This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Most members, particularly older members, of this group are apt to object to being referred to as "Protestants", saying that the church was not founded as a protest against anything, other than perhaps the domination of the present world by Satan. However, it certainly fits within the the historic context of Protestantism, growing as it did mainly out of Baptist- and Presbyterian-related reform movements. Rlquall, 10 June 04, 12:55
I'm going to mercilessly edit some of the recent changes. :) For one thing, the text made it clear that since the churches are autonomous, specific beliefs and practices vary. The article attempts to list some things that are commonly taught or associated with the Church of Christ. There is no need to add disclaimers to individual statements to say this. I presume I'll be similarly mercilessly edited, and consensus will emerge. Jdavidb 20:29, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
It is incorrect to say that the churches of Christ believe that divorce, without reason of adultery is not divorce in the eyes of God and is therefore adultery. This is a minority view held by some of the more extreme members of the church.
A more accurate statement reflecting the majority view is: Divorce, except for reasons of infidelity, is a sin which Jesus compares to adultery.
Because this is a strenuously debated issue, rather than a defining doctrine, I believe that it should be either corrected or deleted entirely.
There are 3 links out of ten devoted to the ICOC, but this is the article for the mainstream Churches of Christ. Since these two groups are often confused, I would like to have something to set these links apart. Otherwise, it seems excessive that 30% of the links are about another group. Jdavidb 19:55, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I believe it might be helpful to add to this article an explanation of baptism as presented by Ferguson in his book, "The Church of Christ A Biblical Ecclesiology for Today" (Eerdmans) ... basically, Ferguson explains that generally speaking people in the Church of Christ (consciously or not) believe that they would answer the questions "How am I saved?" by "Grace" "Why am I saved?" because of my Faith "When am I saved?" when I am baptized. Do you'll think this would help people understand better where they are coming from?
Rlquall 05:59, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Capitalization needed to be standardized within the article. I realize that this is a contentious point; many feel that the capitalization of "Church" aquaints to surrendering to the idea that the body is another denomination. However, even though Wikipedia is by its very nature a collabrative effort, the outcome of each article should be stylistically consistent as if written by a single author. Rlquall 18:18, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I realize that many will see this as even more of a minor quibble than the capitalization "issue". However, " mainline" has become something of a term of art referring to a specific group of major Protestant churches, and it would be wrong to associate the Churches of Christ with this group because it would be historically and semantically inaccurate. Therefore, I have amended it to the more generic "mainstream", which better signifies what is meant here in my opinion. Rlquall 18:22, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Is Pepperdine the best choice of an example here? I would think that Abeline, Harding, or Lipscomb would be more representative of the "mainstream" of belief. Many in the C of C "heartland" automatically suspect and disdain Pepperdine, admittedly in part just due to its California location, but also for its perceived (and sometimes real) "liberalism" by Church of Christ standards. Rlquall 17:39, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
(Would a good minor Wikiproject be "List of colleges and universities associated with the Churches of Christ?)
Liberal or conservative tendencies shouldn't play into this discussion. Rather, the willingness and promotion of the college itself as representative of Churches of Christ. Pepperdine has been much less willing in recent years to bill itself as an institution of the Churches of Christ, whereas Abilene Christian University, Oklahoma Chrisitan University, Harding University, and Lipscomb University are still the major colleges that outwardly claim association with the CoC, regardless of liberal or conservative leanings. -- Soonercary 03:06, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Florida College in Temple Terrace, Florida [1] should be included in the list of colleges. Although it is not a seminary, it does have a bibilcal studies department whose beliefs are most akin to those of the non-institutional side of the church.
Links to individual CoC congregations' websites are unnecessary. There is potential for an overwhelming amount of links if this were allowed to continue. There are already links to website directories of CoCs in the article. Users should use those directories provided rather than link to individual congregations in the wiki article.
