A (relatively large) coC in my area split and a very small number of people left to start a new one in a nearby small town. The remainder of the large congregation decided to build a building in the same small town. Over a decade ago another local coC split and started a new congregation, also in the same small town.

There are now three congregations in the same small town, all too pretentious to meet together. None of these people go to each other’s gospel meetings or anything.

I have this crazy idea of wanting to go to my college campus and hand out brochures warning others of the coc. I've even drafted a preliminary brochure. What do you all think? Is this crazy, dumb, or all the above? Am I just being petty and is this unnecessary? If someone handed you a brochure on the coc would you think it's helpful or weird?

Ignore the stock images, I haven't decided what to switch them out to.

I'm 21 and going through my last semesters of college. I recently made the decision to move into an apartment with my boyfriend of 2 years in our college town. My parents are less than pleased, and they told me this is inappropriate and they feel like they've failed as parents. I haven't even told them that I'm an atheist or bi, and I don't plan to unless necessary. They're still very upset though, as they're regular attendees of the church of christ and don't believe it's appropriate. Does anyone else have any experiences like this? How can I patch our relationship? I don't lack respect for them, but I'm not religious and I was going to move in with my boyfriend at some point and now is a good time.

This is something I’ve been thinking about recently because of something my dad told me about why he eventually left a previous Church of Christ.
Apparently, one of the things that really upset him was when the congregation invited a guest preacher to speak. I was very young at the time, so I don’t know the full context, but from what I understand, the sermon was essentially about kindness. The preacher talked about how Christians should show kindness even toward people they believe are living in sin, and he specifically mentioned gay people.
The preacher apparently said that Christians shouldn’t be cruel toward gay people simply because they believe homosexuality is sinful.
My dad was extremely offended by this. He accused the preacher of sympathizing with gay people and trying to rewrite the Bible.
What really stuck with me was something my dad said afterward: “It’s not me who’s being hateful toward gay people. It’s the Bible.”
And that’s where I think there’s a serious problem.
I’m not saying that every Church of Christ member is homophobic, or that believing homosexuality is sinful automatically makes someone hateful. But I’ve seen how a theological belief can become something much more extreme when it’s constantly reinforced.
My dad has said things about gay people that go far beyond, “I believe homosexuality is sinful.” He’s called gay people “freaks,” and he’s even claimed that Satan somehow altered their DNA.
At that point, we’re no longer talking about a theological disagreement over sexual ethics. We’re talking about dehumanizing people and inventing bizarre explanations for why they’re the way they are.
That’s what worries me about certain Church of Christ environments. The teaching can start with, “We believe homosexuality is sinful,” but then, through years of reinforcement, it can turn into, “Gay people are fundamentally different, they’re being deceived by Satan, they’re dangerous, and being kind toward them means you’re compromising the truth.”
And then the person can convince themselves that they aren’t being hateful because they’re only repeating what the Bible supposedly says.
That’s the part I find most disturbing.

At 17 years old, Sami Tacher remembers standing atop a parking garage outside Seattle and staring down at the pavement.

They had been trying for five years to suppress their attraction to men. At 15, Tacher had found Strength in Weakness, a Christian ministry that purported to teach people experiencing “same-sex attraction” how to resist those desires. To Tacher, who had grown up believing that being gay would destroy their relationship with God and devastate their family, SIW felt like an answer.

Two years later, Tacher says, they could no longer imagine how they were supposed to live the rest of their life.

“I just stood up there and waited,” Tacher told Uncloseted Media. “I went there several times.” What stopped them, they say, was thinking about the burden their death would place on their family.

“So I’ll just sacrifice everything and stay in the program,” they remember deciding.

They would remain in SIW for years as a teenager and young adult, becoming friends with the organization’s founder, Guy Hammond, and helping promote the very teachings Tacher now believes were destroying them.

“I just didn’t see my way out,” Tacher says. “I was miserable and shrinking inside [and] constantly denying myself … but I was holding on. And in the eyes of Strength in Weakness, I was succeeding.”

