Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have never been involved in a denominational church , but the non denominational churches i have been involved in have only been different in title and nothing else .
That's interesting, pcamps. I have to say I've been to only one non-denominational service in my life and so I'm really unable to make s comparison. I do have one question, though: What have you found the non-denominational churches' stance on universalism to be?
Yep...you are right: there are thousands. Sadly, there are not (yet) millions. If you read how they did it in the Bible, in the very beginning days of Christianity, there were no denominations. People met wherever they could find room, in homes, in synagogues, in large buildings, and even out in the open public. They were all non-denominational.
Of course that was true in the beginning, but they had one big advantage over people even a couple of hundred years later, and that was that they had the Apostles Christ had personally chosen to guide them. That's why He said he intended to build His Church on a foundation of prophets and apostles. Paul speaks of the organization of this Church in Ephesians 4:11-14, where he says, "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive..."
So Jesus Christ appointed apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. His purpose in doing so was to perfect His followers, to minister to them and to teach them. These were to remain in place until all of us are unified in the faith and in our knowledge of the Son of God, enabling us to grow to maturity in the Lord. Otherwise, we will continue to be like children in the gospel, persuaded first one way and then another, and unable to distinguish between true and false doctrines, being subject to the teachings of those who are crafty and who desire to deceive us.
Quote:
Denominations are a creation of man, adhering to rigid "blinders-on" belief systems, with endless non-Biblical traditions and rituals of man, and are very divisive. (just reading a few posts on this forum will give you a subtle hint)
Or maybe they are groups of sincere individuals who believe their doctrines are the doctrines taught anciently.
If you think that there was no denominationalism until the Protestant Reformation (and I know you haven't said that, even though I suspect that's what you believe), you are very wrong. There were many factions within the early Church starting from quite early on. Why do you think Paul spoke so often about the internal problems plaguing the Church? Even in his lifetime, there were misunderstandings and misinterpretation of doctrine. I'm not sure why you think it would be any different today and that non-denominational Christianity is a solution for the problem.
Quote:
Could it be that non-denomination people are simply trying to do things the Bible way, to go back to our roots?
I think that's exactly what they are trying to do. I just don't think they've been very successful.
The term 'non-denominational' is really a name given to a group of churches that do not have a head office or hiearchy. The Churches of Christ/Christian Churches are an example of a Non-denomination. Each congregation is autonomous and is able to elect their own elders, deacons and hire who they wish for minister. They have control of their own monies and support many missionaries around the world. They have a conference every year that draw thousands. Most are not charismatic and would even preach against the movement. They are very strong on the Bible as being the only guide for the church. I find that they have organized in a sense to become a 'non-denomination' denomination. It is probably because they have been around since the 1800's. They were ridiculed in their begining days for not having the organization that the main-line denominations had.
Today, there are many 'non-denomination' churches of differing idealogies. The main thing that stands out is that each is autonomous and is resposible for what it does. Not all 'non-denominational' churches are the same. They will come in all shapes and sizes and of differing flavours. Some will be strong on one teaching and others on opposing teaching. I have heard that it is the biggest move of the Spirit today and it has the professional theologians baffled.
The beauty of the 'non-denominational' churches is that if one member church brings in a doctrine that causes the church to stray, then it affects a small segment of that movement. In the larger 'denominational' churches there is the danger that if a person becomes the head huncho and he/she declares that the resurrection never happened (like the United Church in Canada) than it affects all the member churches under its umbrella. The denominations began with a heart for the Lord, but men got in the way and made monster organizations. The non-denominational churches have to be watchful, because they can have the same type of mentality and create little monsters. If it is the work of man, then the flesh will find a way to affect a good work. As brothers and sisters, we must pray for the work of the Holy Spirit to keep our hands off and to allow Him to truly make the bride ready.
I asked two questions actually. They were: So what exactly is a non-denominational church if not just a denominational church without a name? And why is it better than a denominational church?
