Back to the Bible, 3

Articles

Larry Walker
02/10/16 - Back to the Bible

“Back to the Bible” in the 1800s (3)

Last article we saw how the work of Alexander Campbell led to a great reform movement with the goal of uniting Christians based on Bible principles. By 1812, Thomas and Alexander, based on their study began to teach that baptism in the New Testament was an immersion, not sprinkling or pouring. Both of them were immersed, and Alexander found that his teaching on the mode of baptism was consistent with that of the Baptists, and he found many opportunities to preach among them. The Brush Run Church, in an effort to extend their influence, associated with the Redstone Baptist Association, where at first Campbell’s teaching was highly respected and desired.

But in 1816, he delivered his “Sermon on the Law”, wherein he taught that the New Testament should be considered the standard of faith over the Old. This did not sit well with many of the Baptists, and eventually Campbell severed his ties with the Redstone Association in 1823, as he knew they were planning to expel him. He later associated with the Mahoning Baptist Association in Ohio. Also in 1823, Campbell started writing extensively, publishing The Christian Baptist, a monthly that had a wide influence, especially in Ohio and Kentucky. He harshly condemned the religious practices and the religious leaders of his day. He continued to teach baptism as immersion, receiving support from the Baptists but strong opposition from other religious groups. He debated several Presbyterian preachers on infant baptism and on immersion as the mode of baptism. But later, when Campbell developed the teaching that remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit followed baptism, many Baptists were enraged by this. By 1830, several Baptist associations began to speak against those who espoused this doctrine. Campbell’s followers came to be known as “Reformed Baptists” or simply “Reformers,” and they grew dramatically during this period. This issue was a defining one at that time, and ultimately caused the Baptists to reject any association with Campbell, and finally they determined to stamp out the “Campbellite heresy.” One writer suggested that “if the Lord had not been on the side of the Baptists, the ‘Campbellites’ would have completely overrun them in Kentucky.” To this day, the issue remains a key distinction [not the only one, of course] between us and our Baptist neighbors.

As time passed, these “Reformed Baptists” developed a greater identity of their own, and moving more toward New Testament language, began to call themselves simply “Disciples”. In many parts of the country, the principles of these “Disciples” were clearly akin to those that had been adopted by the “Christians” that were influenced by Barton Stone [see article 1 in this series]. A natural affinity developed, and with urging and patience and pleading, in many regions these two groups joined together. This union was not without its problems. Though they had basic agreement in their approach, and were completely at ease with many issues, there were others that caused some concerns:

The Christians felt that Campbell’s views on the Holy Spirit were deficient. They saw him as having an intellectual religion more than a spiritual one. Campbell maintained that the Holy Spirit operated on the heart only through preaching or reading of the Scriptures.
The Disciples felt that the Christians were loose on baptism for remission of sins. While the Christians generally supported the doctrine, they were reluctant to deny fellowship to those who did not yet understand it that way.
The Christians believed the Disciples were over-zealous in their practice of taking the Lord’s supper every Sunday. This probably grew from the Christians’ idea that communion had to be administered by an ordained preacher. Since they did not have enough preachers for their widely scattered congregations, they did not see how they could properly “administer” this ordinance each Lord’s day.
They disagreed on what to call themselves. The Disciples preferred that name and the Christians preferred theirs. During the 1830s, various approaches were taken to solve this, but it seems the name Christian prevailed in many places. Many adopted “Christian Church” and others “Church of Christ”. Some used the name “Disciples of Christ” or just “Disciples”. [Of course, over the next few decades, new issues led to the crystallization of distinct groups using these names.]

Campbell and Stone had many other areas of disagreement, but most of these were theological issues that did not very directly affect the masses of brethren. The ones listed above were the most practical barriers. But in spite of these obstacles, in many regions, especially in Kentucky, Indiana, and parts of Ohio, there was a happy union of the followers of Stone and Campbell during the 1830s and 1840s. The movement also spread rapidly in sections of Tennessee, Arkansas, Alabama, and even to Texas by the time of the Civil War.

Larry Walker

May 2009