How do non-denominational Christians pick a church?

[PRmerger]

Duh!

If they “are not christians” then on what basis do they belong on a list of “Christian churches?”

What am I missing here?

Love and prays,
Pat

That is addressed by the author of the reference I cited here; they are listed as “marginal” Christians: (bold mine)

Originally posted by PhilVaz: From these are formed nearly 1600 “denominations.” The largest of these (year 1995 members, year 2000 denominations) are the JWs (11 million members, 226 denominations), next are the Mormons (8 million members, 122 denominations), and far behind are the “metaphysical” science cults (1.1 million members, 59 denominations), etc. I’ll agree most of these are very borderline “Christian.” They might refer to “Jesus Christ” and use the Bible in their “worship services” but for the most part they reject the historic Creeds and Councils of Christendom (Nicene, Athanasian, Ephesus, Chalcedon, etc).

I also addressed that here:

However, the discussion is whether they have a legitimate place in the 40,000 Christian denomination list. Certainly, when one considers all the other 40,000 denominations, their position as an “organized aggregate of worship centers or congregations of similar ecclesiastical tradition” is as valid as any other.

Finally, I stated this here:

I am willing to concede that we can remove “Mormons” and “JWs” from the list, as well as separate the 242 Catholic denominations into one–thus lowering the final count for today from 41363 to 41,119.

Still an obscenity. Still a paradigm created in hell, IMHO.

 

[Xavierlives]

That is addressed by the author of the reference I cited here; they are listed as “marginal” Christians: (bold mine)

I also addressed that here:

Finally, I stated this here:

The point is you can’t just concede numbers when they are proven wrong. No one has wanted to take a fine-tooth comb to the rest of the numbers because these have already been shown to have flaws.

Then those flaws are obscene. Your continued use of those flawed numbers is obscene.

You and the source you use want to show division. Give up your numbers. Give up your divisions. Seek unity.

 

[jmcrae]

Well besides the fact that I think PRMerger now has me on ignore.

The point is an independent Baptist Church or an Independent Church of Christ or Independent Christian Church is not its own denomination. They, for one reason or another are not affliated. That doesn’t mean they don’t hold the exact views as that denomination. Exact Doctrine. Exact Bylaws. Exact Theology. Two Denominations? NO!

Denominational distinctions don’t hinge on “sameness” of theology or liturgy, though - the issue is not what they believe, but who is in charge. If two different parishes have identical Orders of Service and teach the same theology, but one is governed by the SBC, and the other is governed by a locally appointed Board of Deacons, then they are not of the same denomination - they are different denominations, because they are governed by different people.

Conversely, people who attend the Tridentine Mass, the Byzantine Divine Liturgy, or the Mass of Pope Paul VI - three entirely different Liturgies, and I would expect that the emphasis of the preaching is also quite a bit different in each, but all are part of the same Church; the Catholic Church, because they are all under the same governor - the Pope.

 

[Xavierlives]

Denominational distinctions don’t hinge on “sameness” of theology or liturgy, though - the issue is not what they believe, but who is in charge. If two different parishes have identical Orders of Service and teach the same theology, but one is governed by the SBC, and the other is governed by a locally appointed Board of Deacons, then they are not of the same denomination - they are different denominations, because they are governed by different people.

Conversely, people who attend the Tridentine Mass, the Byzantine Divine Liturgy, or the Mass of Pope Paul VI - three entirely different Liturgies, and I would expect that the emphasis of the preaching is also quite a bit different in each, but all are part of the same Church; the Catholic Church, because they are all under the same governor - the Pope.

What you fail to recognize in your analysis is every Baptist Church, within their constructs, does not suggest to be governed by any “Baptist” oversight. Every Baptist church under the SBC is just as independent as a Baptist Church without the SBC.

Under this knowledge and the use of this list, we might as well total up every Baptist church and make them their own denomination as well. With 35 million Baptists, surely we can get 30,000-50,000 more denominations added.

 

[PRmerger]

Denominational distinctions don’t hinge on “sameness” of theology or liturgy, though - the issue is not what they believe, but who is in charge.

And given the SS paradigm, whoever’s “in charge” determines this particular denomination’s doctrines.

