My name is André Ferreira (21) member of a local church vinculated to the non-institucional branch of the Churchs of Christ in São Paulo-SP, Brazil, and I need to say that I'm astunished by the quality, impartiality and precision of your work; and I'm saying that not just regarding this specific video - so important for me and for a Church that forgets so easily his own history - but of all the videos of your channel. Well job; keep going with your excelent work. May God bless you richely.
As an ordained, fifth generation member of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), I commend you for this concise summary of our history of mergers and subsequent sad divisions. Thank you!
@@toomanyhobbies2011 Please check your assumptions. I sensed a call to ministry as early as third grade, and my prayers and the prayers of many faithful people continued to guide me the whole way. And while I was formally ordained within the Disciples of Christ, it was with the leading of the Holy Spirit, and not done without decades of preparation, study, prayer and discernment. None of that in any way puts me "above" other believers. If anything it reminds me at every turn that I am chief among sinners, but have heard the call of God to serve God's people with God's help and to the best of my knowledge and ability. Pray for me.
If you can read , read Romans 1: 16 , I Corinthians 15: 1-4 and 1Corinthians 12 :13 where it is the Holy Spirit that baptizes a believer into the Body or Christ .
@@VVeremoose Rất đúng câu xưa để lại học thầy phản bạn để nưng đỡ nhau đánh lừa giáo dân chúa kết tội ai bao giờ khônghcm học từ nước ngoài về lợi dụng sự độc tài ích kỷ đóng cửa dạy bảo nhau cùng nhân dân hướng đến tương lai nếu địa chủ theo tàu thì được bình yên ngày này người Trung Quốc am hiểu Tây phương rất nhiều chiến tranh nào lại không chăm sóc cho dân tộc ấy vươn lên trong sự bất công chúa soi sáng cho hcm chống lại bọn sống Tây trong tội lỗi cũng dân tộc ta nhân tài từ nước ngoài trở về Nga Xô tiết lộ mọi điều cần thiết thay đổi cuộc đời hcm vậy mọi người hãy học hỏi để trở thành lợi ích chung của tôn giáo dân tộc trong mọi sắc tộc trên thế giới hiểu biết tôn trọng nhau Đi tu là phải cạo trọc để người ta xem được trí tuệ bên trong hơn là trờ tóc rụng để biết đến cái tóc cái tội hcm gieo cho tương lai của trẻ em tạ ơn chúa Amen...X
Let me start by saying, I have been to many churches in my 75 years. The one thing they all have in common, they believe they are right and everyone else is wrong. I love the Lord and talk to Him often, not only as my savior, but as a friend. I have read the Bible many times and the one thing that stands out, is that Jesus loves us enough to die on the cross. The outstanding rule is to love God with all your heart, mind and body. Also to love your neighbor as yourself. Why do humans insist on adding so many rules?
I really enjoy watching your videos. I'm now evangelical Anglican, but I grew up in a fundamentalist KJV Baptist church. So your frame of reference works well for me. But mainly I appreciate the fact you present the information in a fair and even-handed manner. I always feel informed. Your videos wouldn't appeal to me at all if they were just a bunch of screeds against non-fundamentalists.
Thanks Phillip. I believe half of the problem that causes the screed-type videos people make is that they are generally given from an position that misrepresents "the other side", who ever that happens to be. So if everyone is better informed on who "the other side" really is, I hope this can raise the level of discussion somewhat - even if the disagreement remains. I plan to keep making these videos as long as people keep watching!
As a graduate of a Restoration Movement affiliated Bible College who had his minor in history (and much of that church history), and a Minister in the "Churches of Christ and Christian Churches" for nearly 25 years, I learned something from this video I hadn't heard before. Thanks.
Well presented. Non-institutional churches of Christ are not opposed to non church organizations but rather supporting them with church funds; individuals are free to support any ministry. Also the non hierarchical structure means that division and unity within these churches (except for the Disciples) becomes murky. The division of 1904 was only due to the US census making it "official". Likewise many moves toward unity have taken place but are all "unofficial". This was a very well presented video and very fair, but the lack of a denominational head or headquarters could have been more emphasized to truly understand the nature of these splits. Without a denominational structure, all splits are informal, and can just as easily be undone.
I strongly encourage you to research the Black churches of Christ and Southwestern Christian College. While doctrinally the same, they are their own separate fellowship and function as such. The biggest reason for this was Jim Crow and segregation. Most of the churches of Christ were in the south and just like all other institutions churches were segregated, most seminaries and bible colleges were also segregated. Black churches fellowshipped where they were welcome, with other black churches. There were many civil rights leaders who were member of Black churches of Christ. What I find most interesting is how politically progressive and theologically conservative most are. Uniquely they are far more interconnected and disfellowship is much more harsh. Please look into and maybe do a part 2. It's a very rich and educational journey.
One of the prominent teachers in the International Churches of Christ mentioned that he had read "Hard-Fighting Soldiers: A History of African American Churches of Christ", and I have put that on my reading list of books I want to read. The book "Roll Jordan Roll"--the biography of Marshall Keeble--is right there in my bookcase and I can see it as I write this. It is one of the other books I would like to dive into. (Incidentally however, I am researching about the split between the COC and DOC, which is how I stumbled onto this video.)
And you still are apart of this cult religion? See if y'all claim to be THE BODY OF CHRIST then that means y'all are not going to hell but you had hate in your church hmmm it is a contradiction because the body of Christ is God's bride
Thank you, young man!!! I have been seeking a clear, plain understanding of this history for years. Dear LORD, thank you for allowing me to have found this information. In Jesus, the Christ name -AMEN
I've been associated with the Christian Churches and Churches of Christ since I was a kid. This was a fair and unbiased explanation of the movement. I think Campbell's ideals were laudable (as the narrator says, akin to the thoughts of C.S. Lewis and John Locke), to unite all Christians on the core beliefs we have in common, but it's an ironic and sad - yet probably an unavoidable - byproduct of our human condition that every time the Restoration Movement tried to break away and abandon denominations and be considered "merely" Christians, it ended up essentially just being another denomination, and it ended up multiplying rather than simplifying the problem. I think we can learn lessons from their struggles.
