What is non Denominational

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

“Non-denominational” is how you can call yourself vaguely Christian without being a member of a Church that has any authority over you.

I don’t think so, its more of just a way for Baptists and Presbyterians and pentecostals to be able to get together on a collective basis.

You think so?

In most of my dealings, those labels and beliefs have to be shed and/or eroded in order to generate the sense of community that they’re going for.

In short, admission to the group COSTS part of your identity as a Baptist or Presbyterian or Pentecostal.

The obvious exception is generally the guys (and maybe a few gals) at the top. There’s usually a very clear denomination association there, it’s just not publicly named. As an example, everyone knows that the super-popular nondenom in my area is Baptist. All the ministers went to Baptist seminaries and they only hire the like on as staff. So, take that as you wish.

But don’t call them Baptist!

 

[TC3033]

TC3033:

I feel they’re far more than vaguely Christians. I wouldn’t consider myself a “vague Christian”. Some of the strongest, most “God Fearing” Christians I’ve ever met were non-denominational.

Hey! I’m not going to fight you there!

Most of the nondenoms I know personally are pretty pumped about it.

It just gets a little tricky when “Getting JACKED for Jesus!” stops an actual question comes up. Like:
“Can I be an actively gay Christian?”
“I’m divorced. Can I remarry?”
“How, exactly, does one get saved?”
“Am I saved for good or can I lose my salvation”.

The trouble is that nondenoms can’t answer any of these with any real authority. The best nondenom pastors have is “This is what I think the Bible says”, even though they typically drop the “I think” from the presentation.
No surprise, it’s a different explanation from what the other nondenom three blocks down would have given.

But you’re totally right about their zeal and “being ‘on fire’ for the Lord”. But, in truth, I’ve seen identical, self-sure group mania in religious services of all stripes - not just Christian. Which is exactly why it is completely and utterly worthless as a measure of truth. …as much as that pains to say…

Since nondenom Christians are there purely because they choose to be and they find the message appeals to them, I really do think that fact makes much nondenom Christianity a form of emotionally fueled, projected self worship in a group setting. YVVM, obviously

Why are you using this “catch phrase” type vocabulary? It’s almost as if you’re stereotyping.

That last think I would think of my Grandmother, God rest her soul and the most God fearing person I’ve ever met, is that she was “Jacked” or “on fire”…or whatever catch phrase you want to throw.

She is the most genuine, reverent CHRISTIAN I’ve ever met, and I know of many more like her in the church.

Honestly, it sounds like, to me anyway, that you’re taking these TV churches (like Joel Osteen’s) and projecting that “since I seen it on TV it must be the way they all are”, much the same way that I as a non-Catholic, am not welcome in my wife’s parish , I figured that’s the way they all were.

I honestly feel sorry for you, that you can call another Christian’s form of worship “emotionally fueled” and “self worship”. Or that you even paint all that identify in this way.

 

[Vonsalza]

Why are you using this “catch phrase” type vocabulary? It’s almost as if you’re stereotyping.

Most of these nondenoms, certainly the most successful ones, are built on being highly marketable. Catch-phrasing is actually commonly used in “selling” the latest sermon series they’re working on.

As such, it’s completely appropriate as representation.

That last think I would think of my Grandmother… She is the most genuine, reverent CHRISTIAN I’ve ever met…

I’m not doubting that at all. Separated brethren (and, I guess, “sistern”) can absolutely have genuine belief. And it’s not limited to Christians. Some of the most zealous proselytizing I’ve ever seen was done by a young Muslim man. You could see the fire in his eyes!

Which, again, is why sincerity is not a marker for truth.

Honestly, it sounds like, to me anyway, that you’re taking these TV churches (like Joel Osteen’s) and projecting that “since I seen it on TV it must be the way they all are”, much the same way that I as a non-Catholic, am not welcome in my wife’s parish , I figured that’s the way they all were.

Nossir. I obtain my data first hand. I’m a pretty ecumenical fellow and I participate in all the dialogue I can. Most of the protestant pastors in my area know me. A few know me well.

Additionally, I grew up Baptist; specifically second-wave evangelical Independent Baptist that paid dues to the SBC for seminary discounts. I’ve seen - and participated - in quite a bit of this kind of stuff firsthand before I finally swam the Tiber.

And if the Catholics at your wife’s parish aren’t polite to you, then shame on them!

I honestly feel sorry for you, that you can call another Christian’s form of worship “emotionally fueled” and “self worship”. Or that you even paint all that identify in this way.

I know that’s painful to admit, and I hate to be the guy to “red pill” you on the issue. But it’s true.

Nondenom Christians, by and large, choose a congregation that doesn’t challenge deeply held views (whether rightly or wrongly) and has some sort of appeal - generally to pathos as opposed to ethos or logos.

Genuinely, sorry to be the one to tell ya fella.

 

[TC3033]

TC3033:

Why are you using this “catch phrase” type vocabulary? It’s almost as if you’re stereotyping.

Most of these nondenoms, certainly the most successful ones, are built on being highly marketable. Catch-phrasing is actually commonly used in “selling” the latest sermon series they’re working on.

As such, it’s completely appropriate as representation.

