What is non-denominational?

[Cat]

Brian_C, is the church you mentioned no longer affiliated with the AofG? Or has it just changed its name?

Back in the 1980s, my husband and I were faithful members of a Christian and Missionary Alliance Church. This is an evangelical Protestant denomination that is 100 years old, and is still quite small in the U.S., but huge overseas. It was founded by A.B. Simpson, a Presbyterian minister who wanted to create a “missionary society” to help churches of all denominations send more missionaries to the unreached people in the world. However, Simpson’s parachurch organization turned into its own denomination! (Someone posted above that this happens, and they’re right!).

Anyway, back in the 80s, my husband and I sat through a series on “Church Growth in the C&MA.” One strong suggestion was to name the C&MA churches something other than “1st Christian and Missionary Alliance Church.”

After all, that’s quite a mouthful! And since the denomination isn’t well-known to Americans, a lot of people think it’s a cult and won’t even give it a try. “Alliance” sounds kind of culty, don’t you think? Or para-military. Seriously, the name scares people away.

So they suggested names like “Community Church” and “The Friendly Church” and “The Bible Church”, etc.

But these churches were still very much C&MA. And they don’t try to hide their denominational beliefs at all. There are statements of faith all over the place in any C&MA church, and if nothing else, you can open the hymnal and read about the C&MA. And of course, there’s online!

The huge AofG church in our city recently renamed itself “The Community.” But they are still very much AofG.

I guess I don’t ascribe any ulterior motives when people name their churches “friendly-sounding” names, other than simply trying to attract more people.

And I don’t see anything wrong with that, either. I suppose it could be money-motivated, but all of the Protestant pastors I know are more interested in winning souls to Jesus Christ than they are in getting rich. And that’s a GOOD motive for growing a great, big church!

In fact, our Catholic parish is trying very hard to attract the thousands of people who are on the membership list, but haven’t darkened the doors of the church in decades. In other words, they are trying to “grow” our church and get more bodies through the door. Is there anything wrong with that?

Of course it will mean more offering monies–nothing wrong with that! Think of all the Church could do with more money! So many food baskets for the poor! So many more youth could go to Steubenville! And maybe we could even buy a decent sound system that actually works and allows everyone, even the elderly, to hear the homily!

But the main thing is that these souls will be back with Jesus again, participating with their brothers and sisters in Holy Communion. What a wonderful thought–all of our members back home at Mass again!

Again, I think we should all assume the most charitable things about non-denominational churches rather than ascribing all kinds of non-Christian motives. I know there are nasty non-denominational churches, and certainly there are rotten apples in the basket of pastors, but I honestly think that most of them love Jesus and want to serve Him.

 

[averheyen]

Hello! Your local non-denom here!

I really can’t understand the anymosity towards non-denominational churches. If you have a question, try asking a non-denom… instead of spouting half/un-truths. I am here… hit me up!

That’s not a half truth. I spent some time as a non-denom too ya know.

No anymosity as well, these are my honest observations, I apologize if I outrightly offended.

 

[Brian_C]

Well, while I wouldn’t really agree with hiding their affiliation either, rather than merely changing it, there is now no mention of AOG on their website. There is however, mention, of the pastor’s self-named evangelistic association.

 

[St_Violet]

Non-denominationals really try hard to modernize christianity to the point where it really becomes the opposite of what Christ and the apostles intended. I left the Catholic Church for sometime and considered myself non-denominational, you begin to find out quick that non denominationals are no different then any established protestant churches, like most established protestant churches, not even non denominational churches can settle agreements with other non denominational churches. I thank GOD everyday he brought me back to the Church ,Christ established.

 

[Petergee]

This is a bit mean-spirited and quite untrue, although I know that there certainly are some nasty non-denominational fellowships around.

Impolitely direct perhaps, but it is true.

But I know personally many non-denominational pastors, and it is as I said in one of my posts above–they left a denomination

and started their own personal new denomination

simply because they wanted the freedom to shepherd their flock by themselves without interference from a denominational headquarters.

If they want to tell people that they are independent of any other statewide, nationwide or international denomination, then they should use the word “Independent” in their name, or call it “Joe Bloggs’ Church” or “Smallville Church” or whatever. If you are a separate protestant group, you are a denomination. To call one of these groups “non-denominational” is mean-spirited towards other denominations and quite untrue.