I am an evangelist serving in the churches of Christ. I too find your videos informative and accurate and entertaining. Keep them coming. By they way, There are more splits and divisions among us, those who use one cup only and have no Bible classes, is one such. I'd love to hear you break that down.
Don’t forget the churches that divided because new carpet needed to be installed and one half wanted to keep it blue while the other half wanted to buy the carpet that was on sale to save a few bucks and make it red.
@@JL-pj6kk I was a part of one who had division because they put in new windows and new lights. Members were wearing sunglasses in protest before they split. (I'm not kidding)
I am a member of the Church of Christ. We use one cup and one loaf, acapello singing and we do not divide up into classes during services! Why? Because we do not add to or take away from what the New Testament teach! We strive to worship by the example set in the scriptures! Keep in mind when you worship it’s not to be entertained or to do things that are convenient but when we worship it is to praise and honor God! Doing things his way not ours. Would I like other ways, probably so! But it’s not what I like or what you like that counts. It is what God expects, that counts! Remember he doesn’t except strange fire as a worship to him!
as always an informative and fair analysis of the Restoration Movement churches. I am an elder in a "Christian Church" (instrumental, non-Disciples) -- although I care little for the name except to the extent that it accurately communicates our purpose to the community. While I agree with your assessment that mergers are unlikely, it is my constant prayer. God bless!
You always present the facts in a clear, unbiased manner. I disagree with certain positions that you discuss in your various videos, but not in the way you present them.
As a fifth-generation Restoration Movement Minister who serves with the CC/COC, I appreciate your balanced overview of the movement. I'm not sure if it will come to fruition but there has been talk in recent years of the Disciples of Christ uniting with the United Church of Christ.
Huh, I grew up in a Non-Institutional Church of Christ. I appreciate the work that you put in to the video, and as it turns out, having spent about 21 years attending at the Church of Christ, I still learned something new about them from this video. Turns out that my biggest problem with that specific church was also a major point of contention for Stone and Campbell. Turns out we're all not so different after all...🤷♂
I was CoC 34yrs.. my major point of contention was that they deny the basic laws of God. They weren't "nailed to the cross"... which breaks everything and on a very basic level.
This was excellent. I’m a Catholic who grew up in the CofC and went to Harding University. You impartially stated the history of the RM in a way rarely seen. I’m sending this to my family still in the CofC.
I grew up a true blood coC (hence the last name), parents met at Lipscomb and everything! Entered the Catholic church last year, and now discerning religious life! Always wonderful to fine someone else in the coc-Catholic niche!
The non-institutional groups are even more split. You have some (pejoratively called "one-cuppers") who don't believe in Sunday School classes or single "located preachers" (as they call them), and further will only have one communion cup (even they divide between whether the cup can or cannot be refilled during a service). Campbell was a strong proponent of debating opponents; this debating philosophy continues to this date.
Of the nearly 12,000 churches in the USA, less than 3,000 are of non-institutional, one cup or non Sunday School persuasions, or about 25%. Of these 3,000 churches, about 1,000 are one cup/non Sunday School (about half of these are one cup), and the rest are non-institutional.
He didn't even bring up who caused this split in the first place. Daniel Sommer is the one that caused this split, and he doesn't get brought up in the Churches of Christ. Sommer pushed for a division between the Churches of Christ and the Christian Church and when it took place celebrated by saying, "The Church of Christ will be entirely separated from the Christian Church. Hallelujah!" The date of the beginning of the actual division was Sunday, August 18, 1889. The place was Sand Creek, Illinois, where Sommer delivered what he called "An Address and Declaration, " drawing its title from the Declaration and Address of Thomas Campbell. At its close Sommer said, "In closing up this address and declaration, we state that we are impelled from a sense of duty to say, that all such innovations and corruptions to which we have referred, that after being admonished, and having had sufficient time for reflection, if they do not turn away from such abominations, that we can not and will not regard them as brethren."
I'm third generation Church of Christ. I know more about the history the movement than anyone else in my family. I can tell you about the Campbells, Stone, "Racoon" John Smith, Walter Scott, David Lipscomb, James Harding, Daniel Sommer, E.M. Zerr Carl Ketcherside and I could go on as well about the roles they played in the movement. I researched Church of Christ history because I (an institutional) dated and married a non-instutional. I'm certain that the Campbells and Stone would be sorely disappointed if they saw how their unity movement couldn't maintain unity over the decades.
Using your diagram (8:22), the 3 middle branches (COC(Institutional), ICOC, and CC/COC) are beginning to show a greater level of acceptance of each other. While not a full on merger, this acknowledgement of our common theology and heritage is a big step...
As far as the Disciples of Christ merging with outside groups, that has already happened with what they call "covenant partnership" with the United Church of Christ, in which technically they are separate denominations, but there is such a high degree of ministers, etc. that move freely between the two that on a practical level it is nearly a merger.
@@tcsmith4875 I've been reading through a lot of the material that the DOC published in both The Bethany Press and Chalice Press (and I guess Chalice is what Bethany once was?) The liberalism I have found is indeed *very* liberal
@@seekingthekingdomfirst I'm a fourth generation DOC and yes, that's the case. But it doesn't really reflect the minds of the congregants. Our congregations tend to hold the center [re: the teaching of Paul in Romans 14] and leave room for God's judgement. Unfortunately, the leadership have tended toward a more politicized view of things that is comparable to that of Christians on the right wing who are also increasingly political. For those of us who remain faithful to the Romans 14 principle, it can be frustrating. But many of us do sense a call to remain in fellowship becuase we believe that God is working on and in all of us. I believe these many divisions and weaknesses will be addressed.
You might mention that the two interpretive views you mentioned are known as the Regulative Principle and the Normative Principle and are not exclusive to these denominations.
The WORST church experience I have EVER had, were the three non-institutional Churches of Christ that I was induced to attend (not including the one in the Philippines).
