Religion

[Pike11]

I go to a Pentecotal Church. Born again Baby!! NO religion, NO rituals. Just God.  

[HyperShadow100]

I go to a WELS (Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod) Church. Baptised and raised as a Lutheran Christian, and proud of it. smile  

[SakuraKeirani]

how come it says theres 3 pages.. but when u try to look on the third it says something... weird >_>  

[[ + Aly + ]]

x0xkasumix0x

how come it says theres 3 pages.. but when u try to look on the third it says something... weird >_>

Gaia's been wierd lately. xp  

[Dopetoinfinity_13]

I'm just christian...no fancy seventh day adventist or anything  

[VashuTStampedo]

ShadowAngel X24

VashuTStampedo

Forte X24

I grew up in a catholic family/church till I was age 10.
From there I went Born Again up till I was 15.
Now I am Uber Born Again Christian.

Uber Born Again Christian?

I know Uber means new. So you're a New born again christian?

über doesnt mean new. confused It actually means "super" or "ultimate" or to the effect. I'm German. It can also be used in terms of "very" as in a "large amount" but not in quantity; rather quality.

Like "very" [born-again] Christian

Neu in German means new, or nochmalig. wink

When I ran it through the translator - uberlagen means superior. uber just means new. And some dude told me this somewhere. But ... eh.  

[[ + Aly + ]]

VashuTStampedo

ShadowAngel X24

VashuTStampedo

Forte X24

I grew up in a catholic family/church till I was age 10.
From there I went Born Again up till I was 15.
Now I am Uber Born Again Christian.

Uber Born Again Christian?

I know Uber means new. So you're a New born again christian?

über doesnt mean new. confused It actually means "super" or "ultimate" or to the effect. I'm German. It can also be used in terms of "very" as in a "large amount" but not in quantity; rather quality.

Like "very" [born-again] Christian

Neu in German means new, or nochmalig. wink

When I ran it through the translator - uberlagen means superior. uber just means new. And some dude told me this somewhere. But ... eh.

Uberlagen does mean superior. But uber doesnt mean new. =P It's really not too much of a difference. If you're thinking under "new" terms, realize that "new" can have a certain amount of "more quality" to it as opposed to old. wink  

[ItIsWritten]

I am a non-denominational Christian.

There are a lot more non-denominational Christians here than I thought there would be... but it seems like some of them have a different definition of that term than I do...?  

[Woodlock]

I ask this of all who claim to be such: exactly what is a 'nondenominational christian'? To me, this is like saying "I'm an unaffiliated club member'; this is impossible, as to be a member of a club you must be affiliated with it. I am a baptist. Why? Because they follow a particular doctrine. Does that mean I believe only baptists are saved? Not a chance. However, I agree with the Fundamental Independent Baptists on virtually every point of doctrine. I oppose the Southern Baptist Convention for it's ecumenical movement. Does that mean I think they are all going to hell? Not quite(LOL j/k, the answer is no). However, any church with doctrine (in other words, EVERY church) is a denominational church. If you believe that Jesus is God, risen from the dead, paid for your sins completely and is in heaven waiting for us, that's a doctrine. "Nondenominational" means that the Mormon doctrine of man-God is equally as valid as the biblical Trinity. This cannot be, as two opposing doctrines cannot coexist. Roman Catholics are a denomination, Church of England is a denomination, Pentacostal is a denomination, ICC is a denomination, Baptist is a denomination, and so on. The church as a whole (or in the case of Catholics and Church of England the authority of the church) is in general agreement on doctrine. To go between any two named denominations is to see a great deal of difference. ICC believes they are the only ones who can be saved; Baptists do not. Catholics hold the Pope as the Vicar, or stand-in, for God; The Church of England has their King in that role. Most of these groups have nonfellowship (which means that they require rebaptism to go from one to the other, do not accept each other's Statements of Faith, and cannot take the Lord's Supper with each other). Why? Because their doctrines are different. Each group considers the others to be nonbelievers. These groups cannot accept outside baptisms or allow communion within their church with others because God commands us not to have such fellowship with nonbelievers. Baptists and Catholics are probably the best and most prominent example, because the Baptist's line(the AnaBaptists, or Paulicians) declared nonfellowship with Catholics not long after the creation of the Catholic church in 250 AD. Catholics do not accept Baptist baptisms, do not accept Baptists are saved, and will not share communion with them knowingly. The same is in reverse; baptists do not accept these things from the Catholics either. (Note that this no longer applies to the Southern Baptists in many cases, as the ecumenical movement has infected the Southern Baptist Convention quite badly). It is because each of these groups believe the other one's doctrine is false (and thus unsavable). There is a right answer.

In any case, I would like more info on exactly what a 'nondenominational' church is, what they stand for, and what they're doctrine is. If they differ, can they truly be nondenominational?  

[PreacherBoy]

Yeah... it seems to me that Nondenominational churches are becoming a pretty popular denomination. (Yeah you heard what I said)  

[freakybaby]

biggrin Wow, sooooo many religions

stare makes you feel small in the world

wink Who cares? I LOVE YOU ALL!!

ninja What religion am I?

3nodding I'm Baptist, uh huh that's right. 3nodding  

[Teh-Invinsible-Maccaroneh]

I'm non- denomiential but I act Pentecostal. Which makes it funny when I'm at church.  

