Is This the Essence of Denominationalism?

[Musicmaster]

Denominational-ism = Groupthink

As you all have likely discerned, I'm one who's in favor of Biblicism, which involves critical thinking, seeking stability upon ALL that scripture declares and teaches, questioning paradigmic thinking at every turn, lifting a critical eye toward denominational creeds and doctrinal statements (not all are necessarily bad or wrong), disregarding denominational symbologies, never jumping onboard any of the many, many bandwagons out there, and enjoying the peace and freedom that is our birthright in Christ Jesus.

Groupthink like many things, can be a good thing. The problems arise when we dig down into the deeper layers upon which any one groupthink rests upon. Perhaps this could be termed as the outflow of groupthink-ism.

Groupthink-ism tends toward fostering a strong sense of remaining within the defined walls of the core creed. This -ism, then, erodes into the dirt the common sense desire to openly vocalize a view that runs contrary to the core dogmas of the groupthink. Unpopular or controversial topics and views are generally anathema within a denominational groupthink, thus drowning out the potential for spiritual insights from the babes in the faith, all the way up into the ranks of spiritual giants walking this earth in our midst.

The desire for remaining cohesively bound together also lends to the tendency speak out as an expression of critical thinking. I was once accused years ago of being a 'lone star Christian' by a number of denominational-ism, groupthink victims. Groupthink can most generally rationalize any and all of their biases, no matter how outlandish and even anti-biblical. Such thinking morphs into decision-making that refuses to take all things into consideration, especially intellectual challenges from 'outsiders.'

The cognitive dissonance (ignoring conflicting information) of groupthink inevitably drives the group into gross disregard for any pursuit of absolute truth coupled with any desire to set aside internal groupthink paradigms. The only way to break such a cycle is for the leaders within the groupthink to encourage individual initiative for thinking independently, and presenting their ideas for discussion, with the Bible as the sole authority one may hold in his hands...and ultimately Holy Spirit direction sought after by all members.

Thoughts?

MM

 

[Major]

Denominational-ism = Groupthink

As you all have likely discerned, I'm one who's in favor of Biblicism, which involves critical thinking, seeking stability upon ALL that scripture declares and teaches, questioning paradigmic thinking at every turn, lifting a critical eye toward denominational creeds and doctrinal statements (not all are necessarily bad or wrong), disregarding denominational symbologies, never jumping onboard any of the many, many bandwagons out there, and enjoying the peace and freedom that is our birthright in Christ Jesus.

Groupthink like many things, can be a good thing. The problems arise when we dig down into the deeper layers upon which any one groupthink rests upon. Perhaps this could be termed as the outflow of groupthink-ism.

Groupthink-ism tends toward fostering a strong sense of remaining within the defined walls of the core creed. This -ism, then, erodes into the dirt the common sense desire to openly vocalize a view that runs contrary to the core dogmas of the groupthink. Unpopular or controversial topics and views are generally anathema within a denominational groupthink, thus drowning out the potential for spiritual insights from the babes in the faith, all the way up into the ranks of spiritual giants walking this earth in our midst.

The desire for remaining cohesively bound together also lends to the tendency speak out as an expression of critical thinking. I was once accused years ago of being a 'lone star Christian' by a number of denominational-ism, groupthink victims. Groupthink can most generally rationalize any and all of their biases, no matter how outlandish and even anti-biblical. Such thinking morphs into decision-making that refuses to take all things into consideration, especially intellectual challenges from 'outsiders.'

The cognitive dissonance (ignoring conflicting information) of groupthink inevitably drives the group into gross disregard for any pursuit of absolute truth coupled with any desire to set aside internal groupthink paradigms. The only way to break such a cycle is for the leaders within the groupthink to encourage individual initiative for thinking independently, and presenting their ideas for discussion, with the Bible as the sole authority one may hold in his hands...and ultimately Holy Spirit direction sought after by all members.

Thoughts?

MM

I resemble that comment. I too am a Bible person. I DO belong to a Christian church however. I also support group meeting and Bible study, BUT not GROUP THINK answers. A "Group" can not determine a right answer becuase numbers do not make for correct doctrine.

When you think about it, the entire New Testament tells the story of a nation (the Israelites) who believes that they completely understand the scriptures....... who God is and what He requires of them. When a prophet, who turns out to be God Himself, shows up on the scene to tell them otherwise, they kill Him—having complete and utter confidence that they’re correct in their theology and practice which is Group think!