Thanks for your video and your work on this channel! I grew up in an international church of christ and am still a member today. Just wanted to let you know that there was another split - I think that’s the one maybe you’re referring to in the 90s maybe? But yeah there’s another group called International Christian Churches (ICC) that split from the ICOC in the recent past. Sorry to add even greater complexity since the names are all so similar 😅 not that I picked the names lol but yeah maybe something to research and add! Anyway, I wish all Christians could be united 🥲 thanks again!
Lol so you’re a kingdom kid? Yeah you’re definitely still in a cult but less of a cult that the ICC. I left that organization last year. I pray you study your church history more thoroughly because they have an active lawsuit out on them. Godspeed
It's been my understanding that Stone's group didn't leave the Christian Connexion, but as a loose alliance of independent churches, some of them remained with the Connexion and some of them aligned with Campbell's group.
The institutional Churches of Christ and the independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ celebrated an informal reunification at the North American Christian Convention in 2006. Since neither group has a denominational structure acceptance of this reunification varies on a congregational basis with independent Christian Churches tending to accept acapella Churches of Christ as being within the same brotherhood more readily than the inverse.
Well unfortunately, what goes on in a Christian worship assembly does matter sill, even on theological grounds. The issue is still clear. Will we worship a Spirit God through spiritual ways and means (John 4:24), or will we embellish our own carnal side and gratify our own flesh. Spiritual worship involves understanding - words that mean things (1 Corinthians 14:15-17); the sacrifice of praise - the fruit of lips (Hebrews 13:15); and does not include the works of our hands (Acts 17:25). Some may find it acceptable to take up materialistic inanimate objects, and then to manipulate those objects for the sole purpose of making noise, which then produces vibrating sound waves that tingle one's own flesh, and thus gives sensual pleasure to those hearing it. But when others disagree with that, unification becomes impossible. Maybe we should look to Jesus for the only example of Him doing anything musical, which was acapella and congregational (Mark 14:26; Matthew 26:30).
The Church of Christ may not have a governmental structure over the local church, it is still a denomination. They all share the name Church of Christ and the same beliefs.
I grew up in Disciples of Christ, had no idea they where part of Church of Christ and have been going to a CoC for a bit.. So sad to hear of all the divisions and now I understand the church I was attending better. I think piano is fine but there are better instruments haha. Also the main reason I don't grumble about lack of piano even though I think its fine, is that I can't stand the ear drum splitting concerts that go on in mainstream churches. You can't even hear the body, just those with a mic.
Having been 'born' into the Church of Christ, I have always found it slightly hilarious that most members would not recognize those names, (Stone-Campbell) if mentioned!... but I understand why.
i was raised in and currently attend an Independent Christian Church. These are just called the "Christian Church" and are unaffiliated with any denomination but come from the Stone-Campbell tradition. we aren't Disciples of Christ or Church of Christ (though we are both, of course) by denominational affiliation, but each church is completely independent - do you do a video about these churches?
Good information, but there were churches of Christ in the 1700s and even the 1600s in the US. Churches of Christ did not start in the 1800s or 1900s. I encourage you to resarch more about the churches of Christ history or records.
So was Campbell saved prior to him not being baptized? Or when a "Baptist" preacher baptized him? Bc there weren't any "Church of Christ" preachers yet. And if their were, why didn't Campbell go to them instead of a Baptist Preacher for baptism? Or was Campbell saved bf he came up with the claim of no musical instruments? Or was he saved prior to him naming his church the name "church of Christ?"
The question of baptism is not based on whom did it but that it occured and for the right reasons in the proper form. So a baptism by a baptist preacher is perfectly acceptable if for repentance, remission of sin, and in full acceptance of salvation by dying and being reborn in Christ. The baptism must be a burial and rebirth in water, meaning full immersion. That is all that scripturally is required.
Ex-cOC member here. Let me answer according to the Church of Christ doctrine. COCs believe that according to Mark 16:16, Baptism is necessary for salvation. Everyone without a valid Baptism is not saved. Campbell believed that he was not saved prior to Baptism. cOC teaches that a valid Baptism is required for salvation, and it involves full immersion of a believer, with the understanding that Baptism is for the washing away of their sins. Most COCs believe that you don't necessarily need to be a part of their group to be saved, but you do need a valid Baptism. This defacto excludes all other protestant denominations, as all other protestants believe that Baptism is a work, and you cannot be saved by works. Imho, the greatest distinctions of COC from all other denominations is their stance on Baptism and musical instruments.
This is true, good job on not saying Campbell established the Church. As Jesus did, so thank you! Also, there are Churches that took the name Church of Christ a little before 100 years of Campbell's life, and not considering the Churches across the world. Evidence says they practiced baptism in water for the remission of sins, and believed everything that the Campbell movement believed out of the Bible. Nowadays, we deny the name Campbellite, as his intent was not to make a denomination.
I was a member of the ICOC for 14 years, now part of the Church of Christ for the past 19 months. Both the ICOC and COC celebrate communion every Sunday, but I have noticed that the DOC has quite a lot of books that have been published on the topic of communion. Your comment makes me want to dive into the importance of communion further
@@seekingthekingdomfirst The Disciples of Christ, in good Campbellite fashion, love to debate about almost everything. The one constant, however, is that the Lord's Supper is observed EVERY Lord's Day. It is so important to the Disciples that our emblem is a red Chalice bearing the cross of St. Andrew (in honor of our Scottish roots.)
why are their minutes books and grave stones in England from 1699 and 1403 where they say church of Chirst? Seems like the church of Christ goes back even further then some people think. Campbell wanted to restore the biblical church of CHIRST started and called church of Christ in 34 AD.
Great history here; nice and concise. Could you do one focused on the International Church of Christ, the 2003 “Letter”, the creation of the International Christian Churches, and their present states? Thanks!
