What Is A Predenominational Christian?

[adisciplinedlearner]

I don't care what the rules of YOUR BOARD was. They were no doubt different than this board. When you joined this board you AGREED to abide by these rules, and you have not. You did not fill out your profile in agreement to the stated rules and still haven't. The way that you have filled it out is deceptive and unclear. Those are the facts and contrary to the rules set out by the administration. Whether or not you agree with the rules is totally irrelevant.

Brother DHK, As God is my witness, I filled out your form honestly. It appears that you might be a religious bully. If so, go ahead and ban me from your board.

 

[DHK]

Brother DHK, As God is my witness, I filled out your form honestly. It appears that you might be a religious bully. If so, go ahead and ban me from your board.

Did you exist before denominations--1900 years ago. That is what the literal meaning of the word is. No, you did not. Thus the made up term makes you a liar doesn't it?

 

[adisciplinedlearner]

I do not claim that I existed before the rise of denominations. I only claim that true Christianity is the kind that existed before there were any denominations. This is the only kind of Christianity that interests me.

 

[DHK]

I do not claim that I existed before the rise of denominations. I only claim that true Christianity is the kind that existed before there were any denominations. This is the only kind of Christianity that interests me.

If you are a Baptist put the name Baptist. That is what most Baptist believes.

 

[adisciplinedlearner]

Maybe the best way to put it is that I am committed to the kind of Christianity that existed before there were any denominations. I am opposed to denominational Christianity.

 

[adisciplinedlearner]

I would call myself a Baptist if I were a Baptist. I am not a Baptist. I do not agree with Baptist doctrine or polity, at least as a whole.

I am just a Christian. I am simply a disciple of Christ. This is what the first Christians were in New Testament times.

 

[DHK]

Maybe the best way to put it is that I am committed to the kind of Christianity that existed before there were any denominations. I am opposed to denominational Christianity.

So far so good, I believe the same thing.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

A predenominational Christian is a Christian or disciple of Christ who seeks to base all of his religious beliefs and practices upon the New Testament itself, starting with the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. He desires to recover original New Testament Christianity, or the faith once delivered unto the saints. He is neither Catholic nor Protestant and rejects any and all Catholic and Protestant traditions that are inconsistent with or contrary to the New Testament, no matter how deeply-entrenced these traditions may have become. His overriding goal is to be true to Christ and true to the New Testament.

Answer:A primitive Christian

 

[DHK]

I would call myself a Baptist if I were a Baptist. I am not a Baptist. I do not agree with Baptist doctrine or polity, at least as a whole.

I am just a Christian. I am simply a disciple of Christ. This is what the first Christians were in New Testament times.

Yep, you surely don't believe in Baptist doctrine; that I know.
The "disciples of Christ" are somewhat of a cult, as far as I know. Some here know more about them than I do. Nevertheless you would call them a "denomination." That is why a "label" of some sort is important. It identifies who you are; what you believe, even when you don't belong to a "denomination.

Ask the Mormons. They can trace their genealogy right back to Adam, so they say.
Ask the Church of Christ. They trace their roots back to the Apostles, they claim.
I believe even the Oneness Pentecostal may make some similar claim.
You might think of joining one of the above groups if that doctrine is of utmost importance to you.

 

[Ruiz]

When I read this post, initially, I thought four things.

1. I am glad to see a zeal for the Word of God.
2. I am sad to see that they this type of belief seems to reject wisdom of Godly people throughout the ages.
3. Isn't this type of group denominating?
4. I think this is rather presumptious to assume that others are not trying to derive what they believe from the Bible.

To me, rejecting the wisdom of other Godly men and women throughout the ages is foolish. I am not saying we should agree with old saints, but they sometimes have insights and wisdom into the things of God and the Bible that we need and can benefit. Often, relying upon myself I may not have the wisdom of others and understanding their viewpoint can help keep me from error. Even this week, I was reading a treatise from a much wiser man and saw the error of my previous theology in a certain area. Left to myself, I may never have fully realized my error. Yet, God gave us a long history of people to challenge our beliefs.

Yes, I think my beliefs are Biblical. Yet, I also rely upon wisdom from great men of the past to challenge me, encourage me, and to help me weight their arguments against scripture. I am much better for having done so.

Ultimately, a belief that says "Just me and my Bible" will end in error. Rather, I believe in Sola Scriptura. Rather, I believe in preaching and I believe great men have insight in areas where I am weak. I need the greats of the past to help me dig deep in areas where I am shallow.

 

[adisciplinedlearner]

When I read this post, initially, I thought four things.

1. I am glad to see a zeal for the Word of God.
2. I am sad to see that they this type of belief seems to reject wisdom of Godly people throughout the ages.
3. Isn't this type of group denominating?
4. I think this is rather presumptious to assume that others are not trying to derive what they believe from the Bible.