-- Ichabod 14:02, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
-- Rlquall 23:20, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I would appreciate the recent "editor" coming forward and identifying himself/herself. This sort of thing is unfortunate, even though what is expressed is exactly what the American Restoration Movement saw itself as being. But anonymous edits erasing hours of work by several persons strike me as being "un-Christian" in the extreme. Rlquall 23:46, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This article seems to take the CoC's claims as to its origins at face value; that is, that it is merely a restoration of early Christianity. While the CoC's view of itself should certainly be stated, there needs to be a section on the group's history -- who founded them, what were some of the religious trends and fashions prevelant at the time and place where the CoC was founded. Just giving the CoC's pov and not any more secular historical background makes this article NPOV, though I just put the "cleanup" tag on there to give people time to fix it. I am sick, and unable to write a good section on the history at this time; if no one else comes forward to do so soon, I'll need to put a NPOV tag up there. Zantastik 07:57, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think the statements and links to the Restoration Movement serves this purpose. Otherwise, a "historical and modern origins" section could be added without really removing anything else. This could address Campbell, David Lipscomb, and Daniel Summer. What else is really needed? Carltonh 16:49, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I have NPOVed it. However, I am a member of this church, so a Gentile should probably edit me. ;-) And I'd like to say, while this article gets the facts straight, we're not as odd as we look. Danlovejoy 22:50, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
"No intermediate locales in the afterlife between heaven and hell; Purgatory and limbo are seen as human creations, mentioned nowhere in scripture and unheard of for centuries after the completion of the New Testament."
I grew up in the church of Christ and was taught the doctrine of Hades - a places souls go after death to await judgment. Was anyone else taught this?
I have removed the reference to Purgatory and Limbo per this discussion and other discussions I've had offline.
This site appears to be a personal crusade against the Church of Christ and Christianity in general rather than a rational critique of the sect's theology. Witness the URL - the Church is listed under "cults." I would encourage links to more even-handed and level-headed criticisms of the Church of Christ. Danlovejoy 16:04, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
... Should we include how that "you can't join the Church of Christ, you can only be added to it? This is huge to some, who will almost disfellowship someone who speaks of himself or someone else as having "joined" the church. (Anyone know if this is an issue in any other group?) Once I saw that list of unique phraseologies, it really brought back lots of memories. Also, should it be noted how the insistance on this rather unique terminology is somewhat lessened among most younger members of urban and suburban "progressive" churches? I am finding this to be increasingly the case. I mut say that I have heard lots of talent among those unrobed choirs, the "Praise Teams", also in progressive suburban churches. Does this trend merit mentioning? Rlquall 02:49, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
An anonymous contributor came through and de-capitalized many of the instances of "Church of Christ." I reverted. I would contend that this is non-encyclopedic usage. No one outside of the Churches of Christ is going to understand this oddness, and it's explained in the article. In fact, most young people IN the church are not going to get it. Danlovejoy 22:37, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I have removed the link to Camp Yarnill under /*See Also*/. It is not nearly as noteworthy as the other two "See Also" links there. It looks like a lovely place, but there are literally hundreds of Christian camps associated with the Churches of Christ. I could name a dozen off the top of my head. To link to just one seems inappropriate to me. Danlovejoy 15:15, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps a section for the (general) leanings of various Churches of Christ. i.e. Conservative = Gospel Advocate, Harding U. types, moderate to progressive = ACU, Christian Chronicle types and finally those moving toward instruments / evangelical models (Max Lucado). Better section titles would be necessary, but it may clarify to the outsider what the differnces are in a more common language.
Secondly, thanks to everyone for cleaing up this entry.
Pspadaro 19:39, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Your assertion that the traditional conservative churches of Christ preach the church rather than Jesus is a point of view that would be very offensive to most members.
Jdavidb
17:40, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
No, I have not experienced that, but I have experienced persons in group three and four say the opposite about group two. Jdavidb 14:30, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
I think we need to separate out subjects like Vacation Bible School from that big long list. That's not in any way distinctive of the church of Christ, as seen in the Vacation Bible School article.
Maybe a list of commonalities with mainstream evangelical/fundamentalist Protestantism, preceded by (or perhaps followed by) a list of distinctive doctrines and practices (with the ever present caveat that some churches are in various stages of mainstreaming and assimilation with the rest of Protestantism so individual items on the list may vary).
I mean, believe in verbal-plenary inspiration and infallibility of the Scripture is hardly unique to the church of Christ, being shared with fundamentalism and Catholicism, I believe. While it's not something that every Christian tradition in the world accepts, it's also not exactly something that makes the casual observer say, "Whoa! I never heard of a church like that!"
