I had a couple encounters with Catholics and other denominations that tried to convince that being non denominational is wrong (I personally never really looked into different denominations but follow God and the scriptures he’s provided us with)
Some of them even believed that they are the one and only denomination that is correct and if you don’t follow that beliefs or their traditions you’re not gonna be saved and while burn in hell.
I’ve been reading the gospels and there’s many instances where Jesus says that they only way you are saved is through him and having faith and believing in him will give you eternal like no matter the church or the denomination. So does the denomination really matter?
Very few denominations/traditions say that if you aren’t a Christian within their tradition/denomination that you aren’t saved and are going to burn in hell.
For example, the official [Roman] Catholic position is that they have the fullness of the truth, and thus Christians outside of communion with Rome are lacking the fullness of the Christian faith; but nevertheless, are still Christian. This was officially articulated at the Second Vatican Council (there are certain Traditionalists, who are opposed to Vatican II, but these groups are considered schismatic and sectarian by Catholic teaching–these traditionalists and ultra-traditionalists include Sedevacantists who insist that not only are all Protestants and Orthodox not truly Christian, but say the same thing about mainstream Catholics as well.
Outside of certain Fundamentalist groups, the vast majority of Protestant denominations recognize all Christians who confess the Nicene Creed (either explicitly or implicitly) as holding to the Christian faith; with an understanding that all who have faith in Christ (regardless of denomination) are saved. There are certain Fundamentalist groups which may disagree and argue only those who belong to their particular denomination are saved, but these are the outliers not representative of normative views among most Protestants.
I know of some self-claimed non-denominational groups which argue theirs is the only way to be saved, and go so far to argue that all denominations are apostate and their members going to hell. The irony in that by delineating themselves as a group they are, of course, a denomination.
I am, in a lot of ways, uncomfortable with presenting salvation as primarily a theology exam. I don’t think getting our doctrine right is what determines that we are saved; but I do believe that good theology is vital, not as to how we get saved; but good theology promotes faith in Christ, while bad theology has significant danger.
If you were to ask me, therefore, if it is impossible for (e.g.) a Mormon to be saved. I don’t think it would be right to say Mormons can’t be saved. Even though I believe Mormonism to be a deeply grotesque perversion of Christianity, so far removed from what is meaningfully Christian as to not be Christian at all. Mormonism is, in no meaningful way, Christian. But does that mean that a person raised in the Mormon church can’t be saved? It would be wrong for me to say they can’t be saved; but I can say that I desire them to come out of it and to come to a real Christian church (whether Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox) so they can hear a true confession of the God who reveals Himself in Christ, and hear the true Gospel of His grace. Because while I can’t say a Mormon can’t be saved, I can say there is no salvation in Mormonism.
Ultimately our salvation depends on what God has done for us in Christ, who suffered and died for us; our salvation depends on who God is, and what God has done. It doesn’t depend on us and what we do–including on whether we get all our doctrinal i’s dotted and t’s crossed. But it does matter what we are confessing and preaching–which is why bad theology is detrimental. Not because salvation depends on us getting things right; but because bad preaching can harm faith, and rather than steering us toward Christ, it can steer us away from Christ.
Jesus said that where two or more are gathered in His Name, there is where He will be in the midst of them (Matthew 18:20).
One of the problems with man’s flesh, is that it seeks status, pomp, wanting to be recognized and exalted. That is of this world, not Christ’s Kingdom.
Remember how Lord Jesus warned His disciples against the manner of the Pharisees, how the Pharisees loved the upper rooms at feasts, and the chief seats at the synagogue, enlarged the borders of their garments, and loved being greeted at the market places, and enjoyed being called Rabbi. (Matthew 23). They sought to exalt themselves, which is a work of the flesh.
The Church organizations and Church buildings of today are not Christ’s true Church. Today, the true Church is of The Spirit, not of any material or flesh manifestation. This is why Jesus said what He did about two or more gathered in His Name. If you study online with a group of believers, or study with a TV pastor or YouTube video pastor, you are in Church according to Lord Jesus’ interpretation.
But what it all boils down to is, whoever you listen to, are they teaching the actual Word of God? and HOW can you know? According to each believer’s ability, we are to check out our teachers by going into God’s written Word for ourselves.
