What is with "non-denominational Christians"?

[mango_2003]

Catholic4aReasn:

*there is a hell

*there isn’t a hell

Very few groups don’t believe in a hell…most of the only groups I’ve ever heard say this aren’t Christian.

*Jesus is God

*Jesus isn’t God

*There is no trinity
*There is a trinity

*Jesus is Father, Son and holy Spirit
*Jesus is God the Son only

Simple…you don’t believe in the Jesus of the Bible…you aren’t Christian. Simple as that. By what authority??? The Bible. The doctrine of the Trinity is clear.

*Salvation can be lost

*Salvation can’t be lost

*Salvation is assured
*Salvation isn’t assured

While this is a somewhat important topic…it has little to do with the idea of being saved. All Christians will agree that we are saved through the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. God isn’t going to deny salvation if you do/don’t believe in OSAS.

*Baptism is necessary for salvation

*Baptism isn’t necessary for salvation

It’s sad to me that anyone would think it is necessary when so many verses point otherwise. This, unfortunately, is an important issue.

*Speaking in tongues is Satanic

*Speaking in tongues is necessary as evidence of salvation
*Speaking in tongues is not necessary as evidence of salvation

There are no Christian groups that teach that tounges is necessary for salvation. I have no idea what groups say that it is Satanic…never heard of that before. What is interesting is that if you read 1 Cor. 12 and 14…it seems that Paul thinks that it is an important gift…not more important than any other spiritual gift…but he makes it clear throughout 1 Cor. that all parts of the Body of Christ should work together, and all be used… Why is it that so few RC’s know much about tounges?

These divisions don’t seem “not so bad” to me, in fact, they seem pretty important. Why do non-Catholics consider divisions such as these acceptable within the Body of Christ, a body that is to be perfectly one as Jesus and the Father are one

(John 17:21-23)? Do Jesus and the Father disagree on doctrine? No. Nor can the Body of Christ, according to scripture.

Yes…but even within the RC there are disagreements. It seems that every RC that I have met thinks that that RCC teaches something different. If the RCC alone is the Body of Christ…then why all the discrepensies??

Also…check that verse out again (and the one before it)…it doesn’t say that they ARE one…it says that He wants us to be one…which hopefully will happen…someday.

Peace and love,

~mango~

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

flameburns623:

Most Protestants give some thought to this matter in their Articles of Faith, Confessions, or other statements of faith. Some general agreement exists that the Apostle’s Creed, Nicene Creed, and Athanasian Creed define a rock-bottom minimum of Christian belief. Protestants have little trouble in distinguishing between ‘Christian’ denominations and cults or heresies: the hard-shell Baptist recognizes the Methodist, the Church of Christer, the Presbyterian, and sometimes even the Roman Catholic as brother Christians. (That’s not a personal jab at Catholics: some real debate exists among sectarian fundamentalists about whether the Roman Catholic Church is a real Christian denomination or if it is a hodge-podge of pagan religions and heresies disguised as Christianity. I’m using a sectarian Baptist in my example and don’t want to overly generalize ‘his’ ecumenism), He rejects the Mormon, the Jehovah’s Witness, the Unity Schooler and the Unitarian as heretics. “Authority” is an issue for Roman Catholics and Mormons: it’s a non-starter for Protestants.

One of the great flaws of the contemporary non-denominational church movement has been noted elsewhere in this thread: whereas the denominational movements steeped their membership in sectarian theology, the contemporary groups tend to do ‘Christianity-lite’: a feel-good/do-good sort blend of Bible verses, praise songs, and pop psychology which the proponents of such movements HOPE will expose masses of unchurched folk to enough of the Gospel to make them hunger for more. My experience is that even if they do, the non-denoms hardly ever do anything to offer them the substance that the ‘user-friendly/seeker-sensitive’ services lack.

OK, but that didn’t answer my questions. I’ll repost them.

*Where does scripture indicate which doctrinal issues are “core” and which are “peripheral”?

If not in scripture, who is it who gets to decide which doctrinal issues are “core” and which are “peripheral”? By what authority does this person do so?

