Author Topic: The Disciples of Christ  (Read 18413 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline s1n4m1n

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3687
  • Manna: 55
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Day's Work
The Disciples of Christ
« on: Thu Dec 18, 2008 - 16:31:29 »
I'm always mystified as to why there are not more Disicples of Christ members on this forum. In fact, I don't know if anyone currently posting here regularly is a member of that church.

One thing I have a question on is their 2020 program of adding 1000 new congregations by 2020. My understanding is that they have had some success, but what some of that seems to come from is pre-existing congregations joining the DoC. I suspect in some cases it has to do with the clergy pension program.

Also I would like to know how their fellowship with the UCC is doing.


Christian Forums and Message Board

The Disciples of Christ
« on: Thu Dec 18, 2008 - 16:31:29 »

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12471
  • Manna: 226
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #1 on: Thu Dec 18, 2008 - 21:19:13 »
I am a member of the DoC.  We actually are duel  DoC UCC.  I hate being associated with the UCC.  However, when this congregation broke off another DoC in the 80s the UCC gave a lot of money to get things started so we carry both names.

Offline s1n4m1n

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3687
  • Manna: 55
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Day's Work
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #2 on: Thu Dec 18, 2008 - 21:39:10 »
So how is that 2020 thing working out?

Also I see some declaration of principles being worked on.

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12471
  • Manna: 226
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #3 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 10:21:22 »
Actually Ken I don't know.  We are about as close to autonomous as a DoC/UCC can be,  We have almost no contact with either just do our own thing.

The denom HQ's think they are doing great and wonderful thing but they are mostly being ignored by the rank and file.  They are to liberal for 75% of us.  The problem is the world thinks they are speaking for us.   

Offline Jimbob

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 21536
  • Manna: 439
  • Gender: Male
  • Me fail English? That's unpossible.
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #4 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 10:31:43 »
Johnb, I visited a DoC in our area to meet the group, since we RM folk are so rare up here (this cong. has been around since before the days of Campbell, and is one of the very few DoC's remaining here) and that was their take as well.  They didn't have much good to say at all for their  NY regional leadership either, which was considered far too liberal for them. 

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #4 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 10:31:43 »



Offline Jimmy

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14574
  • Manna: 294
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #5 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 10:35:15 »
Actually Ken I don't know.  We are about as close to autonomous as a DoC/UCC can be,  We have almost no contact with either just do our own thing.

The denom HQ's think they are doing great and wonderful thing but they are mostly being ignored by the rank and file.  They are to liberal for 75% of us.  The problem is the world thinks they are speaking for us.   

If you identify yourself with them, then they are speaking for you even if you don't agree with them.  Why do you not disassociate yourself from them?  Is it a matter of legalities in the ownership of property etc.?

Offline s1n4m1n

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3687
  • Manna: 55
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Day's Work
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #6 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 10:39:57 »
So how does this "to liberal" leadership even get in power? I assume they are selected by the delegates to regional and national conventions. Would the majority of the DoC congregations be liberal.

Offline s1n4m1n

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3687
  • Manna: 55
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Day's Work
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #7 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 12:03:28 »
Johnb,

How does the UCC connection work on a local level? I know they baptize infants and the DoC doesn't, it seems like their could be some conflicts.


Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12471
  • Manna: 226
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #8 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 12:22:43 »
Actually Ken I don't know.  We are about as close to autonomous as a DoC/UCC can be,  We have almost no contact with either just do our own thing.

The denom HQ's think they are doing great and wonderful thing but they are mostly being ignored by the rank and file.  They are to liberal for 75% of us.  The problem is the world thinks they are speaking for us.   

If you identify yourself with them, then they are speaking for you even if you don't agree with them.  Why do you not disassociate yourself from them?  Is it a matter of legalities in the ownership of property etc.?



