Non-denoms ?? oxymoron??

[Romulus]

I am unsure of you hidden agenda here but it is quite clear that you have one.

Hi Singinbeauty, My agenda in this thread is to fully understand how a Non-denom is not or is an oxymoron.

I had to step away from this thread because it has an underlying threatening feel to it. Like I have to be careful of what I say because a bomb is ready to go off around one of these corners…

Its not my intention to have a threatening feel in this thread…sorry to hear that you got that vibe…the intention here is to understand non-denoms and ultimately the TRUTH…as we are all TRUTH seekers…and we should all help each other discover the TRUTH. Oh and we should not be afraid of posting our views/opinions and worrying about “a bomb” going off or “flaming”… We may say things we are not sure of…and someone may agree or disagree and/or correct us…and hey, that is good, we are all here to be charitable and share…

if we are all sincere TRUTH seekers…sometimes the TRUTH may hit us like a bomb and take us to a place where we don’t want to go…

A denomination, as I understand it, is a sect of Christianity. A part of the many moving parts in Christianity. It may move differently but it works for the common goal of spreading the Word of God.

Sect of Christianity…hmm…let us look it up…here is what my apple dictionary says:

DICTIONARY
sect |sekt| noun
a group of people with somewhat different religious beliefs from those of a larger group to which they belong.

THESAURUS
sect noun
cult, religious group, denomination, persuasion, religious order; splinter group, faction

Ok, so a denomination is a (sect) denomination of Christianity…hence if a church calls itself a non-denomination…then its self-refuting…its both a denomination and not a denomination…it is an oxymoron. I’m a correct here? Have I misunderstood?

I don’t have an accepted dictionary definition because I have never looked it up. I will have to get back to you on this…

I’ve listed some earlier in this thread to assist us. Let us know what you find…they may be other definitions.

Thanks for sharing Singinbeauty

peace be with you

 

[Romulus]

the fact that humans ALWAYS mess things up by interjecting their own pride when they reach a certain level of authority. Happened in the catholic church and it has happened in EVERY protestant denom.

I know this is off topic but I just have to share my thoughts here…

Yes, humans have “original sin”…sinners are in every church, no matter what sect…and yes even the Catholic Church has humans in charge who sin… But Catholics believe that the Church talked about in the New Testament scriptures is the Catholic Church, which is protected by the Advocate…the Holy Spirit…in some supernatural way in which nobody can explain…which leads it to all TRUTH…even if it has sinful humans in charge.

We are human and will never have it perfect. Doesn’t mean we can’t stop trying…

We don’t have to try…Jesus established his church…the Church, the pillar of truth talked about in the NT. There exist quite a bit of scriptural evidence and historical evidence. Here is the first time the word CHURCH is used in the NT.

Matt16: 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

If protestants out there don’t agree…we should start another thread or continue on another existing thread that tries to explain the context of the word “church” in the NT…which happens to occur 77 times.

peace be with you

 

[believers]

I know this is off topic but I just have to share my thoughts here…

Yes, humans have “original sin”…sinners are in every church, no matter what sect…and yes even the Catholic Church has humans in charge who sin… But Catholics believe that the Church talked about in the New Testament scriptures is the Catholic Church, which is protected by the Advocate…the Holy Spirit…in some supernatural way in which nobody can explain…which leads it to all TRUTH…even if it has sinful humans in charge.

We don’t have to try…Jesus established his church…the Church, the pillar of truth talked about in the NT. There exist quite a bit of scriptural evidence and historical evidence. Here is the first time the word CHURCH is used in the NT.

Matt16: 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

If protestants out there don’t agree…we should start another thread or continue on another existing thread that tries to explain the context of the word “church” in the NT…which happens to occur 77 times.

peace be with you

Does “Roman Catholic” appear before “church” in any of those instances?

I distinctly remember the Bible clearly say “church of God”, “churches of God”, and “churches of the saints”. NOWHERE does it say “Roman Catholic Church”.

