Exposing the Denominations of Nondenominational Churches
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 сен 2024
- Does "non-denominational" mean that a church is not part of any group larger than their own congregation? Probably not. Let's look at some of these churches and the groups they belong to.
"Non-denominational" is a great way to confuse a lot of people into thinking their beliefs are obvious and uncontroversial among Christians.
I know of 5 Baptist churches that have dropped the word "Baptist" from their names (and one Assembly of God that now describes itself a "Christian Worship Center." 🤷🏻♂️
I sort of had a similar problem when I was reading C.S. Lewis and he posited his idea of "mere Christianity." Even if we narrow Christianity strictly down to Pauline, Nicean Christianity a lot of what Lewis stated as the bare bones basics of Christianity was so clearly Protestant and specifically Anglican that I could immediately see why all of my Catholic family prefer G.K. Chesterton for their posh and English-flavored pop apologetics.
Yeah non denomination is a title for the churches that are really self deluded enough to think that their beliefs aren't denomination laden. And or actual deception in order to get more people to join their group.
@@tjenadonn6158 If you think Catholic = Christian, you (as well as millions of others who are no less deceived) need to fear what Christ said in Matthew 7:21-23. Follow Christ of the Bible, not clubhouses and doctrines of men.
@@Desert-edDave While I know firsthand the myriad problems with the teachings of the Catholic Church (my husband was one for many years before I married him and I breathed a sigh of relief when he left it), I cannot in any way judge another’s faith.
Yours is a narrow-minded and judgmental statement which demonstrates to me that you clearly believe 1) you can judge anothers’ faith; 2) you as a believer (I assume) have zero idols in your life or any undetected misconceptions about your faith so 3) you feel your “faith” superior.
I’ve known several beautiful, sincere, devoted, Christ-centered CATHOLICS who do not put Mary, the Pope, any priest or any doctrine above Jesus Christ their Savior.
Journey Church...where we don't stop believing
LOL - 😂
Gave me a good chuckle
😂😂
And where everything is done...Faithfully
@@KingoftheJuice18 ...in The City.
I have written this before and I will probably write it again after this time: this channel is the best source for unbiased information and an honest look at Christian groups and their differences and similarities.
I'm in a few Christian groups on Facebook and have recommended this channel to new converts trying to figure out which churches believe what.
There is no such thing as "unbiased."
@@BrotherinChr1stHe’s been upfront about his own personal convictions prior (independent Baptist, if I recall correctly). At any rate, honesty is a good policy to uphold.
@@BrotherinChr1st - No one is unbiased. I don't find this channel to be unbiased.
@@BrotherinChr1st - I do not find this person to be unbiased. I have never seen any other person making content for this channel. This channel represents this person. He is not unbiased.
It would be cool if someone made a website that compiles and maps all these "non-denominational" churches and lists what denominations they're actually a part of.
Yeah, that would be great.
@@unit2394 Then who will spend eternity fixing the errors and arguing with thousands of pastors about how the website doesn't fairly or accurately identify them? LOL
@@dbach1025thats been the case for the last millennium.
That would be incredibly high maintenance. Not only with the setup, but also with edits, complaints, potential lawsuits.
i might try plugging in some statements if faith into GPT and asking for a denomination, finally a use for AI
Every time I hear “non-denominational “ I immediately think “buyer beware” because you don’t really know what they believe (if anything), where they arrive at it , what training the pastor has or who he is accountable to.
While I might not agree with a given denomination 100% at least I can know the ball park of what they SHOULD believe and can easily find out exactly what they believe.
So I will pass…..
I knew 99% of this before I even attended one service. You can always ask for the rest.
I trust 'them' to tell me what they believe... I'm very worried about a lack of accountability... and I'm curious about the training (and replacement) of pastoral staff.
But too many churches no longer hold to the confessional standards of the stated denomination.
This is such a great site for information about Christian groups.
Just because the church is “non-denominational” doesn’t mean the pastor lacks any personal theological positions. He’s human like the rest of us; if he knows anything about anything he’ll more likely than not have an opinion on that thing, and without there being a denomination the church is tied to very little can stop him from bringing those opinions straight to the pulpit.
And here I was, thinking "non-denominational" just meant "Baptists with a smoke machine."
😆😆😆😆😆😆😆
Agreed! Usually, but obviously not always.
They all have that now.. to go with the odious "praise music" and the big screens.
…redeemed zoomer is that you?
@@nlytnlyt6644 I'm too much of a realist about the chances of reforming any of the theologically liberal denominations with episcopal polity without compromising yourself in some way to be Redeemed Zoomer.
Damn Josh you were like "maybe we shouldn't bear false witness about the nature of our churches"
There would be no need if there was some damn transparency!!!
Joshua bringing down the hammer!
Denominations usually exercise a certain discipline on their pastors. Slip those bonds, and temptations arise.
@@danherrick5785 * Non-denominational has multiple meanings: (1) a church that is not part of structured denominational organization but has a set theological-tradition of Christianity it is a part of (like an independent Baptist or Lutheran church with no connection to a denomination organization); (2) an independent church that doesn’t have a set tradition in that it’s theological-tradition is a combination of several theological-traditions, for example a church that is some sort of combination between Baptist, Pentecostal, Mennonite, Wesleyan-Low Church Methodist, and Low Church Pietistic Lutheranism all wrapped up into one; (3) a church that is part of a denomination but the specific congregation does not bar attendance or membership to members of other denominations; (4) a denomination that isn’t part of a set specific denominational traditions for example certain “United and Uniting Churches” and those that are simply “broadly Evangelical / generic Evangelical;” or (5) a mix of all of these. Also not all non-denominational churches are just closeted Baptists, some lean more Pentecostal, others more Mennonite, or broadly non-Pentecostal Charismatic Evangelical, etc.
or yourself.
A girl I dated in high school once told me about when her family first moved to town and was looking for a church to attend. Right near the school was a church called Community of Christ, so they went for a couple Sundays until they noticed the services quoting "biblical" books like Mosiah and Ether, and saw the portrait of Joseph Smith hanging in the hall and realized it was a Mormon church! The girl's family was Nondenominational and used to vague-sounding church names.
Community of Christ is also legally known as the Reoganzied Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, although they only do business as Community of Christ. The are lead by a prophet-president and twelve apostles.
Yeah, the Reorganized Church of Latter Day Saints rebranded itself as the Community of Christ once it redirected its doctrinal views closer to mainline Protestant beliefs. They're still semi-Mormon, but some of the more "unique" (read: heretical) teachings held by the Utah LDS are no longer fully present in the Community of Christ.
@@MAMoreno-- CoC or RLDS--whatever you call them, they are a non-Christian cult.
My husband and I purchased a home near a COC church. After doing a bit of research, it seems they are a progressive off shoot of the LDS church. So, there is Mormon doctrine mixed in with pro LGBTQ, etc. emphasis.
@@gregb6469 they're trinitarian so I dunno what else you're looking for
It's sounds like a marketing scheme meant to bait people.
