Great video. Historical Protestantism always believed that the church should be rooted in the historic catholic (universal) Church. The ones who disagreed were the Anabaptist / restautarionists, who were rejected by the reformers.
How did historic Protestantism believe that the church could be "rooted" like that? It's through right preaching of the Word and administration of the sacraments. If a local nondenominational church has these things and is united with the other local churches around them in love, then they are, in fact, united to the universal church according to historic protestant thought. Check out Truth Unites' video about catholicity for a more complete explanation of historic protestant unity!
A non-denominational church can arguably be more rooted in historic christian teachings since they're not bound to follow, say, a presbyterian confession and forced to go against a Lutheran one. It's less rooted in presbyterian tradition, sure, but that also means it's not forced to ignore that which presbyterians disagree with.
What gives the magisterial reformers more authority than the radical reformers? Given that Calvin wasn’t ordained it’s not apostolic succession. This is just your subjective opinion that the traditions they retained were the correct ones, which itself is based on your own personal interpretation of the Bible. it’s not rooted in anything concrete.
@@comfy8250 I mean at one point calvin and luther were non-denominational pastors who started their own unnamed non-mainline church. lol. We only recognise it as “Lutheranism” or “Calvinism” nowadays because their ideas garnered mass adoption by governments of the time and missionaries & conquest spread it. But at one point their churches were equally as small and un-influential.
I am an Anabaptist and believe you misrepresented us. There were primarily two points of contention for us. Firstly, the practice of christening or infant baptism, and secondly, the union of church and state. We opposed the significant control the state exerted over the church at that time. There's also a lesser-known history of Christians persecuting and brutally killing each other over doctrinal differences, which Anabaptists also rejected, leading to our inclination towards peace and non-resistance ( though I personally have minor disagreements with my church on this matter). Us Anabaptists were killed by both traditional Protestants and Catholics. I would never say that we have everything perfect, but we are oftentimes misrepresented.
I don't want to be snide, but if you were pre-destined to be a farmer does that mean you don't plant your field and trust that its God's intent for the unplanted crops to grow anyways?
He never denied that in an ideal world, it would be better if all Christians would be united in one organization.. But it is not necessary for salvation to be in a specific organization, therefore he said that also non-denominational Christians are saved.
He did not. He is not saying that there is just one true church institution but Historical Protestantism always believed that the church should be rooted in the historic catholic (universal) Church. The ones who disagreed were the Anabaptist / restautarionists, who were rejected by the reformers.
@@robertortiz-wilson1588 Actually the word was invented by the catholic church to propagate the faith (propaganda fidei), that's when the church still had balls.
@@MrMcEggzthis video is dead religion worrying about unnecessary things at its finest. Dude references ‘go out and heal the sick’ with the Catholic Church building hospitals lol
Martin Luther was kicked out of the Catholic Church for reforming it away from corruption and towards the Bible. He didn’t split he was forced out. The Catholic Church in that time period left the one true church by going completely against Gods word.
You can say that. The reformation was God-ordained. In the same way that God opened up salvation for gentiles, not just for the Jews, due to the Jews falling so far from God repeatedly, the same thing happened to Catholicism, at a time where Catholic priests were offering indulgences and idol-worshipping money. Those reformers' doctrine lined up perfectly with God's Word, and also opened up to the masses, the opportunity to read the Bible. The reason you own a Bible, the reason you are able to read the Bible, is because of Protestant Reformers.
@@HebrewsElevenTwentyFive Don't be ridiculous, that is just protestant propaganda. Read some history. If the reformers doctrine lined up perfectly with scripture how come they disagreed with each other?
@@HebrewsElevenTwentyFiveactually the reason you can read a Bible is because of two English kings and an English queen who thought gatekeepers a book was cringe. It was a political movement causing a reformation more than a spiritual motivation
catholics say they don’t worship the pope or worship saints. when everyone is a sinner themselves and we need to respect individual spirituality. directly praying to God instead of having someone else praying on behalf of you. you have to advocate for yourself and pay it to God and Jesus Christ himself.
And they are apparently the cause for the downward trend of Christianity in the West even though the opening graph shows otherwise…did I hear that right? Haha
@@brentott2497 I feel he treats non-denominational believers like they know less, and it's actually fun this same criticism is what Nondenominational used against more traditional denominations when they first started in the 60s up through the 00s. Guess what comes around does go around.
@@asherlito3801 but isn’t that true? Doesn’t nondenominationalism primarily attract people that attended public schools, and may have less religious understanding?
I’m non denominational and all you did in this video was make an argument for the Catholic or Orthodox Church. Did you seriously think this one through?
@@justhair17 he definitely is. Church is more than just denominations. Does he seriously think that non denominational churches don’t communicate, work with, or do anything with any other churches? He thinks they’re all just lone wolves doing what they want? Absolutely not the case. They just don’t have an overarching organizational authority. You can argue that that’s a bad thing but you cannot make the case that they have no impact on the world.
I’ve never been around nondenominational churches that haven’t been connected with other churches or with organized, global networks of other non-denominational pastors. I’m sure there are some, but overall they’re very connected. The upside of nondenominational churches is that they unite beliefs between “mainline” denominations. For example, a lot of nondenominational churches are like a mix of Baptist and Pentecostal (not all of them. Many have a different mix of theologies. I use this one for the sake of making my point). Also, nondenominationals do create schools and largescale charity programs. There is no glory in being the ones that created “highly rated” universities when those universities have been totally warped and taken over by anti-Christian ideologies as they have today. The same can be said about hospitals that are now mutilating people in the name of gender ideology. If you take your arguement to its conclusion, then we should just get rid of denominations altogether and form one united denomination. But that isn’t going to happen. Theres nothing wrong with nondenominationals. Instead of worrying about what denomination someone is, we should all work together as Christians in the world, united despite our denominational (or lack thereof) differences.
Totally 100% agreed. I am non-denominational because I believe that most denominations have a lot of good doctrines, but many are too wrapped up in petty differences and have been effectively neutered when it comes to preaching the gospel and doing work for God. I'm going to a university that was started be a non-denominational church, and it isn't as prestigious, but it doesn't compromise on it's Christian values that it was founded on, and it is respected by many employers, with 99.97% of people being hired into their career fields within the first 6 months of graduating. Aside from that, non-denominational churches statistically are the most biblically based in their doctrine. In my experience non-denominational churches are also the most interconnected, not being bound by associations or denominations means you can more easily join charities and missions with other churches, doing the most good. It seems that his only ideas of non-denominational churches are the megachurches with the celebrity pastors. And while those certainly exist, they are only the minority. I don't hate mainline denominations, but they can learn a lot from non-denominational churches. Likewise, I think that non-denominational churches should take some lessons from mainline churches (I.E., more structured leadership and incorporation of traditional architecture) To be honest, this video just came off as snobby and elitist.
Sounds like you just made an argument for the one true church. Because realistically, everyone isn’t just going to sing Kumbaya and just unit. The Orthodox and Catholics on the other hand…
@@randomjake1488 The argument isn't that there's only one true church, the argument is that we all believe in Jesus and the Bible, and we should all be working together to root out theological liberalism and the withering of Christianity as a whole, because that is a problem that goes over denominational lines. And we should also work together to do good for the world in building missions, schools, and charities. In a way it actually is an argument about the one true church, because it is recognizing that our shared beliefs far outweigh our differences. And while it's good to debate theology, we should be able to come together as soldiers for Christ.
@@TheStarshipGarage Amen, from my experience most non-denominational churches are fine with the other denomination and can work with them as long as they are believing in Jesus as Lord and the core essential tenants of the faith, if they have certain traditions or routines that aren't biblical or is a form of compromise then that's an issue 🤔.
I dont see anyone fighting. It's ok to have a difference of opinion and Im glad to see people passionately defending their church. Im not too worried about what nonbelievers think. I'll let them tell GOD that they rejected HIM because of some youtube comments. Trust me, our comments on this video arent what's keeping them from believing the gospel.
@@trentmiller8127 It's still fighting, but whatever you call it, atheists and muslims and other religious folks are loving how split apart the christians are
@@sharificlesThe irony is the athiests are turning back and regretting being so.. athiest, now. If calling debate or simple aurguing is fighting, then you must not know what real fighting and undying tribalism would be. Trying to create false unity just to save face among nonbelievers and disbelievers is not any help either.
The argument that non-denominational churches lack unity extends to denominational churches too. By categorizing yourself as a denomination, you arbitrarily restrict yourself to working only within that organization. Why don't we see inter-denominational projects? How cool would it be to see all the churches in the city we live in get together, have a meal, pray for the city, care for the homeless, and preach the gospel? If all the denominations stopped arguing about their differences for once and mobilized as one body - especially in our ever-increasing polarized world, I imagine we would be unstoppable.
@@Quincy_Morris Do you see churches in your city collaborating with another to tackle your city's problems? I'm gonna assume and say no, and I hope that I'm wrong.
Thankfully my city does this. In a couple Saturdays from now, churches of all denominations (including my own nondenominational church) are all teaming up to do different sorts of volunteer events in the city and this happens every year
Non-denominational churches collaborate with each other all the time, I see it in my own church. Heck, we have more unity than denominations who are over here tearing each other apart over the issue of gay marriage. My church is involved in dozens of ministries and charities, alongside other churches.
I am a Non-Denominational Christian. I would like to put my church to the test of this video. 1) Does my church have accountability? Yes. It operates in a similar way to the three branches of government in the US. We have a Pastoral Staff, Elder Team, and Deacon Team. These three teams keep one another accountable. It might not be the same model of accountability in a Denomination but that doesn't mean it isn't accountability. 2) Does my church have tradition? Yes. We care deeply about Baptism. We celebrate Communion at least monthly. We hold a strong view of marriage (which is a sacrament in some traditions). We agree with the Apostle's Creed even if we don''t read it during service. We of course celebrate Christmas & Easter and have our own yearly traditions focused on Prayer, Reading of Scripture, Worship, and Service. We even have some Traditions that our friends from the Messianic Jewish tradition lead us in. 3) Does my church have resources? Yes. My church is not a Mega Church but these days it is certainly on the larger side. It probably has more resources then any other church in the community besides a Mega Church not to far away. And we share these resources with churches who are part of different denominations. We are also connected to a number of universities even if we don't own them. 4) Does my church have impact? Well we certainly do in our own local community. We support dozens of different Local Non-Profits and lead a Multi Denominational Mission Week each summer we call One Kingdom. That mission week does project in every town within our county. Plus we support a number of missionaries serving oversees. 5) So is my church unbliblcal, lacking unity, or refusing to share resources? I would have a strong no.
Hello friend, while that all sounds glorious and I'm happy for your Church, I would warn you against following the practices of any so-called 'Messianic Jew'. Paul was VERY clear that they should stop separating themselves from Christians by calling themselves jews, and VERY clear that if you start giving credence to their rites and rituals, you are denying the sacrifice of Christ. Remember: "You who are trying to be justified by the law have been severed from Christ; you have fallen away from grace." and "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Acts 15, Galatians (pretty much all of it, but especially Galatians 2, 3 and 5).
@@HaggisOfDeath There's a group in the community and we invite them in to do like a lecture/presentation and on the Passover. They offer a very insightful Jewish understand of it while also pointing it back to Jesus.
That is _your_ view, but compare what you said in most of these points against what the Bible teaches. It does NOT show God's Church being based on man's government models. It does NOT show God's Church observing Communion. It does NOT observe show God's Church celebrating Christmas or Easter. All of what you said proves how a church can have plenty of traditions, make an impact in the community, and STILL be unbiblical.
@@DavidelCientificoLoco There are certainly denominations that have a much higher view of the eucharist or communion then our church does. But I would not want to to confuse the idea that because we have a lower view that that means we have a low view or believe it to be unimportant. I also think view is fairly common in most mainstream protestant denominations as well.
It does not, since Presbyterianism is a) a confessional historic denomination; b) it is rooted in the history of the church, since they were not new churches built from scratch in the magisterial reformation, but historic churches with validly ordained elders that, together with their congregations, broke with Rome ; c) have apostolic succession (once it is understood that the position of bishop and that of elder are biblically the same, as the Bible and the Didache, and the apostolic fathers indicate); d) they did not build a theology from scratch, but consider the earlier councils and what the Church Fathers taught (the magisterial reform was basically a return to Augustine); and e) condemned the restorationists and Anabaptists.
@@DavidelCientificoLoco This goes back to the differences between Catholics and evangelicals. The Catholics say one thing and we evangelicals say, "Umm, I can read it in the Bible." And you're saying one thing and I'm like, "Uhh, I can look this up in 2 seconds" and see that the liberal PCUSA, which is the true inheritor of the denomination, blesses same-sex unions and has gay ministers. Conservative PCAers are just, to use the Catholic term, schismatics.
I think your head is in the clouds a bit too much with this one. Just because non-denominational churches are not taking over the world, founding highly-rated universities, and other things you describe as having a "huge impact" does not mean that they are not having an impact for the Kingdom of God in their own respective spheres. I do agree that denominations are a good way to organize for the reasons you mentioned, but a lot of your argument relies upon "most nondenominational churches" as I heard over and over, which seems to be an argument based on what is practiced most frequently rather than what could actually be done in a non-denominational church.
Regardless of a "huge impact" or not, Christianity is declining in the West. Likely due to the removal of Christianity as an institution. By definition, Non Denoms can't be one.
they have no accountability besides their pastors. I've been to plenty of non Dom churches and they are the closest thing to a protestant holding their pastor in a pope like position.
@@taslikesdogs Accountability is great, but accountability to what? The Methodists have accountability to a central group of non-Christian leftists. Catholic churches have accountability all the way to the Pope, who himself is accountable to no one. It's like saying America is a bad country--ok, but compared to what?
Agreed, he commits the hasty generalization fallacy. And also, statistically non-denominational churches hold to biblical teachings more than any other denomination. The "rock-star nightclub megachurch" stereotype is just what is most public, but that isn't the majority. And I know a lot of non-denominational churches that join together for missions and community service, and expecting one individual church to be able to found a college is laughable. Most often what happens is multiple churches will help fund the founding of a college or university, and no it isn't going to be Cambridge or Princeton, and you can't expect them to be.
@@taslikesdogs Buddy, you realise literally every mainstream protestant denomination allows women pastors and (most) allow gay weddings? this can be applied to any denom’s leaders
50 percent of the comments section: Catholics and Orthodox saying this video supports their arguments. The other 50 percent: non denoms pointing out the flaws in the arguments.
I am a Christian, or what would be called "non-denominational". I study my bible daily and have never read anything that tells me to prescribe to or identify with anything other than Christian. I believe in, and follow Jesus, not a church structure or denomination. My largest concern with the main denominational churches is the lack of fruit, catholics/orthodox Christians in America are generally (not all) not following Jesus outside of Sunday mass. They have no desire to avoid sin, don't read their Bibles, and have no desire to share the gospel. I'm not being legalistic here, but Jesus himself speaks often about measuring BY FRUIT. Matthew 7:15-20. I grew up Roman-Catholic and was surrounded by "faithful" catholics, I never knew who Jesus was until he spoke to me directly when I was 18 years old at my wits end. The Bible calls us to act differently than non-believers; but every classic-denominational person, after 10+ years of growing up in church, Sunday school, doing confirmation etc, I know makes no effort to live a more holy or fruitful life. There is so much legalism and structure of specific things you need to do (baby baptism, confirmation etc.) but not the same focus on Jesus and LIVING within His commands. I don't say any of this to bash or separate us as the church but I would like to hear thoughts on this from others perspective. The "non-denominational" believers or Christians I know, are on fire for God. They aspire to live a more holy life, they study how they can honor and serve God and they share the gospel as part of their IDENTITY, not just on Sunday. I want to live like Jesus and His disciples, I look to the book of Acts as my reference, not a catholic church just because its "traditional" or been around a long time. We should ALL be the church of Christ, kneeling at the feet of Jesus, not any denomination
Brother ! You just smashed it out the ball park. I absolutely agree. I go to a Pentecostal church but I associate as "just a child of God" nothing more nothing less. The bible says this, I go "yes and amen" It's so simple!
I agree entirely. I have nothing against Catholicism or any other apostolic church, in fact I quite admire the firm believers who stick to their tradition well, but I don’t think this discounts any other church at all. Very well said, brother.
I had the same experience brother, grew up roman catholic, but realised that my neighbours were not following the bible, am currently following the teachings of christ on my own, but I would like it if we can unite all true believers under a recognizable banner and live like the believers in the book of Acts. Acts 4:32-35
Usually I enjoy your videos, but this one is just snobby and ignorant. You commit several logical fallacies, such as the slippery slope, generalization, and either-or fallacy. You complain about how non-denominational churches don't have unity, yet you also complain about how mainline churches are as disunified as ever. Non-denominational churches are actually incredibly united, we aren't bound by the ties of associations, and so we can collaborate with other churches on charities and mission fields, and even building hospitals (usually in countries that don't have good hospitals or medical facilities) and I find it highly ironic that you point out that many prestigious colleges were founded by christians, when those colleges are not some of the most atheistic places nowadays. I am actually attending a college that was founded by a non-denominational church (at one point the founder was apart of a Pentecostal Holiness congregation, but left), and it is highly respected, and 99.97% of students are able to find jobs in their career fields in the first 6 months after they graduate, and this same college also built a hospital, and was able to get various associations of multiple denominations to donate to have these facilities built. You strawman every non-denominational as a megachurch pastor who runs basically a nightclub, but those are just the ones you see plastered online. Non-denominationals are also statistically the most biblically-based churches around, and they are usually more effective at preaching the faith then the whitewashed tombs that many mainline denominations have sadly found themselves in. Non-denominational churches are more united because again, they aren't bound by denominational ties, and see everyone as followers of Christ as long as they accept the basic tenants of faith. While I do agree that non-denominational churches can learn a lot from mainline churches (leadership structure, discussing the early church and the various creeds, etc.) I think mainline churches can learn a lot more from non-denominationals, such as being able to unify their efforts to do good no matter denominational differences, and not twisting the faith to fit the modern narrative. Because despite your stereotype of non-denominationals being uber-modern and anti-traditional, at least most of us dont fly pride flags from our church. And the whole claim about mainline churches being able to do the most good because of their resources is incredibly ironic, considering the fact that mainline churches have been neutered and have withered away due to bad teaching. Non-denominational churches are usually the fastest growing and most spiritually active. The truth is the impact of the whole of Christianity on culture has decreased, and biblical teachings have begun to fade, and we can't just blame certain denominations for that. We're all Soldiers of Christ, no matter our denomination. And don't think that I hate mainline churches, I hope that they thrive once more and are able to preach the Gospel far and wide once again, I just know that me and many others don't agree with the doctrines of most denominations, instead seeing good in all of them, and thus choose to be non-denominational. And you basically just played yourself, as I could edit this video and make this an argument as to why Catholicism is the one true church.
I think the fact that non-denominational churchgoers have surpassed denominational one is proof that non-denominationals are better at spreading the word then the others
Literally the best way I could’ve put it. Thank you for sharing your opinion. I am also non denominational but I don’t have a problem with any other denomination but to say that non denomination is wrong when I am actively watching them make an actual impact all over the world was so hurtful. Thank you for saying all of this so I don’t have to 👍
@RedeemedZoomer, my brother in King Jesus, for all of your good intentions and passions, this may not have been your best work. To suggest that the nondenominational churches lack the ability to link arms and work at the local level to establish schools and hospitals, practice tradition and the sacraments as well as find the resources needed to advance the kingdom is simply blind to all of the history of the churches established after Christ ascended into heaven. The churches in the days of acts belonged to no denomination and yet, meet the same criteria your video lays out in great detail- and yet, turned the world on its head. My brother in Christ Jesus, in love, I simply disagree with you.
That is all of RZ's videos done in this way. He is confrontational to a fault and has to make videos that elevate his positions above others (even when the totality of the video damages his position). He could have made a unifying video demonstrating that despite denominational differences, we are still united in our one holy goal; of leading people to Christ. Our unification is in Christ and our understanding of salvation should be equivalent between denominations (salvation through faith in Christ Jesus, that he is the only son of God, that he is God, and that he died a personal death for each individual; and through that death we may be saved if we believe what he proclaimed and that he is our personal savior). As I watch RZ more and more, I find his videos to be increasingly distasteful, as he continues to throw slights against other Christian orgs and denominations all in his crusade against those he disagrees with. But such is the folly of the unwise, I did the same when I was his age. I still can't stand Calvinists, but I love them and wouldn't debate with them on a public forum. Maybe one day he will put actual thought and effort into his videos instead of this tired tropey style he enjoys right now, but I fear he will only change when the algorithm tells him to.
