The CoC's view of baptism

Thedictator · Jul 17, 2018

bbbbbbb said:
If, indeed, what you say is true, then you would extend the hand of fellowship to all of the (so-called) Plymouth Brethren who are, indeed, independent autonomous congregations. However, as it actually is, even those fellowships which can clearly trace their origins to your own are frequently rejected. One of the simplest reasons for rejection within your movement is the usage of instrumental accompaniment in congregational singing.

Until you actually and truly embrace all Christians as equal to you in Christ, then you will remain one among a multitude of denominations in Christendom.

How much fellowship one has with other Christians depends on each congregation. Some are ecumenical and some are not at all. We can not Embrace All Christians because of Doctrine.
Some Christians Believe:
1. or do not believe in the trinity
2. That Jesus is Satan's brother
3. That Jesus is not God
4. That the Bible is not God's Word
5. Do not believe in the Lord's Supper (communion)
6. believe in Baptism at all
7. That Angels are equal to God
8. That is Church is Unnecessary and not needed.
9. That non-Christian Religion is equal to Christianity
10. That God was a one time a man
11. Do not believe that there is a Holy Spirit
12. That Man is equal with God.
There are a 1000 or more Christian doctrines that I and my fellowship can not except. As for the instrumental accompaniment in congregational singing that is not as big of a deal as the above statements with me and many of my fellow bothers. We do not exclude anyone from fellowship with us they exclude themselves from fellowship with us by their man-made doctrines.

Thedictator · Jul 17, 2018

bbbbbbb said:
Here are my answers:

1. Now are you saying that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is not needed for Salvation just because there is work involved?? No, I have never said any such thing.
2. What about the Work of the Cross? Please clarify. Do you mean taking up one's cross and following Jesus?
3. Is the work of Believing in Jesus Christ needed for Salvation? No

Now I have three questions for you, as follow:

1. When can a person know with absolute certainty that they are saved?
2. When can a person know with absolute certainty that they have lost their salvation?
3. When can a person who has lost his salvation know with absolute certainty that he has regained his salvation?

I look forward to your answers. Thank you.

You just said that because there is work being done by humans in baptism it can't a part of salvation and then turned around and said the opposite about the Gospel.

So you believe you do not have to believe in Jesus Christ to be saved? Ok

My answers to you
1. Acts 2:38
2. a person can be lost and not know it ( 1 Timothy 4:1 ) but some people know that they have turned away from God and went back into the World. ( 1 John 1:6) (2 John 1:8)
3. 1 John 1:7, 1 John 5:14, If you are already a Christian pray to God for forgiveness.

notreligus · Aug 10, 2018

This group was originally part of the Redstone Baptist Association. Thomas and Alexander Campbell, Presbyterians within a Baptist group, were invited to leave and to stop trying to change the doctrine of the Redstone Baptist Association. The followers of the Campbells, the Campbellites, officially joined with the followers of Barton Stone, the Stoneites, in 1842, in Lexington, Kentucky, and Alexander Campbell named the group the Disciples of Christ. David Lipscomb opposed the use of musical instruments in worship services and the southern Disciples still held onto Civil War sentiments against the northern Disciples congregations and Lipscomb led a new splinter group formed from the Disciples, in 1906, and this was called the Churches of Christ.

The Independent Christian Church also came out of the Disciples as a group who did not agree with the Disciples having a headquarters and hierarchy so they moved on as a third group formed from the Disciples. Until the mid-60's the Christian Church and Churches of Christ were thought of as one group, except the Christian Church believed there was nothing wrong with using a mechanical instrument such as a piano during worship. The Churches of Christ rely mostly on tradition but claim that instruments are "not authorized" by the Bible so they should not be used.

When Alexander Campbell came to America in the early 1800s he still believed that infant baptism was proper. Over time the New Presbyterians convinced him otherwise.

notreligus · Aug 10, 2018

The largest Christian Church is Southeast Christian Church in Louisville, Kentucky with well over 25,000 members. It's probably close to 30,000 now with all of the new campuses. They used to belong to the Evangelical Willow Creek Association. They serve communion each service - Saturday and Sunday services - and require immersion baptism for membership but do not teach that water baptism is for salvation. In the past it was common that Christian Churches (and Churches of Christ) claim that one could not be saved without water baptism.

Thedictator · Aug 10, 2018

notreligus said:
This group was originally part of the Redstone Baptist Association. Thomas and Alexander Campbell, Presbyterians within a Baptist group, were invited to leave and to stop trying to change the doctrine of the Redstone Baptist Association.