That's religion in a nutshell.
Exactly.
The seeker-sensitive movement.
It gets more young people.
@@pianoplayer2260 Only because they lack the knowledge or social skills to challenge it
"Non-denominational, you're not fooling anybody, you're just a baptist church with a cool website." - Tim Hawkins
Heard that from the Redeemed Zoomer.
That's what I've always thought. Default is baptistic theology every time.
I cannot begin to describe how refreshing it is to hear somebody make clear and concise explanations about churches while being respectful and yet refusing to engage in deceptive (intentionally or not) word games about the churches. I wish my "denomination" were as direct, truthful and informational as you!
This is something that has honestly bugged me, so thank you for addressing it so plainly.
I'm a Baptist Minister working in a Methodist church, with a long history of cross-denominational work, but if someone asks me what i am, i say "Baptist."
Even if I'm comfortable with a variety of traditions, i feel disingenuous if i try to cover up my particular beliefs.
Thank you for that!
Minister? Out west a Pastor is a Baptist, Southern Baptist or non-denom. A Minister is a Methodist.
I'm not trying to debate, I only think it's Intresting you called your self a Minister as a Baptist.
I think region does play a part. For example, I was a Southern Baptist, howver sometimes on Saturday nights I'd go the services at my freinds Assembly of God church.
Both services were pretty chill for what one might expect from either. Though at one point the FSBC church, we had an interm, genuine Southern Preacher! If you fell asleep, well then you were probably asleep in the asleep in the Biblical sense.
@jed-henrywitkowski6470 Most Baptists around here use the title Pastor. I think I default to Minister because I've worked in a lot of church adjacent positions, even when also working as a pastor.
For example, one of my biggest jobs was as a chaplain for a non-profit serving people with disabilities. It wasn't a church, so I wasn't the "pastor," but I was still working in an explicitly ministry oriented position.
Since I've done a lot of service both inside & outside of the church, Minister feels like a better fit. Still ordained. Still preaching. Just slightly different context than a lot of traditional pastors.
How can you work in a church that teaches a completely different view of the sacraments? Aren’t you uncomfortable with all the baptism of infants? And non memorialist view of the Lord’s supper. Nevermind the fact that Methodists have bishops. I’ve known many baptists and it is difficult for them to work in non baptist churches. I know of only one baptist who changed his mind on baptism and was received into the church he worked for and subsequently ordained as a priest
CROSS-DENOMINATIONAL....a new one. Love it
Even as a non-christian, something always felt off about non-denominationalism when I found out about it 15 years ago
This is the closest I have seen to this channel being polemical “quit lying by claiming to be non-denominational” would be a less polite way of saying the same thing
You are a non-Christian but are watching this channel. Are you looking into finding a church? This channel is a good place to do reserach.
@@run4cmtI imagine many non-Christians watch this channel because it's both incredibly interesting and informative. Me being one as well 😊
@@dogsandyoga1743I am an ex-Christian and I find this fascinating as well
@@run4cmt I'm an ex-Christian (specifically ex-Catholic) pagan (in the spirit of honesty we're fostering here my main influences are the British Witchcraft Revival, Thelema, Reconstructionist Celtic Polytheism, and chaos magic: if you call me New Age hands will be thrown) who is just here because I'm a massive religion nerd.
"I have a very particular set of skills, skills I have acquired over a very long set of videos. Skills that make me a nightmare for churches like you. If you name your denomination right now, that'll be the end of it. But if you don't, I will research you, I will find you, and I will make a video about you."
-Ready to Harvest
You made me laugh
🤣🤣💯🏆
Perfect! 👍💯
Has he never actually named what church he is apart of ??
@@yardgunner4033 His position as impartial reporter makes such talk unwise.
It's really fascinating the way that we sometimes play with language like this. I have a coworker who is very vocally Christian, and one time I asked him what tradition he was raised in (I could already tell that using the word "denomination" wasn't going to yield results). He responded that he doesn't bother with tradition, he just follows Jesus. Ironically, that said quite a bit about what tradition he came out of.
It's like when my Evangelical relatives say "we don't have doctrine, we just read the Bible." I try to point out that's Sola Scriptura, which is one of the two founding doctrines of Protestantism, but it just doesn't compute for them. It's like that Spongebob scene with Patrick and his wallet (if you know, you know).
@@Fragolux Sola scriptura.
Solus Christus.
Sola fide.
Sola gratia.
Soli Deo gloria.
1+1+1+1+1=2?
@JRBWare1942 those aren't mutually exclusive.
@@FragoluxAs an evangelical, I think you’re completely right in calling out the lack of self awareness within the nondenominational fundamentalist sphere of christianity, but I promise you that those evangelicals truly have a heart for the lost. Which is something that some more high church denominations lack.
@@JRBWare1942 I wasn't aware of the other three. I always thought Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide were the founding pillars of Protestant.
Excellent video! "Denomination" comes from a root that means "to name." Technically, to be non-denominational means "not to name," which is what non-denominational churches are not doing (they name themselves by their statement of beliefs). Personally, I find churches that call themselves non-denominational to be insidious in that they are not fully disclosing their true identity so to attract attendees. In other words, it is a marketing technique one would find among some businesses.
A minister in the Presbyterian Church in America told me they keep the denomination's name off their church website because people in their city will not attend a church that advertises a denomination. I also found this troubling because I would expect a church to state their affiliations somewhere on their website. Full disclosure of beliefs and affiliations is being honest and upfront.
That's certainly one way it can happen. Another is that they have a set of beliefs that are eclectic enough to not allow them into some denomination. Either way it is a red flag.
@@craigbenz4835 Good point!
@@rbittick I am equally suspicious about Lutheran churches that have “Lutheran” on the sign but no designation of which specific Lutheran denomination, ELCA, LCMS,WELS etc, they want whatever prestige may be attached to the “Lutheran” label but without taking a clear stand on any of the controversial issues among Lutherans
I have not encountered a single body of so-called believers that do not openly state what they want you to believe are their core beliefs.
In otherwords. You like people identifying by their church. Not in being Christs.
Another hint is the seminary that the pastor attended. That can usually tell a lot.
Many Churches that have pastoral bios don't say what the pastors education has been. You are right, it is very helpful to know what you are walking into.
What if he went to a non-denominational seminary?
If they even attended a seminary in the first place...
The former pastor at the largest Baptist church in our town went to a United Methodist seminary.
@@gregb6469 still says a lot.
When we were looking for a new church, I searched church websites for this information. I finally resorted to emailing pastors to ask about denomination and several other questions. One pastor told me they fee both Arminian AND Calvinist. 🙄
I finally decided that hiding the denomination was deceitful and eliminated them from my list of possible churches for us.
any church who doesn't list their denomination or doesn't actually join one is a church to avoid
They're both within the reformed tradition, tbh.
