Are denominations Biblical?

Well, if your church congregation's leadership is encouraging you to "have nothing to do with" other Christians, it is in violation of Romans 16:17. It would not be "doctrinally correct" -- it would be encouraging sin.

Romans 16:17 “But I warn you, brothers, to keep an eye on those who cause divisions and temptations, quite out of harmony with what you have been taught, and to keep away from them” (NBV).

Jesus Christ said that He would build ONE church in Matthew 16:15-8.

Per Acts 2:47 and 5:14, the Lord adds believers to it -- we do not add ourselves to it.

As there is only one church, all Christians are part of it -- like it or not.

 

Well, the passage 2 Corinthians 6:14-8 talks about the relationship between believers and UNBELIEVERS.

We are not authorized to apply those prescriptions against fellow Christians. Romans 16:17 tells us not to promote divisions among Christians.

Christians are people. Those religious tenets commonly labeled "doctrines" are things.

This is a distinction that is often not made.

 

If I could, I would award you five gold stars.

 

Thanks for the compliment I just noticed. I am revising this post for that purpose.

Not necessarily.

Often, denominations are made into divisions. Denominations in themselves are not divisions.

Correct.

The Bible was also not written for factious people to self-excuse themselves for divisions based upon some pretense `We are right on this-and-that, so we can.'

Scripture's commands are binding regardless of who is `correct' and who is `errant.'

Amen!

Matthew 16:15-8 states that Christ would build only one church. Acts 2:47 and 5:14 says that the Lord Himself adds "believers" to it.

Romans 16:17 tells us to refrain from promoting divisions therein. It sounds like you obey that command.

 

We can all be one big happy church, with no individual churches allowed, and allow all the error anyone wants, and we will no longer have the biblical gospel becasue we accepted and allowed error to creep in. We'll all be more happy as rcc's.

 

Tali,

Denominations could possibly be something that is scriptural, and ordained by God.

As a result of denominationalism, like minded believers can find a place where they can fellowship with others with the same preferences.

Some believers want a reverant, quiet, subued worship and fellowship experience, where everything is scheduled out almost to the minute. As a result of the denominational set up they can find a place that they enjoy.

Others, such as myself, are drawn more to vibrant, joyful and sometimes even "raucous" worship experience where spontaneity and "open-endedness" allowed. And again, denominations give us that option.

So in that regard I guess one could concievably say God orchestrated these branchs of the one body of Christ for that purpose.

In spite of the *so called* divisions, the differences are no problem at all in my opinion. What IS sometimes a problem is the lack of "brotherhood" among differant groups that sometimes exists. THATS definetly a problem.

Even the differences regarding doctrine are no problem. Its the nastiness and bitterness that come about sometimes that is the problem. THAT is a problem in my view...but not the different views. The differing views are Gods "checks and balances" system. Without those discussions, error and blasphemy would flow free and unhindered for centuries...as we see in the Church of Rome and the "Orthodox" groups.

The lack of love and brotherhood that sometimes exists is a problem in my view...but not the differences, or different groups.

The protestant/evangelical/pentecostal/charismatic church IS one body. Not many. We are the Body of Christ here on earth. But unfortunetly, we dont always act like it.

Grace and peace,

Mike

 

Amen, Sister DonnA -- you are so RIGHT ON! :thumbs:

 

Darren wrote

AMEN!!!! and anyone who says different is divisive
Donna wrote

Trouble is sister you do not promote the Gospel in what you say...but are promoting the baptist church!!!
no one is saying the RC church as an organization is correct nor am i saying I would partake of the Lords supper there, but you must realise like it or not that there will be RC's (as you put it) in Heaven saved by the blood of the Lamb. It may even shock you how many.
There are people partaking of the Lords supper in the Baptist church that won't enter the Kingdom. (sorry, but had to be said) and I go to a Baptist church but you notice I don't say *belong* because I belong to Christ.
As far as I'm concerned they should throw out all names that cause division especially those who say they have it ALL right
Ive seem more Christianity and Truth from people who worship in an old rented hall with no name above the door

 

DonnA's problem seems to be three-fold:

1) A belief that we all have to agree on virtually all trivial details to be one church,

2) A belief that disapproval of a religious tenet must be expressed by division,

3) A belief that we get to divide the Lord's church on the basis of our opinions on what is `biblical' and what is `errant.'​

I see no basis in Scripture for any of these assumptions.

That there is only one church, and that all Christians are part of it, has been documented in my prior post. The church's foundation is that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of the living God. It is built by the Lord adding believers to it. A plurality of religious tenets does not compose the church -- the church is composed of "believers."

The New Testament-era church did not agree on everything. See Romans 14. They did not worship the same; see Acts 21 where Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians worshipped differently with approval.

To `disagree' and to `divide' are two different actions. The Greek expressions translated accordingly also differ. Disagreement can be expressed without division. It is done every day.

Jesus Christ said what He said at John 17:20-1. The expected inference of that requires no `surmising.' Many of the things used as pretenses for division are based on what some mortal/s surmises `The Lord would want us to teach this.' First, it is a mortal opinion -- even if it is accurate. Second, even if it is accurate, it does not mean that the Lord is okay with His utterance being set aside for it.