@@TearlessGosling too many Christians have been putting off serious theological evaluations of their positions for decades now to the point of willing or unknowing ignorance. That has been the main stumble for Christianity in many places during the past century. Attempting to water everything down.
First, i wanna say ive been watching your videos for a while now and have a lot of respect for you. Im in a nondenominational church, and we're atill quite traditional. It looks like any other church and partakes of weekly communion but doesnt enforce artificial tradition, and focuses entirely on christ as the head of the church. We're also well-funded and well populated. We view all scripture-based, nondenominational churches as united in the Church of Christ, which is completely immaterial and intangible.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 no, but we do support widows in need and feed the homeless, as well as lead transcontinental mission trips. I think heal the sick can simply be taken to mean help those who cant help themselves, to provide. I dont think massive, wealthy churches are a great idea because they are more open to corruption. In more modest churches, its easier for the elders and the rest of the congregation to keep each other in check. Tradition can be useful, but only to a certain point.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 so are you saying that a church should be graded on how much money it makes to build hospitals? your church hasn't built any hospitals yet. non-denominational churches can come together to get enough money to build hospitals too there does not need to be an organization behind the thing edit: no I don't know what I'm saying either I just tried to refute your argument and I couldn't find a way to articulate mine. a church should not be rated on if it builds a hospital or not but by if it is following Gods words.
Bro just no, I left a denominational church because of the tradition it got in the way of teaching Christ. I go to a non-denominational church and the ability they have to collaborate and reach into communities is insane. God works in mysterious ways but this one isn’t it.
@matheuscaneta1194 hey yeah so the one belief that pushed me away was the idea they believed “they” would be the only people to go to heaven. One true church doctrine. They also had all these little things that they required or else you had lost your first love. None of those things (black shoes, button up shirts, no tv, no radio,(no they’re not Amish)) have any salvational value. I could go on but I think you get the point. Those traditions were held above the Bible and personally I think that’s something anyone should be mindful of. If it’s not Salvational don’t put so much emphasis on it. “Keep the main things the plan things”
@ravenvane2227 not church tradition, rather the inspired word of God. It is am easy mistake to make, but the two do not necessarily align. Take for examples the Pharisees and their many traditions which claimed root in God's word, but departed from it all the same.
@@highadmiralbittenfield9689 The Pharisees did not have the Holy Spirit to guide them; unlike the early Church. The verse specifies oral tradition which imo is a clear indicator that the apostles did not put everything in writing. I believe that church tradition has authority as long as it doesn’t contradict the Bible.
Exactly what i was thinking. What he said about all these pastors basically becoming their own pope is exactly what the reformers did. So his condemnation of non-denominationalism is really just a condemnation of all schism in general throughout history. Including the protestant schisms
RZ I love your videos, but denominations shouldn’t be treated like your favorite sports team, it’s about glorifying the lord and praising him. If you’re Catholic, Protestant, or orthodox that’s second to being a follower of Christ.
I go to a denominational church, but I must say that I disagree with you on this one. The early church did not have denominations. What we need is for Christians from different beliefs and traditions to come together and unite for the common good of the Church and beyond. I could use the points you made and say that this is why we should have NO denominations and all be united as one body of Christ. Denominations divide and separate us from each other.
The early church had 1 denomination not 0. There wasn’t a bunch of non connected independent churches spreading around. There was a structure and connection between them and they all (mostly) agreed to adhered to and confessed to the same laid out beliefs from the councils and the leaders of the universal church. That’s very different from non denominational independent churches that operate on their own and aren’t connected to other churches.
I'm just browsing the comments for entertainment lmao I respect RZ despite our theological differences but come on bro you shot yourself in the foot here
So this line of thinking could easily be taken a step further to remove all protestant churches and unite with the most powerful and influential church (Catholic) because the smaller protestant denominations (Presbyterian, Lutheran, Methodist) do not have the same organizational power.
The answer to one extreme isn’t necessary the other extreme. That would be like saying someone who doesn’t support anarcho-capitalism logically needs to become a communist.
Amen, lets be one again 😂🇻🇦. Been serious: Truth been said one of the goal of any true Christian church should be look for unit in Christianity, what is usually made (at least in the Catholic Church) by some sort of ecumenism to try to understand and, where possible, heal our diferences. Is not without reason that the Catholic church has a substantial number of Eastern Churchs and even Anglican Ordinariats (this last one with few but proeminent members, including a substancial number of ex-anglican bishops). The problem is "non-denominationalism" made it impossible, even in theory; been the anthithesis of unity: we can't reach unity if what the church believe is strictly dependent in what the specific leader of that specific congregation believe, specially if whenever someone don't like something about the church he/she just created another one.
The amount of dislikes is phenomenal lol. Edit: The number of likes this comment got is the number of times RZ commits strawman in every video. He should really think about what the lord says about the church. Edit 2: presbyterian church in your description already raises a few red flags about your understanding about scripture.
@@redeemedzoomer6053denial is a stage of grief, just accept that you have a bad opinion full of logical fallacies that literally contradicts your own denomination.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 It seems moreso its just you have a permanent anti-fan club after your atheist video, similar to how on your insta and twitter there's persistent dissidents who comment *every* time. Of course good news is none of of these people have any real nuanced worldviews they're all pretty much stuck in 2009 with nothing new or interesting to offer
You've descended from a channel who respects all traditions and educates people about them to a channel that puts down other traditions without logic to stay relevant. I think the biggest example of this is contrasting your "Why I'm NOT xyz denomination" series, which outlined your personal beliefs and made me respect you more, to "Why this denomination is stupid and unbiblical" videos like this one. Idk what happened man.
I have to disagree here and say that doctrine is more important than organizational affiliations, in the same way that scripture has more authority than tradition.
In the so-called non-denominal churches, doctrine is typically abysmal. They adopt whatever is popular or whatever pet doctrine the uneducated pastor holds.
@matheuscaneta1194 I suspect most NDs are started by preachers who aren't qualified to lead (or to continue to lead) a church in the denomination they were in.
I think it's a little bit too late to unite the churches into a "one true Apostolic Church" (note: Absolutely NOT the Roman Catholic Church BUT the One that branched off and rooted from the *"Council of Nicea."* or even earlier the *Council of Jerusalem* , the one true Original Universal CHURCH agreed upon by the Apostles and early Church Fathers.🔥 Uniting it by "natural means" or using "man made reforms" is just pure wishful thinking because ALL major churches (Presbyterian, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Methodist, Lutheran, Baptist, etc.) have already established their own set of doctrines, creeds, beliefs (Trinity, Unitarianism, Calvinism, Universalism, Arminianism, etc.) and none will comply to anyone since they believe their own doctrines are the Truth and Non-Denominational churches are the same. They "created" their own set of rules and doctrines.(- do you think 2.5 billion Catholics will just convert to Protestantism and vice versa? - ) Again, it will not happen given by those set of problems, add to that the rise of Atheism, Paganism, Secularism, Feminism, Naturalism, Mythicism and all the EVIL 'isms". (plus Zionism and unbelief of the Jews to their Messiah Jesus, Technocracy and rise of AI.) The only way for the whole Christian church to be united again is through "Supernatural means" and that is the *2nd Coming of Jesus Christ* and rule the world with the rod of iron to vanquish ALL evil and opposition literary. It's only his coming whether Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib, Pos-Trib, or whether Premil, Amill but certainly not Post-Mill theonomy wishful thinking that Christians should conquer the "7 mountains of the World" or convert the world to Christ before Jesus comes. It's purely wishful thinking agenda and ideology. (not lack of Faith or escapism as others fanatics claim, but FACTS - "Why polish the brass of the sinking ship?"). Sorry Folks, *NO OTHER HOPE or SOLUTION but the coming of Jesus Christ.* That's what you ALL should pray for. "In the last days, perilous times shall come." - II Timothy 3:1-5
It's called the "Blessed Hope" for a reason. The 2nd coming of Jesus Christ is the Key to everything Good on Earth. No ideologies, reasoning, agenda, propaganda can change the world and hope or power can trump that. Come, lord Jesus, Maranatha!
Well said, thank you. It's sad to reflect on the public breakdown of the Christian testimony and our (as in, believers) failure in responsibility - yet even this sobering reflection is a source of joy, because it turns our minds and hearts to consider the Lord Jesus, to look for His coming, and anticipate the perfection of His administration in the day of display.
@@thebowshot9341 it's a pleasure, my friend. Agreed with you that it's sad to reflect the breakdown of Christian testimony. I always see Christians fighting amongst themselves. There are so many conflicts INTERNALLY within the Universal Body of Christ. (This pastor expose this pastor for false teachings. Protestant vs Catholic vs Orthodox, Calvinism vs Arminianism, Progressive vs Conservative Christianity, Charismatic vs Cessationist. Dispensational Premil vs Postmil, etc) Add to that the enemies of Faith trying to destroy Christianity from the outside: "Atheism, Islam, Feminism, Secularism....." Yet amidst all this chaos, as you have said: "it turns our minds and hearts to consider the Lord Jesus, to look for His coming, and anticipate the perfection of His administration in the day of display." - The Ultimate hope of ALL believers, even Paul and the apostles, are longing to see that. But we are the generation who has "a Big chance" of seeing it unfold in our times. No other hope but Jesus Christ returning to finally destroy and end ALL evil, disagreements and confusion once and for all. As the apostle Peter himself said. "But, according to his promise, we look for NEW heavens and a NEW earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness (2 Peter 3:13)🔥
As a Roman catholic, I’m sad to see that all the churches have split from each other over the years. I wish all Christians could unite in the church in some way.
the church itself never split since it is not a banner, flag, or particular temple. The body of Christ is composed of everyone who truly believes in Him with all their heart, the believers are the church, no matter from where these followers came, if their faith is sincere then they are part of the church. This is something that many physical churches got wrong, many try to sell themselves as the better church or the "true" church, however, it is not about the institution, it is about the heart.
You know what? Im not even going to argue about that. I agree that everyone who has same the faith and does the will of God shall be saved. God bless you 🙏.
@@fvardona Exactly! Pride rules over the physical churches. That's why a lot of them have hypocrites and ignorant ''christians''. They are always playing with the word of God to bring more people. That's a huge issue. However, there are still good and respectable churches.
As a fellow Catholic I 100% agree, there was a better way to go about the reformation than splitting from our church, and now we have a mess, a billion protestant denomination all pointing fingers and calling each other false teachers, and only look at US! US started as a protestant nation, and it ended up secular 🤦🏻♀️, I wish that protestants would notice why giving the authority to interpret scripture to oneself isn't a good idea 🤷🏻♀️
I'm sorry RZ, I think you are off base on this one. Have you been to any non-denominational churches? In my experience, at an ND Bible church, you will find a group of people who are fiercely and fearlessly devoted to scripture and who love the Lord. Most denominations (including yours) depart from scripture. There are no denominations in the Bible. Those were created by men. Traditions are nice, but they aren't more important than the word of God. I would propose that Denominational churches are more contrary to scripture than non-denominational ones. Remember.... when the Bible refers to the "church", it is referring to a group of believers in Christ, not a man-made organization. One other major logical flaw .... ND churches most likely arose due to the failure of the mainline denominations to uphold biblical truth. The rise in ND churches didn't CAUSE a failure in Mainline churches (which is a surprising leap in logic given that you think ND churches have no influence), but instead are probably the RESULT. Sorry this comment seems kind of belligerent. I love most of your videos, but I had to say something about this one. It troubles me greatly to see division in the church. We are all part of one church, regardless of denomination. We all need to focus on loving the Lord first and then loving each other.
Out of all the mainline denominations, Baptists most closely reflect my theology. My only main difference if the ability to receive spiritual gifts today, but I would be 100% comfortable attending a Baptist church. The funny thing is belonging to a denomination can actually restrict helping other denominations, whereas non denominational can help whoever they want. I think denominations and non denominations are fine. As long as God is present in your local fellowship and your core theology is good, go where God leads you.
@@mattm7798i mean it doesnt have to, I help my other Christian homies of other denoms bc I know they are brothers, just with slight belief differences💪✝️
I’m a Baptist and I’m afraid I don’t agree with this message. You said that God’s people act as a united front and always share their resources. You also mentioned how non denominational churches often lack resources. Therefore, other churches should share resources with them, as they should, but what stops them? Their denomination. The fact that some denominations are larger than others does not mean that the smaller denominations, or singular non denominational churches are unbiblical.
Pretty sure Zoomer was saying that the non-denom was not sharing their resources, not that the denom was not. And you can clearly see this since denoms share with hospitals, etc. While non-denom do not share via hospitals, they might support charities, but they are still collecting and less sharing.
@@NJWEBER18 I believe the point OP was making is that larger denoms do not share *with* non-denoms *because of their denominational differences*. If we are all truly Christian, then why shouldn't Presbyterians, etc, do more to support their nondenominational brothers who clearly have less than they do? Its an interesting question.
@@Whatever_is_Tov and the point of Zoomer is that non-denom are less biblical than large denoms, so why would large denoms share resources with unbiblical non-denoms? Each non-denom is a further split from one church, so supporting them with resources is supporting unbiblical polychurchism. Unbiblical church =/= no christians to be found. Most Christian Churchs are unbiblical in some way. If every church was totally biblical, they would all be part of one church, as the bible tells us to do.
I generally respect you quite a bit and your videos have done wonders for me, but this one is off base. All this does is create divisiveness in the church, and a house divided cannot stand. -Non-denominational Christian
@@ICantThinkOfAFunnyHandle No, it's saying we can do it better by ourselves, and 2000 years of tradition isn't of any value, and why do we need the sacraments that they had for the first 1500 years anyway. It is being a law unto thyself. I was a non-denominational pastor myself for decades. Then church history and the Bible demonstrated how wrong I was. I have since become a confessional Christian, and the communion I joined was a Lutheran one.
My brother in Christ you are preaching your theology more than you are preaching about God. There is a reason why your denomination struggles with the existence of God and it is becoming more progressive. I know more devout non-denominational church goers that preach the gospel than I do reformed church goers. Stop acting like a pharisee by boasting of your works. Give praise and lift up your brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus.
I go to a nondenominational and it is very traditional. They preach the gospel, sing hymns, lead prayers, and we do the Lords supper. It’s got the look and feel of a normal church and we are united with other churches. I joined this church because I don’t know where I belong in the whole denomination list, and this one seems to be the perfect middle road. We need to remember that God works in different ways. Sometimes his solutions are right there in front of us, but we’re not paying attention to it. I remember asking what kind of church do I belong in because I don’t know where to go. And then I remembered there is a small, wholesome community church just down the road. I’m trusting God with this one, and he hasn’t led me astray yet.
I'm in a similar church myself. I can see where RZ is coming from but non-denominational Churches are more capable of things than he gives them credit for
I agree with this, as a reformed Baptist. I can’t imagine being a new Christian and having to choose between so many different denominations. Nondenominational churches tend to be gospel focused. They have their problems IMO and I don’t prefer them over reformed Baptist churches. But they are useful. I go to a Bible study at a nondenominational church as well as at my reformed Baptist church and it’s great!
This. I think RZ has hit the point where any Church that isn't HIS church or a historic church shouldn't exist. I think project Reconquista warped his mind.
@@pedroguimaraes6094 Eh, most non-denominational churches are actually just charismatic churches. Arguable, that implies at least some degree of identity and rootedness imo.
After many times I have seen this channel, I finally decided to check out a video. Now I see why I never felt the need. Tradition is only meaningful if it’s from the love of God. Should Jesus have been a Roman citizen since that was more influential than being a Jew? No. God’s power is above any organization or nation. Funny enough, your graphic at 3:40 doesn’t work- because it was SpongeBob’s krabby patty who actually had substance, while all of King Neptune’s had none. Your own image you chose betrays you. I have been to a bunch of different christian churches, different denominations, still I could no church family. God led my wife and I to this church, which we have looked into leaving, and God instead has kept us there and pushed us to get involved. My church is getting together with many other churches in the area to do baptisms together. We are united spiritually in our faith of Jesus and what He did for us. Don’t generalize or minimize God’s influence just because you don’t understand it. May the Lord bless you.
You’ve entirely (again) missed the point of non-denominationalism. Non-denominationalism is not “I want to isolate myself from the wider Christian tradition” it is “I reject factionalism in its current form of denominationalism.” Saying that denominationalism is the answer to biblical unity of the church is just… absurd, sorry, I can’t think of a better way of putting it. Naming yourself as separate from the churches around you is, by definition, factionalism. Not (non) naming (denom) yourself as part of a sect is what the early church modeled. The decline of Christian popularity and the corruption of mainline denominations is why non-denominationalism exists, it is a response, not a cause. Trauma, abuse, and failure of the institutions that were meant to protect congregants from being subject to those abuses led many gospel loving christians to come together in local communities.
Non denominationalism exists because it synchronizes modern thoughts and culture with religion, turning worship into a performance at a concert. It also dumbs down Christianity and theology immensely. It's popular amongst the uninformed, lost, and confused because it's extremely easy to get involved in.
@@footballnick2 The trappings of religion are not the Gospel. The question isn’t ‘do I like the way they do church?’ but ‘is the Gospel and “orthodox” christian teaching at the heart of the congregation?’ If you would visit a bible church or two, rather than looking at the scandalous marketing attempts of a few mega churches, you’d see the non-denom movement is about church unity and gospel centered truth, instead of institutions and socio-political clout. If we’re all non-denominational, then there’s no ground to fight each other about which institution we submit ourselves to, because we are all equally submitted to Christ.
The irony is really strong here. "The Bible says that the church should be united. So we should all fall into this arbitrary selection of boxes and refusing to do so is unbiblical." Completely backwards.
Baptist here. Your argument is really against congregational polity, which is a perfectly valid point of disagreement within Christianity and not deserving of the conclusions you reach. If an individual non-dom church is unbiblical in its teaching, of course it should be condemned - but saying the existence of them as a group is unbiblical is simply false
@@Dokilokiify Care to explain how? GOd calls us to all be one. As a non-denominational Christian, I am regularly preaching the Word of God on my university campus, supporting various Christian organizations on my campus; I don't see people who are too proud of their denominations doing such. Holding to your one denomination is unbliblical. The local church is the most important church, and it should nto be divided into 1500 churches per city. The way churches are too is also unbiblical. It isn't supposed to be a lecture, everyone is supposed to be worship God together, not 1 man teaching. That is for teaching the bible, not worship.
3:30 NOT TRUE my non denominational still uses the Nicene Creed. Also I would agrue the Nicene Creed is the only only that really matters for someone to be "Christian". I feel like the following creeds were just disputes on theology which IMO doesn't really matter when it comes to the simple question of IS Jesus the Christ and does faith in Him save us from Hell and allow us to enter Heaven?
That's a great start, but those churches will sprout and die and some live for longer and then there will be a split and the congregation gets cut in half. There is no accountability, no doctrinal statement that holds members accountable. The Gospel is great, but you have to read all of the Bible, all of the other parts where it talks about the importance of unity, where it talks about the establishment of unified churches that were all connected together.
Calling nom denominational churches, infinite denominational churches is like calling atheists infinite believers. Because their beliefs are not universally set.
Uh? What? Non-denominational churches maximize denominalism. They're the complete opposite of what they claim to be. How is calling an Atheist a believer an analogy?
If you believe all of this, you should consider Catholicism. Protestantism isn't one main tradition, as all of the denominations have significant theological differences. This is one of the big appeals of Protestantism: you can find an ideology that best fits your personal beliefs without having to conform to strict doctrines.
I don’t really care about the strictness of a doctrine I care about the wrongness of a doctrine. And there’s too much wrong with Catholicism for me to agree with it based on scripture.
I can't believe in Catholicism due to its absolute constant reformation of its own teachings over the years. Until the 1500s it was rather tame, but after the Council of Trent, Vatican I, and Vatican II teachings were implemented into its Catechism, I simply think the church is falling apart. Especially with these Bishops utilizing Vatican II to become a more worldly accepting organization.
@pyramidhead156 There may be reformation of practices that are not infallibly defined. However, there is never reformation of dogma, so there is the assurance that the Church at its core will always espouse the true values of Christ. This guarantee is widely absent in Protestantism, where there is no infallible tradition. Again, I can see Protestantism's appeal in this way as a more "democratic" system of belief, even as a Catholic.