@@jalapeno.tabascothat is false sir it’s not about religion it’s about the heart toward Christ. I go to one and it’s amazing I feel the Holy Spirit move through there
@@nathanielkleber1443 1. Christianity is a religion, the Bible even calls it that
2. "it’s amazing I feel the Holy Spirit move through there"
really? what exactly is that feeling? where does the Bible say we "feel" the Holy Spirit? John 3:8 says we don't see Him, we hear Him, i don't recall anything about feeling Him
and the heart is deceptively wicked, who can know it? emotions are the easiest thing in the world to manipulate
Christianity is about truth, not feelings, it's just the emotionally charged music and atmosphere, these churches manufacture this experience
"We're a mix of Armenian and Calvinist" means they probably mix and match the doctrines, but that doesn't work. In Calvinism, for instance, predestination has to be the case BECAUSE of the total depravity of man. Contrarily, in Armenianism, predestination is unnecessary because man is NOT totally depraved. All the doctrines specified in the distinction are interdependent like that. People who mix the two generally do so because they're not comfortable with some aspect of one or the other, so they change it, not because they've put a lot of thought into it.
All that is to say that the pastor may not have been attempting to obfuscate. He may genuinely have a hodgepodge theology.
This the best video about "non-denom" churches I've seen yet.
I was raised in a Vineyard church and found it confusing that we called ourselves non-denominational when we were part of a global association of churches that all have “Vineyard” in their name. I’m a Catholic now, but this video was really helpful in clarifying my childhood confusion, thank you!
I always assumed that the term “non-denominational” was just a marketing concept designed to draw in more low-information Christians in order to grow their congregation.
If someone was raised in a particular faith tradition, say, Southern Baptist for example, and they move to a new city or a new part of the country, then they use denominational labels to weed out the churches that they would prefer NOT to visit (like Pentecostal, for example), and to narrow down the list of churches that they would like to try out that would be similar to what they are used to. Pastors and church leaders know this, so they seem to remove the denominational label from their signage in an apparent attempt to confuse the new church seekers and to trick them into trying out their church even though it may be different than what you are used to. Many churches are personality driven rather than doctrine driven now-a-days anyway, as it seems that the theological knowledge of the average church goer is very shallow.
It's nice having the straightforward answer of, "I'm Catholic and got to a Catholic church."
Yes. We have a lot of beliefs Protestants would consider strange, but we don’t pretend we’re a typical church like non-denominational congregations do. Usually our priests are rather upfront.
Which catholic?
Roman or one many orthodox catholic?
Charismatic catholic
Myriad rites?
@@astutik8909Catholicism has almost 30 rites and different movements within it but we’re all 100% Catholic. We don’t break apart just because certain people prefer different languages or worship styles. We have one catechism and all profess obedience to the pope. So there’s huge variation without disunity. It’s really awesome.
@@ashleynovels well,apart from theorthodox remember?
@@astutik8909 You mean the Eastern Orthodox? How much are you interested to know?
In short, they aren't Catholic. They split off in 1054 AD due to a dispute on how much power the Bishop of Rome (aka Pope) should have. They wouldn't accept anything but a purely ceremonial role. What they seem to have in common with Catholics is just what was universal in Christianity back in the first Millennium.
I've always known that "nondenominational" is a lie at least 99% of the time. You have done a great job of exposing and explaining this deception. Thank you very, very much. I loved this vid!
Yea, it's getting pretty interesting as to why so many want to be called this nowadays. I wonder if it's a money thing or something in the future that we don't know yet.
If they keep Sun-Day and not the 7th day Sabbath they ARE a denomination of protestantism.
@@truthnottradition7 As opposed to those that meet on Saturns-Day?
The sad TRUTH is that most of the denominational corporate churches are just as lost. People want to be tickled. The truth is lost. Second Timothy 4:2-3.
Thank you for making this. It’s been driving me nuts trying to explain to people why they aren’t “non-denominational.” Now I can just show them this!
1:50 pretty sure this 'fallacy of equivocation' got a Nazgul killed in Return of the King
Not just any Nagzgūl, the Witch King of Angmar! Religion for breakfast just did a really interesting video about Bible translations that talks about how different versions translate, and situations like this one are part of that. Very interesting
Ha! First thing that crossed my mind, too.
I love your clarity and insight! Knowledge is always useful. "If we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another!" 1 John 1:7
I was invited to a Bible Study at a "Non-Denominational" Church while walking around my college campus last week. I showed up to find it was at the building of the World Mission Society Church of God.
Yep, that's a cult
@@shishsquared why is it a cult
@@user-cs2tc8qn1h They are well known to be incredibly manipulative, aggressively evangelizing to people at very vulnerable times in their lives (such as college students). They pressure people to go to their Bible studies, then guilt them into getting baptized, and at that point the person feels like they are too invested to turn back so they get more and more involved in the organization.
Besides that, they:
- Believe in God the Mother
- Believe a man in Korea in the 1960's was the second coming of Christ
- Believe that they are the only way to Heaven
Just a few cliff notes:
They believe their founder was the second coming of Christ and their current leader is God, the Mother. They have made concrete date doomsday predictions. They have received criticism for, and this is putting it gently, being a high control group (this is a newer scholarly term in regard to the study of cults/high control groups) with very strict, to the point of destructive, rules.
Highly recommend looking them up and reading about them. They're just one of the many infamously... we'll say "intense" South Korean Christianities.
@@user-cs2tc8qn1h mostly due to the strong amount of control and destructive power they hold over the lives of their members. Their theology is also nutso. Mike Winger has done some great videos breaking it down
50 years ago, most people looking to join a church were raised in a denomination, moved houses, and sought out a church of the same denomination in their new hometown. Nowadays, with so many people being raised in non-churchgoing families, most people looking to join a church were never part of any denomination, so the labels have no meaning to them, and a church that claims to welcome everyone and simply teach the word of God is more appealing. Or they left their old denomination and are looking for a church that affirms their theological/political orientation, which has become more important for most people than old denominational disputes.
people who are taught to hate denominations fall for this nonsense
@@jalapeno.tabascoWell then I guess that makes me old-school, though part of that is having been raised in a churchgoing family myself.
Even then, friends I knew growing up whose parents did take them to church have talked with me during college and after about searching for a church they think is a right fit for them, so it seems to be a pretty big phenomenon nowadays.
I think another (and more positive) thing that is happening is that people are thinking critically about their faith and aren't just assuming that because they were born into a denomination, therefore it is the right one. Instead, some are actually wrestling with what both their inherited faith and other denominations are teaching and examining those beliefs critically.
So while people leaving their denomination in some cases is certainly a sign of people looking to cherry pick their beliefs, in other cases it is a sign of discernment and a desire to "rightly divide the word of truth" and not just follow blindly.
It's also worthwhile to recognize that we have come to a point in denominational history where there are greater differences between, for example, conservative and liberal Methodist churches than there are between a conservative Methodist and a conservative Presbyterian church. The fundamentalist-modernist controversy threw a wrench into most denominational labels and probably led to the aversion toward denominations that we see today.
