Is God Denominational?

[ama49]

I would love to hear your comments on my site about this. Please stop by at:

Grace for Grace

[prisonchaplain]

Some denominations are closer to correct teaching than others. Also, some have more accurate views of what the Scripture reveals, and yet do not live according to God's standards. Others are further away from accuracy, but live compelling, godly lives.

Nevertheless, the best course, the truest way to obey the command to "do all we can," is to combine godly living with true teaching and belief. Doctrine does matter, because God wants us to know him personally, spiritually, and intellectually.

Perhaps the following story will illustrate: a professor of religion was once asked what he would do if he knew Jesus would return in four years. His answer? I would study for 3 1/2 years, and then preach for six months!

The point is that it is far better to teach correctly for a short time, being well equiped, than to labor hard, but ignorantly and with little power.

[skalenfehl]

It's like it says quoting Ephesians:

Eph. 4: 5

5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

We believe we have the fullness of truth, but there is truth found in all other faiths. We only seek to add to the truth that is found in the other faiths, which is why all men are invited to come unto Him. For this very reason did He establish His church upon the foundation of apostles and prophets, Himself being the cornerstone.

[prisonchaplain]

The phrase "denominational" may throw us off. My contention is that there is truth, and there are teachings that are closer or further away from the truth. Likewise, there are behaviors and actions that are closer to or further from godliness.

Skalenfehl adds the perspective that there is one church with the fullness of the gospel. If so, it would not be a denomination, but rather the Church.

IMHO, as one who does not believe there is only one fully true church organization, denominations are okay, so long as we see ourselves as part of one true, universal Christian church. After all, my wife's baptism in the Presbyterian Church (Hapdong Branch - Korea) translated just fine into the American Assemblies of God. She didn't have to redo it. :-)

[abqfriend]

J. B. Phillips wrote a small book about 40 years ago-called "Your God is Too Small." It is a classic. It's basic premise is that we try to limit God or put God in a box."

"Denominations" or parts of various faith traditions do that. It is not limited to just Christianity.

There are "denominations or sub-groups in Judaism and Islam and Buddhism also.

I belong to one of the largest "denominations." called the Roman Catholic Church. In my opinion, it trys to do that also-put God in a box-it's box.

Each of us comes to a point in life where we feel that (hopefully) the Holy Ghost is guiding us in the direction of "Truth.' That truth may be in one "denomination." or another. Every "denomination" that I know of calls their church the "true church." Most denominations find some "truth" in other "denominations of their same faith tradition-such as Christianity, Judaism, Islam or Buddhism.

We, in our understanding of God may put limits on who belongs to who, but ultimately that decision is God's-or as some call Him, The Heavenly Father.

Perhaps our finding the Truth and living the Truth-- is our journey in this life.

I am a truth seeker-perhaps you are too-and if you have found it-that is wonderful for you.

May our Heavenly Faither Bless each of you in seeking, finding and living the Truth.

-Carol

[Traveler]

I believe this is a most interesting question - that is how does G-d view all of the demonations. I am quite sure that the creation of many demonations is not the work of G-d. I do not think he is pleased that believers divide themselves.

This leads us to one of two possible conclusions.

First. That there is no true demonation authorized by G-d as the holder of his truth.

Second. That there is a true demonation created and authorized by G-d and that all the other demonations are creations of man and have some truth and some error.

If G-d has a true religion it would seem to me that he would also have a true demonation as well. Logic tells me that if there is no authorized demonation that it cannot be argued that there is a true authorized religion.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

I believe this is a most interesting question - that is how does G-d view all of the demonations.

Was this a typo or an attempt at humor?

I am quite sure that the creation of many demonations is not the work of G-d. I do not think he is pleased that believers divide themselves.

Let me help you. Denominations are unifying organizations, not divisive ones. For example, the Assemblies of God formed in 1914 to bring together many independent pentecostal churches, so that we might more effectively carry out the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19-20). Today we unify over 12,000 congregations domestically, and nearly 60 million members worldwide. We did not form as a brake from any other group, but rather to unify. IMHO most denominations see themselves as I've described--not as breakaways from other churches, but as a union of like-minded believers.

This leads us to one of two possible conclusions.

First. That there is no true demonation authorized by G-d as the holder of his truth.

Second. That there is a true demonation created and authorized by G-d and that all the other demonations are creations of man and have some truth and some error.

I'd argue for the third option. Many denominations were ordained by God to carry out his work.

