Faith

Are We the Only Christians Going to Heaven?

Published

1 month ago

July 15, 2026

faithandfreedo

Faith Facts

Early Restoration Movement Churches of Christ embraced the motto “Christians only, but not the only Christians,” seeking to follow Jesus alone while acknowledging sincere believers across denominations
A survey of 139 church leaders and members reveals a significant divide between those who maintain an exclusivist view and those who recognize Christians in other faith communities
Black Churches of Christ historically used the slogan to affirm spiritual legitimacy amid racial segregation, focusing on dignity rather than doctrinal boundaries

A familiar accusation echoes through many Churches of Christ today: “You think you’re the only ones going to heaven.”

Yet the early 19th century American Restoration Movement held a radically different vision. “Christians only, but not the only Christians” was their rallying cry—a commitment to follow Jesus alone without man-made creeds, while humbly acknowledging sincere disagreements within the Body of Christ.

An informal survey of 139 church leaders and members from 30 states reveals that while most are familiar with this historic saying, the church community remains deeply divided over its meaning and application today.

“I seek to be simply a Christian, wearing Christ’s name and submitting to His authority,” said Bill Robinson, minister for the Upper West Manhattan Church of Christ in New York.

Steve Cloer, director of the Harding School of Theology’s Center for Church and City Engagement in Memphis, Tenn., said the phrase “encapsulates the heart of the Restoration.” “We seek to be Christians — nothing more, nothing less. And yet, we acknowledge that we do not have everything figured out either.”

“We seek to be Christians — nothing more, nothing less. And yet, we acknowledge that we do not have everything figured out either.”

But not everyone remembers this inclusive vision. Some grew up in a more exclusionary tradition.

“Growing up, being a Church of Christ member was more of a very exclusive faith community — that we were the only ones who ever had a chance of being admitted to heaven,” recalled Bruce Robins, a deacon of the Laurel Church of Christ in Maryland who was raised in a family of Church of Christ preachers in Searcy, Ark.

Heath Cary, a deacon of the Maryland Heights Church of Christ in Missouri, also remembered a more exclusionary mindset growing up in Churches of Christ in Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas. Because of that, Cary said, he wants to distance himself from baggage that includes “a desire (at least stereotypically) to legalistically define … who is in and who is out.”

For Jay Plank, minister for the RiverWalk Church of Christ in Wichita, Kan., experience with other believers has supported the concept of being “not the only Christians.”

“I’ve met too many people not of the Restoration stripe who live and breathe the love of Christ,” Plank said. “If only Restoration folks are saved,” he added, “what about all who lived between A.D. 33 and the early 1800s? Are they all lost? … We have no exclusive claim to eternal life, and dare not be so presumptuous as to believe we can usurp God by saying who is and is not a child of God.”

Meanwhile, Black Churches of Christ have viewed the slogan through an entirely different lens, according to Aaron Sayles, a member of the Newport News Church of Christ in Virginia.

“The slogan was about survival and dignity, not doctrinal boundary drawing,” he said. “White Restoration leaders used the slogan to fight denominational creeds. Black Christians used it to fight exclusion, segregation and racial humiliation. So, for Black Churches of Christ, the slogan meant, ‘We are Christians, even if white Christians refuse to treat us like brothers and sisters.’ It was a declaration of spiritual legitimacy in a world that denied their humanity.”

Criticisms of the Slogan

While the idea of avoiding exclusivist attitudes resonates with many members of Churches of Christ, some also cautioned against endorsing error or denominationalism.

“I do not claim to be the final judge of every soul, because the Lord knows those who are His,” said Robinson, the Manhattan minister. “But I do not identify with any use of the phrase that either has an ecumenical intent to fellowship those who practice error or weakens the necessity of obeying the Gospel, abiding in Christ’s Word, or honoring the one body, one faith and one baptism revealed in Scripture.”

“I also think that ecumenism has crept in,” concurred Connie Stinnett, a member of the Grace Point Church of Christ in Jonesboro, Ark., who grew up in a Methodist church. “And I’m personally not comfortable saying that, basically, anything goes. I do believe that God has made it clear what He expects, particularly regarding salvation.”

Some respondents challenged part or all of the slogan entirely.

