Which would you choose - Doctrinal Accuracy or Racial Reconciliation?

[Livelysword]

Why just worry about the "AA" CofC around the corner?  What about those other folks who "believe and are baptized?"  Can't reconcile with them folks because they don't have the right SOF?

Lively:  I do not have a problem with one who has obeyed the gospel but has not found where the other faithful saints gather...  he still has to assemble himself with the faithful saints... and that does not happen at the Baptist or Methodist or Lutheran ect... churches     sooner or later he has to come out from among them and be separate...


2Co 6:14  Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
2Co 6:15  And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
2Co 6:16  And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
2Co 6:17  Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
2Co 6:18  And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

[Johnb]

So then unless one assembles with a group that did not exist until the 19th century they will be lost?   

[Livelysword]

So then unless one assembles with a group that did not exist until the 19th century they will be lost?   

Lively:  If you happen to read the bible, there is a book called Acts of the Apostles in which you will find that the disciples were called Christians... which is what we are called today... having obeyed the same identical gospel they did... makes us also Christians...  I am not sure which group you are referring to that popped up in the 19th century...  but no other foundation can a man lay then that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ... if any man build upon this foundation, he shall receive reward...  so just for your info... any group which may pop up at any time from the death of Christ forward who builds upon that foundation is a Christian just as those who were first called Christians at Antioch...  Hopefully you have learned something here today...  but no doubt you think we are followers of Campbell, and are therefore Campbellites??   I really think you need to concern yourself with the foundation of Christ, and if that is what Campbell and the rest were building upon...



Co 3:10  According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
1Co 3:11  For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
1Co 3:12  Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
1Co 3:13  Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
1Co 3:14  If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.



Act 11:26  And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.


1Pe 4:16  Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.



The only thing Paul was persuading people to become was Christians...


Act 26:28  Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.

[zoonance]

Why just worry about the "AA" CofC around the corner?  What about those other folks who "believe and are baptized?"  Can't reconcile with them folks because they don't have the right SOF?

As a group, I doubt it from either direction!  I don't see baptist, methodist, catholics etc.  beating a path to someone else's door.   Also, some whites get along.  That's progress.      Race relations (in this country - or at least around here) something ... deeper and more challenging even.  It involves more than just doctrine, which is divisive enough as evidenced by the sofs all over the place.

[Mere Nick]

What would be the point of meeting with a congregation of folks representing the whole spectrum of humanity if, say, you don't meet in an upper room?

[Bocephus]

What would be the point of meeting with a congregation of folks representing the whole spectrum of humanity if, say, you don't meet in an upper room?

My congregation does.  We are the true church.

[zoonance]

What would be the point of meeting with a congregation of folks representing the whole spectrum of humanity if, say, you don't meet in an upper room?

My congregation does.  We are the true church.

Just like scripture only recognized the collection of funds on the first day of the week to support nonlocal needs of distant believers, I believe you guys need to collect bucks to support our travel to your services every sunday so that unity will have finally been accomplished and the Lord can return!      

[Johnb]

Lively
I used to preach for the CoC.  I have 2 post graduate degrees from their colleges.  So I think I am familiar with the RM and the teaching of the CoC being the one true church.  Problem is there is no evidence of any group that teaches and pratices as the CoC that has existed from the first century until now.  If that be the case you are calling Jesus a lair when He said the gates of hell shall not prevail against His church.  According to the logic of your theology the church disappeared and everyone was lost for 15 plus centuries.  Please don't insult folks intelligence by going to the remnant argument.  There is simply no evidence for it.
The purpose of the RM was to unite Christians in all the sects.  That means those who started the RM believed their must be Christian in ll the sects.  They had to be there because the CoC did not exist.

I have challenged you in other places to defend the CENI theology that the CoC uses but you are unable or unwilling to examine the bases for the legalistic CoC theology.

[zoonance]

Lively
I used to preach for the CoC.  I have 2 post graduate degrees from their colleges.  So I think I am familiar with the RM and the teaching of the CoC being the one true church.  Problem is there is no evidence of any group that teaches and pratices as the CoC that has existed from the first century until now.  If that be the case you are calling Jesus a lair when He said the gates of hell shall not prevail against His church.  According to the logic of your theology the church disappeared and everyone was lost for 15 plus centuries.  Please don't insult folks intelligence by going to the remnant argument.  There is simply no evidence for it.
The purpose of the RM was to unite Christians in all the sects.  That means those who started the RM believed their must be Christian in ll the sects.  They had to be there because the CoC did not exist.

