"Non-denominational"??? What does that even mean?

2PhiloVoid · Jan 10, 2021

Albion said:
Trolls will be trolls and that speaks for itself, no matter what profile they pretend to represent. But on the matter of the other group you are referring to (I think), do you see them as mere posers or, OTOH, simply extremely unorthodox Christians somewhat similar to Unitarians who often will insist that they are Christians because they hold Jesus in high regard as a moral leader, some kind of an inspiration for mankind, etc. etc.?

Good question, Albion! That's an excellent one actually.

I'm going to have to say that I think the latter group is made up of various folks with various mindsets: some may be another kind of trollish infiltrator, while yet some other may simply be confused. And so, they use the term "non-denominational."

The problem comes in for me, of course, because I've typically associated "non-denominational" with various Charismatic Christians and that's what I expect to find when I see that. So, it bugs me when I encounter someone who claims the label ....... but turns out to be way out in the Left Field of Non-Trinitarian, New Age, and/or other Cultic thinking. If, for instance, a person is Unitarian, then that is the label they should be using.

What are your thoughts on all of this?

Bible Highlighter · Jan 10, 2021

2PhiloVoid said:
I hear ya. That's kind of the same thing that happened to the Churches of Christ/Christian Church. They wanted to form a new group that was "Christian only and not the only Christian" but they ended up with...........yet another denomination.

Yes, out of non-denominationalism arose from the founders of the Church of Christ (of which I strongly disagree with on certain beliefs), but still the concept or idea of non-denominationalism still exists outside of the Church of Christ. For there are other churches that cling to the label, “non-denominationalism” as an attempt to show that they are not following a line of religious men like the Church of Christ with Thomas Campbell and his followers, but they are following the Word of God. The Church of Christ does not adhere to the label of Non-Denominational, but they hold to the concept of that label. But the point here is that Non-Denominationalism is saying to look to my beliefs, and life now in regards to following God's Word.

#1. Non-Denominationalism is not look to a certain group of men throughout history who created a certain set of formalized beliefs whereby some of them are unbiblical that can appeared to be traced back to one guy.
#2. Non-Denominationalism is basically saying they don't have an official label or name that is attached to a certain set of beliefs that appears to be tied to a man made organization.

2PhiloVoid · Jan 10, 2021

Bible Highlighter said:
Yes, out of non-denominationalism arose from the founders of the Church of Christ (of which I strongly disagree with on certain beliefs), but still the concept or idea of non-denominationalism still exists outside of the Church of Christ. For there are other churches that cling to the label, “non-denominationalism” as an attempt to show that they are not following a line of religious men like the Church of Christ with Thomas Campbell and his followers, but they are following the Word of God. The Church of Christ does not adhere to the label of Non-Denominational, but they hold to the concept of that label. But the point here is that Non-Denominationalism is saying to look to my beliefs, and life now in regards to following God's Word.

#1. Non-Denominationalism is not look to a certain group of men throughout history who created a certain set of formalized beliefs whereby some of them are unbiblical that can appeared to be traced back to one guy.
#2. Non-Denominationalism is basically saying they don't have an official label or name that is attached to a certain set of beliefs that appears to be tied to a man made organization.

Ok. That's all understandable. But for those Christians who feel more "independent," why not just use the term "Christian"? Why all of the fuss over the insistence to use a term that in and off itself only affirms the presence of a 'grudge' against the opposite through dissent?

Isn't is enough for a Christian to simply say, "Hey, World! I'm a Christian!" [Ha! I just realized that some of the influence of C.S. Lewis is showing up in my thinking here. He proposed the idea of "Mere Christianity." I've always like that... !]

Albion · Jan 10, 2021

2PhiloVoid said:
Good question, Albion! That's an excellent one actually.

I'm going to have to say that I think the latter group is made up of various folks with various mindsets: some may be another kind of trollish infiltrator, while yet some other may simply be confused. And so, they use the term "non-denominational."

Yeah, I think you've said it well.

The problem comes in for me, of course, because I've typically associated "non-denominational" with various Charismatic Christians and that's what I expect to find when I see that.

This, however, surprises me a bit. Most non-denominational congregations are unofficial Baptists, I think. But I do know that many are Pentecostal instead.

