Restoration Theory Part 4
Churches of Christ, as an institution, were officially recognized in 1906, but historically are rooted in the Restoration Movement. In my 30 years as a member of the Church of Christ, I’ve discovered three origin theories of the Church of Christ. These are the Remnant Theory, Seed Theory, and Restoration Theory. This entry will focus on Restoration Theory.
Restoration Theory holds that the Church fell away at some point (commonly held to be at the end of the 1st century) and was restored in the 18th century in the United States by Barton Stone and Alexander Campbell. Both men were originally Presbyterian, leaving off due to a series of religious differences. For example, Stone strongly opposed Calvinism (DCHS, n.d.-a), while Campbell rejected infant baptism (DCHS, n.d.-b).
Building on their conviction, these men believed Christian unity could be achieved by using only the Bible and abandoning Tradition and creeds (CCUSC, n.d.). Although the idea is noble, it is ultimately futile. The reason is that the list of books considered Scripture, the canon, was established by tradition. Without tradition as a guide, it is unclear which books belong in the Bible. Some accept the Catholic Church's canon (73 books); others follow Luther's shorter canon (66 books). Therefore, accepting any canon means relying on an external authority, rather than only the Bible, to determine what belongs in Scripture.
This debate continues to develop. Some in the Church of Christ, such as Matt Dabbs, believe the Restoration should not focus on restoring the Church of the 1st century, but on following its general principles of edification and mission (Dabbs, 2025). I’ve heard this theory from others in person, and it may become a different theory altogether someday if it continues to develop. The problem is that Jesus spoke fervently of the Church as a visible institution, like a light set on a hill, not just an invisible collection of spiritual elements. A city on a hill is clear and present, something the Church of Christ can’t be if it’s merely an invisible body of believers who try to practice 1st century teachings.
Given these various perspectives, a critical question arises: If the true Church fell away in the 1st century and was not restored until the 19th century, does that go against Jesus’s prophecy that the Church would never fall? Gaps are unacceptable if Jesus spoke truthfully. The Catholic Church is the visible Church from the 1st century. They have an unbroken line of Popes, have contributed hospitals and schools to the poor, and have a public record of many martyrs. This gives them more credibility as the true 1st-century Church than a group that started in the 19th century and claims to be the true Church restored.
This article was enhanced by AI for grammar, clarity, charity, and fact-checking.
References
CCUSC. n.d. History of the Disciples. Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in the United States and Canada. https://disciples.org/our-identity/history-of-the-disciples/
Dabbs, M. (2025). Redefining What Needs Restored – What’s Next For Churches Of Christ?
Revolution of Ordinaries. https://mattdabbs.com/2025/02/07/church-of-christ-and-restoring-new-testament-christianity/
DCHS. N.d. Barton Stone. Disciples of Christ Historical Society. https://discipleshistory.org/wiki/campbell-alexander-1788-1866/
DCHS. N.d. Campbell Alexander. Disciples of Christ Historical Society. https://discipleshistory.org/wiki/campbell-alexander-1788-1866/