Two thousand years later, the Church often takes the same imperious position that the Pharisees and Sadducees shared........
“We have complete confidence that there’s no more questions without definitive answers.”

Because many Christians exist within a bubble that reverberates our own positions and ideas, they take their imagined unanimity as confirmation that they’re right. Truth is on their side so they allow the culture to determine what is right or wrong.

IMHO, a perfect example of that is "BLACK LIVES MATTER".
Another would be "DEFUND THE POLICE".

Now maybe I am misunderstanding the essance of your thought MM, and if so please correct me. You see, what I am saying is that If we’re raised in a culture, group thinkers that tells us a particular biblical interpretation or political position aligns with God’s point of view, we accept it because the GROUP says so.

That position is further solidified by being around others who share the same ideas. Of course it’s completely natural to immediately dismiss an unfamiliar or contrary idea—even if it’s right. It takes a lot of maturity and self-discipline to hear something contrary and think, ..........
“Hold on, let me read to all of you what God has already said about this situation".

 

[Siloam]

The opposite of group-think is the self as authority (I know I am right because it is right because I know it). Worship should be a balance between reinforcing the faith one has and challenging that same faith to see and serve Christ in new ways.

When choosing a church one is choosing a doctrinal stance and a preaching style and a worship family. Knowing the denomination of a given church and the core of its teaching can be the first step in choosing which church to attend where one serves.

For a while in my career, I was being sent around the country for my job observing software installation at FAA facilities. While at these locations, particularly if I was staying over a weekend, I would seek out a church to attend. Although it was sometimes thought provoking to attend a church with wildly differing approach than my usual, I found that if I chose one of a denomination I was familiar with, my heart was more likely to be in a worshipful state, while if I visited a church with a contrasting approach I was too concerned with the outer trappings and less concerned with worship.

I was most blessed when I was both made to feel at home AND when I saw a contrasting way of seeing and serving Him.

In many cases, it was the sign out front that declared what part of Christs family gathered there that informed my decision.

 

[Musicmaster]

When choosing a church one is choosing a doctrinal stance...

Good point, Siloam. That's what's so sad and messed up as an outflow from denominationalism and the institutionalized model in general.

I still get hammered as to why I'm not a member of an institutionalized model, and the simple answer is that it's nothing more than a model, albeit man-made, but just a model nowhere God-breathed.

They, by nature, waste resources on real estate and operational costs, no matter how much more they can accomplish collectively compared to individuals. Neither the Lord nor Paul measured any church by how much it and they can accomplish monetarily. It's about the love, growth of the individuals spiritually, the outreach and obedience to the commands of Christ. Every institution I have ever been a member or visited has within them the majority who are spiritually stagnant. Those who spiritually grow in that model most generally do so in spite of the institutional model rather than because off it it.

...I found that if I chose one of a denomination I was familiar with, my heart was more likely to be in a worshipful state, while if I visited a church with a contrasting approach I was too concerned with the outer trappings and less concerned with worship.

I hope you don't mind if I say that this is strange to my experience. I don't predicate my worship by the feeling or style of any institutional model I have ever visited. My worship is just that, worship, which is ongoing every day. When Jesus spoke of "inspirit and in truth...," He was addressing a way of life, not something we flip on like a light switch in a special purpose room that has mood music and whatever else they may practice as their norm. I can worship even while walking about in the mall, or in the woods alone, and everything in between.

Just wanted to throw in my bit.

Thanks

MM

 

[bobinfaith]

Denominational-ism = Groupthink
As you all have likely discerned, I'm one who's in favor of Biblicism, which involves critical thinking, seeking stability upon ALL that scripture declares and teaches, questioning paradigmic thinking at every turn, lifting a critical eye toward denominational creeds and doctrinal statements (not all are necessarily bad or wrong), disregarding denominational symbologies, never jumping onboard any of the many, many bandwagons out there, and enjoying the peace and freedom that is our birthright in Christ Jesus.

Groupthink like many things, can be a good thing. The problems arise when we dig down into the deeper layers upon which any one groupthink rests upon. Perhaps this could be termed as the outflow of groupthink-ism.

Groupthink-ism tends toward fostering a strong sense of remaining within the defined walls of the core creed. This -ism, then, erodes into the dirt the common sense desire to openly vocalize a view that runs contrary to the core dogmas of the groupthink. Unpopular or controversial topics and views are generally anathema within a denominational groupthink, thus drowning out the potential for spiritual insights from the babes in the faith, all the way up into the ranks of spiritual giants walking this earth in our midst.