So, it bugs me when I encounter someone who claims the label ....... but turns out to be way out in the Left Field of Non-Trinitarian, New Age, and/or other Cultic thinking. If, for instance, a person is Unitarian, then that is the label they should be using.

What are your thoughts on all of this?

I get what you're saying, and I think that the term "non-denominational" may be appealing to the people you are describing here for the reason that the term seems to signal open-mindedness or being above doctrinal pettiness. That idea figured in Pavel Mosko's post 54, but I neglected it in my earlier post.

Scott Husted · Jan 10, 2021

Bible Highlighter said:
Your not getting what I am saying. But that's okay.

I get what you are saying, but further classification of a word or term is fundamentally a byproduct of the intial choice to spearate yourself from another based on your perception of a word. A non-denominational church (whether they are the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or even the 4th Baptist church (located in Portsmouth Va in the mid 70"s) has its own belief system based on their perception of a word, or words. For instance Rock Church of Virginia Beach whose leaders came out of the hard line Pentecostal movement to embrace the charismatic movement a few moons ago ... those who called them pastors inadvertently followed their way of thinking until they were weaned off of it, or (to sum degree) unknowingly mentally imprisoned by it.

Bible Highlighter · Jan 10, 2021

2PhiloVoid said:
Well, just for the record, it's not only Liberal Christians or Non-denominational Christians who are doing their "own thing," but also us Existential types. But then, there's a problem in saying that we're doing our own thing when the fact is simply that we're being corralled by the Lord through His Spirit and through His Word in similar ways that other, denominational Christians are being corralled.

In my own case it's kind of ironic to say I have "no ties" to any denomination when the fact is that my own approach to Christianity has culled from all of the various types, tropes, movements, and denominations, with a primary focus upon Jesus and the writings of the 1st century disciples and Apostles. It might be more accurate to say that I have "ties" to all denominations, but I don't have any formal ties to any Christian denomination.

Yet, I'm still truly Christian and no one gets to tell me that I'm not.

Do you believe all church denominations should unite as one?
Or do you believe you hold to a church denomination that is the more biblical path?
This is why you would disagree with non-denominationalism.

If a person is a radical evangelical non-denominational Christian, then they are making God's Word their sole authority, and they are not adhereing to some religious group of men in the past alone as their sole guide or ultimate authority. God's Word is their authority.

If one is non-denominational in the liberal camp, they are simply again not looking to some past men, but they are doing their own thing beyond the Word of God in what it plainly says.

The radical and or evangelical non-denominational Christian is not doing their own thing but they are following God's Word as their sole authority for their lives and they are not looking to some guys in the past to build their theology and or to guide their actions in their fatih. I fall into the evangelical and radical body of believers of non-denominationalism because the goal of my life is to believe and obey all of God's Word alone and not the words of men.

2PhiloVoid · Jan 10, 2021

Albion said:
I get what you're saying, and I think that the term "non-denominational" may be appealing to the people you are describing here for the reason that the term seems to signal open-mindedness or being above doctrinal pettiness. That idea figured in Pavel Mosco's post 54, but I neglected it in my earlier post.

....hmmmm. Yeah. I think you're right to say that the term is meant to signal the presence of open-mindedness within one's religious thinking. This may be the case and I'm going to let it rest here and ponder over it further.

I'm also going to let it rest here because I don't want to end up majoring on what might be a minor annoyance. Rather, I just think we should be aware that the term "non-denominational" lends itself to some confusions and equivocations as it is used here and there among both fellow Christians and some "not-quite-Christians."

Albion · Jan 10, 2021

Bible Highlighter said:
If a person is a radical evangelical non-denominational Christian, then they are making God's Word their sole authority, and they are not adhereing to some religious group of men in the past alone as their sole guide or ultimate authority. God's Word is their authority.

God's Word is the authority for almost every Protestant denomination.

The radical and or evangelical non-denominational Christian is not doing their own thing but they are following God's Word as their sole authority for their lives and they are not looking to some guys in the past to build their theology and or to guide their actions in their fatih.

Almost every one of those whom I have met are devotees of some present-day author or TV preacher, though. Most of the traditional Christians, on the other hand, are completely unacquainted with those people.

