The Vineyard, Kelly Edmiston, and the Churches of Christ (#1)
What is “the Vineyard”? According to the Internet,
The Vineyard Movement is a charismatic evangelical Christian denomination with over 2,400 affiliated churches worldwide. The movement is rooted in historic evangelicalism and charismatic renewal. The Vineyard seeks to combine the best of Evangelical traditions with the best of Pentecostal and Charismatic traditions.
Why is that significant? By itself, it would not be; it would only be another of hundreds of religious groups. There is a reason to consider the one that meets in Sugar Land, Texas. But before proceeding, please note that the group is clearly charismatic. Their own website so affirms this fact: “We believe in the present ministry of the Spirit and in the exercise of all of the biblical gifts of the Spirit.” We’ll examine their rationale later.
“Okay. This is a Pentecostal-type group. Why do we care?” There’s more. This group has, as its “lead pastor” Kelly Edmiston. She has been one of the “pastors” there for 17 years. “All right; that’s a little unusual for a woman to have such longevity in today’s religious world, but what is that to us?” Uh, well, she claims to be one of “us.” Her exact words are:
I currently serve as a Pastor in the Vineyard Church but I am still Church of Christ. For those of us born into it, we are always Church of Christ’ers.
Whoa! Say what? Seriously? She goes on to tell her background. Practically all of her ancestors were members of “the Church of Christ” at least three generations back, and her grandfather was an elder.
Errors
Most of us would dispute very vigorously the notion that she is in any way affiliated with us. The article we are quoting from is called “Kelly Edmiston and Women in the Churches of Christ,” and it appeared in a blog by Scot McKnight called Jesus Creed. We are only two paragraphs into the article, and already have discovered 6 errors. We will start with the most recent and work our way back to the beginning.
Neither in the New Testament nor do Christians today call themselves “Church of Christ” or “Church of Christ’ers.” A mere tyro would know better than to use such designations. We refer to ourselves as Christians (Acts 11:26). We are members of the church, the body of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23), the kingdom of God (Matt. 3:2; Col. 1:13-14). The expressions Kelly used speaks of the church as though it is a denomination, like Baptists or Lutherans. The Lord’s church is not a denomination; we are, in fact, opposed to the concept (1 Cor. 1:10-13).
We are not born physically into the Lord’s church. People enter it by means of a spiritual birth, which was taught by Jesus (John 3:3, 6) and also described by Paul (Rom. 6:3-7). Some are born into a physical family whose parents are members of the church, but children can only become members by obeying the gospel of their own free will.
The Vineyard Church is not the church of Christ. The church of Christ was established by Jesus in the first century. According to the Internet (the short version), the “Vineyard movement originated in the late 1970s, during a time of cultural and social change on the West Coast of the United States.” In other words, it was of manmade origin. It was established centuries too late to be the Lord’s church.
Kelly is not qualified to be a “pastor,” since she is not the husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3:2).
A Biblical pastor is one of a plurality of men who oversee a congregation. She uses the word in a denominational sense as “a minister in charge of a Christian church or congregation.” This is an arrangement people feel comfortable with in the 21st century, but it was not the way the Lord designed the church (Acts 14:23; 20:17, 28; 1 Peter 5:1-4).
Although the church in the first century did have spiritual gifts, they were only designed to last until the Word was completely delivered (1 Cor. 12:1-11, 27-13:13). That Word, according to the New Testament, was completely revealed (2 Peter 1:3; Jude 3).
Is Her Statement Credible?
Are we to believe that the church her grandfather was an elder over for many years believed in these six teachings? Did the members speak in tongues, prophesy, heal people, etc.? Did they refer to their preacher as a “pastor”? Did they have a female “pastor”? Did they consider the church of which they were members one established by men—by someone other than Jesus? Did they consider their children members when they were born into this world? Did they refer to themselves like members of denominations do? If they did any or all of these things, can she furnish evidence of it?