Same goes for beliefs on hell, homosexuality, Satan, abortion, etc.
In terms of truly distinctive beliefs and practices, you have: prohibition of instrumental music (probably not most important, but definitely most notable to outside observers, in my experience), necessity of baptism for salvation, church leadership organization (and lack of clergy), amillenialism, and a couple of others. The vast majority of the rest of that list is either common to almost all southern fundamentalist churches, or else something that's not completely unheard of (such as the position on women leadership). Jdavidb 20:03, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Hmm, a quandry for me.
I run a discussion website for members of the church of Christ. I have steadfastly refrained from adding it to this article's external links section because I do not believe in using Wikipedia for self-promotion.
However, if you check this user's edits, all he did was add in a link to the similar site Preachersfiles.com, which would appear to be the same kind of self-promotion.
I make a lot of sweeps around Wikipedia looking for self-promotion and removing it, but I feel a conflict of interest about making the same decision here. So I'll bring it to the attention of this article's other editors and let you decide if it's an appropriate link for this article. Jdavidb 20:12, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
I have reverted from Psy Guy's version to the previous version by jdavidb because the prior explanation had a lot more information and the edit removed them. The only new information I saw there was an assertion about the term "second reformationist" being used often to describe the COC. I have never heard this expression before. If I haven't heard it in 31 years, it's not used "often," at least not in the US. Danlovejoy 22:33, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
An anonymous editor removed this link a couple of revisions ago. I think it's an interesting, informative resource. I don't really like that it exists, but it's there, and it's relevant. I have restored the link. What does everyone think? Danlovejoy 22:42, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
Is it really appropriate to link to the Believers Baptism article? In general, most people seem to think of that term as meaning "baptism of already saved believers," rather than the typical belief of the church of Christ, which is "baptism of people who believe so that they can be saved." In particular, the article starts out defining "Believers Baptism" as baptism given to those who have "made a declaration of faith in Jesus as their personal savior." In general in the church of Christ, the "personal savior" phrase is avoided, and the implication is that the believer is already saved rather than being baptized to be saved. There's a tiny link in the article to the Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ, but really the main Baptism article covers the point of view of the church of Christ much better. Wouldn't it be better to link to Baptism#Baptism in Churches of Christ instead? Jdavidb 14:59, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
I removed the long list of universities in Church Organization, because it is quite long already, and will continue to get longer as people realize their pet institution is not included. Instead, I have provided a link to the category, which is, I believe, definitive. Danlovejoy 03:35, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
We as members of the Church of Christ only believe in two reasons for remarriage, fornication and being married to a non-member who decides to leave the marriage. Those are the only two reasons. Abuse is not considered.
Interpretation of doctrine on divorce and remarriage may be highly controversial in NI churches right now, but in my experience it varies far more widely in the mainstream churches. I think the NI churches are just seeing what has been going on in the mainstream churches for years. I'd suggest the especially NI clause probably doesn't belong. Jdavidb (talk) 22:00, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
We believe that all dancing is wrong. Dancing is only allowed between married couples, and then they must limit it to the privacy of their homes.
Shouldn't this church also be included?
This page needs some serious work. Its hard to read and is innacurate in a few places (churches of christ for one). I'll put it on my list of things to do, but I've already got quite a list. Someone want to help do some cleanup? -- Raogden 22:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
The first meaning listed here is:
"Churches of Christ is one of the descriptions found in the New Testament for local bodies of believers/followers of Jesus Christ."
