Just ask these people who knew better that one should eschew all those bad churches that were teaching "traditions of men" and needed to just go by the Bible alone and that the Holy Spirit guide them completely:
Church of God (Anderson):
"
The history of the Church of God (Anderson) begins in 1881 with Daniel Sidney Warner and several others.[2] Warner had been a member of John Winebrenner's General Eldership of the Church of God, whose members were called Winebrennerians. He differed with the Winebrennerians on the doctrine of sanctification,[3] which he held to be a second definite work of grace, and on the nature of the church. The desire of Warner and the others was to forsake denominationalism and creeds. To this end, they determined to trust in the Holy Spirit as their guide and the Bible as their creed. Warner's vision was that the Church of God would "extend our hand in fellowship to every blood-washed one", rather than align themselves with a movement."
Church of God (Restoration):
"
The group believes that they are ordained by both prophecy and Divine command to restore the church of God as it was in the Book of Acts, and believes that it alone is the only true church.[3] Most of Daniel Layne's beliefs in Revelation originated from some ministers who had left the Church of God (Anderson) reformation movement thirty or so years earlier. This teaching is upheld by the official eschatology, which is a form of church historicism. This Church of God (Restoration)[4] teaches that the 7th Trumpet in the book of the Revelation began to sound around the year 1980 when Daniel Layne was saved, alleging that there was a general discontent among many of its current adherents that were in various Churches of God at that time."
Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement:
"
The Restoration Movement has been characterized by several key principles:
- Christianity should not be divided, Christ intended the creation of one church.[7]:38[13]
- Creeds divide, but Christians should be able to find agreement by standing on the Bible itself (from which they believe all creeds are but human expansions or constrictions)[14]
- Ecclesiastical traditions divide, but Christians should be able to find common ground by following the practice (as best as it can be determined) of the early church.[15]:104–6
- Names of human origin divide, but Christians should be able to find common ground by using biblical names for the church (i.e., "Christian Church", "Church of God" or "Church of Christ" as opposed to "Methodist" or "Lutheran", etc.).[8]:27"
Stone-Campbel denominations:
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ):
"
The name, Disciples of Christ, is shared by two groups, The Churches of Christ and the independent Christian churches and churches of Christ. They emerged from the same roots.[4] The Stone-Campbell movement began as two separate threads, each without knowledge of the other, during the Second Great Awakening in the early 19th century. The first of these two groups, led by Barton W. Stone began at Cane Ridge, Bourbon County, Kentucky. The group called themselves simply Christians. The second, began in western Pennsylvania and Virginia (now West Virginia), led by Thomas Campbell and his son, Alexander Campbell. Because the founders wanted to abandon all denominational labels, they used the biblical names for the followers of Jesus that they found in the Bible.[5]"
Churches of Christ:
"
Churches of Christ are autonomous Christian congregations associated with one another through common beliefs and practices. They seek to base doctrine and practice on the Bible alone. They teach that they are the church written in scripture. They teach that any individual, from the time that the Church began until now, can become part of that church by hearing the truth, believing the truth, repenting from their ways to God's ways, confessing that Jesus in the Bible is Christ, and being baptized for the remission of their sins.
Historically, Churches of Christ in the United States have roots in the American Restoration Movement, and were recognized as a distinct religious group by the U.S. Religious Census of 1906. Prior to that all congregations associated with the Restoration Movement had been reported together by the Census Bureau. The Restoration Movement began on the American frontier during the Second Great Awakening of the early 19th century under the leadership of Thomas and Alexander Campbell, Walter Scott, and Barton W. Stone. Those leaders had declared their independence from their Presbyterian roots, seeking a fresh start to restore the New Testament church, and abandoning creeds. They did not see themselves as establishing a new church. Rather, the movement sought the restoration of the church and "the unification of all Christians in a single body patterned after the church of the New Testament."[2]:54 The names "Church of Christ," "Christian Church" and "Disciples of Christ" were adopted by the movement because they believed these terms to be biblical.