The two main "denominations" in first century Israel, were Pharisee and Sadducee. They had the resources you speak of. Fancy clothing, buildings, money, etc... Jesus was the pastor of a non-denominational church, which had neither of those things. Tell me again how I should conform to your idea of a church!!! And how a non-denominational church is unbiblical!!! The reason there are so many denominations, is because people felt the current denomination had things wrong... Should it all be one giant Christian church? Absolutely... but denominations refuse to give up their traditions, in search of actual truth.
Jesus wasn't non-denominational or a pastor. These terms are completely inapplicable. He is Truth upon which the Church must stand. Is there division in Truth while still remaining the fullness of Truth? The reason for many denominations is because of the failure of Sola Scriptura. It doesn't matter how people feel about something. What's wrong then if progressive churches say that they feel the old interpretations were wrong? Once you reject normative authority, you give permission to infinite heresies. Tradition is about the careful passing of proper exegesis. So disjointing the reading of the Bible from traditional apostolic authority results in anachronistic or subjective reading of the text without having any defense. Any protestant denomination is therefore self-defeating in the long term because progressivism is the logical end of not submitting to an authority that can forbid the founding of new churches.
@@saiguun The word pastor comes from the Latin word for shepherd... You're saying Jesus wasn't a shepherd? He'd disagree with you. And considering there were "denominations" at the time, with differing beliefs on various topics... and considering Jesus was a part of neither of those, but shepherded his own flock... I'd say that fits the modern definition of non-denominational. The above actually proves your point to be wrong about clinging to the tradition set forth by the "church"... You know who else loved their tradition of passing along proper exegesis? The Pharisee and Sadducee. Where they right? Should everyone have shunned the teachings of Jesus and clung to either the Pharisee or the Sadducee? I'm assuming you're catholic... That's a shame. When one knows that they're right, because they say that they're right... Something about "Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall."
Resources? No, the church I attend may not have a "worldwide" impact. However, local impact? Our tiny church has ministered to dozens upon dozens of people financially, emotionally, and spiritually. And no one, beyond our pastors and elders know precisely how many people that is because our focus is deliberately not on our church.
Edit: this whole comment seems mean but I promise I'm trying to be helpful. Leaving it as is, but I'm still sorry! Dang, there were so many silly takes in this I checked my calendar to see if it was April fool's again... let me break down some of the major errors (hopefully clearly): 0. This whole video seems to work off the spotlighted ND churches without respect for nuance. 1. 0:36 Nondenominational (ND) often have their own confessions, inspired by or even ripped from confessions of the church fathers. 2. 0:48 The Holy Spirit convicts hearts. 3. 1:25 If only from a theological stance POV, ND can "melt" the pieces back together by using only the "good" teaching from the other, larger glass pieces. (But make sure to work that out with fear and trembling) Sometimes the inflexibility of a label forces you to accept faulty doctrine. 4. 1:45 Spot on! We don't discard this just because we are ND! I know you didn't say we do that, but it might be interpreted that way based on how it was said. 5. 2:15 these are all examples of how the European church works, not the church catholic. Only reason to bring this up is because it plays later in your video as supporting evidence. 6. 2:35 ND "can't"? I thought all things are possible through Christ, including this "impact" you speak of? 7. 2:51 Tradition - a.) ND has lineage to Early Church, while it's messy to find, it's there. b.) Any time there is a denom split, you break tradition. If I had to say how this argument summarizes, it's "old is good, new is bad" (strawman bc this is YT comment) c.) 3:29 You can read the church fathers and use the content they wrote without being explicit in usage. We hold church fathers as an interpretation tool rather than as (from our vantage) binding documents 8. 3:40 Again, from our vantage it is the mainline churches that look to be hurting for resources. For any good church, there will be generosity. 9. 4:04 Use a different verse to encourage giving to the church... that passage is fairly clear as descriptive only. There's plenty others that would still prove your point! 10. 4:12 man u called us poor... 11. 4:36 Come ON that is such a bad take. How do you get to become a highly rated college? What about colleges founded in other countries? Yes, these colleges are huge blessings to the world. No, the presence of these colleges does not mean you should be Methodist/etc. 12. 4:54 Maybe not hospitals, but definitely doctors. Also people like Francis Chan (love or hate him) have considered opening hospitals. ND is a relatively new concept, let it age! It's not wrong just because it's not "of Peter" or "of Paul". 13. 5:12 This tells me you have not studied the real reasons for being ND. Passion & energy, yes, but also often well studied in the Word. 14. 5:25 ND has the flexibility and a theological capacity to join this united front even with those we disagree with, which was the appeal with which you started the video. 15. 5:46 I don't follow the cause and effect here. 16. 6:18 I definitely don't want a safe space, I want a church where I will grow as a soldier for Christ the most. I have found my locally church to do that best. Where in scripture are we commanded to be a part of a certain denom? Unity does not mean a certain one, rather a collective push to advance God's kingdom. TLDR; this video seems to be built on a strawman of Nondenominational. Maybe try again with a steel man? Earnest and honest best wishes for you, hope this explains some issues many might find in the video in more detail.
6:11 The NT word for church (Koinonia) means community! Not a worldly institution. If Christians find community in a nondenom church, then they're doing church right!
1. Tradition isn’t necessary in a church, so long as it follows the sacraments of the Bible and is rooted in Christ. Nondenom churches are still a derivative of some branches (like pentecostal and baptist and presbyterianism). As for music, there is no such thing as “traditional” worship and music as modern churches use modern instruments for modern worship which would be the same as King David using relevant instruments of his time to worship the Lord (with a harp or lyre) with a setting that is relevant to his time (in the temple the same way we have a church that is filled with colorful lights among other things) 2. Resources vary from churches to church, as I’ve seen non denominations churches share resources in the realm of media and live streaming, financial and other types of things. Sure its not as big as denominational churches but its still there. 3. Influence just like resources, vary from church to church, some churches which are non denominational have bigger influence than others because of the people who serve and work in them. All of these points are overlooked You seem to forget that the reason why so many churches become nondenominational is because that people are tired of the “one true denomination” idea and that people want a church revolving around the Bible and Jesus. Non denominational churches are here to stay and they are only going to grow further, just as there came protestants from catholics, there will also be non denominational churches coming from denominational churches.
If you're trying to get out of a non-denominational church to be part of a group with more tradition/resources/impact, just join an SBC church Not as many of us have smoke machines during worship service, but otherwise the doctrine is comparable to most of them. (And to be fair, a lot of SBC churches/individuals would be extremely close to Presbyterians if we weren't as relaxed on certain aspects of Calvinism and polity or if we baptized infants)
This is totally backwards. I go to a non-denominational church and go to several Bible studies almost exclusively with non-denominational persons at various, unrelated churches. We are the definition of unity in Christ. We have Calvinists, Arminians, dispensationalists, Replacement Theology adherents, and everything in-between, including a Catholic who joins us regularly. And we are united in Christ, despite our individual theological differences. If I joined up with a denomination then when I join the church I would be assenting--in a pledge--to their core statements of faith, which would be impossible to do with the Catholics and most mainline Protestants--in other words, I'd be lying in the name of some faux version of unity and submitting to the authority very likely of leftists and non-Christians. So, if we want unity in Christ under, say, the Catholic Church, then the Catholics need to re-assess some of their core beliefs.
@@karolkos5915 I agree with Nicene creed except for one fundamental thing--the Catholics capitalize the "c" in "Catholic", i.e., "universal." That difference changes everything because the institutional Catholic Church--Roman Catholics--teach fundamentally different things about salvation, Israel, dispensations, Mary, prayer, saints, indulgences, purgatory, the Eucharist, and other things that I don't accept. And I reject it not because I grew up and was taught differently but because I can read the Bible for myself. There is a reason the old Roman Catholic Church executed people for translating the Bible from Latin into common languages.
@@kevinkent6351The Catholics don’t capitalize the c in catholic in the nicene creed, coming from a Catholic. Also the Bible doesn’t disprove the Catholic faith, only Protestant interpretations of the Bible do. And there is no way of knowing what these true interpretations are in the Protestant church since people with the same Holy Spirit disagree on fundamentals and the Bible does have specific instructions on how to interpret. Catholics interpretations are backed from early church writings such as the didache and traditions from the early church and apostles (2 Thessalonians 2:15) while Protestant ones are just based on their own thinking. I would trust the students of the apostles and the apostolic traditions more than myself when figuring out Christianity, and that’s one reason I’m Catholic. Don’t let all the misinformation discourage you from Catholicism, coming from a former Protestant. God bless
@@okj9060 you think making the same, old tired arguments I've heard for decades is going to convince me to join the Catholic Church? That's hilarious. It's not even worth my time responding point by point. I love my Catholic brothers and sisters in Christ, but I disagree with so much Catholic doctrine that if I were to attempt to join the Catholic Church in some act of re-unification I would literally be excommunicated. There's no bridging the doctrinal gap between someone who has spent his life studying the Bible and the Catholic Church. It would be better for us to be united spiritually in Christ than for us to try to co-exist in the same corporate structure. As to the Nicene creed, I mean Catholics in their minds capitalize the "C", which changes the meaning of the creed. That's why Catholics have an obsession with criticising denominations.
3:46 That was the worst meme you could've used. Anyone who knows the full context of the episode would think this meme is pro non-denominationalism. For context, the burger Spongebob (the yellow dude) made was considered great, while the pile of burgers made by King Neptune (the blue dude) were considered awful.
I'm sorry, but this seems so overcomplicated and pharisaical. Jesus didn't call himself a Pharisee or Saduccee. In fact, He was an ordained rabbi by the presence of two witnesses at His baptism (the Father and the Spirit). Denominations are simply different teachings or emphasis. Instead, they should be called "majors" or something like that. A pentecostal church will spend time focusing on the Spirit of God, gifting and His role in the church. Presbyterians may spend more time working out how God works, what our purpose is, and how we are saved theoretically. It doesn't mean either is opposed to either. In the case of theological disagreement, that will always and forever happen throughout the church, even in the same denomination. Non-denominational churches exist PURELY as a local church of the body of Christ. Because Churches aren't an organisation. They are a gathering of the saints. Sorry. It's just true.
I have to respectfully disagree HARDLY on this one. While I cannot speak for most or even all non-denominational churches most have checks and balances inside the church. Around 0:50 you say they are their own pope and such. But most churches I have been in as I’ve moved around and been in non-denominational churches have had inside checks and balances and outside ones. It’s not one guy saying “here’s what’s up people, Jesus says this and I’m 2nd in command.” They establish things that give the church a lifetime beyond this one guy, and make him not even close to some all powerful what I say goes leader. Additionally most of these churches use that same system of outside checks and balances for their resources, people, money, funds, charities, ideas, knowledge, manpower and tradition etc all based on some ideas they get from similar minded churches. As for me and plenty of other non-denominational churchgoers I’ve interacted with we’ve come to these churches not out rebellion or feel for community even, but bc we don’t agree with acts or beliefs of traditional churches. If you put me specifically in a group for example, I am baptist. Yet growing up Baptist in a very go to church in a suit, don’t smile, don’t laugh, the only music is one old lady in the back with a piano, God is serious so no fun here blah blah blah, that tradition sucks. I’ve literally watched my family raise their kids like that, most of my younger cousins now approaching 17-25 years of age where we all kinda get hit with the phase “what do we REALLY believe” have chosen NOT to believe or follow God bc they think it’s boring. And ofc that’s their fault I can’t argue we’ll God didn’t make church fun so it’s fair they won’t be Christians- no, that’s not what I mean. But the traditions aligned with Baptist churches I feel are a NEGATIVE. And a big one at that. It’s to break these traditions you claim are specifically good. I disagree and think (while some traditions are good) these traditions actively harm the church or church image. And I don’t think another denomination has Baptist aligning beliefs but lacks the failing traditions. Another point I just remembered was you said non-denominational churches don’t do sacraments: that’s never been the case. Not one I’ve been in has even suggested abandoning baptism or breaking of Jesus body through communion or abandons the creeds, this I just have to say is a personal bias by Redeemed here. Idk where he’s from but East Coast US and southern Spain where I’ve hopped around churches over the years have never once suggested any belief like that. In fact I think the grand scheme is the opposite personally, all the churches break the glass by making denominations and by having non denominational be the main church where we are all still connected while being separate we can have better unity and as a main ideal of non denominationalism the churches should check and balance and share etc with outside and other churches to keep this unity and help other churches remain biblical along with themselves. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need any denomination, but we don’t live in that world and I think that is part of the fact we live in a fallen world. I absolutely believe this is scriptural and biblical and the best we can do is come as close to perfect as possible on earth here, my belief is that that is through non-denominationalism. Anyway I don’t wanna ramble more; theres absolutely more I could say but unless someone specifically asks I’ll leave it here, I felt I had to voice this opinion.
I've been in nondenom churches, mainline and evangelical churches and I can tell you they've all got their ups and downs. I landed in the Anglican church because I like the accountability the episcopal structure provides for its clergy, so in that sense I would agree they are a sounder base. However, I take issue with most of what you've said. First of all, the examples you give of denominational colonizing is misleading and offensive. Yes, education and healthcare are good things, but the educational institutions you cite as exemplary of the denominational system are the very same institutions which have created the "liberal" Christianity you rail against so much. Furthermore, the wealth which funded those schools and hospitals did not come from faithful denominational attendees selling all they had and holding it in common. It came from the satanic genocide of Indigenous people, many of whom were Christians, and the expropriation of their land. Second, the characterization of nondenominationalism as unbiblical is bizarre. The churches of the Biblical era were locality-based and shared no governing oversight. Their leadership was local with regional ties which, after a couple centuries, tended to fall under the influence of larger church bodies centred upon major cities: Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Rome, and later Constantinople. This is the catholic organization: more like a web of independent bodies with major nodes. Orthodoxy among these bodies was maintained by apostles and bishops but relied upon recognition through mutual discernment. Richer churches might send resources to poorer ones. Churches which grew too heterodox might be slowly cut off from the flow of teaching materials and other resources. The concept of organizing the church like a state, with a governing body that owned the property and enforced conformity, developed in the early middle ages. Finally, as some other commenters have said, the argument of this video will have a tough time drawing a line between "you need to be in a major denomination" and "you need to be in the only true church, i.e. the one I'm part of." Yes, there is properly only one church established by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. It is holy (God-ordained), catholic (universal) and apostolic (the apostles of Jesus were its first leaders and its apostolic mission continues today). Yes, nondenom churches generally do not acknowledge this overtly by reciting a creed every Sunday. But the real question is: do they exemplify these things in actuality? Do they do the works of Jesus in the power of the Spirit for the glory of the Father? Can they call every fellow believer a sibling in Christ? These things are the nature of the Church Triumphant, the body of believers who are struggling to conform themselves into the image of Jesus so that they might live on the earth as God intended when He made the earth. As Jesus said, "a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem." It's not where we worship, it's who we worship that defines us.
As a non-denominational person, your spongebob meme is fitting, because spongebob makes one really excellent crabby patty and king posideon makes thousands of horrible crappy patties.
No, zoomie, you're wrong here. First of all, any argument you are making here is literally the same you could make against any congregationalist or Baptist Church. Secondly, Non denom Churches are held accountable by God, and we clearly see that besides a few megachurches, which we can count on one hand, when a non-denominational church goes against the scriptures, it dies out. Just like Baptist and congregationalist churches. On the other hand, Non-denom Christians ARE more unified than denominationals, by definition. How many Presbyterians sing hymns next to anglicans? How many Orthodox serve the poor regularly next to Catholics? Do non-denominational serve and worship next to people they disagree with regularly? Yes, literally every week in almost every non denom church people with political, secondary doctrinal, and cultural differences praise and serve and learn and preach. There's a reason God is making these churches grow, by His sovereign will, and it's clearly because His favor is with us, at the moment. It is for the same reason the mainlines are dying, and why your reconquista has shown no fruits. Denominationalism is an exercise in vanity. From one part of your mouth you preach unity, while having an entire serires dedicated to why the PCUSA is somehow "the best". In reality, it's just team sports for you. Meanwhile, non-denominational christians don't play these team sports, we are by far more likely to be ecumenical in our gatherings, eagerly Desiring unification with those who agree on the essentials etc. Your arguments could easily be used to justify Catholicism, regardless of your amendments. Your Love of denominationalism is essentially just like cheering on the Steelers, or the eagles, while non-denominational have the Sunday ticket and watch all the games. Denominations are distractions. It's one thing to defend your beliefs, it's another thing entirely to pretend your denomination is somehow special, and no matter how many you pretend to have under your team's banner, it is impossible to reach the same number as you'd reach under the label "christian".
That's because it is the argument for the Catholic Church and RZ is slowly becoming more Catholic. You can just see it happening. It's funny that all this has happened once he's had a long form sitdown with actual Catholic apologists. It's quite amazing that every time someone really looks into the church history they find themselves either no longer opposed to Catholicism and realize that their beliefs are justified, or they end up becoming Catholic themselves.
Non-denominationalism saying anything else is vanity is wild. A non-denom belief system is at its core founded in pride, it says I will not follow any other theology whether it is my place or not. Obedience the opposite of pride is cast completely aside in the name of following my beliefs, their are several churches with apostolic lineage from thousands of years ago, but my personal feelings are the most important. If I have to start up my own church to do it I will.
Sorry, but this whole video feels like a massive caricature of the non-denominational church. Sorry for the essay, but I'm passionate and have thought a long time about this. TL;DR at bottom. The non-denominational movement has its flaws, yes, but it's not like each non-denom church is its own denomination. The illustration you made is incredibly misleading to make it look like every non-denominational church is completely disconnected from fellowship with one another or anyone outside of their church (like they're living in their own bubble, cut off from everything, totally oblivious to other churches). I've never understood it like this. In my eyes, the effort of non-denom churches was to break down the dividing walls of labels (whether or not they're successful is certainly debatable). They're trying to move towards unity in a different way (and I'm not saying I agree with it). "[Non-denominationals] can't have much of an impact on the outside world because they're not part of an organized army." - Says who? Our impact is limited by our denomination? We don't have an effective church body, or we can't reach as many people because we're not a part of a traditional denomination? - Sorry, but this quote makes it sound like we're helpless unless we join a denomination. And it doesn't make the quote of "they're still true Christians" feel much better at the end. If anything, of "if I'm not in a recognized mainline/evangelical denomination, I can't do God's will or be biblical, so I'm damned." - Your last claim in the video also makes it sound like we can't serve the kingdom outside of a traditional denomination. It's not "serve God's kingdom OR be at home," but rather a BOTH, AND. Christians are called to BOTH community and love for one another, AND to serve God's kingdom. You can do that in a non-denom context. "[Non-denominational churches] lack tradition, resources, influence on the world" - I agree non-denoms have lost much of the tradition. It's sad that there's rarely an appreciation for thinkers that have gone before us, except maybe a C.S. Lewis quote every month. It's sad that the sacraments aren't appreciated or reveranced AS MUCH (not to say they can't be or aren't being appreciated and reveranced in some non-denom circles) - I do wish more non-denominational churches shared resources, especially those of the mega-church size. However, that's not to say that they don't share resources or can't make as big of an impact. Besides, , basically saying, "non-denominationals aren't making as big of an impact as us mainlines/evangelicals." - Those of the mega-church size and other non-denominationals seem to make much bigger of a global impact for the kingdom in media formats than many traditional evangelical or mainline denominations due to their emphasis on technology and entertainment. This is the biggest strength of non-denominational churches: THEY CAN REACH PEOPLE THAT TRADITIONAL CHURCHES CANNOT. There's a different audience (and yes, I want them to come to Christ, which means these churches NEED to preach the gospel, no compromise) "As non-denominationalism has risen in the West, Christianity overall has fallen, partly because Christians have no longer been presenting a united front against the world" - So the fall of Christianity is on non-denominationals? - The de-churching issue is WAY more nuanced. I think a better critique on non-denominational Christianity is: - Very low view of the sacraments (typically) (grape juice, open baptism, etc.) - Lack of pastoral accountability (in many circles) - Less-detailed confessions (that are also rarely historical confessions) (there are still confessions & by-laws that are binding in most non-denom circles. It's not like every non-denom church is Mars Hill) - The messages are often watered down for the sake of not offending people (which often fosters a shallow and incomplete faith rather than a deep one) - Lack of teaching church history (which can make Protestantism seem disconnected from the past, where followers are more susceptible to claims like, "to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant," or "Martin Luther invented new doctrine," or "no one believed this until the 1500s," etc.) - Contemporary worship music tends to be TREMENDOUSLY more shallow lyrically than traditional hymns (that doesn't mean it can't impact someone or that all CCM is like this, though the industry is deeply flawed) (also, not all non-denoms use only CCM) Those things need to be fixed. That said, I believe non-denominationals are playing an important role in the Kingdom of reaching the lost. While I hate the methodology of lights & stages, I recognize that many of my friends would have never come to faith if it wasn't for the flashy lights and fancy production setups that got them in the door in the first place. So long as the gospel is boldly preached, that's IMPACT. TL;DR - I think this video was an over-simplified and unfair critique of much of non-denominational Christianity that ignored almost any good that the movement has brought (despite its flaws), so I tried to push the conversation toward what I believe is truly wrong with the movement. I'm open to discussing (please be kind to each other & me in the replies).