 

[believers]

I have attended several non-denoms and found the same to be true of them all. So my “sweeping generalisation” is based on my experiences. From an earlier post:

An explanation: The evangelical megachurch I attended sells CD’s, DVD’s, books, t-shirts- all kinds of stuff right in the foyer outside the sanctuary. One day the preacher was talking about Matt 21, 12-14. He outright said (not prefacing that it was just his personal opinion) that Jesus did what He did because the merchants were selling BLEMISHED ANIMALS for sacrifice, and God demanded unblemished animals. What? This from a so-called Bible-believing Christian! Where is that in the scripture? It’s pretty clear Jesus was angry at the selling of anything in church; but the pastor had to somehow justify his church’s actions by distorting the Scripture he supposedly holds so dear.

I’ve attended other churches too and have yet to know what the pastor and associates disagree on. How exactly would you know this by sitting in a service?

 

[Romulus]

Does “Roman Catholic” appear before “church” in any of those instances?

I distinctly remember the Bible clearly say “church of God”, “churches of God”, and “churches of the saints”. NOWHERE does it say “Roman Catholic Church”.

Believers, we’ll have to start a new thread…maybe call it “The New Testament Church…where is it today??” Or something similar or find an existing thread on the topic. Then we’ll continue from there:thumbsup:

Let us keep this thread on whether or not a non-denom is an oxymoron or is not an oxymoron.

peace be with you

 

[jfallaw]

I’ve attended other churches too and have yet to know what the pastor and associates disagree on. How exactly would you know this by sitting in a service?

Sorry I should have clarified that I worked at the church as a maintenance man for a year, and am still involved as a youth leader. The associate pastor under whom I worked left as a result of his not being able to agree with the direction the pastor was taking the church. A couple other employees in the youth dept. left simply because they were being “silently persecuted” by other associate pastors who thought they knew better than the youth ministers how to run the youth department. The pastor is actually a great guy; he just refuses to get involved and make a stand on anything, preferring instead to let the associates handle everything. Trouble is each associate wants to be the boss! There are many other instances of office politics and power struggles that one sees when actually on staff at a church. It honestly hurts. I often envy those who just sit in the audience and have no idea what is going on behind the scenes, trust me. If I were just a Sunday Christian, then I would still be attending that church, and not the Catholic Church. But since I feel called to youth ministry, I am not content with just “sitting in the service.” I need to be a part of a church that has a semblance of order and in which I feel I can be of true service. My only experience is with Baptist and evangelical non-denoms, so I can’t say that all Protestant churches are this way. I doubt that the churches I have been involved with represent the norm. But I have come to love the Catholic church and it’s authority and order, and though I am not yet involved further, I love the fact that I am invited to “serve” at mass and not just sit in the audience.

 

[Romulus]

bump once again

I haven’t heard a good stand on why a Non-denom is not an oxymoron. Non-denom’s I need your assistance…please explain logically why a Non-denom is not an oxymoron. I read a reply earlier, but since all dictionarys don’t agree on the definition of “denomination”…its not enough…in fact, it appears that most dictionarys agree that a denomination is a “branch of christianity”. Those of you who have more definitions of “denomination” other than the ones i posted, please post, I may have missed some. But, also Singinbeauty, a non-denom, agrees that a denomination is a “sect of christianity”.

Thanks for the feedback.

peace be with you

 

[Syele]

bump once again

I haven’t heard a good stand on why a Non-denom is not an oxymoron. Non-denom’s I need your assistance…please explain logically why a Non-denom is not an oxymoron. I read a reply earlier, but since all dictionarys don’t agree on the definition of “denomination”…its not enough…in fact, it appears that most dictionarys agree that a denomination is a “branch of christianity”. Those of you who have more definitions of “denomination” other than the ones i posted, please post, I may have missed some. But, also Singinbeauty, a non-denom, agrees that a denomination is a “sect of christianity”.

Thanks for the feedback.

peace be with you

yawn This topic crops up once a month or so. I thought maybe people had figured out the answer by now.

Now if you want to know what a name of something means. Why not forget the dictionary and ask the people who named themselves what it means?