Anyone have a citation for this? Where does the NT call the bodies "Churches of Christ"? – SESmith 00:33, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Rom. 16:16 is accurate. Paul calls the bodies churches of Christ in that passage. Of course, scripture also refers to the churches by other names. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.105.130.87 ( talk) 18:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I propose that this DAB page be moved to Church of Christ. Currently, Church of Christ redirects to Churches of Christ. However, I believe that this page would be more useful as the DAB page, since Churches of Christ is not, in my opinion, the "well known primary meaning for [the] term or phrase, much more used than any other". It might meet this standard if we limited our concern to just the United States, but almost definitely not if you include rest of the English-speaking world. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. Vegaswikian ( talk) 06:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, now it's completely backwards. The page with "Churches" (plural) should more accurately be the DAB page and include the various denominational assemblies that exist. The singular "Church of Christ" page should point to the original Church, established at the death of Jesus. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Guile AF (
talk •
contribs)
19:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
The term "christian" is used far to loosly, 1 John: 1: 3 says "That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you also, that ye also may have fellowship with us: yea, and our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ."; to come together and have fellowship, christians would have to think alike, for example most denominations think that baptism isn't necessary (these denominations include Cathlic, Baptist, methodist, and many others); the Church of Christ is not just another denominational name, Acts: 2: 38 says "And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you into the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit." so being baptized is God's law. If you are going to write an encyclopedia-article about something, then you should write it corectly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fwooper ( talk • contribs) 22:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Actually, the correct definition would be that of the original Church of Christ, established by Jesus Christ by His death on the Cross. It's the ONLY assembly created by Him, and not by man. And sure, anyone can use the name "Church of Christ" as their name, but you can legally change your name to "Ronald Regan". It doesn't make you a former President of the US. So the page would be more accurate (and that's the goal here) if it would link "Churches of Christ" to this disambiguation page, and "Church of Christ" to the page currently listed under "Churches of Christ". There is only ONE church, with many buildings for members of the Church to assemble and worship. It's the Church of Christ. Guile AF ( talk) 19:05, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE USE OF INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC IN WORSHIP OF GOD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.215.163.7 ( talk) 06:45, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
If this is a list what is it a list of? Is it a "List of Churches of Christ"? WP:LISTNAME says Standard practice is to entitle list articles as List of ___. Should we move the article to "List of Churches of Christ"? As it stands it seems like this is really a disambig page but then we have two disambig pages with the same name. Bhny ( talk) 22:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
In Matthew 16:18 Christ said he would build his Church, one Church that belonged to him. Paul talks about this Church in Romans 16:16. We see that he is addressing the churches of Christ in verses 1-15.Christ Church the only church of Christ that was authorized by God the Father was started on the day of Pentecost in 33 AD.in the city of Jerusalem.
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Most members, particularly older members, of this group are apt to object to being referred to as "Protestants", saying that the church was not founded as a protest against anything, other than perhaps the domination of the present world by Satan. However, it certainly fits within the the historic context of Protestantism, growing as it did mainly out of Baptist- and Presbyterian-related reform movements. Rlquall, 10 June 04, 12:55
I'm going to mercilessly edit some of the recent changes. :) For one thing, the text made it clear that since the churches are autonomous, specific beliefs and practices vary. The article attempts to list some things that are commonly taught or associated with the Church of Christ. There is no need to add disclaimers to individual statements to say this. I presume I'll be similarly mercilessly edited, and consensus will emerge. Jdavidb 20:29, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
It is incorrect to say that the churches of Christ believe that divorce, without reason of adultery is not divorce in the eyes of God and is therefore adultery. This is a minority view held by some of the more extreme members of the church.
A more accurate statement reflecting the majority view is: Divorce, except for reasons of infidelity, is a sin which Jesus compares to adultery.
Because this is a strenuously debated issue, rather than a defining doctrine, I believe that it should be either corrected or deleted entirely.
There are 3 links out of ten devoted to the ICOC, but this is the article for the mainstream Churches of Christ. Since these two groups are often confused, I would like to have something to set these links apart. Otherwise, it seems excessive that 30% of the links are about another group. Jdavidb 19:55, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I believe it might be helpful to add to this article an explanation of baptism as presented by Ferguson in his book, "The Church of Christ A Biblical Ecclesiology for Today" (Eerdmans) ... basically, Ferguson explains that generally speaking people in the Church of Christ (consciously or not) believe that they would answer the questions "How am I saved?" by "Grace" "Why am I saved?" because of my Faith "When am I saved?" when I am baptized. Do you'll think this would help people understand better where they are coming from?