However, it is going to far to imply that these pastors and their churches are “sneaky” and trying to hide what they believe. … If you ask for a Statement of Faith, they will gladly hand you a copy. Or … make an appointment with the pastor and ask him/her to explain the beliefs of his/her church.

I didn’t say it’s impossible to find out what their beliefs are. I’m complaining about their misleading name. If a church has a sign outside using the word “Baptist” or “Catholic” or “Methodist” that gives you a pretty good idea of their beliefs and practices. “Non-denominational” is a cop-out at best.

I’ve never heard a non-denominational pastor claim that they contain the best of all the denominations. I’m sure that some do, but the statement is too broad to be applied to all non-denoms.

That’s why I put “(the best of)” in parentheses. All of them claim at least that their beliefs are compatible with all denominations.

As for reciting a Rosary or the Litany of the Saints–be fair! If you stood up in the middle of Catholic Mass and started reciting either of these worthy prayers, you would be escorted out! There’s such a thing as propriety.

I never said anything about interrupting any other service. If you recited a Rosary or a litany of the saints when nothing else was going on, you would be booted out of the so-called “non-denominational” church.

From what I’ve seen, non-denominational churches are often much more open to “different” teachings than the denoms are.

You say that like it’s a good thing.

My sponsor’s husband is still Protestant and attends a non-denominational fellowship. … the pastor invited her to give a speech in the pulpit about her experience and her testimony as a Catholic.

No doubt preceded and followed by speakers who contradicted her on numerous points. Obviously the congregation can’t believe all of them. If they want to have a “Christian Debating Society” to present various contradictory beliefs and views, then let them call it that. Because you can hardly call it a church.

Because the non-denom has no governing body, they are free to accept or reject whatever teaching they wish. So if a member should make a good case for the True Presence, there’s a possibility that it might just become part of the Statement of Faith!

Are you proposing that we should mount a campaign to expose all the “non-denominational” denominations to Catholic apologetics from their own pulpits in the hope that they embrace some more Catholic beliefs? Good luck with that.

Again, the main reason for splitting away is freedom to do your own thing in the pulpit and with various ministries, and to be able to keep all the offerings in the church

I’m sure they are the two main reasons for starting one’s own **independent **church, freedom to decide the church’s beliefs to suit yourself and wanting to keep all the money. (“Our church accepts all denominations, but our favourite is the $100 note”.) But I repeat, an independent church is not the same thing as a “non-denominational” church as you seem to think.

I think that if we are going to be evangelistic toward members of non-denominational churches, we need to be charitable in our attitudes. If we assume that their church is sneaky, or some other uncomplimentary term, we shouldn’t be surprised when they aren’t interested in hearing about Catholicism. We need to keep the doors open for dialogue.

Sure, let’s keep talking to them by all means. I just said that the name that they call themselves is sneaky, and in many cases represents an overall sneaky attitude to converting others by stealth. If a group starts out by giving a misleading description of itself, it is unlikely to be open to honest dialogue. “Non-denominational” is itself an uncomplimentary term towards other Christians, as well as being logically untrue.

 

[Cat]

Petergee, the reason they don’t often call themselves “independent” is that there already ARE established denominations called “independent.” It would be even more confusing.

Again, you have made several statements that simply aren’t true.

All of them claim at least that their beliefs are compatible with all denominations Petergee, this is not true at all! Most non-denominational pastors and teachers do just the opposite–claim that they are different than all the other denominations!

**If you are a separate protestant group, you are a denomination. To call one of these groups “non-denominational” is mean-spirited towards other denominations and quite untrue. ** Protestants understand the term “non-denominational”, and they aren’t offended by it. Honest! They understand that it is not mean-spirited or a lie. They understand that it is merely a word that means “autonomous, not affiliated with any governing Board or denominational organization.” Petergee, you are trying to create a conflict where none exists. Protestants aren’t misled by non-denoms. They know how to ferret out the true beliefs of an ecclesial body. They are TAUGHT this when they are children. (I was taught this when I was a child, and so were all of my friends in all of the evangelical churches I was part of over the years.) Perhaps Catholics just have a hard time with this concept because they are used to unity in their Church from their leaders and they don’t usually have to worry about cults or un-orthodoxy in their churches.

