Ex-Church of Christ Support Board

klp wrote:

onward wrote:... where's the scriptural authority to exclude the kitchen, yet approve the restrooms!

Local building codes and ADA are going to specify a number of things. NT says to abide by the law and to submit to authorities. Also, Jesus told his disciples to "go", and so it is expedient to have a place to go.

That's a given, but I'm referring to the site's preference for excluding "kitchen" churches in a Scriptural sense!

I don't find the idea of the site arrogant necessarily, because it could be useful for someone who is wanting to find a CoC if they are new to an area or visiting. What I find arrogant is the attitude that to be a true Christian, these churches are the only ones in the entire country you can visit to be acceptable to God. And of course once you start browsing you see quite a few "Christians Meet Here" or "The Church Meets Here" signs, implying that members of every other denomination aren't really Christians. Total arrogance, as they often display.

MusicMan826 wrote:I don't find the idea of the site arrogant necessarily, because it could be useful for someone who is wanting to find a CoC if they are new to an area or visiting. What I find arrogant is the attitude that to be a true Christian, these churches are the only ones in the entire country you can visit to be acceptable to God. And of course once you start browsing you see quite a few "Christians Meet Here" or "The Church Meets Here" signs, implying that members of every other denomination aren't really Christians. Total arrogance, as they often display.

Agreed, they certainly have the right to publish a list of the "chosen ones" denoting their meeting places. It's the arrogance of this group thinking they alone have the right to determine exactly who is represented in this listing that's so irritating ... at least to me.

onward wrote:

klp wrote:

onward wrote:... where's the scriptural authority to exclude the kitchen, yet approve the restrooms!

Local building codes and ADA are going to specify a number of things. NT says to abide by the law and to submit to authorities. Also, Jesus told his disciples to "go", and so it is expedient to have a place to go.

That's a given, but I'm referring to the site's preference for excluding "kitchen" churches in a Scriptural sense!

OK, I was having fun. But since you asked, the whole idea (right or wrong) behind CofCism is that there is a pattern and authority to follow in order to be the 1st century church such that unity would be attained by those proclaiming Christ. If there is no scriptural authority for kitchens and the social activities then it is by definition something that is contrary to the entire concept of restoration, back-to-the-book CofC religion. Obviously some folks think social events and kitchens and meals violates the proper role of what a congregation is supposed to be. You and others obviously disagree. OK, so what? These other folks are still bound to follow their beliefs. So to them they think they are being honest and faithful...no matter how much others judge them as arrogant.

I always wondered what the CoC thought of the temple is Ezekiel that had a ... KITCHEN!

Who am I kidding, they would say that is OT, nailed to the cross.

Klp - I agree with your statements. I know I lot of great people that attend a coc and would not consider them arrogant. I didn't intend to come across that all cocers are arrogant people. It's just the name of the site and the types of NI groups that are listed and all other groups that are excluded is what bothers me. It kind of goes back to the line of thinking that I grew up with - we have the truth and have interpreted everything perfectly as God intended. It's everyone else who has it wrong. I always wondered how such a small group of people had it figured out and everyone else didn't. That's the attitude I had and that to me is arrogance, intentional or not.

onward wrote:That's a given, but I'm referring to the site's preference for excluding "kitchen" churches in a Scriptural sense!

klp wrote:OK, I was having fun. But since you asked, the whole idea (right or wrong) behind CofCism is that there is a pattern and authority to follow in order to be the 1st century church such that unity would be attained by those proclaiming Christ. If there is no scriptural authority for kitchens and the social activities then it is by definition something that is contrary to the entire concept of restoration, back-to-the-book CofC religion. Obviously some folks think social events and kitchens and meals violates the proper role of what a congregation is supposed to be. You and others obviously disagree. OK, so what? These other folks are still bound to follow their beliefs. So to them they think they are being honest and faithful...no matter how much others judge them as arrogant.

While its just a handy church locator site that anyone has the right to publish, with this group it has a much deeper significance, it ARROGANTLY lists only churches this group deems acceptable to God. Any church missing from this list is considered hopelessly lost forever and ever ... there's more than a tinge of arrogance involved.

The problem seems to be that neither side is willing to extend their hand in fellowship unless their own peculiar beliefs are swallowed wholeheartedly. Actually, I could care less whether they munch snacks in the church building or not, I don't believe it has a bearing on ones relationship to God.

And, yes we can all be arrogant at times!

williamray123 wrote:I remember only one time we weren't close to one, so we had 'house church' so we didn't go to hell on the spot for missing one service.

Did you have the portable Lord's Supper cups with two peel-off lids? The first revealed a styrofoam-like wafer, under which was the second lid which opened the cup of stale of (yet not fermented) grape juice. I went on a cross-country road trip in my early 20s and was sent with a handful of those in case circumstances required that I forsake the assembly.

Lev

Personally I do not know the people who put up the website or what they are thinking or what they think about the places on their listing. I doubt they visit or know every church that is listed, I doubt they are saying their list is exhaustive of approved congregations. I think it is just a simple service that is trying to list congregations who adhere to the NI concept and do not have social/fellowship halls. But again, I do not know them personally or their thoughts/motives. Yall may be right, maybe they are terrible people.

I browsed the Texas list, looking at churches I attended or visited, lo, so many years ago. It is surprising to see there are still so many of these ultra-conservative COCs. Hallelujah, I haven't been inside any of those buildings in years.