Rlquall 05:59, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Capitalization needed to be standardized within the article. I realize that this is a contentious point; many feel that the capitalization of "Church" aquaints to surrendering to the idea that the body is another denomination. However, even though Wikipedia is by its very nature a collabrative effort, the outcome of each article should be stylistically consistent as if written by a single author. Rlquall 18:18, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I realize that many will see this as even more of a minor quibble than the capitalization "issue". However, " mainline" has become something of a term of art referring to a specific group of major Protestant churches, and it would be wrong to associate the Churches of Christ with this group because it would be historically and semantically inaccurate. Therefore, I have amended it to the more generic "mainstream", which better signifies what is meant here in my opinion. Rlquall 18:22, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Is Pepperdine the best choice of an example here? I would think that Abeline, Harding, or Lipscomb would be more representative of the "mainstream" of belief. Many in the C of C "heartland" automatically suspect and disdain Pepperdine, admittedly in part just due to its California location, but also for its perceived (and sometimes real) "liberalism" by Church of Christ standards. Rlquall 17:39, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
(Would a good minor Wikiproject be "List of colleges and universities associated with the Churches of Christ?)
Liberal or conservative tendencies shouldn't play into this discussion. Rather, the willingness and promotion of the college itself as representative of Churches of Christ. Pepperdine has been much less willing in recent years to bill itself as an institution of the Churches of Christ, whereas Abilene Christian University, Oklahoma Chrisitan University, Harding University, and Lipscomb University are still the major colleges that outwardly claim association with the CoC, regardless of liberal or conservative leanings. -- Soonercary 03:06, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Florida College in Temple Terrace, Florida [1] should be included in the list of colleges. Although it is not a seminary, it does have a bibilcal studies department whose beliefs are most akin to those of the non-institutional side of the church.
Links to individual CoC congregations' websites are unnecessary. There is potential for an overwhelming amount of links if this were allowed to continue. There are already links to website directories of CoCs in the article. Users should use those directories provided rather than link to individual congregations in the wiki article.
-- Ichabod 14:02, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
-- Rlquall 23:20, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I would appreciate the recent "editor" coming forward and identifying himself/herself. This sort of thing is unfortunate, even though what is expressed is exactly what the American Restoration Movement saw itself as being. But anonymous edits erasing hours of work by several persons strike me as being "un-Christian" in the extreme. Rlquall 23:46, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This article seems to take the CoC's claims as to its origins at face value; that is, that it is merely a restoration of early Christianity. While the CoC's view of itself should certainly be stated, there needs to be a section on the group's history -- who founded them, what were some of the religious trends and fashions prevelant at the time and place where the CoC was founded. Just giving the CoC's pov and not any more secular historical background makes this article NPOV, though I just put the "cleanup" tag on there to give people time to fix it. I am sick, and unable to write a good section on the history at this time; if no one else comes forward to do so soon, I'll need to put a NPOV tag up there. Zantastik 07:57, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think the statements and links to the Restoration Movement serves this purpose. Otherwise, a "historical and modern origins" section could be added without really removing anything else. This could address Campbell, David Lipscomb, and Daniel Summer. What else is really needed? Carltonh 16:49, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I have NPOVed it. However, I am a member of this church, so a Gentile should probably edit me. ;-) And I'd like to say, while this article gets the facts straight, we're not as odd as we look. Danlovejoy 22:50, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
"No intermediate locales in the afterlife between heaven and hell; Purgatory and limbo are seen as human creations, mentioned nowhere in scripture and unheard of for centuries after the completion of the New Testament."
I grew up in the church of Christ and was taught the doctrine of Hades - a places souls go after death to await judgment. Was anyone else taught this?
I have removed the reference to Purgatory and Limbo per this discussion and other discussions I've had offline.
