GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | RSS | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: Cane Ridge Revival 1801  (Read 6968 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline notreligus

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4033
  • Manna: 152
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« on: Wed Dec 26, 2012 - 14:06:23 »
I find the views concerning the Holy Spirit which are expressed in this forum to be rather contradictory to the history of the Churches of Christ.  The Churches of Christ claim that the church was born in America at Cane Ridge, with the aid of Barton Stone and his church which hosted the communion service at Cane Ridge, Kentucky, in 1801.  What began as a community communion service became a pentecostal type revival that lasted for weeks.  People fell prostrate to the ground and spoke in tongues, they were healed, they were saved.  Barton Stone and other preachers such as area Methodist preachers preached there off and on for weeks. 

One time I watched a program on PBS which showed a busload of Church of Christ folk who traveled to Cane Ridge with their ministers to have an accapella song service inside Barton Stones original church building which is now housed inside a larger outer shell of a building.  Such groups make a pilgrimage of sorts to that church and celebrate the birth of the one true church.  How can this be?  The Churches of Christ would deny that most of what happened there during that revival was truly of God. 

What are the positions of the Churches of Christ folk who post here concerning the Cane Ridge Revival?  Do you accept what happend there as of God?  Are your brethren that go there to celebrate the birth of your new group heretics for accepting this as the birth of the church in America? 

FYI, Stone thought that new converts should be called merely Christians while Alexander Campbell felt that they should be called Disciples.  This was the beginning of the two groups who were known mostly as Disciples of Christ, but many in the Disciples thought that the northern Disciples had become too worldly with their fancy buildings and their use of instrumental music, so they eventually split off to become the Churches of Christ.  Take your pick of the dates of 1901 or 1905 as the date of that new denomination.  The split became formal in 1905.
« Last Edit: Wed Dec 26, 2012 - 14:08:30 by notreligus »

Christian Forums and Message Board

Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« on: Wed Dec 26, 2012 - 14:06:23 »

Offline Willie T

  • Minds of moderate caliber ordinarily condemn everything which is beyond their range.
  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2656
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
  • "Religion is unbelief." Vineyard St.Petersburg, FL
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #1 on: Wed Dec 26, 2012 - 14:26:35 »
You're kidding.  The very heart of the move of the Spirit, and CoC people appreciate it?

Or did I read you wrong?

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #1 on: Wed Dec 26, 2012 - 14:26:35 »

Offline Snargles

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1764
  • Manna: 48
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #2 on: Wed Dec 26, 2012 - 16:13:37 »
I see the "barking exercises" (as Stone called them) and the falling down and writhing on the ground at Cane Ridge to be mass hysteria. The good that Stone and Campbell did was throwing off the accretions of the Catholic church and getting back to basics. Unfortunately, they could not agree on just what the basics were. Campbell's inflated impression of himself didn't help matters. I have been to Cane Ridge several times and view it as the place where we started to use the Bible for our doctrine rather than the teachings of men.

With regard to the DoC/CoC split, we started to go our separate ways during the Civil War. With no central headquarters it took us longer to divide than it would a hierarchical church but by the early 1900s there was no question that two separate denominations existed (I am willing to call the CoC a denom).

Offline notreligus

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4033
  • Manna: 152
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #3 on: Wed Dec 26, 2012 - 16:38:32 »
You're kidding.  The very heart of the move of the Spirit, and CoC people appreciate it?

Or did I read you wrong?

I don't think I understand your comment nor do I think you understood my post. 

I hope that Church of Christ folk will comment on whether or not they acknowledge this Cane Ridge Revival and those things that happened during that revival as they claim that this revival which took place along with Barton Stone (one of their founders) and his congregation was proof of the birth of the true church in America.  A Restoration Movement had begun in Scotland a number of years earlier. 

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #3 on: Wed Dec 26, 2012 - 16:38:32 »

Offline notreligus

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4033
  • Manna: 152
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #4 on: Wed Dec 26, 2012 - 16:49:52 »
I see the "barking exercises" (as Stone called them) and the falling down and writhing on the ground at Cane Ridge to be mass hysteria. The good that Stone and Campbell did was throwing off the accretions of the Catholic church and getting back to basics. Unfortunately, they could not agree on just what the basics were. Campbell's inflated impression of himself didn't help matters. I have been to Cane Ridge several times and view it as the place where we started to use the Bible for our doctrine rather than the teachings of men.

