Churches of Christ Directory

A brief introduction to the Churches of Christ

How they are holding together after having abandoned true doctrine so long ago.

How their theology is turning their members into pharisees or liberals

What happens when you give up the historic creeds and confessions

Why other Protestants are mistaken in thinking the Churches of Christ are just like them.

Historical case study of their organization and beliefs. 

Although they deny it, by logical necessity they must believe in perseverance of the saints.

The problem of their leadership.

An example of their best exegesis.

A semi-humorous list of their beliefs.

The nature of 'He paid our debt'

One of the biggest problems the modern Calvinist has is a dreadful ignorance of the way Christ paid our debt.  I think this is in large part thanks to John Owen who encouraged his readers to adopt a monitary approach.  As an example of this error, see here.
I can't think of any better way to correct this very common deficency in the modern Calvinist thinking than by quoting Dabney46, from chapter 35 of his systematic theology.

In a mere pecuniary debt, the claim is on the money owed, not on the person owing. The amount is numerically estimated. Hence, the surety, in making vicarious payment, must pay the exact number of coins due. And when he has done that, he has, ipso facto, satisfied the debt. His offer of such payment in full is a legal tender which leaves the creditor no discretion of assent or refusal. If he refuses, his claim is canceled for once and all.

Dabney goes on to give an example.

[Say] a mechanic is justly indebted to a land owner in the sum of one hundred pounds and has no money wherewith to pay. Now, should a rich brother offer the landlord the full hundred pounds, in coin of the realm, this would be a legal tender. It would, ipso facto cancel the debt, even though the creditor captiously rejected it. Christ’s satisfaction is not ipso facto in this commercial sense.

The error is obvious, if Christ paid the debt from the cross then our obligation was discharged at the cross.  Which means we have no need for faith, and as a bonus, all those warnings Jesus gave about the need for faith are wrong too.  Dabney continues,

But the legal claim on us for obedience and penalty is personal....Christ’s satisfaction cannot be forced on the divine Creditor as a legal tender; it does not free us ipso facto. And God, the Creditor, has an optional discretion to decline the proffer, if He chooses (before He is bound by His own covenant), or to accept it. Hence, the extent to which, and the terms on which Christ’s vicarious actions shall actually satisfy the law, depend simply on the stipulations made between Father and Son, in the covenant of redemption.

That is to say, we must have faith. Faith is the channel by which Christs righteousness flows into our lives, it's the open hand- that is the requirement.  God demands from everyone faith, because we are naturally capable of it even after our fall.  Lastly, I'll quote Dabney's example of the moral payment:

There is a second supposition, the kind brother is not rich, but is himself an able mechanic, and seeing that the landlord is engaged in building, he proposes that he will work as a builder for him two hundred days, at ten shillings per day, to cancel his poor brother’s debt. This proposal, on the one hand, is not a "legal tender," and does not compel the creditor. He may say that he has already enough mechanics, who are paid in advance, so that he cannot take the proposal. But, if he judges it convenient to accept it, although he does not get the coin, he gets an actual equivalent for his claim, and a fair one... The debtor may thus get a valid release on the terms freely covenanted between the surety and creditor. 

 This is not to deny that we owe God a debt, and God has a right to collect on it, somewhat like money owed, but it is to deny that Christ pays out debt in this way.

Hyper Calvinist Directory

Hyper-Calvinism. The problem is as old as the church and was born when Adam ate the fruit.
In the most narrow and classic sense a Hyper-Calvinist is anyone who denies that faith is necessary for salvation, but in practice this means that the Hyper-Calvinist is anyone who because of their pride denies the clear teaching of Scriptures concerning Salvation and demands that they be saved because of who they are, regardless of what they do. More specifically:

They deny 

1. The centrality of faith in salvation, asserting that it is something else which saves (typically Sovereignty or Election).
2. Scripture teaches God does not desire to see men perish.
3. God sincerely desires to save the non-elect when He makes an offer to them.
4. God restrains sin in the non-elect which results in a lesser condemnation for them.
5. Common grace.
6.  Jesus wept over the thought of the reprobate perishing.

They believe 

1. They themselves are elect and will be saved, regardless of if they have an actual desire for holiness or not.
2. The secret will of God as understood by logic and reason is more important than the Scriptures. 
3. In a strictly Limited Atonement despite it's problems.
4. In Supralapsarianism, despite it's logical problems.
5. God wills the destruction of the non-elect in the same way He wills life for the elect, contrary to scripture.
   
6. That unborn babies who die are (or generally are) not saved.
7. That if we could know for certain who the non-elect are we should not preach to them, something the Bible does not teach.
   
8. The non-elect are hated from eternity past

If you read those bullets you will start to see that that doesn't characterize Hyper-Calvinism, it characterizes most of the people on the internet that call themselves Calvinists.
Everyday ungracious Calvinism is really Hyper-Calvinism, it's a lazy kind of theology that's divorced from either serious reading and thinking, or a claim to the historical Calvinism when it has no business to.
Oh, and just for fun, if you want to get as good at debating as a Hyper-Calvinist, I have provided some helpful tips for you here.

