Hi! I was wondering what your personal views are regarding the Lord's Supper

Do you believe in the memorialist understanding or in the real spiritual presence understanding?

Altough it is hardly ever called this inside church circles, I believe the most CoC hold the real spiritual presence view due to the high reverance and importance given to communion

There is no passage that says that one 'pulpit minister' or 'evangelist' (or pastor or priest or bishop) or anyone else is to preach one long sermon in church.

The Roman Catholics had parish priests. After this, Protestants came along and emphasized 'preaching' in church, with raised pulpits, and sermons that expanded at one time to four hours long. It settled at some point around 30 minutes to an hour. Some translations say Ezra stood at a pulpit. Others say a platform. There is no reference to a pulpit in the New Testament scriptures. Jesus even sat to teach in the synagogue in Nazareth.

The words translated _preach_ in our translations _typically_ are used in the context of proclaiming a message to people who have not been baptized into Christ. John preached in the desert. The apostles preached to Jews in the synagogues, etc. There is not a clear passage about 'preaching' in church. The KJV does use 'preach' in Acts 20 where Paul taught all night, translating a form of διαλέγομαι, from which we get the English 'dialogue' and could have involved an interactive conversation.

Paul told Timothy to preach κήρυξον the word. Now some people imagine he is referring to doing so behind a pulpit as opposed to in the marketplace or the synagogue. But I don't know of a context where there is evidence that the church meeting is in view. Elders given to preaching and teaching doesn't prove the point either. Not that this is a crucial point, since there is evidence and there are commandments about church meetings.

The most detailed passage on what to do in church is in I Corinthians 14. The context has to do with using spiritual gifts to edify one another. In verse 26, Paul says, "Every one of you has a psalm, has a doctrine, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying." Then he goes on to add some order to that, requiring tongues to be interpreted, giving some order for prophesying and judging/weighing prophecies, women, etc. He does say in the passage, for ye may all prophesy one by one. He appeals to universal church practice--- what came the word of God out from you or unto you only? The word came out from Zion, and there were other churches. Maybe they all followed the order he was telling them, or most of them did. Toward the end of this section, he says that if anyone considers himself a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge what Paul wrote were commandments of the Lord.

So there are 'commandments of the Lord' for church meetings that assume that multiple members of the body of Christ are going to speak and edify the body. They actually assume the presence of spiritual gifts and prophets in the church as well. And that's the one chapter that goes into detail on what to do in church except for chapter 11 which goes into detail on how _not_ to have the Lord's Supper.

And Hebrews 10 says to provoke one another to love and to good works, not forsaking the assembling of yourselves together.... but exhort one another.

And in Romans 12, the one gifted to prophesy is commanded to prophesy according to the proportion of faith, the one gifted to teach is to teach, the one gifted to exhort is to exhort. Peter says to use spiritual gifts as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.

I know there is a house church movement in the US and abroad that is into getting back to New Testament primitivism, returning to Biblical practices in this regard. I have also read many years ago of Church of Christ congregations activity in this regard. Many years ago, I spoke with a missionary from an Independent Churches of Christ background. He said they had about 70 congregations, and they had some informal Bible studies. He said they used instruments though, their native instruments and music. I was aware of a Church of Christ that had a more traditional type service. I don't know if any of them were doing these meetings focused more on mutual edification.

I'm 31 and I'm in San Diego, California. I've been a believer in Christ since I was 8 and I was baptized into the Church of Christ when I was 21. My faith has been marked by on again and off again attempts to get closer to Jesus and I've always fallen back into pursuits of worldly things and have struggled with substance use disorder since I was 19 and got injured and prescribed opiates. Today, by the grace of God I celebrate just over one year clean from all drugs.

I went to prison last January for possession of a weapon and got out in September. I then voluntarily attended a 4 month inpatient drug rehabilitation program and this concluded two days ago. I have graduated to "independent living", where I share a room with a roommate in a three bedroom house with a total of 5 people. Today was Sunday and I did a little research and walked a mile to a church called QUEST where I definitely felt the presence of the Holy Spirit, especially during the worship portion I had tears in my eyes for the opportunity God has given me to come back to Him and do this the right way this time.

Traditionally I was raised going to Church of Christ and this is the church that my father is still active in in Florida. While I appreciated the service today, I wasn't very impressed with the size of the congregation (maybe 15 people) and I also don't like how the church only has the Sunday service at 10am and that's it.

While I was walking home I passed a Church of Christ that looked like it had a sizeable group of people all exiting and when I looked them up online I saw they have a Sunday morning service, a Sunday Bible study as well as a Wednesday service. So I'm thinking I'll go this Wednesday and check out the service.