With regard to the DoC/CoC split, we started to go our separate ways during the Civil War. With no central headquarters it took us longer to divide than it would a hierarchical church but by the early 1900s there was no question that two separate denominations existed (I am willing to call the CoC a denom).

Hah!  Just the answer I expected.  I could have pre-written it.  So, Barton Stone used his hypnotic powers to cause these people to create mass hysteria in the name of the Lord.  Why would you claim him as a founder? 

Your teachings are of men. 

Who came up with the six step program and then whittled it down to five so they could be numbered along with the use of the digits of a single hand?  Hint:  It was a man.

Who said that the church had stopped preaching water baptism for the remission of sins and that teaching needed to be restored?  Hint:   It was a man. 

Who claims that it is a sin to have a kitchen in the building?  Hint:  Men.

Who claims it to be a sin to use multiple communion cups?  Hint:  Men. 

You mentioned the Civil War.  Good.  Alexander Campbell was a slave owner.  He was arrested in Scotland when he went back there for a visit.  Students at his Bethany College nearly burned down the place in protest of his having been a slave owner. 

Church of Christ folk give me a chuckle.  They are selective about Bible verses (proof-texting) and they are also selective about which aspects of their history they will claim and which aspects of their history that they deny. 

Church of Christ folk then go to Cane Ridge to celebrate mass hysteria along with the birth of the one true church.    ::crackup::

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #4 on: Wed Dec 26, 2012 - 16:49:52 »



Offline Snargles

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1764
  • Manna: 48
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #5 on: Wed Dec 26, 2012 - 17:22:52 »
Stone didn't whip the people into a frenzy. They were a bunch of Presbyterians who came to an annual Eucharistic festival and played off each other until they acted like a bunch of Pentacostals. Stone didn't agree with such practices.

5 step program - Walter Scott's method of introducing salvation to the unchurched. Not intended to be a complete explanation.
Who said water baptism is necessary for salvation? God, speaking through the NT writers. If you have a complaint, take it up with God.
No kitchen in the building - a lot of strange legalists that I don't count as kin. I eat in the building.
No multiple cups - a smaller group than the non-eaters. I don't know any personally. I have used multiple cups all my life.
Stone and Campbell both freed their slaves. Stone thought that owning slaves was inconsistent with Christianity. Campbell was against slavery but said that the apostle Paul taught that if you were were a slave you should be loyal to your master.
When I go to Cane Ridge I don't think about the mass hysteria. I think "this is where a group of Presbyterians realized they should follow the Bible for doctrine and call themselves Christians."

Offline Willie T

  • Minds of moderate caliber ordinarily condemn everything which is beyond their range.
  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2656
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
  • "Religion is unbelief." Vineyard St.Petersburg, FL
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #6 on: Wed Dec 26, 2012 - 17:25:33 »
You're kidding.  The very heart of the move of the Spirit, and CoC people appreciate it?

Or did I read you wrong?

I don't think I understand your comment nor do I think you understood my post. 

I hope that Church of Christ folk will comment on whether or not they acknowledge this Cane Ridge Revival and those things that happened during that revival as they claim that this revival which took place along with Barton Stone (one of their founders) and his congregation was proof of the birth of the true church in America.  A Restoration Movement had begun in Scotland a number of years earlier.
My comment was that I cannot believe anyone in the CoC would ever acknowledge any association with something like the Cane Ridge Revivals, even if it WAS presbyterian in origin, let alone make pilgrimages there to honor the happenings..

Offline DaveW

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14274
  • Manna: 189
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #7 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 06:14:25 »
So the Presbyterian Proto-CoC/DoC were having a Pentecostal revival a whole CENTURY before Azuza Street?  Amazing!

I never heard of that before.

Offline Tyler

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1289
  • Manna: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #8 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 07:27:05 »
It is not too difficult to "whip people into hysteria." Look at what Hitler did. Khamenei, Bin Laden.
 
