Who is more aligned with Restoration Movement principles?

Ray
Ray

December 20th, 2011, 1:30 pm #1

Who is more aligned with Restoration Movement principles? Madison CofC? Piney.com? ConcernedMembers.com?

From the writings of Alexander Campbell - The Christian Baptist, Volume VII, #11, June 7, 1830, pp. 650-656:

"WHAT means this intolerant spirit? I ask again, What is the meaning of it? Is every man who acknowledges in word and deed the supreme authority of Jesus of Nazareth as Lord Messiah--who has vowed allegiance to him--who is of good report as respects good works, to be sacrificed upon the altar of opinion--because his opinion upon some speculation, fact, or doctrine, differs from mine? Because, while he admits that Jesus died for our sins, he will not dogmatize upon the nature, extent and every attribute of "the atonement"--is he to be deemed unfit for the kingdom of heaven? Admitting "an election of favor," is he to be given over to Satan because of some opinion about the conditionality or unconditionality of that election?--In one word, are we to understand that an exact agreement in opinion, a perfect uniformity is contended for as a bond of union? If so, let our Baptist brethren say so. Let them declare to the world, that

"Tenth, or ten thousandth, breaks the chain alike."

That a disagreement in the tenth opinion, or in the ten thousandth opinion, breaks the bond of union. If this be the decree, let it be published and translated into all languages--let it be known and read by all men. If, again, a perfect uniformity be not decreed, but a partial uniformity, let it be proclaimed in how many opinions an agreement must be obtained; then we shall know who are, and who are not, to be treated as heathen men and publicans.

What makes divisions now? The man who sets up his private judgments as the standard of truth, and compels submission to them; or the man who will bear with a brother who thinks in some things differently from him?

No man can, with either reason or fact on his side, accuse me of making divisions among christians. I declare non-fellowship with no man who owns the Lord in word and deed. Such is a christian. He that denies the Lord in word or deed is not a christian. A Jew or a Gentile he may be, a Pharisee or a Sadducee he may be, but a Christian he cannot be! If a man confess the Lord Jesus, or acknowledge him as the only Saviour sent by God: if he vow allegiance to him, and submit to his government, I will recognize him as a christian and treat him as such. If a man cause divisions and offences by setting up his own decisions, his private judgment, we must consider him as a factionist, and as such he must be excluded--not for his difference in opinions, but because he makes his opinion an idol, and demands homage to it.

There are some preachers in the East and in the West--some self-conceited, opinionative dogmatizers, who are determined to rend...into fractions by their intolerance. They wish moreover to blame it upon us. As well might they blame the sun for its light and heat as blame us for creating divisions. When we shall have cut off from the church any person or persons because of a difference of opinion, then they may say, with reason, we cause divisions. Till then it is gratuitous. They are the heretics, not we. Yes, they are the heresiarchs, and will be so regarded by all the intelligent on earth, and by all in heaven."
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

December 20th, 2011, 5:06 pm #2

In 1850 none of the religious group could even hallucinate the rational role of MACHINES for doing the hard work of WORSHIP, much less IMPOSING instruments knowing that they were the INTOLERANT ONES and inviting the owners who opposed to get over it or get out.

What intolerant Ray does not want you to know is the CONTEXT where the Campbells were never tolerated by the Anglical (Catholic) rooted Disciples of Christ. The NACC would not begin to be until 1927 and were INTOLERANT of the Disciples who finally De-censused them in 1971 at which time the NACC began its intolerant view against any church who would not USE nor quit teaching the truth.

http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/ac ... .HTM#Essay

A GENERAL conspiracy is forming among the "Orthodox Calvinistic Baptists" in Indiana, the object of which is to put a stop to the alarming spread of those principles contained in the Christian Baptist, and advocated by all who earnestly pray for a "restoration of the ancient order of things;" which they, however, have seen proper to honor with the name of "damnable heresies." I have had the honor of being ranked among the first victims of this conspiracy. I have been immolated on the altar of party prejudice and sectarian jealousy. I have passed through the furnace of clerical indignation, "heated seven times hotter than it was wont to be heated." But the smell of fire has not passed on my garments.--Clothed with the panoply of faith, with the volume of unerring wisdom in my hand, I would be ashamed to fear a host of sectarians who have no stronger armor, either offensive or defensive, than their creed.