If I would have known the origin of this denomination I wouldn't have wasted years being involved in it. This video, among others, is quite accurate and I appreciate the details that shows why no "Christian" religious organization is the "church" we read in the New Testament. It's hilarious that they claim to be of the New Testament "pattern" but are far from it beginning with their practice of division. Each group would join to agree in registering their name based on location so, for example, one would call themselves "Texas church of Christ" and another "Alabama church of Christ". All of them have registered different names and the worst is that they establish themselves independently from each other. Independently! That is the actual definition of division and they have a well prepared inference of teaching that explains why they practice this sin. But where's the pattern in the bible in that a group of Christians were called "Ephesus church of Christ" or "Rome church of Christ"? It's amazing how I, and so many others, have been so blind but I think it's just because of being ignorant. I hope many get out of religious organizations and just stick their hope ONLY in the words of God if they truly believe it was inspire by God.
@@crashercarlton If I had a family that would reject me for leaving this denomination, it would've been a distinguished honor to have suffered that for following Christ through His words. In fact, I would wish it. Thank you for your concern and understanding. And, yes, friend, God continues blessing me to this day as I continue to focus only in His words. May we always pursue the peace and love Jesus left us as an example to follow! 🙂
@@jackcollazo I'm visiting a church of Christ and have shown that I would like to be baptized , but have yet to be baptized by them and they don't seem to be concerned with it . Also my mom is in a nursing home and is I'll and I wanted to have her baptized but just the same as me they haven't said anything about her either. The man sent to study the bible with me made the comment after I showed concern about how we could safely baptize her with her being bed bound on oxygen and a feeding tube, said if the the baptism killed her she would go to heaven anyway. This has got me depressed and makes me feel like the CoC are the gatekeepers of Jesus's sacrifice.
@@jboogie8159 your desire of being baptized should not be based on whatever biblestudy you get from any coc religious organization. The words in the bible is inspired of God so if those words inspired you to be baptized then it does not matter who baptizes you or your mom. You can even pay someone to baptized you as long they recite as Jesus said "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" because what counts is God seeing your faith in doing so, not who does the baptizing. Yes, you can even set up to have your mom get baptized and even pay someone to do so if you have to. Don't let anyone make you believe that you have to be baptized in their religious organization because then you would be following the commandments of men and not of God. God bless you and your mom. By the way, I got baptized by a protestant preacher because he was the only one available at the time and place to do so and I never believed in that man's religion. What matter is that I complied to Jesus' command.
@@jackcollazo I was raised in the coC too and was baptized there although am not worshipping with them currently. But the subject of baptism has interested me deeply since Jesus instituted it and having come to know Christ over the years I can't imagine that He was keen on His disciples practicing mere initiation rituals. I've prayed sincerely for understanding the significance of baptism as I have children who are yet to be baptized and the church I fellowship with at the moment applies immersion baptism in obedience but only as an outward symbol, stating clearly that salvation (and the Holy Spirit) is not obtained in water baptism. But the Lord has since been faithful in making me see the significance of water baptism, which I'd like to share here, hoping it would be a blessing to you and those reading this. Until a person is washed by the blood of Christ, he/she is in some form or other under the influence of unclean spirits because they are not yet indwelled by the Holy Spirit. Baptizing in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit drives out unclean spirits from the penitent soul so that he/she may receive the Holy Spirit to indwell them. Salvation is synonymous with being in Christ, Christ in us, or in other words having the Spirit of God within leading us to do the will of God on earth. The coC and probably the doC too are on to the truth about baptism's saving quality but they apply it dogmatically making it look like works although they'd deny it. So the whole debate I've seen between the coC and the reformed churches on whether or not baptism is work unto salvation is moot because baptism is a providence of God by His grace for enabling our reception of His salvation. Christ did hint in Matthew 12: 43 - 45 about the nature of unclean spirits that seek out people in waterless places. And we know what's written in Acts 2: 38 - "And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." In conclusion, I believe that whether or not we understand the why of baptism, the obedience in applying it in the name of Jesus is what's important since God does the saving. The offense towards God in stating there's no salvation in baptism comes merely through misrepresenting God as One who desires rituals.
I grew up in the Christian Church. I would side with the Church of Christ on instruments in the service. Years after I had finished my music degree it occurred to me that the Catholic Church which morphed from the New Testament church was a capella until the late Renaissance.
This leaves one thing out..... I was brought up in the church of christ. Conservative branch. I looked up some of the well known preachers around that day and i was interested in seeing when many of them accepted Jesus for their life..and nothing. It had when baptized, but not when saved. I dont believe for a second that when you are baptized you are automatically saved. Accept Christ as Lord and Savior THEN get baptized
Hi,praise the lord dear brithren .please I'm here seeking your help ,our church we are renting the land and it atemperal building of iron sheet please hkinfly help and we build the house of God
I grew up in a Christian Church that called itself non-denominational (technically they are) but I only recently learned if it's historical connection to the stone-cambel restorationist movement. I don't know if you were clear about the fact that Christian churches, unlike Churches of Christ, reject baptismal regeneration. I'm in Northern Arizona and a few hours south of me in the greater Phoenix area is Christ's Church of the Valley, a "Christian Church". It's the biggest church in the state with weekly attendence of nearly 40,000 people. Thanks for the video.
Yes, same. I asked several years in if we were actually a Church of Christ, as I had been doing some internet research that made me suspect this, and the preacher admitted that they were. I had never heard it mentioned in all my years there, (and we were very involved in the congregation). They made such a big deal out of being non-denominational that the admission very much upset me. During that year, I discovered many more hidden truths in that church which ultimately led my family to leave and find another church.
@@bellyfulochelly4222 I'm sorry to hear that you had to go through that. secrecy in the church is never a good thing. The one I was talking about is not a Church of Christ. There is a very clear distinction between the two. They're not just pretending to be non-denominational, they really are. I love the church I mentioned and I think there theology is an improvement over the churches of Christ. I was simply trying to point out that I didn't realize that they were a branch off of the churches of Christ until recently.
@@joshuas1834 I think the one you are attending is more accurately labeled "interdenominational". The interdenominational ones here (Mississippi) tend to have a Pentecostal-type leaning. The church of Christ and Christian Church are nondenominational, although they disagree over points like instrumental music in worship, missionary societies, etc
@@brendanjobe6895 perhaps baptismal regeneration isn't the term I should have used. To be blunt, all of the churches of Christ I've interacted with say that people, even believers in Jesus, go to hell if they die without being baptized so that's what I meant. Whether or not that's the official doctrine, it's what the ones near me teach and I disagree with them. Secondly, I must have done a poor job explaining my church because it is not the interdenominational pentecostal leaning type that you mentioned. Sorry for the confusion brother. Peace.
