Some Church History

1watchman · Jan 5, 2015

Some Thoughts On Esteeming God's Revival
By Robert DeWitt, 10/08

Sometimes questions are raised as to how one can know the fellowship that began in 1827 was a work of God, and how one can know an assembly today is true to that. It is certainly important that we endeavor to do that, and seek always to obey and honor the Lord in His universal testimony. I believe several things will help one in this, and we need to look at the beginning as shown in the Word of God (Acts 2:41-42 and the Epistles), as well as church history:

1. Appreciating God's work of revival out of man's failures will please God and honor Him. Any serious study of church history will show the decline after the apostolic period and the rise of ceremony, rituals and rules, a hierarchy, and a sectarian spirit. That can be viewed through the rise of the Roman Catholic Religion in about 500 A.D., and the Protestant Reformation in the 1500's.

After the revival of the true gospel message in circa 1500, when the tyranny of the RC religion was broken, the invention of printing allowed the Bible to begin to circulate everywhere. God then moved to revive Church Truth in the early 1800's, which restored the truth of the Word and the liberty of the Holy Spirit. This ministry was not being taught in the world and had been lost under the tyranny of the Roman papacy. Many saints of God were happy to embrace it. The Protestant denominational systems and sects continued, but some began to include this new teaching of A.D 1827. Some believers quit the man-made sects and followed this so-called "brethren movement", which sought to hold firmly to the Word of God; and which has continued now for over 180 years.

God has only one testimony in the world, according to His Word, and we are called to it, not to "the church (or assembly) of your choice", as many Christians like to say. Some sound Bible and book distributors can provide material on the history and the ministry that came forth from those led of God, and direct one to a scriptural gathering (see addresses below). A study of Miller's Church History--original edition, will also help. The sectarian spirit of man even today is dividing the truth of the "one body of Christ" which God raised up, and it should not be allowed by the saints of God. I will not speak further on that here. The earnest seeker can learn about it from sources stated.

2. Earnest prayer that God will reveal the truth and not allow one to continue to wander and wonder, is extremely important. We must not just depend on our reasoning. We need God's mind on it, which requires one to not defend their place, but be honest and humbly cry to God.

3. Searching the scriptures is essential, of course, for we should not want to go contrary to the plain Word of God. There we see His mind that we be of "one accord" and "together", and with "no schism" in the testimony, following the order given, as in Acts and the epistles.

4. Looking at the origin of a gathering is fundamental. Is it a division group? Was the gathering founded on a man and his will? Is it sectarian; i.e. taking a name, or otherwise setting themselves apart from the scriptural way, and establishing teaching and practices to suit themselves? Down through the years brothers with some academic gift and ability for oratory, have set themselves apart from God's original testimony and have gathered a following (Rom.12:3). The form of gathering is not alone the truth of gathering. "The foundation of God standeth sure" (II Tim.2:19), not the ideas and preferences of men. "God requireth that which is past" (Eccl.3:15), so one ought to judge the matter.

5. God's government must be esteemed. A number of divisions in the "brethren movement" resulted from refusal by one or more to bow to assembly government. They were not just leaving a gathering and some brethren, but God's assembly where the "candlestick" was set by Him (Matt. 18:20; Rev.2:5). This is critical and yet so hard for many to accept. We need spiritual discernment. God's government in His assembly is established with overseers that He appoints to uphold and maintain the truth. No man is perfect, but the work is of God (see Heb.13:7 & 17). There is not always unanimity in a gathering, and "majority rule" is not at all God's way. This is a subject little appreciated and understood by many of the saints, who want to second-guess the elders and have things go their way. We can not pursue it here, but God's government in the assembly should be understood, and the sources below can help.

6. Maintaining the revival. Some of the saints have continued the main line testimony from the recovery of 1827 AD, and have not followed after men. Divisions were not just a scattering, as some say, but a departing from the Lord's table. There were those faithful ones who remained and endured division and held fast. It is not an easy path, for it requires one even in tears to see dear brethren and family members depart, who will not humble themselves (see Matt.10:35-38). God did a great and precious work in the early 1800's to revive Church Truth, and we ought to regard it reverently. Does the reader know of this testimony today? One can see papers on "Brethren" history (contact this writer and sources below).

7. Acting on the truth that is revealed, rather than following friends and a popular path. "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). Many saints do not appreciate that sectarianism is wrong and dishonoring to God, and they feel free to go off and set up their own table and gather a following whenever they please. They will have to answer for that.

ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS ON GATHERING

Most real Christians are interested in redemption way and spiritual life, but do not think much about church truth. The subject of Christian gathering as a local assembly (church) is a fundamental of church truth. Here are some essential questions that ought to be answered, especially in view of the nearness of the Lord's return:

A. Should one care about church truth? If not, then one might just as well close the Word of God and forget about His thoughts and purposes, and continue to do what is pleasing to self.

B. Should one care enough to learn what the church is and should be, according to the Word of God? This requires one to lay aside traditions, rituals, programs, activities, organization; and perhaps friends and relatives (Matt.10:37), to follow the scriptural instruction.

C. Should one appreciate that God has called believers to express the "one body of Christ" in the world, be of "likemind", of "one accord", and "together" according to His Word? Many believers try to have a scriptural assembly independently, but give no thought to the fact that they are forming or joining a sect, and thus adding more division to God's testimony.

D. Should one know (or want to know) about the revival by God in 1827----i.e. a work of God to recover His testimony? To appreciate the movement in the early 1800's one needs to be able to see it as God's revival of His testimony lost after the Apostles' time. God never intended we should go to the so-called "church of your choice". There is only one path given and "one body" in the world. It is according to the Word. Faithful saints will want to maintain that good work God raised up from the ruins, not follow Satan's lies.

E. Should one want to be on the ground of God's revival of church truth and honor and follow His way? There continues to be a faithful testimony (allowing for human failure) which one can know. Would the reader like to be part of that?

F. Should the major divisions in the universal church concern one, or are they acceptable? If the sectarian spirit is acceptable, then there will be no end to further divisions in God's testimony. We must not approve it for one will thus suffer loss at the "Judgment Seat Of Christ".

I realize that some believers are not zealous for the gospel work, some are not zealous for church truth, and some are not zealous for worship and devotion. Jesus is altogether "...the Way, the Truth, and the Life" as He said. These things are all a matter of individual exercise, and God's testimony cannot be faulted for our individual failures. What will one do? - RLD.
[For books, literature, and guidance, contact Bible Truth Publishers, Addison, IL - e-mail: BTPmail@cs.com; or www.bibletruthpublishers.com; one can visit Bible Counsel for sound ministry.]

***********************************************

Post Script: Please note, friends, that such posts as this are intended to offer some thoughts to be of help to readers, and I intend that the contents are scriptural, honoring to God, and in a godly spirit ---whether a paper is my personal opinion or the paper of an esteemed writer.

If one disagrees that is alright with me, and I might answer some questions, but I do not wish to debate issues. I invite contacts by PM (personal message) to discuss matters in depth, for otherwise it all seems to disintegrate into carnal opinions. I hold fast God's Word as my only authority for my Christian faith and not religious ideas of men. Truly I do not want to offend anyone, and I realize that writing is quite different than speaking, and it can leave a wrong impression. We all have our own understandings, but if one is a seeker I would like to help. If I have offended anyone, please write me at my PM and let me know, for I truly do not intend to do that. - 1watchman

Shane R · Jan 6, 2015

That could almost be the writing of a Restorationist/Campbellite. The only point I really agree with is his contention that God does not wish for one to join the church of their choosing; ie. not all churches are equal.

JoshuaDaryl · Jan 6, 2015

Remember Jesus said I came not to bring peace but a
Sword. Families will turn against each other. I believe
that this can be good, because nothing forces one
to search scripture more than trying to defend one's
Position.

Eliakim · Jan 7, 2015

Hello Watchman,

I am not allowed to PM due to not having posted 15 posts here. I wrote a whole letter and it was erased.

To recap:

1) Who were the true Christians before the Reformation? I have read you suggested Miller's Church History, and he names Bogomils and Paulicians - both groups appear to have been very unorthodox if not heretical even by Protestant standards. Are there scholarly views to the contrary?

2) Even if Roman Catholics burned all the evidence, wouldn't God at least preserve some evidence of faithful followers who kept pure doctrine? Or did God not work this way, and simply "put up" with the Roman Catholic errors, while still calling them His people?

3) What's so special about 1827? Is this dispensationalism?

Thanks!
E

JoshuaDaryl · Jan 7, 2015

Eliakim said:
Hello Watchman,

I am not allowed to PM due to not having posted 15 posts here. I wrote a whole letter and it was erased.

To recap:

1) Who were the true Christians before the Reformation? I have read you suggested Miller's Church History, and he names Bogomils and Paulicians - both groups appear to have been very unorthodox if not heretical even by Protestant standards. Are there scholarly views to the contrary?

2) Even if Roman Catholics burned all the evidence, wouldn't God at least preserve some evidence of faithful followers who kept pure doctrine? Or did God not work this way, and simply "put up" with the Roman Catholic errors, while still calling them His people?

3) What's so special about 1827? Is this dispensationalism?