Any non-denominational person I ever knew believed that a “Denomination” is a Group of Christian churches governed by a single body of leaders. Since non-Denominational churches are independent of one another they are not governed by a central body of leaders, therefore they are not denominational. Catholics may make up whatever definitions you like, it will not change the point of the name.

Type Define: denomination into google and you get as the first answer:

a group of religious congregations having its own organization and a distinctive faith

Non-denominational churches are independent (not a group) they are not all the same organization and they do not all have a common distinctive faith. They are not denominational.

Now, the first page of responses, I believe, covered at least some of this. If you insist that all Dictionaries must agree on a definition before someone may use a word you should be bound by your own rules. In which case your vocabulary is severely hampered.

 

[JoeyWarren]

bump once again

I haven’t heard a good stand on why a Non-denom is not an oxymoron. Non-denom’s I need your assistance…please explain logically why a Non-denom is not an oxymoron. I read a reply earlier, but since all dictionarys don’t agree on the definition of “denomination”…its not enough…in fact, it appears that most dictionarys agree that a denomination is a “branch of christianity”. Those of you who have more definitions of “denomination” other than the ones i posted, please post, I may have missed some. But, also Singinbeauty, a non-denom, agrees that a denomination is a “sect of christianity”.

Thanks for the feedback.

peace be with you

You will not get an adequate response or defense.

When you peel away the fat and grisel and boil down the church down to it’s nakedness, you will find that the Pastor is the equivalent to the RCC Pope. And more times then not the Pastor is the dictator in that you believe what he teaches or you hit the highway. The Churches Elder/Deacons/Presbyters are in some instances the actual governing single body of leaders. Some are more akin to the CIA, or SS, or in some extreme cases are just like the German Nazi SS.

And that is the whole beauty of non-denominationals. If you don’t lke the particular teaching of your current non-denominational, then you have two choices, either find another non-denominational or start your own.

My dad started his own. When his youngest son became the Pastor, they joined a denomination that promised not to move the Pastor to a different church. When you boil that situation down to its nakedness, my Dad is listening to his own preaching.

 

[Bennie_P]

And that is the whole beauty of non-denominationals. If you don’t lke the particular teaching of your current non-denominational, then you have two choices, either find another non-denominational or start your own.

My dad started his own. When his youngest son became the Pastor, they joined a denomination that promised not to move the Pastor to a different church. When you boil that situation down to its nakedness, my Dad is listening to his own preaching.

This is the biggist problem with non-denominationals - no-authority in teaching nor submission to authority - which = 35,000 different churches. Who has the truth? or teaching authority? I don’t like your red tie, so I will start a church were we wear only blue ties.

Eph 4:3 - 6 Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. One body and one Spirit: as you are called in one hope of your calling. One Lord, one faith, one baptism. One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all.

 

[frnate]

Non-denoms protestants… I’ll like to know how “non-denomination” is not an oxymoron. It appears to me that it is an oxymoron…but maybe I missed something…so I’ll like to read your defense that it is not an oxymoron.

thanks for the feedback

peace be with you

Ask Matthew Gallatin, a former non-denom pastor turned Orthodox. He says there is no such thing as non-denominational churches, only multi-denominational ones.

You’ll find a vast minority of members in a so called non-denom are willing to give up the doctrines they brought with them in order to form a unified group. This is presumably because the doctrines of any given member are the un-mitigated TRUTH as taught plainly in scripture. As newly interpreted and exegeted by some Joe Calvinist.

Do I sound too negative?

Peace,
+N

 

[strngrnrth]

I’m not a member of any church but I attend a Foursquare church. I see myself as nondenom because so far I haven’t found a denomination I am sure is correct. It’s not that I want everything my own way. If I did, I would start my own church. The issue is far too serious for that. I just want to know the truth. I asked a pastor at my church (we have several) to respond to some scriptural defenses of Catholicism so I could see who was right, if either was. The pastor refused, saying I should go where they agree with me. But I said I am trying to find out what to believe, not looking for someone to agree with an opinion I already have. The pastor was very aloof about it and said the staff has no time for such debates. if a church staff can’t take time to discuss theology with an attendee, what is a church? What is it there for? I am sick inside about this.