Actually Jimmy I made that motion.  We have a few older members that were here when the congregation started,  They feel obligated to keep the name because of all the help recieved.  When they are gone it may change. 
PS I have never worried a lot about what others think of me personally nor do I worry about what they think of us as a congregation.  It is clear to all that know us we speak for ourselves.  We own our property etc not the DOC or UCC 

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12471
  • Manna: 226
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #9 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 12:27:00 »
So how does this "to liberal" leadership even get in power? I assume they are selected by the delegates to regional and national conventions. Would the majority of the DoC congregations be liberal.


They went to liberal colleges and the common folks had apathy.  We did not even bother to have a delegate until recently.  I think that is quite common.  The smaller churches are usually more conservative but can not afford to send delegates.  They also do not feel a strong allegence to the DOC or UCC. 

Offline zoonance

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8529
  • Manna: 233
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #10 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 12:33:38 »
We have a DOC in our town but I have never visited.   I simply assumed the "worse" (super liberal, unrecognizable, etc.)  That is unfair.   What kind of "questions" or whatever would I ask or look for if I got around to visiting sometime.  (It is difficult to visit anywhere when you are so busy in your own congregation.)  I assume the UCC is the Universal Council of Churches?

Offline s1n4m1n

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3687
  • Manna: 55
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Day's Work
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #11 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 12:40:11 »
BTW, here are my comments from almost 3 years ago when I visited a DoC congregation: Went to a Disciples of Christ church today

Time sure does fly!

That was when I was going to the Roman Catholic Church in their convert class, but skipped that Sunday to checkout the Disciples.

Since then I didn't finish the conversion and was never confirmed in the RCC but started attending a small Anglican Catholic parish before Easter of that year.

Offline DCR

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11300
  • Manna: 432
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #12 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 12:46:35 »
but started attending a small Anglican Catholic parish before Easter of that year.

Is that the same or different from the Anglican (Episcopal) Church/Church of England?

Offline s1n4m1n

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3687
  • Manna: 55
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Day's Work
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #13 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 14:15:49 »
but started attending a small Anglican Catholic parish before Easter of that year.


Is that the same or different from the Anglican (Episcopal) Church/Church of England?


Organizationally, they are not part of The Episcopal Church or the Anglican Communion.

It can get a little convoluted. When The Episcopal Church (then called the Protestant Episcopal Church) approved of women's ordination to the priesthood and approved a "heteredox" prayerbook in a 1976 General Convention, a congress of concerned churchman meet in St. Louis to reject the innovations in the Affirmation of St. Louis. This rejection lead to the formation of what they called a "continuing" church. This body was supposed to be the authentic Episcopal church in the United States and several Episcopal priests were ordained by a retired Episcopal bishop. The hope was that the Archbishop of Cantarbury would recognize this group as the official Anglican body in the United States. That never happened and the Protestant Episcopal Church never did break apart. The Church of England began ordaining women in 1992 and have recently, this year in fact, approved women bishops.

In addition, and unfortunately, these new bishops couldn't get along and had differing theologies of the church (some low church, some high church). Before the offical Church Constitution was approved one of the bishops pulled out his diocese and decided to go it alone. Eventually, three church bodies came into being, the Anglican Catholic Church (ACC), the Anglican Province of Christ the King (APCK) and the United Episcopal Church of North America (UECNA). Let me tell you, if you think the CoC has problems splitting you should look at these groups.

In one movement toward unity the ACC tried to unite with the American Episcopal Church (formed from a split with the Protestant Episcopal Church over civil rights and the false teaching of som PEC bishops). But due to the unsavory origins of the AEC a majority of the ACC didn't go along so a new group called the Anglican Church in America was formed from parts of the ACC and the AEC. After a couple years a split happened in the ACA and a new group called the Anglican Province of America was formed from some of the former AEC parishes. So from a unity movement of two group, three groups formed. But even after all this there are still holding that they are authentically "continuing" the Anglican Church.

