Have A Blessed Day, Margaret

Thanks for the feedback.

My very limited observations of the Restoration Movement sees a very diverse thought process on day 1 with a rather fast convergence of ideas/beliefs during the first 30 or so years. Divergence began in the late 1800's based on what was called 'innovations' and socio-economic differences.

It sounds like you have studied the movement much more recently than I (I've forgotten a lot of details). That's good. This blog has re-energized my interest.

Thanks again,
Rich.

Please make no mistake that in the early years of the Stone Campbell movement a great deal of latitude was allowed in what people believed so long as they affirmed Jesus as Lord. That Stone and Campbell could untie in spite of differences on very significant theological issues still amazes me.
Peace,
Randall

I'm not a student of Alexander Campbell. I do find it interesting though that I have seen some say AC was more exclusion based than he sounded in his later years and you bring up that Leroy Garrett says he was more inclusion based than he sounds in 1830ish.

Are you saying that Alexander Campbell intentionally published what he did not believe?

BTW, the Lunenburg lady's letter was probably instigated by the guy that became the founder of the Christadelphians – though he may not have intended to found them. I think his name was John Thomas. He was associated with the SC Movement but developed his own beliefs, denying the trinity and insisting that one was not a Christian until immersed – thus the letter. He was even baptized twice, the second time denying beliefs he held the first time he was baptized. Oh, what some have done with baptism and it being the moment of salvation, and having to believe everything just right at that moment.

The SC movement was tolerant of him for a long time in spite of his odd beliefs as there was a lot of tolerance of differing beliefs in the SC movement at that time. Eventually he went his own way.
Peace,
Randall

Alexander Campbell very strongly tried to correct the misunderstandings surrounding his letter to the woman in Lunenburg. Some will argue he did not recant, but he was very firm that he had been misunderstood.

In principle, I totally agree with you.

Alexander Campbell was probably the most influential person in our history as a church. Many respect what he had to say.

But you are correct. The Bible is our only authoritative source.

The latitude of belief allowed in the early decades would astound many of the more conservative brothers and sisters today. B. W. Stone himself was NOT orthodox on the person of Jesus nor in his understanding of the atonement.

Alexander Campbell believed baptism for the remission [forgiveness] of sins was required. He talks about those without it having a false assurance of salvation.

""But do not many of them enjoy the present salvation of God?" How far they may be happy in the peace of God, and the hope of heaven, I presume not to say. And we know so much of human nature as to say, that he that imagines himself pardoned, will feel happy as he that is really so. But one thing we do know, that none can rationally, and with certainty, enjoy the peace of God, and the hope of heaven, but they who intelligently, and in full faith are born of water, or immersed. For the remission of their sins. And as the testimony of God, and not conceit, imagination, nor our reasoning upon what passes in our minds, is the ground of our certainty, we see and feel, that we have an assurance which they cannot have. And we have this advantage over them, we once stood upon their ground, had their hopes, felt their assurance; but they have not stood upon our ground, nor felt our assurance. Moreover, the experience of the first converts shows the difference between their immersion, and the immersions, or sprinklings, of modern gospels."

from Millennial Harbinger – Extra July 5, 1830.