Ever been to a football pep rally where you see kids with their hair dyed and tattooed from neck to toes shouting obscenities?  Ever been to a Baptist or Pentecostal church revival where the preacher runs up and down shouting "hallelujah praise the Lord" where both men and women roll on the floor?
How about Obama in Cleveland, Ohio when he promised cell phones to all who came out to vote.
We, the tax payer we pick up that promise of hysteria. Many, in a hysteria, called for removing God from the Democratic platform at their convension.
So Cane Ridge 1801 is no different. I'm sure God will sort it out. He did in the wilderness of Sin when He told Moses to lift up "a serpent of brass and put it upon a pole."
You know the rest of that story.....hysterics in the camp of Israel.

« Last Edit: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 07:32:00 by Tyler »

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11642
  • Manna: 168
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #9 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 08:00:30 »
From what I have read Stone was a more emotional and effective preacher than Campbell but he did not understand the barking and falling down of folks a Cane Ridge.  It was not something he came up with or was a goal but something that happened and in the end he came to believe it was from God.

Offline apostle

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 392
  • Manna: 21
  • You are now free to move about the Kingdom...
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #10 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 09:52:39 »
Snargles said,
Quote
I have been to Cane Ridge several times and view it as the place where we started to use the Bible for our doctrine rather than the teachings of men.
About time, too.  Nobody else used the Bible in the 1500 years before that.  This takes "having a higher opinion of ourselves that we ought" to a whole new level. Oy, vey!

And Tyler, when the Holy Spirit appears to have done something and you identify it with the work of Hitler and Khomeini, you show an entire lack of the fear of God and a frightening confidence that you know just what happened when you were not there, don't know anybody who was there, and don't believe in any of it in the first place.  I would advise a review of what Jesus says about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit before you natter on further in the darkness.  No doubt God has long ago "sorted out" Cane Ridge to his satisfaction.  He leads us, he does not just sit in heaven and keep score.  But your words are still before the bench.  It is often unwise to judge things of which we do have some direct knowledge; it is downright foolhardy to judge things of which we have NO direct knowledge, especially when they involve God working among his people.

Offline Willie T

  • Minds of moderate caliber ordinarily condemn everything which is beyond their range.
  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2656
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
  • "Religion is unbelief." Vineyard St.Petersburg, FL
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #11 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 09:58:58 »
Snargles said,
Quote
I have been to Cane Ridge several times and view it as the place where we started to use the Bible for our doctrine rather than the teachings of men.
About time, too.  Nobody else used the Bible in the 1500 years before that.  This takes "having a higher opinion of ourselves that we ought" to a whole new level. Oy, vey!

And Tyler, when the Holy Spirit appears to have done something and you identify it with the work of Hitler and Khomeini, you show an entire lack of the fear of God and a frightening confidence that you know just what happened when you were not there, don't know anybody who was there, and don't believe in any of it in the first place.  I would advise a review of what Jesus says about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit before you natter on further in the darkness.  No doubt God has long ago "sorted out" Cane Ridge to his satisfaction.  He leads us, he does not just sit in heaven and keep score.  But your words are still before the bench.  It is often unwise to judge things of which we do have some direct knowledge; it is downright foolhardy to judge things of which we have NO direct knowledge, especially when they involve God working among his people.
Ouch!

Offline notreligus

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4033
  • Manna: 152
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #12 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 13:56:35 »
From what I have read Stone was a more emotional and effective preacher than Campbell but he did not understand the barking and falling down of folks a Cane Ridge.  It was not something he came up with or was a goal but something that happened and in the end he came to believe it was from God.
From what I have read Stone was a more emotional and effective preacher than Campbell but he did not understand the barking and falling down of folks a Cane Ridge.  It was not something he came up with or was a goal but something that happened and in the end he came to believe it was from God.
It is not too difficult to "whip people into hysteria." Look at what Hitler did. Khamenei, Bin Laden.
 
Ever been to a football pep rally where you see kids with their hair dyed and tattooed from neck to toes shouting obscenities?  Ever been to a Baptist or Pentecostal church revival where the preacher runs up and down shouting "hallelujah praise the Lord" where both men and women roll on the floor?
How about Obama in Cleveland, Ohio when he promised cell phones to all who came out to vote.
We, the tax payer we pick up that promise of hysteria. Many, in a hysteria, called for removing God from the Democratic platform at their convension.
So Cane Ridge 1801 is no different. I'm sure God will sort it out. He did in the wilderness of Sin when He told Moses to lift up "a serpent of brass and put it upon a pole."
You know the rest of that story.....hysterics in the camp of Israel.