Currently there are some movements towards unity between the ACC, APCK, and the UECNA. They share ministers and help in each others consecrations and stuff like that. Of course were only talking about 20,000 people total in the three groups and I'm being generous.

The congregation I worship with goes back to 1977 and seems to have been once been a part of the APCK and then the UECNA. They then split from the UECNA and sought the oversight of a retired bishop of that group.

Ken

Anglican Catholic Church

Anglican Province of Christ the King

United Episcopal Church

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12471
  • Manna: 226
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #14 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 16:55:31 »
Zoo
Actually the UCC is United Church of Christ and have a loose connection to the RM.

Ken  we don't have any UCC folks to deal with so we have not faced the infant baptism question.  However, like Stone and the Campbells in the early day we do not make baptism a test of fellowship.

blituri

  • Guest
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #15 on: Fri Dec 19, 2008 - 21:11:23 »
However, like Stone and the Campbells in the early day we do not make baptism a test of fellowship.

Not true: Campbell could "fellowship" anyone who claimed to be a christian with a little "c" as in a christian nation.

However, he said that Christians were believers who had been baptized. He said that if there were "Christians among the sects then they should come out of Babylon."  He noted how silly it would be that if he really participated with the SECTS that he had made it his life's work to teach the SECTS to return to the Bible.

He would preach in an instrumental church but he would not FELLOWSHIP THE ORGAN so it was silenced.
He would not fellowship an unbaptized person in the sense of considering them saved or qualified to fellowship in the sense of leading in a congregation or preaching.

You would not FELLERSHIP me if I wanted to teach the FACTS from Genesis to Revelation about the music issue. Sure, you would let me attend and put something in the pot.

The Disciples have more Anglican roots than the Church of Christ: they follow the High Church idea which was never approved by anyone but the Catholics, that they have the right to use traditon and culture alonside of the Word of God. That is THE major distinction between the Church of Christ and some fraction of the Christian Churches.   They call us a SECT because we do not ADD anything not commanded while they call themselves a CHURCH because they are a LIVING Church able to go with the flow.  They love the demeaning term "strict constructionists."  Lately they have added ANTI-instrumentalists which means that they would not fellowship anyone who doesn't follow orders and stop teaching against "machines for doing hard work."


Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12471
  • Manna: 226
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #16 on: Sat Dec 20, 2008 - 06:48:19 »
In the early part of the RM first Stone then Campebell rejected infant baptism.  However, neither made a connection between the believers baptism and the forgiveness of sin.  When the 2 movements combined the question of baptism came up and Stone insisted that it not be made a test of fellowship but that decision be left to the individual.  He also pointed out that not 1 or 2 in 100 had not had the believers baptism.  Campbell agreed and the merger was complete.  Both Stone and Campbell thought baptism was important but neither made it an absolute test of fellowship.  Campbell said on the subject "should only those of complete knowledge and understanding be admiytted into the kingdom of God?"

Offline Lee Freeman

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10368
  • Manna: 240
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #17 on: Mon Dec 22, 2008 - 16:51:22 »
As a related aside, Jim Jone's socialistic communal People's Temple cult was techincally affiliated with the DoC. He graduated in 1961 from Butler University, which was associated with the DoC, and his congregation in Ukiah became a member of the DoC's Northern California-Nevada region in 1964. After establishing another church in San Francisco it was also awarded membership in the DoC Southern California-Nevada region-an unusual occurance for a church to dual membership in two districts.