No doubt preceded and followed by speakers who contradicted her on numerous points. Obviously the congregation can’t believe all of them. If they want to have a “Christian Debating Society” to present various contradictory beliefs and views, then let them call it that. Because you can hardly call it a church Petergee, you just made this up! This isn’t what happened at all! Why did you do this? To prove your opinion? Well, you can’t make up facts to prove your opinions!

Are you proposing that we should mount a campaign to expose all the “non-denominational” denominations to Catholic apologetics from their own pulpits in the hope that they embrace some more Catholic beliefs? Good luck with that. No, I am proposing that we keeps the doors open for dialogue with non-denominational Christians, and look for ways to invite them to become part of the True Church of Jesus Christ. We need to EARN the right to witness to people. If we make up lies and hold untrue assumptions about their churches, they will be extremely offended and probably refuse to listen to us OR our Church!

I’m sure they are the two main reasons for starting one’s own independent church, freedom to decide the church’s beliefs to suit yourself and wanting to keep all the money. (“Our church accepts all denominations, but our favourite is the $100 note”.) Petergee, I challenge you to get to know some non-denominational pastors well, as I have known some well from childhood. Money or wealth is NOT the motive for most non-denominational pastors!! Again, you are making stuff up to prove your point.

There is absolutely nothing “sneaky” about calling a church “non-denominational” in the sense that the term is understood by Protestants. There is quite a large movement among Protestants who believe that ALL forms of man-made tradition, including “denominations”, are wrong, and contrary to what Jesus taught. Yes, as Catholics, we know that this isn’t correct at all. But to imply that there is any “deceit” going on, or that they are trying to “trick” people into joining churches or accepting a certain belief system is incorrect.

BTW, you do know that there are churches called by traditional denominational names that share little or NO beliefs in common with those denominations. An example would be the “Reformed Baptist Church.” The name “Reformed” has been a denomination since the Reformation (Calvin), and generally, Reformed churches are not simliar to Baptist Churches. This is just one example.

Did you know that there are Protestant churches named after a saint? But no Protestant that I know of would pray to a saint! So is this deceitful?

Truly, Protestant churches have been using all kinds of names for hundreds of years. How about the name “Saddleback Church?!” Dumbest name in the word (IMO), but one of the fastest-growing churches in the world.

The pastors of these non-denominational ecclesial bodies truly mean no deceit. The names they choose are just “names,” and to understand the church inside the building, you have to actually go inside the building and study what the church teaches and practices, and also get to know the pastor in a personal way.

 

[Petergee]

Petergee, the reason they don’t often call themselves “independent” is that there already ARE established denominations called “independent.” It would be even more confusing.

It doesn’t confuse me at all. “Independent” is an adjective. If a church is “independent” then by definition it is not attached to any other independent church, whther or not it has “independent” in its name. The USA is independent. Iran is independent. Does that mean that the USA is somehow linked to Iran or that people get them confused with each other? I don’t think so.

All of them claim at least that their beliefs are compatible with all denominations Petergee, this is not true at all! Most non-denominational pastors and teachers do just the opposite–claim that they are different than all the other denominations!

Again you seem to be using “non-denominational” as a synonym for “independent”. Maybe this is a common usage in the USA but I’ve never heard it before. “Non-denominational” means (purportedly) “equally open to, sponsored by, including and/or embracing people of all Christian denominations and their respective beliefs, without any discrimination between them”. A typical spiel is “People of every Christian denomination are all equally welcome and fully at home here because we’re strictly non-denominataional”.

No doubt preceded and followed by speakers who contradicted her on numerous points. Obviously the congregation can’t believe all of them. Petergee, you just made this up! This isn’t what happened at all!

Really? They never had any speakers before or after her who contradicted any Catholic beliefs or practices? Incredible. Maybe you should ease off on the rhetoric and accusations and look logically at the situation.

We need to EARN the right to witness to people.

Nonsense. All of we Catholics are freely given the right and the duty to witness to people whether they want to hear it or not.

If we make up lies and hold untrue assumptions about their churches, they will be extremely offended and probably refuse to listen to us OR our Church!

And people will get offended if you accuse them of “making up lies” because they disagree with you.

**I’m sure they are the two main reasons for starting one’s own independent church, freedom to decide the church’s beliefs to suit yourself and wanting to keep all the money. ** Petergee, I challenge you to get to know some non-denominational pastors well, as I have known some well from childhood. Money or wealth is NOT the motive for most non-denominational pastors!!