@@KeithEdwinSchooleyExample of this is I had a pastor whose wife was a pastor an hour away in both the very small towns ELCA church and PCUSA church, and the congregation just switched buildings every other week
We met a couple once at a dinner theater event who happened to live nearby us. In North Ga, there is a group of churches called 12 Stone. After they talked about their membership there, I asked about what they believed and what denomination they were. He gave an incredibly vague answer about being a modern church after Christ. Couldn’t tell me hardly any tenets of faith. I looked it up online. Turns out, 12 Stone is a Wesleyan ministry. Why wouldn’t they want to advertise that? That couple had no idea they were Wesleyan.
greater Atlanta?
They have a bunch of campuses in the metro Atlanta area.
On that couple's personal level, it seems like an individual self-image thing. "Wesleyan" is the church their nice old uncle goes to out in the country that meets in an old white chapel with a steeple. They're part of a more dynamic church that may theologically and governmentally be the same, but has space in an office park and is different because you don't feel the cultural pressure to wear suit, the worship music sounds vaguely like the Christian pop/rock station and they offer donuts at fellowship time.
Yooo!! I was also just invited to 12 Stone by a friend who goes there after I moved back into the north GA area. Only after my wife was suspicious of the vague name did she discover that it is Wesleyan.
I’m glad you’re making a video about this.
so many churches hide that they’re part of denominations like the Christian missionary alliance
But "Christian and Missionary Alliance" is the name of a denomination.
@@JRBWare1942 many non demon church’s advertise themselves as non denominational but are members of it.
I have seen that myself.
Yes, CM&A will call themselves a "Community Church". We have one in a nearby city.
So, 99% of the time the term non-denominational just refers to church polity (usually congregational). This strikes me as borderline deception by omission.
I don't see the problem. Non-denominational always just means that they're an independent church, not that they don't have any doctrine. Every church is going to fall within the bounds of some broad tradition or other.
@whosweptmymines3956 I disagree. Most people use the word "denomination" to mean "tradition+doctrine", and they ask about it because they want to know if the church preaches what they understand to be true. Questions about church government and organization come later, if the person starts thinking about joining or tithing there.
@@KRoy-lx4xg Right -- As the video puts it "Question 1" refers to whether this church is Baptist in teachings and practices, or Pentecostal, or Methodist, or COC and that's what the vast majority of times is being asked. "Question 2" is whether the church is truly independent or in a voluntary association or in a subordinate structure.
Here in the South, “nondenominational” means Southern Baptist. Most actually link directly to the SBC’s website for their starement of faith.
Not all are like that. Some lean more Methodist. Basically, if they have a baptismal font they're more Methodist.
A lot of non-denominational churches around my area are more Pentecostal leaning
I just figured out the “non-denominTional” churches usually are associated with a mainline religion. A lot are Baptists or Calvery Chapel. Oj and A lot if baptists churches HIDE they are Calvinists and the congregation has no idea their new pastor is reformed (calvinist) Baptist!
@@michelleheltz6116is “non-denominTional” intentional or just the finger accidentally veering to the caps button instead of “a”? Because I do that sometimes. Phones are so small; they have to make the keyboards tiny so that they fit within the screen’s width.
Where I grew up, the closest thing to a megachurch (indoor playground visible from the highway and everything) used to refer to themselves as a “Baptist Church”, and in recent years they quietly dropped “Baptist” from that name and their big local television advertisements (think I‘ve seen them on RUclips also) expressly promote them as appealing to any Christian feeling like they can’t find a good church.
It is amazing how many times I’ve gotten into arguments over this basic issue. I sometimes like to say to people who claim to belong to a “nondenominational” church “I have a baby I would like to get baptized, will you do it”, the answer to that question reveals so much about them that for some reason they don’t seem to want people to know
I suspect the nondenominational churches do not administer water baptisms to babies, so they claim they should wait until later. I also suspect that they view denominational differences as mainly the differing views on baptism and Holy Communion. Because they believe these are mere ordinances, they think they are unimportant and that denominations place too great importance on these sacraments, so they classify themselves as non-denominational.
They don’t want ppl to know they’re biblical?
@@YeshuaKingMessiah everyone claims to be “Biblical” including Mormons and Muslims
@@Michael-bk5nz I think both uphold their book as far above the Bible
@@YeshuaKingMessiah but they both claim their beliefs are consist with the Bible. It is commonly claimed that “ you can prove anything from the Bible”, strictly literally that isn’t true, for example you can’t prove that there are 27 persons in the Godhead, but it is nevertheless very easy to claim the Bible supports contradictory views.
This is good. I feel non-denominational churches often come off as self-righteous, as if "denomination" is a dirty word and churches that do have a denomination affiliation are less spiritual. I'm a Baptist from Southern California (now living in Arkansas), but my whole life as a Baptist in Southern California, I would meet brothers and sisters in Christ, with whom I shared the most important things in common, and yet they'd snobbishly put me down for going to First Baptist Church. I feel the non-denominational trend is stronger in California.
"It's not a religion, it's a relationship." That's another thing people get unjustifiably snobby about. "Oh, really. And in what style of worship does your 'relationship' engage?" Lol
When a church obscures its denominational affiliation (by question 1), I tend to just assume that they're a certain type of fundamentalist evangelical but know that those words don't play well in their local area
Thanks for this. We've noticed that Baptist churches were ceasing to be (called) Baptist, and we were wondering what it was all about.
Probably because of so many like Westboro Baptist giving anything Baptist a black eye.
@@francismarion6400I’m not even Protestant, and whenever I think of the word “Baptist”, Westboro isn’t even on my mind. I think more of the many local churches that dot the rural parts of the state of Georgia where I grew up, where you’d be likelier to find one than a gasoline station in some areas. To me Westboro is rather fringe and (thankfully) not indicative of most Baptist congregations.
Certainly in recent decades with many Northerners moving south, your average Baptist tends to be much friendlier towards Catholics like me, whereas a WBS congregant would just picket at our funerals because they believe that worn-out “Babylon” nonsense. Folks there think it’s still 1874 for whatever reason
@@DiamondKingStudiosProtestantism is still relevant today, especially in light of the modern changing theological position in the church of Rome.
I think it speaks to your excellence in all your videos to eliminate bias, because this is the first video of yours where I can tell that you're ticked-off by the silliness of calling churches that are 100% denominational. Love your stuff man!
i remember trying to find out the theology of a local church a few years ago, and it felt like trying to pull teeth.
like, i’m very glad that you’re a community church that loves Jesus and welcomes everyone and reads the Bible and praises God and works with the Holy Spirit and is located in the center of town and is open all week and has a large selection of services, but i still don’t know what you believe!
the most i could find out was that they’re part of the Evangelical Alliance - which doesn’t narrow it down very much.
I had that experience--with the church I grew up in. They said we were simply Christians and nothing else. I believed this until my last year of high school. A teacher there told me that my chapel was actually Plymouth Brethren. I didn't know what that was. When I started asking questions, I was literally told to shut up. I moved on to another church a couple years later. It was only in the last few years, with the help of the internet, that I figured out it was Open Brethren, and more specifically, it had come out of the Gospel Hall Assemblies--although this chapel was completely independent as far as I can tell. It was run completely on the whims of the minister.