After the Jonestown murder-suicide (many of the members were forced to drink the posion punch against their will or were injected with the cyanide forcibly)  of Nov. 18, 1978, DoC officials were asked  how Jones' cult could've flown underneath their radar, to which they replied that Peoples' Temple complied with  the minimum reuiremernts of baptism and weekly communion (practiced in unorthodox ways and with unorthodox spins put on both of them by Jones). And it contributed some $1.1 million between 1966 and 1977. The leadership claimed that the denomination had no apparatus for reviewing, judging and removing a congregation, however after the Jonestwon tragedy was looking towards putting such measures in place. Jones had made the DoC look good, with his large (one of the largest in its region), integrated, socially active and progessive congregation; basically, no one bothered to check too closely what Jones was actually teaching, and even if they had, the leadership claimed it was hampered by its policy of congregational autonomy. Jones had ministers from several mainstream denominations fooled, as well as not a few politicians and their wives-including the Mayor of San Francisco and First Lady Rosalin Carter.

Pax.

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12471
  • Manna: 226
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #18 on: Mon Dec 22, 2008 - 16:58:32 »
Lee
You would have to remind me of that.  Also not to proud of the UCC church Obama was a member of.

Offline Lee Freeman

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10368
  • Manna: 240
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #19 on: Tue Dec 23, 2008 - 12:31:25 »
Lee
You would have to remind me of that.  Also not to proud of the UCC church Obama was a member of.

Not pointing any fingers. Regarding Jones there's more than enough guilt to go around. Everyone dropped the ball on that one.

Pax.

blituri

  • Guest
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #20 on: Tue Dec 23, 2008 - 13:13:07 »
It was the Disciples of Christ who wanted to count the Churches of Christ and failed in the 1906 Census.

In 1906 the NACC belonged to the Disciples of Christ. They sected out beginning a decade later but were not taken off the DOC count until 1971.

The Churches of Christ is not a sectarian offshoot of the Christian church.

Offline Lee Freeman

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10368
  • Manna: 240
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #21 on: Tue Dec 23, 2008 - 13:30:14 »
It was the Disciples of Christ who wanted to count the Churches of Christ and failed in the 1906 Census.

In 1906 the NACC belonged to the Disciples of Christ. They sected out beginning a decade later but were not taken off the DOC count until 1971.

The Churches of Christ is not a sectarian offshoot of the Christian church.

Both groups are sectarian offshoots of Stone's and Campbell's Reformation. I think Stone and Campbell might be disgusted with both groups.

Pax.

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12471
  • Manna: 226
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #22 on: Tue Dec 23, 2008 - 15:34:47 »
It was the Disciples of Christ who wanted to count the Churches of Christ and failed in the 1906 Census.

In 1906 the NACC belonged to the Disciples of Christ. They sected out beginning a decade later but were not taken off the DOC count until 1971.

The Churches of Christ is not a sectarian offshoot of the Christian church.

Both groups are sectarian offshoots of Stone's and Campbell's Reformation. I think Stone and Campbell might be disgusted with both groups.

Pax.



Yep!

Offline wave runner

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 356
  • Manna: 46
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #23 on: Tue Dec 23, 2008 - 18:16:51 »
I noticed on a recent documentary on the 20th anniversary of the Jonestown tragedy that archive footage of the People's Temple prior to its move out of the US, that the worship service appeared to be totally without instruments.  Thought that interesting!

Offline Lee Freeman

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10368
  • Manna: 240
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #24 on: Thu Dec 25, 2008 - 15:38:29 »
I noticed on a recent documentary on the 20th anniversary of the Jonestown tragedy that archive footage of the People's Temple prior to its move out of the US, that the worship service appeared to be totally without instruments.  Thought that interesting!

Actually they had a Peoples' Temple Band which played in many of the services, which often accompanied the choir.

In the services Jones really played up his supposed abilities as a faith healer, which is what originally garnered him his celebrity. He even claimed to have raised something like 40 people from the dead. But his miracles were all fakes; for example he would "heal" people of cancer, then send them to the restroom where they would supposedly pass their tumor. But actually these would be Temple members faking it then coming out with a piece of raw meat they'd display and claim was their tumor. In another case an elderly lady who became disillusioned and left the Temple in the early 70s later reported that one Sunday she had been jostled in the service, then members immediately whisked her out and bandaged her undamaged arm, which they then made her claim had been broken and which Jones then claimed to heal. Often Jones would have Temple members disguised or planted in the audience and would pretend to heal them.