This site appears to be a personal crusade against the Church of Christ and Christianity in general rather than a rational critique of the sect's theology. Witness the URL - the Church is listed under "cults." I would encourage links to more even-handed and level-headed criticisms of the Church of Christ. Danlovejoy 16:04, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
... Should we include how that "you can't join the Church of Christ, you can only be added to it? This is huge to some, who will almost disfellowship someone who speaks of himself or someone else as having "joined" the church. (Anyone know if this is an issue in any other group?) Once I saw that list of unique phraseologies, it really brought back lots of memories. Also, should it be noted how the insistance on this rather unique terminology is somewhat lessened among most younger members of urban and suburban "progressive" churches? I am finding this to be increasingly the case. I mut say that I have heard lots of talent among those unrobed choirs, the "Praise Teams", also in progressive suburban churches. Does this trend merit mentioning? Rlquall 02:49, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
An anonymous contributor came through and de-capitalized many of the instances of "Church of Christ." I reverted. I would contend that this is non-encyclopedic usage. No one outside of the Churches of Christ is going to understand this oddness, and it's explained in the article. In fact, most young people IN the church are not going to get it. Danlovejoy 22:37, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I have removed the link to Camp Yarnill under /*See Also*/. It is not nearly as noteworthy as the other two "See Also" links there. It looks like a lovely place, but there are literally hundreds of Christian camps associated with the Churches of Christ. I could name a dozen off the top of my head. To link to just one seems inappropriate to me. Danlovejoy 15:15, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps a section for the (general) leanings of various Churches of Christ. i.e. Conservative = Gospel Advocate, Harding U. types, moderate to progressive = ACU, Christian Chronicle types and finally those moving toward instruments / evangelical models (Max Lucado). Better section titles would be necessary, but it may clarify to the outsider what the differnces are in a more common language.
Secondly, thanks to everyone for cleaing up this entry.
Pspadaro 19:39, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Your assertion that the traditional conservative churches of Christ preach the church rather than Jesus is a point of view that would be very offensive to most members.
Jdavidb
17:40, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
No, I have not experienced that, but I have experienced persons in group three and four say the opposite about group two. Jdavidb 14:30, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
I think we need to separate out subjects like Vacation Bible School from that big long list. That's not in any way distinctive of the church of Christ, as seen in the Vacation Bible School article.
Maybe a list of commonalities with mainstream evangelical/fundamentalist Protestantism, preceded by (or perhaps followed by) a list of distinctive doctrines and practices (with the ever present caveat that some churches are in various stages of mainstreaming and assimilation with the rest of Protestantism so individual items on the list may vary).
I mean, believe in verbal-plenary inspiration and infallibility of the Scripture is hardly unique to the church of Christ, being shared with fundamentalism and Catholicism, I believe. While it's not something that every Christian tradition in the world accepts, it's also not exactly something that makes the casual observer say, "Whoa! I never heard of a church like that!"
Same goes for beliefs on hell, homosexuality, Satan, abortion, etc.
In terms of truly distinctive beliefs and practices, you have: prohibition of instrumental music (probably not most important, but definitely most notable to outside observers, in my experience), necessity of baptism for salvation, church leadership organization (and lack of clergy), amillenialism, and a couple of others. The vast majority of the rest of that list is either common to almost all southern fundamentalist churches, or else something that's not completely unheard of (such as the position on women leadership). Jdavidb 20:03, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Hmm, a quandry for me.
I run a discussion website for members of the church of Christ. I have steadfastly refrained from adding it to this article's external links section because I do not believe in using Wikipedia for self-promotion.
However, if you check this user's edits, all he did was add in a link to the similar site Preachersfiles.com, which would appear to be the same kind of self-promotion.
I make a lot of sweeps around Wikipedia looking for self-promotion and removing it, but I feel a conflict of interest about making the same decision here. So I'll bring it to the attention of this article's other editors and let you decide if it's an appropriate link for this article. Jdavidb 20:12, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
I have reverted from Psy Guy's version to the previous version by jdavidb because the prior explanation had a lot more information and the edit removed them. The only new information I saw there was an assertion about the term "second reformationist" being used often to describe the COC. I have never heard this expression before. If I haven't heard it in 31 years, it's not used "often," at least not in the US. Danlovejoy 22:33, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
An anonymous editor removed this link a couple of revisions ago. I think it's an interesting, informative resource. I don't really like that it exists, but it's there, and it's relevant. I have restored the link. What does everyone think? Danlovejoy 22:42, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
Is it really appropriate to link to the Believers Baptism article? In general, most people seem to think of that term as meaning "baptism of already saved believers," rather than the typical belief of the church of Christ, which is "baptism of people who believe so that they can be saved." In particular, the article starts out defining "Believers Baptism" as baptism given to those who have "made a declaration of faith in Jesus as their personal savior." In general in the church of Christ, the "personal savior" phrase is avoided, and the implication is that the believer is already saved rather than being baptized to be saved. There's a tiny link in the article to the Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ, but really the main Baptism article covers the point of view of the church of Christ much better. Wouldn't it be better to link to Baptism#Baptism in Churches of Christ instead? Jdavidb 14:59, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
I removed the long list of universities in Church Organization, because it is quite long already, and will continue to get longer as people realize their pet institution is not included. Instead, I have provided a link to the category, which is, I believe, definitive. Danlovejoy 03:35, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
We as members of the Church of Christ only believe in two reasons for remarriage, fornication and being married to a non-member who decides to leave the marriage. Those are the only two reasons. Abuse is not considered.