The desire for remaining cohesively bound together also lends to the tendency speak out as an expression of critical thinking. I was once accused years ago of being a 'lone star Christian' by a number of denominational-ism, groupthink victims. Groupthink can most generally rationalize any and all of their biases, no matter how outlandish and even anti-biblical. Such thinking morphs into decision-making that refuses to take all things into consideration, especially intellectual challenges from 'outsiders.'

The cognitive dissonance (ignoring conflicting information) of groupthink inevitably drives the group into gross disregard for any pursuit of absolute truth coupled with any desire to set aside internal groupthink paradigms. The only way to break such a cycle is for the leaders within the groupthink to encourage individual initiative for thinking independently, and presenting their ideas for discussion, with the Bible as the sole authority one may hold in his hands...and ultimately Holy Spirit direction sought after by all members.

Thoughts?

MM

Hello Musicmaster;

Groupthink, Biblicism, critical thinking, denominationalism can be good when the core of these categories keep the Gospels in the center. When we slant, take corners, or mix our self doctrine defining our theology, this is when the think-ism can go bad when the Gospels are not in the center.

Jesus says in John 7:16-18, 16 So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. 17 If anyone's will is to do God's will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority. 18 The one who speaks on his own authority seeks his own glory; but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and in him there is no falsehood. - ESV

Brothers and sisters, we need to challenge ourselves more and dig deep into the Bible. Or this can become a problem, our critical thinking suffers and can lead us into entertainment theory.

Proverbs 14;15, 15 The simple believes everything, but the prudent gives thought to his steps.

2 Timothy 2:7, 7 Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything.

When the Gospels aren't centered we can't distinguish which becomes a liability in our discipleship. For example, Groupthink versus the autonomy of the way a church governs its church body versus an individual Christian's discernment can be three arguments out of nowhere in any given discussion and can breakdown understanding if the Gospels aren't centered. That's my point.

Musicmaster, when someone accused you of being a lone Christian, my question is, who qualified them to make that statement? Whether this person or group was denominational, Groupthink, or self-doctrinated individuals, when we fail to keep the Gospel in the center of our Christian walk, fellowship and conversation, then we fail to pay heed to the verb of fellowship. If these individuals claim they keep the Gospel centered then they would not take the place of God and admonish where you should be.

I personally know Christians here at CFS and there in the community who I discern as lone Christians. One of them could be from a bad experience in a denominational church. Others are very standoffish (distant and cold), or shy (lacks confidence to interact with others) or timid (extremely scared of their surroundings.) There are many reasons and I can go on and on, but it's not my place to judge and direct their path, that's God's place.

I am commissioned to speak to everyone about the Gospels. That's my place. Within the Gospels is a place that can build up esteem and courage to follow where God calls them to worship, to build up and bless others.

Again, we all have enough on our plates to dig deeper and study the Gospels. This can go a long way when we delve into other areas of our faith, keeping the Gospels in the center as our guide, not man's but God's guidance. When we can follow these disciplines, then brothers and sisters in Christ can hold discussions such as denominationalism, groupthink and critical thinking without stumbling, getting sidetracked from the main topic, using impressive words, articulation and escalating to unreasonable arguments.

God bless you, MM, and thank you for getting this thread back on track.

 

[Siloam]

I hope you don't mind if I say that this is strange to my experience. I don't predicate my worship by the feeling or style of any institutional model I have ever visited. My worship is just that, worship, which is ongoing every day.

Didn't you have a long checklist of pointed questions to ask in choosing a church? Knowing the denomination as well as a general awareness of the teachings of the various denominational branches provides a first cut in answering them.

As far as my use of denominations to aid in choosing where to worship when traveling (and thus new to a given area) should be obvious. Without feeling any necessity of judging the correctness of anyone elses doctrine, I know that I do not belong at a pentacostal church preaching a charasmatic approach to worship. Even less to I belong in a pseudo-christian (e.g. LDS or Jehovas Witnesses).

A significant part of going to church is the fellowship with the brothers there. This is difficult if one is straining to put the experience into context and worship _together_ as opposed to simply being in the same building.

 

[Musicmaster]

Didn't you have a long checklist of pointed questions to ask in choosing a church? Knowing the denomination as well as a general awareness of the teachings of the various denominational branches provides a first cut in answering them.

Yes indeed, and almost none of them qualify. The issues are more than just the doctrines, and whether they are culturally and/or socially centristic, but also about openness. James Rutz wrote a pretty good treatise about this. His book is still on Amazon, called The Open Church.