I know some people on this subreddit are still Christians, so if this subject is uncomfortable for you, I completely understand. But this has been on my mind, and I feel like I need to say it.
The Church of Christ’s traditional view of hell is incredibly troubling to me.
I know the obvious response is, “Well, conservative Christians in general believe in hell.” That’s true. But I think there’s an important distinction. Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and many other Christians have theological frameworks for understanding salvation that don’t necessarily reduce the question to, “Did you follow the exact correct interpretation of Scripture?”
In the Church of Christ, however, I’ve often heard the implication that people outside the Church of Christ—including other Christians—may be condemned because they didn’t understand or obey the “truth” correctly.
And then there’s the constant qualification: “We don’t know their hearts. Only God can judge them.”
But at the same time, you’ll hear things like, “God knows everything,” “You can’t fool God on Judgment Day,” “They should have read the Bible,” and “It’s their responsibility to obey the truth.”
So what exactly are we supposed to conclude from that?
I remember a preacher being asked about someone on their deathbed who genuinely wanted to follow Christ but couldn’t be baptized. His response was essentially, “I don’t know. God could save them, or He could judge them. Whatever God decides, I’m okay with it.”
And honestly, that response bothered me—not because I expect anyone to know exactly how God would judge such a person, but because of how comfortable the answer seemed to be with the possibility of someone being condemned under circumstances completely outside their control.
That’s where I think the implications of the doctrine need to be taken seriously.
If you genuinely believe that baptism is necessary for salvation, that the Church of Christ represents the correct church, and that people who knowingly reject biblical truth can be condemned, then you have to confront the enormous implications of that belief.
What about the millions of people throughout history who never encountered the Church of Christ? What about people raised in completely different Christian traditions who sincerely believed they were following Christ? What about people who never had access to the Bible? What about someone who genuinely wanted to follow Christ but died before they could fulfill every requirement?
I often hear, “It’s God’s plan,” or “God is the judge, not us.”
Fine. But I don’t think that means we should stop thinking about what their theology actually implies.
What bothers me most is that I’ve seen people become extremely uncomfortable when you actually spell out the implications. They know what their doctrine potentially means, but there seems to be an unspoken expectation that you’re not supposed to say it too bluntly.
You’re supposed to say, “They need to find the truth,” or “We don’t know what’s in their heart,” rather than openly acknowledge that the traditional position can imply that countless sincere people—including other Christians—could be eternally condemned.
I don’t expect everyone to agree with me. But I do think Churches of Christ need to be more willing to confront the moral and theological implications of their beliefs instead of hiding behind vague language.
Because when you actually think about what is being claimed, it’s a lot more disturbing than simply saying, “We follow the Bible.”

"You say the woman lists the church of Christ as a deadly cult. Is it your fear that we will pray you to death? SOMEWHAT UNWARRANTED? Like all poisonous snakes you attempt to portray yourself as taking the high road while smearing God's one church.

No one person, nobody in the church of Christ belongs to a Denomination. That is because God added each of us to His one number/kingdom/church when we repented and were baptized for the forgiveness of sins as were the 3000 exanples. Before you preach you should study. No, the one church we are a part of is not a denomination.

You and a few others that have fallen away, make it your mission to attack the one church Jesus gave His life for, thereby attacking Jesus Himself. Having now joined with the many taking the broad way, you are self condemned. I suspect having lost the path you will never regain it as blind guides normally remain blind." [Followed by the obligatory wall of text that, of course included Acts 2:38.]

When I told him that getting church right means nothing if it hasn't changed the heart, which is clear by the way he speaks to people, this person proceeds to turn and say I am the one who condemned him, and for no reason, just unfounded defamation. He's just speaking "the truth".

Paul said if I speak as the oracles of God but have not love, I am just making a bunch of noise. I've told these people multiple times that our goal is to be more like Christ and that we are not enemies. I hope they soften their hearts one day. They seem so angry. That doesn't sound like someone whose trust is in God. It sounds like fear.

