Articles
What Is Denominational Christianity?
A fictional, but realistic conversation:
Querist: “Would you like to go sailing on Sunday?”
Christian: “Thanks, but I’ll pass. I will be at worship on Sunday.”
Querist: “That’s OK. What denomination are you?”
Christian: “We’re nondenominational. We are just a group of Christians trying to follow the New Testament pattern. The church Jesus established is not a denomination.”
Querist (puzzled): “Oh … well maybe some other time.”
Do we who staunchly declare our nondenominational status clearly understand what we mean by that denial? Before we can explain this concept to others, we must grasp it ourselves.
First, let’s examine what “denomination” means to the average American. Most consider Christianity to be a general religious movement surrounding the person of Jesus Christ. They observe many diverse groups – “churches” – which claim to follow the same Bible and worship the same God yet have vastly divergent doctrines and practices. Usually the groups themselves claim that the differences are insignificant since they are in agreement on fundamental points.
Secondly, people observe that these churches are “networks”; certain groups are affiliated with each other and under common oversight. A regulatory organization exists which controls the basic parameters of each denomination. They may have a national headquarters, collect dues, issue press releases, hold conventions, debate bylaws and tightly regulate the organization’s operation. The individual “franchises” or congregations, though enjoying some degree of autonomy (self-government), must nevertheless adhere to basic corporate guidelines.
Thirdly, inherent within denominationalism is human origin. People who identify with a particular denomination think in terms of who started their organization and when and where. A multitude of religious groups have begun since the Protestant Reformation, and recent times have seen an explosion of groups that are either independent or nominally affiliated with a denomination. Some revere their founder; others are proud of their denomination’s ethnic roots. Yet others may be enamored with a unique doctrinal feature that gives them definition. But all find their identity in an organization that is essentially a human creation.
When we identify ourselves as “just a Christian,” the above ideas spark the common retort: “Well, what kind of Christian are you?” This is a natural question based on the inquirer’s observations. If we were asked what we drive, and we answer “a car,” the next logical question would be, “What kind of a car?” People understand that “car” is a generic category populated by brands of manufacturers: Ford, Toyota, Mercedes, etc. So it is with modern Christianity. People have been conditioned to understand the term “Christian” as generic, and there are a multitude of “brands” of Christianity.
At the heart of denominationalism lies the question of the authority of the Scriptures. Those who advocate the evolution of Christianity into its current denominational form have a flexible view of the Scriptures, particularly the New Testament. They reject the New Testament as a “blueprint” or a pattern to be closely followed and replicated. This view allows them to accept deviations from the doctrine and practice of the early church in matters such as church organization, what constitutes worship and even such a fundamental question as how one becomes a Christian. Disparity in teaching and practice is not a matter of concern to them, for they see Christianity as “organic,” a living, breathing religious movement shaped by cultural forces.
Conversely, others see the New Testament as the revelation of God’s will that frames the very substance of the church. Jesus, Himself, delivered initial teaching (Heb. 1:2; 2:3; Jn. 16:12) and then empowered the apostles through the Holy Spirit to complete “the faith” (Jn. 14:25-26; 16:13). Paul, for example, insists that what he writes are “the commandments of the Lord” (1 Cor. 14:37), and any deviation from his teaching constitutes a “different gospel” which brings condemnation (Gal. 1:6-9). A significant portion of the New Testament is remedial, reinforcing elements of the gospel, combatting heresy, encouraging saints to adhere to what had been originally revealed from heaven (2 Thes. 2:15; Jude 3). A representative exhortation: “Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you” (1 Tim. 4:16).
The denial of Scriptural authority gives rise to the variety of religious groups who call themselves “Christian” but do not found their doctrines and practices on the New Testament. The opposite outlook gives rise to a “restorationist” mindset. Respect for the authority of the Scriptures compels us to base our teaching and practice upon the original standard, thus “restoring” what the Lord Jesus originally intended for His people.
Though this topic deserves far more analysis than we can give it here, those of a restorationist view reject denominationalism as unbiblical. The Bible does not describe “kinds” of Christians, but it does speak of false brethren (Gal. 2:4); false prophets (1 Jn. 4:1); and false apostles (2 Cor. 11:13) who corrupt the truth (cf. also 1 Cor. 15:12; Gal. 3:1; 2 Tim. 2:16-18). Furthermore, much energy was expended in the first century to prevent the Lord’s body from being divided into Jewish and Gentile factions. There is a unity of relationship among God’s people that rests upon the singularity of the faith. To fragment that unity into disparate denominations is to implement the very division that the apostles worked so hard to avoid.
In closing, be aware that it is easy to adopt a denominational mindset without realizing it. “Soft” authoritarian structures, though not formally recognized, can be a powerful influence. Certain people or entities or just a desire for inclusiveness can cause Christians to think in terms of one big “us”: “our” preachers, camps, schools, sister congregations, etc. Denominational practice begins with denominational thinking.
Also, some may become enamored with denominations for their packed auditoriums, flashy preachers, affirming messages and emotional worship. Such things may create the illusion that denominations have something that others think they are missing. But the Lord has so arranged His church to function most efficiently for the work He wants it to do. He has protected it from autocratic and digressive corruption by the principle of autonomy. Each local body is capable of doing what the Lord requires of it, nothing more, nothing less. We do not need to look longingly at the denominational world. If the foundation is cracked, it doesn’t matter how ornate the superstructure is. Remember, human “builders” rejected the chief cornerstone laid by God (Mt. 21:42-44; 1 Pet. 2:7-8). We should expect the Lord’s church to look quite different from religious organizations created by man.
Why is it important that the Lord’s body is not a denomination? Because denominationalism is not a New Testament concept. It is an invention of man. Many genuine seekers have been confused and disappointed by the labyrinth of denominational contradiction. May we uphold the authority of God’s word, practice undenominational Christianity and be a city “set on a hill (that) cannot be hidden” (Mt. 5:14).