The question has yet to be answered.  Everyone is nibbling at the edges but avoiding the question.

The question is this:  Why do the Churches of Christ claim that this was the evidence that the true church had its beginnings with Stone's church there at Cane Ridge?    That's a reasonable question.

Offline notreligus

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4033
  • Manna: 152
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #13 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 13:58:14 »
You're kidding.  The very heart of the move of the Spirit, and CoC people appreciate it?

Or did I read you wrong?

I don't think I understand your comment nor do I think you understood my post. 

I hope that Church of Christ folk will comment on whether or not they acknowledge this Cane Ridge Revival and those things that happened during that revival as they claim that this revival which took place along with Barton Stone (one of their founders) and his congregation was proof of the birth of the true church in America.  A Restoration Movement had begun in Scotland a number of years earlier.
My comment was that I cannot believe anyone in the CoC would ever acknowledge any association with something like the Cane Ridge Revivals, even if it WAS presbyterian in origin, let alone make pilgrimages there to honor the happenings..

OK.  I considered that but was not sure.

So far you can see that they don't want to agree with their own history. 

Offline notreligus

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4033
  • Manna: 152
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #14 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 14:02:50 »
From what I have read Stone was a more emotional and effective preacher than Campbell but he did not understand the barking and falling down of folks a Cane Ridge.  It was not something he came up with or was a goal but something that happened and in the end he came to believe it was from God.

My original question was not concerning Barton Stone's view of what happened but concerned the Churches of Christ view of what happened.  They claim that this was the birth of their one true church in America, but they don't want to address all that happened during this revival.

I've looked at the web sites of many Churches of Christ.  Some will mention Cane Ridge but leave out the details because they don't line up with Churches of Christ beliefs.  There are entire books devoted to what happened during this revival. 

Offline Man_Of_Honor

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
  • Manna: 71
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #15 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 14:05:23 »
I am unaware of the subject you brought about. I cannot honestly answer your question. Personally, there is ONLY one CoC put my focus towards to and that is the one I attend. What occurs in other CoCs is out of reach and not in my mind.

Offline notreligus

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4033
  • Manna: 152
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #16 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 14:16:32 »
It is not too difficult to "whip people into hysteria." Look at what Hitler did. Khamenei, Bin Laden.
 
Ever been to a football pep rally where you see kids with their hair dyed and tattooed from neck to toes shouting obscenities?  Ever been to a Baptist or Pentecostal church revival where the preacher runs up and down shouting "hallelujah praise the Lord" where both men and women roll on the floor?
How about Obama in Cleveland, Ohio when he promised cell phones to all who came out to vote.
We, the tax payer we pick up that promise of hysteria. Many, in a hysteria, called for removing God from the Democratic platform at their convension.
So Cane Ridge 1801 is no different. I'm sure God will sort it out. He did in the wilderness of Sin when He told Moses to lift up "a serpent of brass and put it upon a pole."
You know the rest of that story.....hysterics in the camp of Israel.



The topic is the 1801 Cane Ridge Revivial.  Are you going to comment on that? 

Do you claim or deny the historical fact that Barton Stone was the primary host of this revival and your group claims this to be the birth of your church in America?   Was he one that was capable of deceiving people and working them into a frenzy?  I think not.  That man was honest about his beliefs and he bumped heads with Alexander Campbell over their personal beliefs about the Trinity.  He was not afraid to stand alone.  I've read his comments about this revival, too.  He did not undestand it all, but I never read anything from him that caused me to conclude that he that that these were acts of hysteria and had nothing to do with the Holy Spirit.  The comments that have been made so far seem to me to be attempts to re-write history.  Walter Scott was a unitarian.  That is historical, too.  But never see anyone in the C of C admitting to that unless they are pressed to. 