Bible Highlighter · Jan 10, 2021

Non-denominationalism is not saying that a certain Biblical beliefs in history from other Christians has not influenced their thinking to some degree, but they are not making those beliefs the basis or foundation of their faith, but they make the Word of God their sole authority and foundation on matters of the faith.

Denominationalism (Catholicism, Reformed churches, Orthodox, Church of Christ, etc.) are saying that they are the true and or more correct denomination. Yet, many times when I have examined these labeled or named denominations I always find something I disagree with big time in regards to what the Bible says and I can most of the time trace that set of beliefs to a specific point in time in history long after the Bible was completed.

Albion · Jan 10, 2021

2PhiloVoid said:
....hmmmm. Yeah. I think you're right to say that the term is meant to signal the presence of open-mindedness within one's religious thinking. This may be the case and I'm going to let it rest here and ponder over it further.

I have to clarify, however. I did not mean to say that they are open-minded within some religious tradition, but that the word itself, non-denominational, is used by them to indicate that they have risen above all those traditions, are free of them, and are capable, unlike other Christians, of thinking outside the box. They see this as being more insightful than people who subscribe to any set of doctrines and claim some denominational affiliation.

I'm also going to let it rest here because I don't want to end up majoring on what might be a minor annoyance. Rather, I just think we should be aware that the term "non-denominational" lends itself to some confusions and equivocations as it is used here and there among both fellow Christians and some "not-quite-Christians."

Agreed.

Bible Highlighter · Jan 10, 2021

Albion said:
God's Word is the authority for almost every Protestant denomination.

But they look to Luther as the guy who really got it. Luther protested against the Catholic church, and his beliefs was what set the Protestant reformation in motion. Not to say that I do not agree with certain Protestant beliefs, but that does not mean Luther got it all right. I disagree with Protestantism on their views of sin and salvation.

You said:
Almost every one of those whom I have met are devotees of some present-day author or TV preacher, though. Most of the traditional Christians, on the other hand, are completely unacquainted with those people.

As I said, there are radical non-denominationalists, and liberal non-denominationalists. These sound like liberal ones to me. A radical non-denominationalist Christian is guided by God's Word and God's Holy Spirit, and they are not looking to follow men so as to build their faith. They are not looking to be spoon fed by men without studying the Word of God themselves heavily with God's help. For the radical man of God for Jesus will trust and rely on God to understand Scripture and to walk with the Lord, and not men and or their stated beliefs.

Bible Highlighter · Jan 10, 2021

Scott Husted said:
I get what you are saying, but further classification of a word or term is fundamentally a byproduct of the intial choice to spearate yourself from another based on your perception of a word. A non-denominational church (whether they are the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or even the 4th Baptist church (located in Portsmouth Va in the mid 70"s) has its own belief system based on their perception of a word, or words. For instance Rock Church of Virginia Beach whose leaders came out of the hard line Pentecostal movement to embrace the charismatic movement a few moons ago ... those who called them pastors inadvertently followed their way of thinking until they were weaned off of it, or (to sum degree) unknowingly mentally imprisoned by it.

Sorry. I disagree, my friend. If you don't agree with radical evangelical Non-Denomationalism that seeks to follow the narrow way, then you don't understand what I am trying to say here.

Silly Uncle Wayne · Jan 10, 2021

2PhiloVoid said:
Ok. We all see folks these days dancing around in various churches who label themselves as "Non-denominational." But I'm wondering about the meaning and denotation of that term since I see people here on C.F. who, as far as I can tell, are sometimes Christians BUT also sometimes not.

And frankly, I don't trust the term. I feel it is too amorphous and possibly obscurantist to mean anything. If a person wants to claim the label of "Christian," even if he or she is like me and feels somewhat Existentialistic about that identity, why doesn't he or she just accept the term, "Christian."

I guess I feel I have to ask because, frankly, I don't trust the variability involved in the term "non-denominational." And the Analytic Philosopher part of my mind just won't let this ambiguity rest; it bothers me.

What does everyone else think? Am I being too stringent in my semantic expecations here?