A division occurred between those who used musical instruments in worship (now usually known as the Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ) and those who chose to sing a cappella because the use of instruments is not mentioned in the New Testament. The congregations in the a cappella tradition are the subject of this article. While the most visible distinction between the two groups was the rejection of musical instruments in the Churches of Christ, other issues also contributed to the separation. One was a disagreement over the appropriateness of organizational structures above the congregational level such as missionary societies.[3] Another was a difference in the underlying approach to Biblical interpretation. For the Churches of Christ, practices not present in accounts of New Testament worship were not permissible in the church, and they could find no New Testament documentation of the use of instrumental music in worship. For the Christian Churches, any practices not expressly forbidden could be considered.[4]:242–247 Though officially recognized as distinct movements from 1906, the actual separation of the Churches of Christ from the Christian Churches had already been taking place gradually for decades."
International Christian Church:
"
The International Christian Church was formed in 2006 by Kip McKean[4] after his split with the International Churches of Christ. He sent out a mission team to begin a new congregation in Phoenix, Arizona, in 2006 and then led a team to Los Angeles in 2007 to start the City of Angels International Christian Church. Each member is expected to give 10% of their income to the church. Additionally there are two "Special Mission Contributions" during the year which each member is expected to financially support."
Here are a few more:
The Worldwide Church of God
Philadelphia Church of God
Restored Church of God
Assemblies of Yahweh
House of Yahweh
Two-by-Twos
Local Churches
Churches of Jesus Christ International
I'm of course barely scratching the surface.
Before anyone thinks my purpose here is to badmouth Christians who belong to any of these, no that's not what I'm doing.
General Theology, lately, has been bombarded by a host of "EVERYONE IS WRONG, HERE LET ME SHOW YOU HOW TO HAVE REAL CHRISTIANITY!" threads that basically say the same as we've all heard a thousand times before: denominations are bad, just use the Bible, the Holy Spirit will guide you to the fullness of the truth.
The thing that people who say these things continually ignore is that they aren't the first person to say this. Just take a glance at history over the last two hundred years. Everytime someone comes along and says these things, decides to go "Bible alone, the Holy Spirit will lead me" and start a church with these principles the result is a brand new denomination. Sometimes (oftentimes) the denomination will say it's not a denomination at all. And then people usually come along and go "Well Founder Bob certainly got it halfway right, but he didn't read the Bible quite right, so I really think it should be done this way instead" and--shockingly--a brand new denomination.
Oh, but perhaps you--person reading this getting mad because you have been saying these same things and don't like what I'm writing about here--are very different. Perhaps you, unlike all these other folks, really do have it right. You're not going to start a new denomination, no of course not. You're just going to start a Bible fellowship based solely on the what the Bible alone says. And if people at your Bible fellowship disagree with you, it's because they don't understand the Bible correctly because they aren't humbling themselves to the Holy Spirit and Christ's gentle voice. Certainly these members of this fellowship you have helped start would never--oh, never mind. Looks like they started a new Bible fellowship next door.
-CryptoLutheran
If I may add, I do think what you said was very much on point. However, what I've also noted is that people within the same vein as the camps you noted also have people either supporting them or joining against them who claim to be from Liturgical traditions - and yet those people will also hold positions which are actually radically opposed to both Christ and Christianity in ways that even Restoration groups would oppose.
I am reminded of how there were multiple times in the past where you'd have people in battles over the topic you noted and people would jump in who were Catholic or Anglican denouncing those groups as unbiblical and yet they would be supporting demonic systems such as
Freemasonry - things which even the groups you mentioned would be against just as other Liturgical groups have called out within their ranks when others try to critique groups outside of their camp while also holding to demonic ideologies within the camp. This happens a lot without people even knowing it when critiquing the groups you listed and yet not even realizing that they are a part of a country built on ungodly principles or ideologies based on groups which had the same mindsets (more shared
here and
here)....
