Non-denominational or not?

[Firstborner]

I kind of look at non-denominational Christianity as just another denomination... I know that's a bit of an oxymoron, but it's how I see it. How about you?

It depends on the non-denominational(nd) group. I attend what I believe to be a truly nd church, but I am sure others would disagree. I find that the majority of nd churches still exclude others on basic unbiblical creeds.

Nope...

I don't see it like that at all.

Some non-denominational churches are trying to become JUST like the first church. Rather than re-invent, we are trying hard to simply restore.

There is to my way of thinking a problem here, they are either already part of the Apostolic Church or they are not. It is not an ideal to be advanced upon, but one which is obtainable by joining the Body of Christ.

As a church moves closer to being like the first century church, they get closer to the real truth. The closer they get to that primitive church, the closer they are to real unity with it: "one body and one Spirit". The further churches move away from that simplicity, the less unified they are. They are not in need of feformation... but restoration.

The true church does not need reformed, though some persons and groups of persons may be given a space for it,if it is not done in that generation they are lost.

Also the church can not need restored, that would mean that it did not exist for a time, and would contradict Christ's words upon the subject.

I am sad that people believe that they need the help of another person to reach God.

I believe that they do need someone to help them understand the bible and God, but the problem is that the teacher does not know he can learn from the student too.
This is a slight arrogance that happens when any minister gets on stage and talks to the people.
The people in the church should be every bit involved in the sermon, by asking questions, adding comments, by adding a different point of view, or by admitting of having a different interpretation to the scripture.
God should be discussed by people, not taught as a subject that can be compared to math or social studies.

The Ethiopian need Phillip's assistance to comprehend the scriptures. Paul says that a person can not hear the gospel without a preacher being sent. That aside, I think we are on the same page, as after conversion and the indwelling of the Spirit we are no longer dependants upon men for understanding. Also I agree that a congregation should be active participants in their meetings for that reason.

Right, but the only way the primitive Church could be restored would be for the individual who established it to personally be involved. According to Roger Williams, pastor of the oldest Baptist Church in America, "[There is] no regularly constituted church of Christ on earth, nor any person authorized to administer any church ordinance, nor can there be until new apostles are sent by the great Head of the Church, for whose coming I am seeking."

Williams was partially correct, he needed to wait for those who held the true gospel to authorize a true gospel church. There is more to this story, this quote was his answer on why he deserted the baptist persuasion church (actually nd as there was no such thing as a Baptist Church at the time) and became what is termed a seeker. The error in his statement is the "on the earth" part of it. He had no way of knowing it when he made the statement but there were persons on other continents who were part of the True Faith, and in a few short years they went to America. Williams ended up meeting them, and though he thought they were what he had originally sought, by then he was too far advanced into Quakerism, making the point moot.

Sometimes if you ask me a church being "nondenominational" could be a weasel term used to attract more members comfortable with.

Agreed. Though there are some legitimate ones, most seem to me to be formed by ministers expelled from other denominations who carry over their creeds and their personal differences.

We also attend an inter-denominational church. We have attended many denominational churches over the years, but have absolutely fallen in love with this church. I like how they encompass everyone, no matter what your denominational background was before. Rather than rejecting all that is denominational, they encompass them. They embrace the "we are one body" mentality more than any other denomination I've been a part of. Theologically and set up of leadership is similar to non-denominational though.

I think the distinction between inter and non denominational churches is wider than that. Inter for one requires one to dummy down (no insult intended) many controversial doctrines in order to reach for an ecumenical unity. Non denoms usually still adhere to a fairly explicit doctrine, just not a sectarian name.

 

[pwfaith]

I think the distinction between inter and non denominational churches is wider than that. Inter for one requires one to dummy down (no insult intended) many controversial doctrines in order to reach for an ecumenical unity. Non denoms usually still adhere to a fairly explicit doctrine, just not a sectarian name.

Can you give me some examples?
(no insult taken )

 

[Firstborner]

Can you give me some examples?
(no insult taken )

Easily, for example the doctrines concerning common salvation. In inter denominational services the doctrines of baptisms is played down, and laying on of hands completely bypassed. And usually salvation is watered down to "Whoever calls upon the name of the Lord" with no comprehension of what it means to call upon his name!

 

[pwfaith]

Easily, for example the doctrines concerning common salvation. In inter denominational services the doctrines of baptisms is played down, and laying on of hands completely bypassed. And usually salvation is watered down to "Whoever calls upon the name of the Lord" with no comprehension of what it means to call upon his name!