When I write “independent”, you read “non-denominational”. Please!

Again, you are making stuff up to prove your point.

What am I “making up”? I merely agreed with your point re the two main reasons why people invent new independent churches. I wasn’t trying to “prove” your own point to you.

There is absolutely nothing “sneaky” about calling a church “non-denominational” … to imply that there is any “deceit” going on, or that they are trying to “trick” people into joining churches or accepting a certain belief system is incorrect.

Your naivete is touching but dangerous. Millions of Catholics have been lured into these purportedly “non-denominational” churches. By the time (if ever) they realised that the church is actually just another protestant denomination, they were hooked.

BTW, you do know that there are churches called by traditional denominational names that share little or NO beliefs in common with those denominations. An example would be the “Reformed Baptist Church.” The name “Reformed” has been a denomination since the Reformation (Calvin), and generally, Reformed churches are not simliar to Baptist Churches. This is just one example.

No. “reformed” like “independent” is merely an adjective. Is “Reformed Jusaism” a Calvinist protestant denomination?

 

[Petergee]

Did you know that there are Protestant churches named after a saint? But no Protestant that I know of would pray to a saint! So is this deceitful?

Of course not. Praying to someone and naming a church after them are two different things. Even secular buildings are often named after admired people.

Truly, Protestant churches have been using all kinds of names for hundreds of years. How about the name “Saddleback Church?!” Dumbest name in the word (IMO), but one of the fastest-growing churches in the world.

Fine name, at least it’s distinctive. I’ve never heard of it though. When you’re growing from a tiny base it’s easy to be “fastest growing” in percentage terms.

The pastors of these non-denominational ecclesial bodies truly mean no deceit. The names they choose are just “names,” and to understand the church inside the building, you have to actually go inside the building and study what the church teaches and practices, and also get to know the pastor in a personal way.

And it’s that misleading, seemingly inoffensive and inclusive-sounding name which gets the punters inside the building in the first place so that the pastor can start working on them.

 

[Brian_C]

Petergee/Cat, please allow me my take on Cat’s last post.

Petergee, the reason they don’t often call themselves “independent” is that there already ARE established denominations called “independent.” It would be even more confusing.

…and all these churches calling themselves non-denom, each having their own beliefs, isn’t confusing?

**

Protestants understand the term “non-denominational”, and they aren’t offended by it. Honest! They understand that it is not mean-spirited or a lie. They understand that it is merely a word that means “autonomous, not affiliated with any governing Board or denominational organization.” Petergee, you are trying to create a conflict where none exists. Protestants aren’t misled by non-denoms. They know how to ferret out the true beliefs of an ecclesial body. They are TAUGHT this when they are children. (I was taught this when I was a child, and so were all of my friends in all of the evangelical churches I was part of over the years.) Perhaps Catholics just have a hard time with this concept because they are used to unity in their Church from their leaders and they don’t usually have to worry about cults or un-orthodoxy in their churches. **

What? I’m sorry but you don’t speak for all protestants. I grew up Baptist and did we feel threatened by non-denoms? Yes, we did. Anyone I knew who WASN’T a non-denom that I ever discussed the issue with thought pretty much the same thing-that non-denoms were trying to be the “you can eat all the sweets and still lose weight!” type of church. They attracted a great deal of the Christmas/Easter only crowd in my experience.

**

Are you proposing that we should mount a campaign to expose all the “non-denominational” denominations to Catholic apologetics from their own pulpits in the hope that they embrace some more Catholic beliefs? Good luck with that.

No, I am proposing that we keeps the doors open for dialogue with non-denominational Christians, and look for ways to invite them to become part of the True Church of Jesus Christ. We need to EARN the right to witness to people. If we make up lies and hold untrue assumptions about their churches, they will be extremely offended and probably refuse to listen to us OR our Church! **

Amen, we SHOULD keep a dialogue going with these folks. As for Petergee making up lies, he’s may be generalizing but I can thing of personal experiences that fit exactly what he’s talking about.

**

I’m sure they are the two main reasons for starting one’s own independent church, freedom to decide the church’s beliefs to suit yourself and wanting to keep all the money. (“Our church accepts all denominations, but our favourite is the $100 note”.)