I have challenged you in other places to defend the CENI theology that the CoC uses but you are unable or unwilling to examine the bases for the legalistic CoC theology.

Actually, some believe the cof was present all along, just in hiding, out of the radar of history.  Goofy for tons of reasons.

I think CENI (and CENIoids whatever it be called) has more valor or purpose in encouraging unity than it does for determining the line between saved and unsaved.  I really would like to hear of a better (for want of a better word) plan for unifying the church.  Papacy down?  biblical authority up? what???

*Modified:  if it ain't 'biblical" then it is human mind filtered.  Thus, it makes sense (in terms of Unification) to minimize human interpretations (PhD theological discussions, common sense applications, etc) as the basis for unity in practice and even in doctrine - if the doctrine is derived by some algebraic formula designed to find X when A, B and C are considered "knowns"

[blituri]

Two degrees probably brought you to 212F.  I would not expect to learn anything but theology at a LIBERAL ARTISTS school.

It as Christ as the ROCK, Water, Manna and guiding Spirit.
When Israel fell into musical idolatry, the tribe of Levi--cursed by their father--was burdened with the sacrificial system.

Christ commanded the Church in the Wilderness and it would have been THE church of Christ.

It was INCLUSIVE of Rest, Reading and rehearsing the Word of God--Bible school that is EXCLUSIVELY
It was EXCLUSIVE of vocal or instrumental rejoicing as a DIRECT COMMAND for the simple simons without the IQ of respect.

The EXCLUSED work would be more than about 700 feet of travel, taking up tithes and offerings or sending our "ministers of the Lord."

The worship INCLUSIVE was to

PREACH the Word of God by READING the word of God (or in the heads of ANY competent elder).

That continued PARALLEL with the sacrificial system where they could PROFANE the Sabbath (that music, Lucifer word) because they had been ABANDONED to a Gentile or pagan system.

Jesus practiced the Synagogue as a place to READ the word and then sit down---EXCLUSIVELY.
He commanded the old synagogue by the word EKKLESIA where singers or players would get hurt real bad.
He ordained, Paul explained and the church maintained the Lord's Supper as an EVANGELISM act.

Jesus paid it all.
There is no command, example, inference or historic pattern for the TITHE or THE LAW OF GIVING: so agreed the Restoration Patternism

The Church of Christ continued and is IDENTIFIED in every period of recorded history. They met each first day of the week, they spoke the Psalms as long as time permitted, the observed the weekly Lord's Supper and the "deacons" carried it to the SHUT INS.  There was no PREACHING and SINGING was imposed in the year 373.  They baptized FOR the remission of sins.

The Campbells continued what John Calvin identified as the RESTORATION OF THE CHURCH to the principle of CENI.  For adults, Calvin taught the truth about baptism.  Calvin called it THE CHURCH OF CHRIST and did a hatched job on preachers by that time which had justified their existence by the Jewish Priesthood.

[Johnb]

Zoo
The problem is all theology including CENI is filltered through human logic.  That is how we determine which commands must be follwed etc.  I perfer the Campbells method of identifying a Christian by their devotion to Christ.  Many consider the RM a failure.  I view it as a success.  When it started each group was claiming to have the real truth and would not consider others as Christains.  That has largely cahanged today (with the exception of the legalistic wing of the CoC and some others)  I believe that is a direct result of the RM movement.

Blituri
HGSR is not a liberalarts school.  The rest of you post as usual was long rambling made no sense and is based more on fantsy than fact.   

[zoonance]

Thus, no human effort is of real value - even though we were admonished to... try?  Based on what?   It clearly is more than just "faith".   There simply is too much recorded to narrow it all down to "I believe" and suddenly we all go skipping down the road singing kumbaya.  It can't be too long before the merry skippers start to ask each other... "believe what?"   

[blituri]

I don't know what means HGRS: But Campbell never said what the liberationists say.  He and I had rather have as a friend an UNBAPTIZED person who followed "c"hristian principles than a baptized person who was not honest.  However, of the "C"hristians who might be among the sects he said they should COME OUT OF BABYLON.  The Lunnies twist the Lunenburg correspondence to their own destruction.

http://www.piney.com/Calvin-Reform-1.html

For where can I exert myself to better purpose or more honestly, where, too, in a matter at this time more necessary, than in attempting, according to my ability,

    to aid the Church of Christ, whose claims it is unlawful in any instance to deny,
    and which is now in grievous distress, and in extreme danger?