Interpretation of doctrine on divorce and remarriage may be highly controversial in NI churches right now, but in my experience it varies far more widely in the mainstream churches. I think the NI churches are just seeing what has been going on in the mainstream churches for years. I'd suggest the especially NI clause probably doesn't belong. Jdavidb (talk) 22:00, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
We believe that all dancing is wrong. Dancing is only allowed between married couples, and then they must limit it to the privacy of their homes.
Shouldn't this church also be included?
This page needs some serious work. Its hard to read and is innacurate in a few places (churches of christ for one). I'll put it on my list of things to do, but I've already got quite a list. Someone want to help do some cleanup? -- Raogden 22:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
The first meaning listed here is:
"Churches of Christ is one of the descriptions found in the New Testament for local bodies of believers/followers of Jesus Christ."
Anyone have a citation for this? Where does the NT call the bodies "Churches of Christ"? – SESmith 00:33, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Rom. 16:16 is accurate. Paul calls the bodies churches of Christ in that passage. Of course, scripture also refers to the churches by other names. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.105.130.87 ( talk) 18:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I propose that this DAB page be moved to Church of Christ. Currently, Church of Christ redirects to Churches of Christ. However, I believe that this page would be more useful as the DAB page, since Churches of Christ is not, in my opinion, the "well known primary meaning for [the] term or phrase, much more used than any other". It might meet this standard if we limited our concern to just the United States, but almost definitely not if you include rest of the English-speaking world. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. Vegaswikian ( talk) 06:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, now it's completely backwards. The page with "Churches" (plural) should more accurately be the DAB page and include the various denominational assemblies that exist. The singular "Church of Christ" page should point to the original Church, established at the death of Jesus. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Guile AF (
talk •
contribs)
19:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
The term "christian" is used far to loosly, 1 John: 1: 3 says "That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you also, that ye also may have fellowship with us: yea, and our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ."; to come together and have fellowship, christians would have to think alike, for example most denominations think that baptism isn't necessary (these denominations include Cathlic, Baptist, methodist, and many others); the Church of Christ is not just another denominational name, Acts: 2: 38 says "And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you into the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit." so being baptized is God's law. If you are going to write an encyclopedia-article about something, then you should write it corectly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fwooper ( talk • contribs) 22:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Actually, the correct definition would be that of the original Church of Christ, established by Jesus Christ by His death on the Cross. It's the ONLY assembly created by Him, and not by man. And sure, anyone can use the name "Church of Christ" as their name, but you can legally change your name to "Ronald Regan". It doesn't make you a former President of the US. So the page would be more accurate (and that's the goal here) if it would link "Churches of Christ" to this disambiguation page, and "Church of Christ" to the page currently listed under "Churches of Christ". There is only ONE church, with many buildings for members of the Church to assemble and worship. It's the Church of Christ. Guile AF ( talk) 19:05, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE USE OF INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC IN WORSHIP OF GOD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.215.163.7 ( talk) 06:45, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
If this is a list what is it a list of? Is it a "List of Churches of Christ"? WP:LISTNAME says Standard practice is to entitle list articles as List of ___. Should we move the article to "List of Churches of Christ"? As it stands it seems like this is really a disambig page but then we have two disambig pages with the same name. Bhny ( talk) 22:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
In Matthew 16:18 Christ said he would build his Church, one Church that belonged to him. Paul talks about this Church in Romans 16:16. We see that he is addressing the churches of Christ in verses 1-15.Christ Church the only church of Christ that was authorized by God the Father was started on the day of Pentecost in 33 AD.in the city of Jerusalem.