People make the mistake of thinking that Campbell’s teachings regarding New Testament worship were peculiar to Campbell. The fact is (and there is solid, undeniable evidence) that before Campbell ever came to America, there were Christians in America teaching and observing the same thing. They even called themselves the church of Christ. The evidence is in a book written by a man named Robert Semple called “History of the Rise and Progress of Baptists in Virginia.” The churches of Christ in Virginia and their beliefs were mentioned in the book. The book was written many years before Alexander Campbell ever came to America. There are copies of it still in existence, and it has been reprinted in recent years. It proves that what many call “Campbellism” didn’t start with Campbell at all. Not only that, but Christians believing and practicing what Campbell later taught about salvation and worship also existed throughout the history of Europe, and their existence was documented by the Catholic Church who opposed them and persecuted them heavily. There is a well-researched book called “Traces of the Kingdom” that was written by an English brother named Keith Sisman. It shows the evidence for the church, patterned after the New Testament example of the first century Christians, existing throughout Europe, long before the Protestant reformation. We are not something that evolved out of Campbell’s previous Protestant traditions as your video suggested, but something that preceded it and started on Pentecost when the apostle Peter (inspired by the Spirit of God) preached the first gospel sermon, documented in Acts 2. The church of Christ (being “of Christ” because it abides in the doctrine of Christ - 2 John 9) has existed ever since. It is not a denomination. It precedes even the concept of denominationalism.
Amen, God has always had a remnant. Jesus said in Matthew 16:18 “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”. His church has always been in existence from the day of Pentecost.
2nd time watching! Great information here. I would add this thought...the Holy Spirit works outside believers until immersion into Christ where He then works from within believers and seals them for entrance into the Kingdom...the promise is offered to all. (I'm both a former Roman Catholic and Calvinist protestant.)
"Now on the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, 'If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, "From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water." ' But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified" (John 7:37-39). Baptized in water, Jesus was anointed, receiving the Holy Spirit. Precisely the same pertains to us in baptism (and additionally, the baptismal entrance into the New Covenant brings the cleansing from sins).
I don't have to delve into what these fellows believed. I need to delve into the scriptures to become informed by God. The function of Baptism was made simple to believe but was continually fleshed out beyond John's (the Baptizer) call to be baptized and Peter's call to be Baptized more specifically in the Name of Jesus Christ. They were both upon repentance for the remission of sins. Mark 1:4 can dispel the notion that the Greek word 'eis' in Acts 2:38 means because of. Furthermore, denying Baptism's role in salvation is not so much a disbelief as it is having fallen prey to a deception. The foundation of Baptism's function is based on what the scriptures say about it. If you base your baptism on something not in scripture then it really isn't obedience and it really isn't a baptism. It MUST be in scripture for it to be a legitimate matter of faith. For instance an outward sign of what has already occurred in the heart. That's not in scripture anywhere. Baptism is an instruction that is to be obeyed motivated by faith. If you are doing it for your outward show you are missing the biblical reason for doing it. Much the same as when Jesus says do your praying in secret and when God hears your prayer in secret he will answer it openly. 1 Peter 3 does not say that baptism represents anything. It says that our baptism saves us much the same as Noah and his family were saved by water. Later passages tell us what Baptism represents like Romans chapter 6. In Romans 6 we see no such relegation of baptism to denominationalism's disfunctional understanding. No Baptism serves as a grave for the man of sin in us that by faith we recon to be dead. We direct this profession toward God... God is the audience. And God seeing us acting in faith by that faith he changes his mind about us and adopts us into his family and grants us the seal of the indwelling spirit. In baptism, it is God who is doing the work. We are making an appeal to him by faith and he is granting that request.
I haven’t met one with that explicit belief. Church of Christ ministers I’ve experienced certainly believe that we must obey what God commands and shouldn’t go beyond what the New Testament doesn’t prescribe, describe, or necessarily infer. Amongst those I know it’s 50/50 on their view of allowing instruments. IMO this is a peripheral, personal, and non salvation issue, but some certainly elevate it to a greater status.