One thing I'm trying to accomplish here is to show how you folk want to side-step things that are included in your history that don't put you in a good light.  There's not a denomination in existence that has all perfect people in it, past or present.  There will not be one perfect person in eternity that was perfected in this life.  It is only by Christ's own righteousness that believers may be called righteous by the Father.  Your church membership means nothing.  The true people of God are the Body of Christ. 



Offline Willie T

  • Minds of moderate caliber ordinarily condemn everything which is beyond their range.
  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2656
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
  • "Religion is unbelief." Vineyard St.Petersburg, FL
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #17 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 14:55:25 »
You're kidding.  The very heart of the move of the Spirit, and CoC people appreciate it?

Or did I read you wrong?

I don't think I understand your comment nor do I think you understood my post. 

I hope that Church of Christ folk will comment on whether or not they acknowledge this Cane Ridge Revival and those things that happened during that revival as they claim that this revival which took place along with Barton Stone (one of their founders) and his congregation was proof of the birth of the true church in America.  A Restoration Movement had begun in Scotland a number of years earlier.
My comment was that I cannot believe anyone in the CoC would ever acknowledge any association with something like the Cane Ridge Revivals, even if it WAS presbyterian in origin, let alone make pilgrimages there to honor the happenings..

OK.  I considered that but was not sure.

So far you can see that they don't want to agree with their own history.
How come ya didn't just ask?

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11642
  • Manna: 168
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #18 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 15:02:05 »
non
As a former CoC preacher I can tell you that the CoC does not claim the cane ridge as the beginning of the CoC but the beginning of the restoration movement.  In the very conservative CoC little is taught about the RM and when it is taught it is cherry picked mostly from the Campbells and not Stone,  Every time I taught a series of lessons on the RM in the CoC I ended up in a meeting with elders because they did not want the whole story told.  The CoC is much more in tune with the logic of the Campbells than the emotions of Stone and Cane Ridge.  Well at least the part they agree with the Campbell's.  ::smile::
When pushed on the views of Stone or Campbell they retreat to the idea of "we have restored the NT church" and what any of these folks taught does not matter.  It is a very illogical stance for those who pride themselves in the logic of the church. ::tippinghat::

Offline Man_Of_Honor

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
  • Manna: 71
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #19 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 15:08:35 »
Disagree with you that church membership means nothing. You are trying to bring about shady things pertaining to CoC when your approach is a shady one. Makes me question your motive and wonder if your responses should be taken as serious since they are nothing but criticisms. You are not really exposing much because the things ypu are bringing about are irrelevant to me in this present time. What I care is if my church sticks to the Word of God scripture by scripture. I am confident to say that we do. Reason why I stopped with the stupidity of going over the Catholics Forum and start debating them in their domain (as a former Catholic myself). I was being a drama king stirring up drama. I allow them to mind their own business and it goes both ways.

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11642
  • Manna: 168
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #20 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 15:11:19 »
Non
The true legalistic CoC does not claim Stone or the Campbell's as founders just folks who helped start the RM.  You see in their logic the only founder is Christ and they have simply restored the NT church as it was in the first century.  They do not understand that this logic is in a vacuum.  When pressed on how the church could go apostate in 303 AD and be restored in the 19th century does no fullfill the promise that the gates of hell will not prevail...  Now days they try to point to some obscure groups that have a doctrine or 2 like their own and claim that the true church went into hiding but small groups could always be found.  Problem is no one has found them.  rofl

Offline Man_Of_Honor

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
  • Manna: 71
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #21 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 15:11:59 »
What is constructed inside and outside my church, there are some CoCs that would disagree with it.

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11642
  • Manna: 168
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #22 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 15:12:52 »
Disagree with you that church membership means nothing. You are trying to bring about shady things pertaining to CoC when your approach is a shady one. Makes me question your motive and wonder if your responses should be taken as serious since they are nothing but criticisms. You are not really exposing much because the things ypu are bringing about are irrelevant to me in this present time. What I care is if my church sticks to the Word of God scripture by scripture. I am confident to say that we do. Reason why I stopped with the stupidity of going over the Catholics Forum and start debating them in their domain (as a former Catholic myself). I was being a drama king stirring up drama. I allow them to mind their own business and it goes both ways.


Thanks Man you just made my point.

