Why are you a Non-Denominational Christian ?

[Job8]

And didn't Paul and the apostles form a heirarchy over churches as they travelled around?

We need to keep in mind that the apostles had unique authority, and even spoke of the "commandments" of the apostles. Therefore they had oversight over all the churches. But the true leadership was always local and limited to each church initially (then corrupted very quickly). But here is what Paul set up (Tit 1:5):
For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

Before we misunderstand "ordain" let's look at the Greek word which is Strong's 2525 -- kathistemi =designate, constitute, convoy, APPOINT [permanently], make, ordain, set. Those elders were mature Christian men with the appropriate spiritual qualifications and gifts, and they were to be the permanent shepherds of that flock only. When the Lord addressed the churches in Asia Minor (Rev 1-3), He addressed each church individually. Had God desired a denomination, this is precisely where we would have found it.

The fact that Paul wrote letters back to churches to correct them is proof that an organization outside the congregation is not unscriptural.

Not at all. (a) Those letters were Scripture, (b) there was no written New Testament, (c) all the churches needed to have the NT writings in their hands. Period. No proof of any denomination. Even though Paul asked the church at Jerusalem to rule on the application of the Law of Moses to Gentiles, the churches in the Roman Empire were not reporting to Jerusalem, or accountable to Jerusalem in the NT.
The structure was CHRIST--->LOCAL ELDERS--->FLOCK

There's nothing that says that a church must be part of a larger organization, but there is nothing that says that they can't.

The larger "organization" is actually a living organism -- the Church, the Body, Bride, and Building of Christ (Eph 3,4,5). With a larger organization, the local eldership (presbytery) would be undermined, as it has been undermined in the denominations.

The "I follow Paul", etc in 1Cor 1:11-17 is about putting the teachings of the leader above those of Christ and many demoninationals and non-denominationals have that problem today. There's nothing more dangerous than an ambitious and charismatic preacher.

Correct. And that is why you always have A PLURALITY OF ELDERS in the NT churches -- not one man ruling the roost (Acts 20:17-35; 1 Pet 5:1-4). These were the pastors (plural) of their church -- feeding, leading, guiding, overseeing, caring. That is also why God gave elders to Moses. One man could simply not handle the responsibility.

 

[Andy S. Wright]

You can go to a UM church in Africa and it would knock your socks off.

Oh yes. I've been blessed to have gone to several mission experiences outside of the US in so-called 'third world' countries. The experience was life changing on many levels.

 

[BryanW92]

If Heaven will not be divided by denominations, why on Earth do we collectively swallow the lie that his church should be?

No one swallows that lie. It is a straw man. We merely accept that it is divided into denominations and into individual churches. After all, if a denomination is bad, how much worse is a solitary church totally disconnected from the rest of the Body?

Do all non-denoms agree 100% on doctrine, government, and even on interpretation? I have two non-denoms that I like. Call them Church H and Church J. Both teach the bible, follow Jesus, love the world, love each other, love God. They baptize...but only one baptizes infants! One of them lets women preach! One has Elders and Deacons. Since they are not in denominations, there is no "division". But there is difference. The Methodist church across the street from Church J and the Presbyterian church down the road from Church H also do not have "division". Only difference.

 

[BryanW92]

Not at all. (a) Those letters were Scripture, (b) there was no written New Testament, (c) all the churches needed to have the NT writings in their hands. Period.

When they were written, those letters were not scripture. Paul would have vehemently disagreed that his letters to individual churches are scripture. He knew scripture and he knew the Gospel. His letters were just guidance at that time. If he had thought they would become scripture, he would have written letters that are more general in nature with less room for people to think that there is contradiction in them. Most denominational differences come from the content of his letters!

Even in this forum, people get all wound up over a verse in an epistle, taking it out of context or failing to view it through the lens of the gospel, as all epistles should be read.

Again, I am not arguing against the idea of non-denominationalism or in favor of all churches being in a denomination. I am just urging people to see each congregation of a denomination as a part of the overall Body of Christ.

 

[Norah63]

Paul went about preaching the kingdom of God.
How many Christians could teach that, understand that, live that?
No wonder the divisions.....

 

[ALoveDivine]

Three reasons.

1. My view of the church; The church is really the sum total of all those who belong to Christ, throughout all of the world. It is not brick and mortar, it is not a building or a specific organization. It is the whole of God's people. The church expresses itself in local congregations, assemblies of God's people in each locality. Hence, I reject any one organizations claim of being the "true church".