If G-d has a true religion it would seem to me that he would also have a true demonation as well.

IMHO, the Assemblies of God, Baptists, Pentecostals, Charismatics, Methodists, Presbyterians, Salvation Army, etc. are true denominations. They worship the right God in the right way, and please Him by the works and faith. I'm not sure why God's one true religions needs to be expressed by one denomination. The Bible does not name one true church, so if we ask which one is the one true church, are we looking for an answer that is not there?

Logic tells me that if there is no authorized demonation that it cannot be argued that there is a true authorized religion.

The Traveler

I would agree that there must be at least one true church, or there would be no true religion. However, I'm not so sure there has to be one and only one.

[VisionOfLehi]

I think they're has to be one that has ALL the correct answers, and contains all the truth. Obviously I believe one Church on Earth has this.

But I also believe there are other true churches, that do worship God, and are wonderful Christians. The Body, or Church, of Christ... I don't believe that just means LDS people. I believe it means faithful and obedient Christians.

They are the Body of Christ... They are not members of Christ's Church on Earth, IMO, but they're definitely... members of Christ.

I can't figure out how to word it.

But Christ judges on our hearts and our deeds, not just what church we belong to.

[Misshalfway]

I struggle a bit with the opening question of this thread. Makes me wonder if someone is trying to make us state whether or not God plays favorites. I wouldn't describe God as denominational. God is a Father first and foremost. And, we no matter where we find ourselves, are His children. I think he hears all prayers no matter what language or form they come in. I believe His blessings are over all the earth and that he is a rewarder of anyone who seeks Him.

I think there are eternal truths.......truths that God lives by and knows will bring us happiness. I think that those truths have been placed inside of the context of a church. But I think it is important to understand that the church is a vehicle or tool for bringing about God's purposes. And I think God uses many churches and institutions and circumstances to bring about his vast purposes. In the end though, there is one goal in my understanding. It is that God's purpose is to bring about the immortality and eternal life of man. And knows the truths that bring about such blessings.

It isn't so much about whether or not God favors this group or that. It is about truth. It is up to us to hear his voice as he leads us to the truth.

[prisonchaplain]

I think they're has to be one that has ALL the correct answers, and contains all the truth. Obviously I believe one Church on Earth has this.

You are taking upon your Church a burden that, imho, cannot be carried. Israel could not carry it, and sure 'nuf, neither could the Catholic Church. Even the Pope is only infallible when he speaks ex cathedra. The Apostles spent three years walking and talking with the Son of God. Yet, they could not maintain a perfect church, even according to your own theology.

[prospectmom]

God is omnipotent, above all , over all, not subject to all this earthly banter.

[VisionOfLehi]

You are taking upon your Church a burden that, imho, cannot be carried. Israel could not carry it, and sure 'nuf, neither could the Catholic Church. Even the Pope is only infallible when he speaks ex cathedra. The Apostles spent three years walking and talking with the Son of God. Yet, they could not maintain a perfect church, even according to your own theology.

I never said perfect, but rather having all the knowledge.

[Maureen]

I believe this is a most interesting question - that is how does G-d view all of the demonations. I am quite sure that the creation of many demonations is not the work of G-d. I do not think he is pleased that believers divide themselves.

This leads us to one of two possible conclusions.

First. That there is no true demonation authorized by G-d as the holder of his truth.

Second. That there is a true demonation created and authorized by G-d and that all the other demonations are creations of man and have some truth and some error.

If G-d has a true religion it would seem to me that he would also have a true demonation as well. Logic tells me that if there is no authorized demonation that it cannot be argued that there is a true authorized religion.

The Traveler

PC has already pointed this out, but I can't help myself. :)

I suspect you feel this way because you've always viewed a variety of church organizations in this very dark, disturbing way. Would it be easier if you changed your thinking to:

d-e-n-o-m-i-n-a-t-i-o-n?

M.

[prisonchaplain]

I never said perfect, but rather having all the knowledge.

"Having all knowledge" . . . Omniscience . . . is that not a form of perfection?

[Moksha]

"Having all knowledge" . . . Omniscience . . . is that not a form of perfection?

It is on Jeopardy.