I don't think it has to be particularly meaningful. For some it will be that that don't associate with any particular denominational theology or even any particular denomination. For others it will be a statement about what they think of denominations. For still others, they might be a part of a church that considers itself 'non-denominational'. The latter are actually quite numerous in the UK and do club together in a loose way. Other churches are part of a denomination, but also part of a non-denominational organisation such as Ground Level.

To a certain extent I wished we were all labeled as Christian, because labels can be misleading. I'm from a Charismatic background, but I've been part of Baptist churches and Assemblies of God in the past. I wouldn't want to be associated with Reformed theology though, particularly Calvinism.

Atheists that I used to debate used to think that every Christian was a Roman Catholic, Young Earth Creationist with Calvinistic theology... and uneducated and unintelligent. Denominations were just a means of reinforcing silly generalisations.

2PhiloVoid · Jan 10, 2021

Bible Highlighter said:
Do you believe all church denominations should unite as one?

Good question! In my own theological outlook, I hold to a general principle of solidarity among all Trinitarian Christians, a solidarity that exists whether we are fully conscious of it or not. I think this principle should be taken into account simply due to the fact that Jesus is Lord of all those who truly seek to call upon Him. Because this is the case, I can incorporate and appreciate the thinking of folks like Pascal (Jansenist Catholic), Kierkegaard (Existential/Off-brand Reformed), C.S. Lewis (Anglican), and Billy Graham (Mainstream Evangelical/Baptist) .....among many, many, many others from all movements, and all of whom I place behind Peter and Paul and, Ultimately, under Jesus Christ our Lord.

Or do you believe you hold to a church denomination that is the more biblical path?

No, not specifically. Although I feel open to be criticized by other Christians as well as to generously return the favor.

This is why you would disagree with non-denominationalism.

Not necessarily. As a philosopher, I might vet out a few additional reasons as to "why" which go beyond the usual ones.

If a person is a radical evangelical non-denominational Christian, then they are making God's Word their sole authority, and they are not adhereing to some religious group of men in the past alone as their sole guide or ultimate authority. God's Word is their authority.

I don't know about that. There is the "attempt" to make God's Word a sole authority, and then there is the larger reality that not one of us in ANY denomination really can see clearly enough to pontificate for all other Christians everywhere and for all time. Yet, there are a few fellow Christians who have claimed to be able to do just that. That's kind of strange if you ask me. I'd rather not begin by judging other Christians as they journey; what I'd rather do is encourage everyone to learn and listen to one another and not be so dang combative with one another.

If one is non-denominational in the liberal camp, they are simply again not looking to some past men, but they are doing their own thing beyond the Word of God in what it plainly says.

That's not necessarily true. I think this statement of yours is too ambiguous to serve as a litmus test for "who is in the faith and who is out of it."

The radical and or evangelical non-denominational Christian is not doing their own thing but they are following God's Word as their sole authority for their lives and they are not looking to some guys in the past to build their theology and or to guide their actions in their fatih. I fall into the evangelical and radical body of believers of non-denominationalism because the goal of my life is to believe and obey all of God's Word alone and not the words of men.

Ok. Well, that's fine if that's where you feel most comfortable being, but I'd suggest that you realize that God and the World He has placed us in is bigger than the Bible itself. It's God, in Christ, through the Holy Spirit whom we want to focus on.

We don't want to end up putting the Bible and our sometimes shortsighted interpretations of it in place of Him.

Bible Highlighter · Jan 10, 2021

Many denominations will say that they follow the teachings that are promoted by a specific person like John Calvin (Calvinists or Reformed churches), or Ellen G. White (SDA), and John Wesley (Wesleyan churches), etc.

However, Paul said,

“...was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?” (1 Corinthians 1:13).

For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? (1 Corinthians 3:4).

Albion · Jan 10, 2021

Bible Highlighter said:
Many denominations will say that they follow the teachings that are promoted by a specific person like John Calvin (Calvinists or Reformed churches), or Ellen G. White (SDA), and John Wesley (Wesleyan churches), etc.

That's true, but many more of the denominations do NOT do that.

Consequently, this is not a valid reason for avoiding or denouncing churches other than non-denominational ones (many of which follow their own hero figure who, however, isn't as famous as the people you mentioned in your post).