“Christians are only in the church of Christ,” argued Samuell Pounds, minister for the Hilltop Church of Christ in Winter Haven, Fla. “The Lord does not have children in another body. They are plants, which the Lord did not plant — unauthorized religious bodies or groups,” he said of denominations.

Mike Stress, a member of the River Road Church of Christ in New Port Richey, Fla., also disagreed with the “not the only Christians” aspect.

“Anytime someone identifies what ‘kind’ of Christian they are (Baptist, Methodist, Catholic, etc.), it indicates to me that they are not a true Christian because they are saying that they place their trust in what a person said over what Christ said,” Stress wrote. “I studied my way out of a denominational church,” he added.

J.D. Williams, a retired preacher in Kannapolis, N.C., was also raised in a denominational Missionary Baptist church. He warned against the phrase: “Basically, it says, ‘Although you are in a denomination, I believe you are a Christian like me!’ How can you teach anyone the truth when you are saying they don’t need it?”

“Basically, it says, ‘Although you are in a denomination, I believe you are a Christian like me!’ How can you teach anyone the truth when you are saying they don’t need it?”

Others had a very different objection to the slogan, concerned that it may inadvertently encourage division.

“I think the ‘Christians only’ part ends up being self-defeating,” said Dominic Venuso, minister for Rochelle Church of Christ in Illinois. “It essentially is a slogan for a group which is saying, ‘We are Christians only.’ But who are ‘we’? As a slogan, it ends up reinforcing a sectarian group identity.”

“I don’t think it’s possible to be a ‘Christian only’ in the strictest sense,” opined Clay McFerrin, a member of the Chisholm Hills Church of Christ in Florence, Ala. “Even without doctrinal differences, an individual’s Christian identity and practice are almost inevitably influenced by their gender, nationality, ethnicity, language, socioeconomic status and/or politics.”

The slogan “has become the very thing it tried to fight against,” added Rich Gould, who preaches for the Riverside Church of Christ in North Augusta, S.C. “It is now used especially by some in the Churches of Christ to say that if you have a denominational name on the sign of your building then you are not a Christian in the first place. … We must understand that if we are asking for everyone to believe everything the exact same way, then we are asking for uniformity, not unity.”

For James Koenig, an elder of the Northside Church of Christ in Temple, Texas, the slogan is effectively a creed itself.

“Our guiding principle is the Gospel, not a man-made cliche or mantra,” the elder said. “If this phrase is the church’s guiding principle, then the bigger message of Christ’s salvation is being missed.”

Cooperation or Condemnation?

Most of the respondents believed the average church member is unfamiliar with the slogan — and with Restoration Movement history generally. When it comes to the idea behind the phrase, Churches of Christ seem to be split.

“We have in place a divide between what I call the Conservative Mainstream Churches of Christ and the Moderate Mainstream Churches of Christ,” said Leonard Allen, dean of the Bible college at Lipscomb University in Nashville, Tenn. “The Conservative stream … tends to hold that there are not ‘Christians in the sects’ (denominations). The Moderate stream tends to hold that there are.”

The more exclusivist view, he added, became dominant among Churches of Christ as they separated from the Disciples of Christ in the late 19th century.

“I have seen tension in two ways,” said Steve Cloer. “One is that the movement at times has crystallized, and we have thought that ‘we have figured things out’ and we ‘are the only ones’ faithful. On the other side, we have become denominational in our thinking, where we are simply ‘Church of Christ,’ and we acknowledge that we are simply another brand among others. I think it is important to navigate both of these cautiously.”

At the same time, several felt the acceptance of Christians among other groups has increased in recent years.

“My generation may be the last one that still remembers the sectarian attitude that church of Christ members were the only ‘true’ Christians,” said Kyle Heffley, an elder of the Southside Church of Christ in Rogers, Ark. “However, I also think that attitude was already dying then and has almost completely died today. As it should.”

The Greenville Oaks Church of Christ in Allen, Texas, teaches that belonging to a Church of Christ “is not a test for faithfulness to God, dependence on Jesus and living with the Holy Spirit,” said member Mike Stoniecki.

Many respondents also expressed an openness to cooperation with groups outside Churches of Christ — particularly for benevolence and community activities.

At the Walled Lake Church of Christ in Michigan, “our benevolence program collaborates with Jewish, Catholic, Lutheran and community organizations to serve the community,” said elder Roger Woods. “Let the Bible speak and do so with love, and bridges will be built that will ultimately plant seeds that will grow,” he added.