They might not believe anything--sort of I Corinthians 2:2 taken to an illogical extreme. There's something to be said for that position (cutting down on dogmatic quibbling, for example); on the other hand, people who insist on believing in nothing may fall for anything. And of course if they really believe something but won't admit it, that's a bit disturbing... and self-defeating.
@@JRBWare1942 That's interesting to me, coming from a (so-called) "exclusive brethren" perspective. The believers with whom I walk in fellowship regard ourselves as simply Christians and nothing else, and I would say we're very careful to keep it that way. I also want to be careful with my words, and I want to avoid being critical of the many faithful believers who are part of the so-called "Open Brethren" movement, but I'm of the conviction that the movement itself was wrong in its very origin (the Bethesda matter, etc), and what you're describing here are some of the fruits of that. It seems that those who were 'in charge' at the chapel you attended were caught in a conundrum - having followed the early principles of the "Plymouth Brethren" movement to a certain extent, but then having got away from them onto the ground of independency (a sectarian position), they didn't want to be associated with the origins from which they'd departed. Then we have the matter of the chapel being run on the whims of the minister - which is exactly the error which led to the Bethesda question. To me - and to my brethren - the matter of being "simply Christians" is of the utmost importance, as we've seen what results from getting away from the principle, both among "Open Brethren" and in the abhorrent and evil system of the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church.
@@thebowshot9341 I've never heard of the Bethesda matter before. The history of the Plymouth Brethren is very shadowy.
The minister at my chapel liked to mock Calvinism every so often. I was always mystified by this, since I didn't know what Calvinism was. I think this may have something to do with the Darby-Muller split, Darby being a Calvinist. My chapel adhered to Free Grace theology--which was not a name they used for it. (They had no name for it.) Now that I know something about church history, I find this very funny because I live in an area that is dominated by the Methodist Church. I never heard the minister mention Arminianism once.
I had someone on these boards tell me once that at his church, J. N. Darby was mentioned at every meeting. At my chapel, the names Darby and Muller were never uttered.
@@JRBWare1942 There a number of 'histories of the brethren' published, but I don't know how widely available they are. I think a short version of Mr Andrew Miller's history of the movement is available online, and that - in my view - is a true account, including the sad matter of Bethesda and the origin of so-called "Open Brethrenism". Church history is a fascinating study, for sure, although often a sobering one.
It's interesting that J.N. Darby is reckoned to be a Calvinist. I always understood from his writings that he held Arminianism and Calvinism to be two erroneous extremes. He says (Collected Writings, Vol. 42, p. 212), "The question of life and responsibility, and of the incompatibility between the the two has been settled at the cross. Arminianism and Calvinism, i.e. the tree of grace and the tree of man's responsibility, are both found in Paradise, nor can we reconcile these two things in man, except it be in Christ," &c. Amongst those with whom I walk in fellowship, I can't recall Arminianism ever being mentioned, and Calvinism very rarely, and really only in relation to the falseness of the doctrine of predestination to damnation.
I think I saw the same comment regarding Darby and Muller - or, a similar one at least. We use the J.N.D. Bible when we gather, but Mr Darby himself isn't often mentioned - he is occasionally quoted. I would say that most of us have J.N.D.'s _Collected Writings_ in some form, as well as his _Synopses_ and other ministry. I've personally had a great deal of enjoyment and profit from it over the years, and I've begun to narrate it for my YT channel.
Any church that removes denominational identifiers from obvious signage, should have all the labels in their food pantry removed from their aluminum cans and boxes. It’s petty, manipulative, and deceitful.
Perfect rebuttal 👍👍
What a ridiculous statement
So grateful for this, I grew up in a nondenominational church and was always so confused trying to figure out how we fit in to other Christian denominations. As an adult I’ve gone back and looked on their statement of faith and educational backgrounds of the pastors (spoiler: we we evangelical lol) but it’s such an interesting way to disguise more extreme beliefs from the public! And to not be held accountable to any larger organizations… 😅
This was great, II had a conversation 15 +/- years ago about this topic with my brother. We shared several good laughs about the fact that the various "non-denominations" are in fact branches of various denominations. 😁
Someone once told me that they were a member of a christian church that met at a location in my city and refused to state a denomination. My response was that is good to know that their church believed in the assumption of Mary (by the way I am not Roman Catholic, merely being controversial). Of course they declared this not to be the case. An interesting discussion ensued. My opinion is that churches and organisations claiming to be non-denominational are being fundamentally dishonest.
So agree with this!
Great video, Joshua. One of your best yet. 👍🏻
Although the Catholic Church could be called a denomination as defined here, denominations are really the product of the reformation, with modern church denominations being subsets of Protestantism.
The Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic Church split in around the year 2000. There have been other churches in the Middle East and Africa that were not part of either.
@@run4cmt ~ I think you meant to type 1000 AD? 😉😊
The Great Schism occurred in 1054.
But you're right. There is no such thing as a nondenominational Catholic Church or a nondenominational Orthodox Church. Nondenominational always means Protestant.
@@run4cmt2000? If the Catholic and Orthodox churches split within my own parents’ lifetimes, surely I would have heard about it.
1054 is usually a more commonly used year.
Though, Catholic denominations (e.g., Eastern Catholic) and Orthodox denominations also exist.
Thoroughly researched and sincerely appreciated.
This may be the best video you have ever published!
This is a fantastic video. Growing up, I often heard in church that belonging to a denomination was a recipe for "going liberal" since that had happened to many of the mainline denominations in the early and mid 1900s. Despite being self-governing, though, we were proud members of an association that would have disfellowshipped us had we stopped teaching certain things. This video is a great corrective to all of that because it reminds us that denominational labels actually protect individuals from stepping into problematic teachings accidentally.
It's not the label that protects individuals from error, rather it's contact with the larger body of Christ
Networks of independent pastors (with little accountability) are not Biblical at all.
The Bible is biblical. Read it. Jesus said go home and pray, behind doors where nobody can see, don't do things just to be seen.
That’s right! Timothy still had Paul as his pastor. Pastors need to be held accountable to their apostles are they’re going to be asking for trouble.
@@anonymoose2474 "The Bible isn't biblical" is probably a position held by someone. Radical Errancy I'm calling it just for funsies.
Little accountablity to whom? Any pastor who is not grounded in the Word will be accountable to both a shrinking congregation and to God.
Shrinking congregation is not a reliable indicator of truth.
I used to go to a "non-denominational" Bible church. It was unaffiliated with any churches, so technically non-denominational. But their doctrine, worship, and polity were no different from any independent dispensational Baptist church.
I once heard someone saying something to the effect of: "Non-denominational just means Baptist in sacraments, Methodist in salvation theology, and Congregationalist in church polity."
This is one of the best sites for this type of information. Please keep doing it.