Now I am not promoting any such idea of not attending a Church. We as brethren in Christ Jesus should associate with each other.
You are absolutely correct. Simply put, Jesus is “the way, the truth, and the life.” John 14:6 Jesus is the key to Salvation. It is simply, accepted by you or not, a fact that without Him, you can not enter into Heaven. It is simply a fact, again, accepted by you or not, that “neither is there salvation in any other: for there is no other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” Acts 4:12
God made His plan of salvation simple and easy for all to obtain.
" For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God." John 3:16-18
First, notice this. Jesus does not say “If you eat meat on Friday, or don’t eat meat at all, or walk a half a mile on the Sabbath day, or if you say ten “Hail Marry’s”” No He says, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” Whoever. This means? Whoever. Anyone. Everyone. All you have to do is accept Jesus and believe He rose from the dead, and you shall be saved. Romans 10:9.
It also says this. “Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.” Does it say “If you murder someone, or if you do not follow this or that tenets of said religion, or if you do all sorts of evil?” No. It says, “but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.” Whoever? Whoever. Anyone. Everyone. That simply? “has not believed” is? “Condemned already.”
There is nothing you need to do except not believe in Jesus, and you are condemned already because He is the only true way to Heaven. He is the Door, the Gate, the Shepard. He and the Father are one. John 10, Romans 10:13 says, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” So any religion that does not have this simple truth, Jesus IS Lord, and He is God, is a false religion.
Peter
Most people curious about Christianity will approach it through a denomination. This is because they support numerous brick and mortar churches and seminaries as well as pass along their traditions and teaching to the children of their members such that most Christians are raised in one denomination or tradition or another.
Perhaps the biggest problem with a denomination is that they are defined by a particular doctrinal package which is usually offered as the complete and final version of Christianity. As a result, anything different is wrong and a threat. Also questioning is discouraged so growth and maturity are often inhibited. The purpose of a church is supposed to be helping each member grow into Christ-likeness (Ephesians chapter 4). Instead a weekly sermon is given that echoes the lectures the pastor heard when he was in seminary.
Once a denomination is established, it is almost impossible to make any changes. In the rare situations where a pastor sees a better truth, his congregation will usually act to prevent him from following it. In a way, both pastor and congregation become prisoners of their system. Another limiting characteristic is the division between pastor and congregation. Having a pastor is often seen as a way to avoid having to do much about faith because the pastor is the one responsible.
Seeing one’s group as on the inside track or having the “right” doctrine can contribute to the self-righteousness of the Pharisees. It also can be seen with the Gnostics and in the ancient Mystery religions. Feelings of affinity that one can have for a particular sports team or school is also a way people can feel that they are special. Rituals and sacraments can also contribute to feelings of unique favor.
Paul calls denominational affiliation immaturity (1Cor 3:1-4). The person who feels at ease accepting what someone has told them about Christ may have more faith in who told them than in Christ. This may even cause people to misplace their faith. Trusting in a pastor or a denomination may cause one to fall short of actual trust in Jesus.
Some people advance in their faith to the point where they may have grown uncomfortable with the doctrine of their denomination. These often try other denominations and may even try so-called non-denominational or bible churches. There are some who find that there is no church that has a consistent practice that is acceptable. These are often berated for failing to observe Hebrews 10:25 which may speak more to the necessity of the faithful remnant of Israel to survive the tribulation. If Christians seek to draw nearer their Savior and denominations tend to draw nearer the world, seeking fellowship outside churches and instruction from some from over the the Internet may be the only viable options left.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. - 2 Timothy 4:3-4
I’ve had this exact encounter I can’t even tell you how many times. And, honestly, it is more off-putting than any Christian should be. I don’t understand why some feel the need to be so aggressive.
Friends
There are some great thoughts shared in this thread, a cornucopia of wisdom. I have very little that I could share that has not already been said…. except this.
The term “Denomination” carries a different meaning to different people, and definitely to different groups. The actual term only means “a name given to something to distinguish it from others”; and it simply means a classification, name, or unit of value. So in Christianity, “denomination” is simply a name given to distinguish a group who hold a common set of beliefs or traditions. Even “non-denominational” gatherings are actually a denomination (as I see it. Others see it diferently).