Petergee, I challenge you to get to know some non-denominational pastors well, as I have known some well from childhood. Money or wealth is NOT the motive for most non-denominational pastors!! Again, you are making stuff up to prove your point.**

Don’t be so sure. How much money is going to go to the national convention or whatever body is always a topic of heated debate. Southern Baptists have gone on about this for years.

There is absolutely nothing “sneaky” about calling a church “non-denominational” in the sense that the term is understood by Protestants. There is quite a large movement among Protestants who believe that ALL forms of man-made tradition, including “denominations”, are wrong, and contrary to what Jesus taught. Yes, as Catholics, we know that this isn’t correct at all. But to imply that there is any “deceit” going on, or that they are trying to “trick” people into joining churches or accepting a certain belief system is incorrect.

I agree that yes, that is the misguided belief of many who are MEMBERS of non-denominational churches. But I can’t say that this is true of SOME (not all, but SOME) non-denom pastors. I know too many of them with Mercedes and Escalades. Not being mean-just stating a fact.

The pastors of these non-denominational ecclesial bodies truly mean no deceit. The names they choose are just “names,” and to understand the church inside the building, you have to actually go inside the building and study what the church teaches and practices, and also get to know the pastor in a personal way.

Again, I think you’re generalizing just as much as anyone else with this statement. Perhaps your personal experience hasn’t led you to witness any deceit…but mine has. Is deceit LIMITED to non-denoms? No.

 

[Little_Mary]

I find that many non-denoms want you to understand that they are more “spiritual” than they are “religious” as if that makes them better then everyone else.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

I find that many non-denoms want you to understand that they are more “spiritual” than they are “religious” as if that makes them better then everyone else.

Most who claim to be spiritual and not religious are simply secular. Some who really are spiritual but don’t claim any religious affiliation are truely religious and spiritual, but they don’t seem to constitute a majority.

For the most part those claiming to be spiritual and not religious and rather arrogant in my experience.

CDL

 

[Verita]

The problem is that no one can speak for all non denominational churches. They are completely independent from each other, have their own priorities, their own beliefs and ways of doing things that have nothing to do with any other church. Being “non-denomination” basically means “I refuse to be named with any other existing Christian organization. I refuse to be named at all.” (Going by the dictionary definition here.) “Non-denominational” is more a description than a name since the very meaning of the word “non denominational” is that it has no name.

It is useless to make generalized observations about
non denominational churches. Every single one is different, something like snowflakes only not as beautiful. I grew up in 2 different non denominational churches pastored by family members. In my experience, and I will only speak from my experience, I have seen non denom churches started for 2 reasons. 1, the person felt “called” to preach and did not want to be part of any
established Christian organization so started his own church. 2, within a church there was disagreement over what direction the church would go in and the losers left and started their own church so they could do what they wanted. In both cases it seems to me that the fundamental (and perhaps unconscious) issue is authority: not wanting to be told what to do by a denomination. Non denom churches basically get to do whatever the people want.

 

[Petergee]

See ancient-future.net/denom.html

Many people pride themselves in being “non-denominational.” “We don’t belong to any (fill in put-down here, such as “man-made,” “hierarchical,” etc.) denomination,” they will say. Then they insist that they joined a non-denominational church to get away from the idea of denomination, and some will even imply that by going non-denominational, they have found a holier, more exciting religious experience than available in denominations. However, in trying to escape, they have really found themselves in the same situation. Let me explain.

If you look at the basic meaning of the word denomination, you will find it simply means “designation” or “categorization.” Thus, by definition, “non” denominational would mean not designating or not categorizing. The reality is that it is very hard to avoid designation, because even the title non-denominational is itself a clear designation, designed to distinguish a church body from other groups. The same case is true if we define denomination as categorization. Many feel that by leaving a bigger Christian body they are, “breaking away from the spirit of denominationalism,” i.e. freeing themselves from categories and divisions. However, upon examination it is fairly clear that whenever a non-denominational church is started, rather than eliminating the spirit of category, a new category has simply been started. Thus, whenever a non-denominational church is started, a new category is also created, and a new denomination has been formed. With over 35,000 Christian denominations in the United States alone, one thing we do not need is another denomination, whether it be named, or whether it is a “non-denominational” denomination.