It exasperates me when a church changes its name, then calls itself a "worship center". Reminds me of the laundry room in my condo building - called a "laundry center." How boring and plain... 🤯
RUclips knows that I like to watch your videos on Sundays and now they will show up at the top of the page every Sunday
On denomination, thank you. I feel like sometimes I'm in the twilight zone. Went to one"non-denominational" church. Every senior staff member was a graduate of Southern Baptist Seminary. Hmmm. They directly sponsored and supported over 50 missionary families. Hmmm. Not saying the work was wrong, but quack waddle swim. Hmmm.
Sending out missionaries is frowned upon in certain denominations?
Sad
I tried to tell people this before. Thanks for shedding the light on the topic.
When someone tells me their church is non-denominational, I ask if the church is more Baptist or Charismatic. That usually gives me a clear idea of what to expect.
Just ask if they operate in the gifts
With churches either claiming to be non-denominational or displaying a denominational name, but no longer holding to the beliefs and confessions of the denomination they name, it is a difficult time for someone new to the city or community and looking for a church that matches their beliefs.
Bloody nominalism
A few years back I attended a “community” church but eventually realized everyone was conservative Anglican, Presbyterian, or Calvinistic Baptist. They practiced both infant baptism and baby dedications per the parents’ beliefs but the pastor clearly preferred baptism. The doctrines of grace were mentioned repeatedly but not explained. When our discipleship groups discussed Romans 9 they seemed unsure what it all meant but when I gave a non-Calvinistic interpretation there was deafening silence and then we just moved on. I eventually felt the situation was disingenuous, presenting themselves as basic Christianity but also subtly steering attendees toward conservative Anglican beliefs.
Infant baptism is baptism.
@@asdfasdf3989no infants were baptised in the Bible. Infant baptism stems from non biblical Roman Catholic 'tradition' based on wrong theological beliefs.
It is baptism per day but done at an inappropriate time as they are not old enough to profess faith in Jesus at that age. The assumption is they'll be raised Christian and confirmed at an older age which isn't the case a lot of the time.
@@Steven-hq3go don’t try fact checking the infant baptism perspective by saying things like “the bible doesn’t say”… the issue of who can be baptised, how baptism takes place, and the effects of baptism are extremely complicated and woven together with a host of other issues about the nature of the sacraments, the number of sacraments, ones understanding of election, regeneration, the hermeneutic one uses to read the Bible, the tradition one finds oneself in and the presuppositions which accompany that set of particular beliefs. You can’t hand wave and say erm actually it’s not biblical. Even that is a dogmatic statement that presupposes a certain set of beliefs.
@@Steven-hq3go entire households were baptized. Has a baby ever been part of your household?
I have always respected Joshua for how hard he works to have a neutral point of view, so I think it says a lot that the first time he seems to express an opinion about a church, this is the thing he chose. Bravo, Joshua
I appreciate that you covered this topic. I'm a bit old-fashioned, though, and IMO you are using a modern interpretation of what a "denomination" is, instead of allowing the word to mean what it means. I.e., a denomination is a group of people who take a name to identify themselves so as to differentiate themselves from others. If the group rejects the idea of taking a common name, it would be, by my understanding, non-denominational. So I use a separate term to refer to such unnamed commonality, "associating". I.e., we associate with those others, not based on name, but because we agree with them on many things.
This difference will sound pedantic to many, but I don't know how anyone can read First Corinthians 1:10-17 and conclude Christians should take names for themselves, i.e. denominate. Agreements and disagreements with other Christians is bound to happen, but if you are not using a name to separate yourself from other Christians, you are non-denominational. That's not to say whatever common understandings they have are correct or incorrect, simply that they are following Paul's advice in this matter and avoiding naming themselves as this or that.
Thus I am glad you identified who is associating with whom, but referring to these groups of people as "denominations" is incorrect, IMO.
The Church at…
The Church that meets in the home of…
Is how ekklesia were identified in the Bible
So non-denominational is a marketing ploy. Not a huge surprise. The deeper problem is that it caters to a society that doesn't care about theology and thinks it shouldn't matter. Spiritualism and all that.
Almost every single non-denominational church is some combination of baptist and pentecostal. It is fundamentally dishonest (and therefore sinful) to say "I am non-denominational" when this is fundamentally untrue. No one is actually non-denominational.
They might have those beliefs but that doesn't mean they are a part of the baptist or Pentecostal denominations. It's not dishonest if they aren't connected to something like the SBC. There are plenty of churches that start from the ground up with various doctrines that don't fit with a specific denom, and thus don't submit to any authority from them. As long as they don't hide their beliefs, which few do, then they aren't being dishonest. They are simply and independent church.
Average conversation with a non-denominational Christian:
"Hey, what denomination are you?"
"I'm just Christian"
"Well, yeah same, but what kind of Christian?"
"One who follows Christ."
"Ok... do you believe in Infant Baptism? Do you believe in the speaking of tongues and gifts of the spirit?"
"No, infant baptism is unbiblical. Of course I believe in the gifts of the spirit!"
"Okay. So you're Pentecostal?"
"No I'm Christian."
"I just believe what the bible says"
"So do I, luckily a bunch of Germans wrote down some stuff that is a pretty good summary of what I believe about the Bible. And if I'm ever in a different city, I can just look up if a church also likes what those German guys wrote"
Believing in the gifts of the spirit doesn't make you Pentecostal, it makes you Charismatic. Believing that there is a separate spirit baptism which is evidenced by speaking in tongues makes you Pentecostal.
A few years back, we went to a startup "store front" non-denominational church with one of the "catchy" modern names they use ("The Connect Place", etc.). We tried to pin them down as to whether they belonged to a larger "umbrella" group that sponsored them. Like trying to pull hen's teeth. (Even though this "umbrella organization" sent in Inspection teams with checklists to determine if this particular "start up" church was meeting all their criteria to receive funding!). I finally elicited from them the name of their sponsoring group supporting them was called "Arise Arizona". (I could find nothing in an online search for an organization by that name other than a Women's ministry located in Phoenix). The same pastor asked me, "How did you find our church?" I said, "You have a large billboard sign advertising services on the street in front of your church. That's how we found you." His response? "That's not the way we wish to grow our church." Actual response. Lol. (We didn't go back)
The claws came out a bit in this video and I’m here for it. 😂
I heard a while ago that many Baptist churches were dropping the word “Baptist” from their name but never understood why.
I went to a church that was "non-denominational," and the Pastor said (and I'm paraphrasing) 'they were honestly a non-denominational with a Baptist influence' and I appreciated the honesty. I also currently go to a Calvary Chapel and the Pastor said there was a level they were "pentecostal with a seat belt."
Stunningly alarming and thought-provoking video. I've shared it with friends.