Romans 14 outlines a list of things Christians disagreed over then, and did not instruct them to reach a common opinion over these disagreements. Romans 16:17 goes on to say explicitly "But I warn you, brothers, to keep an eye on those who cause divisions and temptations, quite out of harmony with what you have been taught, and to keep away from them” (NBV).

 

Denominations are not in themselves divisions.

They are often made into divisions. Some denominations are simply associations of congregations willing for full participation in the Lord's tasks with other Christians.

Correct: it often comes from loving group religious tenets more than the Lord and His people.

If other Christians do not share devotion to those religious tenets, they dislike them. They may say `We love them in the Lord,' but in truth, they want nothing to do with them.

What the Lord urged at John 17:20-1 `can' be honored `When everyone else agrees with us about what we think He wants taught.' Until then, they want us to enact His teachings in separate efforts, regardless of what the Lord unambigously urged.

 

The Bible tells me to have nothing to do with false prophets and false doctrines, not my church.....although my church does abibe by that scripture.

As long as there are denominations teaching that salvation comes from baptism, or if you dont speak in tongues then you cant be saved, or that a preist can and must sbsolve you of your sin,,,ect.....then there will always be divisions, and I believe God does want me to worship in a congregation that teaches false doctrine, so I would have to say that denominations, at least as we have them today, are scriptural. To cross the line of compromise would be disobedience to the Word.

AJ

 

The Bible tells us to stay away from "false prophets" and "false doctrines" -- correct.

Errant Christians, no. Your rationale does not set aside Romans 16:17.

Actually, no. As long as there are church people who insist upon being agreed with, and hold unity hostage to that, there will be divisions.

You see, the Bible does not make the commands to refrain from division the responsibility of `everyone else.' Scripture's commands are the responsibility of the readers/hearers.

 

"""""You see, the Bible does not make the commands to refrain from division the responsibility of `everyone else.' Scripture's commands are the responsibility of the readers/hearers."""""


Well, I am responsibility for the spiritual leadership of my family, and I will NEVER take my son into an unscriptural church and expose him to their false doctine. As long as I can help it, he will only be taught scriputal doctrine.

AJ

 

Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

Rom 16:18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.



This verse you cited backs up my argument. It clearly says to avoid folks whose offences are contrary to the Word, for they dont serve Jesus but themselves.....

What is your point? It says to avoid false doctrine, and this is only one of many scriptures that does.

AJ

 

`Scriptural doctrine' as you think it so. It may or may not be -- unless you are claiming infallibility. Still, even if your reckoning of `Scripturally accurate doctrine' really is so, it would still be your reckoning.

Did I suggest that you take him to a different church congregation? I do not remember suggesting anything of the sort. `At church' is not the only place to be a Christian. Christ's teachings have relevance to all aspects of life -- both at church assembly and away. Christ's teachings can be enacted in all of life.

Okay, we will go with the KJV for now.

The people who "cause divisions and offences" are doing so "contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned."

The "doctrine which ye have learned" prohibited them to "cause divisions and offences." The 1611 word "offences" translates a Greek word translated into contemporary English "temptations" (NBV). Hence, the Roman congregation had been taught "doctrine" which prohibited "cause divisions."

Those who promote divisions in the Roman congregation were aptly described at Romans 16:18. I think a lot of modern divisiveness is well-intentioned. Nonetheless, I think many times modern divisiveness is motivated by a devotion to being agreed with, and not a devotion to Christ.

No, it says

“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them that are causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which ye learned: and turn away from them” (ASV).
“I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them” (ESV).
“But I warn you, brothers, to keep an eye on those who cause divisions and temptations, quite out of harmony with what you have been taught, and to keep away from them” (NBV).​

The passage prohibits "cause divisions and temptations" including "cause divisions." We are to avoid those that do "cause divisions and temptations" because we are not to "cause divisions and temptations."

 

I still dont see the difference you are trying to point out.

It is the folks who chose to follow false doctrine that divided themselves from biblical truth, and it says here to avoid them. This is exactly what I am advocating'

They have divided themselves from true doctrine, and I dont worship with them in their apostate beliefs.

AJ

 

Are you saying that biblical doctrine is subject to a person's "reckoning"? If truth cannot be derived from the scripture, then what is the point of reading it, much less living by it?

I am not infallible, but the Bible is, and it is not for personal interpretation. It says what it says, and means what it means. Too many people try to twist it to fit their idealistic notions. Today's churches have become too PC and somehow have chosen to overlook or twist the scriptures that they deem insensitive to others.

I dont believe God will be very sensitive to those who teach and practice false doctrine, and that is why I believe He says to avoid them. I will have to look it up, but in one passage He even says to "flee" from them....not rush in and worship with them in their apostate ways.

AJ

 

Well, let me try again.

Here is where we differ.

I simply see in the text that "those who cause divisions and temptations" are the ones who are doing wrong.

When they did so "contary to what you have been taught" it means that "what you have been taught" prohibited "cause divisions." To "cause divisions" was the condemned sin.

 

"""""To "cause divisions" was the condemned sin."""""""


I disagree....it was the false doctrine that was the condemned sin, the division was simply the result of the false doctrine.

AJ

 

"""""I simply see in the text that "those who cause divisions and temptations" are the ones who are doing wrong"""""


So, what you are saying is that if a part of my church wanted to accept wiccans as members, that it would be a sin for me, and the others that disagree, to divide ourselves from them?

Huh?

AJ