In Christ,
Nancy *

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

flameburns623:

One doesn’t exegete Scripture using ‘parallels’. You really could make Scripture ‘say anything’ by such a principle.

Does Scripture tells us how one IS to exegete Scripture? If so, where? If not, who is deciding how one is or is not to exegete Scripture?

BTW, parallels CAN effectively be used in identifying types in Scripture. The ones concerning Mary as the ark of the New Covenant are very clear.

The principles for exegeting Scripture can be found by example and usage within Scripture. They have been hammered out and are being hammered out by theologians, not all of those theologians Protestants.

That’s pretty vague and doesn’t address the questions I asked. Can you be more specific?

There aren’t ‘many’. There are some. Because Protestants do not reserve theology to ‘professionals’, our theological debates are hammered out publicly. Catholics also have theological issues which they are continually juggling. Mostly in Latin.

Call it what you will. Even one contradictory interpretation is one too many. God does not give contradictory interpretations of his word.

I wasn’t speaking of “theological issues” but specifically about conflicting and contradictory interpretations of scripture. The Church does not hold, as true, one single contradictory interpretation of scripture.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

mango_2003:
Very few groups don’t believe in a hell…most of the only groups I’ve ever heard say this aren’t Christian.

Simple…you don’t believe in the Jesus of the Bible…you aren’t Christian. Simple as that. By what authority??? The Bible. The doctrine of the Trinity is clear.

While this is a somewhat important topic…it has little to do with the idea of being saved. All Christians will agree that we are saved through the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. God isn’t going to deny salvation if you do/don’t believe in OSAS.

It’s sad to me that anyone would think it is necessary when so many verses point otherwise. This, unfortunately, is an important issue.

There are no Christian groups that teach that tounges is necessary for salvation. I have no idea what groups say that it is Satanic…never heard of that before. What is interesting is that if you read 1 Cor. 12 and 14…it seems that Paul thinks that it is an important gift…not more important than any other spiritual gift…but he makes it clear throughout 1 Cor. that all parts of the Body of Christ should work together, and all be used… Why is it that so few RC’s know much about tounges?

Ya know, it’s interesting. Whenever and wherever I post my list of contradictions held within Protestantism someone always misses the point and begins to defend/criticize particular items on the list.

Yes…but even within the RC there are disagreements. It seems that every RC that I have met thinks that that RCC teaches something different. If the RCC alone is the Body of Christ…then why all the discrepensies??

There is only ONE truth espoused by the Church. Individual Catholics may stray from that truth, but that ONE truth remains. Protestantism, on the other hand, espouses dozens of conflicting and contradictory truths. I’m not talking about the individual beliefs of indivdual Protestants, individuals can and do stray from the truth. I’m referring to the “official” truths espoused by the different Protestant churches, not to mention the countless non-denominational churches; EACH claiming to be the only one that is clearly taught in scripture, EACH teacher of each conflicing and contradictory truth claiming to be lead to this truth by the holy Spirit. The problem is that the holy Spirit does not give contradictory interpretations of his word.

Also…check that verse out again (and the one before it)…it doesn’t say that they ARE one…it says that He wants us to be one…which hopefully will happen…someday.

That passage doesn’t say merely that Jesus wants us to be one and that hopefully someday that would happen. He prayed for his disciples and for those who would come to believe through their WORD…through what they preached. And through what they preached those who would come to believe would be perfectly one as Jesus and the Father are one. And this unity is to be so obvious that the world will know that Jesus was sent by the Father. In order for the preaching of the disciples to bring about this perfect oneness among believers they HAD to preach IDENTICAL doctrine, NO contradictions, because no contradictions exist between Jesus and the Father.

This was WAY more than wishful thinking on Jesus’ part.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[boppysbud]

Sorry to have arrived at this discussion so late, when the topic seems to have moved on. I am going to adress the original topic of this thread.

There is no such thing as “non-denominational”.

To be truly “non-denominational” the non-denomination would have to be free of doctrine.

As we have seen the “non-denominationalists” beleive in Bible Only (sola scriptura) which is a sectarian Protestant doctrine.

