I like the strong fellowship idea too. I think that churches need to show a united presence in a community, no matter what the denominational flavour.

@EcclecticChristian Your points are well noted. I think where you and I would largely differ is that I would prefer a church that has strong fellowship with the other churches in the area (to avoid grossly aberrant doctrine) as opposed to a church that has “strong oversight” from a democratically elected denomination board. Part of the reason I feel this way is that the bigger an organization becomes, the slower it moves. While denominational machines are very useful for churning out support for missionaries, great pastor’s conferences and rousing denomination meetings, it can also hinder the work of Christ.
Practical example: a couple that I have been good friends with for a very long time have felt like God has called them to the mission’s field. However, they could not get financial support from their home church, or any churches in that denomination because they were not “licensed” by the denomination’s seminary. Structure and organization are not bad, but they can be unhelpful when they reach critical mass.
And we are definitely agreed about smaller churches burning out the membership.

Thanks for stopping by. You have some very wonderful poetry by the way.

To answer a few of your questions…

Many of my recent posts have been along the lines of making church statistics more understandable for people. I have had quite a few comments appreciating the fact that I have let the data speak for itself, rather than dwell on the commentary.

That being said, seeing as you asked…

I do value denominations. I am very hesitant to get involved in a church that does not have strong oversight, and I find that this is more likely to happen in a denominational church than an independent one. I do however decry the number of denominations out there and am very appreciative of the number of movements encouraging them to work together.

You note that you don’t see “see church growth as any kind of indicator of a church’s spiritual health”. I agree up to a point. I think a lack of growth over an extended period of time does show that there is likely a spiritual issue that needs to be addressed. Why are we not fulfilling the great commission?

My biggest concerns with small churches, is that they can have a tendency to burn people out. I was in one small church where I was an elder, on the search committee for a new Pastor, worship leader, youth group leader, and Sunday school teacher. This was not healthy for me and my family. Yet, no matter how hard we tried, because of a lack of common vision, the church did not grow. I thought many times how much more effective I might have been for the kingdom if my energies were used elsewhere in a larger church.

It is basically the same theology, in a different package.

I think that is more accurate.

Non-denominationalism is dishonest from the git-go.

They are saying that they do not stand for anything? They value nothing?

To denominate is to place value on something.

The Baptist Church is honest anout their free will, decision theology. They are honest that they do not value infant baptism or believe that the Lord is actually present in the Sacraments.

Non-denominationalism believes those things as well. But they won’t call themselves Baptists (even though that is their theology).

They are selling themselves as anti-tradional church. But they hold most of the same traditions as the Baptist Church. Almost every non-denom. church (in my area anyway) had its roots as a Baptist church.