 

[KatieD]

I recently asked my Protestant brother-in-law, who attends a non-denominational megachurch, why he chose that type of church when he was looking for a church. His answer was that he wanted to avoid all the “baggage” (his word) that denominations carry. He has found, however, that the type of church he attends also has a lot of baggage.

 

[Singinbeauty]

Forgive me if you think I am spouting half or un-truths. I am merely recounting what I have seen countless times.

It wasn’t so much you but one particular person on this thread who’s distaste for my Faith is quite evident. Why it’s this person’s business is beyond me, I just pray for peace and understanding for this person…

 

[averheyen]

It wasn’t so much you but one particular person on this thread who’s distaste for my Faith is quite evident. Why it’s this person’s business is beyond me, I just pray for peace and understanding for this person…

I think he’s just trying to prove that the catholic faith is the one true faith (you are on a catholic forum btw, and catholics still, and for the most part always will officially regard Protestantism as one of the great heresy’s of the church, harsh as that sounds).

However, you’re right, humility is a virtue, and more is owed to your point of view then for swomeone to be distainfull just because you see things differently.

 

[Luke23_43]

Non demonational is just another result from sola scriptura, One man is convinced his interpretation of Scripture is truth, so he breaks off and forms a non-denominational church as a way to protray themselves as true bible readers and have the true charactiztics of christ. Some people believe that being bible reader and calling yourself a christian is enough rather then seeking Truth.

That raises a critical question - whose interpretation of the Bible is correct?

I would say nobody’s interpretation is correct. If we look at **1st Corinthians 2:13-14 **
“These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”

We cannot as men, in our own wisdom, undertand the things of God. That is why the Holy Spirit helps us interperet God’s Word.

Also in **2nd Peter 1:20-21 **
“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”

May God Bless and keep you,
Marek

Summary and some other good passages…

All Scripture is inspired of God
(2 Timothy 3:16-- “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.”);

The writers are inspired of God
(2 Peter 1:21-- “for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”);

Every letter is also inspired
(Galatians 3:16-- “Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as of many, but as of one, “And to your Seed,” who is Christ.”)

And inspiration extents to every jot and tittle
(Matthew 5:18-- “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”).

 

[Singinbeauty]

I think he’s just trying to prove that the catholic faith is the one true faith (you are on a catholic forum btw, and catholics still, and for the most part always will officially regard Protestantism as one of the great heresy’s of the church, harsh as that sounds).

Yes, I know that I am on a catholic forum BUT I am on the ‘non-catholic religion’ part of said forum. So I am in the right place to expect respect.

However, you’re right, humility is a virtue, and more is owed to your point of view then for swomeone to be distainfull just because you see things differently.

I agree.

 

[dessert]

Yes, I know that I am on a catholic forum BUT I am on the ‘non-catholic religion’ part of said forum. So I am in the right place to expect respect.

I agree.

Singin;
I have a few questions for you if you don’t mind?

Maybe you can shed some light on a few things i have wondered about.

Some protestants don’t have manger nativity scenes, what are the reasons for this?

Some don’t reenact things like the last supper or have pics of this or really teach that there were only twelve diciples they say there were more.

Why do they have altar calls after service when they have allready partook of the communion when they then are asked if they don’t know Christ but partook?

D.

 

[Singinbeauty]

Singin;
I have a few questions for you if you don’t mind?

Of course not!

Maybe you can shed some light on a few things i have wondered about.

I can try but I am not God so I don’t know the heart of everyone out there…

Some protestants don’t have manger nativity scenes, what are the reasons for this?

It may go back to the the ‘no idols’ thing. I don’t know, I have never heard of a strong aversion to this.

Some don’t reenact things like the last supper

Why is this important?

…or have pics of this or really teach that there were only twelve diciples they say there were more.

I can only speak for the church I have been to and we are taught only 12 were present.

Why do they have altar calls after service when they have allready partook of the communion when they then are asked if they don’t know Christ but partook?

D.

The church I attend makes sure to let those in the congregation know that if they don’t know or believe in Christ they shouldn’t partake in communion.

Our ‘altar call’ is not what most expect. The pastor just asks those who would like to know more about Christ to pray with him to open their hearts to God. He then lets them know that there are people in the lobby that can answer questions and pray with them. Also they are told of a class they can attend to learn more about the path they are embarking on.