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

[Gregory Thompson]

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-denominational was a label created because people didn't want to be labelled. It did nothing to remove the denominational divisions.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The Southern Baptist Convention is not compatible with the the beliefs of the PCUSA.

So, yeah, which one are you?

Does it matter? And if so, how much does it matter? For my part, I'm not as concerned about how well each denomination 'jives' with the others as some people are.

To be forthright with you in answering your inquiry, I'd have to admit that because various Christian leaders at some of the former churches we attended have offended my otherwise formerly Russian Orthodox wife, I no longer attend any specific church at the moment ...

While I try my best to be conciliatory with people, my wife has had a much more difficult time in reconciling with the kind of almost cultic, sometimes obnoxious, in your face Evangelicalism that exists in some American churches. She wasn't treated well while growing up by her own family, and when she later attended various churches with me over the years (Christian Church/Instrumental or Southern Baptist) we inadvertently bumped into "fellow Christians" whose main task in life seemed to be to lay a heavy guilt trip upon anyone who doesn't tow their specific status-quo line of doctrinal thinking. After a few face fulls of that kind of treatment, she refused to go to church any longer.

Thanks to those "fellow Christians," I now have a fairly difficult time being able to gather my family together to go to any church. Membership is now almost out of the question with her. And being that my son, now, is doubting the veracity of the Christian faith, this makes it all the more difficult. Then of course, the Covid virus doesn't help matters on the social level either.

For my part, I'm more flexible in some respects, or at least I attempt to be. I do my best to be mildly Ecumenical or, better yet, to simply hold FIRMLY to a basic principle of Solidarity that I feel that I have with ALL fellow Trinitarian Christians, even those I disagree with. When important secondary issues of theology or of biblical interpretation arise, I commit to not allowing secondary issues (let alone tertiary issues of church agendas) divide me from my fellow Christians.

So, in essence: I am a member of all Trinitarian churches, but at a formal level I am no longer a specific member of any one of them.

I hope this answers your question to some extent, Tara ... thanks for asking!

 

[bèlla]

That's a helpful layout to whatever dynamics of andragogy are at work in this thread, Bèlla ! Thank you for that bit of ministry on your part, sister.

My pleasure! I immediately thought of it when I read your reply.

As to your question---- I'm not sure where I fit in, honestly, but if the Myers-Briggs designation of INTJ gives any indicator, then we might surmise where I'd end up on these grids you've provided.

You're our resident Sherlock. Intellect is your strength. But there's more than meets the eye. I see it. But that's between us. Pinky swear.

Just to be clear, too, I essentially agree with your earlier post. So, when I say I think I'm being "misunderstood"----which in and of itself is also an ambiguous word----I only mean to imply that I think my lack of eloquence, sloppy syntax and existential leanings may cause others to accidentally think my intentions are other than they truly are.

If they take it at face value they would. But you're like Baskin-Robbins. 36 and more. As we all are. But most folks miss that.

Again, thank you for your help here, Sis!

Don't mention it brother. The dynamic duo strikes again!

Yours in His Service,

~bella

 

[garee]

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?

Thanks . . sorry in advance for the rambling .
Semantic expectations ? Division is how we are expected to hear God as to what His Spirit says to the churches or sects as denominations. It’s his approval we can seek after as believers.. a division that brings peace.

I would offer there is no such thing as non- denomination or non-sect .They are part of the whole. Like the old and new testament.

The name Abraham typifies our heavenly Father, The word literally meaning the Father of all the nations of the world. The division is in respect to his name or power .

We have the treasure of His power that works in us with us but it is never of corrupted flesh and blood (us) we remain powerless in these earthen bodies.

2 Corinthians 4:7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

A sect is in respect to when two or three a family gathers together under all things written in the law and the prophets(sola scriptura)

So then it becomes two or three. . . or two or three thousand the number does not change the power or authority be which we could hear and believe. .

A family is consider a nation or tribe as part of the whole a denomination.

Abraham's father was an Amorite, and mother an Hittite. Abraham the new born again nation to represent the whole it became the Christian nation, the nation of many nations. .

I see the division as actually a safeguard preventing mankind with different heresies (matters of opinion or called private interpretation ) like killing themselves as do the pagan religions (out of sight out of mind.)

You could say giving the denominations a hiding place, denominations signified as cities of refuge that make up the whole. .

Psalm 32:7Thou art my hiding place; thou shalt preserve me from trouble; thou shalt compass me about with songs of deliverance. Selah.

Psalm 119:114 Thou art my hiding place and my shield: I hope in thy word.