2. Denominations tend to form because of theological disputes and pet doctrines. I now tend to see much of theology as being of the flesh, a purely intellectual endeavor which puts too much of our focus on little details that are not all that fundamental to the living faith. I think each local congregation should be led by the Holy Spirit and approach doctrine with humility and not with intellectual pride.

3. This is an extension of number 2 really. I think divergent views can exist peacefully within a local congregation, at least as regards non-essentials. For example, there is really no reason why dispensational premillenialists and amillenialists like myself can't fellowship together in the bonds of love within a local church. There is also no reason why young-earth creationists and those who accept theistic evolution, also like myself, can't fellowship together. We all too often let doctrinal differences shatter our unity, and that should not be the case.

Denominationalism is not a good thing, it only divides God's people. That's why I am a "nondenominational" Christian. Really, I'm just a Christian, any label beyond that is pointless.

I have my own views on things and I could be wrong on many points, but I always strive to know the truth on any matter and I am always open to revising my points of view. If we can all approach doctrine with that mindset we'd be a lot better off.

 

[brinny]

....i dunno.....

i attended a church that was non-denominational, and i didn't dis-agree with their teachings, or Bible study methods, because they adhered to the Bible, so we "meshed" quite well....

 

[ToBeBlessed]

(I thought this reply was linked to Bobinator in post #7, but seems it's not).


IMHO a denomination or parent organization within a denomination really says that you agree with those teachings of that denomination. Although most people don't know exactly what their denomination teaches or the Word, so I find it irrelevant in the fact that most people don't know what they believe much less how to scripturally describe why they believe what they think they believe.http://www.christianforums.com//www.pinterest.com/pin/create/extension/

 

[Job8]

When they were written, those letters were not scripture...

If Peter recognized ALL Paul's letters (epistles) as Scripture, do you really think that Paul did not? (2 Pet 3:15,16). Paul received direct revelations from the Lord and he also penned the bulk of the NT Scriptures.
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

 

[ToBeBlessed]

In this day and age I don't see denominations as being all that bad. This is why.

In Jesus' time people lived very far away from each other and so they were use to gathering with people closer. Now as people are more condensed and have transportation we are able to make choices. People choose. If this was a thread about music/worship preferences no one would think it odd. However with everyone being able to read (in this day and age) and bibles being widely available as well as other resources (ie maps, dictionaries, greek, ect) people that want to study are able to.

If we think back to Paul and Peter's early relationship, we will see a church REALLY divided. Paul was for the gentiles and Peter was for a Jewish continuation. So we see that there were divisions back then. Not little divisions but BIG divisions.

If we eliminate denominations who would preach/teach? Is the Spirit Filled Charismatic going to blend well with the Fire and Brimstone Baptist? Or OSAS with the Works based Christians? Or the Jesus Only (Oneness) Pentecostals with the Catholics?

I just don't see there being peace in the church unless we separate to a certain degree by doctrine. We can all talk about a hypothetical Christian Love Fest without denominations but it's just not realistic.

 

[JLR1300]

When they were written, those letters were not scripture. Paul would have vehemently disagreed that his letters to individual churches are scripture. He knew scripture and he knew the Gospel. His letters were just guidance at that time. If he had thought they would become scripture, he would have written letters that are more general in nature with less room for people to think that there is contradiction in them. Most denominational differences come from the content of his letters!

Even in this forum, people get all wound up over a verse in an epistle, taking it out of context or failing to view it through the lens of the gospel, as all epistles should be read.

Again, I am not arguing against the idea of non-denominationalism or in favor of all churches being in a denomination. I am just urging people to see each congregation of a denomination as a part of the overall Body of Christ.

Bryan... I am not directing all of the comments below at you personally, I am just using what you said as a springboard to say several different things... not all of them are in response to what you said.

In Galatians Paul says that the his Gospel was given directly to him by Jesus Christ. Also Paul was caught up into the third heaven and things were revealed to him that no one else knew. Peter said that Paul's writings were scripture. Also Paul in 2nd Thes. 3:14 after He had given his instructions for the Thessalonian Church He said "and if any man does not obey our word by this epistle, note that man and have no company with him" So Paul didn't just consider his epistles to the churches to be mere guidence... they were expected to be followed. In fact, when the man in the Corinthian church was living with his step mother Paul says that He judged the man and delivered him to Satan. The Apostles were given special Authority by Christ. Jesus said to His disciples that he would give them the Holy Spirit who would bring to rememberance all things whatsoever He had taught them. That means that the disiples had been told that they would teach by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Whatsoever they would bind on earth would be bound in Heaven.... That is special Authority for the Apostles.

