Down the Rabbit Hole

[HighLiter871]

It took many years for me to fully grasp, at the 'gut' level, how absurd the CoC doctrine is -- and I'm referring to what it teaches about itself: "founded 33 A.D." the "one, true Church founded by Christ", all other churches being "denominations" a/k/a, branches or subdivisions of some false church, and evil by definition.

And there's the constant hunger for ANY hint of historical authenticity. Rather pathetic.

Even after I was out of the "whore of Tennessee-Arkansas-Texas", I was haunted by the propaganda absorbed as a child. We attended 3 times a week, plus "Gospel meetings" , lectureships, etc etc.

Only now, all these years later, can I finally comprehend the inanity, the absolute silliness of their position. And in this era of readily accessible information, how otherwise intelligent people can still embrace it (to one degree or another) remains a mystery.

[FinallyFree]

As a child, I did feel very confused by all this. My mother still believes all the "one true church" stuff. Of course, she does not have a computer, so she doesn't have access to a lot of information. She says the Catholic Church was originally the CofC and it got corrupted. She firmly believes the world is 6,000 years old and all the other information is just junk.

[bnot]

The A.D 33 is beyond ridiculous. For me as a teen, I read the infamous one true church tract by James R. Cope from Florida College http://ex-churchofchrist.com/5acts.htm and saw all the dates and the founders of the "denominations". But if he properly researched the coc he could have listed the coc founders and a more accurate date (1889), but no coc bible gangster will ever admit to their true origin.

[MusicMan826]

I recall a time as a kid when I absolutely believed everything I was taught in the COC without question...then I got to the point where I began to ask questions, which they hate. Eventually, "because the bible says so" followed by some not even close to convincing proof text didn't cut it for me anymore. I can't tell you how many posters and charts I saw with a list of denominations, their founders, and their year established, of course all with the COC "started by Jesus Christ in 33 AD". These people are obsessed with denominations and spend more time talking about how "wrong" they are than anything else.

[zeek]

.

[B.H.]

There is a big attempt by the Church of Christ to find their "Church of Christ" existing before Alexander Campbell. They will find peoplein pre-Campbellian history calling themselves "Church of Christ" (even the Catholic Church calls itself that) but when you dig into these long lost "Church of Christs" theologies you will find they are nothing doctrinally like the CoC we knew.

For example, some British Church of Christ (Campbellite) preacher had a website up claiming a man named Hercules Collins who lived in the 1600's was a Church of Christ preacher. Yes, his church was called Church of Christ, but Collins left records about what he believed and taught. His view of salvation was more Baptist like in its theology and he had no problem using a catechism for his church. He even wrote one himself. So you have to be very careful what you fnd.

There was one Church of Christ preacher who was always pestering Petros on his blog. One day I got into a discussion with him (kinda invited myself and BHetted myself in) about the Catholic Bible and church history. I asked him to name a Church of Christ preacher who lived in the second and third centuries AD. And he gave me the names of Catholic patristic fathers! When I pointed out his sources were Catholic, one qouted the Apocryphal books in his epistles and the other was a Catholic bishop he split and never bothered Petros again. Not exactly high level scholarship there.

[williamray123]

The A.D 33 is beyond ridiculous. For me as a teen, I read the infamous one true church tract by James R. Cope from Florida College http://ex-churchofchrist.com/5acts.htm and saw all the dates and the founders of the "denominations". But if he properly researched the coc he could have listed the coc founders and a more accurate date (1889), but no coc bible gangster will ever admit to their true origin.

I ordered a book from Florida College on "biblical authority" by Ferrell Jenkins. He speaks of Alexander Campbell's "sermon on the law" (basically one of the founding documents of the coc) and in his book he says it was delivered to the "redstone association" ... HE conveniently leaves out that this was the "redstone BAPTIST association". This book is in its 20th or so printing so this is not a misprint. He is basically hiding the fact that Alexander Campbell was a member of the baptist association. I believe his father was a presbyterian... but we are founded in 33AD!

[Tsathoggua]

It took many years for me to fully grasp, at the 'gut' level, how absurd the CoC doctrine is -- and I'm referring to what it teaches about itself: "founded 33 A.D." the "one, true Church founded by Christ", all other churches being "denominations" a/k/a, branches or subdivisions of some false church, and evil by definition.

And there's the constant hunger for ANY hint of historical authenticity. Rather pathetic.

Even after I was out of the "whore of Tennessee-Arkansas-Texas", I was haunted by the propaganda absorbed as a child. We attended 3 times a week, plus "Gospel meetings" , lectureships, etc etc.

Only now, all these years later, can I finally comprehend the inanity, the absolute silliness of their position. And in this era of readily accessible information, how otherwise intelligent people can still embrace it (to one degree or another) remains a mystery.

That always seemed a bit ridiculous to me, as well. "We are the only ones who can comprehend the bible correctly / are the only true church" is just downright absurd!

[KLP]

I do not see anything invalid in the notion that humans would corrupt, mutate, improve, change, and/or fall away from a proscribed system of religion...it is just the way humans and society and culture occurs. To me it seems reasonable to assume at some 1st century snapshot in time there was a somewhat consistent church...seems reasonable and possible. That it was and would be changed by humans also seems reasonable.

Nor do I see anything illogical in considering that any organization or process cannot be, at some point, reconstituted or restored or restarted. Watching the Woodwright show or some survival shows indicate that restoring or restarting an old process is possible and of interest to humans. I see no reason why an ancient form of religion cannot be restarted. It also seems to me that this would tend to always be a rather small minority effort...just like the PBS shows.

So conceptually I see no reason to not assume that at most any point in time that it would be fair to assume that all Christian organizations would have diverged from the original. And just the same it would seem that at any point in time a restart or restoration effort would be possible.

I do not see any logic or basis in assuming that the verse "gates of Hell shall not prevail" to be interpreted as meaning a 1st century org it will be operating in at least one cave someplace no matter what. Nor do I see it as logical to assume because a group is small in number to not be a high fidelity restoration.

[Lev]

The book Pagan Christianity, by George Barna and Frank Viola, goes into great, heavily footnoted detail about the theologies and practices of the first century church. The authors explain how and when various innovations were added such as church buildings, clergy, etc. The book heavily promotes the "spirit led" home church movement but is useful to counter the COC claim that first century Christian gatherings would have looked a lot like 21st century COC "worship services" just with different clothes and in a different language. I have heard that very claim from COCers--that they could walk into a first century church meeting in, say, Ephesus, and would need only a tunic and a translator to fit right in. Rubbish! A modern COCer would probably not even recognize a first century church as such.

Lev