[Islander]

I tend to see denominations as the byproduct of biblical interpretation and the lack of prophetic guidance that began to be manifest since early in the church. Even at the time of the Apostles, unquestionable witnesses of words Christ and recipients of the doctrine in full, contention begins to creep into the church. There are several passages of the NT that evidenced this:

Matt. 24: 5, 11, 24

1 Tim. 1: 6, 19

2 Pet. 2: 1, 22

1 Cor. 1: 11

1 Cor. 11: 18

Gal. 1: 6

The above passages evidenced that there was, even in the 1st century, serious contention and divisions within the emerging church. As the number of disciples continued to decrease so did the defections and breaking away of the congregations. Some of the most blatant examples of this rebellion is evident on

3 Jn. 1: 9. Here a certain congregation is even refusing to receive the Apostle or his envoy. By this time it is likely that besides him only Peter and Paul remain alive of all the Apostles.

The first 100 or so years of church history, although convoluted, remains more or less a coherent organization. All historians agree today that the schism which eventually became a permanent form of separation between Eastern and Western Christians did not occur suddenly. It was the result of a progressive "estrangement" (the English term used by the French theologian Yves Congar), and cannot even be dated. The churches of Rome and Constantinople were often separated for long periods of time already between the fourth and the ninth centuries. Those early conflicts were sometimes caused by heresies, held in the capital of the Eastern empire (Arianism, 335-381; Monotheletism, 533-680; Iconoclasm, 723-787; 815-842) and rightfully rejected by Rome. Sometimes Rome and Constantinople differed in their attitude in the field of eccliastical oikonomia (the "Neo-Nicean" position, inherited from the Cappadocian Fathers, 381-ca. 400; the attitude to be adopted towards the Henotikon, also referred to as the "Acacian schism", 482-518), and communication was broken on those grounds. Whatever the issue and whoever was at fault, it is clear that, underneath the debate on a concrete theological or disciplinary problem, there was a developing difference on the respective authority of the "apostolic see" of Rome on the one side, and on the other, the idea of a conciliar consensus prevailing in the East.

By the end of the first 1000 years the conditions were met for an even greater schism. With the launching of the Reformation and Martin Luther's thesis, the Protestant church was born and 2600 new religious affiliation would see the light of day based on a myriad of interpretation of the same scriptures in the following 1000 years.

Again, without prophetic guidance, divisions and interpretations and novel approaches to text analysis and the like are bound to continue.

Edited July 8, 2008 by Islander

[VisionOfLehi]

"Having all knowledge" . . . Omniscience . . . is that not a form of perfection?

Okay, okay. I'll rephrase for the picky.

Having all of the knowledge that the LORD has ever revealed unto mortal man.

Not all knowledge in existence.

[Misshalfway]

I never said perfect, but rather having all the knowledge.

I was gonna say the same thing. Who has a perfect church? LOL!

There will be no perfect church. Only perfect doctrines, or perfect truths and a perfect Savior who invites us to be gathered into one.

[Traveler]

Originally Posted by Traveler

I believe this is a most interesting question - that is how does G-d view all of the demonations. I am quite sure that the creation of many demonations is not the work of G-d. I do not think he is pleased that believers divide themselves.

This leads us to one of two possible conclusions.

First. That there is no true demonation authorized by G-d as the holder of his truth.

Second. That there is a true demonation created and authorized by G-d and that all the other demonations are creations of man and have some truth and some error.

If G-d has a true religion it would seem to me that he would also have a true demonation as well. Logic tells me that if there is no authorized demonation that it cannot be argued that there is a true authorized religion.

The Traveler

PC has already pointed this out, but I can't help myself. :)

I suspect you feel this way because you've always viewed a variety of church organizations in this very dark, disturbing way. Would it be easier if you changed your thinking to:

d-e-n-o-m-i-n-a-t-i-o-n?

M.

Let me explain one simple thought through a question. What does it mean to be "one" with G-d?

My scientific mathematical mind works likes this. If person “A” is one with G-d and person “B” is one with G-d then by the LAW of transitivity person “A” is one with person “B”. But if person “A” and person “B” belong to different denominations the singularity or unity of oneness is a contradiction. The only reason for multiple denominations is because there is an absence of “oneness”.

Therefore if both claim “oneness” with G-d then the only two possible conclusion (under the law of transitive logic) exist in that either one is mistaken or they both are.

The reason for separate denominations is because the believers in each denomination have a slightly different understand of something to which they cannot agree. If I remember correctly Paul was very upset in his day that some Christians had divided themselves based on who had baptized them. So he asked the question “Is Christ divided?”