Nearly four years ago I had the presumption to oppose the doctrine of creeds, &c., in a public assembly, for which I received repeated rebukes from the dominant clergy, who, however, made no attempt to oppugn the arguments I advanced in favor of my position. The three years immediately succeeding this, passed with my saying little or nothing on this or any other of the religious questions which, during that period, were agitated; my time being entirely engrossed by studies of a different nature.

After spending some time at Cincinnati, I returned to my former residence in Rush county, and being more at leisure I determined to give the scriptures a careful, and if possible, an impartial examination. I did so, without favor or affection to any party. The effect was a thorough conviction of the truth of the following propositions, viz.--

1. Faith is nothing more nor less than a conviction of the truth of any position from evidence.

2. That faith in Jesus Christ is nothing more than a belief of the facts recorded of him by the Evangelists, to-wit: that Jesus of Nazareth was the promised Messiah, and that he gave impregnable proof of his divine mission by his miraculous birth, by the numerous miracles which [650] he wrought while living, and by his death, resurrection, and ascension.

3. The evangelical writings, containing the facts relative to the mighty works which were done by Christ and his apostles, together with the corroborating testimony of the prophecies, form altogether a phalanx of evidence sufficient to convince any reasonable mind that "Jesus is the Christ."

4. I became convinced that the popular doctrine of a partial atonement, and unconditional election and reprobation, were alike anti-christian and unscriptural.

These opinions I at all times expressed freely, not a little to the annoyance of my Calvinistic friends. At length, after considerable threatening, the following resolution was adopted by the church on Clifty for my special benefit:--

"Resolved, That we will not fellowship the doctrines propagated by Alexander Campbell, of Bethany. Virginia."


Alexander Campbell DID NOT tolerate instruments and would not preach in a denominational church until the organ and organist was silent. The original intolerant who confiscated the New Bern church in Tennessee said that the organ was to AID the singing but if it were used FOR worship it would be a sin.
Quote
Like
Share

Dave
Dave

December 20th, 2011, 5:43 pm #3

Who is more aligned with Restoration Movement principles? Madison CofC? Piney.com? ConcernedMembers.com?

From the writings of Alexander Campbell - The Christian Baptist, Volume VII, #11, June 7, 1830, pp. 650-656:

"WHAT means this intolerant spirit? I ask again, What is the meaning of it? Is every man who acknowledges in word and deed the supreme authority of Jesus of Nazareth as Lord Messiah--who has vowed allegiance to him--who is of good report as respects good works, to be sacrificed upon the altar of opinion--because his opinion upon some speculation, fact, or doctrine, differs from mine? Because, while he admits that Jesus died for our sins, he will not dogmatize upon the nature, extent and every attribute of "the atonement"--is he to be deemed unfit for the kingdom of heaven? Admitting "an election of favor," is he to be given over to Satan because of some opinion about the conditionality or unconditionality of that election?--In one word, are we to understand that an exact agreement in opinion, a perfect uniformity is contended for as a bond of union? If so, let our Baptist brethren say so. Let them declare to the world, that

"Tenth, or ten thousandth, breaks the chain alike."

That a disagreement in the tenth opinion, or in the ten thousandth opinion, breaks the bond of union. If this be the decree, let it be published and translated into all languages--let it be known and read by all men. If, again, a perfect uniformity be not decreed, but a partial uniformity, let it be proclaimed in how many opinions an agreement must be obtained; then we shall know who are, and who are not, to be treated as heathen men and publicans.

What makes divisions now? The man who sets up his private judgments as the standard of truth, and compels submission to them; or the man who will bear with a brother who thinks in some things differently from him?

No man can, with either reason or fact on his side, accuse me of making divisions among christians. I declare non-fellowship with no man who owns the Lord in word and deed. Such is a christian. He that denies the Lord in word or deed is not a christian. A Jew or a Gentile he may be, a Pharisee or a Sadducee he may be, but a Christian he cannot be! If a man confess the Lord Jesus, or acknowledge him as the only Saviour sent by God: if he vow allegiance to him, and submit to his government, I will recognize him as a christian and treat him as such. If a man cause divisions and offences by setting up his own decisions, his private judgment, we must consider him as a factionist, and as such he must be excluded--not for his difference in opinions, but because he makes his opinion an idol, and demands homage to it.