But there is no occasion for a long preface concerning myself. Receive what I say as you would do if it were pronounced by the united voice

    of all those who either have already taken care to restore the Church,
    or are desirous that it should be restored to true order.

That in these things consists the true and sincere worship which alone God approves, and in which alone He delights,

    is both taught by the Holy Spirit throughout the Scriptures,
    and is also, antecedent to discussion, the obvious dictate of piety.

Nor from the beginning was there any other method of worshipping God, the only difference being, that this spiritual truth, which with us is naked and simple, was under the former dispensation wrapt up in figures.

And this is the meaning of our Saviour's words, "The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth," (John iv. 23.)

For by these words he meant not to declare that God was not worshipped by the fathers in this spiritual manner, but only to point out a distinction in the external form, viz., That while they had the Spirit shadowed forth by many figures, we have it in simplicity. But it has always been an acknowledged point, that God, who is a Spirit, must be worshipped in spirit and in truth.

Moreover, the rule which distinguishes between pure and vitiated worship is of universal application,

    in order that we may not adopt any device which seems fit to ourselves,
    but look to the injunctions of Him who alone is entitled to prescribe.

Therefore, if we would have Him to approve our worship, this rule, which he everywhere enforces with the utmost strictness, must be carefully observed.
            For there is a twofold reason why the Lord,
            in condemning and prohibiting all fictitious worship,
            requires us to give obedience only to his own voice.

First, it tends greatly to establish His authority that we do not follow our own pleasure,
but depend entirely on his sovereignty;

and, secondly, such is our folly, that when we are left at liberty, all we are able to do is to go astray.

And then when once we have turned aside from the right path, there is no end to our wanderings, until we get buried under a multitude of superstitions.

    Justly, therefore, does the Lord, in order to assert his full right of dominion,
         strictly enjoin what he wishes us to do,
         and at once reject all human devices which are at variance with his command.

Justly, too, does he, in express terms, define our limits, that we may not,
         by fabricating perverse modes of worship, provoke His anger against us.

I know how difficult it is to persuade the world that God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by His Word.

    The opposite persuasion which cleaves to them, being seated, as it were, in their very bones and marrow,
         is, that whatever they do has in itself a sufficient sanction,
         provided it exhibits some kind of zeal for the honour of God.

But since God not only regards as fruitless,
         but also plainly abominates, whatever we undertake from zeal to His worship,

    if at variance with His command,
    what do we gain by a contrary course?
    The words of God are clear and distinct, "Obedience is better than sacrifice."

    "In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men," (1 Sam. xv. 22; Matt. xv. 9.)
    Every addition to His word, especially in this matter, is a lie. Mere "will worship" is vanity.
    This is the decision, and when once the judge has decided,

        it is no longer time to debate.

1Sam. 15:22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD
         as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices,
         as in obeying the voice of the LORD?
         Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.
1Sam. 15:23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft,
         and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.

Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD,
         he hath also rejected thee from being king.
1Sam. 15:24 And Saul said unto Samuel, I have sinned:
        for I have transgressed the commandment of the LORD, and thy words:

[blituri]

Only the Disciples /Christian churches ever claimed to use the Law of Silence or INFERENCES.

We know what is commanded in Scripture and have to infer nothing (except rejecting Jesus and replacing him with Fanny Crosby and Twila Paris) about THE issue of musicating in theholy places.

We know what was EXAMPLED in the church and for centuries in churches which left a RECORD.

The Disciples ALSO claim ownership of TRADITIONALISM or using the common traditions as AUTHORITY for an ongoing "guidance of the spirit."

The CENI is well documented in the Bible, all church theologians (including Calvin and Luther) and all founders of denominations.

I would think that to try to RID the world of God's right which WE assume for ourselves is probably of being lawless.

[Johnb]

Zoo
No. It is not just belief or faith.  Faith produces good works and a desire to follow Christ and Godly principles.  I don't see all of us ever agreeing on every jot but striving to live as close to God as we can IMO is what we should do.

Blituri
HGSR=Harding Graduate School of Religion. 
Go read the Declaration and Address instead of piney and you might understand what the Campbells actually believed.