Why Everyone Else is a Denomination

[Evangelical]

I thought this post by Terry in the other thread should be addressed:

Originally Posted by Terry

I have heard no sound argument to refute why everyone else is a denomination, but not the local churches. Exact as the local churches speak, there are many fellowship of churches that regard as everyone else as denominations but not themselves. You have Exclusive Brethren, Iglesia Ni Christo, International Church of Christ, etc.
Rebuttals please.

Let's go back to basics, the very word denomination itself. The word denomination comes from root word "to name", it really means de-name-iation. As soon as a group names itself, it becomes a de-name-iation. That's the difference.

Now someone might say, "it's just a name, sticks and stones", but consider, that to name something is to classify something according to that name.

For example, I have a bag of apples. 5 are green and 10 are red. I name them the bag of "green apples" and "red apples". When I look at the bag I no longer see them as apples, I see their color. The next thing I do is to separate them into separate bags, and label one bag "green apples", and the other "red apples". I divided the apples and it started with me naming them according to their color.

To classify means:

arrange (a group of people or things) in classes or categories according to shared qualities or characteristics.

To classify things means to divide them into groups or types so that things with similar characteristics are in the same group. (https://www.collinsdictionary.com/di...glish/classify).

Names by themselves, they are just names. But a name is a classification according to some characteristics. And a classification is a division.

See the problem with names now? And everyone knows that names matter for babies and marriages, but how come Christians think they don't matter for churches?

Clearly, a denomination has to do with names, or classifying believers, that invariably leads to their division.

What is the Biblical proof that naming or classifying the church is wrong?

Actually, it is okay to name or classify the church, otherwise how could we refer to anyone? But the only classification that the Bible gives a church is its locality eg Corinth and refers to the Christians in that place by their locality name e.g. "the Corinthians". So this is not a matter of right or wrong, but whether we want to use the biblical naming system or a man-made naming system?

Bible - no record of the apostles e.g. Paul ever addressing a church by a name other than locality. Could he have? Sure. Did he? No. Why? Because there's only one church, naming groups of believers by their nonessential characteristics didn't make much sense. Naming a church according to their particular heresy or failure didn't make much sense either.

History - all "denominations" in the early church were heretics. eg Judaizers, gnostics etc.
A good overview of denominations through the ages here:
http://www.astudyofdenominations.com/overview/

This idea of naming the church has resulted in other concepts which are not found in the Bible:

"Finding a (good, suitable, pentecostal, friendly, biblical (insert any other de-name-iating characteristics here) ) church"

Ecumenism - different denominations coming together to pretend they are not denominations. The next Sunday, go back to de-name-iating themselves.