The Rock Springs church near Celina, Tennessee, was started in 1804-five years before Alexander Campbell came to America-and remains until this day. A brother Lowery found a document near Celina dated November 17, 1736…which tells of the organization of a church of Christ in that early day-fifty-two years before Alexander was born (pp. 44-45, quoting from the “Gospel Advocate,” July 27, 1939).
Incorrect on the International Church of Christ. They were seen as a cult, run by a man, from their beginning. At least that is was I was taught at Harding. Kipp left the church of Christ and created his cult. Most of what they required of members was not the New Testament. They were never spoken of as having split because they were always spoken of as having been created a new. I graduated from Harding with a bachelor’s degree in Ministry from Harding back in 2004.
I know I am replying super late but I was born in the 90s and raised in the ICOC. Due to the autonomous nature of COC's Kipp's influence is not universal on how the churches are run. As of now, I have had a lot of friends go to harding who are associated with ICOC and are trying to build bridges with the greater COC churches. We are not taught our church history so I am learning through these videos on how the heck we got here and why people call us a cult
@@easonbragg935 when I was at Harding in 2002-2004 that was the 1st time I had heard of the cult. They called it the “Boston movement” and it was said to be centered seeking the guy Kip. We had professors who had had dealings with them. Same with some previous students who escaped. The stories were that people were expected to clone their behavior, mannerism, and traditions after the one discipling them. And everybody trace the discipling back to Kip. This was trying to force people to live by one set of personality traits and people have different traits. Well, I was at Harding. There was something published where he figured this out and he apologized for it. Seems like he created yet another religion. With a similar name. The store we were told Were ones like a couple who were engaged decided to get married said their wedding date. But when someone above them found out that they had stayed at one other parents houses under the same roof over Christmas break now they were sinners and they had to atone for their sin. Unless they jump through enough hoops to earn forgiveness, they would not be granted permission to get married. The absurdity of being punished because of the potential as somebody could assume that they had sex outside of marriage for sleeping under the same roof chaperoned by one of their parents and then telling them their punishment was that they weren’t allowed to get married until permission was granted what is in the face and what the New Testament says. First of all, being chaperoned removes the suspicion of fornication. And even if they had fornicated or were burning with passion, the solution is to get married. Other people would say that, even though they were believing, after hearing the word, repent of their sins, made a public confession that Jesus is Lord, and was completely submerged into water being baptized into the name of Jesus Christ in a church of Christ congregation they had to get rebaptized into the international church of Christ for their baptism to be valid. Cult behavior. Personally, I don’t know if I meant a current ICOC member in person, only online or knew people who knew former members.
This examination of the church of Christ did not even speak of Christian Hermon Dasher or the Weisenbakers of Georgia which I suppose means that the Southern Church of Christ was not part of that particular branch history
@@seekingthekingdomfirst when I did a search on this website that has a list of Church of Christ locations, it would note instrumental or non-instrumental and they were still under CoC name
@@seekingthekingdomfirst Many today refer to them as "progressive Churches of Christ." Some are also dropping the "church of Christ" from signage. calling themselves something like fellowship of Christ or family of God. Some may choose something like Eastside Community Church (a church of Christ)
I wouldn’t say it’s a lot it’s a very low number and I wouldn’t say it’s increasing either. I’ve gone too many churches of Christ across the country, and they overwhelmingly denounce instruments in the church
The problem with this, is that the Church of Christ existed not only since Christ, but also there are records of the Church of Christ existing 200 years before Stone or Campbell were even born. There were CoC congregations in the USA and in the UK before any of these people you mentioned were born. Campbell even publicly denied starting the Church of Christ.
There is no evidence the CoC existed "since Christ." It is clear, the church as we know it, began in the 1830s, like many other denominations during that time. Just because there were some groups of people calling themselves by the same name 200 hundred years before Stone does not make them the same group. The CoC we have today is from the Stone-Campbell movement. This is easily proven to those who are openminded.
@@truthchannel796 Sorry, can't be proven. First of all there is no way to prove a trace to Simon the Zealot, just hearsay. Secondly, historically, it is documented and proven that the church of Christ in the United States began in the 1830s. People who try to elude that fact are just in a fog and deluding themselves because of sectarian bias. Even the Church of England and the Catholic Church say their roots go back to the 1st century. CoC, CoE and Catholic churches all think by somehow fooling people into thinking that they are legitimate, because their roots go back to the first century are foolish
???????🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏👁️👁️ " Thus saith The LORD." "It is written This slogan developed out of the Controversy with Alexander Campbell. "Churches of Christ" "Let us speak where the Bible speaks, And remain silent where the Bible is silent." 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏 👁️👁️💜💔❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️😇😇😇😇😇😇😇 Note: Alexander Campbell denied he establishment church
Very correct on the split in mid-to-late 1800's, other than the idea that the reason for being "noninstrumental in worship" was ... wealth. It wasn't. It was a basic difference in overall view of scripture, to the point that a member of the Christian Church told me that it would be ok to use cookies and coffee for the Lord's Supper. The video is also correct in documenting the silliness of some divisions. Know what percent of all those groups up there view acapella singing as acceptable to God? 100%! So they split the church needlessly over something that they were 100% sure that they were doing correctly in the first place.
I know your comment was over a year ago, but I sympathize with your comment at the end. I grew up in ICOC and currently am a member of a CoC church, and have been looking into the splits and history a lot. It’s a tough position because while I do think that God gives us a lot more liberty in certain things than some CoC brothers and sisters believe, on the other side of it even going from the assumption that instrument use in worship is permissible, why is that something worth splitting over? If we can all agree that acapella is fine, but have disagreements on instruments, why wouldn’t we just go with what we agree on? I know there were other reasons as well but it’s frustrating to think about. Also interesting to note that besides the 1906 music split that again in the 1970/1990s music was again a part of it. As well as even today more non institutional CoC are adding instruments or second service w instruments
@@mccallmemaybe_ "I know there were other reasons as well but it’s frustrating to think about." Amen to that! Very frustrating! I could tell you about how the "Christian Church" basically stole the church building here in my hometown as I am old enough to have had relatives who were there. They were mostly pre-teen and teenagers at the time. This was around 1910, but all of them lived into their mid 90's. The funny part is that the church of Christ rose to an attendance of over 500, while the Christian Church has been stuck at about 120 for the last one hundred years.