As we all know, denominational-ism fosters and protects the programmatic model whereby the so-called 'laity' is kept silent unless called upon. That runs utterly contrary to Paul's instructions concerning the gathering of believers.

Just saying....

As far as my use of denominations to aid in choosing where to worship when traveling (and thus new to a given area) should be obvious. Without feeling any necessity of judging the correctness of anyone elses doctrine, I know that I do not belong at a pentacostal church preaching a charasmatic approach to worship. Even less to I belong in a pseudo-christian (e.g. LDS or Jehovas Witnesses).

That's reasonable. The only part of your ways and means I would say doesn't parallel my experience is worship. I can do that any where, any time. I don't go by my feelings. Worship, as a way of life, is ongoing whether I join in praise with a group or not. Pentecostal, pseudo-christian, and everything in between, none of them I have ever visited teach the truth about worship as it is addressed in the Bible. None! Every one of them lump it together with praise, as if they are synonymous, and therefore interchangeable.

Utterly false.

A significant part of going to church is the fellowship with the brothers there. This is difficult if one is straining to put the experience into context and worship _together_ as opposed to simply being in the same building.

How much does the average, professing believer know about fellowship. I've heard time and time again the guy behind a pulpit declare how wonderful it was to be there in 'fellowship.' That's ample evidence to the fact that he and, likely, all those other people know nothing about the reality of fellowship. I've addressed true fellowship in other threads, and so will not belabor the point.

Bottom line, though, is that if one seeks to experience TRUE fellowship rather than mere camaraderie and emotional connectedness in leu of the real thing, looking at the backs of other people's heads ain't it, or standing around the coffee pot with a donut in one hand and a steaming coffee in the other...that ain't it. REAL fellowship is dangerous. It tends to ferret out secret sins, demands openness and transparency, all of which most don't want....

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Hello Musicmaster;

Groupthink, Biblicism, critical thinking, denominationalism can be good when the core of these categories keep the Gospels in the center. When we slant, take corners, or mix our self doctrine defining our theology, this is when the think-ism can go bad when the Gospels are not in the center.

Jesus says in John 7:16-18, 16 So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. 17 If anyone's will is to do God's will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority. 18 The one who speaks on his own authority seeks his own glory; but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and in him there is no falsehood. - ESV

Brothers and sisters, we need to challenge ourselves more and dig deep into the Bible. Or this can become a problem, our critical thinking suffers and can lead us into entertainment theory.

Proverbs 14;15, 15 The simple believes everything, but the prudent gives thought to his steps.

2 Timothy 2:7, 7 Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything.

When the Gospels aren't centered we can't distinguish which becomes a liability in our discipleship. For example, Groupthink versus the autonomy of the way a church governs its church body versus an individual Christian's discernment can be three arguments out of nowhere in any given discussion and can breakdown understanding if the Gospels aren't centered. That's my point.

Musicmaster, when someone accused you of being a lone Christian, my question is, who qualified them to make that statement? Whether this person or group was denominational, Groupthink, or self-doctrinated individuals, when we fail to keep the Gospel in the center of our Christian walk, fellowship and conversation, then we fail to pay heed to the verb of fellowship. If these individuals claim they keep the Gospel centered then they would not take the place of God and admonish where you should be.

I personally know Christians here at CFS and there in the community who I discern as lone Christians. One of them could be from a bad experience in a denominational church. Others are very standoffish (distant and cold), or shy (lacks confidence to interact with others) or timid (extremely scared of their surroundings.) There are many reasons and I can go on and on, but it's not my place to judge and direct their path, that's God's place.

I am commissioned to speak to everyone about the Gospels. That's my place. Within the Gospels is a place that can build up esteem and courage to follow where God calls them to worship, to build up and bless others.

Again, we all have enough on our plates to dig deeper and study the Gospels. This can go a long way when we delve into other areas of our faith, keeping the Gospels in the center as our guide, not man's but God's guidance. When we can follow these disciplines, then brothers and sisters in Christ can hold discussions such as denominationalism, groupthink and critical thinking without stumbling, getting sidetracked from the main topic, using impressive words, articulation and escalating to unreasonable arguments.

God bless you, MM, and thank you for getting this thread back on track.

Sorry about quoting this yet again, but it bears forth the importance against how the gathering of believers is conducted within the stoic system of denominational-ism. Denominational-ism grasps the programmatic status quo (while pushing this verse aside) with an iron fisted disregard for the very Book the adherents claim is near and dear to their hearts.

