Seriously- please forgive me. I had no intent to offend anyone with a heart to follow Jesus- though possibly to rattle the chains of some who are too content where they are to look ahead to where He might want to lead them.

I do confess, I misread Mike’s post at the first, then laughed at myself when I realised what I had missed! He saithe professions of the folks I have known, and the claims of the “official” literature I had seen in CofC church buildings.d he didn’t identify with the “message” in the program, and from my experience in the Deep South there ever was only one “message” coming from any of the CofC. I wouldn’t presume to tell you what you believe, I was only reporting what I had seen and heard.

God’s deepest peace be always yours!

r.e.

REPLY: I agree. I do not want Mike saying that anything that he says represents me, or our brotherhood. However, after Robert Easter replied:

The main “embarrassment” concerning the C of C is their claim to be the church of Christ. They reject any mention of salvation by grace, and anybody not of their membership is bound for hell. Though they may be “independent” from one assembly to the next, there must be some kind of consensus or, like the Exclusive Brethren, an ad hoc “pope” someplace keeping them all in line if the biggest variation from the “conservative” to the “progressive” is how many songs they sing, sitting or standing!

They teach “baptism for the remission of sins” so that (1.) baptism is what remits sin (not Jesus’ blood, or faith in His blood), and, (2.) the baptisee must have their mind totally focused the remission of sins for the sins to be remitted. Otherwise, or in case any part of the body doesn’t get completely immersed, they had better try again!”

I find it ironic that in a post denouncing someone speaking for the church, Robert finds the gall, as a detractor, to speak for the church. It gave me a chuckle and I am sure the irony was lost on him.

In the long run, I would rather someone in the church to characterize our teaching, rather Robert, since he hardly has a grip on our belief.

Dan

Arthur, if I read your post correctly you recognise the hypocrisy in the group-driven Exclusivism which effectively says “we are the way” when only Christ can legitimately make that claim. You even refer to large numbers of people who have been harmed by it and who see that it is wrong and dangerous, so how is it “judgmental” to warn others of its dangers? I’m not very bright, and I admit it, but to me that would be like if you were to warm people of a huge hole in the road, and drivers suggest that it was only your opinion that the road was dangerous but they were good drivers, or even condemn you for having inspected the road without authorisation.

You and I both know that Exclusivism is a fork in the road, and that fork leads to disaster. Is it not better to warn people than to sit by and “hope for the best?”

Huh?

Some of the details I’m not real firm on, like your meaning of “bythe book and the standard within” so I’ll just try and respond best I can without running this too long.

.. this debate needs to go further than the walls within the church that somebody visits .How else will what Ray B talks about happen , and until it does many people suffer.

So far we’re totally on the same page. We all need to learn to pray, and to listen, and then to deal with the issues. Any shortcuts will only make matters worse.

It would be good to hear more from Arthur , i see you suggest the philosophy of the church he spoke of as Evangelicalism .

Actually without doing all the reading, I think the term then was Exclusive. A sect that grew up in the 19th Century.

Does Evangelicalism include deceit and splitting familys often for wrong reasons .Does it include making certain laws and excomunicating members for them ,then later removing these laws and making it ok .Should Evangelicalism be compared with something that has caused such widespread devision depression and even suicide .Would Evangelicalism be involved in the use of large ammounts of money to sue and silence any that might try to speak out .
These are questions we need to think about and ask ourselves about dont we ,if we agree with what Ray B says is it right that we should seperate ourselves from thinking and debating and even acting upon these things .

Dusty, here we go with that wide brush again! You seem to be claiming, by asking such pointed questions, that all these things are patently true, and everyone who might be labeled as such is then guilty if only by association. Are you speaking from some personal experience that has you angry at “evangelicalism” for something?

If the church and religion is to survive in the long run …
…or do we follow the footsteps of those that were ashamed of him and slam the doors in the face of those with whom we disagree not even willing to discuss matters…

I’m really wondering about your sources- especially the part about Jesus “dwelling in the house of a woman of shame,” Let me ask you- it looks like this thread is about to get snipped. If these are matters that you are really concerned about, please click on my link and we can discuss it further on the email link there. I know a little about these things, not all that much, but I have some good resources to draw from, so maybe we can get some of these questions answered.

Peace.

Yes I agree with Ray B., and said so. Like in Keith Green’s song, “He is de Vine, and we are de branch!”

If I may ask you, by what standard do you judge “churches” to be wrong? Which churches? All churches, from your second paragraph- without trying to be rude, I’d really like to know if you see yourself (as it seems in the above) as qualified to dismiss two thousand years of prayer and scholarship so quickly. I’m currently reading some stuff from Gregory of Nyssa (4th Century) which is awesome.

Accuse? There is something going on in the various Christian blogs with people logging in to stump for a particular agenda, trying to steer discussions of whatever it used to be into a narrowly-defined question of homosexuality as some kind of new and more highly-evolved ethic. I saw some commonality with that trend in that post, and said so. But as far as politics, no, I try not to advocate for any party, except to try and invite who I can to the party that God’s

Peace,

Robert