Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
There must be a valid reason as to why churches feel the need to name themselves by something other than Christ or just Christian. And I maintain that this reason is a divisive spirit which the Bible spoke against. It is because they feel they are different from the others, when in reality they are the same.
|
Names are simply for identification. A name does not imply an essential difference, it implies an instance difference.
Community church has basically the same meaning as local church. It means a church that serves the community in which it resides. This is actually the meaning of "local church" Nee put forth originally in TNCCL. He pointed out that one church in London was impractical and that localities could be considered being the different neighborhoods and communities within the city. These days it's shorthand for a church which is usually non-denominational, general in beliefs, and non-strident in its approach to non-essentials.
Again, you must see that your view of oneness and division is simply your view. It's your opinion. You have not demonstrated that the Bible prescribes what you believe. I think you need to consider that your insistence on your interpretation of what oneness is and how churches should describe themselves can be just as divisive as any other doctrine someone might intractably insist upon and condemn others for not adhering to.
I believe the best course of action is to encourage generality and unity among believers and let that attitude grow and take its natural course. I've seen much progress in the last twenty years and am convinced if unity happens that's the way it is going to happen. I don't believe your approach is going to accomplish much.
You still have not defined "denomination."