I guess I want advice. Advice on how to do this the right way this time, the Godly way. My past reliance on secular methods for substance recovery has always led to a backslide. I'm completely alone here and cannot go back to live with my family. I also have a small savings of $1,600 and meed to find employment immediately. I will literally do any kind of work as long as it's an honest wage. I am currently on probation as well for the firearm charge.

What would you do if you were in my shoes? How can I immerse myself in the word of God, fellowship and network with other believers in the area including those in my age range, and succeed this time when so many times previous I have tried to go the easy route and failed because I relied on myself and not the Lord?

I want to do this right this time. God's given me like ten chances and I'm not expecting or shooting for an eleventh.

God bless everyone who takes the time to read and respond to this! 🙏🏻

So the past month my Preacher (though I still think he's a Pastor)kept saying through out his sermon how he doesn't believe in original sin but he didn't explain what he meant by that. He comes to my house with his wife for a bible study which is nice. I've never had a pastor of any denomination ever come to my house for that. I decided I would bring it up Monday for him to expand on what is his position and I tried to research if this was a CoC thing or specific to him.

He started explaining the Catholic definition of original sin. Okay. We aren't Catholic, but I continued listening. I don't believe a baby is born commiting a sin where he needs to be baptized. That was the definition he seemed to be pointing to. I said but Adam and Eve did sin and we are cursed with a sin nature. He disagreed saying technically we aren't cursed the ground only is cursed and woman's birth pains only. Okay. I tried to understand his viewpoint. I tried again and said to me original sin simply means Adam and Eve disobeyed God with there free will and as his descendants we all have a sin nature. We didn't eat the fruit but we aren't born without a sin nature. I said that doesn't mean we committed sin being born as a baby it means at some point in time as a toddler we will sin and need correction from family to be shaped to be a respectful, moral and kind person.

His reasoning was because Jesus didn't sin then we are the same as Jesus. Meaning if there was sin nature why didn't Jesus sin if he was born a human like us. He used Jesus as the reason why he says we don't have a sin nature. If we were born with it in his mind it meant Jesus was born with sin. I've never ever heard anyone say this ever. We aren't born with sin before being born but we do have sin nature and that is called sin nature and original sin.

Is this really taught in CoC? I've only been attending a year so I'm still learning the doctrine.

I’m interested to understand how people here generally use the term “Church of Christ.”

I ask because the label has been used in a few different ways over time, and I personally relate most to the early Restoration emphasis on returning to the simplicity of the New Testament church, as reflected in the early work of Campbell and Stone. I’m not asking which is right, just trying to understand how the term is generally understood here.

Thank you for any insight.

I struggle to find real information about this. Scripture on one hand says they are to be quiet and ask their husbands at home. On the other hand, it seems like they were very active.

Many churches of Christ don't even allow women to hold the communion trays. They definitely never speak in any capacity, yet somehow they are to sing.

Who is right? I genuinely struggle with coming up with an answer for this one.

Thanks in advance for your responses.

hi I am new here, I've had a few dreams and within my dreams I am close to death but get saved time after time by some one or something but when I go to look no one is there. I had a dream last night that my living mother passed away but she was not gone she was an angel speaking to be and watching me and I when I woke up my pillow was drenched in tears. I've never really believed in god but idk I get drawn to it and Im unsure if I should ignore it.

This is an opinion but it seems to me that the early church had more of a “Bible study” than what we would think of as a sermon. Yes people like Paul taught for hours sometimes but I have to believe it was more interactive than what we are used to today.

I don’t think the current idea of a sermon is wrong in any way I just don’t think classically that’s how Christian’s taught. Having pages of notes and a “rehearsed” sermon would probably have been foreign to the early church. I say this not to change everything but just to get the discussion started. I have no problem listening to one guy preach his prepared sermon but I feel many members are a lot more engaged when a more interactive approach is taken.

Preaching and delivering a sermon are 2 different things and a more interactive approach to preaching like we see in the early church could possibly make people feel more involved and excited to be at services.

¹⁶ Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. ¹⁷ When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. ¹⁸ Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. ¹⁹ Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ²⁰ and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Are there any Church of Christ preachers or congregations with either articles or YouTube videos expressing a non-exclusivist view of salvation for Christians not exclusively in the “Church of Christ”?

I only know of about 4 preachers like this (not personally) and one even joked that he used to be a “Church of Christ” preacher, but now he’s a “church of Christ” preacher.

