Comments on: iMonk 101: Alastair Roberts on “The Denominational Church”

By: David McLain

David McLain — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:45:24 +0000

Some days I wonder whether we ought to just announce that “The Emperor has no clothes!” and be done with it.

The players:
a) We have a whole bunch of individuals who are born again and who are both infilled by and led by a living God who calls Himself the head of the church.

b) We have those individuals in groups: the Bible acknowledges regional groups (“the church at Ephesus”) and it’s not too hard to stretch that to ethnic groups (“preach to ‘all nations’ ” is to all ethnos, ethnic groups). So we have whatever cultural groups that the individuals associate with. Since the Son of God writes letters to these groups in the book of Revelation, I think we can call them divinely sanctioned.

c) We have denominations – and denominational leaders – who have come in after the previous two were in place, declaring, “We are now your leaders. Submit to us.”

This third group seems to be pretty much self-appointed, self-replicating, self-governing, and arguably, self-serving. Why do the other two groups submit to them?

I’ve heard people claim that without denominational structure, we can’t have unity! I see two problems here:

1) having denominational structure has taken us further from the unity for which Jesus prayed.

2) the unity they aspire to is based on our submission to the doctrine they teach, not on our relationship with each other and with our Head. I’m not sure that this is the unity for which we aspire.

By: Troy

Troy — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 16:09:36 +0000

The long and this discussion seems to come down to some very simple observations beginning with the fact that God did not create denominations, people did. It was not His design nor intention for His Church to be fractionalized rather we are to be united in one Spirit. Denominations, in and of themselves, exist because Christians have come to divisiveness over the interpretation of scripture. These divisions happen when one or both parties involved in the dispute are not in sync with God on a daily basis because, if we were, then the Spirit, which is One, would unite us all in our understanding. Personally, I grew up and still attend Souther Baptist affiliated churches. First and foremost, I do not consider myself baptist but rather a Christian. Christianity is not a denomination rather it is a faith and is available to all that repent of their sins and choose to follow Christ. As the bible clearly states, it is a gift and cannot be earned only received. Furthermore, there is only one foundational truth one must believe to be saved and that is that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us and if we confess our sins and choose to believe in him we will have eternal life. Any teaching otherwise is to be fully rejected and any person or denomination doing so must also be rejected. For this is what I find to be true, that though I was raised in the faith(Christianity) from birth, most people have little to no knowledge of scripture when they come to accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior. Thus, while there may be valid reason for why we have a multitude of denominations in some cases, for the most part, I think God is very disappointed that we cannot, through the Spirit, find common ground among all genuine Christians. I look forward to that day. Don’t you? Your brother in Christ.

By: Eclectic Christian - Michael Bell

Eclectic Christian - Michael Bell — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 04:34:04 +0000

Boaz:

Ephesians 4: 1-5

1As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. 2Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. 3Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. 4There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called— 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

Our calling is a heavenly calling. We are going to be united there. We need to try a lot harder here to put aside our differences.

By: Lance Athanasius

Lance Athanasius — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:22:49 +0000

The reason they have a unified church in abu Dhabi and in most muslim nations is because they don’t allow Christians to have denominations. They allow Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant. All Protestant churches get to be one church regardless of language, denomination, etc..My friend is a missionary in Indonesia. He was pastor of a similar church in Borneo. He is now in Java. He said there are definite pluses but also minuses. Especially when a pastor has elders and deacons who disagree on many things. Unity is hard.

By: Lance Athanasius

Lance Athanasius — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:16:14 +0000

boaz I would remind you that Lutherans, Catholics, Reformed, and Orthodox arrested, jailed, and put to death Baptists who would not baptize their own children. It was still illegal in most European nations as late as 1880 to not baptize your infant. I attend a Southern Baptist church. My wife was raised in a Lutheran church (Missouri). She has only had infant baptism. I believe in a believers baptism, but not in order to go to heaven. Our church used to share a building with a Lutheran congregation. I attended a Good Friday service there. I knew in advance they had closed communion and it did not offend me nor did it diminish my ability to worship God with them.
When someone tells me I have to speak in tongues to prove my salvation…then I get a little riled. lol

By: Lance Athanasius

Lance Athanasius — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:05:48 +0000

imonk I am glad you brought up the Nicene Creed. When I am witnessing to mormons, jw’s and other cults I always point out that even though Christianity seems to be divided into many camps called denominations, the majority of us affirm the Nicene Creed. Catholic, Orthodox, and Reformed all believe in One God manifested in three persons:Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; i.e. we agree on the nature of who God is. So many Christians know so little about church history and how various denominations came to be formed. Luther never started a Lutheran church, and John Wesley was Anglican and never attended a methodist church. I think we need to affirm the Creed now more than ever. While I enjoyed the little satire on emerging and reformed churches it is disturbing that the leadership of the emerging church movement denounces the Creed, questions the authenticity of Scripture, and has at best a grade school knowledge of church history. There are religions like Islam, Hinduism, etc… and then there are cults. I define a cult of Christianity as a group that says they are “christians” but deny the Nicene Creed….same as Athanasius did over 1500 years ago.

By: Jjoe

Jjoe — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:58:06 +0000

Neither does scripture say it is OK for Christians to divide into denominations and reject each other over points of law, points that will never be settled this side of eternity.

For example, suppose that closed communion is a false teaching. What then? Is there a person or organization on this earth with the power and will to correct it?

If one is to err, it is best to err on the side of love for neighbor, IMHO, and that would surely include breaking bread and drinking from the cup together, in remembrance of Christ.

By: greg r

greg r — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 02:21:19 +0000

Not much to say here except that your brand of church, from what I can discern from a blog site post, is “not that satisfying” to me; I guess we all decide what looks like Jesus to each of us. My observation is that christians are generally faced with two choices here:1) find some kind of ecumenism that makes biblical sense or 2) find the ‘one true church’. Looks like you opted for #2. Good luck with that.

By: Joel

Joel — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 02:19:19 +0000

Michael, Rich Bledsoe has been working at this for some time. You might want to give him a listen:

http://www.stannespublichouse.com/ontap/2008/index.php

By: boaz

boaz — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 02:02:00 +0000

Another Lutheran here.
If he is against division where there is really unity in doctrine, great, I agree. Where congregations agree on doctrine they are in fellowship, and it makes little sense to set up separate bodies.

But if what is being argued for is a doctrine of ignoring doctrinal division for the sake of unity, I would disagree because the argument isn’t supported by Scripture. Nowhere does scripture tell us to accept division or ignore true teaching for the sake of unity. Paul is constantly worried about correcting and protecting the beliefs of his congregations from false teachers.

In my view, Baptists refusing to recognize infant baptisms are more faithful to scriptures teaching on fellowship than those that would ignore their doctrinal beliefs solely for unity.