To me, rejecting the wisdom of other Godly men and women throughout the ages is foolish. I am not saying we should agree with old saints, but they sometimes have insights and wisdom into the things of God and the Bible that we need and can benefit. Often, relying upon myself I may not have the wisdom of others and understanding their viewpoint can help keep me from error. Even this week, I was reading a treatise from a much wiser man and saw the error of my previous theology in a certain area. Left to myself, I may never have fully realized my error. Yet, God gave us a long history of people to challenge our beliefs.

Yes, I think my beliefs are Biblical. Yet, I also rely upon wisdom from great men of the past to challenge me, encourage me, and to help me weight their arguments against scripture. I am much better for having done so.

Ultimately, a belief that says "Just me and my Bible" will end in error. Rather, I believe in Sola Scriptura. Rather, I believe in preaching and I believe great men have insight in areas where I am weak. I need the greats of the past to help me dig deep in areas where I am shallow.

I agree with the overall message of this post.

 

[adisciplinedlearner]

Yep, you surely don't believe in Baptist doctrine; that I know.
The "disciples of Christ" are somewhat of a cult, as far as I know. Some here know more about them than I do. Nevertheless you would call them a "denomination." That is why a "label" of some sort is important. It identifies who you are; what you believe, even when you don't belong to a "denomination.

Ask the Mormons. They can trace their genealogy right back to Adam, so they say.
Ask the Church of Christ. They trace their roots back to the Apostles, they claim.
I believe even the Oneness Pentecostal may make some similar claim.
You might think of joining one of the above groups if that doctrine is of utmost importance to you.

I am a disciple of Christ, not a Disciple of Christ. I have no interest in tracing some kind of church genealogy back to Christ and His apostles. I left the Landmark Baptists a few years ago.

 

[adisciplinedlearner]

I believe it is best for us to refer to ourselves by New Testament names. This would include calling ourselves Christians, disciples of Christ, and so on. For 30 years, I was a big "B" Baptist, but I would never refer to myself as a Baptist today.

 

[Dr. Walter]

I believe it is best for us to refer to ourselves by New Testament names. This would include calling ourselves Christians, disciples of Christ, and so on. For 30 years, I was a big "B" Baptist, but I would never refer to myself as a Baptist today.

Since the New Testament practice is the assembling of saints together as an ekklesia who fellowship with plural churches then what ekklesia and do you assemble with and what plural churches does your ekkesia fellowship with and what do they call themselves?

 

[adisciplinedlearner]

Christ's church is the aggregate of Christians. His church has no formal, official name, no church building, no church sign, no church business cards, no church letterhead, and so on. This is the only church I care about.

 

[DHK]

I believe it is best for us to refer to ourselves by New Testament names. This would include calling ourselves Christians, disciples of Christ, and so on. For 30 years, I was a big "B" Baptist, but I would never refer to myself as a Baptist today.

So let's all call ourselves Christians. I will let you go first.
Throughout history:
Christians have baptized their candidates naked.
Both baptism and speaking in tongues are required for salvation.
Christ is an angel, a created being.
There is no such thing as hell.
In the end all will be saved, even Hitler and Stalin.

I could go on, but these are some of your beliefs as a "Christian."
It is necessary to define what kind of Christian we are.
The Muslims in most Islamic nations look upon America as a "Christian" nation. Many of them don't differentiate between any groups, but most of them only differentiate between Catholic and Protestant, and know nothing of the rest. You can call yourself "Predenominational" but the Muslim puts as part of the "Great Satan" just like it does to every other "Christian" in America.

 

[rbell]

Q: What is a "predenominational Christan?"
A: What members of the Church of Christ denomination call themselves.

 

[rbell]

Good grief, ADL...how many groups, viewpoints, and theologies have you "left?"

Best I can tell, you're the only "true Christian" in existence...

:laugh:

 

[DHK]

Christ's church is the aggregate of Christians. His church has no formal, official name, no church building, no church sign, no church business cards, no church letterhead, and so on. This is the only church I care about.

You have become a Watchman Neeerite. :laugh:

 

[adisciplinedlearner]

I do not think I am the only true Christian on earth, but I am convinced that there are millions of true Christians. This does not mean, however, that I recognize denominational churches as true churches of Christ.

When we read in the New Testament about Christ's church, it helps our understanding of it if we think of it as Christ's spiritual body or Christ's spiritual house. When the Lord added to the church daily (Acts 2:47), He added to His spiritual body or spiritual house. When I say it is a spiritual body or spiritual house, I do not mean it is an invisible, non-physical body or house, but it is a body or house made up of Christians. Jesus promised to build to completion this spiritual body or spiritual house (Mat. 16:18), and He is now doing so one lively stone at a time (I Pet. 2:5). This is the spiritual body or spiritual house that will spend eternity with Him.