Christian: Denominations?

[Scuba Pete]

The remnant was BORN uppity: hence the calling by grace!

OK, OK... maybe they were RE-BORN uppity!

 

[Baerly]

If I asked you what your denomination is, what would you say? (For those of you who haven't caught on, I'm asking. )

I am not a part of any denomination. If I understand the scriptures correctly the bible denounces All denominations (1Cor.1:8-10). All denominations started from 300 to aprox. 2000 years to late to be the church of the bible. I am a part of the Lords church you read about in the bible,there is but one true church(1Cor.12:20). If your in a church that began after 33 A.D. your in a man made church,not the church of our Lord.

I know all denominations are wrong because they all speak different doctrines.
Jesus is not the author of confusion (1Cor.14:33). in love baerly

 

[Topanga]

If I asked you what your denomination is, what would you say? (For those of you who haven't caught on, I'm asking. )

That's a great sermon that you shared in one of your posts.
In response to your question, I am non-denominational...simply a christian.

 

[Katzpur]

I am not a part of any denomination. If I understand the scriptures correctly the bible denounces All denominations (1Cor.1:8-10). All denominations started from 300 to aprox. 2000 years to late to be the church of the bible. I am a part of the Lords church you read about in the bible,there is but one true church(1Cor.12:20). If your in a church that began after 33 A.D. your in a man made church,not the church of our Lord.

Well, all Christian denominations claim to be the Church of our Lord. How do you know that the Church you are a part of is the Lord's Church?

I know all denominations are wrong because they all speak different doctrines.
Jesus is not the author of confusion (1Cor.14:33). in love baerly

This is not proof that all of them are wrong. There could be one that taught the same doctrines Jesus taught. If there was, it wouldn't be wrong, would it?

 

[GoldenDragon]

This is not proof that all of them are wrong. There could be one that taught the same doctrines Jesus taught. If there was, it wouldn't be wrong, would it?

Wouldn't they be Jewish doctrines then?After all Jesus was a pious Jew hoping to improve/fulfill the Judaism of his time Christianity itself didn't even show signs of exitence(other than Jesus himself) until 40 days after Jesus ascended into Heaven(Pentecost)...maybe not..?

and my denomination is Roman Catholic

 

[kai]

i am puzzled by the term non denominational what is a nondenominational church?

 

[Katzpur]

Wouldn't they be Jewish doctrines then?After all Jesus was a pious Jew hoping to improve/fulfill the Judaism of his time Christianity itself didn't even show signs of exitence(other than Jesus himself) until 40 days after Jesus ascended into Heaven(Pentecost)...maybe not..?

and my denomination is Roman Catholic

I don't think so. Jesus Christ told Peter that He was going to establish what He referred to as "my Church." Wouldn't that be the Church of Jesus Christ?

 

[Katzpur]

i am puzzled by the term non denominational what is a nondenominational church?

To me, it's the term that Christians use when they can't make up their minds as to where they stand. In other words, they like to think that by claiming that they are "non-denominational," their doctrines are somehow more pure than the doctrines of Catholicism, Lutheranism, Presbyterianism, etc. That, of course, is pure nonsense. A non-denominational Christian is just a Christian who doesn't agree with all of the doctrines of any of the myriad of Christian denominations he has to choose from. A non-denominational Christian may claim that he takes his beliefs from the Bible, but so do Christians who are affiliated with a specific denomination. It's just a matter of how we all interpret what the Bible has to say.

(I can't wait for the fallout from this post! )

 

[kai]

To me, it's the term that Christians use when they can't make up their minds as to where they stand. In other words, they like to think that by claiming that they are "non-denominational," their doctrines are somehow more pure than the doctrines of Catholicism, Lutheranism, Presbyterianism, etc. That, of course, is pure nonsense. A non-denominational Christian is just a Christian who doesn't agree with all of the doctrines of any of the myriad of Christian denominations he has to choose from. A non-denominational Christian may claim that he takes his beliefs from the Bible, but so do Christians who are affiliated with a specific denomination. It's just a matter of how we all interpret what the Bible has to say.