Heavenly Rewards Analogy

I cleaned the backyard today with the help of my 1 year old daughter. I would pull up the weeds and she would carry a few of them to the weed pile. 
When we went to show off her hard work I gave her full credit for everything we had accomplished together- not because she had genuinely accomplished everything herself, but because of how much I enjoy giving.  Yes I did all the work and she put in a token amount of help, but it made me so proud that she helped I was happy to give her all the credit.

I understand the idea of a heavenly reward better now.

Making sense of the Scriptures

Matt 22:41-46a "Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, saying, "What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?" They said to him, "The son of David."He said to them, "How is it then that David, in the Spirit, calls him Lord, saying,  The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet'? If then David calls him Lord, how is he his son?"And no one was able to answer him a word"
Mark 12:37b And the great throng heard him gladly.

The law of non-contradiction is fundamental to all logic and reason. A thing can only be one thing- itself. 
In other words, I can't say God takes pleasure in the death of the wicked and then say God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked and have the word pleasure mean the same thing in both cases.
The Pharisees knew this, which causes the car crash for them in this text.  How can the Messiah be the son of David, and therefore be below him, yet be called Lord, and therefore be above him at the same time?

On this side of the cross it's easy to figure out, Jesus, being God is David's lord, but descendent both physically and by right.  All of this is dreadfully obvious, but the conclusion of the matter is somehow not: without Christ at the center of the Bible the scriptures make no sense.  He is at the center of every text, to take Him out of it is to make the Scriptures incomprehensible. 
He is it's center.

Reprobation and Election at work

About two years ago I designed a product at work, wrote up a proposal on it, and had senior company officials pitch the idea to a customer. It was a hit.
I got the green light and a pile of cash to make my vision a reality.  Then it began- I designed the architecture, picked out components, adjusted the power supplies so everything would play nice together and put it all down on a printed circuit board. I took that design and debugged it, pulled out all the problems and recreated it into a smaller, less module form factor.  I took that complex design and stacked the boards together, placed it inside a custom metal enclosure, put in the batteries and powered it up. After debugging the software team and I selected eight of the final design style units to go to the customer, then we put them through their paces until they passed every test we could throw at them. And that's when I realized something.

Seeing my final product all powered up and working like I imagined, planned, and designed made me love those little boxes. I do really love all my eight customer deliverable products, they are simply beautiful.
 
And I did all this, knowing that six of these are going to be subject to destructive testing by the customer.  Two I have marked and chosen for non-destructive use, and not because of their performance (in fact the lid doesn't fit as snugly on one of the two keepers as it does on the others) but because of the choice I made.
And even knowing the six are going to be destroyed, I love them still, and am proud of my work in them.

How much more then does God love His workmanship and creatures, even knowing He has decided not to give them special saving grace?

The verse that makes you a moderate Calvinist II

Jude 1:5 "Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe" 

Hyper Calvinists assert that Christ died only to pay the penalty due the elect alone and did nothing for the non-elect.  "For if Christ intended to save the non-elect" they argue "then they would no longer be non-elect, they would by definition be elect.  Yet they are in hell, so obviously He did not intend to save them, which means His death was of no use to them.  He did in no way die for them."
With great difficulty the occasional hyper Calvinist may be argued down to the position where he assents that Christ's death is sufficient to save everyone, theoretically, because Christ's blood is of limitless value, but they would compare it thusly: if I invited George Washington to sleep at my house for the night there is room enough in the house, there is no deficiency in the house, but the corpse is not going to make good on my offer, therefore I never intended to have G.W. over.
While that has a certain appeal in being able to easily understand the mission and motive of Christ (save the elect) we must first ask ourselves, is this Biblical?  

The answer is ultimately no, because of the Jude passage which speaks to this point exactly. Jesus saved a people out of Egypt, but then because of their unbelief destroyed them. Christ dying to save mankind and then condemning them for their sins is therefore not only in character for Him, but an action that has historical precedent.  Jude felt that this aspect of God's character was so important that He was giving a special note to it.  Paul too has this same thought in 1 Corinthians 10:1-6 "For I want you to know, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ. Nevertheless, with most of them God was not pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness. these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did."
Moderate Calvinism is then the only one which can successfully make sense of these two passages: Christ's death is for all mankind, but especially for those who believe and are thereby saved fully.  For just because the children of Israel didn't make it into the promise land didn't mean they were not delivered from slavery in Egypt.

The hyper Calvinist will attempt to hold fast to his worldview by reading the word saved as separated.  Jesus did not save them, but culled them so that He might pour His great fury on them in the wilderness. "Yes God drew them out of Egypt, but since they perished in the wilderness it was His will to destroy them, therefore God drew them out to destroy them." To this, three answers.  (Likewise, since Jude established a connection between the desert wanderings and our faith, each of these arguments is directly applicable to the satisfaction provided by Christ on behalf of all mankind.)