It's a good thing that the Campbells left the Smithers (also known as Baptist) because the Smithers were throttled with heresy.

notreligus · Aug 11, 2018

Thedictator said:
It's a good thing that the Campbells left the Smithers (also known as Baptist) because the Smithers were throttled with heresy.

Walter Scott was one of those Baptists. Barton Stone was a Unitarian. Alexander Campbell claimed that his teachings would usher in the Millennium and the return of Christ. The problem with Campbell's teaching on that was the Civil War came along and showed that his prophetic words were wrong. It was no accident that his monthly newsletter was called The Millennial Harbinger.

Campbell’s Millennium

From page 124 of The Encyclopedia of the Stone-Campbell Movement:

Campbell expected "great changes in the world" that would bring about the "amelioration" of society as well as the church. In a series on "Millennium" beginning with the first issue of his new Journal (January 1830), he identified the changes he anticipated. It included the triumph of Christianity over the world, the end of sectarianism, and the union of Christians. It would be a time of extended prosperity around the world, and not necessarily limited to a literal 1,000 years. Wars would cease, and peace and goodwill would generally prevail. The Jews would turn to Jesus Christ as the Messiah. The weather would be mild. Crimes and punishment would cease. Health would be more vigorous, labor less arduous, lands more fertile. The knowledge of the Lord would cover the earth as the waters cover the sea. America, his adopted country, would be its epicenter.

These were his expectations when at age 41 he began The Millennial Harbinger. Not only was a millennium on the horizon, but his journal was its harbinger. He was not only announcing its coming, but was an agent of its arrival.

notreligus · Aug 14, 2018

Sources of Alexander Campbell's doctrine still available, read and taught in Restoration Movement schools, including those of the Churches of Christ: The Living Oracles, Campbell's personal edition of the New Testament; The Christian System, Campbell's summary of his theological views; and, The Millennial Harbinger, monthly newsletters published for many years and available to download as a PDF. None of these have been banned. To say that Campbell doctrine is not taught today is not factually true. Over many years I have experienced that Churches of Christ nearly deny that the Campbell's existed but the other sister churches of the Restoration Movement do not. They're not afraid of the fact that their churches are not direct descendants of the first century church. The first Christian church, called The Way, was made up of Jews who left the leadership of Moses and came under the authority of Christ.

Albion · Aug 14, 2018

notreligus said:
I was born into a Restoration Movement family. I have over 40 years of experience with Christian and Church of Christ congregations. I attended a Christian Church/Churches of Christ Bible college (Master's Program). Campbellite is a word used in many books about the history of Christianity in America. Perhaps you've not done much reading about your own church history. I have. I can provide a long list to you. You should consider buying a copy of The Encyclopedia of the Stone Campbell Movement, with writings by Disciples of Christ, Christian Church, and Churches of Christ theologians.

You are threatening me. Are you a moderator? You should not try to bully me when I'm stating these things in a historically correct manner.

You can report the state of Ohio. They use Campbellite as a proper historical term, which is exactly what it is. Your opinion is not a fact.

Would it be correct to say that Campbellite is a term that people who are part of the Restorationist movement dislike, much as Catholics want their church not to be called a denomination (although it is) and Baptists often claim that they are not Protestants (although they are)?

A lot of organizations have their own jargon that is used internally, but that doesn't mean that everyone else is wrong for using the standard terminology.

This is the first time I have heard Campbellite described as a slur. I took it to be similar to Lutheran, Wesleyan, Swedenborgian, or Calvinist.

Albion · Aug 14, 2018

Thedictator said:
There are plenty of words and phrases that can be used like Restoration Movement which we want to be called.

What are some of those?

Thedictator · Aug 14, 2018

Albion said:
Would it be correct to say that Campbellite is a term that people who are part of the Restorationist movement dislike, much as Catholics want their church not to be called a denomination (although it is) and Baptists often claim that they are not Protestants (although they are)?

A lot of organizations have their own jargon that is used internally, but that doesn't mean that everyone else is wrong for using the standard terminology.

This is the first time I have heard Campbellite described as a slur. I took it to be similar to Lutheran, Wesleyan, Swedenborgian, or Calvinist.

As far as I know those Churches either want to be called that or do not mind the being called that. Most people in the Restoration Movement want to be called followers of Jesus Christ ONLY, and no a follower of some leader of past movement. Yes to some people Campbellite is a slur. I have been a member of The three major Churches ( Disciples of Christ, Christian Church, Churches of Christ) in the Restoration Movement and none of them ever used this term to describe themselves.