There are some preachers in the East and in the West--some self-conceited, opinionative dogmatizers, who are determined to rend...into fractions by their intolerance. They wish moreover to blame it upon us. As well might they blame the sun for its light and heat as blame us for creating divisions. When we shall have cut off from the church any person or persons because of a difference of opinion, then they may say, with reason, we cause divisions. Till then it is gratuitous. They are the heretics, not we. Yes, they are the heresiarchs, and will be so regarded by all the intelligent on earth, and by all in heaven."
We will not hearken to those questions which gender strife, nor discuss them at all. If a person says such is his private opinion, let him have it as his private opinion; but lay no stress upon it; and if it be a wrong private opinion, it will die a natural death much sooner than if you attempt to kill it. Alexander Campbell

I have tried the pharisaic plan, and the monastic. I was once so straight, that, like the Indians tree, I leaned a little the other way. And however much I may be slandered now as seeking popularity or a popular course, I have to rejoice that to my own satisfaction, as well as to others, I proved that truth, and not popularity, was my object; for I was once so strict a Separatist that I would neither pray nor sing praises with any one who was not as perfect as I supposed myself. In this most unpopular course I persisted until I discovered the mistake, and saw that on the principle embraced in my conduct, there never could be a congregation or church upon the earth. Alexander Campbell

Bend boy, BEND!!!
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

December 20th, 2011, 5:53 pm #4

"In Gnostic circles religious poetry arose to compete with the Old Testament Psalms. Some Catholics therefore distrusted the composition of hymns after this pattern, on the ground that they might smack of heresy. Yet from at least the second century hymns were written by the orthodox which, like their Gnostic counterparts,

employed the forms of Greek poetry...

Until near the end of the fourth century, in the services of the Catholic Church
only the Old Testament Psalms and
the hymns or canticles from the New Testament were sung:

the other hymns were for personal family, or private use.

Gradually there were prepared versical paraphrases of the Psalms, hymns
with lines of equal length, and hymns which were acrostic." (Latourette, Christianity. p. 207).

To Ephraim (c. 373) pertains the high and unique distinction of having originated-or at least given its living impulse to-a new departure in sacred literature; and that, not for his own country merely, but for Christendom.

From him came, if not the first idea, at all events the first successful example,
of making song an essential constituent of public worship,
and an exponent of theological teaching;


and from him it spread and prevailed through the Eastern Churches, and affected even those of the West.

To the Hymns, on which chiefly his fame rests, the Syriac ritual in all its forms owes much of its strength and richness; and to them is largely due the place which Hymnody holds throughout the Church everywhere.


Sow them TARES boys, sow them TARES: they make you drunk without wine and blind so you cannot read black text on brown paper.
Quote
Like
Share

Ray
Ray

December 21st, 2011, 12:24 pm #5

In 1850 none of the religious group could even hallucinate the rational role of MACHINES for doing the hard work of WORSHIP, much less IMPOSING instruments knowing that they were the INTOLERANT ONES and inviting the owners who opposed to get over it or get out.

What intolerant Ray does not want you to know is the CONTEXT where the Campbells were never tolerated by the Anglical (Catholic) rooted Disciples of Christ. The NACC would not begin to be until 1927 and were INTOLERANT of the Disciples who finally De-censused them in 1971 at which time the NACC began its intolerant view against any church who would not USE nor quit teaching the truth.

http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/ac ... .HTM#Essay

A GENERAL conspiracy is forming among the "Orthodox Calvinistic Baptists" in Indiana, the object of which is to put a stop to the alarming spread of those principles contained in the Christian Baptist, and advocated by all who earnestly pray for a "restoration of the ancient order of things;" which they, however, have seen proper to honor with the name of "damnable heresies." I have had the honor of being ranked among the first victims of this conspiracy. I have been immolated on the altar of party prejudice and sectarian jealousy. I have passed through the furnace of clerical indignation, "heated seven times hotter than it was wont to be heated." But the smell of fire has not passed on my garments.--Clothed with the panoply of faith, with the volume of unerring wisdom in my hand, I would be ashamed to fear a host of sectarians who have no stronger armor, either offensive or defensive, than their creed.