These are not all the departures mentioned in the article. But before resuming a list of those, consider one that comes from another article she wrote. She was defending a minister’s email relationship with a female member over which he got in trouble. Her defense consisted mainly of pointing out that the minister’s wife and the member’s husband were aware of the correspondence and that it had not led to anything sexual; they were just friends. In the course of her defense, however, she made the following statement concerning herself on the issue of modesty. She complains that brethren told her:
“I should wear a shirt over my bathing suit at Church swim parties.” Question: “Who authorized Church swim parties?” Does such an event meet with the teachings of holiness set forth in the Scriptures (2 Cor. 7:1; 1 Peter 1:14-16)? What does that say about a congregation when its members appear nearly naked in each other’s presence? The fig leaves that Adam wore probably covered as much as today’s swim trunks. Eve’s leaves probably covered more flesh than what women wear today. God made for this first couple suitable clothing—“tunics of skins” (Gen. 3:21). By definition, these garments covered from the shoulders to the knees.
How inappropriate would it be for a church leader to appear publicly in such a state of undress! Men are stimulated visually; what are they to think when someone like Kelly appears in modern swimwear? If anyone can picture the apostles naked (except for a strip of cloth around their loins) and the women who followed Jesus sashaying around the Sea of Galilee in immodest apparel (1 Tim. 2:9-10), he ought to be ashamed. No Biblical authority for pool parties exists.
Background
Returning to the main article, we find out more about Kelly’s background. She states that she graduated from Abilene Christian University, earning a degree in Social Work. She later received a Masters in Divinity from the same institution. She claims to have been a minister “in a Church of Christ” for ten years. That information explains a lot.
The only school affiliated with the churches of Christ more liberal than Abilene Christian University (ACU) is Pepperdine. Some brethren suggest that ACU should stand for Almost Christian University. They have led the way in causing the church to depart from the faith in Texas.
Kelly does not specify which “Church of Christ” she worked with. It may have been a Christian Church since many of them still use that designation. There are not any faithful churches of Christ who would hire a woman as a preacher in light of what the New Testament teaches on the subject (1 Tim. 2:11-14).
Many of the professors at ACU would approve of women in the ministry. Both women and denominational “pastors” have been invited to speak at Abilene. They abandoned adherence to the teachings of the New Testament decades ago. One would hardly be surprised any more at any false teaching they would propagate. Kelly received her training from this university.
This Is Love?
Trying to make the most of her past affiliation with the church, Kelly affirms: “Because of this Church of Christ legacy, I grew up loving the bible and cherishing it as the Word of God.” She cherishes the Word so much that she refuses to capitalize Bible. No, it was not a slip of the pen; she consistently uses a small b. She belabors the point of how much she loves the Bible and concludes the paragraph by saying:
For us “Church of Christ’ers”, the bible is a big deal. We value it. We love it. We believe it is instructive for church practice. And even though I no longer attend a Church of Christ, I still hold to a similar hermeneutic as I approach the bible.
How can anyone take this claim seriously when she does not capitalize Bible, continues to use terminology not found in the Scriptures, and considers God’s Word only instructive rather than binding on people today? Her claims of love for the Bible and the church are absurd. She loves the church so much she no longer is affiliated with it. Instead, she is with a denomination not authorized anywhere in the Bible. She has already departed from New Testament teaching in the six ways described earlier. Nobody believes that Kelly loves either the Bible or the church. No one can so mistreat them and claim to value and love them.
Origin of the Churches of Christ
Simply stated, Jesus built (Matt. 16:18) His church in the first century. He gave His blood to purchase the church (Acts 20:28) and is Head over that body (Eph. 1:22-23). Paul refers to “the churches of Christ” in Romans 16:16. Yet Kelly claims:
Churches of Christ (along with Disciples of Christ and Christian Churches) were born out of the “Restoration Movement” that began in the 19th century led primarily by Barton Stone and Alexander Campbell. These men sought to unite the church by looking at the bible and the apostolic church as their guide for church practice.
The church has existed since the first century. The original body departed from the faith in numerous ways (like ACU), and original concepts had to be restored—especially concerning salvation and worship. It is true that a great effort to restore these things was made in the 1800s, but such attempts were under way for centuries (see Traces of the Kingdom by Keith Sisman).
Furthermore, Campbell and Stone had no intention of beginning a new church—or another denomination; they simply desired to go back to the teachings of the Bible and be the New Testament church described therein. Christians do not follow the teachings of those men because they said so. We follow the teachings of the New Testament because God said so. Unity will exist when people set aside manmade doctrines, traditions, and practices—and follow what the New Testament authorizes (Col. 3:17).
One other comment needs to be made concerning that last quote. The Christian Church began using musical instruments (which no New Testament church ever did) more than a century ago, and the Disciples of Christ are so liberal that we have nothing in common. They went out from us because they were not of us.