Now this is a way better discussion over non-denominationalism As a non-denominational myself, I agree that non-denominational churches still have flaws for the most part but I also think alot of issues is more down to an individual church rather than non-denominationalism itself. I can't speak on all non-denominational churches but I would say we hold a high view of the sacraments, I mean, we use grape juice because we have minors take part in communion and since wine is an alcohol, minors drinking isn't a good sight. Still, thank you for actually making a well done comment on a video that just completely fumbled the ball and tripped into a garbage bin.
@@redhitman5311 as a Lutheran growing up, we were drinking wine as minors after confirmation, as it was considered a religious exemption. This is actually one thing that bothers me about my current non-denominational church, as Jesus clearly talked about the bread and the wine, not juice. However, it does put a large emphasis on baptism.
@Allaiya. Understandable, me personally, I see the bread and wine as more of a symbol than needing to be exactly wine in order to have it be considered communion, I mean both wine and grape juice stems from grapes. Also, you can think about grape juice helping those who are recovering alcoholics, wine could be a trigger for them so grape juice is a good way to to allow them to take communion without worry of relapse. Ultimately, I'm trying to see the heart of what God says about communion than having to be exact about it though I do agree wine would probably be better.
I heavily disagree, and this is why. 1. You first state that the non-denominational churches are new and then show concern for their lack of resources. Let me ask, if a new denomination arose (which would be no different from past denominations arising), would you then say they are wrong for having no resources? If it is new, let it grow. If the nondenominational church had strong resources 10 years from now, would you say its still sinful? Your argument here depends on the growth and youth of the nondenominational church, and it would have been best for you to stray from its youth entirely for your point. 2. Also, they aren't THAT new, they started in the 18th century and most are not as fancy and nontraditional as you say. I grew up in one and it is a nice, old, decorated church with tradition. Today, I only go to nondenominational churches that are old. Now, megachurches do cling to non-denominationalism, I admit 3. Yes, Christ calls the church to be united. But that doesn't mean one has to leave non-denominationalism to do so. You create this either or fallacy that doesn't exist: be unbiblical or change your views. In reality, The non-denominational church doesn't actually need to deform. It just needs to UNITE. Churches can be united REGARDLESS of denomination. You don't even explore the possibility of non-denominational churches merging with other churches to achieve great things. MY church does this, and is assisted by other churches and pastors GLOBALLY, installing churches in less fortunate nations and connecting them to united churches in America. 4. As you said, there have been many splits, and its bad. Believe it or not, denominations shouldn't exist period, and that's what I as a non-denominationalist choose to be non-denominational about. Every denomination is built on its weird desire to take scripture out of context, or have an unbacked theological view, or something else stupid and useless. It is silly to even imply that a Christian should just develop a denomination (meaning to literally lean on values they don't actually have). I will not become a member of a church that I heavily disagree with. I conclude, you are entitled to this view, but no: non-denominationalism is not unbiblical. For it to be unbiblical, it must be, as you said, incapable of unity. Then, and only then, is it truly unbiblical. But it isn't. They can unify with other denominational churches (because churches shouldn't be unified over denominations in the first place. You should be unified because you're a church of Christ). They can unify AS non-denominational churches, and they can over time progress and build resources. Unless the Methodists were unbiblical until they developed their own allies and resources, neither are the non-denominationalists unbiblical until they develop their own allies and resources. Yes I agree that we should be united, but we don't have to disband to do that.
I feel like you have made a solid argument to say it’s either the Catholic Church or Non-Denominational. The argument from resources, tradition or history just takes you back to Catholic and Orthodoxy. I say this as an a non-denominational you’re locking Protestants out of Protestantism.
the best thing about non denominational churches comes from the fact that you don't have to bicker over slightly different viewpoints like other denominations do with one another. that harmony is what allows non denominational churches to be the greatest force in God's kingdom
Why wouldn't non-denominational have doctrinal bickering? Any reason other than they're all sheep to a charismatic leader. Good churches don't have much doctrinal bickering because they follow doctrines ironed out over centuries.
This is very much a strawman view of non-denominational churches. The vast majority of non-denominational churches are part of a larger organisation of some sort. These non-denominational denominations tend to have a more relational and less formal structure than traditional denominations, but this doesn't mean that they consist of entirely autonomous churches that simply do their own thing.
It's the adoption of stereotypes based solely on the worst examples that happen to be clearly visible. It's like saying home schooled kids are "weird." And accepting it as fact from the surface level. Vs a more reasoned, rational, or academic take which could be home schooling can lead to a child who hasn't been properly socialized. Do we throw the baby out with the bath water? And go you either accept public education or you adopt home schooling and inevitably have an unsocialized weird child. Lol
My church is nondenominational because there former denomination became woke and told us to not follow the truth ofbthe bible. Dude good the churches in Canada have been forced to become nondenominational by the denominations.
I really challenge you to go to a non denominational church for a Sunday. Because I agree with some of the things you say especially the tradition part but you say it isn’t apart of the Bible to be non denominational however it’s also against the Bible to hold yourself above others because you are apart of a larger denomination. Same thing as the Jewish churches and their leaders in the New Testament. Another part of non denominational that’s appealing is not being attached to a branch of church that has bent the words of the Bible in the past to justify things. Being able to start from a fresh point without religious politics is huge benefit to non denominational church.
@@redeemedzoomer6053Or the denom is wrong. Case in point: the Pope's recent words. Many Catholics are in a pickle because their man representing Peter went non-biblical on certain spicy subjects.
If non denominational churches lack resources as you say, isn’t it the duty of other churches, irrespective of denomination, to provide those resources? I certainly think so. But the fact that they are part of a denomination prevents that. The fact that they are part of a larger group of Christians doesn’t hide the fact that we, as Christians, are split by our denominations. Therefore, I would say that denominations divide us, not unite us.
I love how the reactions to this video sums up Non denominational christians outraged A lot of protestants disapointed because of how the video is not well made and puts Zoomer in a bad image and the Catholics, absolutely laughing their asses off, Lmao
Non-denominational (and that means Bible believing) churches have access to the unlimited wealth and provision of God to achieve the purpose God has appointed for them, so resources aren’t a problem. Tradition is the only one that can be an issue, but the main point of non-denominational is to avoid the restrictive traditionality that causes issues in mainline churches. What Protestantism/Reformation was to the Catholic Church, Non-Denominational was to things like CoE and Anglicanism. The goal is to strip away everything that isn’t from God in His word, and so focus on the core tenets of following Christ. Influence is a strange one. Salt is scattered, not dumped in one spot. The wider the spread of Christians, the greater the impact of them on the world will be. In the end, trying to consolidate everyone into a single hierarchical bucket puts you at risk of being led astray by leaders who are motivated by politics and greed. Independent churches, in contact with eachother, with multiple elders appointed over each. Christ is the High Priest, now and forever. The Bride waits for the Bridegroom to come, and until then there is no centralised power on earth that isn’t born or corrupted by the wickedness of man.
@@bikesrcool_1958 It says we’re to be citizens/part of the kingdom, not that the kingdom will be rooted here on earth (as it’s the Kingdom of Heaven after all) But we’re only sojourners here at this time as Peter says. The kingdom will be on this earth in the future, Jesus is very clear on that, but until the King arrives, we’re just foreigners from that Kingdom here on earth.
@@bikesrcool_1958 I think it’s just our view of ‘Kingdom’ aha. The ‘kingdom of God/Heaven’ as a physical location is currently heaven based, with a prophesied time to come to earth in the future (which you rightly point out is mentioned by Christ etc), which will fulfil all of the Israel/Mount Zion prophecies from Isaiah and the like in the Old Testament. We are currently citizens of the Kingdom of God, but sojourn as foreigners in this world (in the world, but not of it). So the kingdom is indeed current, but is not physically on earth yet, only its people are (you and I). It’s our role in bringing the coming Kingdom which usually is the bigger division. Some say that the church should prepare the world for the coming of Christ (e.g. make an earthly kingdom for Him to inhabit), but others say that we are salt of the earth, meant to preserve and stop the spread of sin until the coming day of wrath/judgement upon it.
Non-Denom churches network with each other, dude. Like... they are a meta-denomination. They form cliques and keep each other inline... even Bethel or Hillsong.
@@loganleroy8622 You can also just leave a denomination at any time and become _denomination - issue we split over._ The politics is exactly the same, just more like a federation than provinces.
@@matthew_scarbrough Right, which is why it's problematic and doesn't actually lead to any church unity. There's no way to hold members accountable, because they can just have their own "interpretations" of scripture. That's why it's a problem to have these denominations.
@@loganleroy8622 Nor is there a way, by that definition, to keep unity in a denomination. All you can do in a denomination is say, "We don't agree with this one church," and that's it. Maybe you can kick them out. But you also have issues with denominations like hyper-liberalism. You don't really see that as much with non-denom because each church stands or falls on its own merits and has to hold up to the scruteny of _everyone_ around it, not just other members of their denomination.
@@matthew_scarbrough Right, which is why you should be unified in a single church, ie the one that actually has any legitimacy to claim to be the universal church.
Using your army analogy: Non-denoms have for the most part decided to join ranks against the actual enemy. Presbyterians, on the other hand, have decided that they can fight the enemy while also fighting their brothers who are Pentecostal, Methodist, Lutheran, Anglican, Baptist, Mennonite, and... well, basically everybody. You're telling people that unless they agree with you on paedobaptism, Calvinism, and covenant theology-secondary issues-they can't come with you to spread the gospel in the world-the primary issue. That's not unity, that's exclusivity. As a Presbyterian, I appreciate the effect that non-denoms have had on the world. Denominations are stupid. How can we love an invisible God while casting aspersions on our visible brothers?
"Non-denoms are unbiblical because they dont have as much worldly wealth as bigger, older denoms do. We're great because we made the colleges that now teach people to hate God and the hospitals that turn men into women." Thats effectively all I'm getting out of this video. If its not talking about worldly possessions, which seems stupid in a world passing away, its about "unity" but I don't see you bending the knee to Rome in the name of unity. They have more wealth than any other, too. Bigger, prettier churches, more colleges, libraries, etc. Funny how reformists/calvinists always circle back to the same arguments as catholics. In my experience, it seems you guys just want to be your own Vatican over your own Rome.
Please Mr Zoomer, tell me what denomination was the church in Jerusalem, the church in Rome, the churches in Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus, Philippi, Colosse, Thessalonica etc...? You say that a non-denominational church is unbiblical, yet I cannot find a single denomination in the bible. By the way, your universities and hospitals are doing wonders for the gospel.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 By definition you cannot have one denomination. According to the Cambridge dictionary, a denomination is "a religious group whose beliefs differ in some ways from other groups in the same religion." One united church is non-denominational. I appreciate your zeal for the church but I believe your video is incorrect to say that non-denominational (which by definition would be non-divided) is unbiblical. I apologize if my original comment was sarcastic. I work as an overseas missionary, planted a non-denominational church and I am very passionate about it,. To hear it called unbiblical was, let me just say, difficult. But we can pray together, "YOUR kingdom come."
The dislikes give me hope that people are starting to see through RZ's nonsense. A great Bible "summarizer" but when he starts talking about churches he completely drops the ball.
If you wanna argue that non-denominational churches are necessarily not "rooted in tradition" in comparison to denominational ones, that's true in a sense (i.e. they don't necessarily bind their consciences to follow whatever theologians in the XVIth century decided was essential, like a Calvinist soteriology or a specific view of the millennium), but to argue that they're worse off when it comes to church unity is just absurd. How is someone in a presbyterian church that refuses to collaborate with any christian that doesn't adhere 100% to the WCF in any way more united to other christians than a non-denominational one who's free to collaborate with calvinists, arminians, molinists, people with different end-times views, etc? If anything a church like the EFCA displays far more of a "christian unity" ethos than any reformed denomination.
First of all, protestant denominations are not binding to the conscience since the only infallible authority is the Bible and tradition is always reformed in light of that. Second of all, you can very well see that the denominations work together, that's the point of the Reconquista, all these different denominations working together for the kingdom.
These are people within very libtard denominations working together, not denominations. And you go try joining an OPC church while having an Arminian soteriology to see how non-binding it is in a confessional denomination.
… this was extreme. Kinda pushes away your non-denominational subscribers, don’t you think? I’m non-denominational, but we have a Statement of Faith that was based on the Nicene Creed + the Bible. We do communion once a month. We do evangelism, baptisms, retreats. Outreach, even. Of course we don’t have the resources you say - non-denominational churches were usually founded and are run by the simplest of men. The richer people get their own place and the flashier ambiances, but you might have left out the small community churches that just looks like a gathering of believers. I do think non-denominational is an irony in itself because it *is* a denomination, but saying that they shouldn’t exist is another thing. If you think this video will make non-denoms switch to Presbyterianism (or any other denomination), you might be thinking wrong.
This is the biggest miss I’ve seen RZ take ever. Almost none of these arguments are even remotely true, and almost all of them more accurately reflect the ignorance and misunderstanding of denominational churches in the present day.
Counterpoint: Nondenominationalism is an America phenomenon. America is much more Christian than Europe. Therefore, nondenominationalism has saved Christianity in America.
This is a very worldly perspective. The one direct Scriptural reference, Acts 4:32, is not at all clearly prescriptive. As for the arguments of “how do you expect to make an impact” or “how shall you be organized in the ‘Christian Army’“, the effectiveness and value of the Christian life is not ultimately found in the visible impact we leave, but merely how faithful we are to the Word of God and the voice of the Spirit in our everyday lives. Nothing about Jesus’ ministry followed any of the conventional wisdom for how a Christian ministry ought to be structured to “maximize impact”. Rather, Christ was simply faithful to the Father’s call day-in and day-out, and through radical obedience alone the Lord changed the world. This is not even to say that denominations have no place in Christ’s unified Church (unified around the one true head Jesus Christ and His Gospel, not any particular council or doctrine), as I agree God has worked wonderful things through them. Rather, I simply believe it’s foolish and worldly to make such blanket statements about nondenominationalism.
Great video. Historical Protestantism always believed that the church should be rooted in the historic catholic (universal) Church. The ones who disagreed were the Anabaptist / restautarionists, who were rejected by the reformers.
How did historic Protestantism believe that the church could be "rooted" like that?
It's through right preaching of the Word and administration of the sacraments.
If a local nondenominational church has these things and is united with the other local churches around them in love, then they are, in fact, united to the universal church according to historic protestant thought.
Check out Truth Unites' video about catholicity for a more complete explanation of historic protestant unity!
A non-denominational church can arguably be more rooted in historic christian teachings since they're not bound to follow, say, a presbyterian confession and forced to go against a Lutheran one.
It's less rooted in presbyterian tradition, sure, but that also means it's not forced to ignore that which presbyterians disagree with.
What gives the magisterial reformers more authority than the radical reformers? Given that Calvin wasn’t ordained it’s not apostolic succession. This is just your subjective opinion that the traditions they retained were the correct ones, which itself is based on your own personal interpretation of the Bible. it’s not rooted in anything concrete.
@@comfy8250 I mean at one point calvin and luther were non-denominational pastors who started their own unnamed non-mainline church. lol.
We only recognise it as “Lutheranism” or “Calvinism” nowadays because their ideas garnered mass adoption by governments of the time and missionaries & conquest spread it. But at one point their churches were equally as small and un-influential.
I am an Anabaptist and believe you misrepresented us. There were primarily two points of contention for us. Firstly, the practice of christening or infant baptism, and secondly, the union of church and state. We opposed the significant control the state exerted over the church at that time. There's also a lesser-known history of Christians persecuting and brutally killing each other over doctrinal differences, which Anabaptists also rejected, leading to our inclination towards peace and non-resistance ( though I personally have minor disagreements with my church on this matter). Us Anabaptists were killed by both traditional Protestants and Catholics. I would never say that we have everything perfect, but we are oftentimes misrepresented.
But Zoomer, I was predestined to be non-denominational
Lol this is great
haha good one :)
bro said the quiet part out loud
Zing
I don't want to be snide, but if you were pre-destined to be a farmer does that mean you don't plant your field and trust that its God's intent for the unplanted crops to grow anyways?
Bro just made the argument for the “one true church” doctrine without realising it.
He never denied that in an ideal world, it would be better if all Christians would be united in one organization.. But it is not necessary for salvation to be in a specific organization, therefore he said that also non-denominational Christians are saved.
@@GhostVII he is just speaking from a protestant perspective
There is no one true denomination . All religions are the same thing.
He did not. He is not saying that there is just one true church institution but Historical Protestantism always believed that the church should be rooted in the historic catholic (universal) Church. The ones who disagreed were the Anabaptist / restautarionists, who were rejected by the reformers.
I'm a protestant and I agree - this video is unmistakably advocating one true church
This basically was an unintentional Roman Catholic propaganda 💀
Based
The original meaning of propaganda simply means to propagate ideas so I’m all for it!
@@robertortiz-wilson1588 Actually the word was invented by the catholic church to propagate the faith (propaganda fidei), that's when the church still had balls.
@@matejmoravek4580 true!
Except Rome split from the EO church... *Stirs pot*
POV: you click on a redeemed zoomed video just to look at the comments
...and IMO, I am more convinced of non-denominational responses than RZ's argument. His argument is silly
This may be his worst video lol.
Comments section is entertaining. He definitely didn't think this one through
Me its the most contriversial one
@@MrMcEggzthis video is dead religion worrying about unnecessary things at its finest. Dude references ‘go out and heal the sick’ with the Catholic Church building hospitals lol
Using the same logic you should be catholic. You can't just say: my split is okay, but the smaller ones are not.
Martin Luther was kicked out of the Catholic Church for reforming it away from corruption and towards the Bible.
He didn’t split he was forced out.
The Catholic Church in that time period left the one true church by going completely against Gods word.
You can say that. The reformation was God-ordained. In the same way that God opened up salvation for gentiles, not just for the Jews, due to the Jews falling so far from God repeatedly, the same thing happened to Catholicism, at a time where Catholic priests were offering indulgences and idol-worshipping money. Those reformers' doctrine lined up perfectly with God's Word, and also opened up to the masses, the opportunity to read the Bible. The reason you own a Bible, the reason you are able to read the Bible, is because of Protestant Reformers.
@@HebrewsElevenTwentyFive Don't be ridiculous, that is just protestant propaganda. Read some history.
If the reformers doctrine lined up perfectly with scripture how come they disagreed with each other?
@@HebrewsElevenTwentyFiveactually the reason you can read a Bible is because of two English kings and an English queen who thought gatekeepers a book was cringe. It was a political movement causing a reformation more than a spiritual motivation
Again, the reformation wasd not "split", they got kicked out.
Wrong on most points. also "my church is rich and yours is poor make your chuch unbiblical" is a rough argument
Redeemed zommer is becoming catholic without realizing it
Would be based
LOL
Even better Holy Spirit works
For real
catholics say they don’t worship the pope or worship saints. when everyone is a sinner themselves and we need to respect individual spirituality. directly praying to God instead of having someone else praying on behalf of you. you have to advocate for yourself and pay it to God and Jesus Christ himself.
The rise of non denominational churches rose from the failure of the mainline and traditional churches.
And they are apparently the cause for the downward trend of Christianity in the West even though the opening graph shows otherwise…did I hear that right? Haha
@@brentott2497 I feel he treats non-denominational believers like they know less, and it's actually fun this same criticism is what Nondenominational used against more traditional denominations when they first started in the 60s up through the 00s. Guess what comes around does go around.
@asherlito3801 yeah, non denomination members are usually ignorant af tho
@@asherlito3801 but isn’t that true? Doesn’t nondenominationalism primarily attract people that attended public schools, and may have less religious understanding?
@@derek4412 Are you really sayng that because someone whent to a public school, they cannot study theology?
This is the hardest I've seen Redeemed Zoomer get ratioed.