They also believe in “Gettin’ Saved”, which is an Evangelical Protestant denominational teaching.

In fact every single “non-denominational” denomination that I have experience with (even if the are denominations of one congregation) is either Baptist or Pentecostal/Charismatic in nature, doctrine, and worship practices. Last I heard Baptist and Pentecostal/Charismatic were denominations.

Has anyone here ever heard of a “non-denominational” church having liturgical services or baptising babies? Why not? Because they are really Baptist or P/C going under “non-denominational” names on the sign in front of their churches, once you get inside you learn quickly that their worship is non-liturgical, and the teaching is either Baptist or Pentecostal/Charismatic.

 

[boppysbud]

One other thing, the practice of “non-denominational” fundamentalist Christians of labeling their Schools, bookstores, and media outlets as just “Christian” and nothing else.

This practice really bothers me since it implies that no-one but the “non-denominational” fundamentalists are Christian at all and it seems to me that these folk think they are the only Christians to exist.

We have Catholic Christian schools, bookstores, and media outlets as well, we just call them Catholic, because we know (unlike the fundies) that we are not the only Christians to exist.

 

[La_Chiara]

boppysbud:

One other thing, the practice of “non-denominational” fundamentalist Christians of labeling their Schools, bookstores, and media outlets as just “Christian” and nothing else.

This practice really bothers me since it implies that no-one but the “non-denominational” fundamentalists are Christian at all and it seems to me that these folk think they are the only Christians to exist.

We have Catholic Christian schools, bookstores, and media outlets as well, we just call them Catholic, because we know (unlike the fundies) that we are not the only Christians to exist.

My thoughts exactly! And you are from Texas where there are a lot more of these practices than we have up here in Yankee land. Thanks for weighing in!

 

[dream_wanderer]

Catholic4aReasn:

Ya know, it’s interesting. Whenever and wherever I post my list of contradictions held within Protestantism someone always misses the point and begins to defend/criticize particular items on the list.

And if we were to give that same list to another group of Protestants…they would start defending doctrines the first group said were not Biblical.



dream wanderer

 

[Matt16_18]

SavedByHim:

In my experience, many of the parishioners of this church want to be pastors “when they grow up”. (I have 4 in my family alone that have become pastors or who are in school to become a pastor and they all went to the same church.) Many of their friends are also going to school to be a pastor. So, anyways, all these people go off to school, become a pastor and start their own church.

Well, how can they just “start their own church”? Is it really a held belief that you can go rent a building, renovate it and start a church?

Good observations. Protestants gernerally don’t recognize any authority as binding other than their own private interpretations of the Bible. All it takes is a little education and a big ego, and you have all the authority that you need to found a new church.

One of the fires that is fueling the non-denominational church craze among the Protestants is the fact that Protestant colleges and seminaries churn out more “pastors” than there are positions available for these new graduates. Way more – and now they are pumping out scads of women pastors too.

If a new grad is going to be tied to a particular denomination, he or she has vastly narrowed down the possibilities of ever finding a paying job as a pastor. The ambitious among the new grads aren’t that interested in being underpaid associate pastors, and waiting around for the next thirty years for the pastor to retire so that they can get a shot at being a pastor when they are fifty. This is America, the land of the entrepreneur, and the go-getter! The ambitious see a golden opportunity in starting up a non-denominational church. The non-denoms can draw members from the thousands of different Protestant denominations, and that gives the non-denom pastor wannabe a huge advantage over the “pastor” in search of a flock that has limited his options to a paying position in the Reformed Zion Union Apostolic Church or the Church of God of the Mountain Assembly.

If a non denominational pastor can get 100 people from various denominations to join his new Church and tithe 10% of their income, the pastor will have a cash flow that is ten times greater than the average income of those doing the tithing. That is usually enough to pay a decent salary with enough left over to use for operating expenses of the newly founded non-denominational church.

The phenomena that I see occuring all over the USA is that of the associate pastor (or pastor or deacon) in a little denominational church that has some experience under his belt. He finally realizes that unless he founds his own non-denom Church, he will never be able to have a decent income because of limited opportunities in the established denoms.