Now that the Apostles are gone we certainly don't need a council or denomination stepping into the Apostles places and trying to assume their authority and telling the churches what to do. We already have the inspired writings of the Apostles so we don't need a bunch of uninspired men trying to tell us what to believe.

It is so ironic that some people want to say that the Apostles didn't think their inspired writings were anything more then mere guidance but yet they want a modern day uninspired denomination or council to have complete authority over the churches.

 

[Job8]

I am just urging people to see each congregation of a denomination as a part of the overall Body of Christ.

The Body of Christ is only those who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit and have been placed in that Body by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:13). Not all who bear the label of "Christian" are indeed in that Body, since there would be wheat and tares, good fish and bad fish, sheep and goats in the external visible Christendom. Therefore the above is not a valid statement. Some do not maintain the true teachings of Christ and the apostles.

 

[BryanW92]

The Body of Christ is only those who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit and have been placed in that Body by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:13). Not all who bear the label of "Christian" are indeed in that Body, since there would be wheat and tares, good fish and bad fish, sheep and goats in the external visible Christendom. Therefore the above is not a valid statement. Some do not maintain the true teachings of Christ and the apostles.

You and I don't get to decide who is and who is not indwelt by the Holy Spirit. In fact, it doesn't happen by church or by congregation or by denomination. It happens to people. Individual people! There are those who are saved by Christ sitting in Roman Catholic Churches right now, and there are probably some who do not have the Holy Spirit sitting in your church on Sunday.

 

[BryanW92]

It is so ironic that some people want to say that the Apostles didn't think their inspired writings were anything more then mere guidance but yet they want a modern day uninspired denomination or council to have complete authority over the churches.

Outside of the RCC, denominations and councils do not have complete authority over individuals or even over congregations. Just because you believe that does make it so...unless you think you deserve to have complete authority.

 

[Norah63]

This goes back I would think, to that line about, ' when the scriptures were written down' Bryan said they were not scripture.
I believe they were written down because the Holy Spirit gave them, which makes them scripture.
Is this a division which makes us all non-doms?

 

[BryanW92]

This goes back I would think, to that line about, ' when the scriptures were written down' Bryan said they were not scripture.
I believe they were written down because the Holy Spirit gave them, which makes them scripture.
Is this a division which makes us all non-doms?

The Holy Spirit gives people a lot of things. Every day, people receive knowledge and prophecy (in the form or discernment) and that doesn't make it scripture.

 

[Norah63]

Receiving truth is for the one receiving it.
Decernment decides between truth and false.

 

[BryanW92]

Receiving truth is for the one receiving it.
Decernment decides between truth and false.

My point exactly. The writers of the epistles were familiar with the Hebrew bible. They knew what a book of prophecy and scripture looked like. If they had thought that their letters would be scripture one day, they would have written them with more of a "Thus saith the Lord" tone or as a parable, as Jesus had taught them.

Instead, they wrote them as letters between people. I'm not saying that the letters were not inspired by the Spirit because they certainly were. I'm just saying that these men were being inspired by the Spirit a lot in those days and their surviving letters (along with an unknown number of Spirit-inspired letters that did not survive) were not written with the notion of "Hmmm...I think I'll write some scripture today" as their motivation.

 

[Job8]

The Holy Spirit gives people a lot of things. Every day, people receive knowledge and prophecy (in the form or discernment) and that doesn't make it scripture.

Bryan,

Are you still looking for more specific Scriptures which refute your mistaken ideas about Divine inspiration?

Rather than simply accept the fact that you are mistaken, you keep going round and round as though you know exactly what was going on in the minds and lives of the apostles.

I already gave you one powerful Scripture to prove that the apostles knew that they were writing Scripture, but you simply ignored it. Would you do the same if other Scriptures were provided? Do you understand that prophecy is direct revelation from God, and that when it is written down IT BECOMES SCRIPTURE?

 

[BryanW92]

Bryan,

Are you still looking for more specific Scriptures which refute your mistaken ideas about Divine inspiration?

Rather than simply accept the fact that you are mistaken, you keep going round and round as though you know exactly what was going on in the minds and lives of the apostles.

I already gave you one powerful Scripture to prove that the apostles knew that they were writing Scripture, but you simply ignored it. Would you do the same if other Scriptures were provided? Do you understand that prophecy is direct revelation from God, and that when it is written down IT BECOMES SCRIPTURE?

Are you talking about 1 Cor 12:13? That has nothing to do with the subject other than to prove what I am saying, that there are Christians who have the Holy Spirit that can be found in any Christian church, denomination or non-denomination. We are all of one spirit, as the verse says. Being of a different congregation does not mean that one is in the spirit and the other is not in the spirit.