Offline Man_Of_Honor

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
  • Manna: 71
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #23 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 15:14:57 »
I know. I read your posts. But again, that is my personal take.

HRoberson

  • Guest
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #24 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 15:20:05 »
There are some observations I would make.


Most members of churches of Christ would not know what Cane Ridge was, much less consider it the beginning of the church in America.


Cane Ridge was a multi-day, multi-denominational event with preachers from a variety of groups, including Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists.


There is no reason to deny that the Spirit was at work in that place. Whether everything that occurred was a working of the Spirit or not is questionable.


If churches of Christ claim a date for the beginning of their movement, it would most likely be the 1832 meeting between Campbell and Stone where they decided to join their two groups which had begun independently. Some might point to the rejection of Campbell's followers from the Redstone Baptist Association (1824), or perhaps even the dissolution of the Mahoning Association as the "beginning" of a separate group.


These two groups (Stone's and Campbell's) were not the only groups to come to similar understandings of what the church should be, but they evidently provided the impetus to the development of what is called the American Restoration Movement, or Stone-Campbell Movement.



The church of Christ penchant for more cognitive approaches to Christianity is likely an artifact of Campbell's style, but since most members of churches of Christ couldn't tell you what Campbell thought nor his style, these are not determinative of current belief. More likely, the statements of Jesus that essentially point to his words and deeds as reasons to believe, and Paul's rational argumentation style provide the current basis of a cognitive approach.


However, to acknowledge that churches of Christ take a cognitive approach to Scripture does not mean that they deny the operation of the Spirit. There are some, no doubt, who do. There are many who do not. Churches of Christ do not fit neatly in a box.


Churches of Christ are not Calvinist, and to that degree, they deny that the direct operation of the Spirit is needed for conversion. That however, is not the same thing as denying that the Spirit operates in the "real world."

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11642
  • Manna: 168
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #25 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 15:36:33 »
Excellent observations HR
Like I said most in the CoC today know very little about the RM and their own history.  I have met very few CoC preachers who have every read Thomas Campbell's D&A or any amount of actual writings of either of the Campbells.  Even at the graduate level I received very elementary information on the RM.  Many of today's members of the CoC know nothing of the RM or their roots. 

Offline Man_Of_Honor

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
  • Manna: 71
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #26 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 15:40:06 »
HRob, that was a sound and reasonable response. Quite interesting how some here are trying to bring about the history (past), when my church and I would rather put our minds into the Word of God. Something more relevant to us. They do not realize times have changed now.

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11642
  • Manna: 168
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #27 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 16:00:53 »
MoH
I can't speak for others but I am simply trying to keep it honest.  There is nothing wrong with trying to be a biblical assembly it is something we should strive for.  The problem comes with the claim that "we have restored the one true church"  and condemnation of other Christians who do things different.  This is not in keeping with scripture nor the RM history.  One of the crys of the RM was "Not the only Christians but Christians only".  Problem is when every other group is refered to as a denomination and the CoC as the "Lord's Church"  by deed we have claimed to be the only Christiansd.

Offline Willie T

  • Minds of moderate caliber ordinarily condemn everything which is beyond their range.
  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2656
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
  • "Religion is unbelief." Vineyard St.Petersburg, FL
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #28 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 16:04:19 »
MoH
I can't speak for others but I am simply trying to keep it honest.  There is nothing wrong with trying to be a biblical assembly it is something we should strive for.  The problem comes with the claim that "we have restored the one true church"  and condemnation of other Christians who do things different.  This is not in keeping with scripture nor the RM history.  One of the crys of the RM was "Not the only Christians but Christians only".  Problem is when every other group is refered to as a denomination and the CoC as the "Lord's Church"  by deed we have claimed to be the only Christiansd.
That was one of the things that helped drive me away from "THE Church".  Everyone holding up signs that said "Hurray for OUR side.... the ONLY side."

Offline Man_Of_Honor

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
  • Manna: 71
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #29 on: Thu Dec 27, 2012 - 16:05:13 »
OK. I see where you are coming from. Others made a similar response as yours.