[ItIsWritten]

Woodlock

snip

I think you have a slightly different idea of the meaning of nondenominational than I do. Nondenominational is not the same as ecumenical. (I agree with you on the ecumenical movement; if the faiths are exclusive, how can they be united?) Also, please note that some people on this thread have reffered to nondenominational in kind of a trans-denominational sense, but that is not what it means to me, either.

To define non-denominational, we must first define what a denomination is. Merriam-Webster Online defines it as: "a religious organization uniting local congregations in a single legal and administrative body." A church that is non-denominational is therefore a local congregation not affiliated with other local congregations in a legal and administrative body (which I will from here out refer to as earthly organization or leadership). Of course, there are other non-denominational congregations out there, but we are not connected by any leadership other than Christ's. Each congregation, if it has enough eligible men, will (hopefully) have elders and deacons appointed, but their authority does not extend outside the local congregation.

You may wonder, what is wrong with earthly leadership over more than one local church? Well, quite simply, there is nothing said about it in the bible. Paul tells Timothy to appoint elders and deacons over local congregations, and is recorded as having done it himself, iirc, but there is no other organizational structure spoken of in the New Testament.

In essence, the "club" metaphor you used is irrelevant, since denominations are not commanded, and therefore have no scriptural value. Thus, belonging to a "club" is worthless. Sorry if this sounds harsh, but it's what I believe.

Well, there you have it. I hope I answered all of your questions, but if not, just let me know!

Note: I'm not going to be around Gaia much for a while, as it has been distracting me from my schoolwork, but I will keep this one page bookmarked so I can try to respond when needed.  

[PreacherBoy]

ItIsWritten

Woodlock

snip

I think you have a slightly different idea of the meaning of nondenominational than I do. Nondenominational is not the same as ecumenical. (I agree with you on the ecumenical movement; if the faiths are exclusive, how can they be united?) Also, please note that some people on this thread have reffered to nondenominational in kind of a trans-denominational sense, but that is not what it means to me, either.

To define non-denominational, we must first define what a denomination is. Merriam-Webster Online defines it as: "a religious organization uniting local congregations in a single legal and administrative body." A church that is non-denominational is therefore a local congregation not affiliated with other local congregations in a legal and administrative body (which I will from here out refer to as earthly organization or leadership). Of course, there are other non-denominational congregations out there, but we are not connected by any leadership other than Christ's. Each congregation, if it has enough eligible men, will (hopefully) have elders and deacons appointed, but their authority does not extend outside the local congregation.

You may wonder, what is wrong with earthly leadership over more than one local church? Well, quite simply, there is nothing said about it in the bible. Paul tells Timothy to appoint elders and deacons over local congregations, and is recorded as having done it himself, iirc, but there is no other organizational structure spoken of in the New Testament.

In essence, the "club" metaphor you used is irrelevant, since denominations are not commanded, and therefore have no scriptural value. Thus, belonging to a "club" is worthless. Sorry if this sounds harsh, but it's what I believe.

Well, there you have it. I hope I answered all of your questions, but if not, just let me know!

Note: I'm not going to be around Gaia much for a while, as it has been distracting me from my schoolwork, but I will keep this one page bookmarked so I can try to respond when needed.

This is the same as an independent Baptist church. Even though we call ourselves Baptist, there is no organization or head over our church. You are exactly right that there should be no authority over the local church but God.

However, my definition of denomination is more along the lines of "a group of local churches who share the same set of fundamental doctrines." Am I wrong about this? If this is the case, then many "non-denominational" churches could be grouped together as a denomination.

Unfortunately, what I've found with many "non-denominational" churches or organizations is that they avoid most controversial points of doctrine in order to please any denomination (any set of fundamental doctrines). This is ecumenical, even if all of the groups call themselves Christian. These types of congregations tend to focus solely on love, and worship, and never address many important aspects of Christianity (like the source of our salvation, or eternal security, or what sin is, etc.).

Hopefully your church is not like these.  

[ItIsWritten]

KiBlast

This is the same as an independent Baptist church. Even though we call ourselves Baptist, there is no organization or head over our church. You are exactly right that there should be no authority over the local church but God.

However, my definition of denomination is more along the lines of "a group of local churches who share the same set of fundamental doctrines." Am I wrong about this? If this is the case, then many "non-denominational" churches could be grouped together as a denomination.

While we could certainly be considered a denomination in that we are a group of people that have common beliefs, the common definition (at least in my area) is that of a group of people under authority on earth. Therefore, to separate ourselves from the common definition, we refer to ourselves as non-denominational. However, I'm learning that there are also other definitions of that term, so I suppose we could be misunderstood calling ourselves non-denominational as well.

By that same coin, why would you call yourself a Baptist if A) you could be mistaken as an organized Baptist, and B) (most importantly, IMHO) there is no biblical example of the term "Baptist" being applied to a congregation or an individual Christian?

KiBlast

Unfortunately, what I've found with many "non-denominational" churches or organizations is that they avoid most controversial points of doctrine in order to please any denomination (any set of fundamental doctrines). This is ecumenical, even if all of the groups call themselves Christian. These types of congregations tend to focus solely on love, and worship, and never address many important aspects of Christianity (like the source of our salvation, or eternal security, or what sin is, etc.).

Hopefully your church is not like these.

To quote Paul (or rather, his english translation), "Certainly not!" wink While love and worship are wonderful, it counts for nothing if we aren't doing it correctly. We struggle with varying interpretations of the scriptures, and I, at least, have no problem with someone trying to show me, using the bible, that I am wrong.