I am personally a real stickler about people staying on topic, so I try very hard to do that. I'm sorry you think I've gone off topic in the case, but I really don't think I have. Would it help if I turned the question around and asked what you see denominational churches doing that is really any different from what non-denominational churches do? In a Lutheran Church, you're going to hear readings from the Bible, interpreted as Martin Luther interpreted them. In a non-denominational church, aren't you just going to hear readings from the Bible, interpreted by your pastor?
I was raised in the Lutheran church and I was bored to death. The Pastor wore a robe, the music was an organ with hymns, the seats were uncomfortable, everyone had to dress up and the message was without the Power of the Holy Spirit, boring, dry and half the time I slept through it.
I have been back to the Lutheran Church through the years because my uncle is the Pastor of one in Palm Springs and I have relatives that are Lutheran. Even so, it is still boring to me. Very old fashioned and traditional... No wonder people don't want to go to church... Yawn!!
And not to mention all the times I went to church and time I spent sitting in confirmation classes I never knew Jesus or what Salvation was about nor did I care..
The non-denominational church. Yes.. the Pastor reads scripture or gives a message but the flow of the Holy Spirit keeps everything from being repetitious and monotonous. In other words in is alive and active touching your life in a very practical way.
There are basically no rules and no scripts to follow because the Pastor is letting the Spirit lead Him and He is teaching according to the way he is being led.. Yes, there is an order to the service but there is a sense of freedom from rules there. And you don't have to dress up and all that.
That is what makes a non-denominationall church great... The flow or lead of the Spirit, not the lead of man made rules and agendas.... This includes worship as well. Instead of being entertained by a choir one is worshipping the Lord with the worship band...
The term 'non-denominational' is really a name given to a group of churches that do not have a head office or hiearchy. The Churches of Christ/Christian Churches are an example of a Non-denomination. Each congregation is autonomous and is able to elect their own elders, deacons and hire who they wish for minister. They have control of their own monies and support many missionaries around the world. They have a conference every year that draw thousands. Most are not charismatic and would even preach against the movement. They are very strong on the Bible as being the only guide for the church. I find that they have organized in a sense to become a 'non-denomination' denomination. It is probably because they have been around since the 1800's. They were ridiculed in their begining days for not having the organization that the main-line denominations had.
Today, there are many 'non-denomination' churches of differing idealogies. The main thing that stands out is that each is autonomous and is resposible for what it does. Not all 'non-denominational' churches are the same. They will come in all shapes and sizes and of differing flavours. Some will be strong on one teaching and others on opposing teaching. I have heard that it is the biggist move of the Spirit today and it has the professional theologians baffled.
The beauty of the 'non-denominational' churches is that if one member church brings in a doctrine that causes the church to stray, then it affects a small segment of that movement. In the larger 'denominational' churches there is the danger that if a person becomes the head huncho and he/she declares that the resurrection never happened (like the United Church in Canada) than it affects all the member churches under its umbrella. The denominations began with a heart for the Lord, but men got in the way and made monster organizations. The non-denominational churches have to be watchful, because they can have the same type of mentality and create little monsters. If it is the work of man, then the flesh will find a way to affect a good work. As brothers and sisters, we must pray for the work of the Holy Spirit to keep our hands off and to allow Him to truly make the bride ready.
Thanks for the info, donnyb. Would you mind what you mean by the "charismatic movement." It's a term I'm not really familiar with, although I have heard the word.
That's interesting, pcamps. I have to say I've been to only one non-denominational service in my life and so I'm really unable to make s comparison. I do have one question, though: What have you found the non-denominational churches' stance on universalism to be?
If the Church is a bible believing church they do not believe in Universalism...because it is not biblical... Sorry.
The term 'non-denominational' is really a name given to a group of churches that do not have a head office or hiearchy. The Churches of Christ/Christian Churches are an example of a Non-denomination. Each congregation is autonomous and is able to elect their own elders, deacons and hire who they wish for minister. They have control of their own monies and support many missionaries around the world. They have a conference every year that draw thousands. Most are not charismatic and would even preach against the movement. They are very strong on the Bible as being the only guide for the church. I find that they have organized in a sense to become a 'non-denomination' denomination. It is probably because they have been around since the 1800's. They were ridiculed in their begining days for not having the organization that the main-line denominations had.