The argument debunking too
I’m non denominational and all you did in this video was make an argument for the Catholic or Orthodox Church. Did you seriously think this one through?
He isnt wrong tho
@@justhair17 he definitely is. Church is more than just denominations. Does he seriously think that non denominational churches don’t communicate, work with, or do anything with any other churches? He thinks they’re all just lone wolves doing what they want? Absolutely not the case. They just don’t have an overarching organizational authority. You can argue that that’s a bad thing but you cannot make the case that they have no impact on the world.
You mean the true churches?
@@Sirmisfits1 whatever floats your boat tough guy
@@JeyBerg The boat I float in is called “Truth”
I’ve never been around nondenominational churches that haven’t been connected with other churches or with organized, global networks of other non-denominational pastors. I’m sure there are some, but overall they’re very connected. The upside of nondenominational churches is that they unite beliefs between “mainline” denominations. For example, a lot of nondenominational churches are like a mix of Baptist and Pentecostal (not all of them. Many have a different mix of theologies. I use this one for the sake of making my point).
Also, nondenominationals do create schools and largescale charity programs. There is no glory in being the ones that created “highly rated” universities when those universities have been totally warped and taken over by anti-Christian ideologies as they have today. The same can be said about hospitals that are now mutilating people in the name of gender ideology.
If you take your arguement to its conclusion, then we should just get rid of denominations altogether and form one united denomination. But that isn’t going to happen. Theres nothing wrong with nondenominationals. Instead of worrying about what denomination someone is, we should all work together as Christians in the world, united despite our denominational (or lack thereof) differences.
Well said
Totally 100% agreed. I am non-denominational because I believe that most denominations have a lot of good doctrines, but many are too wrapped up in petty differences and have been effectively neutered when it comes to preaching the gospel and doing work for God. I'm going to a university that was started be a non-denominational church, and it isn't as prestigious, but it doesn't compromise on it's Christian values that it was founded on, and it is respected by many employers, with 99.97% of people being hired into their career fields within the first 6 months of graduating. Aside from that, non-denominational churches statistically are the most biblically based in their doctrine. In my experience non-denominational churches are also the most interconnected, not being bound by associations or denominations means you can more easily join charities and missions with other churches, doing the most good.
It seems that his only ideas of non-denominational churches are the megachurches with the celebrity pastors. And while those certainly exist, they are only the minority.
I don't hate mainline denominations, but they can learn a lot from non-denominational churches. Likewise, I think that non-denominational churches should take some lessons from mainline churches (I.E., more structured leadership and incorporation of traditional architecture)
To be honest, this video just came off as snobby and elitist.
Sounds like you just made an argument for the one true church. Because realistically, everyone isn’t just going to sing Kumbaya and just unit. The Orthodox and Catholics on the other hand…
@@randomjake1488 The argument isn't that there's only one true church, the argument is that we all believe in Jesus and the Bible, and we should all be working together to root out theological liberalism and the withering of Christianity as a whole, because that is a problem that goes over denominational lines. And we should also work together to do good for the world in building missions, schools, and charities. In a way it actually is an argument about the one true church, because it is recognizing that our shared beliefs far outweigh our differences. And while it's good to debate theology, we should be able to come together as soldiers for Christ.
@@TheStarshipGarage Amen, from my experience most non-denominational churches are fine with the other denomination and can work with them as long as they are believing in Jesus as Lord and the core essential tenants of the faith, if they have certain traditions or routines that aren't biblical or is a form of compromise then that's an issue 🤔.
I give Zoomer 6 months before his video about why he's converting to Catholicism.
nah
That would be epic!
Why would he start following things that aren’t in the BIble?
@KillDevilXO Who gave you the Bible? Where did God say in the Bible that you are to follow the doctrine of sola scriptora?
@@robertortiz-wilson1588 Catholics believe plenty of things that aren’t in the Bible :)
Redeemed zoomer, you’re sounding mighty Catholic in this video, maybe you should convert 🤗
I said it in his previous video too lol, its inevitable
He will soon join the only true church 😁
One true church statements? Sounds pretty Catholic to me Im open for him to convert haha
@@CivicN17 and what is that?
Catholic in the making
Let's keep on fighting with each other. Non believers love it.
So do history textbook publishers
I dont see anyone fighting. It's ok to have a difference of opinion and Im glad to see people passionately defending their church. Im not too worried about what nonbelievers think. I'll let them tell GOD that they rejected HIM because of some youtube comments. Trust me, our comments on this video arent what's keeping them from believing the gospel.
@@trentmiller8127 It's still fighting, but whatever you call it, atheists and muslims and other religious folks are loving how split apart the christians are
watch his shorts
@@sharificlesThe irony is the athiests are turning back and regretting being so.. athiest, now. If calling debate or simple aurguing is fighting, then you must not know what real fighting and undying tribalism would be.
Trying to create false unity just to save face among nonbelievers and disbelievers is not any help either.
Good thing those mainline churches founded our prestigious universities. Why don't we check on them and see how they're doing now...
That is, if you can maneuver past all the anti-Jewish demonstrations that are standing in your way...
Or the field of science for that matter. Let's see how well the kept up with their Christian root- OH MY GOODNESS!
@@lastreagandemocratwho killed Jesus?
@@what-oy8ilwhat ethnicity was Jesus
@@supahotnoodlesapx9588 Probably the similar makeup of the land where he was born.
The argument that non-denominational churches lack unity extends to denominational churches too. By categorizing yourself as a denomination, you arbitrarily restrict yourself to working only within that organization. Why don't we see inter-denominational projects? How cool would it be to see all the churches in the city we live in get together, have a meal, pray for the city, care for the homeless, and preach the gospel? If all the denominations stopped arguing about their differences for once and mobilized as one body - especially in our ever-increasing polarized world, I imagine we would be unstoppable.
You think we don’t see interdenominational projects?
@@Quincy_Morris Do you see churches in your city collaborating with another to tackle your city's problems? I'm gonna assume and say no, and I hope that I'm wrong.
it's even funnier considering he is currently trying to bring back unity within his denomination . RZ is a real hack sometimes
Thankfully my city does this. In a couple Saturdays from now, churches of all denominations (including my own nondenominational church) are all teaming up to do different sorts of volunteer events in the city and this happens every year
Non-denominational churches collaborate with each other all the time, I see it in my own church. Heck, we have more unity than denominations who are over here tearing each other apart over the issue of gay marriage. My church is involved in dozens of ministries and charities, alongside other churches.
I am a Non-Denominational Christian. I would like to put my church to the test of this video.
1) Does my church have accountability? Yes. It operates in a similar way to the three branches of government in the US. We have a Pastoral Staff, Elder Team, and Deacon Team. These three teams keep one another accountable. It might not be the same model of accountability in a Denomination but that doesn't mean it isn't accountability.
2) Does my church have tradition? Yes. We care deeply about Baptism. We celebrate Communion at least monthly. We hold a strong view of marriage (which is a sacrament in some traditions). We agree with the Apostle's Creed even if we don''t read it during service. We of course celebrate Christmas & Easter and have our own yearly traditions focused on Prayer, Reading of Scripture, Worship, and Service. We even have some Traditions that our friends from the Messianic Jewish tradition lead us in.
3) Does my church have resources? Yes. My church is not a Mega Church but these days it is certainly on the larger side. It probably has more resources then any other church in the community besides a Mega Church not to far away. And we share these resources with churches who are part of different denominations. We are also connected to a number of universities even if we don't own them.
4) Does my church have impact? Well we certainly do in our own local community. We support dozens of different Local Non-Profits and lead a Multi Denominational Mission Week each summer we call One Kingdom. That mission week does project in every town within our county. Plus we support a number of missionaries serving oversees.
5) So is my church unbliblcal, lacking unity, or refusing to share resources? I would have a strong no.
Hello friend, while that all sounds glorious and I'm happy for your Church, I would warn you against following the practices of any so-called 'Messianic Jew'. Paul was VERY clear that they should stop separating themselves from Christians by calling themselves jews, and VERY clear that if you start giving credence to their rites and rituals, you are denying the sacrifice of Christ. Remember: "You who are trying to be justified by the law have been severed from Christ; you have fallen away from grace." and "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Acts 15, Galatians (pretty much all of it, but especially Galatians 2, 3 and 5).
@@HaggisOfDeath There's a group in the community and we invite them in to do like a lecture/presentation and on the Passover. They offer a very insightful Jewish understand of it while also pointing it back to Jesus.
But you have a low vew of the euchatist/comunión and other denomination are most taditional
That is _your_ view, but compare what you said in most of these points against what the Bible teaches. It does NOT show God's Church being based on man's government models. It does NOT show God's Church observing Communion. It does NOT observe show God's Church celebrating Christmas or Easter. All of what you said proves how a church can have plenty of traditions, make an impact in the community, and STILL be unbiblical.
@@DavidelCientificoLoco There are certainly denominations that have a much higher view of the eucharist or communion then our church does. But I would not want to to confuse the idea that because we have a lower view that that means we have a low view or believe it to be unimportant. I also think view is fairly common in most mainstream protestant denominations as well.
In this video:
Zoomer steps in the wrong hole and falls right in. Find out if he makes it out next time on Dragon Ball Z!
Your argument equally condemns Presbyterianism
It does not, since Presbyterianism is a) a confessional historic denomination; b) it is rooted in the history of the church, since they were not new churches built from scratch in the magisterial reformation, but historic churches with validly ordained elders that, together with their congregations, broke with Rome ; c) have apostolic succession (once it is understood that the position of bishop and that of elder are biblically the same, as the Bible and the Didache, and the apostolic fathers indicate); d) they did not build a theology from scratch, but consider the earlier councils and what the Church Fathers taught (the magisterial reform was basically a return to Augustine); and e) condemned the restorationists and Anabaptists.
@@pedroguimaraes6094Presbyterians do not have apostolic succession….
@@pedroguimaraes6094 And with all that "magesterium" and "apostolic succession" they concluded that homosexuality isn't a sin.
@@kevinkent6351thats a misconeption btw
@@DavidelCientificoLoco This goes back to the differences between Catholics and evangelicals. The Catholics say one thing and we evangelicals say, "Umm, I can read it in the Bible." And you're saying one thing and I'm like, "Uhh, I can look this up in 2 seconds" and see that the liberal PCUSA, which is the true inheritor of the denomination, blesses same-sex unions and has gay ministers. Conservative PCAers are just, to use the Catholic term, schismatics.
I think your head is in the clouds a bit too much with this one. Just because non-denominational churches are not taking over the world, founding highly-rated universities, and other things you describe as having a "huge impact" does not mean that they are not having an impact for the Kingdom of God in their own respective spheres.
I do agree that denominations are a good way to organize for the reasons you mentioned, but a lot of your argument relies upon "most nondenominational churches" as I heard over and over, which seems to be an argument based on what is practiced most frequently rather than what could actually be done in a non-denominational church.
Regardless of a "huge impact" or not, Christianity is declining in the West. Likely due to the removal of Christianity as an institution. By definition, Non Denoms can't be one.
they have no accountability besides their pastors. I've been to plenty of non Dom churches and they are the closest thing to a protestant holding their pastor in a pope like position.
@@taslikesdogs Accountability is great, but accountability to what? The Methodists have accountability to a central group of non-Christian leftists. Catholic churches have accountability all the way to the Pope, who himself is accountable to no one. It's like saying America is a bad country--ok, but compared to what?
Agreed, he commits the hasty generalization fallacy. And also, statistically non-denominational churches hold to biblical teachings more than any other denomination. The "rock-star nightclub megachurch" stereotype is just what is most public, but that isn't the majority. And I know a lot of non-denominational churches that join together for missions and community service, and expecting one individual church to be able to found a college is laughable. Most often what happens is multiple churches will help fund the founding of a college or university, and no it isn't going to be Cambridge or Princeton, and you can't expect them to be.
@@taslikesdogs Buddy, you realise literally every mainstream protestant denomination allows women pastors and (most) allow gay weddings? this can be applied to any denom’s leaders
50 percent of the comments section: Catholics and Orthodox saying this video supports their arguments.
The other 50 percent: non denoms pointing out the flaws in the arguments.
I am a Christian, or what would be called "non-denominational".
I study my bible daily and have never read anything that tells me to prescribe to or identify with anything other than Christian. I believe in, and follow Jesus, not a church structure or denomination. My largest concern with the main denominational churches is the lack of fruit, catholics/orthodox Christians in America are generally (not all) not following Jesus outside of Sunday mass. They have no desire to avoid sin, don't read their Bibles, and have no desire to share the gospel. I'm not being legalistic here, but Jesus himself speaks often about measuring BY FRUIT. Matthew 7:15-20. I grew up Roman-Catholic and was surrounded by "faithful" catholics, I never knew who Jesus was until he spoke to me directly when I was 18 years old at my wits end. The Bible calls us to act differently than non-believers; but every classic-denominational person, after 10+ years of growing up in church, Sunday school, doing confirmation etc, I know makes no effort to live a more holy or fruitful life. There is so much legalism and structure of specific things you need to do (baby baptism, confirmation etc.) but not the same focus on Jesus and LIVING within His commands. I don't say any of this to bash or separate us as the church but I would like to hear thoughts on this from others perspective.
The "non-denominational" believers or Christians I know, are on fire for God. They aspire to live a more holy life, they study how they can honor and serve God and they share the gospel as part of their IDENTITY, not just on Sunday.
I want to live like Jesus and His disciples, I look to the book of Acts as my reference, not a catholic church just because its "traditional" or been around a long time. We should ALL be the church of Christ, kneeling at the feet of Jesus, not any denomination
Yessir EXACTLY💯
Brother ! You just smashed it out the ball park.
I absolutely agree.
I go to a Pentecostal church but I associate as "just a child of God"
nothing more nothing less.
The bible says this, I go "yes and amen"
It's so simple!
I agree entirely. I have nothing against Catholicism or any other apostolic church, in fact I quite admire the firm believers who stick to their tradition well, but I don’t think this discounts any other church at all. Very well said, brother.
I had the same experience brother, grew up roman catholic, but realised that my neighbours were not following the bible, am currently following the teachings of christ on my own, but I would like it if we can unite all true believers under a recognizable banner and live like the believers in the book of Acts. Acts 4:32-35
This should be top comment!
Usually I enjoy your videos, but this one is just snobby and ignorant. You commit several logical fallacies, such as the slippery slope, generalization, and either-or fallacy. You complain about how non-denominational churches don't have unity, yet you also complain about how mainline churches are as disunified as ever. Non-denominational churches are actually incredibly united, we aren't bound by the ties of associations, and so we can collaborate with other churches on charities and mission fields, and even building hospitals (usually in countries that don't have good hospitals or medical facilities) and I find it highly ironic that you point out that many prestigious colleges were founded by christians, when those colleges are not some of the most atheistic places nowadays. I am actually attending a college that was founded by a non-denominational church (at one point the founder was apart of a Pentecostal Holiness congregation, but left), and it is highly respected, and 99.97% of students are able to find jobs in their career fields in the first 6 months after they graduate, and this same college also built a hospital, and was able to get various associations of multiple denominations to donate to have these facilities built.
You strawman every non-denominational as a megachurch pastor who runs basically a nightclub, but those are just the ones you see plastered online.
Non-denominationals are also statistically the most biblically-based churches around, and they are usually more effective at preaching the faith then the whitewashed tombs that many mainline denominations have sadly found themselves in. Non-denominational churches are more united because again, they aren't bound by denominational ties, and see everyone as followers of Christ as long as they accept the basic tenants of faith. While I do agree that non-denominational churches can learn a lot from mainline churches (leadership structure, discussing the early church and the various creeds, etc.) I think mainline churches can learn a lot more from non-denominationals, such as being able to unify their efforts to do good no matter denominational differences, and not twisting the faith to fit the modern narrative. Because despite your stereotype of non-denominationals being uber-modern and anti-traditional, at least most of us dont fly pride flags from our church.
And the whole claim about mainline churches being able to do the most good because of their resources is incredibly ironic, considering the fact that mainline churches have been neutered and have withered away due to bad teaching. Non-denominational churches are usually the fastest growing and most spiritually active. The truth is the impact of the whole of Christianity on culture has decreased, and biblical teachings have begun to fade, and we can't just blame certain denominations for that. We're all Soldiers of Christ, no matter our denomination.
And don't think that I hate mainline churches, I hope that they thrive once more and are able to preach the Gospel far and wide once again, I just know that me and many others don't agree with the doctrines of most denominations, instead seeing good in all of them, and thus choose to be non-denominational.
And you basically just played yourself, as I could edit this video and make this an argument as to why Catholicism is the one true church.
I think the fact that non-denominational churchgoers have surpassed denominational one is proof that non-denominationals are better at spreading the word then the others
Dude...took the words right out of my mouth
What church do you attend, if you don’t mind me asking...
Literally the best way I could’ve put it. Thank you for sharing your opinion. I am also non denominational but I don’t have a problem with any other denomination but to say that non denomination is wrong when I am actively watching them make an actual impact all over the world was so hurtful. Thank you for saying all of this so I don’t have to 👍
Waiting for someone to say this
"Unified" refers to theological views
@RedeemedZoomer, my brother in King Jesus, for all of your good intentions and passions, this may not have been your best work.
To suggest that the nondenominational churches lack the ability to link arms and work at the local level to establish schools and hospitals, practice tradition and the sacraments as well as find the resources needed to advance the kingdom is simply blind to all of the history of the churches established after Christ ascended into heaven. The churches in the days of acts belonged to no denomination and yet, meet the same criteria your video lays out in great detail- and yet, turned the world on its head.
My brother in Christ Jesus, in love, I simply disagree with you.
I love redeemed Zoomer, and as a Non-denominational I admit we have some issues, but I feel we got straw manned a lot through out the video
That is all of RZ's videos done in this way. He is confrontational to a fault and has to make videos that elevate his positions above others (even when the totality of the video damages his position).
He could have made a unifying video demonstrating that despite denominational differences, we are still united in our one holy goal; of leading people to Christ. Our unification is in Christ and our understanding of salvation should be equivalent between denominations (salvation through faith in Christ Jesus, that he is the only son of God, that he is God, and that he died a personal death for each individual; and through that death we may be saved if we believe what he proclaimed and that he is our personal savior).
As I watch RZ more and more, I find his videos to be increasingly distasteful, as he continues to throw slights against other Christian orgs and denominations all in his crusade against those he disagrees with. But such is the folly of the unwise, I did the same when I was his age. I still can't stand Calvinists, but I love them and wouldn't debate with them on a public forum.
Maybe one day he will put actual thought and effort into his videos instead of this tired tropey style he enjoys right now, but I fear he will only change when the algorithm tells him to.
@@TearlessGoslingLol I can’t stand Calvinism either.
@@TearlessGosling too many Christians have been putting off serious theological evaluations of their positions for decades now to the point of willing or unknowing ignorance. That has been the main stumble for Christianity in many places during the past century. Attempting to water everything down.
There is no such thing as non denominational, you are in a denomination of you.
Same. Downvoted and unsubbed because of this.
First, i wanna say ive been watching your videos for a while now and have a lot of respect for you. Im in a nondenominational church, and we're atill quite traditional. It looks like any other church and partakes of weekly communion but doesnt enforce artificial tradition, and focuses entirely on christ as the head of the church. We're also well-funded and well populated. We view all scripture-based, nondenominational churches as united in the Church of Christ, which is completely immaterial and intangible.
have you founded any hospitals yet?
@@redeemedzoomer6053 no, but we do support widows in need and feed the homeless, as well as lead transcontinental mission trips. I think heal the sick can simply be taken to mean help those who cant help themselves, to provide. I dont think massive, wealthy churches are a great idea because they are more open to corruption. In more modest churches, its easier for the elders and the rest of the congregation to keep each other in check. Tradition can be useful, but only to a certain point.
@@redeemedzoomer6053has you church founded any hospitals yet?
@@redeemedzoomer6053"and this shall be the mark of the true church, that they have founded a hospital" Opinions 3:46
@@redeemedzoomer6053 so are you saying that a church should be graded on how much money it makes to build hospitals? your church hasn't built any hospitals yet. non-denominational churches can come together to get enough money to build hospitals too there does not need to be an organization behind the thing
edit: no I don't know what I'm saying either I just tried to refute your argument and I couldn't find a way to articulate mine.
a church should not be rated on if it builds a hospital or not but by if it is following Gods words.
Bro just no, I left a denominational church because of the tradition it got in the way of teaching Christ. I go to a non-denominational church and the ability they have to collaborate and reach into communities is insane. God works in mysterious ways but this one isn’t it.