Bible Highlighter · Jan 10, 2021

2PhiloVoid said:
Good question! In my own theological outlook, I hold to a general principle of solidarity among all Trinitarian Christians, a solidarity that exists whether we are fully conscious of it or not. I think this principle should be taken into account simply due to the fact that Jesus is Lord of all those who truly seek to call upon Him. Because this is the case, I can incorporate and appreciate the thinking of folks like Pascal (Jansenist Catholic), Kierkegaard (Existential/Off-brand Reformed), C.S. Lewis (Anglican), and Billy Graham (Mainstream Evangelical/Baptist) .....among many, many, many others from all movements, and all of whom I place behind Peter and Paul and, Ultimately, under Jesus Christ our Lord.

No, not specifically. Although I feel open to be criticized by other Christians as well as to generously return the favor.

Not necessarily. As a philosopher, I might vet out a few additional reasons as to "why" which go beyond the usual ones.

I don't know about that. There is the "attempt" to make God's Word a sole authority, and then there is the larger reality that not one of us in ANY denomination really can see clearly enough to pontificate for all other Christians everywhere and for all time. Yet, there are a few fellow Christians who have claimed to be able to do just that. That's kind of strange if you ask me. I'd rather not begin by judging other Christians as they journey; what I'd rather do is encourage everyone to learn and listen to one another and not be so dang combative with one another.

That's not necessarily true. I think this statement of yours is too ambiguous to serve as a litmus test for "who is in the faith and who is out of it."

Ok. Well, that's fine if that's where you feel most comfortable being, but I'd suggest that you realize that God and the World He has placed us in is bigger than the Bible itself. It's God, in Christ, through the Holy Spirit whom we want to focus on.

We don't want to end up putting the Bible and our sometimes shortsighted interpretations of it in place of Him.

Jesus said narrow is the way that leads unto life and few be there that find it (Matthew 7:14).
Jesus basically asks the question that when He returns, will He find faith on the earth? (Luke 18:8).
We are already seeing the last days happen before our eyes with the fulfillment of 2 Timothy 3:1-9.
Not everyone who says unto Him Lord, Lord are going to make it (See: Matthew 7:21, Matthew 7:23, and Matthew 7:26-27).

Maria Billingsley · Jan 10, 2021

2PhiloVoid said:
Ok. We all see folks these days dancing around in various churches who label themselves as "Non-denominational." But I'm wondering about the meaning and denotation of that term since I see people here on C.F. who, as far as I can tell, are sometimes Christians BUT also sometimes not.

And frankly, I don't trust the term. I feel it is too amorphous and possibly obscurantist to mean anything. If a person wants to claim the label of "Christian," even if he or she is like me and feels somewhat Existentialistic about that identity, why doesn't he or she just accept the term, "Christian."

I guess I feel I have to ask because, frankly, I don't trust the variability involved in the term "non-denominational." And the Analytic Philosopher part of my mind just won't let this ambiguity rest; it bothers me.

What does everyone else think? Am I being too stringent in my semantic expecations here?

Non denominations are now considered a denomination. Even if they disagree. Blessings.

Bible Highlighter · Jan 10, 2021

Albion said:
That's true, but many more of the denominations do NOT do that.

Can you name one? Even Protestant churches are in a way pointing back to Martin Luther. They are basically saying they are following him in a way because he started the Protestant Reformation.

Bible Highlighter · Jan 10, 2021

Maria Billingsley said:
Non denominations are now considered a denomination. Even if they disagree. Blessings.

Non-denominational churches do not have a set of formalized beliefs that is tied to a specific guy or church group. The beliefs in non-denominational churches varies greatly depending on a person's approach in interpreting God's Holy Word. One can be a radical Non-denominationalist, and one can be a liberal non-denomintionalist. So I would not say they fall under as a specific denominational group with a peg down set of beliefs. The idea of Non-denom is not declaring that we must have a label, and it is saying that we are not looking to some group of men in the past to build our faith, but we are looking to use the Word of God alone to do that with God's help.

"Non-denominational"??? What does that even mean?

Downhill Prevention!

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Downhill Prevention!

Facilitator

Well-Known Member

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Downhill Prevention!

Facilitator

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Facilitator

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Well-Known Member

Downhill Prevention!

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Facilitator

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Well-Known Member

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Similar threads