@Disciple-makers- The 50% you have met that go beyond God’s authority in His command to “sing and make melody in your heart” are not the church of Christ. They are not of Christ and do not have God because they “do not abide in the doctrine of Christ” (2 John 9). They have divided themselves from the body of Christ by deciding to adopt the instrument and pursue their own idea of praise to God. In doing so, they have violated 1 Corinthians 1:10. They are not the church that Jesus built. They are an inauthentic replica. True Christians can have no fellowship with them (Ephesians 5:11)
Aletheia8054 Come on, please be serious. It says to “teach one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs.” How do you do that without vocalizing the words? You’ve distorted the sentence structure, too. “Sing” (one command. “AND make melody in your hearts” (another command, linked to the first). It has to do with the song meaning something to you in your heart - the heart being the spiritual instrument. It never mentions God desiring or authorizing a mechanical instrument in Christian worship. Look up the history of the use of mechanical instruments in worship. Note when it started and who started it (hundreds of years after the first century). Note how none of the groups that emerged from the Protestant reformation used instruments in their worship until almost three centuries later (1800’s). Look up what preachers like Wesley and Spurgeon wrote about using instruments in worship. The churches of Christ didn’t invent the concept of not using mechanical instruments in worship. We just held firm to the faith when the denominations started adopting that modern practice. We stayed with the Bible teaching and didn’t “go too far” (2 John 9) when others abandoned the practice that they had previously believed was right. Now you can go on TH-cam and see a T.D. Jake’s video where he has a young woman on stage “twerking for Jesus.” That’s what worship eventually devolves into when we abandon the idea of citing scriptural authority. “Whatever you do in word or in deed, do everything in the name [meaning by the authority] of the Lord, Jesus.” (Colossians 3:17).
Acts 8:35-40, Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Romans 6:3-6, Galatians 3:26-27, 1 Peter 3:20-21, John 3:5, Mark 16:16, Matthew 28:19, I'd be careful about adding your human understanding to the Word of God. First comes the obedience in water and then comes the Spirit according to Acts 2: 37-38. It was reversed one time in Acts 10 in order to show the Jewish Apostles that Gentiles could now become part of the Church or Called Out. They still had to be baptized in water however according to Acts 10:47 in order to be saved.
Splitting "water baptism" from "Spirit baptism" is just an argumentative dodge by those who are plainly wrong. James D. G. Dunn once popularized the malarkey.
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
People make the mistake of thinking that Campbell’s teachings regarding New Testament worship were peculiar to Campbell. The fact is (and there is solid, undeniable evidence) that before Campbell ever came to America, there were Christians in America teaching and observing the same thing. They even called themselves the church of Christ. The evidence is in a book written by a man named Robert Semple called “History of the Rise and Progress of Baptists in Virginia.” The churches of Christ in Virginia and their beliefs were mentioned in the book. The book was written many years before Alexander Campbell ever came to America. There are copies of it still in existence, and it has been reprinted in recent years. It proves that what many call “Campbellism” didn’t start with Campbell at all. Not only that, but Christians believing and practicing what Campbell later taught about salvation and worship also existed throughout the history of Europe, and their existence was documented by the Catholic Church who opposed them and persecuted them heavily. There is a well-researched book called “Traces of the Kingdom” that was written by an English brother named Keith Sisman. It shows the evidence for the church, patterned after the New Testament example of the first century Christians, existing throughout Europe, long before the Protestant reformation. We are not something that evolved out of Campbell’s previous Protestant traditions as your video suggested, but something that preceded it and started on Pentecost when the apostle Peter (inspired by the Spirit of God) preached the first gospel sermon, documented in Acts 2. The church of Christ (being “of Christ” because it abides in the doctrine of Christ - 2 John 9) has existed ever since. It is not a denomination. It precedes even the concept of denominationalism.
Amen, God has always had a remnant. Jesus said in Matthew 16:18
“And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”. His church has always been in existence from the day of Pentecost.
2nd time watching! Great information here. I would add this thought...the Holy Spirit works outside believers until immersion into Christ where He then works from within believers and seals them for entrance into the Kingdom...the promise is offered to all. (I'm both a former Roman Catholic and Calvinist protestant.)
"Now on the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, 'If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, "From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water." ' But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified" (John 7:37-39). Baptized in water, Jesus was anointed, receiving the Holy Spirit. Precisely the same pertains to us in baptism (and additionally, the baptismal entrance into the New Covenant brings the cleansing from sins).