In that way the Bible informs us there must be heresies (matters of opinion) amongst us, as long as the difference do not do despite the fullness of Christ's grace salvation which some sect do.. . We can bring the gospel to them in a hope it will wash the feet as did Christ with Peter. a hope of those who do despite to the fullness of grace. The washing of the word

The word heresy is the Greek word for sect.. Sect means a group of mankind that share a common opinion therefore making the format of one assembly different than the one next door. And therefore having different needs that affect all like the 7 denominations revealed in Revelations (churches)

The first mention of a denomination on this side of the cross were called “The Nazarene” or the “Way” .it was opposed by two sects, the Pharisees with Sadducees. Two false sects that put aside their differences in the formats and became one source to destroy what they called heresy .All things written in the law and the prophets (sola scriptura) They accused Paul who was used to bring the gospel a heretic or false apostle so they could keep their own kind of law . I heard it through the grape vine, called a law of the fathers

Of the 7 denomination revealed in Revelations (churches) one is called the Nicolaitian sect under the leadership and founder Nicole .They left their first love which was trusting the unseen Holy Spirit the teacher And they sought after the teaching of men (heresies) .They returned to their first love, the first experience of hearing God through it as it is written, God working in us, with us, the witness of His Spirit

Remember the kingdom of God does not come by observing the temporal things of this corrupted creation we have the power of His authority as our treasure in us but it is not of us flesh and blood. We neither wrestle against it nor strengthened by the temporal things seen.

 

[Tara Blount]

Does it matter? And if so, how much does it matter? For my part, I'm not as concerned about how well each denomination 'jives' with the others as some people are.

To be forthright with you in answering your inquiry, I'd have to admit that because various Christian leaders at some of the former churches we attended have offended my otherwise formerly Russian Orthodox wife, I no longer attend any specific church at the moment ...

It matters because you mentioned those denominations by name and then said you agree with them all as part of your "philosophy." I don't care about your "philosophy" as much as I see that it contradicts itself. I thought you had something there. PC and Southern Baptist are not the same thing. I think you are an agnostic not a "christian." No big deal.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

It matters because you mentioned those denominations by name and then said you agree with them all as part of your "philosophy." Finally, we get the truth from you. Believing in nothing is different than believing in everything. So, yeah. A little honesty.

Yes, I "agree" because I think our common faith in Christ requires a bit less than all that which some denominations attempt to so precisely articulate about God and His Word. The honest truth is that I neither believe in "nothing" nor in "everything," and I hope that you see that this is the case with me.

Do you think I'm somehow lacking in my faith and vision?

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

"Non-denominational" churches are generally Baptist or Pentecostal in their theology, even if they don't use the name. How can we tell? Well, how many non-denominational churches practice infant baptism?

 

[Ceallaigh]

I'll take it for granted that non-denominational here means non-denominational Christian. Which is what I am, but I'd rather openly identify myself as a Christian.

 

[coffee4u]

"Non-denominational" churches are generally Baptist or Pentecostal in their theology, even if they don't use the name. How can we tell? Well, how many non-denominational churches practice infant baptism?

This also varies by country. A denomination may have the same name but not actually be the same church at all. I consider Baptist (here) to be a denomination but I don't know what US Baptists believe to be able to tell if they are even similar.
Yet another reason not to use a label since it may mean completely different things depending on what country a person is from.

 

[Tara Blount]

The honest truth is that I neither believe in "nothing" nor in "everything," and I hope that you see that this is the case with me.

Do you think I'm somehow lacking in my faith and vision?

I don't care and I don't think anything. You don't seem to have faith and yet you want to be religious.

Religion is the enemy. A church building is a place for telling stories and taking money from people. Inside your heart, you are a person and a miracle. No religion can change you.

You are right. Baptists and Presbyterians meet in buildings and tell stories. Telling stories to collect money is religion. It's funny because you have hit on the meaning of "non-denominational church." It's a big building where nobody believes anything but money is exchanged and preachers are paid to keep telling stories. This is why Christianity has died to the world.

 

[Neostarwcc]

You're right nondenominational is a little weird. If you're going to label yourself a Protestant generally you're either an Arminian or Reformed/Calvinist.

That should be your label. Not Christian, not nondenominational, not Baptist...etc. Because Baptists can be two sides of the coin. Lutherans can be either. It just gets so confusing among us Protestants. Either you're Arminian or you're Reformed. There is no inbetween really.

And when one carries the label Christian it gets highly confusing. What kind of Christian? Eastern Orthodox Catholic Protestant, what?