@matheuscaneta1194 hey yeah so the one belief that pushed me away was the idea they believed “they” would be the only people to go to heaven. One true church doctrine. They also had all these little things that they required or else you had lost your first love. None of those things (black shoes, button up shirts, no tv, no radio,(no they’re not Amish)) have any salvational value. I could go on but I think you get the point. Those traditions were held above the Bible and personally I think that’s something anyone should be mindful of. If it’s not Salvational don’t put so much emphasis on it. “Keep the main things the plan things”
Exactly bro, denominations are man made rules turned into religion in which Jesus came to abolish the same way the Jews did in the old testament
God's Word > man's traditions (rituals and laws) and opinions
2 Thessalonians 2:15. It is a Biblical command to follow church tradition.
@ravenvane2227 not church tradition, rather the inspired word of God. It is am easy mistake to make, but the two do not necessarily align. Take for examples the Pharisees and their many traditions which claimed root in God's word, but departed from it all the same.
@@highadmiralbittenfield9689 The Pharisees did not have the Holy Spirit to guide them; unlike the early Church. The verse specifies oral tradition which imo is a clear indicator that the apostles did not put everything in writing. I believe that church tradition has authority as long as it doesn’t contradict the Bible.
@@ravenvane2227your church has drag queen story hour and weds gay people now. Pretty sure that isn't traditional
Which is why we shouldnt have a new non denominational church every week stringing up because a pastor wants to play pope
It's kind of funny seeing a protestant saying this. Non-denominationalism is pretty much inevitable once you accept protestantism
Exactly what i was thinking. What he said about all these pastors basically becoming their own pope is exactly what the reformers did. So his condemnation of non-denominationalism is really just a condemnation of all schism in general throughout history. Including the protestant schisms
The fruit of Protestantism is division.
and thats good. Denominations shouldn't even exist. We all need to be ONE body under christ, capable of having our ideas without segregating ourselves
Yup. That's why Protestantism is so great!
Which is why I’m catholic
Converting to Catholism would solve this conundrum.
That would be converting from Christianity to outright paganism
@@veler6049 >That would be converting from Christianity to outright paganism
:O
@@khata1169????
@@veler6049Cope Prot
RZ I love your videos, but denominations shouldn’t be treated like your favorite sports team, it’s about glorifying the lord and praising him. If you’re Catholic, Protestant, or orthodox that’s second to being a follower of Christ.
BAM! Well said!
Couldn't agree more
👏👏👏
I go to a denominational church, but I must say that I disagree with you on this one. The early church did not have denominations. What we need is for Christians from different beliefs and traditions to come together and unite for the common good of the Church and beyond. I could use the points you made and say that this is why we should have NO denominations and all be united as one body of Christ. Denominations divide and separate us from each other.
FAX
The early church had 1 denomination not 0. There wasn’t a bunch of non connected independent churches spreading around. There was a structure and connection between them and they all (mostly) agreed to adhered to and confessed to the same laid out beliefs from the councils and the leaders of the universal church. That’s very different from non denominational independent churches that operate on their own and aren’t connected to other churches.
@@lawdog22 "Whoever is not against us is for us." Jesus Christ, Mark 9:38. How 'bout them apples?
@@lawdog22 1 denomination? There can't be denomation from a sinle thing.
@@absolutepixels3812 ok fair if we are gonna get into the technical definition of the word “denomination.” I’m sure there’s a better word to use there
I'm just browsing the comments for entertainment lmao
I respect RZ despite our theological differences but come on bro you shot yourself in the foot here
So this line of thinking could easily be taken a step further to remove all protestant churches and unite with the most powerful and influential church (Catholic) because the smaller protestant denominations (Presbyterian, Lutheran, Methodist) do not have the same organizational power.
How this thought never crossed his mind baffles me
The answer to one extreme isn’t necessary the other extreme. That would be like saying someone who doesn’t support anarcho-capitalism logically needs to become a communist.
Amen, lets be one again 😂🇻🇦. Been serious: Truth been said one of the goal of any true Christian church should be look for unit in Christianity, what is usually made (at least in the Catholic Church) by some sort of ecumenism to try to understand and, where possible, heal our diferences. Is not without reason that the Catholic church has a substantial number of Eastern Churchs and even Anglican Ordinariats (this last one with few but proeminent members, including a substancial number of ex-anglican bishops).
The problem is "non-denominationalism" made it impossible, even in theory; been the anthithesis of unity: we can't reach unity if what the church believe is strictly dependent in what the specific leader of that specific congregation believe, specially if whenever someone don't like something about the church he/she just created another one.
What about the Orthodox Church?
@@TheDallasDwayne , we should be one with then as well.
The amount of dislikes is phenomenal lol.
Edit: The number of likes this comment got is the number of times RZ commits strawman in every video. He should really think about what the lord says about the church.
Edit 2: presbyterian church in your description already raises a few red flags about your understanding about scripture.
The “return dislike extension” is not accurate
@@redeemedzoomer6053 I am not sure about that
@@redeemedzoomer6053denial is a stage of grief, just accept that you have a bad opinion full of logical fallacies that literally contradicts your own denomination.
@@redeemedzoomer6053cope
@@redeemedzoomer6053 It seems moreso its just you have a permanent anti-fan club after your atheist video, similar to how on your insta and twitter there's persistent dissidents who comment *every* time. Of course good news is none of of these people have any real nuanced worldviews they're all pretty much stuck in 2009 with nothing new or interesting to offer
You've descended from a channel who respects all traditions and educates people about them to a channel that puts down other traditions without logic to stay relevant. I think the biggest example of this is contrasting your "Why I'm NOT xyz denomination" series, which outlined your personal beliefs and made me respect you more, to "Why this denomination is stupid and unbiblical" videos like this one. Idk what happened man.
Yeah I’ve noticed this too. It’s disappointing. And when you look at his Twitter posts it’s even more discouraging. Not reflective of good character.
This is the most hypocritical thing I have ever seen in my life.
How can you say this AND BE A PROTESTANT?
He's becoming Catholic, he just doesn't realize it himself yet.
Maybe the Protestant reformation was a mistake. But, let's not maximize that mistake with infinite denominationalism.
I have to disagree here and say that doctrine is more important than organizational affiliations, in the same way that scripture has more authority than tradition.
In the so-called non-denominal churches, doctrine is typically abysmal. They adopt whatever is popular or whatever pet doctrine the uneducated pastor holds.
@matheuscaneta1194 I suspect most NDs are started by preachers who aren't qualified to lead (or to continue to lead) a church in the denomination they were in.
I think it's a little bit too late to unite the churches into a "one true Apostolic Church" (note: Absolutely NOT the Roman Catholic Church BUT the One that branched off and rooted from the *"Council of Nicea."* or even earlier the *Council of Jerusalem* , the one true Original Universal CHURCH agreed upon by the Apostles and early Church Fathers.🔥
Uniting it by "natural means" or using "man made reforms" is just pure wishful thinking because ALL major churches (Presbyterian, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Methodist, Lutheran, Baptist, etc.) have already established their own set of doctrines, creeds, beliefs (Trinity, Unitarianism, Calvinism, Universalism, Arminianism, etc.) and none will comply to anyone since they believe their own doctrines are the Truth and Non-Denominational churches are the same. They "created" their own set of rules and doctrines.(- do you think 2.5 billion Catholics will just convert to Protestantism and vice versa? - ) Again, it will not happen given by those set of problems, add to that the rise of Atheism, Paganism, Secularism, Feminism, Naturalism, Mythicism and all the EVIL 'isms". (plus Zionism and unbelief of the Jews to their Messiah Jesus, Technocracy and rise of AI.)
The only way for the whole Christian church to be united again is through "Supernatural means" and that is the *2nd Coming of Jesus Christ* and rule the world with the rod of iron to vanquish ALL evil and opposition literary. It's only his coming whether Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib, Pos-Trib, or whether Premil, Amill but certainly not Post-Mill theonomy wishful thinking that Christians should conquer the "7 mountains of the World" or convert the world to Christ before Jesus comes. It's purely wishful thinking agenda and ideology. (not lack of Faith or escapism as others fanatics claim, but FACTS - "Why polish the brass of the sinking ship?"). Sorry Folks, *NO OTHER HOPE or SOLUTION but the coming of Jesus Christ.* That's what you ALL should pray for. "In the last days, perilous times shall come." - II Timothy 3:1-5
It's called the "Blessed Hope" for a reason. The 2nd coming of Jesus Christ is the Key to everything Good on Earth. No ideologies, reasoning, agenda, propaganda can change the world and hope or power can trump that. Come, lord Jesus, Maranatha!
Well said, thank you. It's sad to reflect on the public breakdown of the Christian testimony and our (as in, believers) failure in responsibility - yet even this sobering reflection is a source of joy, because it turns our minds and hearts to consider the Lord Jesus, to look for His coming, and anticipate the perfection of His administration in the day of display.
@@thebowshot9341 it's a pleasure, my friend. Agreed with you that it's sad to reflect the breakdown of Christian testimony. I always see Christians fighting amongst themselves. There are so many conflicts INTERNALLY within the Universal Body of Christ. (This pastor expose this pastor for false teachings. Protestant vs Catholic vs Orthodox, Calvinism vs Arminianism, Progressive vs Conservative Christianity, Charismatic vs Cessationist. Dispensational Premil vs Postmil, etc) Add to that the enemies of Faith trying to destroy Christianity from the outside: "Atheism, Islam, Feminism, Secularism....."
Yet amidst all this chaos, as you have said: "it turns our minds and hearts to consider the Lord Jesus, to look for His coming, and anticipate the perfection of His administration in the day of display." - The Ultimate hope of ALL believers, even Paul and the apostles, are longing to see that. But we are the generation who has "a Big chance" of seeing it unfold in our times. No other hope but Jesus Christ returning to finally destroy and end ALL evil, disagreements and confusion once and for all. As the apostle Peter himself said. "But, according to his promise, we look for NEW heavens and a NEW earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness (2 Peter 3:13)🔥
As a Roman catholic, I’m sad to see that all the churches have split from each other over the years. I wish all Christians could unite in the church in some way.
the church itself never split since it is not a banner, flag, or particular temple. The body of Christ is composed of everyone who truly believes in Him with all their heart, the believers are the church, no matter from where these followers came, if their faith is sincere then they are part of the church. This is something that many physical churches got wrong, many try to sell themselves as the better church or the "true" church, however, it is not about the institution, it is about the heart.
You know what? Im not even going to argue about that. I agree that everyone who has same the faith and does the will of God shall be saved. God bless you 🙏.
@@fvardona Exactly! Pride rules over the physical churches. That's why a lot of them have hypocrites and ignorant ''christians''. They are always playing with the word of God to bring more people. That's a huge issue. However, there are still good and respectable churches.
As a fellow Catholic I 100% agree, there was a better way to go about the reformation than splitting from our church, and now we have a mess, a billion protestant denomination all pointing fingers and calling each other false teachers, and only look at US! US started as a protestant nation, and it ended up secular 🤦🏻♀️, I wish that protestants would notice why giving the authority to interpret scripture to oneself isn't a good idea 🤷🏻♀️
@@fvardonaExactly this is all to dismissed often. All genuine Christian are the church.
He’s getting flamed for this one 🔥🔥🔥
@matheuscaneta1194 Yes he is
@matheuscaneta1194
How?
I'm sorry RZ, I think you are off base on this one. Have you been to any non-denominational churches? In my experience, at an ND Bible church, you will find a group of people who are fiercely and fearlessly devoted to scripture and who love the Lord. Most denominations (including yours) depart from scripture.
There are no denominations in the Bible. Those were created by men. Traditions are nice, but they aren't more important than the word of God. I would propose that Denominational churches are more contrary to scripture than non-denominational ones.
Remember.... when the Bible refers to the "church", it is referring to a group of believers in Christ, not a man-made organization.
One other major logical flaw .... ND churches most likely arose due to the failure of the mainline denominations to uphold biblical truth. The rise in ND churches didn't CAUSE a failure in Mainline churches (which is a surprising leap in logic given that you think ND churches have no influence), but instead are probably the RESULT.
Sorry this comment seems kind of belligerent. I love most of your videos, but I had to say something about this one. It troubles me greatly to see division in the church. We are all part of one church, regardless of denomination. We all need to focus on loving the Lord first and then loving each other.
As a baptist, I've never wanted to be non-denominational more than I do after watching this video.
He stated one argument that you shouldn’t start a Non-Denominational Church because your broke.
This comment wins
Well usually the non-denominational churches are baptist or has some baptism practices btw
Out of all the mainline denominations, Baptists most closely reflect my theology. My only main difference if the ability to receive spiritual gifts today, but I would be 100% comfortable attending a Baptist church.
The funny thing is belonging to a denomination can actually restrict helping other denominations, whereas non denominational can help whoever they want.
I think denominations and non denominations are fine. As long as God is present in your local fellowship and your core theology is good, go where God leads you.
@@mattm7798i mean it doesnt have to, I help my other Christian homies of other denoms bc I know they are brothers, just with slight belief differences💪✝️
I’m a Baptist and I’m afraid I don’t agree with this message. You said that God’s people act as a united front and always share their resources. You also mentioned how non denominational churches often lack resources. Therefore, other churches should share resources with them, as they should, but what stops them? Their denomination. The fact that some denominations are larger than others does not mean that the smaller denominations, or singular non denominational churches are unbiblical.
I disagree.
@@ChimpOnComputerthat's fine
Pretty sure Zoomer was saying that the non-denom was not sharing their resources, not that the denom was not. And you can clearly see this since denoms share with hospitals, etc. While non-denom do not share via hospitals, they might support charities, but they are still collecting and less sharing.
@@NJWEBER18 I believe the point OP was making is that larger denoms do not share *with* non-denoms *because of their denominational differences*. If we are all truly Christian, then why shouldn't Presbyterians, etc, do more to support their nondenominational brothers who clearly have less than they do? Its an interesting question.
@@Whatever_is_Tov and the point of Zoomer is that non-denom are less biblical than large denoms, so why would large denoms share resources with unbiblical non-denoms? Each non-denom is a further split from one church, so supporting them with resources is supporting unbiblical polychurchism.
Unbiblical church =/= no christians to be found. Most Christian Churchs are unbiblical in some way. If every church was totally biblical, they would all be part of one church, as the bible tells us to do.
This video made me want to non-denom even harder
This video unintentionally screams apostolic Christianity 💀
Based and papalpilled
That would be a major improvement!!!!!
@@aglassofmilk5779 Pope is not necessary; Orthodoxy is the way!
@@Israel_Girmaynop, sorry, they are nationalistic churches
I generally respect you quite a bit and your videos have done wonders for me, but this one is off base. All this does is create divisiveness in the church, and a house divided cannot stand.
-Non-denominational Christian
Well said.
Non-denominationalism "is" division.
@@ronv7995 Protestantism "is" division
-a Catholic
see the issue?
@@ronv7995non-denominationalism is refusing to divide Christianity up into neat little boxes.
@@ICantThinkOfAFunnyHandle No, it's saying we can do it better by ourselves, and 2000 years of tradition isn't of any value, and why do we need the sacraments that they had for the first 1500 years anyway. It is being a law unto thyself. I was a non-denominational pastor myself for decades. Then church history and the Bible demonstrated how wrong I was. I have since become a confessional Christian, and the communion I joined was a Lutheran one.
My brother in Christ you are preaching your theology more than you are preaching about God. There is a reason why your denomination struggles with the existence of God and it is becoming more progressive. I know more devout non-denominational church goers that preach the gospel than I do reformed church goers. Stop acting like a pharisee by boasting of your works. Give praise and lift up your brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus.
I go to a nondenominational and it is very traditional. They preach the gospel, sing hymns, lead prayers, and we do the Lords supper. It’s got the look and feel of a normal church and we are united with other churches. I joined this church because I don’t know where I belong in the whole denomination list, and this one seems to be the perfect middle road. We need to remember that God works in different ways. Sometimes his solutions are right there in front of us, but we’re not paying attention to it. I remember asking what kind of church do I belong in because I don’t know where to go. And then I remembered there is a small, wholesome community church just down the road. I’m trusting God with this one, and he hasn’t led me astray yet.
I'm in a similar church myself. I can see where RZ is coming from but non-denominational Churches are more capable of things than he gives them credit for
I agree with this, as a reformed Baptist. I can’t imagine being a new Christian and having to choose between so many different denominations. Nondenominational churches tend to be gospel focused. They have their problems IMO and I don’t prefer them over reformed Baptist churches. But they are useful. I go to a Bible study at a nondenominational church as well as at my reformed Baptist church and it’s great!
@@wetfart420 there's more exceptions out there than you realize
@@wetfart420 I mean if I find found one in downtown Seattle than they must be out there
Next he's going to say that us Baptists shouldn't be Baptist but instead a denomination that's more traditional.
Baptist at least has their own identity, confessions and rootness in the Anglican tradition.
"Yes" 😂
This. I think RZ has hit the point where any Church that isn't HIS church or a historic church shouldn't exist. I think project Reconquista warped his mind.
@@pedroguimaraes6094 Eh, most non-denominational churches are actually just charismatic churches. Arguable, that implies at least some degree of identity and rootedness imo.
I mean yeah, ideally they should be. But you should be Baptist instead of non-denominational.
After many times I have seen this channel, I finally decided to check out a video. Now I see why I never felt the need.
Tradition is only meaningful if it’s from the love of God. Should Jesus have been a Roman citizen since that was more influential than being a Jew? No. God’s power is above any organization or nation.
Funny enough, your graphic at 3:40 doesn’t work- because it was SpongeBob’s krabby patty who actually had substance, while all of King Neptune’s had none. Your own image you chose betrays you.
I have been to a bunch of different christian churches, different denominations, still I could no church family. God led my wife and I to this church, which we have looked into leaving, and God instead has kept us there and pushed us to get involved.
My church is getting together with many other churches in the area to do baptisms together. We are united spiritually in our faith of Jesus and what He did for us. Don’t generalize or minimize God’s influence just because you don’t understand it.
May the Lord bless you.
You’ve entirely (again) missed the point of non-denominationalism. Non-denominationalism is not “I want to isolate myself from the wider Christian tradition” it is “I reject factionalism in its current form of denominationalism.” Saying that denominationalism is the answer to biblical unity of the church is just… absurd, sorry, I can’t think of a better way of putting it. Naming yourself as separate from the churches around you is, by definition, factionalism. Not (non) naming (denom) yourself as part of a sect is what the early church modeled.
The decline of Christian popularity and the corruption of mainline denominations is why non-denominationalism exists, it is a response, not a cause. Trauma, abuse, and failure of the institutions that were meant to protect congregants from being subject to those abuses led many gospel loving christians to come together in local communities.
This! So much this!
Non denominationalism exists because it synchronizes modern thoughts and culture with religion, turning worship into a performance at a concert. It also dumbs down Christianity and theology immensely. It's popular amongst the uninformed, lost, and confused because it's extremely easy to get involved in.
@@footballnick2 The trappings of religion are not the Gospel. The question isn’t ‘do I like the way they do church?’ but ‘is the Gospel and “orthodox” christian teaching at the heart of the congregation?’
If you would visit a bible church or two, rather than looking at the scandalous marketing attempts of a few mega churches, you’d see the non-denom movement is about church unity and gospel centered truth, instead of institutions and socio-political clout.
If we’re all non-denominational, then there’s no ground to fight each other about which institution we submit ourselves to, because we are all equally submitted to Christ.
The irony is really strong here. "The Bible says that the church should be united. So we should all fall into this arbitrary selection of boxes and refusing to do so is unbiblical."
Completely backwards.
Baptist here. Your argument is really against congregational polity, which is a perfectly valid point of disagreement within Christianity and not deserving of the conclusions you reach. If an individual non-dom church is unbiblical in its teaching, of course it should be condemned - but saying the existence of them as a group is unbiblical is simply false
Baptist denominations hold to so-called non-denominal doctrine, that is maximized denominationalism, except they use the term independent.
That's the part you are missing, they are all not biblical, because they go against Christ's teaching.
and hurtful 😢
@@Dokilokiify Care to explain how? GOd calls us to all be one. As a non-denominational Christian, I am regularly preaching the Word of God on my university campus, supporting various Christian organizations on my campus; I don't see people who are too proud of their denominations doing such. Holding to your one denomination is unbliblical. The local church is the most important church, and it should nto be divided into 1500 churches per city. The way churches are too is also unbiblical. It isn't supposed to be a lecture, everyone is supposed to be worship God together, not 1 man teaching. That is for teaching the bible, not worship.