Offline Tyler

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1289
  • Manna: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #30 on: Fri Dec 28, 2012 - 07:19:49 »
HR...:"Churches of Christ are not Calvinist, and to that degree, they deny that the direct operation of the Spirit is needed for conversion. That however, is not the same thing as denying that the Spirit operates in the "real world."

True! and, this is why the Campbell's and men of the Restoration move away from their Presbyterian/Baptist roots.
John Calvin took his Spirit regeneration theology from Augustine's belief in the "total depravity" of man by inheriting Adam's sin. The basic tenet of Catholicism and Protestantism.

Although Calvin reduced Augustine's sacramental system of "infuse faith" to two (baptism and the Lord's Supper) he taught, and the Protestant world still teaches that man must first be "elected" from the foundation of the world using Ephesians 1:4 and the "spiritual man" of 1 Cor. 2:14 verses the "natural man" as examples of their theology of predestination and enlightenment.

Man of Honor, coming out of Catholicism, I am sure can attest to the fact that the teaching in Catholicism has the ordained priest being infused with the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands by the bishops. Having this "indwelled Spirit" (that they believe) it is impossible to remove a "Spirit filled" man from the Catholic church clergy. This is why they had to shuffle pedophile priests around the country or to hide them out. Impossible to teach that the Church has the apostolic right to infuse the Spirit by the laying on of hands and them remove Him in same manner.

This is the theory in Protestantism is it not? "Once saved, always saved" is the cry of the Calvinist. Once you have been infused with the Spirit, the Protestants will go to John 10 and pull out their favorite sheep verse: "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me----and no man is able to pluck them out of my hand." If this is the real meaning of this allegory why the need of shepherds to watch over the flock?   

I imagine notreligus has spent a great deal of time in the sheep pen..I get the feeling "notreligius" is more religious than he lets on. I believe he is making an effort to herd the coC back to Cane Ridge and infuse them with the Spirit. But, according to Augustine and Calvin you can't lead a sheep to water unless he/she has been miraculously infused with the Holy Spirit by reversing their will. Now, the sheep can do nothing but to love God and fall into line and get fleeced.

I believe it comes down to this: One can believe by an emotional experience (ask Jesus into your heart) that he/she has had a transcendental feeling of being saved from the wrath of God in their heart, or one can believe the "promise" of Acts 2:38-39.

If the Lord is not true to His written word then there is not a hell of a lot I can do about it! Cane Ridge of 1801 is history along with the slaughter of the Anabaptists by the Protestants and Catholics in the 1500's over their refusal to take oaths along with their belief that the only conscious members of the Lord's church are to be baptized by immersion and separation of church and state. For this belief, they were burned at the stake, removal of their tongues, buried alive and because of their belief in immersion: drowned! Now, there's a history to be proud.

Offline notreligus

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4033
  • Manna: 152
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #31 on: Fri Dec 28, 2012 - 09:42:06 »
HR...:"Churches of Christ are not Calvinist, and to that degree, they deny that the direct operation of the Spirit is needed for conversion. That however, is not the same thing as denying that the Spirit operates in the "real world."

True! and, this is why the Campbell's and men of the Restoration move away from their Presbyterian/Baptist roots.
John Calvin took his Spirit regeneration theology from Augustine's belief in the "total depravity" of man by inheriting Adam's sin. The basic tenet of Catholicism and Protestantism.

Although Calvin reduced Augustine's sacramental system of "infuse faith" to two (baptism and the Lord's Supper) he taught, and the Protestant world still teaches that man must first be "elected" from the foundation of the world using Ephesians 1:4 and the "spiritual man" of 1 Cor. 2:14 verses the "natural man" as examples of their theology of predestination and enlightenment.

Man of Honor, coming out of Catholicism, I am sure can attest to the fact that the teaching in Catholicism has the ordained priest being infused with the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands by the bishops. Having this "indwelled Spirit" (that they believe) it is impossible to remove a "Spirit filled" man from the Catholic church clergy. This is why they had to shuffle pedophile priests around the country or to hide them out. Impossible to teach that the Church has the apostolic right to infuse the Spirit by the laying on of hands and them remove Him in same manner.