(I can't wait for the fallout from this post! )

so hes a member of a nondenominational denomination church, i see

 

[Baerly]

Well, all Christian denominations claim to be the Church of our Lord. How do you know that the Church you are a part of is the Lord's Church?

This is not proof that all of them are wrong. There could be one that taught the same doctrines Jesus taught. If there was, it wouldn't be wrong, would it?

Katzpur,that is a very good question. I live for questions like this. My reasons are:
(Isaiah 2:2-4) says the house of the Lord would be established in Jerusalem in the last days and all nations would flow into it. notice the word it, not them.

(1Tim.3:15) equates the house of the Lord with the church of our Lord. Notice it
says church not churches plural.

Jesus said he would build his church and he used the words church and kingdom interchangeably in (Matt.16:18,19). Notice only one church. The church and the kingdom were to be established at the same time. That is because they are one in the same. When one enters the church he has entered the kingdom. The keys Jesus speaks of are WORDS (Acts 11:14).

Jesus told some of his apostles that they would not see death until they seen the kingdom come in POWER (Mark 1:9).That happened in (Acts 2).

(Luke 24:49) - Jesus PROMISES the apostles POWER from on high. He also tells them to WAIT IN JERUSALEM until that power comes upon them. (vs 47) tells us that REPENTANCE and REMISSIONS of SINS will be preached at JERUSALEM. This is all telling us where,how and when the church would begin by prophecy.

In (Acts 2:1-4) In 33A.D.that POWER came upon the apostles in JERUSALEM and REPENTANCE and REMISSION of sins was preached exactly like all the prophecies had said. So this church began in 33A.D. in Jerusalem when the power came upon the apostles and the gospel message of God was spoke (Acts 2:38).Notice also that the Jewish people entered the church in (Acts 2,but in (Acts 10)The gentiles enterd the church. It was at this time that the prophecy was fullfilled that ALL FLESH had entered the church both Jews and Gentiles.Soon after the Lord gave a name to his people.They were called CHRISTIANS first in antioch
(Acts 11:26). These scripures deal with prophecies of when,where and how the church would be established. They also tell how one would enter that church.
All denominations oppose the bible when it comes to how one enters the church of our Lord. These scriptures are the reason I know I am apart of the true church.
There is of course, studies on when sins are forgiven (Acts 22:16), the organization of the church,worship of the church,work of the church. All these must harmonize with the word of God. All this information can be found within the new testament (2 Peter 1:3).ALL people entered the church by water baptism and they were told by Paul they were translated into the kingdom (Col.1:13) (Rev.1:9). Funny ,some people claim the kingdom has not come yet,I guess the inspired apostle did not know that.

Yes,If people follow the commamdments of our Lord they are a part of this true church. - in love Baerly *Thanks for asking*

 

[Baerly]

Let me say I am not apart of a nondenominational church.

I am a part of an undenominational church.

In other words I am not a part of ANY DENOMINATION at all.

I am just a part of the church Jesus taught about in (MAtt.16:18,19). in love Baerly

 

[athanasius]

Baerly,

No matter what church you are part of, you still are part of a denomination! If you claim to be part of the church that Jesus founded based off of (Matt 16:13-19), then you would be part of the Catholic Church as history shows and the Fathers of the Church attest too.

 

[AllisonW70]

I am Baptist.
I have visited several other churches of different denominations and felt just as comfortable there as I do in my own. As long as I can feel the presence of the Lord, it doesn't matter to me what name is on the building!

 

[Katzpur]

Baerly,

No matter what church you are part of, you still are part of a denomination! If you claim to be part of the church that Jesus founded based off of (Matt 16:13-19), then you would be part of the Catholic Church as history shows and the Fathers of the Church attest too.

While I don't come to the same conclusion you do, your reasoning is totally on target. :yes:

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I'm a Unitarian. I really like the freedom to search for your own spiritual path that the Unitarian Universalist Church gives it members.

