Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Hmmm, that's worth pondering.
Non-denomination became a denomination the moment the first group identified themselves as such.
I don't see how that logically makes sense. It would make the world only a binary place when it is much more multifaceted than that. Examples are abundant where 2 things that are "not" something are not part of the same group in any way other than not being that particular something .
I don't think so in the context of this thread. The Calvinistic, not-charismatic, OSAS church may be non-denominational. The Armenian, charismatic, salvation can be lost church may be non-denominational. Their beliefs are way further apart than the beliefs of any churches in a denomination (say Southern Baptist or Anglican or Presbyterian, etc.) They decidedly are not part of the same denomination (a recognized autonomous branch of the Christian Church). They are what they say they are, independent of each other. Non-denominational.The binary is in the choice ... simliar to God calling light good ...
Non-denomination became a denomination the moment the first group identified themselves as such.
I don't think so in the context of this thread. The Calvinistic, not-charismatic, OSAS church may be non-denominational. The Armenian, charismatic, salvation can be lost church may be non-denominational. Their beliefs are way further apart than the beliefs of any churches in a denomination (say Southern Baptist or Anglican or Presbyterian, etc.) They decidedly are not part of the same denomination (a recognized autonomous branch of the Christian Church). They are what they say they are, independent of each other. Non-denominational.
While this is true that non-denominationalism can be traced back in history to when they started to use that term to a group of people, the concept of non-denominationalism is basically an idea of stating that one is not following solely a specific church that is tied to a group of men that many times involves man made traditions, but it involves simply following what God's Word says alone. Granted, everyone has their own interpretation of God's Word, and so one can find churches that are acting unbiblically within non-denominational churches. The point is that the non-denominational church is not declaring to follow a specifically named church with a certain line of men throughout history who have made a flawed set of beliefs that run contrary to the Bible that usually begain with one guy appearing to invent that set of beliefs (that run contrary to His Word). Non-denominationalism is saying that God's Word is our authority alone, but everyone has their own interpretation of His Word. So there can be a varying degree of non-denominational churches. Some non-denominational churches can be more evangelical, and others can be more liberal (like seeker friendly churches that sell folks on feel good messages with no repentance or talk of sin).
I've yet to find a named church that does not wander after another's belief system ...
The problem with the term non-denominational is that it really has no meaning. It's essentially used to describe what used to be known as congregationalist churches. They don't have any connection with the broader church, which means there's no church government overseeing matters.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?
But your missing the point of non-denominationalism. Such a church is declaring that they are not officially following a certain set of men's beliefs. Sure, many of them may contradict themselves but the point of non-denomitionalism is that it is not following a certain “name brand” or “label” and it is not following a certain set of religious men through history as their guide but they are making God's Word their guide. Some in non-denominational churches are more radical and others are more liberal. It does not mean that they do not hold to a certain set of beliefs that others do. It simply means that their guide is God's Word and they are not looking to men who have formalized a certain set of beliefs or traditions.
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.
As one who describes himself as non-denominational, let me explain what I mean by it. As an aside, the word "Christian" means many different things to many different people.
A denomination is a structure imposed on believers by an organisation that oversees affiliated churches. It normally involves a particular doctrinal emphasis that it teaches in dedicated theological institutions. Attendance is mandatory if you want to be a part of the leadership. I was a Baptist for the first 5 years of my Christian life, then I became a Pentecostal for 5 years.
I was never a fan of denominations. Why? I travelled a great deal with the Navy. I did not always have a choice as to what denomination I attended. I discovered that there is much more that Christians have in common than they have that divides. Which made me question why Christians so readily dummy spit and form a new denomination.
The problem seems to me to be religious pride and the tremendous organisational inertia in a major denomination. Religious pride believes that the denomination has all the revelation that there is to have and there is nothing that needs to change in the denomination's articles of faith. Should a movement arise within the denomination that seeks change, the inbuilt inertia makes it easier for the group to move rather than the organisation to change. So the Methodists came out of the Anglican church, against Wesley's will. He worked within the Anglican church, and refused to ordain Methodist ministers. I believe that to be a great example of how an individual can make a difference without creating division. It's a shame that his followers were not prepared to do likewise.
I see denominations in general as "fossilised revivals". Often a truth has been rediscovered and a new denomination formed as a result. The reformation only restored some of the Biblical truth lost. So the reformers continued the practice of christening. When the truth of immersion baptism (a tautology) came along, those who preached it were often persecuted and rejected. So another denomination formed. And so on ad nauseam.
Our fellowship does exclude anyone on the basis of denominational affiliation. The only criteria is that the individual be born again and that they are not divisive.
Non-denomination became a denomination the moment the first group identified themselves as such.
Inevitably perception creates a set of beliefs that then become over time formalized by this same means, which includes what people call God's word ...
Once upon a time I did after being raised conservative Lutheran and being a member of the Wisconsin synod, (and knowing lots of the old Missouri synod folks growing up).
Unhappy with things in my youth especially parochial school, left Christianity in my college years. And came back when I was about to enter graduate school and joined my best friend in my hometown who was in the Charismatic movement. Nondenominational was super popular with the charismatics, since many of the Pentecostal denominations took certain stands against some of the various movements like Latter Rain etc. Being Nondenominational was a little like being "an independent voter" in politics where you want the various politicians to compete for your vote, and in some ways was almost a little like some of the "Seeker Sensitive" stuff that appeared later in the decade of the 90s it signaled that you did not have big ideological commitments other than trying to seek truth from the Bible etc. so as not to scare away any visitors interested in your church or movement.
The problem with this label for me (of late) isn't so much that fellow Christians use it but that I see some people now using it who are not only not Charismatic and/or independent Christian, but not Christian at all. They're either trolls or New Agers who infiltrate in.
Non-denominationalism is basically saying... look at my set of beliefs and actions now in regards to following God's Word, and do not look to a certain set of religious men throughout history who have formalized a certain set of beliefs that usually appears to run contary to God's Word and can be traced back to one guy inventing it.
Evangelical radical Christians like to be called non-denominational because they want to follow the narrow way that Jesus talked about (i.e. Just follow His Word alone and not a certain group of religous men through man made history). For Jesus says narrow is the way, and FEW be there that find it. Liberal Christians who identify as non-denominational are simply just doing their own thing and not declaring they have any ties to any formalized named church throughout history.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?