This is the theory in Protestantism is it not? "Once saved, always saved" is the cry of the Calvinist. Once you have been infused with the Spirit, the Protestants will go to John 10 and pull out their favorite sheep verse: "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me----and no man is able to pluck them out of my hand." If this is the real meaning of this allegory why the need of shepherds to watch over the flock?   

I imagine notreligus has spent a great deal of time in the sheep pen..I get the feeling "notreligius" is more religious than he lets on. I believe he is making an effort to herd the coC back to Cane Ridge and infuse them with the Spirit. But, according to Augustine and Calvin you can't lead a sheep to water unless he/she has been miraculously infused with the Holy Spirit by reversing their will. Now, the sheep can do nothing but to love God and fall into line and get fleeced.

I believe it comes down to this: One can believe by an emotional experience (ask Jesus into your heart) that he/she has had a transcendental feeling of being saved from the wrath of God in their heart, or one can believe the "promise" of Acts 2:38-39.

If the Lord is not true to His written word then there is not a hell of a lot I can do about it! Cane Ridge of 1801 is history along with the slaughter of the Anabaptists by the Protestants and Catholics in the 1500's over their refusal to take oaths along with their belief that the only conscious members of the Lord's church are to be baptized by immersion and separation of church and state. For this belief, they were burned at the stake, removal of their tongues, buried alive and because of their belief in immersion: drowned! Now, there's a history to be proud.

This is just more revisionist speculation and another rabbit trail. 

Your comments about Baptists and Calvinists don't fly.  Thomas and Alexander Campbell were Baptists for 16 years!   Yes, for 16 years they did not move away from their Calvinist roots.  Moving away from the Presbyterian Church is one thing, but leaving Calvinism behind is another thing.  Alexander Campbell, who liked to publish newsletters to promote his dogma, published the monthly Christian Baptist publication while he was in the Baptist Church.  Alexander and his entire family were baptized by a Baptist preacher named Matthias Luce.  This is a historical fact the hard-line part of the Churches of Christ have tried to sanitize. 

I am not religious.  If I were religious that would mean that I had to do something to earn God's grace.  Christ did all that was necessary on the cross.  He took the curse and punishment that was due me and all of mankind as the Father put in on Him.  Christ's righteousness has been imputed to me by faith.  I know that most of the hard-line folk in this group want to dispute what God's Word tells us and add works to salvtion.  The Churches of Christ generally confuse salvation and discipleship.  There are things we do as disciples that have nothing to do with becoming part of the Body of Christ. 

Ephesians 2:8  For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;


Offline Man_Of_Honor

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
  • Manna: 71
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #33 on: Fri Dec 28, 2012 - 11:52:37 »
Amen, Tyler! Well stated! Your explanation comes into fruition when I see the responses of many over at the Theology Forum. One can clearly see thw differences in what we have been taught. Personally, I feel the OP has an agenda coming into this forum and spreading all of this information as if it is relevant to many of us in this current time. Funny that they bring about the church they attend and one can see the affects of Luther, Calvin, and others within their churches. Yet, they keep themselves silent. They cannot hide when they are publicizing their responses in these forums. That is why I chuckle when others speak about CoC being this or that when their churches have been led astray from the actual teachings within the Word of God. Pure comedy.

Offline notreligus

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4033
  • Manna: 152
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Cane Ridge Revival 1801
« Reply #34 on: Fri Dec 28, 2012 - 14:11:18 »
Amen, Tyler! Well stated! Your explanation comes into fruition when I see the responses of many over at the Theology Forum. One can clearly see thw differences in what we have been taught. Personally, I feel the OP has an agenda coming into this forum and spreading all of this information as if it is relevant to many of us in this current time. Funny that they bring about the church they attend and one can see the affects of Luther, Calvin, and others within their churches. Yet, they keep themselves silent. They cannot hide when they are publicizing their responses in these forums. That is why I chuckle when others speak about CoC being this or that when their churches have been led astray from the actual teachings within the Word of God. Pure comedy.

You guys are pretty good at using the system here.  You are experts at calling others liars without using the word.  You get an A+ for that ability. 

Now, produce your proof that I am a Luther-follower and a Calvinist.  You won't be able to as you have no proof. 

You guys don't teach the pure Word of God;  you teach a personal dogma that was formulated especially by Walter Scott and then used by Alexander Campbell.