Our church does laying on of hands, anoints with oil and salvation is mostly definitely not watered down. One of the things that really drew us to this particular church (aside from the awesome kids ministry - important when you have 5 of them lol) was the way the pastor took time to explain everything. They don't do what is called "Christianese" - use terms that are common to Christians but the rest of the world has no clue what they mean. I feel like our pastor(s) does a wonderful job of being able to preach to those who are new to church, new to Christianity, new in their faith while at the same time challenging those who are mature in the faith to really dig deeper. It's hard to explain. All the leaders have such a great balance, imo.

The things you mentioned above, are things I experienced most in the Baptist and Methodist denominations. We have been at this church for just over 4 yrs. We are pretty involved, esp in leadership positions. I have never once gotten the impression that they are willing to dumb down anything Scriptural for the sake of ecumenical unity. Their goal is more of just creating a place where anyone can be comfortable, no matter what their background and find commonality in God's Word. I would say doctrinally their pretty close to Baptist but without all the judgmental-like, divisive attitudes (I grew up Baptist and my parents still are, I'm allowed to make that claim LOL)

 

[Firstborner]

Our church does laying on of hands, anoints with oil and salvation is mostly definitely not watered down. One of the things that really drew us to this particular church (aside from the awesome kids ministry - important when you have 5 of them lol) was the way the pastor took time to explain everything. They don't do what is called "Christianese" - use terms that are common to Christians but the rest of the world has no clue what they mean. I feel like our pastor(s) does a wonderful job of being able to preach to those who are new to church, new to Christianity, new in their faith while at the same time challenging those who are mature in the faith to really dig deeper. It's hard to explain. All the leaders have such a great balance, imo.

The things you mentioned above, are things I experienced most in the Baptist and Methodist denominations. We have been at this church for just over 4 yrs. We are pretty involved, esp in leadership positions. I have never once gotten the impression that they are willing to dumb down anything Scriptural for the sake of ecumenical unity. Their goal is more of just creating a place where anyone can be comfortable, no matter what their background and find commonality in God's Word. I would say doctrinally their pretty close to Baptist but without all the judgmental-like, divisive attitudes (I grew up Baptist and my parents still are, I'm allowed to make that claim LOL)

Well sounds good, very unlike any inter denominational group I have run across. To what end is the laying on of hands performed?

 

[pwfaith]

Well sounds good, very unlike any inter denominational group I have run across. To what end is the laying on of hands performed?

Not sure what you mean by "to what end" lol but we do it when praying for someone - be it commissioning them in a ministry, for healing, etc. I have seen them do it as a whole congregation, putting a hand on the shoulder of the one in front of you, all the way to the front of the room, to the one needing prayer.

I honestly thought it was a "bad" thing until I got to college lol I just never remembered seeing it in church growing up. My dad said they did it when they brought in new deacons but I guess it was just never called that. Kind of a "hush hush" thing it seemed. I was totally freaked out when one of my roommates friends came in one night after I had just found out about the tragedy of a friend I had made over the summer, and she and another girl laid hands on me and started praying. It's funny now. But it was totally new to me back then.

 

[Firstborner]

Not sure what you mean by "to what end" lol but we do it when praying for someone - be it commissioning them in a ministry, for healing, etc. I have seen them do it as a whole congregation, putting a hand on the shoulder of the one in front of you, all the way to the front of the room, to the one needing prayer.

I honestly thought it was a "bad" thing until I got to college lol I just never remembered seeing it in church growing up. My dad said they did it when they brought in new deacons but I guess it was just never called that. Kind of a "hush hush" thing it seemed. I was totally freaked out when one of my roommates friends came in one night after I had just found out about the tragedy of a friend I had made over the summer, and she and another girl laid hands on me and started praying. It's funny now. But it was totally new to me back then.

Apart from healing and personal prayer, and ministerial appointments are hands layed upon believers when confirmed to the church?

Just a curiosity, not a prelude to a debate.

 

[pwfaith]

Apart from healing and personal prayer, and ministerial appointments are hands layed upon believers when confirmed to the church?

Just a curiosity, not a prelude to a debate.

Yes. The elders and pastor are usually up there with them. Our church is rather large. Approx. 3000+ on a good Sunday. When a group of people finishes the Membership class they all come on stage and answer the pastors questions about being a member and then they lay hands on them and pray for them as they are sent out into the church, community and world.

 

[Firstborner]

Yes. The elders and pastor are usually up there with them. Our church is rather large. Approx. 3000+ on a good Sunday. When a group of people finishes the Membership class they all come on stage and answer the pastors questions about being a member and then they lay hands on them and pray for them as they are sent out into the church, community and world.

Interesting. It seems that these days many non denom as well as other churches have somewhat backed off of LOH.