@@brendanjobe6895 oh wow! It’s interesting to hear different people’s experiences with CoC and the Christian Churches especially throughout time. I would say attendance also depends on where you are, for example my church growing up had probably over 350 attendees (pre pandemic) but I left due to practices I believe are unbiblical. Then on the other hand you have my current CoC church, that is dying out due to an unfortunate lack of zeal to evangelize and no help/accountability for younger folks or new believers. This is why I wish all of us CoC, ICOC, etc would be open to taking a good look at ourselves and doing better. CoC can appreciate the evangelizing and discipling efforts that ICOC emphasizes and ICOC can think through the traditions of the CoC and maybe understand that sometimes, things are done a certain way for a long time because they’re actually correct or hold true to the Bible, and that not everything needs an overhaul every few decades to update with culture. We’re all called to be counterculture in that we stand through the test of time to the Bible, and I hope that the Bible will be able to bring back some unity within these movements ❤️
@@mccallmemaybe_ Yes, it is indeed interesting. The two congregations to which I am referring are a block apart and both are "downtown". We have more young people than they have all total. What they did was this: worshiped for about forty years without an instrument. Then, desiring to be more like their religious neighbors, a few very influential (and wealthy) members decided that we needed the instrument. As far as anyone could recall, they never advanced a Biblical argument: these were businessmen who were used to getting their way. Of course, there was a backlash that was temporarily solved by having two services. The first (and most convenient) was at 11 AM and was instrumental. The second at 1 PM was non-instrumental. At first, it seemed that the self-created problem was temporarily solved. Attendance at each services was about equal, 60-70 people at each service. After a few years, however, the non-instrumental attendance was well over 100. Sensing a loss of power, the leaders of the instrumental side (the business owners, political leaders, etc) simply changed the locks. When the non-instrumental group showed up at 1 PM, they were permanently locked out of their own building by the "upstanding, respectable" members. The "church of Christ" had to meet in the basement of the courthouse. Of course, it is joked about today. "Did y'all manage to get 100 in worship today?" "Building thieves just never seem to grow." "Why don't you turn up the volume on your organ? It'll cover up y'all's sorry singing." "I drove past your building at 11 - not a bad attendance for Sunday School." Somehow the laughing about it is all on one side, but it serves to remind them what they REALLY were and are - thieves. Deep down, they resent the comments, especially the ones involving their direct ancestors. A minority of members wound up stealing the building. They don't even bother denying it. Such stories are common throughout the South. And such stories are sad. This one is so well documented that nobody dares deny it. Back in the 1960's (when cassette recorders became widely available), our song leader interviewed people who were there that Sunday morning at 1 PM, so I get to hear my aunt Lillie and aunt Mattye all over again.
@@mccallmemaybe_ "my current CoC church, that is dying out due to an unfortunate lack of zeal to evangelize and no help/accountability for younger folks or new believers." That will kill any church over time. I am unaware of any exceptions. And it is very sad. It begins with the eldership and preacher as a rule. When one attends worship services for six months and never hears a single sermon on conversion, it's not hard to figure out where that congregation is headed.
@@truthnottradition7 I don't have detailed info on their doctrine and how it matches with Scripture. But the little I do know matches better than the denominational world
@@tudor8040 The book Traces of the Kingdom shows the Lord's Church all through the last 2000 years, not just the ones you refuse to believe about. Much of the early history it was forced underground, as the catholics persecuted them worse than the romans.
@@JaysonCarmona Strike a nerve, did I? There isn't a single critique of Smith and his book that was not already made by Alexander Campbell within months of its publication. I feel no need to debate you about an idea debunked 192 years ago.
The instrumental worship question also has its roots in the Civil War. Southern congregations were badly impoverished after the war and could not afford organs or pianos. This grew into a tradition over time While I love and defend our acapella tradition, it is just a tradition.
My many church of Christ cousins would agree. (My family split when the churches did back around the turn of the last century. We didn't reconcile until a family reunion in July of 2000!}
Well said! I agree that acapella vs instrumental music is a tradition, based on culture and the budgets of individual churches rather than any clear Biblical teaching one way or the other. As a member of the Christian Churches and Churches of Christ, I am equally at home in either type of worship service, so long as the brothers and sisters there are worshipping in Sprit and in Truth.
@@DamonNomad82 I have a strong, strong preference for acapella. But it's only a preference. There is no command related to how to employ music in worship as long as it is orderly and proper.
Even Eastern Orthodox mainly sing Capella. It’s not just tradition these are elements of early Christian churches because scripture emphasizes to sing verbally for New Testament churches.
It is hard for fallen human understand that there is nothing you can do to be saved apart from sola fide in Christ. Most of evangelicals are trusting in their work and sacraments to be saved. They no different from catholics 7 th day adventist, mormons l, Jehovah witnesses etc . It been like since the apostolic age started with the Galatians.
I been going to church of christ since i was born in new Mexico and now in california. They are all just like the original 1906 churches. They do missionary work, baptism and do not have musical instruments. They only do what's written.
how did the disciples preach to the gentiles that Jesus is GOD and the father is God without letting them understand that they are two gods but not one or A God has a a moral son like Zeus and his son Perseus
They didn't. The Trinity was invented in the 4th Century. The title God doesn't mean Almighty God, Jesus is called God because he is an agent of God just like Moses was called God. Satan is called the God of this world.