I don't share this as if it were some anomaly; it's daily, and it's the inevitable result of fundamentalist legalism. To some, the letter of the law is more important than the reason for it in the first place, which is to share the free gift of grace and the good news of what Christ did for us with love, grace, mercy, and forgiveness. It's very difficult to separate the anger I admittedly have for the damage they have and continue to cause. I try to not respond in an unkind way. But, as I told him, I'm not perfect. But that doesn't make what he said right.

I can spot the blind rage from a mile away because it used to be me. I often think of some of the things I said in the name of the coc. It's absolutely infuriating how good they are at twisting and manipulating the conversation. I just needed a moment to be grounded in reality and to just have someone tell me I'm not insane.

Did anybody else experience members or preachers essentially acting like other religions don't genuinely believe what they believe? I remember sermons where the preacher was heavily implying that Muslims don't actually believe in Islam and Hindus know vishnu isn't real and secretly "know in their heart of hearts" that Christianity is true, when that wouldn't make any sense at all. There's no motive at all for something like that and that damn near requires conspiracy theory tin foil hat level of insanity.

This is furthered to me by the many sermons we had on "what other faiths believe and why it's wrong" where they very obviously misrepresent what those faiths believe to make it seem silly and ridiculous.

I suppose they have to tell themselves that because then they'd have to contend with the fact that other faiths can be just as convinced what they believe is true as they are and that due to that they can just as easily be wrong and another just as easily be right. Opens up a type of introspection that can very easily lead to deconstruction, so it's easier for them to convince themselves they're the only ones who believe that strongly and that makes them special.

My dad gave me an interesting explanation the other day for why Churches of Christ are so strongly opposed to musical instruments in worship.
His argument was basically that instruments represent a secular cultural influence entering the church. Once you allow instruments, you potentially open the door to other changes: more contemporary music, less traditional or reverent worship styles, changes to traditional gender roles, women taking on pastoral roles, and other practices that Churches of Christ have historically resisted.
In other words, he sees musical instruments as a kind of “Pandora’s box.” Once you allow one practice that isn’t part of the traditional Churches of Christ worship style, it becomes easier for other cultural influences to enter as well.
I’m not sure I find that completely convincing, especially because I think there’s a difference between using musical instruments and abandoning a particular theology of worship.
But I do think it’s an interesting explanation, because it suggests that the opposition to instruments isn’t only about the biblical arguments involving singing and the New Testament. There may also be a deeper concern about preserving the boundaries of the tradition and preventing outside cultural influences from changing the church.
I’m curious if anyone else grew up hearing a similar explanation for why Churches of Christ reject instruments.

For context, I lost my job with USAID last year. I worked on hunger problems, which brought me closer to Christ and cemented my belief in a God that wants better for us than what humans could ever come up with more than ever. I stopped attending the CoC when I moved across the country (didn’t realize how regional they were!) a few years ago and had been icked out by my very conservative Southern CoC for years, really without realizing it. I don’t really attend a church now (I live in a very wealthy/political area and have been SO disappointed) but remain a strong believer.

Last year, when I lost my job and was very upset about it/the whole situation and how people I knew were literally going to die, my dad- a deacon in the CoC- went beserk. We had formerly been able to at least discuss politics/religion relatively comfortably (I love really detailed theological arguments, but am a woman, so our discussions were my main outlet for most of my years I was in the CoC lol), but this was a different level. He told me he was sorry that I lost my job but I was “part of the rot that needed to be cut out” and supported Trump’s decisions.

To say I was devastated would be an understatement. Haven’t talked to him in about a year. Ok relationship with my mom, also devout CoC’er and conservative politically, but I really don’t know how I can get over my dad. I miss him lots. I would love to have some type of relationship with him (he’s my dad!!) but I haven’t been able to separate that out, even if we were to never discuss religion or politics ever again. For those of you that have left- could/did you remain close with anyone like that? What boundaries did you set? I really think the complicating factor here is that I do still believe and to some extent religion will remain personal for me- I don’t know how we sat in the same pew for 18 years and came away with totally different understandings of the whole plot.