Jones originally began in the early 50's within the Pentecostal/Charismatic churches of Indiana but gradually shifted over to the the Disciples because their looser structure and congregational autonomy allowed Jones to get away with more things than he could with the Pentecostal fellowship. Originally he preached a gospel of integration and civil rights based upon the inclusiveness of the gospel. But as he went on he dropped any pretense of orthodox Christianity, and began preaching an atheistic mesage of socialism which was mixed with certain Eastern themes like reincarnation. Jones claimed not to believe in the traditional Judaeo-Christian God and identified himself as an incarnation of an impersonal socialist "god-force." His followers referred to him as "Father." He was often known to throw down a Bible and stomp on it in services as well as swear in the pulpit. A large number of his members were black, as was one of his associate pastors, Archie Ijames, however the inner circle, the Temples' planning commission, or p. c., was comprised of twenty and thirty-something white males and females.

Jones used intimidation, guilt, fear and sex to keep his followers in line. He would have "catharrsis" sessions in which, among other things, members on the p. c. were encouraged to criticize the faults of others on the p.  c., and male members were encouraged to admit latent homosexual impulses, and would often himself take these males as lovers, as a sick kind of therapy and in other cases, sired children by female members of the cult (even though he was married) with whom he was having sexual relations. He would also force couples who a child to sign a sheet implying that Jim Jones was the biological father of the child, to dissuade these couples from leaving the Temple. One of these instances blew up in his face after a couple named Stoen, highly placed in the Peoples' Temple, finally did defect. Jones then produced the bogus document claiming he was the real father of their young son. The Stoens divorced because of all of this, but nevertheless waged a nearly successful custody battle for their son, who unfortunately died at only six years old at Jonestown. "Father" got lots of bad press because of this but by that time was already entrenched in Guyana, and had his propaganda machine spin the episode to make it look like the Stoens were just a couple of disgrunteled liars out to get him. Jones also had Temple members spy on the activities of other Temple members, the Temple made illgeal political campaign contributions, often donating to candidates of both parties. etc. And Jones had a squad of armed guards, allegedly to protect him from assassination attempts, however the assassination attempts were staged by Jones. Jones would often get his way by feigning heart attacks if members didn't want to follow his orders, and, in a disurbing nod to the later Jonestown murder-suicide, to test their loyalty, on a couple of occasions he had members on the p. c. drink punch which he said was poisoned; Jones even had some of the members feign death, but then, at the last moment, told the group it was all just a test.

He was a very disturbed guy!

Pax.
« Last Edit: Thu Dec 25, 2008 - 15:56:46 by Lee Freeman »

Offline Jimbob

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 21536
  • Manna: 439
  • Gender: Male
  • Me fail English? That's unpossible.
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #25 on: Thu Dec 25, 2008 - 15:44:03 »
Lee
You would have to remind me of that.  Also not to proud of the UCC church Obama was a member of.
You would think people would realize that extremists within a particular body are just that, and that people would not judge the whole by its lunatic fringe.  However, if there is one thing I've learned here at GCM, it's that this, unfortunately, is not a realistic expectation.  Whether is the DoC, the CoC, the RCC, or the Baskin-Robbins, someone will always judge the mainstream by the extreme.

Offline Bon Voyage

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16049
  • Manna: 408
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #26 on: Thu Dec 25, 2008 - 16:17:41 »
Lee
You would have to remind me of that.  Also not to proud of the UCC church Obama was a member of.
You would think people would realize that extremists within a particular body are just that, and that people would not judge the whole by its lunatic fringe.  However, if there is one thing I've learned here at GCM, it's that this, unfortunately, is not a realistic expectation.  Whether is the DoC, the CoC, the RCC, or the Baskin-Robbins, someone will always judge the mainstream by the extreme.