That is, whether they believe in
-divorce and remarriage
-baptism as a sacrament, ordinance or other some other theological entity
-the nature of original sin
-Wednesday evening prayer services
-altar calls
-infant dedications
-whether to call God Jehovah

etc etc etc

:sad_yes:

 

[SonofMonica]

What you fail to recognize in your analysis is every Baptist Church, within their constructs, does not suggest to be governed by any “Baptist” oversight. Every Baptist church under the SBC is just as independent as a Baptist Church without the SBC.

Under this knowledge and the use of this list, we might as well total up every Baptist church and make them their own denomination as well. With 35 million Baptists, surely we can get 30,000-50,000 more denominations added.

That is false. Every baptist Church in the SBC submits to the Convention voluntarily, but the Convention does have its own rules, it owns seminaries, and, most importantly, it sets its own requirements for affiliation. This is not, for practical purposes, any different than the Catholic Church, except that in the SBC if your individual Church has more money then you get more representatives in the convention. A Catholic diocesan bishop (analogous to the SBC’s state convention) doesn’t really exercise any more practical control over an individual Catholic parish on an everyday level than does the state convention does on an individual baptist Church that joins the SBC. He does have final authority, but it is not generally exercised in terms of telling a parish church what songs they can sing on Sunday. The difference comes in how oversight is dealt out. In the Catholic Church, the bishop could tell the pastor what songs to sing if he wanted to. In the SBC, the association would simply be forced to dis-affiliate from the local congregation if it didn’t like the songs. It would not have the power to directly tell the congregation to stop singing them. It’s not hard to see why the SBC setup, then, leads to more splintering. With no one in charge, all you can do is splinter further, should you disagree. I am using the “songs” as an example that may seem trivial, but I think it demonstrates that we can certainly look at the SBC as a denomination and an independent Church as a denomination and the Catholic Church as a denomination, without any logical conflict.

 

[PJM]

=PRmerger;6235627]So what, in the end, is the “valid” number of Christian denominations?

You’re using this “flawed” “study” to tell me what is the correct statistic?

Now I’m really

Again, being “critical” of the 40,000 number just because “it sounds too high and it includes Mormons” is not sufficient grounds for dismissal, IMHO…until a better resource can be provided.

[SIGN1]I’d really like to know: if 40,000 is incorrect, what’s the correct number, and how do you know? [/SIGN1]

***According to our Lord Jesus Christ Himself; any number higher than ZERO is tooooo high:thumbsup: Mt.16:15-19 *and

Eph. 2:19 "So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, [singular] built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; [singular] in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.**

Love and prayers friends,

 

[jmcrae]

What you fail to recognize in your analysis is every Baptist Church, within their constructs, does not suggest to be governed by any “Baptist” oversight. Every Baptist church under the SBC is just as independent as a Baptist Church without the SBC.

Then what is the point of having the SBC? Is it a job retraining program for homeless people, or or some other kind of make-work, or what?

 

[SonofMonica]

Then what is the point of having the SBC? Is it a job retraining program for homeless people, or or some other kind of make-work, or what?

Well, you see theologically speaking, the Baptists are correct that each congregation is supposed to be absolutely autonomous. That’s the way God wanted it. Problem is, God completely forgot to think about the practical side of things. So since God was clearly off the day he was supposed to figure out how to build his Church, America made up his slack. They thought up the Southern Baptist Convention as a way to pool resources and accomplish the Great Commission. It took God 1800 years of twiddling his thumbs and completely failing to set up his Church on Earth, until the baptists came along and figured out a way to practically govern it, while maintaining the theological truth that congregations must be independent.

 

[Xavierlives]

That is false. Every baptist Church in the SBC submits to the Convention voluntarily, but the Convention does have its own rules, it owns seminaries, and, most importantly, it sets its own requirements for affiliation. This is not, for practical purposes, any different than the Catholic Church, except that in the SBC if your individual Church has more money then you get more representatives in the convention. A Catholic diocesan bishop (analogous to the SBC’s state convention) doesn’t really exercise any more practical control over an individual Catholic parish on an everyday level than does the state convention does on an individual baptist Church that joins the SBC. He does have final authority, but it is not generally exercised in terms of telling a parish church what songs they can sing on Sunday. The difference comes in how oversight is dealt out. In the Catholic Church, the bishop could tell the pastor what songs to sing if he wanted to. In the SBC, the association would simply be forced to dis-affiliate from the local congregation if it didn’t like the songs. It would not have the power to directly tell the congregation to stop singing them. It’s not hard to see why the SBC setup, then, leads to more splintering. With no one in charge, all you can do is splinter further, should you disagree. I am using the “songs” as an example that may seem trivial, but I think it demonstrates that we can certainly look at the SBC as a denomination and an independent Church as a denomination and the Catholic Church as a denomination, without any logical conflict.