1 Corinthians 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

Mutual edification seems to be the most overlooked aspect of Paul's instructions to us about the gathering of believers.

Oh, I've heard it all (or, so I assume). "We do just that in our cell groups," or "We have community groups that practice that very thing."

(snort) It's amazing how these same people will look at injunctions aimed at elders and deacons, and broadly apply those to all other believers, and yet take 1 Corinthians 14:26 and relegate it off into some corner shelf of yet another programmatic chess piece they call "cells" or "community groups" or whatever other names may be applied to what is pushed off and away from the sacred cow of their precious, communal building.

Corporate praise is wonderful so long as worship isn't mistakenly watered down by making the terms interchangeable and synonymous in belief and practice. What's amazing is how overlooked Paul's words are when he clearly stated WHEN YE COME TOGETHER, EVERY ONE OF YOU... The slight-of-hand word and phrase tricks the defenders of the paradigm apply as justification for ignoring the span of that statement, and thus shrinking it down to some distant, programmatic activities placed throughout each week in other places around town, that's a complete and utter disregard for the broadness of scope that statement actually encompasses.

Subjective application of the instructions given to us, crushed under the track treads of tradition, renders of none effect the word of God when it comes to governing the gathering of believers. That's the sad reality easily discerned in the hearts and minds of all who read and accept scripture for what it says. I don't blame ministers so much who are hired as the hirelings to uphold the programmatic mainstay of traditions. The average believer in the congregations are to blame for their own ignorance and stiff-necked disregard for reading the scriptures and demanding they be put into practice. No. It's mostly on them. However, ministers are not so blameless who refuse to at least introduce the congregations to the power in the truths of God's word.

If I didn't have the word of God to back all this, I would be silent on the topic, for it would have no teeth to grind and chew stiff-necked traditions into conforming pieces. As it is, traditions will continue to grind into powder all scriptural instructions that dare stand in contrast to the god of the programmatic traditions of denominational-ism...and it's not just denominations that do this. Almost ALL the independent organizations march to the tune of that same god as well.

Blessings to you, brother, and all others here, May the Lord pour out upon all a love for obedience to His written word, and especially to His indwelling Spirit.

MM

 

[Siloam]

The only part of your ways and means I would say doesn't parallel my experience is worship. I can do that any where, any time. I don't go by my feelings. Worship, as a way of life, is ongoing whether I join in praise with a group or not. Pentecostal, pseudo-christian, and everything in between, none of them I have ever visited teach the truth about worship as it is addressed in the Bible. None! Every one of them lump it together with praise, as if they are synonymous, and therefore interchangeable.

While there is much more to worship than the "church experience", the assembly and fellowship of Christians is a central source of strength and encouragement.

Remember the advice Paul gave the Hebrews:

Hebrews 10:23-25 (NASB)
23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful; 24 and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, 25 not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.

 

[Musicmaster]

While there is much more to worship than the "church experience", the assembly and fellowship of Christians is a central source of strength and encouragement.

Remember the advice Paul gave the Hebrews:

Hebrews 10:23-25 (NASB)
23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful; 24 and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, 25 not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.

Thanks, Siloam.

I've encountered quite often from institutionalists, throughout the years, where many assume that because there are those who are not partakers of the institutional model, they may or are forsaking the gathering of believers...as if the institutional model were the only viable and legitimate form of gathering...never minding that the institutional model is purely man-made rather than God-breathed.

For the casual reader, suffice it to say that, for those who assume along this line, there are a number of expressions of the gathering of believers. The institutional, programmatic model is no more legitimate than for two people to meet in the forest among the trees, gathering together in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ:

Matthew 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Notice that it doesn't say two or three hundred, thousand, etc. Two or three. More may or may not be better. It all depends on how obedient they are to the instructions given in scripture, no matter what number there are.

Many within the institutional model routinely ignore the instructions of scripture, waving aside their guilt with indifference.

I do appreciate the sense of being at home among a people. That can be good. However, when disobedience becomes the paradigm that most dare not question, that's when I just shake my head and walk away. That level of pragmatism is inflexibly and stoicly stiff-necked. We all have the freedom to participate in whatever model we choose. None are perfect, right? Perfection is found only in Christ being in the limelight in all gatherings, rather than men. A time for teaching is good for those who need it. That too is another topic that's worthy of scrutiny and discussion.

MM