Thanks!
E

Agreed
There were many small church' s
at that time. Furthermore I would never
claim any denomination as the only true
church. Because even during the lives
of the apostles there could be found
error in every church, as well as true
devotion. The thing we have to remember
is that sinful people are involved. The
only way to tell if the church is true is by
Comparing it to word of God

1watchman · Jan 29, 2015

I surely do not believe everyone must join one Christian fellowship to be accepted by God, as some fear, but that God has given ONLY ONE testimony for His Church in the world; that is as shown in a thorough study of Bible teachings. That testimony is lightly esteemed, and a minority in christendom in our day.

I must for myself reject any sects of men that set up other kind of religious systems and organizations to please the ideas of some people; however I love all souls and like to share my values with all. Look up always, friends!

Eliakim · Feb 2, 2015

Watchman,

Why did God keep it all a secret until 1827?

1watchman · Feb 12, 2015

God did not keep Church Truth a secret, Eliakim, but as one can see how history unfolded and man chose His own religious ways, God gave him space and revealed things at the best time. I have several papers on aspects of this, if you would be interested. Feel free to write me.

ViaCrucis · Feb 12, 2015

The "best time" was God Incarnate.

Nothing was revealed in 1827, we have God's Revelation--Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh. And we have His Church, which has been with us these last two thousand years, and it's never been a secret.

False religion looks to new revelation, for us as Christians there is Jesus Christ and His Gospel.

-CryptoLutheran

barryatlake · Feb 12, 2015

Originally Posted by Eliakim View Post
Hello Watchman,

I am not allowed to PM due to not having posted 15 posts here. I wrote a whole letter and it was erased.

To recap:

1) Who were the true Christians before the Reformation? I have read you suggested Miller's Church History, and he names Bogomils and Paulicians - both groups appear to have been very unorthodox if not heretical even by Protestant standards. Are there scholarly views to the contrary?

2) Even if Roman Catholics burned all the evidence, wouldn't God at least preserve some evidence of faithful followers who kept pure doctrine? Or did God not work this way, and simply "put up" with the Roman Catholic errors, while still calling them His people?

3) What's so special about 1827? Is this dispensationalism?

Thanks!
E
Agreed
There were many small church' s
at that time. Furthermore I would never
claim any denomination as the only true
church. Because even during the lives
of the apostles there could be found
error in every church, as well as true
devotion. The thing we have to remember
is that sinful people are involved. The
only way to tell if the church is true is by
Comparing it to word of God
__________________

To put it bluntly with first things first, Jesus never left us a completed bible, so that eliminates "Bible Alone " churches right off the bat. Unless you read Matthew 16 as Jesus proclaims that His Bible and not His Church is protected from "even the gates of hell".
Reading Matt 16:15-19 as it was intended to be understood, we can see that when Jesus said : "my church" He never meant that "my church'' will be understood to be "my churches". And yes it does mean that it is to be understood that "all members" of that one apostolic church { Apostolic because all agree that Jesus formed His Church on His Apostles Luke 10:16 ] would follow the very same Gospel, Doctrinal Teachings [ Matt.28:18-20, Eph.4: 3-6, ] The only "Doctrinal Teachings" that Jesus wants for His Church, was already in place at Pentecost 1ST. Century [ Romans 16:17-18, 1 Cor.1:10 ] Jesus never intended any other doctrine or different teachings within His one church. Jesus never made a mistake with his church, mere protesting men made those many mistakes hundreds of years down the road.

Eliakim · Feb 15, 2015

Watchman,

But what if the real revelation came in 1832 with the merging of Stone and Campbell? How do we know John Nelson Darby's group was the real new "special moment"? Also there might be a new one coming still~

Albion · Feb 15, 2015

Eliakim said:
Watchman,

But what if the real revelation came in 1832 with the merging of Stone and Campbell?

Did Stone or the Campbells claim to be the recipients of some special revelation that drastically altered the Christian religion--in the way that Smith did? I don't think so. They merely concluded that denominationalism was wrong and that they'd do best to emulate the early church, as described in Scripture.

Eliakim · Feb 15, 2015

Barryatlake,

Couldn't "church" mean mystical body of Christ, which includes all the different congregations that put Jesus Christ and no other as their God and Savior? I don't think we need to think like the world, and make a visible church empire with one supreme emperor at the helm...that's very man-like to do that...

Eliakim · Feb 15, 2015

oh also Watchman, do the Brethren usually use the JND Bible or KJV, or some other?

Eliakim · Feb 15, 2015

Albion,

Joseph Smith the mormon? Who said anything about him?