With uber autonomy is there a such thing as mainstream?

Offline Jimbob

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 21536
  • Manna: 439
  • Gender: Male
  • Me fail English? That's unpossible.
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #27 on: Thu Dec 25, 2008 - 17:13:06 »
Yeah, actually there seems to be.  It's the fruit of forces other than a denominational hierarchy, but it's real and tangible, nonetheless.  Those influences tend to be school/college circles, workshops, publications, etc.  In and of themselves, these influences don't have any authority over the congregations, but because a congregation's leadership may all subscribe to a particular pov and circle-of-influence, it has the same end effects, istm.

For example, most churches associated with ACU tend to swim the same currents (same to be said for most such schools).  You see that with the Spiritual Sword circle as well.  But, many of these circles are overlapping, and that produces a larger hive mindset that then produces a "mainstream" of thought and practice.  When a smaller circle breaks off over this or that, they then quickly lose that hive mindset and become pretty distinct (like the SS crowd). 

Hopefully that makes more sense on your screen than mine, because that's not worded quite as clearly as the concept in my head.  Must be the triptophan.

Offline Bon Voyage

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16049
  • Manna: 408
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #28 on: Thu Dec 25, 2008 - 17:44:41 »
Yeah, actually there seems to be.  It's the fruit of forces other than a denominational hierarchy, but it's real and tangible, nonetheless.  Those influences tend to be school/college circles, workshops, publications, etc.  In and of themselves, these influences don't have any authority over the congregations, but because a congregation's leadership may all subscribe to a particular pov and circle-of-influence, it has the same end effects, istm.

For example, most churches associated with ACU tend to swim the same currents (same to be said for most such schools).  You see that with the Spiritual Sword circle as well.  But, many of these circles are overlapping, and that produces a larger hive mindset that then produces a "mainstream" of thought and practice.  When a smaller circle breaks off over this or that, they then quickly lose that hive mindset and become pretty distinct (like the SS crowd). 

Hopefully that makes more sense on your screen than mine, because that's not worded quite as clearly as the concept in my head.  Must be the triptophan.

The Bible Church movement is quite a bit younger, even though like the RM it has Baptist/Presbyterian roots and lives by "back to the bible" etc.  There aren't as many colleges or publications for influence. 

Offline Jimbob

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 21536
  • Manna: 439
  • Gender: Male
  • Me fail English? That's unpossible.
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #29 on: Thu Dec 25, 2008 - 19:25:46 »
I've a friend who likes to point out that most "back to the bible" movements have at least partial roots in conservative Presbyterianism.

Offline zoonance

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8529
  • Manna: 233
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #30 on: Wed Dec 31, 2008 - 13:13:45 »
http://www.fcclufkin.com/index.htm

Johnb and others.  Here is our local DOC congregation.  I would really appreciate any comments.

Offline zoonance

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8529
  • Manna: 233
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #31 on: Wed Dec 31, 2008 - 13:23:35 »
http://66.76.50.73:8585/service-12-28-08

This will make some of you happy!

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12471
  • Manna: 226
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #32 on: Thu Jan 01, 2009 - 20:47:51 »
Exellent web site Zoo.  I enjoyed the video also. 

Offline zoonance

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8529
  • Manna: 233
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #33 on: Sat Jan 03, 2009 - 12:48:28 »
Does it look familar enough to you to be an accurate representation of the DOC?   I agree, the website is one of the best I have found.  Somebody is doing a fabulous job.

Offline kebecer1

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 439
  • Manna: 2
Re: The Disciples of Christ
« Reply #34 on: Thu May 06, 2010 - 14:16:46 »
Through the New Church movement, Disciples have planted 657 new churches since 2001, more than halfway to realizing the church's vision to start 1,000 new churches by 2020. More than 42,000 new Disciples have been reached through these new faith communities, and the momentum continues to grow.