Nearly four years ago I had the presumption to oppose the doctrine of creeds, &c., in a public assembly, for which I received repeated rebukes from the dominant clergy, who, however, made no attempt to oppugn the arguments I advanced in favor of my position. The three years immediately succeeding this, passed with my saying little or nothing on this or any other of the religious questions which, during that period, were agitated; my time being entirely engrossed by studies of a different nature.

After spending some time at Cincinnati, I returned to my former residence in Rush county, and being more at leisure I determined to give the scriptures a careful, and if possible, an impartial examination. I did so, without favor or affection to any party. The effect was a thorough conviction of the truth of the following propositions, viz.--

1. Faith is nothing more nor less than a conviction of the truth of any position from evidence.

2. That faith in Jesus Christ is nothing more than a belief of the facts recorded of him by the Evangelists, to-wit: that Jesus of Nazareth was the promised Messiah, and that he gave impregnable proof of his divine mission by his miraculous birth, by the numerous miracles which [650] he wrought while living, and by his death, resurrection, and ascension.

3. The evangelical writings, containing the facts relative to the mighty works which were done by Christ and his apostles, together with the corroborating testimony of the prophecies, form altogether a phalanx of evidence sufficient to convince any reasonable mind that "Jesus is the Christ."

4. I became convinced that the popular doctrine of a partial atonement, and unconditional election and reprobation, were alike anti-christian and unscriptural.

These opinions I at all times expressed freely, not a little to the annoyance of my Calvinistic friends. At length, after considerable threatening, the following resolution was adopted by the church on Clifty for my special benefit:--

"Resolved, That we will not fellowship the doctrines propagated by Alexander Campbell, of Bethany. Virginia."


Alexander Campbell DID NOT tolerate instruments and would not preach in a denominational church until the organ and organist was silent. The original intolerant who confiscated the New Bern church in Tennessee said that the organ was to AID the singing but if it were used FOR worship it would be a sin.
Would Ken recant his sin of slander, or is he willing to detail where he thinks that I or others who disagree with him are "intoleant"?
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

December 21st, 2011, 3:03 pm #6

I quoted the context of your patrial quote. This had to do with the Baptists who refused to fellowship with the 'Campbells." I posted the whole story so people can read for themselves.

Instrumentalists IMPOSED into peaceable Disciples churches and were therefore INTOLERANT of those who rested their hostile takeover.

Non-instrumental churches allow everyone to attend: Instrumentalists deliberately EXCLUDE those who know that instruments were never INCLUDED for any ocngregational assembly.

Alexander was not tolerant of any instruments in Churches of Christ. Read the whole thought pattern.
Quote
Like
Share

Dave
Dave

December 21st, 2011, 4:35 pm #7

Who is more aligned with Restoration Movement principles? Madison CofC? Piney.com? ConcernedMembers.com?

From the writings of Alexander Campbell - The Christian Baptist, Volume VII, #11, June 7, 1830, pp. 650-656:

"WHAT means this intolerant spirit? I ask again, What is the meaning of it? Is every man who acknowledges in word and deed the supreme authority of Jesus of Nazareth as Lord Messiah--who has vowed allegiance to him--who is of good report as respects good works, to be sacrificed upon the altar of opinion--because his opinion upon some speculation, fact, or doctrine, differs from mine? Because, while he admits that Jesus died for our sins, he will not dogmatize upon the nature, extent and every attribute of "the atonement"--is he to be deemed unfit for the kingdom of heaven? Admitting "an election of favor," is he to be given over to Satan because of some opinion about the conditionality or unconditionality of that election?--In one word, are we to understand that an exact agreement in opinion, a perfect uniformity is contended for as a bond of union? If so, let our Baptist brethren say so. Let them declare to the world, that

"Tenth, or ten thousandth, breaks the chain alike."

That a disagreement in the tenth opinion, or in the ten thousandth opinion, breaks the bond of union. If this be the decree, let it be published and translated into all languages--let it be known and read by all men. If, again, a perfect uniformity be not decreed, but a partial uniformity, let it be proclaimed in how many opinions an agreement must be obtained; then we shall know who are, and who are not, to be treated as heathen men and publicans.