I was comparing the Stone-Campell movement with the Brethren movement since both I believe claim God was working something very special and important at that time, yet if I'm not mistaken these two groups disagree on what God's new movement requires...

Mormons are in a whole different league since they add to the Word of God.

But Brethren claim God did something extremely important in 1827.

But Seventh Day Adventists say He did something important a little later.

So do Stone Campell followers.

And maybe God is still going to show us something important we missed still yet, I suppose, if we follow this sort of thinking.

Seems like a slippery slope. What do you think Watchman?

E

PS: I must add that Phillip Schaff thought God did something amazing too with 1517...so this philosophy of history of God revealing important (salvation essential according to many) things as "progressive revealing of important things" strikes me as a bit off. I don't think God does that. I suppose you could say they aren't "new" things, only recovering lost Apostolic times things, but doesn't that imply that the gates of hell prevailed then???

Albion · Feb 15, 2015

Eliakim said:
I must add that Phillip Schaff thought God did something amazing too with 1517

Of course, the events of 1827 and thereabouts are only a tiny ripple in Christian history whereas the Protestant Reformation--by any standard--was of immense significance, whether one approves of it or not.

Eliakim · Feb 16, 2015

Albion said:
Of course, the events of 1827 and thereabouts are only a tiny ripple in Christian history whereas the Protestant Reformation--by any standard--was of immense significance, whether one approves of it or not.

Well, again, I'm not sure God works like this. Such a progressive philosophy of history is interesting, but it would seem to make us believers insecure in knowing that we have the full revelation already.

No need to wait for a 1827 or a 1832 or even a 2027.

But then again I could be wrong, and maybe God does work like this...

I am coming to believe to be a logical Protestant, one must subscribe to this progressive view of history, otherwise we must discount 1517.

I'm all ears to having a discussion though~
:groupray:

E

Albion · Feb 16, 2015

Eliakim said:
Well, again, I'm not sure God works like this. Such a progressive philosophy of history is interesting, but it would seem to make us believers insecure in knowing that we have the full revelation already.

I should probably have been clearer there than I was. I did not intend to comment on the idea of "progressive revelation" or anything like that but just to note that the Protestant Reformation was truly one of the most consequential events in Western and Christian history, whereas there are hundreds of little events that dot the path and are of significance mainly to the people whose churches or personal value systems owe something to them. IOW, to compare the two as if they were equals or on the same level is really questionable.

barryatlake · Feb 16, 2015

Eliakim, you wrote: " Barryatlake,

Couldn't "church" mean mystical body of Christ, which includes all the different congregations that put Jesus Christ and no other as their God and Savior? I don't think we need to think like the world, and make a visible church empire with one supreme emperor at the helm...that's very man-like to do that...

Eliakim, how could God [ Jesus ] say one thing and then man turns around and tries to attempt change, as in the case of Protestant Reformation, where men along with "another" somewhat changed but never completely abolish what God intended as His Church on earth ? Just pick up your Holy Bible [ even if it's a KJV ] and read from it [ being that is your only sole reference ] in this verse of [Romans 16:17-18 ] " I appeal to you brethren to take note of those who create dissension and difficulties in opposition to the doctrine WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN TAUGHT; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by FAIR AND FLATTERING WORDS they deceive the hearts of the simple -minded. In the preceding verse you can read where the "Doctrinal Teaching " is already administered by Jesus [THEN ] and ONLY to His One church, Jesus never intended any other doctrine accept that doctrine as taught by Jesus to His teaching apostles / successors. To further establish the true fact that Christ's Church was intended to be just ONE VISIBLE AUTHORITATIVE CHURCH [Matt.28: 18-20, Luke 10:16 ] without a multitude of conflicting churches with its members all having their different minds interpreting the Holy Bible with those same different minds we have verse [2 Peter 1: 20, 3: 16 ] [ 1 Cor.1: 10 ] I'm quite sure that most Protestants never intended to insult Jesus by changing His Church into a myriad of churches with different doctrines other than the doctrine that He gave to His Apostolic Church at its conception.

1watchman · Feb 17, 2015

One might see much of the truth of what I have shared, at Bible Counsel. One can ask questions there. Others might prefer all the new innovations of men, but God surely did revive His testimony in that work of 1827 AD, and that testimony continues whether any men choose to accept it. I am only here to share this work, and I will not debate it.

Some of us are glad for that revival and it has proved to be a blessing, and continues worldwide.

Some Church History

Overseer

Priest

Soldier of the Lord

Newbie

Soldier of the Lord

Overseer

Newbie

Overseer

Confessional Lutheran

barryatlake

Guest

Newbie

Facilitator

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Facilitator

Newbie

Facilitator

barryatlake

Guest

Overseer

Similar threads