There is an opportunity knocking for an ambitious Protestant to follow the corporate model. Begin selling franchises for non-denominational Christian Bible Churches (like L. Ron Hubbard did for $cientology) . The McChurch Corp. ®™ could sell song books, pulpit bibles, bible study guides (guaranteed to contain only the “core” doctrines of Protestantism), fellowship programs, newletters, etc. to the franchisees of the Nondenominational Christian Bible Church, Incorporated. A multi billion McChurch Corporation would have economies of scale that are out of reach for the small mom and pop non denoms, and they could ruthlessly eliminate all competition – just like WalMart has done in the retail business in small towns.

 

[JGC]

mango_2003:

I would, however, consider myself to lean toward Protestant theology and toward Roman Catholic worship.

~mango~

Broad church Anglicanism for you then!

I would try High Church which would sate your appetite for Catholic worship… however look where that got me…

 

[Matt16_18]

Catholic4aReasn:

Where does scripture indicate which doctrinal issues are “core” and which are “peripheral”?

If not in scripture, who is it who gets to decide which doctrinal issues are “core” and which are “peripheral”? By what authority does this person do so?

In Christ,
Nancy

The McChurch Corporation would decide which doctrines are “core”. Corportations already own all the major news media, and the McChurch Corporation would just follow the existing model. The Fox Channel Corporation tells us that the news is what they decide it is, and they have millions of people that have accepted that idea.

The McChurch Corporation could hire some Disney executives and engage in endless advertising and marketing that would sell the idea that they are the standard for wholesome family oriented theology. Nixon hired a bunch of Disney executives and they were to successfully market him as a law and order Republican out to preserve the American way of life. Marketing the Family Christian Values of the McChurch Corporation should be a piece of cake for Madison Avenue.

 

[La_Chiara]

Geez, Matt, thanks for the colorful synopsis. You basically confirmed much of what I had observed from a distance.

I have a question about tithing in non-denominational churches. How do they enforce tithing? How does a church truly know that the member is really giving 10 percent of his income? Or is that not important? It seems to me that part of the church-hopping and the family worship trends must be related to Protestant Christians not wanting to financially support a church. (Which is not to say Catholics are any better. Catholics will go to Mass regularly and toss $1 in the collection basket!)

 

[Matt16_18]

La Chiara:

I have a question about tithing in non-denominational churches. How do they enforce tithing? How does a church truly know that the member is really giving 10 percent of his income?

Non-denom pastors understand that without the tithe they don’t get paid. So they relentless preach that tithing is a commandment that Christians are obligated to observe to be pleasing to God. Non-denoms want commitments from their members, and they are not shy about asking for that commitment. The successful non-denoms give their members a sense of having a mission in life, and members are encouraged to find out active ministry to be involved in. An important mission that all members share is bringing in new members into the church, and all members get trained in that mission.

It seems to me that part of the church-hopping and the family worship trends must be related to Protestant Christians not wanting to financially support a church.

True story. I belong to a Catholic prayer group rents out conference halls for teaching seminars, Marian Conferences, etc. One time we were using a room in a large city owned conference center that had a Protestant church that met at the center because they did not yet have a building of their own. When we got their to set up for our conference, the security guards for the center were all upset when at what had just happened. It seems that the Protestants took up a collection and it was over a million dollars. They had to call in an armored truck to take the collection out of the conference center. The security guards were upset because they are low paid, unarmed rent-a-cops, and they didn’t like being put in the position of having to provide security for that much money.

Our Catholic prayer group is constantly struggling to get enough money together to pay our expenses. The Protestant church that was meeting in the conference center with the million dollar collection has a very high percentage of its members that are young families that are ex-Catholics. In fact, exCatholics are the largest group in that Protesant Church.