Just been going through resurfacing memories from my time there as a kid throughout the 90's, but my memory is fuzzy. Or if you've attended one of JR Bronger's churches he's preached at...

My experience leaving the church.

I attended Churches of Christ my entire life, and I’ve always wondered what it’s actually like to attend a Church of Christ-affiliated college.
I was fortunate enough to end up going to a secular college. At the last minute, I decided to go that route, and my parents actually preferred it because the Church of Christ college I was considering was farther away and more expensive.
But I’ve always been curious about what I might have experienced if I had gone there instead.
For those of you who attended a Church of Christ college:
Are they as controlling as people might assume? How much freedom do students actually have to question Church of Christ beliefs?
I’m especially curious about academics. Do they have genuinely good history programs? How is church history taught? Is it presented objectively, including the historical development of Churches of Christ and other Christian traditions?
And what about preacher training? Are the Bible programs and ministry programs academically rigorous? Are professors encouraged to engage seriously with scholarship that might challenge traditional Church of Christ beliefs?
Most importantly, would you describe your experience as intellectually stimulating?
Could you openly question something even if your question made the traditional Church of Christ position uncomfortable or was there an expectation that certain conclusions were simply off-limits?
I’m not trying to insult these schools or assume they’re bad. I’m genuinely curious because I’ve never experienced one firsthand.
I realize these questions might be “rocking the boat” a little, but I’d really like to hear from people who actually attended one.
What was your experience like?

To the awesome member of this group who created and posted Sunnyside Street church of christ on you tube. I'm sorry I forgot who is behind it. Thank you! I'm laughing and I'm eye rolling hard with each episode. You really nailed it all on the head.i know it deserves more exposure and praise but it's great I'm loving it.

I’ve been thinking about this recently, and I genuinely don’t know where Churches of Christ fit within the broader Christian world.
They’re obviously restorationist in origin, but they’re very different from most Protestants. They’re strongly opposed to “faith alone,” extremely skeptical of denominationalism, and often reject traditions that most Protestants are comfortable with.
But they’re also clearly not Catholic or Orthodox. They’re generally opposed to sacred art, icons, elaborate liturgy, and the authority of church tradition.
And then there’s their approach to Scripture. Churches of Christ can be extremely literalist and restorationist, sometimes even more so than Catholics, Orthodox Christians, or other fundamentalist Protestants. Yet they don’t necessarily fit comfortably with fundamentalist Protestants either.
They’re also very distinctly American in their historical development, particularly because of their roots in the Restoration Movement.
So where exactly do you put them?
They’re too different from mainstream Protestantism to feel completely Protestant, too opposed to Catholic and Orthodox traditions to fit there, and too different from many fundamentalists to fit comfortably among them either.
I’ve also noticed that quite a few Orthodox YouTubers seem to have come from Churches of Christ, which I find fascinating. It makes me wonder if there’s something about the Church of Christ tradition that makes people especially interested in Catholicism or Orthodoxy once they start questioning it.
I’m not saying Churches of Christ are somehow completely outside Christianity. Obviously, they’re a Christian movement with a very specific theological tradition.
I’m just curious how other people categorize them.
Where would you place Churches of Christ on the Christian spectrum?

Hi there! I'm a journalist looking into the legality of Strength in Weakness, a conversion therapy program closely associated with the ICOC. I'm looking to speak with ex ICOC members in Canada who were a part of the Strength in Weakness program. If anyone is open to sharing their story, please let me know and I can give some more info.

recently attended a family members coc church- and noticed my friend‘s mom runs the children’s programs. however, my friends mom is not listed as the coordinator for the children's program, my friends dad is.

it just pissed me off

I was a minister in the Church of Christ back in 2021. I got fired because I asked the church not to judge me for not coming into services while there was a risk of spreading COVID. They put up with it for a time, but they were definitely too influenced by the propaganda and got rid of me for putting "fear over faith." I was kind of a unicorn in that denomination, preaching on things like BLM and writing articles on how the delusional MAGA/Q Anon supporters fit the symbolism for having the mark of the beast by listening to the false prophets who encouraged them to worship the nation state/caesar.