3:30 NOT TRUE my non denominational still uses the Nicene Creed. Also I would agrue the Nicene Creed is the only only that really matters for someone to be "Christian". I feel like the following creeds were just disputes on theology which IMO doesn't really matter when it comes to the simple question of IS Jesus the Christ and does faith in Him save us from Hell and allow us to enter Heaven?
"Non-Demominational" churches plant churches all the time. But it's biblically focused and rejects glorifying humans.
My church focuses on the Gospel.
Guess what, the bible glorifies humans. It's our duty as Christians to glorify our fellow christians.
@@JamesPreus Praying to humans? If it's true that humans are sinful, the churches they create will be sinful as well.
@@JamesPreus do u have a bible verse to support that? Only God deserves glory
Hmm ... A lot of non denominational churches do glorify humans. What denomination do you think false teachers are part of? They don't have one!
That's a great start, but those churches will sprout and die and some live for longer and then there will be a split and the congregation gets cut in half. There is no accountability, no doctrinal statement that holds members accountable. The Gospel is great, but you have to read all of the Bible, all of the other parts where it talks about the importance of unity, where it talks about the establishment of unified churches that were all connected together.
Calling nom denominational churches, infinite denominational churches is like calling atheists infinite believers.
Because their beliefs are not universally set.
Kinda yeah?
it's an inherently stupid point especially when the vast majority of non denoms are just baptists and Pentecostals
This is literally his argument, idk what you are trying to argue here by restating his point
yes
Uh? What? Non-denominational churches maximize denominalism. They're the complete opposite of what they claim to be. How is calling an Atheist a believer an analogy?
Brother, you should not have used these images at 3:46 to make bigger churches seem better. Have you even seen this scene in spongebob?
If you believe all of this, you should consider Catholicism. Protestantism isn't one main tradition, as all of the denominations have significant theological differences. This is one of the big appeals of Protestantism: you can find an ideology that best fits your personal beliefs without having to conform to strict doctrines.
I don’t really care about the strictness of a doctrine I care about the wrongness of a doctrine. And there’s too much wrong with Catholicism for me to agree with it based on scripture.
@@bikesrcool_1958, every errant system has its own apologists.
I can't believe in Catholicism due to its absolute constant reformation of its own teachings over the years. Until the 1500s it was rather tame, but after the Council of Trent, Vatican I, and Vatican II teachings were implemented into its Catechism, I simply think the church is falling apart. Especially with these Bishops utilizing Vatican II to become a more worldly accepting organization.
@pyramidhead156 There may be reformation of practices that are not infallibly defined. However, there is never reformation of dogma, so there is the assurance that the Church at its core will always espouse the true values of Christ. This guarantee is widely absent in Protestantism, where there is no infallible tradition. Again, I can see Protestantism's appeal in this way as a more "democratic" system of belief, even as a Catholic.
@@LA_Tigerthe claim of infallible tradition doesn't make it true
The two main "denominations" in first century Israel, were Pharisee and Sadducee. They had the resources you speak of. Fancy clothing, buildings, money, etc...
Jesus was the pastor of a non-denominational church, which had neither of those things.
Tell me again how I should conform to your idea of a church!!! And how a non-denominational church is unbiblical!!!
The reason there are so many denominations, is because people felt the current denomination had things wrong...
Should it all be one giant Christian church? Absolutely... but denominations refuse to give up their traditions, in search of actual truth.
Jesus wasn't non-denominational or a pastor. These terms are completely inapplicable. He is Truth upon which the Church must stand. Is there division in Truth while still remaining the fullness of Truth?
The reason for many denominations is because of the failure of Sola Scriptura. It doesn't matter how people feel about something. What's wrong then if progressive churches say that they feel the old interpretations were wrong? Once you reject normative authority, you give permission to infinite heresies. Tradition is about the careful passing of proper exegesis. So disjointing the reading of the Bible from traditional apostolic authority results in anachronistic or subjective reading of the text without having any defense. Any protestant denomination is therefore self-defeating in the long term because progressivism is the logical end of not submitting to an authority that can forbid the founding of new churches.
@@saiguun
The word pastor comes from the Latin word for shepherd... You're saying Jesus wasn't a shepherd? He'd disagree with you.
And considering there were "denominations" at the time, with differing beliefs on various topics... and considering Jesus was a part of neither of those, but shepherded his own flock... I'd say that fits the modern definition of non-denominational.
The above actually proves your point to be wrong about clinging to the tradition set forth by the "church"...
You know who else loved their tradition of passing along proper exegesis? The Pharisee and Sadducee.
Where they right? Should everyone have shunned the teachings of Jesus and clung to either the Pharisee or the Sadducee?
I'm assuming you're catholic... That's a shame. When one knows that they're right, because they say that they're right... Something about "Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall."
Resources? No, the church I attend may not have a "worldwide" impact. However, local impact? Our tiny church has ministered to dozens upon dozens of people financially, emotionally, and spiritually. And no one, beyond our pastors and elders know precisely how many people that is because our focus is deliberately not on our church.
Edit: this whole comment seems mean but I promise I'm trying to be helpful. Leaving it as is, but I'm still sorry!
Dang, there were so many silly takes in this I checked my calendar to see if it was April fool's again... let me break down some of the major errors (hopefully clearly):
0. This whole video seems to work off the spotlighted ND churches without respect for nuance.
1. 0:36 Nondenominational (ND) often have their own confessions, inspired by or even ripped from confessions of the church fathers.
2. 0:48 The Holy Spirit convicts hearts.
3. 1:25 If only from a theological stance POV, ND can "melt" the pieces back together by using only the "good" teaching from the other, larger glass pieces. (But make sure to work that out with fear and trembling) Sometimes the inflexibility of a label forces you to accept faulty doctrine.
4. 1:45 Spot on! We don't discard this just because we are ND! I know you didn't say we do that, but it might be interpreted that way based on how it was said.
5. 2:15 these are all examples of how the European church works, not the church catholic. Only reason to bring this up is because it plays later in your video as supporting evidence.
6. 2:35 ND "can't"? I thought all things are possible through Christ, including this "impact" you speak of?
7. 2:51 Tradition - a.) ND has lineage to Early Church, while it's messy to find, it's there. b.) Any time there is a denom split, you break tradition. If I had to say how this argument summarizes, it's "old is good, new is bad" (strawman bc this is YT comment) c.) 3:29 You can read the church fathers and use the content they wrote without being explicit in usage. We hold church fathers as an interpretation tool rather than as (from our vantage) binding documents
8. 3:40 Again, from our vantage it is the mainline churches that look to be hurting for resources. For any good church, there will be generosity.
9. 4:04 Use a different verse to encourage giving to the church... that passage is fairly clear as descriptive only. There's plenty others that would still prove your point!
10. 4:12 man u called us poor...
11. 4:36 Come ON that is such a bad take. How do you get to become a highly rated college? What about colleges founded in other countries? Yes, these colleges are huge blessings to the world. No, the presence of these colleges does not mean you should be Methodist/etc.
12. 4:54 Maybe not hospitals, but definitely doctors. Also people like Francis Chan (love or hate him) have considered opening hospitals. ND is a relatively new concept, let it age! It's not wrong just because it's not "of Peter" or "of Paul".
13. 5:12 This tells me you have not studied the real reasons for being ND. Passion & energy, yes, but also often well studied in the Word.
14. 5:25 ND has the flexibility and a theological capacity to join this united front even with those we disagree with, which was the appeal with which you started the video.
15. 5:46 I don't follow the cause and effect here.
16. 6:18 I definitely don't want a safe space, I want a church where I will grow as a soldier for Christ the most. I have found my locally church to do that best. Where in scripture are we commanded to be a part of a certain denom? Unity does not mean a certain one, rather a collective push to advance God's kingdom.
TLDR; this video seems to be built on a strawman of Nondenominational. Maybe try again with a steel man?
Earnest and honest best wishes for you, hope this explains some issues many might find in the video in more detail.
Excellent comment
6:11 The NT word for church (Koinonia) means community! Not a worldly institution. If Christians find community in a nondenom church, then they're doing church right!
1. Tradition isn’t necessary in a church, so long as it follows the sacraments of the Bible and is rooted in Christ. Nondenom churches are still a derivative of some branches (like pentecostal and baptist and presbyterianism). As for music, there is no such thing as “traditional” worship and music as modern churches use modern instruments for modern worship which would be the same as King David using relevant instruments of his time to worship the Lord (with a harp or lyre) with a setting that is relevant to his time (in the temple the same way we have a church that is filled with colorful lights among other things)
2. Resources vary from churches to church, as I’ve seen non denominations churches share resources in the realm of media and live streaming, financial and other types of things. Sure its not as big as denominational churches but its still there.
3. Influence just like resources, vary from church to church, some churches which are non denominational have bigger influence than others because of the people who serve and work in them. All of these points are overlooked
You seem to forget that the reason why so many churches become nondenominational is because that people are tired of the “one true denomination” idea and that people want a church revolving around the Bible and Jesus. Non denominational churches are here to stay and they are only going to grow further, just as there came protestants from catholics, there will also be non denominational churches coming from denominational churches.
If you're trying to get out of a non-denominational church to be part of a group with more tradition/resources/impact, just join an SBC church
Not as many of us have smoke machines during worship service, but otherwise the doctrine is comparable to most of them. (And to be fair, a lot of SBC churches/individuals would be extremely close to Presbyterians if we weren't as relaxed on certain aspects of Calvinism and polity or if we baptized infants)
This is totally backwards. I go to a non-denominational church and go to several Bible studies almost exclusively with non-denominational persons at various, unrelated churches. We are the definition of unity in Christ. We have Calvinists, Arminians, dispensationalists, Replacement Theology adherents, and everything in-between, including a Catholic who joins us regularly. And we are united in Christ, despite our individual theological differences. If I joined up with a denomination then when I join the church I would be assenting--in a pledge--to their core statements of faith, which would be impossible to do with the Catholics and most mainline Protestants--in other words, I'd be lying in the name of some faux version of unity and submitting to the authority very likely of leftists and non-Christians. So, if we want unity in Christ under, say, the Catholic Church, then the Catholics need to re-assess some of their core beliefs.
No king but King Jesus
What part of the Nicene creed do you disagree with and what sort of core beliefs are we to re-asses?
@@karolkos5915 I agree with Nicene creed except for one fundamental thing--the Catholics capitalize the "c" in "Catholic", i.e., "universal." That difference changes everything because the institutional Catholic Church--Roman Catholics--teach fundamentally different things about salvation, Israel, dispensations, Mary, prayer, saints, indulgences, purgatory, the Eucharist, and other things that I don't accept. And I reject it not because I grew up and was taught differently but because I can read the Bible for myself. There is a reason the old Roman Catholic Church executed people for translating the Bible from Latin into common languages.
@@kevinkent6351The Catholics don’t capitalize the c in catholic in the nicene creed, coming from a Catholic. Also the Bible doesn’t disprove the Catholic faith, only Protestant interpretations of the Bible do. And there is no way of knowing what these true interpretations are in the Protestant church since people with the same Holy Spirit disagree on fundamentals and the Bible does have specific instructions on how to interpret.
Catholics interpretations are backed from early church writings such as the didache and traditions from the early church and apostles (2 Thessalonians 2:15) while Protestant ones are just based on their own thinking.
I would trust the students of the apostles and the apostolic traditions more than myself when figuring out Christianity, and that’s one reason I’m Catholic.
Don’t let all the misinformation discourage you from Catholicism, coming from a former Protestant. God bless
@@okj9060 you think making the same, old tired arguments I've heard for decades is going to convince me to join the Catholic Church? That's hilarious. It's not even worth my time responding point by point. I love my Catholic brothers and sisters in Christ, but I disagree with so much Catholic doctrine that if I were to attempt to join the Catholic Church in some act of re-unification I would literally be excommunicated. There's no bridging the doctrinal gap between someone who has spent his life studying the Bible and the Catholic Church. It would be better for us to be united spiritually in Christ than for us to try to co-exist in the same corporate structure.
As to the Nicene creed, I mean Catholics in their minds capitalize the "C", which changes the meaning of the creed. That's why Catholics have an obsession with criticising denominations.
3:46
That was the worst meme you could've used. Anyone who knows the full context of the episode would think this meme is pro non-denominationalism. For context, the burger Spongebob (the yellow dude) made was considered great, while the pile of burgers made by King Neptune (the blue dude) were considered awful.
wow he defeated himself without even knowing it
Genuinely what I was thinking too. Quality has a quantity
Yeah tbh that just made RZ and his point look really superficial.
😂😂😂
I was just thinking that while watching 😂😂
I'm sorry, but this seems so overcomplicated and pharisaical. Jesus didn't call himself a Pharisee or Saduccee. In fact, He was an ordained rabbi by the presence of two witnesses at His baptism (the Father and the Spirit). Denominations are simply different teachings or emphasis.
Instead, they should be called "majors" or something like that. A pentecostal church will spend time focusing on the Spirit of God, gifting and His role in the church. Presbyterians may spend more time working out how God works, what our purpose is, and how we are saved theoretically. It doesn't mean either is opposed to either.
In the case of theological disagreement, that will always and forever happen throughout the church, even in the same denomination. Non-denominational churches exist PURELY as a local church of the body of Christ.
Because Churches aren't an organisation. They are a gathering of the saints. Sorry. It's just true.
I have to respectfully disagree HARDLY on this one. While I cannot speak for most or even all non-denominational churches most have checks and balances inside the church. Around 0:50 you say they are their own pope and such. But most churches I have been in as I’ve moved around and been in non-denominational churches have had inside checks and balances and outside ones. It’s not one guy saying “here’s what’s up people, Jesus says this and I’m 2nd in command.” They establish things that give the church a lifetime beyond this one guy, and make him not even close to some all powerful what I say goes leader. Additionally most of these churches use that same system of outside checks and balances for their resources, people, money, funds, charities, ideas, knowledge, manpower and tradition etc all based on some ideas they get from similar minded churches. As for me and plenty of other non-denominational churchgoers I’ve interacted with we’ve come to these churches not out rebellion or feel for community even, but bc we don’t agree with acts or beliefs of traditional churches. If you put me specifically in a group for example, I am baptist. Yet growing up Baptist in a very go to church in a suit, don’t smile, don’t laugh, the only music is one old lady in the back with a piano, God is serious so no fun here blah blah blah, that tradition sucks. I’ve literally watched my family raise their kids like that, most of my younger cousins now approaching 17-25 years of age where we all kinda get hit with the phase “what do we REALLY believe” have chosen NOT to believe or follow God bc they think it’s boring. And ofc that’s their fault I can’t argue we’ll God didn’t make church fun so it’s fair they won’t be Christians- no, that’s not what I mean. But the traditions aligned with Baptist churches I feel are a NEGATIVE. And a big one at that. It’s to break these traditions you claim are specifically good. I disagree and think (while some traditions are good) these traditions actively harm the church or church image. And I don’t think another denomination has Baptist aligning beliefs but lacks the failing traditions. Another point I just remembered was you said non-denominational churches don’t do sacraments: that’s never been the case. Not one I’ve been in has even suggested abandoning baptism or breaking of Jesus body through communion or abandons the creeds, this I just have to say is a personal bias by Redeemed here. Idk where he’s from but East Coast US and southern Spain where I’ve hopped around churches over the years have never once suggested any belief like that. In fact I think the grand scheme is the opposite personally, all the churches break the glass by making denominations and by having non denominational be the main church where we are all still connected while being separate we can have better unity and as a main ideal of non denominationalism the churches should check and balance and share etc with outside and other churches to keep this unity and help other churches remain biblical along with themselves. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need any denomination, but we don’t live in that world and I think that is part of the fact we live in a fallen world. I absolutely believe this is scriptural and biblical and the best we can do is come as close to perfect as possible on earth here, my belief is that that is through non-denominationalism. Anyway I don’t wanna ramble more; theres absolutely more I could say but unless someone specifically asks I’ll leave it here, I felt I had to voice this opinion.
I've been in nondenom churches, mainline and evangelical churches and I can tell you they've all got their ups and downs. I landed in the Anglican church because I like the accountability the episcopal structure provides for its clergy, so in that sense I would agree they are a sounder base. However, I take issue with most of what you've said.
First of all, the examples you give of denominational colonizing is misleading and offensive. Yes, education and healthcare are good things, but the educational institutions you cite as exemplary of the denominational system are the very same institutions which have created the "liberal" Christianity you rail against so much. Furthermore, the wealth which funded those schools and hospitals did not come from faithful denominational attendees selling all they had and holding it in common. It came from the satanic genocide of Indigenous people, many of whom were Christians, and the expropriation of their land.
Second, the characterization of nondenominationalism as unbiblical is bizarre. The churches of the Biblical era were locality-based and shared no governing oversight. Their leadership was local with regional ties which, after a couple centuries, tended to fall under the influence of larger church bodies centred upon major cities: Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Rome, and later Constantinople. This is the catholic organization: more like a web of independent bodies with major nodes. Orthodoxy among these bodies was maintained by apostles and bishops but relied upon recognition through mutual discernment. Richer churches might send resources to poorer ones. Churches which grew too heterodox might be slowly cut off from the flow of teaching materials and other resources. The concept of organizing the church like a state, with a governing body that owned the property and enforced conformity, developed in the early middle ages.
Finally, as some other commenters have said, the argument of this video will have a tough time drawing a line between "you need to be in a major denomination" and "you need to be in the only true church, i.e. the one I'm part of." Yes, there is properly only one church established by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. It is holy (God-ordained), catholic (universal) and apostolic (the apostles of Jesus were its first leaders and its apostolic mission continues today). Yes, nondenom churches generally do not acknowledge this overtly by reciting a creed every Sunday. But the real question is: do they exemplify these things in actuality? Do they do the works of Jesus in the power of the Spirit for the glory of the Father? Can they call every fellow believer a sibling in Christ? These things are the nature of the Church Triumphant, the body of believers who are struggling to conform themselves into the image of Jesus so that they might live on the earth as God intended when He made the earth. As Jesus said, "a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem."
It's not where we worship, it's who we worship that defines us.
As a non-denominational person, your spongebob meme is fitting, because spongebob makes one really excellent crabby patty and king posideon makes thousands of horrible crappy patties.
No, zoomie, you're wrong here. First of all, any argument you are making here is literally the same you could make against any congregationalist or Baptist Church.
Secondly, Non denom Churches are held accountable by God, and we clearly see that besides a few megachurches, which we can count on one hand, when a non-denominational church goes against the scriptures, it dies out. Just like Baptist and congregationalist churches. On the other hand, Non-denom Christians ARE more unified than denominationals, by definition. How many Presbyterians sing hymns next to anglicans? How many Orthodox serve the poor regularly next to Catholics? Do non-denominational serve and worship next to people they disagree with regularly? Yes, literally every week in almost every non denom church people with political, secondary doctrinal, and cultural differences praise and serve and learn and preach. There's a reason God is making these churches grow, by His sovereign will, and it's clearly because His favor is with us, at the moment. It is for the same reason the mainlines are dying, and why your reconquista has shown no fruits.
Denominationalism is an exercise in vanity.
From one part of your mouth you preach unity, while having an entire serires dedicated to why the PCUSA is somehow "the best". In reality, it's just team sports for you. Meanwhile, non-denominational christians don't play these team sports, we are by far more likely to be ecumenical in our gatherings, eagerly Desiring unification with those who agree on the essentials etc. Your arguments could easily be used to justify Catholicism, regardless of your amendments.
Your Love of denominationalism is essentially just like cheering on the Steelers, or the eagles, while non-denominational have the Sunday ticket and watch all the games. Denominations are distractions.
It's one thing to defend your beliefs, it's another thing entirely to pretend your denomination is somehow special, and no matter how many you pretend to have under your team's banner, it is impossible to reach the same number as you'd reach under the label "christian".
Amen
A staunch Calvinist has an issue with vanity and a love for needless division, never heard this before 🤔
That's because it is the argument for the Catholic Church and RZ is slowly becoming more Catholic. You can just see it happening. It's funny that all this has happened once he's had a long form sitdown with actual Catholic apologists. It's quite amazing that every time someone really looks into the church history they find themselves either no longer opposed to Catholicism and realize that their beliefs are justified, or they end up becoming Catholic themselves.