@@dwashington1333 jesus said who have seen me have seen god after one of his disciples asked to see God Jesus said i am the lord of the Sabbath He said he was before abraham existence Stop twisting the texts to make it fit ur own bias The holy spirit called also the spirit of the father whom search the deepest of the father , this is the trinity been around since Paul's letters
The problem is NOT with the text. It's a result of reading it with presupposition applied to the mind before ever opening the book. Not many of us wipe the mind clean of beliefs before reading and believing what it says.
@@OzCrusader Jesus allowed the Church in Laodecia to fall into error, but it wasn’t Jesus fault. The Israelites fell into error, it wasn’t God’s fault. The gates prevail against the church because the Church is the people, and the saved people will not have hell prevail over them.
Stone was an Arian who when being examined for ordination may have practiced mental reservation. The entire movement was colored by Alexander Campbell's doctrine which he culled from the Rev. John Glas and his son in law Robert Sandeman. The main idea underlying Campbelliism is that the individual is not led by the Holy Spirit to the point of believing. This is rationalism and or Pelagianism. On the other hand, Jesus said, "No man can come unto me except the Father which sent me draw him." [John 6:44] Campbellism is free will on steroids. Campbell also made off with a teaching taken from the Scotch Baptists, which asserted that on being baptized one receives forgiveness of sins. This teaching showed up in the Book of Mormon. Mormonism is indebted to Campbell who based his spurious Restoration Movement on the doctiine of Baptism for the forgiveness of sins. The Mormon Church is presently considering a name change where it will be called the Restored Church or some such thing. Mormons can't shake the influence of Campbell. You can tell that the Book of Mormon is a product of 19th century church life, and not some ancient manuscript recovered and translated by placing a rock in a hat.
I love when someone from outside our tradition deigns to tell us what we believe.🙄 Yes, Alexander Campbell was a contemporary of Joseph Smith, but the relationship between them was at best adversarial. In the Feb 1832 edition of the Millennial Harbinger, Alexander Campbell published the very first critique of the newly published Book of Mormon. In his article, he runs his pen through it, refutes every single thing in it, and gave every argument against it that ever followed. They were not friends.
@@frankendragon5442 Your comment is off the wall. Campbell being adversarial was due in part because the Mormons made off with his doctrine of baptism for the forgiveness of sins, an unscriptural teaching. And because he knew that the Book of Mormon was fake. Are you blind can't you see that. Mormonism is fake and you support it because you are not led of God anymore than Campbell Your prophet was a confidence man and nothing more. If you read Revelation in Mormonism by George Arbaugh and you remain a Mormon there is no hope for your soul.
Very informative, but so sad to see how individual men who think they know better than the early church fathers have split the church. One day all will return to the Catholic Church, which Jesus founded on the rock of Peter, and we will be united again as Christ desires. Trust the Apostles and early church fathers who were closest to Christ!!!
The apostles and early disciples never prayed to Mary or to a “saint.” Never. The apostles taught “repent and be baptized;” an infant cannot repent and make their own decision. There is so much in the Catholic doctrine that is unbiblical. Trust in Jesus himself as your Savior, and receive his imparted righteousness. Peace, brother!
It’s also quite sad, that (a majority, from what I’ve personally witnessed & engaged with) that are “in” the “Catholic Church” boast that it is the “only tru church…” While human history has taught us, that NO “body” can be “perfect,” because it’s made up of fallen humans. Just by readin like every letter written by Paul, or even better read the 7 letters in the book of Revelation, The letters to those 7 churches in Asia Minor…ONLY the 2 churches were not “warned…” It was the 2 that at that time, were under the MOST persecution (& obviously not as financially “secure,” prominent, etc…) They were told, some may say you are poor, “but I say you are rich…” Rich in their devotion to Christ, His teachin’s, fellowship/unity w/their fellow brothers (& sisters, widows, children…) Btw~The Church of Christ, (churches) “run”independently. Jus abidin by the “UNITY” and model that scripture (simply) lays out. A church body should be lead/“govern’d” according to His Word, and what His Apostles taught/wrote in their buildin of His church, while here on earth (in the 1st century…) The church of “Christ” embraces the 1st Century Church. And I’m sure your knowledgeable that In early church history (1st/2nd centuries), the word “catholic” meant “universal.” (Amongst “Christian” brothers…) Maybe US (repented) believers, baptized in Christ should reflex LESS on that of this world, and MORE on that of the next… We ( “I”) should seek Him, discernment, READ His Word, and take time DAILY to PRAY in Thanksgiving… For the One whom suffered agonizing pain, ridicule, torturous beatings for hours, shed His blood as a sacrifice to save ALL! Even those whom were considered “God’s people,” at that time, betrayed Him… “His” church, should ALWAYS stay devoted, focused, seekin…Jesus, the Christ! We’r ALL only responsible for our sins made and spoken in this world, come judgement day. Jus TRUST in Jesus! Cuz in the end, WE ALL WIN! God Bless!😇💙🙏🏼
Bill, please research the construction of the 66 books of the Bible. Your being told not to worship God but a tradition of men which is condemned in the Bible.
Actually the "church fathers," came up with some horrible doctrines that were opposed to God's Word. And the Catholic church that began in the 300AD has been filled with abuses, etc. even to this day.
RTH has an axe to grind. 8 minute overview is equal to what the media has always done. If this kid wants to make a 6 hour video about Calvinism and how the "Faith Only" religion has replaced and reinterpreted the Bible with false doctrine, that would be the truth.
This "kid" is actually a professor at a Bible college and old enough to be married. He states that his channel serves as a "video encyclopedia" of information about different denominations.
He may be Wesleyan. His theology tends to lean more away from predestination and 'once saved always saved', just from what I've seen in his other videos. Not sure though I would, on the other hand, contend that this video is strictly factual. It isn't a doctrinal video, but an informational one Edit: He's independent Baptist, so about as Calvinist as anyone in the CofC🤷♂
as a former ICOC member and now currently COC member, I found this video to be extremely informative, and did not observe any bias. Actually, I learned more about the movement from this video than from the books I have found on the topic over the past several months, as this video was concise and straight to the point
No, they are not a denomination because are not governed by an overall higher power like the Baptist association is every church of Christ is individually ran and operated. They do not answer to other churches.