That last think I would think of my Grandmother… She is the most genuine, reverent CHRISTIAN I’ve ever met…

I’m not doubting that at all. Separated brethren (and, I guess, “sistern”) can absolutely have genuine belief. And it’s not limited to Christians. Some of the most zealous proselytizing I’ve ever seen was done by a young Muslim man. You could see the fire in his eyes!

Which, again, is why sincerity is not a marker for truth.

Honestly, it sounds like, to me anyway, that you’re taking these TV churches (like Joel Osteen’s) and projecting that “since I seen it on TV it must be the way they all are”, much the same way that I as a non-Catholic, am not welcome in my wife’s parish , I figured that’s the way they all were.

Nossir. I obtain my data first hand. I’m a pretty ecumenical fellow and I participate in all the dialogue I can. Most of the protestant pastors in my area know me. A few know me well.

Additionally, I grew up Baptist; specifically second-wave evangelical Independent Baptist that paid dues to the SBC for seminary discounts. I’ve seen - and participated - in quite a bit of this kind of stuff firsthand before I finally swam the Tiber.

And if the Catholics at your wife’s parish aren’t polite to you, then shame on them!

I honestly feel sorry for you, that you can call another Christian’s form of worship “emotionally fueled” and “self worship”. Or that you even paint all that identify in this way.

I know that’s painful to admit, and I hate to be the guy to “red pill” you on the issue. But it’s true.

Nondenom Christians, by and large, choose a congregation that doesn’t challenge deeply held views (whether rightly or wrongly) and has some sort of appeal - generally to pathos as opposed to ethos or logos.

Genuinely, sorry to be the one to tell ya fella.

And…we move to passive aggressiveness. So, I guess we’re done.

Sorry, I don’t accept your opinion as fact, so I don’t see it as a red pill of the sort.

 

[CatholicSpirit]

Non denominational is like wearing a t-shirt that says, “I went from atheist to believing in Jesus Christ.” It is a make-it-up-as-you-go religious denomination.

You can be a polygamous nationalist with a severe weight problem that drops pixie dust on people and still be non-denominational. The next step is Evangelical if you start divorcing until there is one wife left or baptist if you lose the weight.

 

[TC3033]

Non denominational is like wearing a t-shirt that says, “I went from atheist to believing in Jesus Christ.” It is a make-it-up-as-you-go religious denomination.

You can be a polygamous nationalist with a severe weight problem that drops pixie dust on people and still be non-denominational. The next step is Evangelical if you start divorcing until there is one wife left or baptist if you lose the weight.

 

[CatholicSpirit]

Dude, I am laughing so hard right now omfgoodness, I thought nobody would read that hahahahaha

 

[Vonsalza]

And…we move to passive aggressiveness. So, I guess we’re done.

I’m not being passive aggressive at all and I’m sorry you feel that way.

Sorry, I don’t accept your opinion as fact, so I don’t see it as a red pill of the sort.

Thanks for your time!

 

[TC3033]

The below is quite passive aggressive.

Genuinely, sorry to be the one to tell ya fella.

Thanks for your time as well!

 

[Reuben_J]

I feel they’re far more than vaguely Christians. I wouldn’t consider myself a “vague Christian”. Some of the strongest, most “God Fearing” Christians I’ve ever met were non-denominational.

How can you would be the most God Fearing Christian if you do not attend the Holy Mass? A God fearing Christian should be in fear of the Lord and would be willing to do His command for fear of not loving and obedient to Him. He fears to losing the loving presence of the Lord.

 

[Genesis315]

It’s funny, in my experience most “non-denomiational” churches are basically baptist, they just don’t call themselves that (it seems others in the thread have the same experiences).

 

[Augustinian]

It’s funny, in my experience most “non-denomiational” churches are basically baptist, they just don’t call themselves that (it seems others in the thread have the same experiences).

That’s probably most true in parts of the country that are dominated by baptists. In other areas of the country which were settled more by Lutherans or Presbyterians, you might have a different observation

 

[twf]

I think a lot of non-denominational churches are essentially some form of Pentecostalism.

 

[Genesis315]

Maybe. Non-denominationalism is generally an attempt at “pure” bible Christianity, unhindered by historical demonational baggage and traditions. But this also means they eschew things like liturgy. In any event, I don’t think most non-denoms are vaguely religious, as some have suggested. The people going for this are usually pretty devoted.

 

[TC3033]

No…not really. At least non that I’ve been in, or experienced.

 

[twf]

Some of them are pretty charismatic and definitely promote prosperity gospel.

 

[TC3033]

I’ll go with: Because we’re not Catholic and don’t believe that one needs to be Catholic a good Christian.

By that logic, my CEO Catholic in-laws are better Christians (in your book) than my family who religiously attends church every Sunday. That just something I don’t, or won’t, buy into.

 

[TC3033]

Ya, that’s totally fair.

There are some that are Wayyyyy out in right field.

 

[Reuben_J]

Jesus commands us to go to the mass (the Eucharist). If you are a God fearing Christian, you would follow his command, wouldn’t you?

I don’t know how he/she can be God fearing if he/she does not obey Jesus command. In fact, he/she will follow everything that Jesus commands us to do as we possibly can.

But of course, you are entitled to your opinion. I was just saying.

 

[TC3033]

You’re obviously welcome to your opinion as well.

Thanks!