When asked to answer accusation or simple inquiry the churches of Christ generally immediately claim, “We’re not a denomination“. To the unaware, this phrase sounds like they are referring to how church government works (Presbyterian vs. Episcopalian) or perhaps they are referring to worship styles (Charismatic vs Baptist).

When they say, “we are not a denomination,” they mean “we are not a denomination; we are the church described in the Bible.”

A denomination is an apostate.

For the churches of Christ, a denomination is an apostate organization that has split off from the One True Church and is evidenced by characteristics deemed unbiblical by them.

By establishing these human-determined standards, the churches of Christ effectively disqualify all other congregations from being Christ’s One True Church. Any group that diverges from their pattern whether in baptism, worship style, or governance is considered outside the biblical blueprint.

This approach elevates human interpretation above the text itself. The focus shifts from following Christ to following the interpretive conclusions of a particular hermeneutical system. In practice, this means the CoC measures the legitimacy of other churches not by Scripture alone, but by how closely they align with their interpretation of Scripture.

The Purposes Behind Use of The Phrase

• Discrediting outsiders: To signal to other church of Christ members to not listen to the person speaking who is from a denomination. It is part of their social conditioning, to turn off their listening ears. They are asserting internal group boundaries and clearly establishing who is the other. Conversations with outsiders threaten the internal narrative. If the outsider raises a good point, the quickest way to neutralize dissonance is to declare their entire tradition invalid.
• To discredit the source of information: They simply are not accountable to an apostate group of people claiming to be Christian, nor should they be compared with one. No object, question, inquiry, or statement has any validity, truth, or weight.
• Conflict and Rebuke Avoidance: The phrase operates as an escape hatch from having to address content, evidence, or counter-arguments. Rather than dealing with doctrinal substance, the speaker collapses the entire discussion into one category, “we are not a denomination.”
• Self-Affirming Mantra and Hidden Slur to Insult the Hearer: To covertly insult the person, group, or topic they are speaking about. It gives a feeling of moral superiority, almost like a self-affirming mantra one would say in the mirror to cheer oneself up. it is an emotional boost. “We’re not a denomination” means “We’re the only ones faithful enough to refuse denominational tendencies.”
• Control of Interpretive Authority: It sets the epistemic rules before the conversation even starts. They are defining themselves as the ones who have the correct interpretation, the only valid authority of scripture. By framing the situation this way, the churches of Christ position themselves as the sole possessor of valid hermeneutics. They are reframing the discussion to their doctrines and theology, excluding standard Christian doctrines.
• Defense against cognitive dissonance: Cognitive dissonance causes an uncomfortable feeling. They can rid themselves of this feeling quickly by asserting this phrase. “We restored the church, we haven’t added anything.” If the outsider raises a good point, the quickest way to neutralize dissonance is to declare their entire tradition invalid.
  This stops the discomfort before it begins.
• To avoid historical scrutiny: To admit they are a denomination would open the door to uncomfortable questions. Why do we have a name, boundaries, institutions, and shared identity markers? Claiming, we are not a denomination, helps avoid the historical examination that would undermine restorationist exclusivity.
• Reaffirming their belief that outsiders are the apostate: Within their framework, denomination is synonymous with fallen away. So saying “We are not a denomination” is also code for: “We are the remnant; you are the apostasy.” This reinforces the restorationist story without having to retell it. If we are the one true church, then those other guys must be the fallen apostate.
• Maintenance of Social Isolation: If outsiders are categorized as denominational and therefore spiritually unsafe, interaction remains limited to evangelism, not dialogue. This maintains the social bubble that prevents exposure to alternative Christian traditions, scholarship, and church history.

A Response to Fear, Not Delusion

Inside the churches of Christ this phrase is seen as a badge of purity, outsiders see arrogance, delusion or dismissiveness. Outside the churches of Christ, others hear it as a denial of obvious reality, since the group has a shared name, boundaries, doctrines, and identity like any other denomination. It can come across as defensive, dismissive, or isolating. Some perceive it as a way to avoid honest engagement, because the statement shuts down discussion rather than addressing substance. Scholars often see it as a rhetorical strategy, a claim meant to preserve a restorationist narrative rather than a factual description of the group’s structure.

Most of the functions of this phrase are rooted in fear or the avoidance of fear. It calms the fear of being wrong. It protects members from the fear of engaging ideas that might challenge their beliefs. It relieves the fear of historical scrutiny by shutting down questions before they form. It reduces the fear of conflict by ending conversations early. It guards against the fear of cognitive dissonance by dismissing outside perspectives as invalid. It soothes the fear of losing group identity by drawing firm boundaries between insiders and outsiders. It also answers the fear that their interpretive system might not hold up under comparison with the broader Christian tradition.

The phrase is not just a doctrinal claim. It functions as a psychological shield. It reassures members that they are safe, right, faithful, and secure, even when evidence or questions suggest otherwise. In this sense, the statement is less about theology and more about managing fear inside the group.