episcopalian/Anglican, Greek Orthodox

Fundamentalists: Baptists

Evangelical: most nondenominational churches

Quasi-Christian: Mormons, 7th Day Adventist, Jehovah's Witnesses[/quote]

I agee that the orthodox aren't necessarily protestant. Also, remember that you have to define protestant groups either individually, or as the group that they are affiliated with (as in the Southern baptist convention).

[Dusty Fro]

Blah you guys, I'm just saying what my friend's mom, who was raised Methodist, says about the religion she was raised in. I also went to a discussion put on by the UMC in which they told me personally that the Bible was "problematic." I'm just adding to the conversation, not bashing. It's next to impossible for me to "bash" other Christians' religions, because I don't claim one, myself.