Maybe you need to go talk to some SBC church before you make these claims, There are various and sundry reasons for being members of the SBC but they distinctly claim their independence. I have worked on writing or revising bylaws for two separate Baptist churches and while they affliate themselves (maybe even somewhat submit to certain requirements) their are defininately independent.

I wish there was a good example to even make with it. I’d say franchise, but even franchisees have less control than a Baptist Church. What they enjoy from their association is, yes, ministers from their seminaries. They enjoy a retirement and insurance. They enjoy assistance when their pastor is away from the pulpit. But no where is the day to day operations dictated from above. Furthermore, you only need to visit two Baptist churches to recognize that things are different.

 

[tweetymom]

The point is you can’t just concede numbers when they are proven wrong. No one has wanted to take a fine-tooth comb to the rest of the numbers because these have already been shown to have flaws.

Then those flaws are obscene. Your continued use of those flawed numbers is obscene.

You and the source you use want to show division. Give up your numbers. Give up your divisions. Seek unity.

Unfortuntunally some people, seem to like divisions and do not want unity. It’s usually my way or the highway. It is too bad that all of us as believers cannot look past ourselves to get along in Christ’s love.

 

[1beleevr]

Or showing him off the cross is like saying he never died for your sins.

Can you show Biblical support for creches? I’m assuming you had one on display in your home during Christmas?

Possibly. We certainly have no proof that they didn’t wear them. Or that they objected to wearing them.

If my son or daughter gave his life up for me in the supreme act of love I would certainly keep a reminder of it on my desk and look at it daily and kiss that reminder every single chance I got!

Right back at 'cha, Sir.

]

I was willing to believe that you, prmerger, were not capable of making ridiculous statements; but then you go and say," Or showing Him off the Cross, means He never died for our sins!" And I didn’t ask you if your son or daughter gave their lives for you; I asked would you keep a picture of their bloody, mangled, possibly decapitated body where you couls see itDoes not seeing an empty Cross, and an empty tomb= victory over not only sin, but death? What about the crosses that people put on roadsides, in memory of someone who was killed at that spot? I started this all by saying that I, 1beleevr, do not NEED to see a corpus on my Cross to remind me of the horror of that day. If you choose to display a crucifix, by all means do! Let’s call a truce and you carry a crucifix and I won’t!

 

[1beleevr]

***According to our Lord Jesus Christ Himself; any number higher than ZERO is tooooo high:thumbsup: Mt.16:15-19 ***and

Eph. 2:19 "So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, [singular] built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; [singular] in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

Love and prayers friends,

]

I am inclined to believe that Paul was speaking about ALL believers in Christ, when he wrote this verse in Ephesians!

 

[1beleevr]

Hey prmerger: Isn’t comparing creches and crucifixes, like comparing apples and oranges? The only parallel I can draw between the two, is one was a starting point, and the other one, the end! You should probably reread the Gospels where they speak of His body being REMOVED from the Cross, and placed in a tomb!

 

[tweetymom]

]

I am inclined to believe that Paul was speaking about ALL believers in Christ, when he wrote this verse in Ephesians!

I do believe that way and I am so thankful for all of Gods promises and He has set me free because of Jesus Christ, who came off the cross as if only for me.:clapping:

 

[fbl9]

Well I am not the one that made the qualifier. It was said that it was a “failed experiment.” So, I do not see it failed or an experiment.

As for your authority statement, I am not sure where you are going. If you could clarify it for me?

Thanks i was just trying to be a bit funny…As this thread has progressed since this post perhaps you have seen what i am trying to say…if some one disagrees they round up their supporters and head out creating a new “cell”(church) they aren’t sent out but they are free to leave and teach that which contradicts their orginal source,then they are free to turn aound and say well it’s okay for you to believe what you do and it’s fine for me to believe what i do and we are still one…which makes no sense at all.