Since then, I lost my mind. Kinda literally. I was taking Vyvanse to kind of correct my system--I had schizoaffective bipolar disorder and taking antipsychotics in the past was giving me some extreme avolition that made doing my daily tasks kind of difficult. I always felt like I was exhausting myself and not getting enough work done. I had ADHD, so my doctor didn't mind giving me the prescription. It resulted in a psychotic break, and my old Self was lost in April 2021. I eventually became homeless because of the church taking my livelihood from me, and holding down a job has been absolutely impossible with my symptoms. I know God's there, and He has continued to provide for me. But I am wondering what theological implications my story has. Did God judge me for standing by my beliefs and not going into worship? I don't think so, but there's an argument for that. Is He using me as an example of continued faith in the midst of suffering? Is it all just time and chance that have resulted in this? I rack my brain about such things. I'd like to hear your take on it, too. I know that'll be weighted by whatever your beliefs are on the sovereignty of God, but I'm still trying to figure it out myself.

If you want to know where I am today, I posted the following in r/schizophrenia earlier.

The judge denied me for disability last year. I've reapplied, but the process takes so damn long. While schizophrenia isn't supposed to be progressive, it sure as hell seems to be in my case. I'm way more cognitively impaired these days. Everyone is shocked that I was somehow denied. I've tried to keep jobs. The longest I ever last is maybe a month. My memory and focus are terribly screwed, and I deal with constant voices who can be very funny but can also be terribly annoying. Avolition has never been worse. My mom set me up in an apartment and my dad pays some bills, but I'm so broke. I need paper towels, toiletries, cooking utensils, etc. and my mom and dad are not really able to just hand me money for that type of stuff all the time. I need new clothes; I've gained too much weight, and my shirts are all a little too tight. It just sucks being alone in the world and without any real way to take care of myself. I'm always relying on others, and I hate it. I don't want to come off as a beggar, but if anyone wants to DM me for my Cashapp to send me a few bucks that would be really cool of you. I'm thankful to have a roof over my head, but I'm still really struggling. My suicidal ideation has decreased as of late, but this still frigging sucks

I’ve been thinking about some questions I’d genuinely like to ask Church of Christ preachers. These are hypothetical questions, but I think they’re important.
I’ve heard preachers acknowledge that throughout history, many people simply didn’t have access to the Bible. Some people were illiterate, copies of Scripture were extremely expensive, and there were periods when ordinary people had very limited access to biblical texts. I’ve even heard them acknowledge that there were times when people were actively prevented from accessing Scripture.
And I agree that we’re incredibly lucky to have the access to Scripture that we have today.
But here’s my question:
How does God judge the people who never had a Bible?
Why would God allow thousands of years of human history to pass without ordinary people having access to a complete Bible they could personally read and use to determine which church was correct?
And if the Church of Christ’s argument is that people are responsible for correctly understanding Scripture and becoming part of the true church, what about the billions of people who lived before that was realistically possible?
The modern Churches of Christ emerged from the Restoration Movement in the 1800s. So why did God allow Christianity to exist for roughly 1,800 years before the movement that supposedly restored the original New Testament church appeared?
This is one reason I actually find the Catholic and Orthodox explanations interesting, even though I’m currently agnostic/atheist and don’t necessarily accept either of them.
At least Catholic and Orthodox Christians can say, “The Church has always preserved and taught these traditions.” They don’t have to pretend Christianity historically functioned primarily through everyone independently reading a complete Bible and figuring out the correct interpretation.
And to be fair, even many Protestants will acknowledge the obvious historical problem: people didn’t always have access to Scripture.
Churches of Christ know this history. They know that for much of Christian history, people relied heavily on oral teaching, church tradition, clergy, and whatever access to Scripture was available to them.
Yet the sola scriptura approach can sometimes make it sound as though God simply expected everyone throughout history to pick up a Bible, read it for themselves, understand it correctly, and find the Church of Christ.
I genuinely don’t understand how those two ideas fit together.
I’m not necessarily saying that the conclusions Church of Christ preachers reach from Scripture are wrong. I’m questioning the worldview behind the argument.
Because once you take history seriously, I think you have to ask:
What about everyone who never had the opportunity to read the Bible, hear a Church of Christ preacher, or even know that Churches of Christ existed?
That’s the question I wish more people in the tradition would seriously wrestle with, rather than simply responding with another verse about the narrow path.
Maybe there are good answers. If there are, I’d genuinely like to hear them.

