Southern speech often contains colloquialisms that reference impossibilities. One example would be the commonly used phrase, "Cut the light on." Now you and I both know that it is literally impossible to "cut" a light on, and that anytime a circuit is "cut," the light would go off. BUT, people still use the phrase and it has become acceptable.
I personally believe we have done the same thing in the religious realm, so I want to pose a question -- Is it REALLY even possible to be a non-denominational church? Without question, a church can be interdenominational (combining and utilizing aspects of various denominations), but what about non-denominational? Is it even possible for a church to be void of any and all denominational practices and/or traditions?
Here's my observance. It has become a common practice for churches to remove their denominational titles from their church signs. Some believe it helps them attract more guests into their services. I personally agree that there are SOME times when such action has merit and removes "real" barriers (and I'm all for removing barriers); but taking the denominational title off the church sign still does NOT make it non-denominational -- it just means they removed a word from the sign. The church still adheres to a doctrinal position of some sort. Some will claim the Bible as their doctrinal statement and it should be, but let me give you a word of caution regarding the spinsters who try to be cute and say they base all of their beliefs on the Bible -- BEWARE -- strong denominational churches make the same claim. To borrow another Southern expression... "That dog won't hunt!"
It is obvious that non-denominational churches adhere to doctrinal positions with denominational slants, because they differ in their positions regarding faith and practice. Consider some of the the variations among non-denominational churches. Regarding baptism, some baptize by immersion, some by sprinkling, some by pouring, and some baptize with the Holy Spirit. Regarding communion, some use unleavened bread, some use loaves, some drink wine, and some drink grape juice. Regarding pastors, some allow females, some require males, some allow divorcees, and some do not. Regarding elders and deacons, some have them, some do not. Regarding salvation, some believe once saved always saved, some believe true believers are secure, and some believe you can fall from grace. Regarding speaking in tongues, some believe it still occurs and some believe it has ceased. Some believe in faith healing and some do not. Some believe the Bible IS the Word of God and others believe it contains the Word of God. These are just a few of the MAJOR differences among "so-called" non-denominational churches.
I contend that each "non-denominational" church takes on the denominational background of the pastor(s), because he was raised, discipled, and trained in a church of some denominational persuasion. He attended a seminary that adheres to some denominational slant. If he wasn't trained or hasn't been proven in a church setting, then he is a novice and doesn't even meet the requirements to be a pastor. Without question, every church has to adhere to some position regarding salvation, baptism, the Lord's supper, the inerrancy of Scripture, etc.; otherwise it is nothing more than a crowd of people with a diversity of opinions.
Some use non-denominationalism as a marketing tool, but they still hold to a strict doctrinal position influenced by a particular denomination-- although they DO NOT LIKE TO PUBLISH THEIR DOCTRINAL POSITIONS, because it would reveal their slant! Interestingly enough, Thom Rainer points out in his book, "Surprising Insights from the Unchurched," that while churches are removing their denominations from their signs, those outside the church actually want to know what group they affiliate with. While in melting pots like South Florida or New York City a denominational title may turn a few away, the Christian culture of the Deep South cries out to know.
Think about it -- if a pastor has no doctrinal position, then how can he preach? Either Jesus is God or He's not... either the Bible is inerrant or it's not... either salvation comes by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone or it does not... and the list goes on. Paul told Timothy to be ready to give an answer to any man who asked. How could he answer if he didn't have a specific system of beliefs? It's been said that "If you stand for nothing, then you'll fall for anything," so you better know where you stand regarding doctrine.
I applaud those who try to be "biblical, not traditional;" but please realize that no church is truly void of all denominationalism. I'll leave you with my final observation..."Today, non-denominationalism has become a denomination."
No comments:
Post a Comment