In my fifty years in The Kingdom, I have found even local groups who identify as a particular denomination still demonstrate quite a bit of variety from church to church. One gathering of a particular denomination may be quite conservative or quite liberal as compared to a different gathering of the same denomination in a different location. It seems the Holy Spirit grows (sanctifies) the individual AS HE SEES FIT, and uses the fellowship of the local gathering to do it. I have worshiped with many folks, who are growing within an assembly, who don’t actually agree with all of the distinctives of the name written on the flashy readerboard out by the street, or over the door on the marquee. I am personally more inclined to counsel a new believer to choose a congregation where you find you can learn, grow, and serve. Move on when you find that ceases, or when the distinctives begin to clash with what The Holy Spirit is producing in your life. This has been my journey too. I was brought to belief while attending a congregation I would not attend today, but The Lord knew what I needed, and when I needed it. None of my upbringing was wasted.
I do understand that the core idea of “non-denominational” generally is meant as “not belonging to an already established denomination”. Which is, I think, the only sense that makes sense. Where things become troublesome, in my opinion, is when “non-denominational” is used as a kind of contrast to “denominational”–especially when it is presented in a valuating kind of way. As though “non-denominational” is in some sense presented better than “denominational”, or as though “non-denominational” somehow excludes traditions, doctrinal standards, or a set of theological ideas and forms of Christian praxis based around a particular set of ideas; and where statements such as “I just believe what the Bible says” or “I just believe in Jesus” exist–as though there aren’t a myriad of factors coloring, influencing, and shaping those beliefs, how those beliefs are expressed, and how they are put into practice.
Further, when many congregations share a particular set of beliefs and practices, with a shared formal naming format (e.g. Church of Christ, Calvary Chapel, Vineyard, etc) this is very clearly a denomination in every sense of the word.
Disclaimer: I am not trying to present these three groups as the same kind of thing, only that I have encountered members of these groups say that theirs is “non-denominational” when they meet the most basic criteria for what constitutes a denomination.
I bring this up, also, because I have encountered many who self-identify as “non-denominational” who have acted as judgmental, or more-so, in the fashion described in the Opening Post. I have been told, in no uncertain terms, that I am not saved and that I will be damned because I am part of a denomination, or because I am not part of their group.
I am not seeking, in saying this, to castigate all who self-identify as non-denominational or who belong to churches that self-identify as such; only to cover a wider territory on the matter. Again, I think there is a logic in calling a church “non-denominational” when the meaning is simply “not belonging to an already established denomination”; though we should be honest that once such a church, and organizational structure is established, it does pass from “non-denominational” into being a denomination. Because while “Small Town Community Church” may not be part of an established Lutheran, Baptist, Methodist, or {fill in the blank} denomination; it does become an entity of its own, with its own identity, with a set of ideas, beliefs, and practices which denominate it as, in some way, distinct.
Well said. I sense your experience has taught you well on this subject.
As you know, The Bible has little to say on this contemporary phenomenon, unless we gather some pertinent wisdom from Paul’s admonishments to the Corinthian gathering.
“For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” (1 Corinthians 1:11-13)
Here it seems the Corinthian divisions were within the church, and, as far as we can tell, had not splintered the church into discrete gatherings, each with their own traditions, routines, hierarchies, and even architecture. It’s hard to say how “bad” it got. It’s notable that even in the first century, this early “denominationalism” was seen as “contentions”, which are, to The Apostle, an “evident work of the flesh” (Galatians 5:19-21). It was as true then as it still is today, (as your own experience has revealed). The most sobering thing about The Apostle’s list of “evident works of the flesh”, in his letter to the Galatiians, is his dire warning that “those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.” This should make us think long-and-hard about our recalcitrant denominational stances. I fully understand anyone who says they desire to fellowship with a particular denomination because “those people see the truths taught in the Bible as I do”. The “contention” arises when groups feel the need to convince other groups of their “wrongness”. We have a professional “accuser” (Heb. Śāṭān), and we sure do not need to help him ply his trade.
In the few discussions I have had with others on this topic, I have been told many consider a “denomination” to be an organization with multiple likeminded gatherings (local churches), but with some sort of central government or leadership. This implies that a “non-denominational” church is self-governing, autonomous, independent, and/or answers to no other outside human authority. This definition seems to be more organizational and less ecclesiastical to me. Still, it may be as-good-as-any working definition, although it seems inaccurate to the true definition of the word “denomination”.