What makes divisions now? The man who sets up his private judgments as the standard of truth, and compels submission to them; or the man who will bear with a brother who thinks in some things differently from him?

No man can, with either reason or fact on his side, accuse me of making divisions among christians. I declare non-fellowship with no man who owns the Lord in word and deed. Such is a christian. He that denies the Lord in word or deed is not a christian. A Jew or a Gentile he may be, a Pharisee or a Sadducee he may be, but a Christian he cannot be! If a man confess the Lord Jesus, or acknowledge him as the only Saviour sent by God: if he vow allegiance to him, and submit to his government, I will recognize him as a christian and treat him as such. If a man cause divisions and offences by setting up his own decisions, his private judgment, we must consider him as a factionist, and as such he must be excluded--not for his difference in opinions, but because he makes his opinion an idol, and demands homage to it.

There are some preachers in the East and in the West--some self-conceited, opinionative dogmatizers, who are determined to rend...into fractions by their intolerance. They wish moreover to blame it upon us. As well might they blame the sun for its light and heat as blame us for creating divisions. When we shall have cut off from the church any person or persons because of a difference of opinion, then they may say, with reason, we cause divisions. Till then it is gratuitous. They are the heretics, not we. Yes, they are the heresiarchs, and will be so regarded by all the intelligent on earth, and by all in heaven."
Ken said "Instrumentalists IMPOSED into peaceable Disciples churches and were therefore INTOLERANT of those who rested their hostile takeover. Non-instrumental churches allow everyone to attend: Instrumentalists deliberately EXCLUDE those who know that instruments were never INCLUDED for any ocngregational assembly."

Ken, what you said there is simply not true....and if any of the readers have kept up with your useless diatribe they might even call it a lie.

Those who have chosen to worship with instruments or the use of praise teams almost always opt for a different time slot. I have visited Christian churches and know that they do NOT deliberately exclude anyone.
It has nothing to do with a hostile takeover. I used to think that maybe it was senility with you Ken, but it isn't. You KNOW better, but have decided to behave accordingly.
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

December 21st, 2011, 4:49 pm #8

Rick Atchley being mentored by David Faust, NACC president that year:

Rick.Atchley.Chris.Seidman.Instrumental.Music.Delusion.html

Rick Atchley and Chris Seidman musical delusions.

Well, we discipled the children of those progressive churches
for a whole generation to grow past us Boomers.
They never heard the sermons we heard.
They never heard the rationale for a cappella music.

We sent them to youth rallies and Church of Christ events
with some of the finest Christian bands in the world.
We discipled our children to leave our Movement!


Any time anyone IMPOSES instruments they know that they will EXCLUDE those who will not participate in the idolatry of talent.

They EXCLUDE the ex-owners from questioning the "leaders" or speaking against them hostile takeover.

If you throw a skunk into a widow's living room you PLAN to EXCLUDE the widows.
Quote
Like
Share

Ray
Ray

December 22nd, 2011, 1:13 pm #9

I quoted the context of your patrial quote. This had to do with the Baptists who refused to fellowship with the 'Campbells." I posted the whole story so people can read for themselves.

Instrumentalists IMPOSED into peaceable Disciples churches and were therefore INTOLERANT of those who rested their hostile takeover.

Non-instrumental churches allow everyone to attend: Instrumentalists deliberately EXCLUDE those who know that instruments were never INCLUDED for any ocngregational assembly.

Alexander was not tolerant of any instruments in Churches of Christ. Read the whole thought pattern.
Ken,

Your obsession with musical instruments has made you not only intolerant of any opinion other than your own, it has made you clueless and blind. The article by Alexander Campbell posted had nothing to do with intruments. It had to do with those who force their opinions on others, and pass judgement on others and cause divisions based on their opinions, which is exactly what you and this website do. You are so paranoid with your obsession that you see instruments where there are none, force your intolerance on others, see it in others where there is none, and sinfully divide from other believers based on your obsessed opinion. You are exactly the kind of person Alexander Campbell warned Christians about in the article I posted.
Quote
Share

B
B

December 22nd, 2011, 5:17 pm #10

Ray states that Ken is obsessed, intolerant, clueless, blind, opinionated, judgmental, divisive, and paranoid.

Now just what exactly is Ray's beef with Ken anyway?
Quote
Share