1. It's expressly and explicitly against Scriptures.  Deuteronomy 6:21,23 "then you shall say to your son, 'We were Pharaoh's slaves in Egypt. And the LORD brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand....And he brought us out from there, that he might bring us in and give us the land that he swore to give to our fathers" 
2. It's against reason.  Why should God rescue them and not merely let them perish with the wonders in Egypt when He poured the plagues on them?
3. The word saved is the same found in Matthew 1:21.
4. It sows confusion into the text.  When Moses begged God on behalf of Israel, what did he say?  Exodus 32:11 "Why should the Egyptians say, 'With evil intent did he bring them out, to kill them in the mountains and to consume them from the face of the earth'? Turn from your burning anger and relent from this disaster against your people." For His glory, and because Moses asked, God relented.  Yet if the hypers are right this passage makes no sense, because it was always God's intention to destroy them, certainly not to allow Moses to intercede.

It will also be argued that the Jude passage is a warning to the elect, who cannot lose their salvation because God will preserve them until the end.  But that cavil only is to nullify Jude's warning and wipe out the passage entirely. "Christ will save you regardless, so who cares about what the children of Israel did or didn't do in the desert?" Christ perseveres us in Him by His power, by having us work out our own salvation, by having us strengthen ourselves, by making our election secure.  He warns us that the warning may goad us into action. To ignore the warning then is to miss the salvation it points towards.

If the Bible says that the problem with men not being saved is in their lack of faith, then we should insist that lack of faith not sufficient atonement is the problem.  Jude is a warning that the failure mechanism lies with us, not God's intention for us.  If people end up in hell it's because of their own lack of faith, not because of a sufficient provision. Not because Christ didn't atone for their sins, but because they didn't accept His offer. 
Thus, moderate Calvinism is the only one which allows us to make sense of this passage.

James quoting the scriptures

Proverbs 3:27-30 - Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is in your power to do it. Do not say to your neighbor, "Go, and come again, tomorrow I will give it"--when you have it with you. Do not plan evil against your neighbor, who dwells trustingly beside you. Do not contend with a man for no reason, when he has done you no harm.

James 5:4 - Behold, the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, are crying out against you, and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts.

A Very Jewish Sermon

From selected text

Matt 5:5 "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth."
Ps 37:11 "But the meek shall inherit the land and delight themselves in abundant peace."

Matt 5:6 Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
Ps 34:8-10 "Oh, taste and see that the LORD is good! Blessed is the man who takes refuge in him! Oh, fear the LORD, you his saints, for those who fear him have no lack! The young lions suffer want and hunger; but those who seek the LORD lack no good thing."

Matt 5:7 Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.
Ps 18:25 "With the merciful you show yourself merciful; with the blameless man you show yourself blameless;"

Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
Ps 18:26 "with the purified you show yourself pure; and with the crooked you make yourself seem tortuous."
PS 73:1 "A Psalm of Asaph. Truly God is good to Israel, to those who are pure in heart."

A repentance analogy with American cars

Repentance is making a serious moral about face. I don't mean the word serious as an adjective meaning greater, or more impressive, I mean it in the sober, committed sense of the word. If you really believed you have done wrong and want to stop you need to change your behavior.

Full disclosure: I inherited a Dodge Neon my wife bought before we were married, and the car is a lemon. And I hate it. So now she and the baby use my Corolla and I get the junker which has transmission problems (we rebuilt it twice) it leaks fluid, and has since 40,000 miles.

While fixing it again the thought occurred to me this morning: what would it take for me to be willing to commit my family to a GM, or Chrysler, or Dodge car? What would it take for me to accept them as part of my own cherished possession and trust the safety of my family to them? I think the answer is simple: they must repent.  They must make an apology for all the wrongs they have done to me and mine, they must admit they've screwed ups, that they have been deceitful, lazy, maybe even criminal. And they have to be specific. If they issued a generic blank apology that would indicate to me they had no intention of changing their poor car performance, and that would be unacceptable. They must be so committed to changing their ways that they not only say it, but do it. And then I would accept them.

James 2:14, 17, 24, 26

Christ is the fufillment of Isaiah 25:6-9

Isaiah 25:6 On this mountain the LORD of hosts will make for all peoples a feast of rich food, a feast of well-aged wine, of rich food full of marrow, of aged wine well refined.

Luke 22:15-18 And he said to them, "I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you I will not eat it  until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God." And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, "Take this, and divide it among yourselves. For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes."
John 14:2-3 In my Father's house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also"

v7 And He will swallow up on this mountain the covering that is cast over all peoples, the veil that is spread over all nations.

2 Cor 3:14-16- "But their minds were hardened. For to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away.Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their hearts But when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed."

v8 He will swallow up death forever; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from all faces, and the reproach of his people he will take away from all the earth, for the LORD has spoken.

1 Cor 15:55-57- ""O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?" The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ."
Rev 7:17- "For the Lamb in the midst of the throne will be their shepherd, and He will guide them to springs of living water, and God will wipe away every tear from their eyes."
Rev 21:4 "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away."

v9 It will be said on that day, "Behold, this is our God; we have waited for Him, that He might save us. This is the LORD; we have waited for Him; let us be glad and rejoice in His salvation." 

Matthew 27:37 "And over His head they put the charge against Him, which read, "This is Jesus, the King of the Jews."
1 Peter 2:24 "He Himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By His wounds you have been healed."
Phil 4:4- "Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice"