1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Dropping "Baptist" Or Other Denoms From Church Names?

Discussion in 'The Church Forum' started by HammerStone, Oct 10, 2014.

  1. HammerStone

    HammerStone Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Likes Received:
    United States
    A number of churches chose to drop their denominational affiliation from their name. This is a notable trend in Baptist circles, although I've noticed it also in Assembly of God, some Churches of God, and a few others. Then it seems that many other churches and denominations, such as most to all Roman Catholic, United Methodist and various Lutheran churches aren't dropping their monikers.

    Is this a bad thing or a good thing in your view?

    I'd prefer we avoid rants about denominations, FYI.
  2. sojourner4Christ

    sojourner4Christ sojourning non-citizen

    Likes Received:

    My view is rubbish. Rather, what saith Scripture?

    It is the denial of the scripture's absolute authority, and not its difficulty of interpretation, that has resulted in the various divisions of Christ's congregation. The Gospel is simple, it’s just that men make it complicated.

    Once an absolute standard has been abandoned, there is no logic for determining right from wrong other than human logic. Whenever a congregation abandons the absolute standard of Scripture, the outcome of all religious and moral decisions is left in the hands of men. And whether these decisions are rendered by clergy, scholars, theologians, courts, synods, membership votes, or forum posters, if the decisions do not come from Scripture, then they must come from people of society, and sooner or later those decisions will inevitably be influenced by society.

    It is not reasonable to maintain that God continues to speak "through the Church" or through prophets or angels or in any way other than his Holy Scriptures. Why not? Consider what the scripture itself says in this matter:

    Galatians 1:8–9 "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."

    Now if the apostles wrote down what they taught, and these writings were collected and preserved in what we now call the scripture, and then if someone else (even an angel) adds something to what the apostles wrote, aren't they teaching something "other than" what the apostles taught? You see, anyone can claim to speak for God. Anyone can say that God speaks through the Church, or through the priests or through a board of elders or even through a preacher or individual members of a congregation. But in reality, one person's claims are as good as another’s, and one congregation's opinions are as good as another's. If, however, the scripture is God's unerring word, then the one who teaches from it does not teach his opinions, but teaches the truth of God. The entire context of Galatians 1:1-16 shows how denominations are of men, and are a different gospel, and how Paul stayed away from such.

    You're not going to like what you're about to read. It stands against today's massive movement of worldwide ecumenism. The short story is, the Lord showed me that the way one comes under the curse of denominationalism is by being a part of, supporting, encouraging, agreeing with, or otherwise fomenting a division/sect/denomination within the body of Christ. The length of the curse is indeterminate- -- it's up to you.

    "Dropping their denominational affiliation from their name" is pointless if they maintain their division and worse if they drop it for ecumenical reasons.

    Religious denominations actually go contrary to scripture, because they divide Christ (1 Corinthians 1:10-17; 3:3). A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand (Matthew 12:25, Mark 3:24-25, Luke 11:17). In scripture, God's people are called the Christ's assembly (note: the Greek word ekklesia is translated as 'church' in most bibles; it actually refers to a group of people, and not to a physical building. Therefore, the literal translation is either 'assembly' or 'congregation'). For example, "the assembly of God" (Acts 20:28, 1 Corinthians 1:2; 10:32; 11:22; 15:9, 2 Corinthians 1:1, Galatians 1:13, 1 Timothy 3:5), or "the assembles of God" (1 Cor.11:16; 1 Thess.2:14; 2 Thess.1:4), or "the assembles of Christ" (Romans 16:16). To call the assembly (church) of God by a different name, is to replace the name of God's assembly (church) with a man-made name. God considers "naming the name of Christ" to be iniquity (2 Timothy 2:19). All denominations create a man-made name to place on their man-made Church. Where is their authority for doing this?

    1 Corinthians 1:10-13, "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you ; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you . Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?"

    The above verse clearly condemns denominations. The reason for denominations is because those in the assembly (church) did not "speak the same thing", and that caused "divisions among them", and were no longer "joined together." Therefore, they formed different ‘Churches’ because of all the ‘contentions among them’. Just like how, in the above verses, those in the first century divided themselves and said they were of the assembly of "Chloe, Paul, Apollos, Cephas, etc.", denominations today divide themselves and say they are of the Church of the "Baptists, Catholics, Protestants, Lutherans, Evangelical, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Open Brethren, Seventh day Adventists, Mormons, Orthodox, Quakers, Methodist, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Calvinism, Arminianism, etc." But, as Paul asks above, "Is Christ divided?" If not, then how can these divided Churches be of Christ?

    Another example of an attempt to ‘divide’ God into separate ‘Churches’ is at the transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-13, Mark 9:2-13, Luke 9:28-36). After Peter saw Moses, Elijah, and Jesus, he wanted to build a tabernacle (Church) for each one of them. But the Father himself descended in a cloud and said, "This is my beloved Son: hear him." In other words, we are to submit to Jesus only, and preach what he says. This attitude is reflected in the last recorded words of the mother of Jesus, Mary, when she said, "Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it" (John 2:5). We are not to build temples after other men, or upon other men’s teachings, but we are to do what Jesus told us to do.

    Psalms 133:1, "Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!"

    1 John 3:14, "We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death."

    It is not possible to "dwell together in unity," or to "love the brethren" when denominations are too busy fighting with each other and disagreeing with each other.

    Amos 3:3, "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?"

    Denominationalism: "The system and ideology founded on the division of the religious population into numerous ecclesiastical bodies, each stressing particular values or traditions and each competing with the other in the same community under substantial conditions of freedom. Thus denominationalism has usually been associated with religious pluralism, voluntaryism, mutual respect and recognition, and neutrality on the part of the state." Westminster Dictionary of Church History (1971), pages 262-263.

    As you can see, the very definition of ‘denominationalism’ goes against the very heart of scripture. If you take the five words in bold above, for example, and compare these words with what scripture says about them, it is all negative: Division (1 Corinthians 1:10-17; 3:3). Traditions (Matthew 15:3,6, Mark 7:8,9,13. Colossians 2:8). Competing (2 Corinthians 10:12). Religious pluralism (Galatians 1:8,9). Respect (James 2:9, Leviticus 19:15, Deuteronomy 10:17, 2 Chronicles 19:7).

    "The Bible in no way envisages the organization of the church into denominations. It instead assumes the opposite, that all Christians, except those being disciplined, will be in full fellowship with all others. Any tendencies to the contrary were roundly denounced (1 Cor.1:10-13). Paul could write a letter to the Christians meeting in various places in Rome or Galatia with every assurance that all would receive its message. Today, for any city or country, he would have to place the letter as an advertisement in the secular media and hope." Elwell’s Evangelistic Dictionary of Theology, (1984), page 310.

    "Articles, Creeds, and Confessions of Faith alike fail to give us this full knowledge of God which is so essential to our faith and walk. They are only man’s impressions, inferences, and conclusions drawn from Scripture; and have themselves to be judged by Scripture. Whatever of truth there may be in them, or however useful, they can never take the place of the Word of God. Only in the "person" of the Living Word, and in the pages of the written Word, can we get to know God." E.W. Bullinger, The Knowledge of God, (1920), page 3.

    "We do not use any non-scriptural words or expressions. These are the things which divide the members of the One Body, instead of uniting them. These introduce the seeds of strife and contention. These have been the causes of controversies and martyrdom’s". E.W.Bullinger, The Knowledge of God, (1920), page 3.

    On the 26th of May, 1786, James Madison, who subsequently became president of the United States, said in a sermon he delivered before the Protestant Episcopal Church in the State of Virginia, "I earnestly recommend to our Christians to reject every system as the fallible production of human contrivance, which shall dictate the articles of faith; and adopt the Gospel alone as their guide. Those Christian societies will ever be found to have formed their union upon principles, the wisest and the best, which makes the scriptures alone, and not human articles, a confession of belief, the sole rule of faith and conduct." W.D. Frazie "Reminiscences and Sermons"(1896. page 63).

    James Madison also said, "We have staked the whole future of the American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future...upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves, according to the Ten Commandments of God."

    In the New Testament, the English word "heresy" is from an untranslated Greek word (word #139). It's used nine times; four times it is left untranslated, but the other five times it is translated. This word is translated as "sect" (i.e., denomination) in Acts 5:17; 15:5; 24:5; 26:5 and 28:22. However, it is left untranslated in Acts 24:14, 1 Corinthians 11:19, Galatians 5:20 and 2 Peter 2:1. Let’s see what some of these verses would say if it was translated.

    1 Corinthians 11:18-19, "For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies [sects, denominations] among you..."

    It shows that denominations cause divisions! What else does scripture say about sects?

    Galatians 5:19-21, "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies (sects, denominations), Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God."

    Denominations are defined as a work of the flesh! We are told that they who partake of these things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Why not? Because denominations cause divisions, and Christ is not divided. Therefore, denominations are not of Christ!

    2 Peter 2:1, "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies (sects, denominations), even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction."

    This passage says false prophets and false teachers will bring in denominations, and they will deny the Lord. Denominations do deny the Lord by dividing the Lord.

    When you start getting into re-definitions and re-statements of the Truth, you’re no longer in the Truth, you’re an image of the Truth. A sect or denomination is not the real thing, it is not the Truth; it is only an interpretation of the Truth, it is only a perception of the Truth. The works of men (creeds, confessions, or articles of faith) quicken no one and save no souls.

    John 6:63, "It is the spirit [*not creeds, confessions, or articles of faith] that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."

    Hosea 8:6, "…the workman made it [*creeds, confessions, or articles of faith]; therefore it is not God:"

    Isaiah 17:7-8, "At that day shall a man look to his Maker, and his eyes shall have respect to the Holy One of Israel. And he shall not look to the altars, the work of his hands, neither shall respect that which his fingers have made [*creeds, confessions, or articles of faith]..."

    Also, when people say they are a "New Testament Church", they separate themselves, because they’re saying they popped up at some point 2,000 years ago, whereas God's "church" is from the beginning (Gen.1:1, Psalms 119:160, Pro.8:23, Isa.40:21; 41:4,26; 46:10; 48:5, Jer.17:12, Mark 10:6, Acts 15:18, Col.1:18, 1 John 2:7; 3:11, 2 John 1:5,6, Rev.21:6; 22:13). The "New Covenant Church," for example, is an imperfect church like all other denominations.

    -- Richard, Jesus Christ's assembly at New Zealand
  3. Enquirer

    Enquirer New Member

    Likes Received:
    I personally don't think that there is any Theological issue at stake here, also irrespective of a persons denomination believers are fully aware that
    Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church, so tags don't really matter.
    Denominations simply gave communities identity as they rallied around a particular viewpoint of the Scriptures.
    The fact they are "unbundling" themselves from these tags is perhaps a sign that Jesus Christ is asserting his authority over his body once again.

    My strongest feeling though, is that communities are becoming more diverse as new people of various cultures move into them, changing the "flavour"
    or culture of the churches.
    This might also mean that new money is flowing into them thereby granting these "denominational" churches new found financial independence
    from their "mother" church which they might have relied on in the past.
    I'm fairly sure that we might see new names like "XYZ Community Church" as opposed to "XYZ Baptist/Methodist etc Church".

    Also new preachers are being exposed to a wider range of doctrine as they study and so new viewpoints are entering in and are clashing with
    the "old ways".
    And with the new money they are able to break away and establish themselves.
    Though I'm sure they will still maintain a connection of some sorts to their former denominations to placate the older members in their churches.

    I don't really know what churches are like in other countries but I'm guessing that they progressively moving toward a more "full gospel"
    type of setup ... God heals, God is interested in your financial prosperity, the gifts of the Spirit etc.

    Also, the "mother" church might be opening it's doors to accepting gay marriages and doctrines which mirror current society etc. like what
    happened to J.I.Packer breaking away from the Anglican Church in Canada over the very issue of the Anglican Church accepting same
    sex marriages..
    This would then force the tagged churches to become independent and even drop the tag against their will.
  4. Rocky Wiley

    Rocky Wiley New Member

    Likes Received:
    I have seen many UPC churches leave and go independent and others remove 'UPC' from their name. Most of these come from changes in standards, that were never required in the New Testament.