 

[James the Persian]

Whilst others sometimes refer to Orthodoxy as a denomination we do not and we object to that word strongly. We completely reject both denominationalism and the branch theory and so we are simply the Church. We pre-date by at least 1500 years all the churches that do call themselves denominations anyway.

James

 

[Katzpur]

Whilst others sometimes refer to Orthodoxy as a denomination we do not and we object to that word strongly. We completely reject both denominationalism and the branch theory and so we are simply the Church. We pre-date by at least 1500 years all the churches that do call themselves denominations anyway.

James

Yes, but Roman Catholics think of Roman Catholicism as "the" Church, and Latter-day Saints think of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as "the" Church. Non-denominational Christians (now there's a word I object to strongly) seem to think that by refusing to identify with any specific denomination, that makes them part of "the" Church. Jesus didn't establish 30,000 different denominations; He established "His" Church. And the bottom line is that all 30,000+ of the different denominations that exist worldwide today cannot agree on what doctrines constitute "the truth." Whether you like the word "denomination" or not seems to me to be beside the point.

 

[athanasius]

Katzpur I Have To Agree With You 100%. Good Logic And Reasoning!

God Bless

 

[James the Persian]

Yes, but Roman Catholics think of Roman Catholicism as "the" Church, and Latter-day Saints think of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as "the" Church. Non-denominational Christians (now there's a word I object to strongly) seem to think that by refusing to identify with any specific denomination, that makes them part of "the" Church. Jesus didn't establish 30,000 different denominations; He established "His" Church. And the bottom line is that all 30,000+ of the different denominations that exist worldwide today cannot agree on what doctrines constitute "the truth." Whether you like the word "denomination" or not seems to me to be beside the point.

I don't agree. Just by using the word denomination you are, in effect, saying that the Church is divided because you are saying that these bodies, denominated as X, Y or Z are all parts of the Church. This despite the fact that they are not in communion with one another. To hold to that belief, from our point of view, is a grave heresy and so I will not ever describe Orthodoxy as a denomination. She is the Church not a particular named part of her. I don't discount the possibility of there being Christians out there who are truly following Christ and hence will be in the Church Triumphant, but the Church Militant is one and the organisations they belong to are not part of it. I fully accept and appreciate that those of you such as the LDS and RCs will have a similar position with respect to your own churches but we must simply agree to disagree. What I can't understand is why you would choose to call yourselves by a term that tacitly agrees that you are not the One True Church as you claim.

James

 

[Quiddity]

I don't agree. Just by using the word denomination you are, in effect, saying that the Church is divided because you are saying that these bodies, denominated as X, Y or Z are all parts of the Church. This despite the fact that they are not in communion with one another. To hold to that belief, from our point of view, is a grave heresy and so I will not ever describe Orthodoxy as a denomination. She is the Church not a particular named part of her. I don't discount the possibility of there being Christians out there who are truly following Christ and hence will be in the Church Triumphant, but the Church Militant is one and the organisations they belong to are not part of it. I fully accept and appreciate that those of you such as the LDS and RCs will have a similar position with respect to your own churches but we must simply agree to disagree. What I can't understand is why you would choose to call yourselves by a term that tacitly agrees that you are not the One True Church as you claim.

James

Using the word denomination or The Church is going to say whatever the reader gets out of it. I can say that the Catholic Church (in union with Rome) is "The Church" until I turn blue in the face. To outsiders, it is meaningless and we are no more then another denomination. Although I disagree that we are just another denomination, I won't spend a breath in fighting over the word. In fact St. Paul clearly tells us to be wary of such things:

2 Timothy 2:14
Remind people of these things and charge them before God to stop disputing about words. This serves no useful purpose since it harms those who listen.

I think there is bigger fish to fry. If you can help others on theological/doctrinal matters that seperate you, I think that is much more productive. God willing, he may just realize that it is The Church without you even saying it is.

As a saint once said (his name I can't remember at the moment):
Preach the gospel, and use words if you have to.