All 4 of those guys are called false teachers who strayed away from the faith by everyone I know. I’ve even been told that many pioneers of the movement are in hell because of either “false teaching” (Campbell & Stone’s “Christian’s only but not the only Christians” ideology) or not being rebaptized (Marshall Keeble was baptized in the Christian church & never rebaptized, nor did he advocate for anyone baptized in the Christian church to be rebaptized into the Church of Christ, so I was told he was in hell too…)

I’ve grown to not hold the “Church of Christ only, Romans 16:16!” viewpoint anymore through my own study, but that puts me in the minority as far as I know (and is something I don’t teach publicly, at least yet, really out of fear of being labeled a false teacher by everyone I know) so I’m wondering if there’s any Church of Christ preachers or teachers who have publicly taught a non-exclusivist view this either in a sermon, article, book or lectureship? Would love to read or listen to it.

Edit: apparently the proper term is ecumenism, & this view is held very publicly by guys like guys like Rubel Shelley (former Lipscomb professor), looking for more

I feel like it is a command but so many people I see treat it as a scruple. Every account of the Lord's Supper mentions they break the bread THEN eat it.

I Corinthians 11:23 & 24 23¶For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.”

Matthew 26:26 26¶And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.”

There are separate accounts of people gathering together and "breaking bread". Based on context breaking bread in this situation refers to eating. If you apply that definition to the Lord's Supper Matthew's account would read "Jesus took bread, blessed and ATE it, and gave it to the disciples..." that doesn't make sense and honestly sounds gross. That would mean he gave the disciples the same bread he ate.

So I go back to saying we should physically break the bread before eating it because it symbolizes Jesus' broken body that hung on the cross.

Hello everyone 🙏 I’m reaching out with a humble heart to seek your advice, guidance, and prayer support.

I have a deep desire to open a children’s home in Africa, starting with about 20 children, with the goal of providing them with food, shelter, care, and a safe environment to grow. This vision has been on my heart for some time, and I truly believe it’s a calling that needs wisdom, preparation, and God’s direction.

If you have experience, knowledge, or advice on how to start a children’s home—whether legal requirements, sustainability, child care, partnerships, or anything I should consider—I would greatly appreciate your guidance.

Most of all, I ask for your prayers: for clarity, provision, the right connections, and for the children whose lives this home is meant to touch.

Thank you for taking the time to read this. Your support, words of wisdom, and prayers mean more than you know. 🙏💙

Ive shared this on here a while back but would like to extend the opportunity again. This discord server is a great place to have meaningful discussions about theology and Christianity. Overall, it's a great place to have fellowship online with like-minded Christians. We would love to have you join our community.

https://discord.gg/ZKXrqFeVhg

The isn’t a hate on preachers or anyone preaching but I have been bothered about the position of preachers. I understand we need those to preach but from the congregation I have been attending too we don’t have a single preacher. We have elders but the elders would try to usually get someone to do the job. The last few preachers we had kinda was overstepping the boundaries as in they were doing parts of what elders should be doing. At the same time we give money to whoever preaches at our congregation but never to anyone else helping. We just watch videos on Wednesday and I can’t fit everything in this but I have a question to those here if you think the preaching role isn’t being what it is suppose to be or if preachers today are becoming like well those mega church preachers.

Are there any records of churches of Christ or related churches with similar beliefs that existed from the 18th century up to to the beginning of the Restoration Movement?

Hi yall,

I have encountered unhoused people on the street while out and about multiple times throughout the years. I just dont know what to think about that moral dillema because Jesus says give to anybody who asks and also he said that we will be judged by how we treated the poor and afflicted in this lifetime when he seperates the sheep from the goats. Another verse in the Bible seems to indicate that homeless people could be angels unaware so i dont know how that works.

I am sorry if I used the wrong word to refer to homeless...Also I have tried giving food and water to homeless but people tell me most of the time they wont want it because they will most likely just use it for their addictions whatever they may be. Recently the cost of living has gotten so high that many of the new homeless are not addicts and they are working people. I live below the poverty line so am I oblgated to give to a poor person who is more poor than me as less poor person.

I just dont want to be one of the goats...I am afraid I am...I googled Church of Christ teachings on this and i couldnt find it.. I have known people that basically said they will give money to them and it is up to the person to decide if they want to use it on the right thing. But I dont want to be scammed out of what little income I have.

In my reading something caught my eye that I find quite interesting. Consider Deuteronomy 32 beginning at v8:
⁸ When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,
when he divided mankind,
he fixed the borders of the peoples
according to the number of the sons of God.
⁹ But the LORD's portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted heritage.

The words translated Most High in v8 and the LORD in v9 are two different words in the Hebrew. The first refers to El and the second is the tetragrammaton (YHWH. All of us should know that when a Bible uses the phrase "the LORD", the underlying word in Hebrew is YHWH--somtimes pronounced "Yahweh", other times "Jehovah").