What I consider noteworthy in the Apostle’s rebuke of factionalism among the Corinthians, is among the factions there was one that said “I am of Christ”. While, certainly those who played apostolic favorites were bad “I am of Cephas” “I am of Apollos” “I am of Paul”, but the Apostle condemns all factionalism, and that includes those who were creativing division by saying “I am of Christ”. Where the Apostle counseled unity–all were in Christ, because while one may have planted and another watered, it was God who caused the growth, and thus the whole were in Christ, having received the same Christian baptism, and thus as the Apostle says in chapter 12, all were baptized in the same Spirit, drank of the same Spirit, and it was the same Spirit who wrought the diversity of charisms within the Church–thus the whole Body is united under the same Head, and thus one member cannot say to another member, “I do not need you”.
I consider this relevant when, even in modern times where Christians are tragically divided along denominational lines, some will insist “I am just a Christian” but then continue to perpetuate division, as though their brethren are somehow other-than or less-than. What the Apostle would teach us is the same as he taught the Corinthians, we are united in the same Christ, by the one and same Spirit, having received the same baptism. Our divisions are wrong, even when we insist “I am of Christ” as though Christ Himself should be divided.
As for this:
I would agree that this isn’t particularly accurate. We can consider just one example: the Baptist tradition. The Baptist tradition has always held to a set of distinctives, one of which is the autonomy of the local congregation. This is why Baptist denominations historically exist as free associations or conventions. E.g. the Southern Baptist Convention.
The scriptures are not vague regarding God’s design for our unity in Jesus, as a testimony to the world (By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another." (John 13:35). It is the work of The Holy Spirit. When the world sees us bickering among ourselves, accusing each other, harshly correcting, disfellowshipping, dividing, etc, we lose an important aspect of why God left us here after we were raised to newness of life.
We have been given very clear instructions to abide in Jesus as we edify (build-up) His body. That means encouraging, teaching, being peacemakers, showing deference and patience, reassure whenever possible, warn waywardness, but in gentleness and meekness, live tranquil simple lives, not pursuing the same goals as the world, and always being ready to explain the hope that others see in our words and actions.
One additional observation that I can add is Paul’s subtle use of the preposition ἐγὼ μέν εἰμι… (“I am of…”). The repeated ἐγώ (“I”) emphasizes personal allegiance:
ἐγὼ μέν εἰμι Παύλου -“I am of Paul.”
ἐγὼ δὲ Ἀπολλῶ - “But I am of Apollos.”
ἐγὼ δὲ Κηφᾶ - “But I am of Cephas.”
ἐγὼ δὲ Χριστοῦ - “But I am of Christ.”
The stress falls on “I” and “of”-“my group,” “my leader,” “my identity.” The problem is not simply whom they claimed to follow, but the sectarian mindset behind the claim.
This fits perfectly with Paul’s remedy. He doesn’t say, “Join the Christ party.” Instead, he asks..
“Is Christ divided?” (1 Cor. 1:13)
The implied answer is, “Of course not!” If Christ is one, then His body should not be fractured into competing camps.
Ironically, this passage has perennial relevance. Christians today can make the same mistake:
None of those labels is inherently wrong if they simply describe theological convictions. But the moment they become primary identities that eclipse our shared identity in Christ or foster pride and division, we’ve recreated the very problem Paul rebuked in Corinth.
Paul’s concern is not the existence of theological differences; it’s elevating secondary allegiances above our common union with Christ. That’s why his solution is not to abolish theological reflection but to bring everyone back to the cross:
“For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel… lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power” (1 Cor. 1:17).ch. 2:1, 4, 13; [2 Cor. 10:10; 11:6; 2 Pet. 1:16] Cited from Isa. 29:14; [Job 5:12, 13; Jer. 8:9; Matt. 11:25]
The cross levels every believer. No party can boast there.
Our salvation does not depend on the denomination we attend. Our salvation depends on whether we know the Truth or not and whether we abide by that Truth. If your denomination does not teach you the right Truth, then that denomination is not for you.