Churches in my hometown:
- Irreverent Catholic church with kindergarten-level hymnody and preaching
- Irreverent Anglican church with kindergarten-level hymnody and preaching
- Irreverent Presbyterian church with kindergarten-level hymnody and preaching
- Irreverent United church with kindergarten-level hymnody and preaching
- Irreverent Baptist church with kindergarten-level hymnody and preaching (when the pastor decides to show up)
- Oneness Pentecostal church with wealth-based wish-fulfilment preaching and phony Southern accents
- Non-denominational church with a lame rock concert and a really dull Bible study
- Methodist church with a lame rock concert and a moderately dull Bible study
Great information in this video! You made me chuckle in one part of the video. Sometimes when you walk into a "non-denom" church you always have to ask what denomination it is. When you walk into a Catholic Church, you know it's the Catholic Church. St. Peter, ora pro nobis.
I wouldn't be so sure! There are several denominations where a person could (and many have) gone inside thinking they were (canonical) Catholic churches, but they are not. For example:
Polish National Catholic Church pncc.org/
Ecumenical Catholic Church ecumenical-catholics.org/
Society of St Pius V web.archive.org/web/20171015033208/sspv.org/
I’ve dealt with this problem for over fifty years, but this is actually - even with theological schooling - heard a clear definition of definition one! So thanks for that. Consequently I’ve struggled a great deal to try and explain this perspective regarding various churches. Only hearing two, I thought in one, but tried to explain two! Never knew what people were really asking! PS in multiple cases I’ve never found any statement of faith on such church website! Instant red flag!
YAAAS the title alone. Dude, I love you.
Being a member of independent Christian Churches (mentioned by you in passing), I very early on understood the problems of calling oneself "nondenominational." We don't meet the definition in your Question 2, as all of our churches are autonomous, but I think it's impossible for any church not to meet Question 1 in some way. The Campbells wanted to shed all the man-made accretions of denominational churches and follow just the format found in the New Testament. But every time they attempted to do this, they just ended up forming a new denomination, by definition, because denomination just means "a collective designation", and there's no way to form a group without that group having a collective designation. You can say "We are Christians only", but everyone will know you as an independent Christian church, and bingo, all the churches like you have a collective designation, i.e., a "denomination." It's an admirable goal, but it's impossible not to have some label attached to it no matter what you do, because that's how words work and how our human brains work; we put things in categories. Denominations.
The Church at…
The Church meeting in the home of…
Those very simple biblical titles work well
Ekklesia is rly just translated assembly, not church
@@YeshuaKingMessiah I agree that some of the words we use in modern Bibles are confusing, because they aren't modern words but often carry-overs from decisions made by the KJV or even older translations. "Church" derives from the Greek "kuriakon", meaning [a house] belonging to a lord, but the Bible never once uses that word for the church, but rather uses "ekklesia", meaning [those who are] called out. So the word "church" in modern Bibles carries with it the baggage of "a house or building", which it shouldn't have. "The assembly" or "congregation" would be a better rendering.
Similarly, "baptism" isn't even translated, but merely transliterated. Baptism literally means, "to immerse", but since by the time the Bible was being translated into English, so many churches were dipping, pouring or sprinkling, the translators decided to just transliterate the word rather than translate what it really meant, so as not to ruffle any feathers. And some of our other "Bible" words are in need of updating or at least explaining: nobody knows what "sin" means anymore, or "repent"; these are words that fell out of English usage, except in churches, at least 200 years ago.
13:30 Nice outro graphic
Here in the Bible Belt, any "non-denominational" church is either theologically baptist, pentecostal, or a blend of the two. Label is irrelevant when your practice is about identical.
I think that this was one of the most informative videos you have produced recently! Thank you for that. I traveled recently to my home-state of Georgia and noticed a LOT of these types of churches in the smaller cities (New Life, New Hope, on and on). I wondered if they were affiliated with a larger group or were totally independent. Love your channel.
Great video/argument! It also seems that there is strong correlation between "nondenominational" churches and churches that follow one charismatic pastor more closely than any specific theology.
I honestly view non-denominationalism as dishonest at best and schismatic at worst. I don’t like hiding the group you’re a part of because you think it will attract more members. I also don’t like trying to go it alone and acting like you have a unique theology or don’t want to be hindered by labels. Again, that’s just dishonest.
Bait & Switch
Every church has a unique theology.
I appreciate this! It is good to bring clarity around the fact that all churches have a background and history, which influences what they teach. 👍🏽
This is similar to hiding where the food you eat comes from, or making it overly difficult to find out.
This is great. I've always wondered what was going on with all of these non-denominational churches. Super helpful.
You should do a video on the 24 different rites in Catholicism (Roman is only one) and the differences between them (leavened vs unleavened bread brought for consecration, art styles, style of baptism, age of certain sacraments, etc). Most Christians don’t know there are different rites or might mistake them for denominations because despite all being under the same pope, they have their own leadership layers below that and just look and feel so different from one another.
I have a friend who is Ukrainian Catholic, and when I mentioned it to some of my very Catholic relatives, even they didn't know it was a thing. I went to his wedding and it was very interesting seeing the differences between that service and a Roman Rite service
The Orthodox heretical churches have their own popes
I always thought the best way was to figure out where the senior staff went to seminary and pretty much you're set.
For me "nondenominational" brings up questions about accountability... is there anyone outside of the church that can hold the pastor, leaders, and congregation accountable for what they do and don't do in ministry? Where are the checks and balances? It would be interesting to see how these "nondenominational" denominations handle those issues.
Well... CoC's don't have oversight and are truly independent. Mostly the elders ran the show and we would have monthly men's meetings to discuss issues. If a man was decently studied and showed an error it would be studied by all and if needed a correction could be made.
But.... they are pretty well steeped in the same dogma so most issues were very small.
(I'm no longer CoC just giving an honest account)
The elders are the highest accountability structure. If they mess up, it’s God alone they have to answer to. Being that I’ve seen a lot of denominations make some serious mistakes I think the accountability aspect may be a wash except to say if it goes bad at the top of a denomination more people are affected.
I love this one brother keep up the hard work. Church need to stop lying to people and hiding behind Non-denominational
I grew up in CoC and it took me until high school to realize we really were just another denomination. Its easy to declare yourself the one true church if you can claim every other church is following a denomination started by men. You just have to ignore that you're also a part of a group of churches who can trace their roots back to movements started by men.
Oh how I wish I could give more than one thumbs up! Excellent video, as always.
The church in which I was raised switched from non-denominational to baptist when I was a kid. Nothing really changed. I just remember the music getting a lot better.
A few years later, the church split, with half the congregation (including my family) leaving with the pastor to form a new church while the folks that stayed reverted back to non-denominational.
It was very strange to me as a child 😂
I appreciate your videos so much. I grew up in a Church of God (Cleveland) church until I was 20+ years old and never knew most of the information that you have provided in most of your videos.
The most recent conversation/debate I've been enjoying is Evangelical vs Non-Evangelical churches, or the argument of "Who is the Sunday gathering PRIMARLY designed for?". 15 years ago, I would have never thought I would be basically taking a stand AGAINST going to evangelical churches. Weird how Christ works in us.
Sabbath keeper?
“The ekklesia met”
Ekklesia just means assembly
Only Believers would want to assemble, right? It wasn’t for seekers, the assembly was for the Blood-bought.