    That being said, doctrine is primarily a big wall that closes the mind to other bible truth. Is it important not to close our minds to God's word? I think it is up to God, and we don't know how much untruth God will allow to continue in the church.
  5. rockytopva

    rockytopva Well-Known Member Encounter Team

    Likes Received:
    United States
    Especially Pentecostal Holiness! Let see some substitutions going on just in our conference...

    Tabernacle of Praise
    Worship Center
    Valley Harvest
    Faith Assembly
    Voice of Praise
    New Vision
    New Covenant
    Cross Point
    Destiny Outreach
    Tree of Life
    Temple of Worship
    Emmanuel Fellowship
    New Beginnings
    Life Center
    Life Line
    Grace Fellowship
    Living Word Worship
    Victory Chapel
    Faith Temple
    Abundant Life
    New Horizons
    Christian Life
    Faith Central
    On Eagles Wings
    The Upper Room
    Ray of Hope
    Strong Tower
    Christian Fellowship
    Life Flow
    Good News
    New Beginnings
    Word of Life
    Haven of Praise
    City of Refuge
    Ceres Ministries
    Calvary Full Gospel
    Life Line
    Harvest Fellowship
    Life Changers
    Millennial World Outreach
  6. Raeneske

    Raeneske New Member

    Likes Received:
    No one is saved by a name. Doesn't matter what church you say you're affiliated with, you aren't saved by your affiliation with that church. Now, with that said, I do not advocate dropping the name. What happens at that point, is the churches come together under the umbrella term, Christian. And that's bad news for those who want to stay pure in doctrine.

    Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

    2 Corinthians 6:14-18 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, 18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

    Revelation 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

    Take away their distinctive names, and all you have are a bunch of confused Christian churches, who come together and worship God with a bunch of feel good sermons. Doctrine is made unimportant. So long as the churches teach love God and love your neighbour, searching the scriptures for truth becomes "unnecessary". And such a step will prove fatal to millions, maybe even billions, of Christians around the world. Doing such a thing would eventually help create a one world, universal, church.
  7. Chuckt

    Chuckt New Member

    Likes Received:
    My Church did this about 8-10 years ago. You all don't understand what is going on. Your church joined the Emergent Church movement and they didn't tell you.
    You might as well forget about learning anything anymore because Church is now for non-Christians and it isn't for believers.
    There are over 5,000 churches in the United States that did this.

    They can't make converts.
    Think of it as regime change. They took the name "Baptist" down. So now it is a community church so you are now run by "community" or non-Christians because it is regime change; sort of like changing the flag and putting another flag up.

    This is something you need to listen to several times because it probably isn't taught in your church so you need to listen to it, study it, and learn it which means you better listen to it several times because you need a starting point to tell the church to start doing basics or you can leave the church and save yourself a lot of problems or you can try to stay and learn on the job and lose.

    What Happened to Expository Preaching

    After you watch that, learn this:

  8. Angelina

    Angelina Prayer Warrior Staff Member Admin

    Likes Received:
    New Zealand
    Although I did not watch the link, I agree with chuckt on the above. As a point of reference, it would be difficult to define a churches m.o. without having to research their roots if they were to drop their affiliation from their title. It would take a number of church visits to finally realize that a particular church has a different take on some of the relevant aspects of belief that I personally uphold. This would be frustrating if I were moving to another area or looking for a particular church with similar denominational views.

    I personally do not think that there is an issue with calling a church "Baptist", "Catholic" or "Lutheran" because the name gives an indication of their beliefs and is easier for seekers to find when one is searching for a church to be involved in.

    On the other side of the coin, you have the issue of systems calling themselves a "church" who are not believer's in Jesus the son of God, the gospel message or the bible ... who hide themselves under the guise of a "christian assembly" due to the drop in their affiliated association. This is happening anyway but I think you get the general gist of what I am saying.... :huh:

    IMHO Christians ought to be bold and upfront - if they are a spade, they should call themselves a spade. ;)
    Chuckt likes this.
  9. Chuckt

    Chuckt New Member

    Likes Received:
    They are also doing "Outsourced Theology". In other words, someone who isn't accountable to you is doing theology in a room somewhere and they are most likely selling it back to your church which means your pastor wouldn't be doing their job and the person they are buying the sermon from are not accountable to your church.