I belong to an nd church that still has quite a history, going back to the colonial period when you were obligated to belong to the state church. When I attend other nds or inter ds I find a lack of history and doctrinal sincerity that I have at the home churches. Often times I find that they are simply sub sects of denominations that have cast off their denominational name without leaving the creeds.

Sounds like you found what is comfortable to you.

 

[pwfaith]

We have

I grew up Baptist, then attended a C&MA church in college, a baptist church for a little while and then when we got married some friends asked us to teach Sunday School at a little Methodist church. We returned to the C&MA when we moved to PA, and then a contemporary Baptist church. The C&MA was the only one I had seen them lay hand on anyone, until our current church.

 

[Villager]

I kind of look at non-denominational Christianity as just another denomination... I know that's a bit of an oxymoron, but it's how I see it. How about you?

If non-denominational groups are set up, or taken over, by people with the worldly standards of the denominations, they will of course be or become denominations but without that formal description. Genuine Christians are very, very picky indeed about who they permit to join them, for this very reason.

Christianity is of course non-denominational. Denominations have nothing very much to do with Christianity, and have no existence in spiritual reality. They are used at least as much to impede the gospel of Christ as to further it, particularly today, when most denominations have become grotesque caricatures of what they were a century ago; and they were often grotesque enough then.

Those who are born again of the Spirit of Jesus have His unity, and at a level that is as deep as human relationships can go. Two Christians can work and pray together for extended periods without even an awareness of any possible denominational affiliation that either may have. Christians may have everything in common with others outside their denomination, and nothing in common with members of their denomination.

Not all non-denominational people are Christians. One does not need a denomination, with its worldy set-up, to go badly wrong; one can do that very well oneself. But at least one is without the interferfence, legalistic or liberal, of denominational structures, that impede Christians who attempt to increase genuine spiritual and practical improvements in people's lives within a denomination.

 

[gdemoss]

I am non-denom. I do not have a church. I have not found one that isn't littered with heresy. The problem with the visible body of Christ today is simply that they are not following him. If everyone would pick up their cross, deny themselves (which is required to even be a disciple), then we would have a natural unity. If everyone was poor in spirit (humble) there would be no confrontation (only by pride cometh contention). The denominational world has been taken down by the deceitfulness of sin. They have brought in many man made doctrines that have made the word of God without effect. Jesus Christ was the lowest servant on the planet. He has called me and you to be the same. As Christians we are supposed to have escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust by partaking in the divine nature. Instead we find the Church full of people that believe we cannot be like Christ until we die. Unfortunately for them we can only have boldness in the day of judgement if we are as he is in this present world. That said, I cannot attend a Church that is walking in darkness. I am to have no fellowship with darkness but rather reprove it. We are the light of the world. Light exposes darkness. Darkness hates light. We are to be hated in this world. Beware if people speak highly of you.

 

[Aleah]

I think it's true many try to get away from unorthodox names they had bad associations with. I was raised Apostolic Pentecostal (UPCI) and I respect many aspects of the religion but I don't follow all of it so I attend a non denominational church right now. It helps me shy away from too much excess in religious teachings.

I kind of look at non-denominational Christianity as just another denomination... I know that's a bit of an oxymoron, but it's how I see it. How about you?

 

[Aleah]

The word "denomination" is just shorthand that tells you generally what a church believes. Saying a church is "nondenominational" makes it sound like that church has no beliefs, but of course that isn't the case at all. Most "nondenominational" church I know of teach a mixture of Baptist and Pentecostal doctrine. They generally consider baptism and holy communion to be symbols, baptism is "believers baptism" done by immersion, they generally have communion monthly or quarterly, some advocate speaking in tongues or are open to it, all of that makes them Baptist/Pentecostals without the label. I think a more honest term would be "independent church" because that is what they truly are, not affiliated with any larger organization. An example is Calvary Chapel. The local Calvary Chapel where I live is listed as "nondenominational". They are not, they are part of the Calvary Chapel denimination. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, it's a duck. These "nondenominational" churches are their own denomination.

I agree. I was curious because I just started attending a non denominational church and was delighted to find speaking in tongues. However the service ran for four hours. Is this true for most "non denominational " churches?

 

[RedDragon94]

I kind of look at non-denominational Christianity as just another denomination... I know that's a bit of an oxymoron, but it's how I see it. How about you?

Welp, I couldn't get the link to work. I see non denominational Christianity as ecclectic. Right now I am attending a Baptist church on Sundays and a Methodist church on Tuesdays. The Methodist church is actually more conservative than I thought it would be.

 

[BenTheBeliever]

I kind of look at non-denominational Christianity as just another denomination... I know that's a bit of an oxymoron, but it's how I see it. How about you?

Depending on the church you go to. The one i go to it is come as you are.