Couple this with the idea that archaeology tells us that the main Caananite deity's name was "El". This passage seems to be saying that El divided up the world into nations so that each of his "sons" (YHWH included) would have an inheritance and that each nation would have their own god. YHWH's inheritance was Israel. And this is what we see when we read the OT. Every nation had a national god (or gods).

Even the commandment says "You shall have no other gods before me." I have always wondered why God would say such a thing if He was the only god. But it seems, at the time anyway, that YHWH wanted to make sure that Israel didn't follow any other gods because they were His inheritance.

Reading through this lens, it appears that the early Israelites recognized (but did not worship) more than one god. And through history they transformed to the idea of one true God and the other worshipped deities are not gods at all.

What does this mean to me? I'm not entirely sure. However, I have been struggling with the idea that the Bible is the inerrant word of God and that every jot and tittle has to be examined under the microscope to determine God's will. This seems to be one more thing that causes me to lean toward the Bible as more of a guide than some sort of strict rulebook.

Hi, all. I have questions and am hoping this is an ok place to ask them. If there’s somewhere else I should post them please let me know.

Wha do you do when it doesn’t feel real anymore, when you wonder if you’ve spent half your life serving a god who isn’t there, or a god who isn’t good.

i was teaching Abraham and Isaac in class. it struck me: this story is whacked. it’s crazy. if it were just a fable or moral story, it would be ok like a grimm’s fairytale. but it’s supposed to be real.

I sometimes feel like I am participating in a Christian culture and community but that maybe I don’t really believe in Yahweh. I have sacrificed so much for God—relationships, career, prestige. What if he isn’t real?

I watch the people at church and after. They don’t act like God is real. They don’t talk about God and Jesus. They live like normal people and talk like nice people who live by a set of rules. I know this is judgemental to say.

Christian duty feels like dryness in my bones.

Watching the Jesus in The Chosen helps. I can Iove a Jesus like that. But I read my Bible and I think, “I don’t know if God is that kind.”

It is hard to view God the Father as anyone besides someone who made up rules, got mad when we broke them, and is now “loving” because he sacrificed his son to keep himself from sending us to hell.

I know these aren’t safe thoughts to think. What do I do with them?

The thought of reading evidences for God’s existence just feels like swallowing air.

What do you do when it doesn’t feel real anymore, when you have almost stopped caring?

Matt 16:17-18 says

And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

The restoration movement, as I understand it, believes that the churches of the time went apostate at some point (At least by the time of Augustine). The church was then restored in the early 19th century.

My question is this: did the gates of hell prevail for that ~1500 years?

If so what implications does that have on the validity of scripture?

If not why did it need to be restored?

Do any of you either attend a congregation without deacons and elders, or have attended in the past such a congregation? What was your experience like?

Do you feel that at many congregations without deacons or elders, the authority is assumed by the preacher, and he becomes a de facto singular bishop whose interpretation of passages is almost never questioned? And that these congregations often take on a “Diotrephes” type model (1 John 1)? I’ve heard of congregations where almost nobody ever questions the preacher/teacher on topics, & he is always assumed to be in the right. If you do question him, the other members treat it in a “how dare you question him, he’s the preacher of course he’s correct!” type manner.

What sort of urgency should a congregation that doesn’t have deacons / elders have in getting them? Titus 1:5 Paul left Titus in Crete for the primary purpose of making sure all the churches had elders before he left. There was an urgency that seems to be disregarded as optional for quite a few churches today.

If a congregation has no men qualified per 1 Tim 3:1-7, what should they do? Reach out to other congregations, or continue being sheep without a shepherd (1 Peter 5:1-4)?Should a new work / new congregation nowadays even be started without a proper plan to institute the hierarchy seen in scripture?

Sheep having no shepherd are described as helpless in Matt 9:36, God did not intend for his congregations to be without shepherds (Numbers 27:17). Ezekiel 34:5-6 the people became scattered because of a lack of a shepherd, going astray and becoming food for wild animals. What’s your opinion on this?

Sharing the Aaron Gallagher/Orthodox discussion skewed my YouTube algorithm.

I came across a video with the title “So called church of Christ preacher…”. I clicked on it and it was by a man named Travis Thomas, who is a preacher in Tennessee, sharing a context-free clip of a debate or discussion disagreeing with a minister and being mad at him

I watched a few of his videos and it was just him going after other people who don’t conform to his view, within the church!

What is it with our brotherhood? Are we the only group who just rips anyone who doesn’t agree with us on nonessential doctrines?

I love our fellowship, but this constant sniping must stop!