    They don't want to be typecasted. They want to reinvent Christianity to remove consumer resistance.

    In some ways and this is an advanced instruction of mine but they started the religion of Cain:

    Jude 1:11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

    You might not see it for a while if you study it but there are similarities.

    Other people tried this for three decades and admitted they failed. Maybe you need to learn from the past:


    Willow Creek Repents (sort of)

    Having spent thirty years creating and promoting a multi-million dollar organization driven by programs and measuring participation, and convincing other church leaders to do the same, you can see why Hybels called this research "the wake-up call" of his adult life.

    Hybels confesses:
    We made a mistake. What we should have done when people crossed the line of faith and become Christians, we should have started telling people and teaching people that they have to take responsibility to become ?self feeders.' We should have gotten people, taught people, how to read their bible between service, how to do the spiritual practices much more aggressively on their own.

    In other words, spiritual growth doesn't happen best by becoming dependent on elaborate church programs but through the age old spiritual practices of prayer, bible reading, and relationships. And, ironically, these basic disciplines do not require multi-million dollar facilities and hundreds of staff to manage.


  10. rockytopva

    rockytopva Well-Known Member Encounter Team

    Likes Received:
    United States
    There is a big difference between charismatic and pentecostal holiness.

    The pentecostal holiness teach the Wesley methods...

    1. Justification - We are justified by faith.
    2. Salvation - Easy as believing on Jesus
    3. Sanctification - With love and a sweet spirit.
    4. Witness of the Spirit - Pentecostals would take this with tongues.

    With the charismatic movement there is no teaching on sanctification. Some even try to 'teach' people how to speak in tongues. I worry that along with the name change comes a move towards charismatic. In the old Pentecostal school of thought they would teach you to tarry at the altar and seek sanctification. When one got sanctified one was not far away from the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

    The old Pentecostal Holiness crowd were happy and incredibly decent. I have never met a finer people...
  11. clark thompson

    clark thompson Member

    Likes Received:
    United States
    Dropping the name means you no longer have to go by their guidelines this could be a bad thing in most cases but can be good by serving God outside the resrictions.
  12. Enquirer

    Enquirer New Member

    Likes Received:
    1) I have observed this as an increasing trend amongst many of the charismatic churches where I live, everything has become relative to the believer
    or you are told, "but you know that you should walk upright" but they don't teach this.
    Most of the teachings these days are focused on "your prosperity" or the "miraculous".
    In the past year so far I have only heard "one" message on Christ exclusively ... ONE ... and that was from a visiting speaker.

    First "grace" was taught (Joseph Prince), and with it the accompanying message of "no condemnation".
    I must admit I lost it when at one home fellowship meeting one of the members went as far as telling everyone that "we don't have to confess our sins
    any longer and we should not talk about holiness because we might upset someone because we are all under grace" ... and how dare we judge other
    And when I observed how the members present there that evening seemed to lap up that garbage, that was too much for me.

    Well - Lord forgive me - I thoroughly roasted him right there and then, the leader of the group tried to step in and defend him, so I roasted them as well.
    What an uproar, that night gave a whole new meaning to the word "tumult".
    I received a call from one of the associate Pastor's the next day pleading with me that I "take it easy".

    Three months or so later, I was vindicated as the Senior Pastor of our parent church stood up at conference and totally rejected the "no confession of
    sin" grace teaching.

    Just a word to the critics of the charismatic, word of faith movements ... God has his soldiers everywhere.

    2) Teaching people how to speak in tongues ... boy was I shocked when I first saw this ... it was like sandpaper inside my spirit.
    I am yet to confront the person doing this ... it's just a matter of time.
  13. Methinks

    Methinks New Member

    Likes Received:
    On some levels denominations or different flavors of church are a good thing. For instance a church affilliated with a denomination does not need to duplicate infrastructure or get individual permits etc. to be able to send help abroad to international targets.
    Different flavors of church are as necessary in todays society as different makes and models of vehicles to drive.
    On the other hand, it is totally up to the individual church membership group to make certain that they are following and practising the word and intent of God. God does indeed have his soldiers everywhere.
    Christians need to be visible to and in the community where they are living and practising their beliefs.
    There is only one God and it does not really matter what the church that I belong to calls itself as long as that church is truly and deeply aligned with the God of heaven and earth.
  14. Wormwood

    Wormwood Chaps Staff Member

    Likes Received:
    United States
    They are all trying to be like us Independent Christian Church folks! :) Copycats.

    In my grossly lopsided opinion... I think churches are doing this because folks aren't interested in denominational ties. Yet remaining part of a denominational tie and just changing the name is a bit disingenuous in my book. Seems like a bait and switch job to me.
  15. Born_Again

    Born_Again Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Likes Received:
    United States
    I was raised Lutheren but my family changed to Presbyterian when I was about 13ish.... At that age, this is what I saw.... "Wow, the pastor can actually leave the pulpit and walk around??? These guys are more fun and have foose ball table!!!!" So now I'm married with Kids. My wife was raised southern Baptist.... When we started discussing idealology we differed... As I grew in Christ I found we were missing the point..... Niether church seemed to be what God was asking of His people. As of right now, I dont attend any church mostly because I have yet to find one locally that jives with what the scriptures say....

    Quick example, My old church, every Sunday we had what I called the sin of the week. The pastor led us in a prayer for a particular sin and asking for fogiveness. I dont recall commiting half of those sins.... :huh:
  16. HearGod

    HearGod New Member

    Likes Received:
    1) Please show (unless you are unable to do so) one or two verses (not more please) of the gospel which we have preached unto the Galatians (Ahem, and you?).

    2) Please show (unless you are unable to do so) one (not more please) example of this any man that might have preached any other gospel unto the Galatians.

    3) Please show (unless you are unable to do so) one or two verses (not more please) of the other gospel.

    I am a busy man, so I try to avoid reading lengthy preaching (especially nonsensical/unsalted type). Sorry!

    Ephesians 1:22
    And He (God) put all things in subjection under His (Christ) feet, and gave Him (Christ) as head over all things to the church,

    Ephesians 4:12
    for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ;

    Ephesians 5:23
    For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.

    Colossians 1:18a
    He is also the head of the body, the church;


    1 Corinthians 11:3
    But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

    Could someone please answer these questions?

    1) In this case, will it be okay for me to say that, God is the head of the head of the church?

    2) Since Christ is the head of every man, and Christ also is the head of the church, and He is also the head of the body, the church, will it be okay for me to say that, the body, the church is actually every man?

    3) And what is the original Greek given words for the English translated term/words, "the church"? (I.e. A singular feminine [definite] article, "the" and a singular feminine noun, "church.")

    If ass could speak, perhaps Christians (not walls) could talk, no? (No offense! Just for laughs!)
  17. StanJ

    StanJ Lifelong student of God's Word.

    Likes Received:
    I think all churches should have BOC in their name. ;)

    If the trend is away from the denom being identified I think it's for good reason, especially if that particular local assembly doesn't really want to identify itself with a set of doctrines.
  18. Axehead

    Axehead New Member

    Likes Received:
    Form does not guarantee function. Or put another way, dropping a denominational name does not guarantee the Centrality of Christ over men is recovered.

    You can dress up the outside, but the inside may still be man-centered rather than Christ-centered and than spells corruptness.
  19. lforrest

    lforrest Well-Known Member Staff Member Admin

    Likes Received:
    I would prefer just "Church." Nothing before it, nothing after it.
  20. Axehead

    Axehead New Member

    Likes Received:
    That is pretty much what the Bible says, lforrest. I agree. The church at Ephesus, church at Antioch, etc, etc. There is even a church at San Diego, or Houston or New York City, but all the believers are divided and don't see themselves as belonging to a bigger whole. The Church at San Diego is all believers that love Jesus and have departed from iniquity. There are churches across the street from each other that have absolutely no relationship with each other. Something is wrong with that.

    2Ti_2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

    But, everyone is busy conducting spiritual interviews to make sure they are of the same "club" before they hang with someone. We don't test the spirits by asking others which Christian "club" they belong to.