Albion · Aug 14, 2018

Thedictator said:
As far as I know those Churches either want to be called that or do not mind the being called that.

That's the case NOW. Those churches finally accepted what had been considered a putdown earlier, so hardly anyone thinks of those words as slurs today.

Most people in the Restoration Movement want to be called followers of Jesus Christ ONLY, and no a follower of some leader of past movement. Yes to some people Campbellite is a slur. I have been a member of The three major Churches ( Disciples of Christ, Christian Church, Churches of Christ) in the Restoration Movement and none of them ever used this term to describe themselves.

OK, but I was hoping that when you said there are "plenty" of acceptable alternatives, you had in mind more than just these two.

While I am more than happy to adjust, I hope you realize that Restoration Movement doesn't work in most cases ("I'm a Baptist but I married a nice lady who is a Restorationist Movement". Really?) and Follower of Jesus Christ doesn't distinguish those three churches you named from 40,000 other ones.

Maybe this is why the term Campbellite survives--if those are the other choices.

Thedictator · Aug 14, 2018

Albion said:
What are some of those?

One of our central belief's is that we ONLY follow Jesus Christ and his teachings. Why should we accept a term or name that attacks that central belief.

I have heard names or terms used like: Non-creedal Church, American Reform, American non-denominational, Christian Church, Disciples of Christ, Christian, Churches of Christ, Bible only Churches, New Testament Church, Christ only Church, or just Restoration Movement.

As for as I know no one has objected of these names, and many are used a great deal within the movement.

Albion · Aug 14, 2018

Thedictator said:
One of our central belief's is that we ONLY follow Jesus Christ and his teachings. Why should we accept a term or name that attacks that central belief.

I don't think you should. I just wanted a term to use that is parallel to the terms that most other Christians use for their affiliations (Baptist, Anglican, Methodist, Unitarian, etc.).

I have heard names or terms used like: Non-creedal Church, American Reform, American non-denominational, Christian Church, Disciples of Christ, Christian, Churches of Christ, Bible only Churches, New Testament Church, Christ only Church, or just Restoration Movement.

Those are terms that refer to certain church bodies or groups or denominations. We cannot say "I'm an Anglican, he's a Mormon, and my online friend Thedictator is a New Testament Church."

However, it is fair to point out that some well-known denominations also leave us with this problem--United Church of Christ, Evangelical Covenant Church, etc.

Anyway, you raised an interesting point that I had never thought about, so thanks for your time with the follow-up.

Truthfrees · Aug 15, 2018

MOD HAT

posts have been removed

please discuss the topic and not each other or mods or reporting each other

report posts without announcing it in the thread

Thedictator · Aug 15, 2018

Truthfrees said:
MOD HAT

posts have been removed

please discuss the topic and not each other or mods or reporting each other

report posts without announcing it in the thread

sorry, will do

Thedictator · Aug 15, 2018

notreligus said:
This group was originally part of the Redstone Baptist Association. Thomas and Alexander Campbell, Presbyterians within a Baptist group, were invited to leave and to stop trying to change the doctrine of the Redstone Baptist Association. The followers of the Campbells, the Campbellites, officially joined with the followers of Barton Stone, the Stoneites, in 1842, in Lexington, Kentucky, and Alexander Campbell named the group the Disciples of Christ. David Lipscomb opposed the use of musical instruments in worship services and the southern Disciples still held onto Civil War sentiments against the northern Disciples congregations and Lipscomb led a new splinter group formed from the Disciples, in 1906, and this was called the Churches of Christ.

The Independent Christian Church also came out of the Disciples as a group who did not agree with the Disciples having a headquarters and hierarchy so they moved on as a third group formed from the Disciples. Until the mid-60's the Christian Church and Churches of Christ were thought of as one group, except the Christian Church believed there was nothing wrong with using a mechanical instrument such as a piano during worship. The Churches of Christ rely mostly on tradition but claim that instruments are "not authorized" by the Bible so they should not be used.

When Alexander Campbell came to America in the early 1800s he still believed that infant baptism was proper. Over time the New Presbyterians convinced him otherwise.

The CoC's view of baptism

Retired Coach, Now Missionary to the World

Retired Coach, Now Missionary to the World

Member

Member

Retired Coach, Now Missionary to the World

Member

Member

Facilitator

Facilitator

Retired Coach, Now Missionary to the World

Facilitator

Retired Coach, Now Missionary to the World

Facilitator

Well-Known Member

Retired Coach, Now Missionary to the World

Retired Coach, Now Missionary to the World

Similar threads