@@loganleroy8622 either they swallow the bitter pill of papal infallibility, or they reject it and just go Orthodox
Non-denominationalism saying anything else is vanity is wild. A non-denom belief system is at its core founded in pride, it says I will not follow any other theology whether it is my place or not. Obedience the opposite of pride is cast completely aside in the name of following my beliefs, their are several churches with apostolic lineage from thousands of years ago, but my personal feelings are the most important. If I have to start up my own church to do it I will.
This video gives me Ben Shapiro vibes idk why
IKRRRRR
Yep
3:51 SponegBob won that competition. Quality over quantity.
Sorry, but this whole video feels like a massive caricature of the non-denominational church. Sorry for the essay, but I'm passionate and have thought a long time about this. TL;DR at bottom.
The non-denominational movement has its flaws, yes, but it's not like each non-denom church is its own denomination. The illustration you made is incredibly misleading to make it look like every non-denominational church is completely disconnected from fellowship with one another or anyone outside of their church (like they're living in their own bubble, cut off from everything, totally oblivious to other churches). I've never understood it like this. In my eyes, the effort of non-denom churches was to break down the dividing walls of labels (whether or not they're successful is certainly debatable). They're trying to move towards unity in a different way (and I'm not saying I agree with it).
"[Non-denominationals] can't have much of an impact on the outside world because they're not part of an organized army."
- Says who? Our impact is limited by our denomination? We don't have an effective church body, or we can't reach as many people because we're not a part of a traditional denomination?
- Sorry, but this quote makes it sound like we're helpless unless we join a denomination. And it doesn't make the quote of "they're still true Christians" feel much better at the end. If anything, of "if I'm not in a recognized mainline/evangelical denomination, I can't do God's will or be biblical, so I'm damned."
- Your last claim in the video also makes it sound like we can't serve the kingdom outside of a traditional denomination. It's not "serve God's kingdom OR be at home," but rather a BOTH, AND. Christians are called to BOTH community and love for one another, AND to serve God's kingdom. You can do that in a non-denom context.
"[Non-denominational churches] lack tradition, resources, influence on the world"
- I agree non-denoms have lost much of the tradition. It's sad that there's rarely an appreciation for thinkers that have gone before us, except maybe a C.S. Lewis quote every month. It's sad that the sacraments aren't appreciated or reveranced AS MUCH (not to say they can't be or aren't being appreciated and reveranced in some non-denom circles)
- I do wish more non-denominational churches shared resources, especially those of the mega-church size. However, that's not to say that they don't share resources or can't make as big of an impact. Besides, , basically saying, "non-denominationals aren't making as big of an impact as us mainlines/evangelicals."
- Those of the mega-church size and other non-denominationals seem to make much bigger of a global impact for the kingdom in media formats than many traditional evangelical or mainline denominations due to their emphasis on technology and entertainment. This is the biggest strength of non-denominational churches: THEY CAN REACH PEOPLE THAT TRADITIONAL CHURCHES CANNOT. There's a different audience (and yes, I want them to come to Christ, which means these churches NEED to preach the gospel, no compromise)
"As non-denominationalism has risen in the West, Christianity overall has fallen, partly because Christians have no longer been presenting a united front against the world"
- So the fall of Christianity is on non-denominationals?
- The de-churching issue is WAY more nuanced.
I think a better critique on non-denominational Christianity is:
- Very low view of the sacraments (typically) (grape juice, open baptism, etc.)
- Lack of pastoral accountability (in many circles)
- Less-detailed confessions (that are also rarely historical confessions) (there are still confessions & by-laws that are binding in most non-denom circles. It's not like every non-denom church is Mars Hill)
- The messages are often watered down for the sake of not offending people (which often fosters a shallow and incomplete faith rather than a deep one)
- Lack of teaching church history (which can make Protestantism seem disconnected from the past, where followers are more susceptible to claims like, "to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant," or "Martin Luther invented new doctrine," or "no one believed this until the 1500s," etc.)
- Contemporary worship music tends to be TREMENDOUSLY more shallow lyrically than traditional hymns (that doesn't mean it can't impact someone or that all CCM is like this, though the industry is deeply flawed) (also, not all non-denoms use only CCM)
Those things need to be fixed. That said, I believe non-denominationals are playing an important role in the Kingdom of reaching the lost. While I hate the methodology of lights & stages, I recognize that many of my friends would have never come to faith if it wasn't for the flashy lights and fancy production setups that got them in the door in the first place. So long as the gospel is boldly preached, that's IMPACT.
TL;DR - I think this video was an over-simplified and unfair critique of much of non-denominational Christianity that ignored almost any good that the movement has brought (despite its flaws), so I tried to push the conversation toward what I believe is truly wrong with the movement. I'm open to discussing (please be kind to each other & me in the replies).
Now this is a way better discussion over non-denominationalism
As a non-denominational myself, I agree that non-denominational churches still have flaws for the most part but I also think alot of issues is more down to an individual church rather than non-denominationalism itself.
I can't speak on all non-denominational churches but I would say we hold a high view of the sacraments, I mean, we use grape juice because we have minors take part in communion and since wine is an alcohol, minors drinking isn't a good sight.
Still, thank you for actually making a well done comment on a video that just completely fumbled the ball and tripped into a garbage bin.
@@redhitman5311 as a Lutheran growing up, we were drinking wine as minors after confirmation, as it was considered a religious exemption. This is actually one thing that bothers me about my current non-denominational church, as Jesus clearly talked about the bread and the wine, not juice.
However, it does put a large emphasis on baptism.
@Allaiya. Understandable, me personally, I see the bread and wine as more of a symbol than needing to be exactly wine in order to have it be considered communion, I mean both wine and grape juice stems from grapes.
Also, you can think about grape juice helping those who are recovering alcoholics, wine could be a trigger for them so grape juice is a good way to to allow them to take communion without worry of relapse.
Ultimately, I'm trying to see the heart of what God says about communion than having to be exact about it though I do agree wine would probably be better.
@@redhitman5311 The second part makes sense. We do have a self admitted alcoholic at my church so it probably wouldn’t be good for her.
This video finally sealed my decision to join the Catholic Church.
You know we can see your comments on other videos by clicking your profile right....? You've made the church look bad
Look into eastern orthodoxy; god bless!
I heavily disagree, and this is why.
1. You first state that the non-denominational churches are new and then show concern for their lack of resources. Let me ask, if a new denomination arose (which would be no different from past denominations arising), would you then say they are wrong for having no resources? If it is new, let it grow. If the nondenominational church had strong resources 10 years from now, would you say its still sinful? Your argument here depends on the growth and youth of the nondenominational church, and it would have been best for you to stray from its youth entirely for your point.
2. Also, they aren't THAT new, they started in the 18th century and most are not as fancy and nontraditional as you say. I grew up in one and it is a nice, old, decorated church with tradition. Today, I only go to nondenominational churches that are old. Now, megachurches do cling to non-denominationalism, I admit
3. Yes, Christ calls the church to be united. But that doesn't mean one has to leave non-denominationalism to do so. You create this either or fallacy that doesn't exist: be unbiblical or change your views. In reality, The non-denominational church doesn't actually need to deform. It just needs to UNITE. Churches can be united REGARDLESS of denomination. You don't even explore the possibility of non-denominational churches merging with other churches to achieve great things. MY church does this, and is assisted by other churches and pastors GLOBALLY, installing churches in less fortunate nations and connecting them to united churches in America.
4. As you said, there have been many splits, and its bad. Believe it or not, denominations shouldn't exist period, and that's what I as a non-denominationalist choose to be non-denominational about. Every denomination is built on its weird desire to take scripture out of context, or have an unbacked theological view, or something else stupid and useless. It is silly to even imply that a Christian should just develop a denomination (meaning to literally lean on values they don't actually have). I will not become a member of a church that I heavily disagree with.
I conclude, you are entitled to this view, but no: non-denominationalism is not unbiblical. For it to be unbiblical, it must be, as you said, incapable of unity. Then, and only then, is it truly unbiblical. But it isn't. They can unify with other denominational churches (because churches shouldn't be unified over denominations in the first place. You should be unified because you're a church of Christ). They can unify AS non-denominational churches, and they can over time progress and build resources. Unless the Methodists were unbiblical until they developed their own allies and resources, neither are the non-denominationalists unbiblical until they develop their own allies and resources.
Yes I agree that we should be united, but we don't have to disband to do that.
I feel like you have made a solid argument to say it’s either the Catholic Church or Non-Denominational. The argument from resources, tradition or history just takes you back to Catholic and Orthodoxy. I say this as an a non-denominational you’re locking Protestants out of Protestantism.
the best thing about non denominational churches comes from the fact that you don't have to bicker over slightly different viewpoints like other denominations do with one another. that harmony is what allows non denominational churches to be the greatest force in God's kingdom
Why wouldn't non-denominational have doctrinal bickering? Any reason other than they're all sheep to a charismatic leader.
Good churches don't have much doctrinal bickering because they follow doctrines ironed out over centuries.
Except the Catholic Church is the strongest force
@@Aiophgy not anymore bud
@@AiophgyStrongest or richest?
so you're saying I'm not a proper Christian bc my denomination didnt take credit for enough cool stuff..? interesting.
This is very much a strawman view of non-denominational churches. The vast majority of non-denominational churches are part of a larger organisation of some sort. These non-denominational denominations tend to have a more relational and less formal structure than traditional denominations, but this doesn't mean that they consist of entirely autonomous churches that simply do their own thing.
It's the adoption of stereotypes based solely on the worst examples that happen to be clearly visible.
It's like saying home schooled kids are "weird." And accepting it as fact from the surface level. Vs a more reasoned, rational, or academic take which could be home schooling can lead to a child who hasn't been properly socialized.
Do we throw the baby out with the bath water? And go you either accept public education or you adopt home schooling and inevitably have an unsocialized weird child. Lol
My church is “nondenominational”, and is a “fellowship” of 3700 churches worldwide.
My denominational has 221,700 and was formed by Jesus.
My church is nondenominational because there former denomination became woke and told us to not follow the truth ofbthe bible. Dude good the churches in Canada have been forced to become nondenominational by the denominations.
@@madelizabethjade 🙌👍😊
I really challenge you to go to a non denominational church for a Sunday. Because I agree with some of the things you say especially the tradition part but you say it isn’t apart of the Bible to be non denominational however it’s also against the Bible to hold yourself above others because you are apart of a larger denomination. Same thing as the Jewish churches and their leaders in the New Testament. Another part of non denominational that’s appealing is not being attached to a branch of church that has bent the words of the Bible in the past to justify things. Being able to start from a fresh point without religious politics is huge benefit to non denominational church.
Have you considered that some people remain Nondenom because they do not agree with the beliefs or practices of other denominations?
If no denomination agrees with you you’re probably just wrong
@@redeemedzoomer6053Or the denom is wrong. Case in point: the Pope's recent words. Many Catholics are in a pickle because their man representing Peter went non-biblical on certain spicy subjects.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 that's a logical fallacy.
Vague as fricc
@@ucarouen What exactly did he go non-biblical on?
If non denominational churches lack resources as you say, isn’t it the duty of other churches, irrespective of denomination, to provide those resources? I certainly think so. But the fact that they are part of a denomination prevents that. The fact that they are part of a larger group of Christians doesn’t hide the fact that we, as Christians, are split by our denominations. Therefore, I would say that denominations divide us, not unite us.
I love how the reactions to this video sums up
Non denominational christians outraged
A lot of protestants disapointed because of how the video is not well made and puts Zoomer in a bad image
and the Catholics, absolutely laughing their asses off, Lmao
Non-denominational (and that means Bible believing) churches have access to the unlimited wealth and provision of God to achieve the purpose God has appointed for them, so resources aren’t a problem.
Tradition is the only one that can be an issue, but the main point of non-denominational is to avoid the restrictive traditionality that causes issues in mainline churches.
What Protestantism/Reformation was to the Catholic Church, Non-Denominational was to things like CoE and Anglicanism.
The goal is to strip away everything that isn’t from
God in His word, and so focus on the core tenets of following Christ.
Influence is a strange one. Salt is scattered, not dumped in one spot. The wider the spread of Christians, the greater the impact of them on the world will be.
In the end, trying to consolidate everyone into a single hierarchical bucket puts you at risk of being led astray by leaders who are motivated by politics and greed.
Independent churches, in contact with eachother, with multiple elders appointed over each. Christ is the High Priest, now and forever. The Bride waits for the Bridegroom to come, and until then there is no centralised power on earth that isn’t born or corrupted by the wickedness of man.
@@bikesrcool_1958 It says we’re to be citizens/part of the kingdom, not that the kingdom will be rooted here on earth (as it’s the Kingdom of Heaven after all) But we’re only sojourners here at this time as Peter says. The kingdom will be on this earth in the future, Jesus is very clear on that, but until the King arrives, we’re just foreigners from that Kingdom here on earth.
@@bikesrcool_1958 I think it’s just our view of ‘Kingdom’ aha. The ‘kingdom of God/Heaven’ as a physical location is currently heaven based, with a prophesied time to come to earth in the future (which you rightly point out is mentioned by Christ etc), which will fulfil all of the Israel/Mount Zion prophecies from Isaiah and the like in the Old Testament.
We are currently citizens of the Kingdom of God, but sojourn as foreigners in this world (in the world, but not of it).
So the kingdom is indeed current, but is not physically on earth yet, only its people are (you and I).
It’s our role in bringing the coming Kingdom which usually is the bigger division. Some say that the church should prepare the world for the coming of Christ (e.g. make an earthly kingdom for Him to inhabit), but others say that we are salt of the earth, meant to preserve and stop the spread of sin until the coming day of wrath/judgement upon it.
Non-Denom churches network with each other, dude. Like... they are a meta-denomination. They form cliques and keep each other inline... even Bethel or Hillsong.
Right, but there's no accountability and they can just leave that "network" at any time.
@@loganleroy8622 You can also just leave a denomination at any time and become _denomination - issue we split over._
The politics is exactly the same, just more like a federation than provinces.
@@matthew_scarbrough Right, which is why it's problematic and doesn't actually lead to any church unity. There's no way to hold members accountable, because they can just have their own "interpretations" of scripture. That's why it's a problem to have these denominations.
@@loganleroy8622 Nor is there a way, by that definition, to keep unity in a denomination. All you can do in a denomination is say, "We don't agree with this one church," and that's it. Maybe you can kick them out. But you also have issues with denominations like hyper-liberalism. You don't really see that as much with non-denom because each church stands or falls on its own merits and has to hold up to the scruteny of _everyone_ around it, not just other members of their denomination.
@@matthew_scarbrough Right, which is why you should be unified in a single church, ie the one that actually has any legitimacy to claim to be the universal church.
Using your army analogy: Non-denoms have for the most part decided to join ranks against the actual enemy. Presbyterians, on the other hand, have decided that they can fight the enemy while also fighting their brothers who are Pentecostal, Methodist, Lutheran, Anglican, Baptist, Mennonite, and... well, basically everybody. You're telling people that unless they agree with you on paedobaptism, Calvinism, and covenant theology-secondary issues-they can't come with you to spread the gospel in the world-the primary issue. That's not unity, that's exclusivity. As a Presbyterian, I appreciate the effect that non-denoms have had on the world. Denominations are stupid. How can we love an invisible God while casting aspersions on our visible brothers?
Thanks for introducing us to the book of 2 Opinions!
W book of the bible right there
W comment. L video
@@yasiem6245 I think his video is spot on, he gave very good arguments
@@ryankleinjan6967 not really. His arguments can extend to Protestantism
@@brightonhansford3926 which I agree with
Can’t wait for zoomer to accept his own arguments and submit to Rome 🙏
"Non-denoms are unbiblical because they dont have as much worldly wealth as bigger, older denoms do. We're great because we made the colleges that now teach people to hate God and the hospitals that turn men into women."
Thats effectively all I'm getting out of this video. If its not talking about worldly possessions, which seems stupid in a world passing away, its about "unity" but I don't see you bending the knee to Rome in the name of unity. They have more wealth than any other, too. Bigger, prettier churches, more colleges, libraries, etc.
Funny how reformists/calvinists always circle back to the same arguments as catholics. In my experience, it seems you guys just want to be your own Vatican over your own Rome.
Please Mr Zoomer, tell me what denomination was the church in Jerusalem, the church in Rome, the churches in Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus, Philippi, Colosse, Thessalonica etc...? You say that a non-denominational church is unbiblical, yet I cannot find a single denomination in the bible. By the way, your universities and hospitals are doing wonders for the gospel.
They weren’t part of a denomination cuz the whole church was one denomination
They were all unified as a single church with different bishoprics until the Oriental Orthodox schism in 451.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 By definition you cannot have one denomination. According to the Cambridge dictionary, a denomination is "a religious group whose beliefs differ in some ways from other groups in the same religion." One united church is non-denominational. I appreciate your zeal for the church but I believe your video is incorrect to say that non-denominational (which by definition would be non-divided) is unbiblical. I apologize if my original comment was sarcastic. I work as an overseas missionary, planted a non-denominational church and I am very passionate about it,. To hear it called unbiblical was, let me just say, difficult. But we can pray together, "YOUR kingdom come."
Did you just put the pope hat on Johnny Mac lol
The dislikes give me hope that people are starting to see through RZ's nonsense. A great Bible "summarizer" but when he starts talking about churches he completely drops the ball.
If you wanna argue that non-denominational churches are necessarily not "rooted in tradition" in comparison to denominational ones, that's true in a sense (i.e. they don't necessarily bind their consciences to follow whatever theologians in the XVIth century decided was essential, like a Calvinist soteriology or a specific view of the millennium), but to argue that they're worse off when it comes to church unity is just absurd.
How is someone in a presbyterian church that refuses to collaborate with any christian that doesn't adhere 100% to the WCF in any way more united to other christians than a non-denominational one who's free to collaborate with calvinists, arminians, molinists, people with different end-times views, etc?
If anything a church like the EFCA displays far more of a "christian unity" ethos than any reformed denomination.
First of all, protestant denominations are not binding to the conscience since the only infallible authority is the Bible and tradition is always reformed in light of that. Second of all, you can very well see that the denominations work together, that's the point of the Reconquista, all these different denominations working together for the kingdom.
These are people within very libtard denominations working together, not denominations.
And you go try joining an OPC church while having an Arminian soteriology to see how non-binding it is in a confessional denomination.
… this was extreme. Kinda pushes away your non-denominational subscribers, don’t you think?
I’m non-denominational, but we have a Statement of Faith that was based on the Nicene Creed + the Bible. We do communion once a month. We do evangelism, baptisms, retreats. Outreach, even.
Of course we don’t have the resources you say - non-denominational churches were usually founded and are run by the simplest of men. The richer people get their own place and the flashier ambiances, but you might have left out the small community churches that just looks like a gathering of believers.
I do think non-denominational is an irony in itself because it *is* a denomination, but saying that they shouldn’t exist is another thing.
If you think this video will make non-denoms switch to Presbyterianism (or any other denomination), you might be thinking wrong.
And yes I watched the whole video
This is the biggest miss I’ve seen RZ take ever. Almost none of these arguments are even remotely true, and almost all of them more accurately reflect the ignorance and misunderstanding of denominational churches in the present day.
Clarify the points made don’t just cry about
Christ prayed for unity - He will get what he wants
Counterpoint: Nondenominationalism is an America phenomenon. America is much more Christian than Europe. Therefore, nondenominationalism has saved Christianity in America.
Good point!
on the contrary, christianity in america is shrinking.
America is much more Christian than Europe because the founding fathers were Christian. The founding fathers were not non denominational
@@isaielizondo9877 Sad but true. It's not as bad as Europe, but it's a problem.
@@isaielizondo9877 is it the nondenominational churches or the mainline that are bleeding members?
This is a very worldly perspective. The one direct Scriptural reference, Acts 4:32, is not at all clearly prescriptive. As for the arguments of “how do you expect to make an impact” or “how shall you be organized in the ‘Christian Army’“, the effectiveness and value of the Christian life is not ultimately found in the visible impact we leave, but merely how faithful we are to the Word of God and the voice of the Spirit in our everyday lives.
Nothing about Jesus’ ministry followed any of the conventional wisdom for how a Christian ministry ought to be structured to “maximize impact”. Rather, Christ was simply faithful to the Father’s call day-in and day-out, and through radical obedience alone the Lord changed the world.
This is not even to say that denominations have no place in Christ’s unified Church (unified around the one true head Jesus Christ and His Gospel, not any particular council or doctrine), as I agree God has worked wonderful things through them. Rather, I simply believe it’s foolish and worldly to make such blanket statements about nondenominationalism.