 

[CD4]

**Matt…I really think your sarcasm is misplaced…While you have made a couple of possibly good points, you have painted a rather…dare I say the word…uncharitable picture. **

**You have forgottent that most non-denominational ministers have not entered them ministry to satisfy a big ego…They, like Cathoic priests, feel “called” to their vocation. I have known many such ministers, and all have been sincere in their desire to serve the Lord. **

Non-denominational Protestand churches, particulary the Evangelical ones, are flourishing because many mainline Protestants are fed up with the liberalism and hypocrisy to be found in the mainline denominations…most of which turn a blind eye to abortion, and other moral issues…

**As for Catholics who become members of Evangelical churches…They have usually beeen hurt in some way by the Catholic Church, and are happy to find a place that welcomes them with open arms. These churches are very welcoming, warm and servant oriented. This does not mean that their theology is correct, or that they will satisfy in the long run, but it is why Catholics are drawn to them. **

**I sometimes attend such a church with my husband…It is large, and very friendly…But, the longer I go there with E., the more Catholic I become…My Catholic faith is strengthened everytime I hear someting I know isn’t “right”. And, I take every opportunity to witness to my Catholic faith. **

These people are not the enemy…They are loveing, sincere Christians…We must look to ourselves to keep our people…and perhaps take a look at some of the things Evangelical chuches are doing to attract memebers. We know we have the fullness of faith…We need to learn how to draw people to that fullness, and keep them there!

 

[Matt16_18]

CD4:

Matt…I really think your sarcasm is misplaced…

Of course I am being sarcastic. I understand that many nondenom ministers are sincere. I also am not naïve about the dynamics that are generating the non-denominational church craze among the Protestants. I agree with all the things you have said about why Protestants are flocking to the nondenoms. But no matter what nice things we can say about the nondenoms, these ecclesial communities are separated physically and spiritually from Church that Christ founded – they are all merely institutions that men have founded. No one that is in a nondenominational churches is doing what God wills for them. The members of the nondenoms may be sincere, they may be doing some good things, but God does not want any human to be outside of the true church.

Catholics do indeed need to learn from the nondenoms. If ex-Catholics can commit to a nondenom and help raise a million dollars in a single collection, Catholics can make the same commitment to their parish.

The ex-Protestants that are coming into the Catholic Church are a great blessing. If we could get our clergy to listen to the ex-Protestants, we could all learn some lessons how to build up a committed community of believers.

 

[bengal_fan]

mango_2003:
There are no Christian groups that teach that tounges is necessary for salvation. I have no idea what groups say that it is Satanic…never heard of that before. What is interesting is that if you read 1 Cor. 12 and 14…it seems that Paul thinks that it is an important gift…not more important than any other spiritual gift…but he makes it clear throughout 1 Cor. that all parts of the Body of Christ should work together, and all be used

most assembly of God churches believe (and teach) that tongues are necessary for salvation (“if you don’t speak in tongues, you must not have the Spirit and are, therefore, not saved”). the mainstream Church of Christ teaches that all miraculous spiritual gifts died out with the death of the last apostle and therefore, anyone who practices them is either faking, or practicing them by the power of satan. so in both circumstances there are christian denominations who think and do these things

 

[Salvo]

LA CHIARA,

The whole “non-Denominational” thing springs from this whole “have it your way” culture of the US. In other words, “I’ll take some sola-scriptura, some pre-destination, throw in a little ‘by faith alone’ and hold the dogma.” It allows people to essentially pick and choose what they want to beleive without being accountable to anyone other than their version or interpretation of God.

Saddly, far too many Catholics are of this mindset as well.

 

[Matt16_18]

Salvo:

The whole “non-Denominational” thing springs from this whole “have it your way” culture of the US. In other words, “I’ll take some sola-scriptura, some pre-destination, throw in a little ‘by faith alone’ and hold the dogma.” .

The McChurch happy meals!

 

[Salvo]

Matt16_18:

The McChurch happy meals!

Right. Because isn’t that what it’s all about? Being happy?

Oh, and being convenient.

 

[La_Chiara]

Salvo:

Right. Because isn’t that what it’s all about? Being happy?

Oh, and being convenient.

It is all about “ME” and “what I want”. As a post on another thread said, it is the “sin of pride”. So rejecting Catholicism, rejecting organized religion, choosing your own church and what you are willing to believe, or not going to church at all are all about “what I want.”