Bible studies were for seekers.
@@truthnottradition7it doesn’t seem so
Unfortunately
Shabbat is a blessing rejected by most Believers as a very effective strategy of the devil.
The Apostles and all the disciples assembled in their synagogues on Shabbat as Messiah did, every Shabbat. After the Resurrection as well as before His sacrifice.
When Paul came round, they met after work the first day of the week to hear him, starting & staying so late that once a man fell out the window asleep.
These evening assemblies in homes of the rich were more to understand the fullness revealed in Him than subbing for Shabbat keeping as the Believers certainly were in the synagogues for Shabbat!
Not getting circumcised anymore nor making sacrifices in Temple anymore were not antithetical to keeping the Feasts and Shabbats!
When the gospel moved out to wholly pagan lands, they had no synagogues there so the infant Church (local Believers) just met in homes where their Messianic Jewish apostles were assembling on Shabbats.
Nice video! It made me think of these questions; they're rhetorical in nature 😅
Which denomination did Jesus belong to?
Which denomination did Jesus teach his apostles and other followers had to join?
Which denomination did the apostles teach we must join to be saved in the body of Christ?
Again, just rhetorical 😁
Besides kids know it all.....
...and I'm just a kid 🤣😅
Have a great day everyone 😊
I'm sharing this video. Thank you for making this. This concept seems to allude people. But a true non-denominational church is its own denomination at best.
I’ve always tried to distinguish between a “denomination” and “tradition.” A tradition is a more broad term that defines the historical linage of a church or group of churches. A denomination is a group that organizes and has some semblance of authority over churches (I use the term “authority” loosely as not all denominations would see their organization as having any authority over them.) For example, the tradition I belong to is the Baptist one, I believe Southern Baptists, Cooperative Baptist, Free Will Baptists, and others to be part of this same tradition. However, the denomination I belong to the ABCUSA. Therefore, I think it’s possible for “nondenominational” churches to belong to the Pentecostal tradition while not belonging to a “denomination” in the traditional sense.
On a side note, I would be interested to hear more on your channel about nondenominational churches and how many of them may have other churches that are part of their network or “campuses” as people call them. They basically function as a s denomination with the lead pastor being a bishop. Also, I’m curious how networks like the Gospel Coalition might serve in similar ways to denominations for many of these churches.
In the case of Baptists in particular, I would consider the SBC, ABCUSA, and other such organizations as affiliations or associations rather than denominations. And I would regard Baptists as part of the larger English Separatist tradition. So by default, I'd have to use the word "denomination" for Baptists in particular.
To answer a question 1, I use the term “denominational tradition” i.e. Methodist, Reformed, Pentecostal, Anglican; whereas I to answer question 2, I say “denominational sect” i.e. ELCA, Southern Baptist, PCA, Calvary Chapel
The church I grew up in rejected the concept of tradition altogether. If you asked them, "Which denominational tradition do you follow?", they would have answered, "We don't follow tradition. We follow the Bible."
City Gates says “conversative” not “conservative” which, based on “God’s Word verse-by-verse” earlier, I would say is intentionally conVERSative.
I grew up attending what was called an "Interdenominational" Church as opposed to "nondenominational." During my years there, one minister was Methodist and he was followed by a Presbyterian. Members of the church had grown up in various mainline Protestant denominations and the congregation seemed pretty happy with the services and practices.
Interdenominational is such a green flag to me compared to nondenominational
Sorry but I disagreed by minute 4... if I ask their denomination, I'm asking who are they affiliated with or governed under. Any church not affiliated with a larger governing body is non denominational... if I go to a restaurant, and it isn't part of a franchise and there is a sign on the door that says independently owned and operated, I'm not going to say that well they have burgers and fries so they are a McDonald's.... or they have creamy soft serve chocolate milk shakes so they must be a Wendy's or they flame broil so they are a burger King. Similarity isn't sufficient to establish something like a modern denomination...which didn't exist in the first few centuries.
I was raised in a denomination and would sometimes visit a nondemonational pentecostal church. While they were similar I could immediately spot the differences between their church and the one I grew up in. I could visit a Baptist or a methodist church and see their differences and similarities. Yet if I went to another church of the same denomination the similarities were greater than the differences.
Why? The same way that if I go to a McDonald's in LA it will be similar to one in Atlanta.
Personally, it's time we tear down the barriers between the body of Christ. Heaven will have calvinists and Catholics, pentecostals and baptists and evey other denominational boundary we created. Christ doesn't care about the name on the door....he cares about who's name is on our heart.
Amen!
Further confirmation of the brilliant work you do. My friend always asks people when they say their church was non-denominational, "Oh which non-denominational denomination is it?" This whole non-denominational thing has been so disingenuous, or willfully naïve at best.
Yeah, with the demise of "organized" traditional religion, they needed something to confuse the next generation even better. While not all of those Churches are equal, there is a pattern most of them follow: Pentecostal, informal, Biblical inerrant, traditionalist, Trump supporter. Its all over the place with the odd exception far and between. I don't know if they really have such a secret umbrella of their own, but to say the least, there is so much they have all in common compared to what they disagree on... Is that simply occasional? I don't think so.
It's weird but when I ask what denomination a church is, I'm asking #2. Like assemblies of God, etc
Assemblies of God is Pentecostal.
@@luker.6799 I know. Haha.
I see two guidelines for Christians when it comes to denominations: 1) putting your denomination before Christianity is distracting, 2) being opaque about your church organization's beliefs or associations is deceptive.
Nailed it! The non-denominational label helps obscure many cults.
Although this begs the question, can there be a truly “non-denominational” church?
Baptist and Pentecostal are rarely called cults.
@@FishermensCorner If a legitimately healthy church chooses to go with a name that doesn’t clearly identify their denomination, then it should be easily obtainable on their website, social media, or printed printed paperwork available when there’s a worship service. The cults want to obscure as much as possible.
@xray342radio that's absolutely false. Most non-denominational churches are Pentecostal or Baptist and they're rarely considered cults... like that claim doesn't even make any sense, I see a Jehovah Witness church, not being called non-denominational, I see Mormon churches, not call non denominational... are there often called cults...
@@FishermensCorner All religions around the world are cults
Though I wouldn't generally call them cults in a modern sense, there is a type of Pentecost that denies the Trinity. I would absolutely call them a cult, they are heathens pretending to be Christian to decieve people.
Excellent description Josh! I agree that churches need to be crystal clear who they are once someone goes inside to visit. I had visited several churches back in the late 90's - early 2000's and didn't have a clue what the believed if they said Non-Denominational. It's exactly why I started going to the Library every day to study the reference works to know what each denom. believes. Of course, that still didn't help when going into the Single name building like you mentioned "Journey" or "The Quest" But, by getting to know what certain groups believe, like Lutheran vs Disciples of Christ. I'm formerly raised Anderson Church Of God, and yes, they even don't compile lists of members. I've been trying to contact my Pastor and wife from 1970's , and can't even find them!