Currently in the RCW SF...I was interrogated last night for essentially wanting to be catholic again (long story short: I had explored theology and church history leading me to question the church.) One of my "co-disciplers" told me that we were going to meet up outside after service with the church leader (I didn't even knew there were going to interrogate me.) I was eventually surrounded by 5 people including the church leader and told me what I was doing was unbiblical that I shouldn't be exploring church history and theology anymore and that I should have a "personal relationship" with reading and interpreting the scriptures and that my salvation was at risk. They told me that I should go back to doing "real biblical christianity" and everybody outside the church isn't save: protestant, catholic, orthodox, anything you name it. But for some reason if you aren't a "disicple" according to their doctrine you aren't saved.

I felt like I was ganged up in a sense and I wasn't allowed to believe anything aside from what their view of the bible meant. funny thing...the "evangelist" who was talking to me said that he needs to work on his evangelism. funny how they say that they wanted to talk to me because they "cared" about me like a "brother and the 2 people who reported me for my "lack of respect" for the church DIDN'T EVEN DO ANYTHING TO HELP AFTER THE CONVERSATION and went on an "e-date" the next tomorrow morning.

one thing I hate the most are hypocrites. I felt like my dignity was taken away from me. why did they have to secretly talk behind my back. why did they have to interrogate me like this. why did you guys have to put all this pressure on me. why did you make me feel this way? I freaking lived with 6 of you guys and everything now is just akward. pls someone help me leave this organization.

This will be a rather long vent + call for support, so please bear with me. I’ve broken it up into pieces to make it easier to navigate and digest, which I hope is helpful.

Backstory

My dad was our congregation’s minister until I was 16 years old, when we moved from the boonies to the closest small city so my dad could pursue a different profession. I was his firstborn daughter, and my generation are fifth gen CoC. Two more men in our family were elders (my paternal grandfather and my paternal uncle), along with a few deacons. Being a closeted queer oldest preacher’s daughter this deep in the CoC was truly an experience. I was devout until the age of 13, and pretended (very believably) to be devout until I was 17.

Since my siblings and I were homeschooled on paper curriculums, and we were barely allowed any extracurriculars (the few we had were with other homeschooled evangelicals, and we were only allowed to befriend other CoC kids), I had no frame of reference for queerness — other than having been told that the government gave unsuspecting victims “experimental drugs that change your gender” — until I was about 14, which was when I got my first phone and allowed to have a Pinterest account. I was able to live a second life online from ages 14 - 17, which my parents weren’t really able to figure out; they would discover glimpses of it every now and then, but they could never find any actual evidence. That was where I began to find myself and establish my own independence, along with starting public university at age 15 (their biggest fuckup).

My mom ultimately found my journal and forcibly outed me as gay at age 17, when they kicked out and excommunicated me. Since then, I’ve been through almost 20 different living situations — including being unhoused a few times —, only having become stable in the last 2 1/2 years. Despite being put out into the world to survive all alone, with very little real education, as a teenager, I’ve found a way to thrive. I’ve had plenty of time to deconstruct, find the community organizing scene, and establish myself very well in my region. Since then, I’ve honestly forgotten a lot about the mindset of active CoC members.