 

[Tara Blount]

You're right nondenominational is a little weird. If you're going to label yourself a Protestant generally you're either an Arminian or Reformed/Calvinist.

Maybe it's the labels. How many of the faithful know what they are?

Nobody knows these terms. I think that is where the non-denominational movement came from. To get away from the buzz words. Somehow, non-denominational churches became more religious and obscure.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The wikipedia definition is "A religious denomination is a subgroup within a religion that operates under a common name, tradition, and identity. The term refers to the various Christian denominations. It is also used to describe the four major branches of Judaism."

I don't agree with this, but the idea is there. My definition of denomination is a group of people that agree on a common doctrine and/or liturgy, thereby implicitly disagreeing with those who hold different doctrines and rituals.

I am non-denominational, meaning that I decide for myself what the Bible says, even if it disagrees with others' interpretations. I have no need to feel accepted by a group of people who think differently, as that often leads to feelings of superiority and intolerance on their part.

Well I consider myself as a non denominational because while I do believe in a majority of the Eastern Orthodox teachings there are some that I prefer to remain neutral on like for example Mary’s perpetual virginity. I see evidence supporting both sides of the argument but neither side has any conclusive evidence so I prefer to remain neutral on this matter. I don’t think I could rightly call myself an Eastern Orthodox without embracing all of the church’s teachings so I tend to refer to myself as a non denominational who has a tendency to lean towards the Orthodox teachings. In this case I haven’t formulated my own doctrines but rather I have declined to embrace some of the Orthodox doctrines that I cannot conform to be true.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I don't care and I don't think anything. You don't seem to have faith and yet you want to be religious.

Religion is the enemy. A church building is a place for telling stories and taking money from people. Inside your heart, you are a person and a miracle. No religion can change you.

You are right. Baptists and Presbyterians meet in buildings and tell stories. Telling stories to collect money is religion. It's funny because you have hit on the meaning of "non-denominational church." It's a big building where nobody believes anything but money is exchanged and preachers are paid to keep telling stories. This is why Christianity has died to the world.

I don't have faith, Tara? Are you sure about that?

Well, welcome to ChristianForums!

 

[Tara Blount]

I don’t think I could rightly call myself an Eastern Orthodox without embracing all of the church’s teachings

True. You don't pronounce yourself part of a religion when you don't know anything about it.

Through the sacrament of communion, you are testifying of your belief in the tenets of the universal church. You are not Orthodox unless you have been baptized by a monk or a Metropolitan. It works differently than a Protestant church.

 

[Tara Blount]

I don't have faith, Tara? Are you sure about that?
Well, welcome to ChristianForums!

According to the words you have spoken. You have said that you believe in everything but the beliefs you claim to embrace are opposed to one another. The term you want is "agnostic," spiritual or deistic. Nothing wrong with that. It's just the modern way of saying "I don't believe but I believe." You're modern.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

According to the words you have spoken, I am pretty sure. You have said that you believe in everything but the beliefs you claim to embrace are opposed to one another. You are an agnostic. Nothing wrong with that. It's the modern way of saying "I don't believe but I believe." The only way you could be telling the truth is if you don't actually have a faith. You need to be honest. It's the only way to know. If you want attention, that's fine

Tara, you're new to this website, but I've been here for 10 years. I am a Christian and I generally adhere to the Nicene Creed. So, what you may want to do is consider the fact that since you're new here, and since you've basically "plunged" into the center of a thread discussion, you might not be aware of the overall contexts that are a part of the discussion.

No, I did not say I believe in everything; what I'm claiming is that I, as an Existential Christian, can simply look at 2,000 years of Christian History and various strands of Christian theology and learn from them all: I can learn from voices in the Roman Catholic church, and I can learn from voices in the Orthodox churches; I can also learn from voices in the Anglican and the assorted Protestant churches.

Does this help clarify my point of view?

 

[Tara Blount]

Now you are insulting me. Thanks for showing yourself, I guess.

 

[BNR32FAN]

True. You don't pronounce yourself part of a religion when you don't know anything about it.

Through the sacrament of communion, you are testifying of your belief in the tenets of the universal church. You are not Orthodox unless you have been baptized by a monk or a Metropolitan. It works differently than a Protestant church.

I wouldn’t say that I don’t know anything about the EOC. I know a bit, how much I would say is subjective depending on whom your speaking to.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Now you are insulting me. Thanks for showing yourself, I guess.

Actually, I draw from sources like Blaise Pascal, Kierkegaard and C.S. Lewis, among others, and I don't think these persons can be counted as "non-Christian." Thereby, neither am I a "non-Christian." I'm definitely not a deist nor a spiritualist either.