 

[Romulus]

Type Define: denomination into google and you get as the first answer:

a group of religious congregations having its own organization and a distinctive faith

Thanks for the feedback Syele…calm down its not my intention to flame here…just looking for a logical explaination on why a non-denom is not an oxymoron…even if it comes up once or month or so…new forum members can still get great answers here. Ok…so is the definition you googled…your accepted definition?

peace be with you

 

[JoeyWarren]

I’m not a member of any church but I attend a Foursquare church. I see myself as nondenom because so far I haven’t found a denomination I am sure is correct. It’s not that I want everything my own way. If I did, I would start my own church. The issue is far too serious for that. I just want to know the truth. I asked a pastor at my church (we have several) to respond to some scriptural defenses of Catholicism so I could see who was right, if either was. The pastor refused, saying I should go where they agree with me. But I said I am trying to find out what to believe, not looking for someone to agree with an opinion I already have. The pastor was very aloof about it and said the staff has no time for such debates. if a church staff can’t take time to discuss theology with an attendee, what is a church? What is it there for? I am sick inside about this.

I am sorry for you. Does your Pastor have any Theological training? Or is he like my brother whom is a Bishop of The Church of God and does not have one iota of Theological studies? He goes strictly by the KJV.

 

[Romulus]

I’m not a member of any church but I attend a Foursquare church. I see myself as nondenom because so far I haven’t found a denomination I am sure is correct. It’s not that I want everything my own way. If I did, I would start my own church. The issue is far too serious for that. I just want to know the truth. I asked a pastor at my church (we have several) to respond to some scriptural defenses of Catholicism so I could see who was right, if either was. The pastor refused, saying I should go where they agree with me. But I said I am trying to find out what to believe, not looking for someone to agree with an opinion I already have. The pastor was very aloof about it and said the staff has no time for such debates. if a church staff can’t take time to discuss theology with an attendee, what is a church? What is it there for? I am sick inside about this.

It is awesome that you sincerely seek the truth strngrnrth. We all pray for you and each other that we all continue on our spiritual journey’s to accept the fullness of Christ’s teachings and his Church. Also, we should keep in mind, that the TRUTH may make us uncomfortable…but if we are sincere truth seekers, we should follow it.

peace be with you

 

[Syele]

Thanks for the feedback Syele…calm down its not my intention to flame here…just looking for a logical explaination on why a non-denom is not an oxymoron…even if it comes up once or month or so…new forum members can still get great answers here. Ok…so is the definition you googled…your accepted definition?

peace be with you

It is the definition I accept, the definition every Non-Denominational Christian I ever met accepted, the definition my Assembly of God Church accepts and the definition the Baptist Church my mother used to attend accepts. Not my fault if some dictionaries are vague. It is perfectly logical.

I’m glad it wasn’t your intention to flame but this topic usually becomes a way to make fun of Protestants and whine about non-denominational lack of a centralized structure. I actually think it is getting funny, no one seems to see how ridiculous it all sounds.

First, they say non-denominationals have no structure so they are their own denomination. (Note the definition of denomination makes this impossible.) Then they say, “Furthermore, they believe their Pastors are POPES!!!” (This is downright silly, Most non-denominational Pastors are seen as teachers and in no way capable of declaring anything infallibly.)

They follow this argument with a rant about 35,000 denominations (a Quote from Barrett, conveniently forgetting that the same man says there are over 2k Catholic “Denominations”.) If anyone should dare point out the problems inherent in using that figure they open themselves up to a whole bunch of Catholics going on and on about non-denominational lack Church authority. (Note, this is the same people who just said that non-denominationals each have their own pope!)

Seriously people, If you want to debate Authority in the church, try a thread like “There should be Authority in the Church!” and then discuss why you think Protestants don’t have enough. You could even get aggressive and ask why we don’t think we are rebellious by rejecting authority. I can think of a hundred arguments that you could present that would provoke a thoughtful discussion. Instead we go through this circle once a month.