And yes, those things are massive problems all around. Much of the U.S was already founded on Restorationist principles, including the idea that the U.S itself was "the New Israel" and other ideas that justified all manner of mess in the name of "a City on a Hill" (As was the case with the Puritans when they came over with their "errand in the wilderness" and had to justify their existence in the New World by pitting themselves against all others). Mormons did the same thing based on Restorationist ideology - even when waging war with multiple other groups, as shared in
Mormonism & War: Why do Christians claim Mormonism is Peaceful despite its history?
That said....
There are many wonderful things that have developed which we should keep in mind when it comes to the Restorationist groups....
Restoration Movement in its History, Beliefs, and Practices (including those today considering themselves to be Neo-
Restorationists or things like the
Campbellite and Restorationist traditions in the South - and other places involving
Restorationists )
With positive things coming out of the Restorationist camp, I'm reminded of the Welsh Revival of 1904-05, as most focus on Azuza Street (itself birthed out a view that it was the "END TIMES" and the last move of the Holy Spirit was to happen in their days.."latter rain") as if that was the sole revival/movement developing at the time when in fact there were various others that had impact...connecting with the Pentecostal Movement as well.
Some coming to mind are ones such as Evan Roberts, as he is acknowledged by many Christians as the first charismatic leader of the 20th century, and among his legacies is the Apostolic Church, whose founders were inspired by this great revival. ....and in many ways, the Azuza Street Revival and Pentecostalism did not arise in a vaccum. There were things precedding it---all of it connected with the Restorationist movement (even as it concerns the aspect
of restoranist house churches) - and as it concerns variations of that today, its always amazing to see how they have developed in other parts of the world. Smith Wigglesworth is one who comes to mind----for he was a British by-product of the Pentecostal Revival in the States, by way of A.A. Boddy and his wife, Mary. Their centre in Sunderland was one early manifestation of the growing desire for power in ministry. ..and behind Sunderland lay the experiences of the Welsh revival (1903-5) and of course the Keswick meetings.
There are other works where Jenkins does some good investigative history on the development of groups that he discussed in his "The New Christendom" book. One of them is known as
"Mystics and messiahs : cults and new religions in American history" . I was able to get at the library by Jenkins/review it--and it goes into good detail about the history of cults within the U.S...and seeing how they have evolved.
Within it, Jenkins profiles some of the more famous new American religions, such as Mormonism - but he also examines some lesser-known groups, such as the House of David. Its interesting to witness how religious tolerance is still challenging today...for where some contend that we are in a unprecedented era of new "cults" and "heterodoxy", it can be easily forgotten how the American religious landscape has always been filled with new faiths dismissed in their time as deviant. As Charles Ferguson observed in 1928, "America has always been the sanctuary of amazing cults." ..but America has also been the home of an often hysterical anti-cult backlash. Jenkins provided some insightful analysis of why cults arouse such fear and hatred both in the secular world and in mainstream churches, many of which--Baptists, Quakers, Pentecostals, and Methodists--were themselves originally regarded as cults. I enjoyed learning of the many instances where the very religious movements that were once denounced as new faiths produce the leaders who in turn denounce the faiths that come after them.
And with the Restorationist camp, they do exactly as their grandparent - the Reformation - did when it comes to demanding for freedom to believe as they wish....and yet wanting to say that their own existence is to be the END of development since it is often seen in many camps coming out of the Restorationist camp that they are the fulfillment of truth.
With the Restorationist camp, we also have people that came out of it such as John Darby and his views on Dispensationalism (
many of which were corrupt in addition to the fact that many things Darby did were indeed oppressive to others disagreeing ) - and from him came Plymoth Brethren (including
all the splits in the groups of Brethern that followed) and others. And it may continue onward.
The Reformation had many beautiful things going for it and I do believe the Lord worked in it -
but it also had a dark side which set the stage for a lot of mess (more shared
here and
here/
here)...and we have to be honest with that. For other places to investigate which may be beneficial:
Just stating the obvious!