I think that some may be defining denominations as the LDS define congregations. But even at that I have attended two congregations of the same denominational church within a block of each other– yet they disagreed greatly on several different matters concerning how their congregations should operate and view certain doctrines.

There is nothing I have observed in history or in responses on this forum that indicates to me that G-d is responsible for the enmity that requires there be more than one Christian denomination.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

I was gonna say the same thing. Who has a perfect church? LOL!

There will be no perfect church. Only perfect doctrines, or perfect truths and a perfect Savior who invites us to be gathered into one.

Interesting question in light of Matt 5:48. The ancient understanding of perfect was complete or whole. There is a very real difference that is pointed out in the scriptures between being complete or whole and not having ever had a flaw.

Therefore the question should be – which is complete or whole?

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

The presumption that denomination implies division and enmity is false, imho. I'm sure you can find sharp disagreements within a single LDS ward, but such is called "agency," not division or enmity. Likewise, as I mentioned before, most denominations formed to bring together, to unite Christians, for a common cause--the Kingdom. And these different groups do proclaim the same Christ, the same gospel, and we call one another, across denominational lines "Christian" and "Brother/Sister."

Paul did decry factions--but Traveler...those were divisive parties within a single congregation! If it is true that your church carries the fullness of the gospel, and yet recognizes the gifts and truths found in other groups, then "demonation," seems to be hypberbole in the extreme.

[VisionOfLehi]

We can find sharp disagreements between LDS people on this board! It most certainly exists within wards, and probably even branches.

But what PC says is right. We're all working towards the same goal:

Salvation and Zion.

[Traveler]

The presumption that denomination implies division and enmity is false, imho. I'm sure you can find sharp disagreements within a single LDS ward, but such is called "agency," not division or enmity. Likewise, as I mentioned before, most denominations formed to bring together, to unite Christians, for a common cause--the Kingdom. And these different groups do proclaim the same Christ, the same gospel, and we call one another, across denominational lines "Christian" and "Brother/Sister."

Paul did decry factions--but Traveler...those were divisive parties within a single congregation! If it is true that your church carries the fullness of the gospel, and yet recognizes the gifts and truths found in other groups, then "demonation," seems to be hypberbole in the extreme.

I would rather not go into certain points but it would seem that there are some discrepancies in terms. Please do not think that I am trying to create divisions.

What is the meaning of the term Protestant? What are Protestants protesting?

What does being “one” with G-d mean to you? See John 17:20-26 – I think there is prophesy here concerning confusion about one thing in particular, if believers become divided into denominations.

Are denominations a promise of what will be in heaven? If not, why – if you think so, would you provide some scripture?

It is my honest opinion that there will be no denominations in heaven and therefore there should not be denominations on earth (see Matt 6:10) Do some unwitting and ignorantly pray for one thing and then labor for another?

– You are correct about dissension in congregations (even the best planted congregations of wheat?) – I would submit that Jesus prophesied of such in speaking about the sewer of tares. I think it is clear that G-d does not seek that there be differences – I had thought it was clear who does. There is a saying - united we stand, divided we fall

I would also add that united in opinion is not the same as being one with G-d. I believe that sacrificing our personal opinions is the essence of oneness with G-d.

The Traveler

[Islander]

The presumption that denomination implies division and enmity is false, imho. I'm sure you can find sharp disagreements within a single LDS ward, but such is called "agency," not division or enmity. Likewise, as I mentioned before, most denominations formed to bring together, to unite Christians, for a common cause--the Kingdom. And these different groups do proclaim the same Christ, the same gospel, and we call one another, across denominational lines "Christian" and "Brother/Sister."

Paul did decry factions--but Traveler...those were divisive parties within a single congregation! If it is true that your church carries the fullness of the gospel, and yet recognizes the gifts and truths found in other groups, then "demonation," seems to be hypberbole in the extreme.

True. I further submit that as more and more lay people read and inquire about the LDS church on their own, the faster the stigma and misinformation will fade to the background. After all, smart people have always found a way to exchange and elevate the discourse above the traditions and tedious repetition of the ages that try, by cheer reiteration, to perpetuate falsehoods and animosity. I think books like "Claiming Christ" will do much for clearing the air and dispelling much myth and fiction about the LDS church and the members at large.

Like I suggested to a kind brother in the forum not to long ago. sometimes we must agree to disagree without further argument and split the difference. No need for contention.

[WANDERER]

I think people oriented might be a slightly better understanding...judgements on God's elect seems like rather shakey ground to be treading.