I don't have to delve into what these fellows believed. I need to delve into the scriptures to become informed by God. The function of Baptism was made simple to believe but was continually fleshed out beyond John's (the Baptizer) call to be baptized and Peter's call to be Baptized more specifically in the Name of Jesus Christ. They were both upon repentance for the remission of sins. Mark 1:4 can dispel the notion that the Greek word 'eis' in Acts 2:38 means because of. Furthermore, denying Baptism's role in salvation is not so much a disbelief as it is having fallen prey to a deception. The foundation of Baptism's function is based on what the scriptures say about it. If you base your baptism on something not in scripture then it really isn't obedience and it really isn't a baptism. It MUST be in scripture for it to be a legitimate matter of faith. For instance an outward sign of what has already occurred in the heart. That's not in scripture anywhere. Baptism is an instruction that is to be obeyed motivated by faith. If you are doing it for your outward show you are missing the biblical reason for doing it. Much the same as when Jesus says do your praying in secret and when God hears your prayer in secret he will answer it openly. 1 Peter 3 does not say that baptism represents anything. It says that our baptism saves us much the same as Noah and his family were saved by water. Later passages tell us what Baptism represents like Romans chapter 6. In Romans 6 we see no such relegation of baptism to denominationalism's disfunctional understanding. No Baptism serves as a grave for the man of sin in us that by faith we recon to be dead. We direct this profession toward God... God is the audience. And God seeing us acting in faith by that faith he changes his mind about us and adopts us into his family and grants us the seal of the indwelling spirit. In baptism, it is God who is doing the work. We are making an appeal to him by faith and he is granting that request.
Hello, I'm impressed with your teaching. Where do you worship currently? I'm in Indiana and a brother in Christ.
@@bellcoolmountain6650 I am a shut-in. The internet is my mission field. I currently reside in Nashville.
@@thundershadow go to Truth
@@thundershadow With Proof
@@thundershadow Type Travis
♥️✝️♥️
What do you believe?
Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet you. (Romans 16:16, ESV)
Dont the Cambellites (Church of Christ) believe that you will burn in hell if you worship god with musical instruments?
I haven’t met one with that explicit belief. Church of Christ ministers I’ve experienced certainly believe that we must obey what God commands and shouldn’t go beyond what the New Testament doesn’t prescribe, describe, or necessarily infer. Amongst those I know it’s 50/50 on their view of allowing instruments.
IMO this is a peripheral, personal, and non salvation issue, but some certainly elevate it to a greater status.
Why don’t they use musical instruments?
@Disciple-makers- The 50% you have met that go beyond God’s authority in His command to “sing and make melody in your heart” are not the church of Christ. They are not of Christ and do not have God because they “do not abide in the doctrine of Christ” (2 John 9). They have divided themselves from the body of Christ by deciding to adopt the instrument and pursue their own idea of praise to God. In doing so, they have violated 1 Corinthians 1:10. They are not the church that Jesus built. They are an inauthentic replica. True Christians can have no fellowship with them (Ephesians 5:11)
@@brettcarter6189 well if you’re singing out loud, then you must be disobeying the scripture because it says do it in your heart.
Aletheia8054 Come on, please be serious. It says to “teach one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs.” How do you do that without vocalizing the words? You’ve distorted the sentence structure, too. “Sing” (one command. “AND make melody in your hearts” (another command, linked to the first). It has to do with the song meaning something to you in your heart - the heart being the spiritual instrument. It never mentions God desiring or authorizing a mechanical instrument in Christian worship. Look up the history of the use of mechanical instruments in worship. Note when it started and who started it (hundreds of years after the first century). Note how none of the groups that emerged from the Protestant reformation used instruments in their worship until almost three centuries later (1800’s). Look up what preachers like Wesley and Spurgeon wrote about using instruments in worship. The churches of Christ didn’t invent the concept of not using mechanical instruments in worship. We just held firm to the faith when the denominations started adopting that modern practice. We stayed with the Bible teaching and didn’t “go too far” (2 John 9) when others abandoned the practice that they had previously believed was right. Now you can go on TH-cam and see a T.D. Jake’s video where he has a young woman on stage “twerking for Jesus.” That’s what worship eventually devolves into when we abandon the idea of citing scriptural authority. “Whatever you do in word or in deed, do everything in the name [meaning by the authority] of the Lord, Jesus.” (Colossians 3:17).
Matthew 16.18 ends the idea of any restoration movement...
All orthodoxy holds to baptism for the remission of sins...
Eph 4.5 One Lord ,One faith and one BAPTISM..( this is spiritual) .this means water baptism is not part of a Christians calling today .
Acts 8:35-40, Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Romans 6:3-6, Galatians 3:26-27, 1 Peter 3:20-21, John 3:5, Mark 16:16, Matthew 28:19, I'd be careful about adding your human understanding to the Word of God. First comes the obedience in water and then comes the Spirit according to Acts 2: 37-38. It was reversed one time in Acts 10 in order to show the Jewish Apostles that Gentiles could now become part of the Church or Called Out. They still had to be baptized in water however according to Acts 10:47 in order to be saved.
Splitting "water baptism" from "Spirit baptism" is just an argumentative dodge by those who are plainly wrong. James D. G. Dunn once popularized the malarkey.
It didn't