 

[fbl9]

]

As did I from you prmerger&fbl9! But I will not say shame on you two, for because of Christ’s finished work on the Cross, there is no shame or guilt!(Romans 8:1)

the rattle of the empty can can be heard

And as far as the Cross, in scripture, it tells of Christ being taken down OFF the Cross by Nicodemus and Joseph of Arithmethea; so putting Him on crossses is like saying He was never taken off! Tell me, can you show Biblical support for crucifixes? Did the apostles wear them?

The fact still remains that Christ’s victory over sin was made on the cross not at His reserection.Although it is difficult to seperate the two,Christ’s reserection did nothing to save our souls but it is the hope of the final victory over death,which will be on the last day…Christ won our salvation with His death not His reserection, but it is also by His reserection that we can be sure of salvation.Can you show me in scripture where believers weren’t required to sell all and give it to the church?

If your son or daughter died a horrible death, and was disfigured and mangled; would you keep a picture of them on your desk, or coffee table to remind you?

yeah my parent keep a picture of my brother who died in a violent accident.

And many of us have made light of each other’s words or posts, so don’t go selfrighteous or holier than thou on me

hey you are the one who brought up how “arrogant” catholics are…i was just remeindeing you just how you are not how how you seem to think you are.

The example you gave was very weak! And I am still learning to be more humble! I don’t always see Christ in your posts, or sense humility or charity either! It’s all part of the disunity which infects the Christian community!

You call mocking a sinners return to the faith weak,man you are one beautiful peice.

 

[1beleevr]

the rattle of the empty can can be heardThe fact still remains that Christ’s victory over sin was made on the cross not at His reserection.Although it is difficult to seperate the two,Christ’s reserection did nothing to save our souls but it is the hope of the final victory over death,which will be on the last day…Christ won our salvation with His death not His reserection, but it is also by His reserection that we can be sure of salvation.Can you show me in scripture where believers weren’t required to sell all and give it to the church?yeah my parent keep a picture of my brother who died in a violent accident.hey you are the one who brought up how “arrogant” catholics are…i was just remeindeing you just how you are not how how you seem to think you are.You call mocking a sinners return to the faith weak,man you are one beautiful peice.

]

So, that’s what that sound coming from your posts was Do you remember what Christ said right before He died? Let me refresh your memory, “It is finished!” This means He had completed His work on earth; dying for our sins, and our opportunity at salvation. The resurrection was a fulfillment of prophecy, and a visual sign(first seen by Mary Magdalene) of His victory over the grave!!! Not sure what you mean by believers not being required to sell everything and give it to the church Is this picture of your brother one which porteys the violence of his death, or perhaps a more serene happy picture! Let’s face it, dude, you won’t change your mind about crucifixes, and I will NEVER wear a Cross with a corpus on it! There is no precedence for it, short of the catholics saying it was acceptable! And we are all capable of arrogance, I have just experienced more from catholics in the last year! And don’t flatter yourself; your posts are ususally rather lacking in charity!

 

[tweetymom]

]

So, that’s what that sound coming from your posts was Do you remember what Christ said right before He died? Let me refresh your memory, “It is finished!” This means He had completed His work on earth; dying for our sins, and our opportunity at salvation. The resurrection was a fulfillment of prophecy, and a visual sign(first seen by Mary Magdalene) of His victory over the grave!!! Not sure what you mean by believers not being required to sell everything and give it to the church Is this picture of your brother one which porteys the violence of his death, or perhaps a more serene happy picture! Let’s face it, dude, you won’t change your mind about crucifixes, and I will NEVER wear a Cross with a corpus on it! There is no precedence for it, short of the catholics saying it was acceptable! And we are all capable of arrogance, I have just experienced more from catholics in the last year! And don’t flatter yourself; your posts are ususally rather lacking in charity!

so true.

 

[MyRdmrLvs]

:banghead:

The 40,000 denomination is being rejected.

Based on what? Because it contains Mormons. And the number seems staggeringly high.

Ok.

So, if you reject it, what do you have to offer?

Show me the “correct” statistic and then we can discuss!

the only list that matters is the one that is made by God rather than a list made by man. A more fruitful discussion might be what it takes to be on His list. If your point is that there are too many denominations, I agree that is the general idea of a nondenominational church. We have decided that we might have some differences but we should not be divisive about it.