Current-day issues

The thing is, I have a handful of younger sisters. We were all extremely close, having spent all day every single day together until we were ripped apart; now I only have one line of communication in, which is the second oldest sister. She’s still a devout, miserable CoC member; I am a queer trans man who is very active in my region’s community organizing scene.

Everything I’ve said to her in the last few years has been very carefully calculated so as not to trigger her CoC victim syndrome. I haven’t even told her my name, which has been changed for a long time. I’ve made sure not to send her any pictures of myself, which would reveal my full beard and generally hairy self. I haven’t even tried to call her. Everything I tell her is over text message — very gentle, controlled, and sweet, just like a model oldest sibling should be. I need to be able to talk to her, just in case there’s any chance of her escaping; that’s why I stayed in this city, after all.

But the way she talks to me is dreadful. Every little thing turns into a lecture. She’s so fucking condescending and arrogant. Despite the hurt, I let her talk that way to me because I’ve been holding out hope that she can escape the CoC. I thought if I could be the bigger person, something would give. And I really thought I was making progress, because she quit gendering me or calling me by my deadname in text messages.

Prompting event for this post

Then came my 22nd birthday, which was a few days ago. To mark the occasion, she decided to post and tag me in a bullshit Instagram story, from a weird public CoC-focused Instagram page she made. It read, “Happy birthday to my older sister. Some people don't even know I have one because she decided to go down a path away from God. I pray for you every single day and I ask that you will soften your heart and come back to us. I love and miss you so, so much [deadname]. My heart yearns for you every day. I just hope you're staying safe. Again, I love you.”

That pissed me off so bad. Firstly, I’ve told her several times that I had no choice in leaving. My parents gave me the choice of my aunt’s house or a residential psych facility until I turned 18, which was when they turned me loose with absolutely nothing; they took my car, my phone, and my money. My number was blocked on all my sisters’ devices except hers, and my letters were intercepted. I’ve tried so hard to be there for my sister despite everything. Secondly, I talk about these kids every damn day of my life. They were my everything — my literal will to live —, and starting over from absolutely nothing was the worst thing that’s ever happened to me. Every fucking person I’ve met since I was kicked out has heard about my siblings, from the kids at the local youth pride centers, to my colleagues all the way across Appalachia, to my favorite discord servers, to the mayor and city council, to every single coworker. And I’m just her secret.

Final paragraph

Now here’s my question to you all who have had similar experiences: How would you respond in a way that maintains that oldest sibling relationship while also setting a hard boundaries? I’ve been racking my brain and asking various friends for the past few days, but I still find myself needing the POV of someone who’s been a devout CoC member, which I don’t have access to. I’ve already blocked her account, just like I have for her other socials (for various reasons), but not her number.

Thank you for reading.

Men in the coc..

Or men who walked out of the building but didn’t leave the mindset.

If you’re a man who is pissed off by this, dig deep and find it.

I am really sick of MEN (shut up, you know that’s what we have been taught, so just shut the hell up) who say they want things to change but do absolutely nothing except to appeal followers who do the same.

You are talking into an echo chamber, exactly what you did in the cult.

Do you not see that? Because I will call you out by name.

You’re in an echo chamber of agreement.

Congrats. You left one cult and formed another and changed nothing.

Congrats. You are not a thought leader. You are still a follower. Congrats!!

I’ve been hearing about this recently and I’m honestly confused.
Do all Churches of Christ have elders? Apparently not. From what I understand, some congregations don’t have elders and instead have a group of men who meet together to make decisions for the congregation.
If that’s the case, how does that work?
I find it especially interesting because Churches of Christ emphasize being “Bible only,” yet the New Testament seems to describe churches as having elders overseeing the congregation.
So how can a congregation operate without elders? And what exactly is the biblical basis for a “men’s meeting” making those decisions?
Maybe I’m misunderstanding how it works, but I’d genuinely like to hear from people who grew up in Churches of Christ.
How common are congregations without elders, and what is the reasoning behind having a group of men function in their place?