Stop regurgitating the same old tired phrases and try for some original thought on the matter.

 

[Romulus]

Type Define: denomination into google and you get as the first answer:

a group of religious congregations having its own organization and a distinctive faith

Non-denominational churches are independent (not a group) they are not all the same organization and they do not all have a common distinctive faith. They are not denominational.

Syele, yes I read it before by another forumer who listed it earlier in this thread…it comes to a “well my dictionary says this” argument…then we need to ask ourselves, which is the TRUE definition? Not the definition that supports our personal viewpoint so we can reprove each other…the definition that is TRUE…we may have to look for the origin, historical derivation and definitions of the word “denomination”.

Also, it appears that this thread can be finalized if we determine what exactly is the CHURCH that the NT talks about…what was it? where is it now? And yes, that is another thread…but once we all fully understand the what is the CHURCH of the NT…this thread maybe finished…

In fact, we should look for that thread…“Jesus’ Church, the NT Church…where is it today?”. If this thread doesn’t exist, then we should start it…so we may all search for the TRUTH.

peace be with you

 

[Syele]

Syele, yes I read it before by another forumer who listed it earlier in this thread…it comes to a “well my dictionary says this” argument…then we need to ask ourselves, which is the TRUE definition? Not the definition that supports our personal viewpoint so we can reprove each other…the definition that is TRUE…we may have to look for the origin, historical derivation and definitions of the word “denomination”.

in other words you reject the meaning that millions of people agree on caue the dictionary is vague. In tht case let’s look up it’s word origins.

denomination etymonline.com/graphics/dictionary.gif1398, “a naming,” from L. denominationem (nom. denominatio) “a calling by anything other than the proper name, metonymy,” from denominare “to name,” from de- “completely” + nominare “to name.” Monetary sense is 1660; meaning “religious sect” is 1716.

Well if you insist on reducing it to what it meant in 1716. and ignore its current meaning, then don’t go claiming Catholics are not a denomination. they are a religious sect and they do have a name.

remember, English is an evolving language. It changes over time. The way we speak today is vastly different than it was in 1716. I simply don’t buy your argument that one cannot use a term in a way different than it’s original meaning.

Also, it appears that this thread can be finalized if we determine what exactly is the CHURCH that the NT talks about…what was it? where is it now? And yes, that is another thread…but once we all fully understand the what is the CHURCH of the NT…this thread maybe finished…

Good luck on that. I doubt you can make that point just by claiming non-denominational is an oxymoron. Sounds like an entirely different thread to me.

 

[Contarini]

bump once again

I haven’t heard a good stand on why a Non-denom is not an oxymoron. Non-denom’s I need your assistance…please explain logically why a Non-denom is not an oxymoron. I read a reply earlier, but since all dictionarys don’t agree on the definition of “denomination”…its not enough…in fact, it appears that most dictionarys agree that a denomination is a “branch of christianity”.

Syele is right–who cares what the dictionaries say? You admit they don’t agree. You need to pay attention to what the people who actually use the term mean by it. Dictionaries are good starting points, but when it comes to religious terminology they are not the last word. You have to look at how the word is actually used. Instead of trying to prove that “non-denominational” is an oxymoron, you should be asking “what is the sense of ‘denomination’” that you reject? Sometimes, as in the claim of many evangelicals not to be “religious” or in the claim of many free church folks not to be Protestants, you find that in fact they are using language to obfuscate and reshape reality. But in this case they generally have a clear, defensible definition of denomination–an organization that supervises and has authority over a number of local churches. Many people, particularly scholars who study American religion, would clarify that a “denomination” is a kind of organization that flourishes primarily in societies with a “free religious economy.” In this even narrower definition, a state church would not be a denomination, because it aspires in some sense to embrace all the Christians in a particular nation, and a denomination (as defined by many scholars) is a voluntary association that that does not aspire to be more than one part of a broader religious spectrum.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[GregoryPalamas]

Catholics are above this nonsense. Denominations are factions. Non-denominations are factions that pretend they aren’t factions.

CDL