@@Crusader1984 I was CoC for 34yrs and would have said something very similar in the past. But now that I've taken off the campbellian filter... They have unspoken litmus tests to justify their segregations / groupings. Of the "denomination" I was with... Florida College and any known preacher or elder or trusted church that could vouch for you meant you were "in".
@@truthnottradition7 - If that is the case then those brethren have an institutional mindset of the church, which i agree exists around FC. But being "in" just because of what college you went to or who you know is not the standard for the majority of churches I know. For example, even if you went to FC but taught calvinism or institutionalism or any other perceived deviation, you would be rejected. For that vast majority of NI coCs there is doctrinal primacy over all other considerations. Also, why is it a "campbellian filter" to affirm a distinction of denominationalism that has hierarchal parachurch structures? A generic fellowship of churches with extremely loose affiliation with similar practices does not a denomination make. A movement or fellowship, sure? A recognizable denomination? No. That is one reason why I do not call the anabaptists movements a denomination. God bless and grace be with you!
@@barbershopboy05 Thanks for the thoughts.... I say campbellian because I have recently researched the root cause of the current CoC's in America. Alexander Campbell and Barton W. Stone are the two most prominent thinkers from the inaugural years of the American, Christian, restoration movement, who both published prominent journals in their era of the early 1800s (The Christian Baptist, Millennial Harbinger, and The Christian Messenger). I bought the 850 page stone campbell encyclopedia, read online as much as I could find, and I even went to Bethany to see the place myself. Went so far as to even stand over his grave and look at all the names of people who were in part responsible for the "church" I had spent some many years in. I'm confident I know more about that movement than 99% of CoC church members. I have also studied the whole of the Bible and using context it exhibits. I've found the two don't match. CoC's along with all other protestant theologies to some measure or another PRETEXT passages to make the Bible fit their theology. CoC's claim to be THE "new testament church" just as is seen in Rom 16:16. Silent where the bible is silent a speak where it speaks. And a whole lot of other non-biblical colloquial idioms are stated as proof of being the proper church Christ built. I now see that they simply use (a whole lot of) pretexting and yes even CoC dogma as justification for the inconsistencies of what they do that conflicts w/bible scriptures. And specifically Pauls letters. A few examples: The word "fulfil" (plēroō) in Matt 5:17, Acts 20:7, Col 2:14, Eph 2:15 ect... And when those fail to be accepted by a critical and contextual observer (like me) they just play make believe. Acts 15:21 for example... one elder I was trying to show the 7th day Sabbath WAS observed by gentile believers **after the cross** would NOT read vs 21. He.... wouldn't... read.... a bible verse. Unbelievable! Took him to Heb ch3 to set context then read ch4. Deer in the headlights look then he just denied that's what it meant. It makes me ill feeling because I 100% believed it hook line and sinker and lived it fully until.... I looked for proper context. My experience was with 7 congregations in 6 different states over 34 yrs. Those "congregations" I was a part of, DO resemble that Stone - Campbell protestant / restoration movement of the 1800s. And to an astonishing level too. They all want to deny it (to my face).. but it's demonstrably true when one simply looks at the evidence of what they taught (200yrs ago) vs CoC's today. Brother... they 95% match each other! In my first hand experience they give at least a 50% nod to anyone from FC. Yes just because FC is involved didn't give them a green light. But I personally sat in "business meetings" where FC grads moved to the top of lists for potential preachers and elders. I know what I saw first hand. That self proclaimed "restoration movement" description has me tweaked very deeply because they far more embrace protestantism than they do the beliefs and actions of churches we see in the apostolic writings. Those "first century churches" did not adhere to a part catholic / part restoration theology. No they were obedient to laws of God and accepting messiah Yeshua (Jesus) as having paid the price for us breaking the commandments of God. We are saved by grace CoC's will say. And that part they get correct, but what they fail to see or ask is... grace from breaking what? Some ambiguous "laws of christ" or... breaking laws of the Father. Brother maybe you can't see it because your a part of that CoC mindset? I hope not because its very difficult to see yourself from a critical viewpoint. I've studied this w/15+ CoC elders, preachers, and teachers and to date only one has admitted their life didn't align with the pattern of the apostolic writings. When I decided to be honest (critical) and simply read the whole of the Bible for myself I found no constructs as CoC's teach. None... there is no such thing as "old law". Passages like Matt 5:17, Col 2, eph 2:15, and generally Paul's letters are all pretexted to fit a 1800's protestant / Stone-Campbell dogma. Pretexting is both dishonest and IMO a heresy. There are no dispensation of laws of God. There are no biblical constructs of "moral law", "ceremonial law" ect... Its protestants who crafted those contracts so as to manipulate or abolish certian commandments. There are simply laws of God given through differing men and covenants w/differing people. CoC's conflate everything left of Matthew as "old" and defacto assume it's good to know but NOT APPLICABLE to believers in Messiah Yeshua today. Not once in 34yrs in CoC's did I ever hear something I've recently learned which MASSIVELY sets context... Law keeping / Sabbath controversies of the Gospels are on issues of Halacha (based on biblical commandments (mitzvot), subsequent Talmudic and rabbinic law Halacha teaches how to behave between others and God) The N.T. uses paradosis for Jewish Halachah (Rabbinic rules for walking out Torah): For example see Matthew 15:2,3,6; Mark 7:3,5,8,9,13. Paul uses it in a negative sense in Colossians 2:8 “tradition of men,” and in a positive sense for his own instruction as to how believers should walk (1 Cor 11:2; Gal 1:14; 2 Thess 2:15; 3:6). Why did I never hear that IN CoC's? I know why.. because CoC preachers and Elders are either ignorant of "halacha" or presuppose "old law" was "nailed to the cross". Yet it's a often a central point in Paul's writings. I'd welcome a study on this w/any CoC. Maybe more will come to see the truth.... and be obedient to it instead of following 200yr old protestant dogma. Shalom
how did the disciples preach to the gentiles that Jesus is GOD and the father is God without letting them understand that they are two gods but not one or A God has a a moral son like Zeus and his son Perseus