Today, there are many 'non-denomination' churches of differing idealogies. The main thing that stands out is that each is autonomous and is resposible for what it does. Not all 'non-denominational' churches are the same. They will come in all shapes and sizes and of differing flavours. Some will be strong on one teaching and others on opposing teaching. I have heard that it is the biggest move of the Spirit today and it has the professional theologians baffled.
The beauty of the 'non-denominational' churches is that if one member church brings in a doctrine that causes the church to stray, then it affects a small segment of that movement. In the larger 'denominational' churches there is the danger that if a person becomes the head huncho and he/she declares that the resurrection never happened (like the United Church in Canada) than it affects all the member churches under its umbrella. The denominations began with a heart for the Lord, but men got in the way and made monster organizations. The non-denominational churches have to be watchful, because they can have the same type of mentality and create little monsters. If it is the work of man, then the flesh will find a way to affect a good work. As brothers and sisters, we must pray for the work of the Holy Spirit to keep our hands off and to allow Him to truly make the bride ready. The non-denominational churches have always been around as a thorn to the mainline denominations and to the state. They will always have a place in the work of God.
If the Church is a bible believing church they do not believe in Universalism...because it is not biblical... Sorry.
Hmmm. That's interesting because I do believe the Bible, I also believe in a kind of "modified" universalism. I'm sorry, too.
I was just using that as an example because what pcamps said kind of confused me. Anyway, he has since sent me a DM explaining what he meant. (I really do hope this thread isn't going end up off topic because of that one post.)
Let me give you another example of why I'm confused. Let's say ten different non-denominational Christian ministers were each going to give a sermon on baptism. I can the distinct possibility for a wide variety of interpretations to be taught, even if they used no source other than the Bible. For instance (and these questions are meant to be rhetorical; it's not my point to debate baptism on this thread any more than it was my point to debate universalism on this thread)...
Water baptism is essential for salvation vs. water baptism is not essential for salvation.
Babies should be baptized vs. only older children and adults should be baptized.
Baptism must be by immersion vs. baptism may be by sprinkling.
One must hold a particular authority to baptize vs. no special authority is needed.
One must receive the Holy Ghost first and then be baptized vs. one must be baptized first and then receive the Holy Ghost.
Do you see what I mean? I used to think the answers to these questions were very cut and dried, because I was not aware of the verses that teach the other position. As I talked to people with differing beliefs, I realized that there were scriptures to support either position. Wouldn't a minister's person viewpoint enter in to his selection of verses and his interpretation of them? How does being a part of a non-denominational church assure you of hearing the truth taught any more than being part of a denominational one does?
Charismatic movement is what has been labled as the move of the Holy Spirit similar to and after the Pentecostal movement. the pentecostals were organized into denominations with its strong aherence to speaking in tongues. the charismatics built on that and recognized the full ministry of the Holy Spirit and took off more in house meetings and then onto full fledge churches. a lot of the music today has the charismatic flavour with whorsip teams and lots of music. this is probably a simple look at the movement.
Here is some denomenational stuff you may want to check out aboutCalvary Chapel there are some very big splits and cultish things going on in some of them...
CHURCHIANITY vs CHRISTIANITY
These are general questions and not meant to be taken personally by any specific organizations or individuals.
1. Should the life of a congregation of Christians revolve around the personality of a man?
2. Should human leaders try to be the Holy Spirit in peoples lives?
3. Should meetings of believers be productions for spectators to watch?
4. Who is truly our Pastor? Whose sheep are we?
5. Must a Christian Fellowship be operated like a business corporation? Must it have a CEO? Must it have assets to acquire and control? Should leaders act like employers? Should Christian brothers be treated like employees?
6. Is frantic, unrelenting activity, projects, programs necessarily the same thing as Holy Spirit-led ministry?
7. Is the Church a human organization that must be "controlled" or "operated" or is the Church simply the individuals who belong to Jesus and who are called to be in a relationship with each other?
8. Should there be a priesthood-class of men over the laity or does the Bible teach the priesthood of all believers?
Last edited by caucazhin; 01-25-2010 at 08:52 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
what is a non-denomination