Tim Tripp, senior minister for the West Side Church of Christ in Russellville, Ark., offered an especially conciliatory approach.

“If they believe that Jesus is the son of God and have faith in his name, I generally consider them to be brothers/sisters in Christ and on the mission of Christ,” Tripp wrote. “I seek to build relationships with them and partner with them in activities where we both can participate in good conscience.”

But most respondents were equally wary of cooperating with denominations in a way that could be seen as supportive of doctrines they disagree with.

Martin Pyle, who ministers for the Riverwood Church of Christ in Nashville, Tenn., said his congregation will “gladly engage” with denominational churches in activities that don’t involve worship — such as a homeless ministry or an Easter egg hunt.

“We cooperate to the extent possible without compromising our core identity/doctrines,” Pyle said. “Would we join with a Muslim congregation for shared prayer? No. Would we cooperate in picking up trash in our community? Yes. Would we cooperate with a local Baptist church in a prayer service? Yes.”

“I don’t believe we can cooperate in areas in which we would be teaching the Bible,” echoed Kenneth Mills, a member of the College Church of Christ in Searcy, Ark. “I believe we need to be respectful and cautious.”

“There are doctrinal differences within our congregation. … If getting everything right were the basis of our fellowship, there would be none.”

For Rob Sparks, minister for the Fernvale Church of Christ in Tennessee, being “not the only Christians” is more about having the humility to recognize that no one is a perfect follower of Christ.

“I mean, there are doctrinal differences within our congregation, and we cooperate internally. Why would that stop at the doors of our church?” he asked. “When we disagree, we disagree as sisters and brothers in Christ, not as Christians and non-Christians. … If getting everything right were the basis of our fellowship, there would be none. Hence, the importance of the Restoration Movement’s call to move toward Jesus wherever we start from.”

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Faith

Christian Filmmaker Reveals Spiritual Danger Behind the Camera

Published

2 hours ago

August 18, 2026

faithandfreedo

Faith Facts

Alex Kendrick and his brother Stephen are remaking their first Christian film “Flywheel” more than 20 years after its original release
The remake is being produced in the Philippines with a new generation of filmmakers and cast
Kendrick warns that Christian filmmakers face spiritual danger when they seek personal glory rather than honoring God

More than two decades after launching their groundbreaking ministry in Christian cinema, filmmakers Alex and Stephen Kendrick are returning to where it all began. The brothers behind beloved faith-based films like “Fireproof” and “War Room” are now overseeing a remake of their very first movie, “Flywheel,” but with a powerful twist that underscores their commitment to raising up the next generation of believers in filmmaking.

This time, the story is being retold thousands of miles away in the Philippines, with an entirely new cast and crew of Christian filmmakers eager to share the gospel through their craft.

The original “Flywheel” was created in 2003 on a shoestring budget of just $20,000 in Albany, Georgia. Despite its humble origins, the film resonated with audiences and laid the foundation for what would become one of the most successful Christian film ministries in modern history. The Kendrick brothers went on to produce several box office hits that have touched millions of lives worldwide.

Now, as the story gets new life in a different culture, Alex Kendrick is using the opportunity to share a crucial spiritual warning with Christian filmmakers and content creators everywhere.

In discussing the remake, Kendrick emphasized the spiritual dangers that come with success in Christian media. He cautioned that believers working in film and creative industries must constantly guard their hearts against the temptation to pursue their own glory rather than God’s.

“We have to resist the urge to make it about ourselves,” Kendrick explained, highlighting the subtle but dangerous shift that can occur when Christians in media begin to focus on personal recognition rather than Kingdom impact.

The decision to empower Filipino filmmakers to remake “Flywheel” reflects the Kendrick brothers’ commitment to mentoring and equipping believers globally. Rather than simply exporting American Christian films, they’re investing in indigenous storytellers who can reach their own communities with culturally relevant but biblically grounded messages.

This approach aligns with the Great Commission’s call to make disciples of all nations, recognizing that effective evangelism often requires local voices and cultural understanding.

The remake also serves as a testament to the enduring power of stories centered on repentance, redemption, and transformation—themes that transcend cultural boundaries. “Flywheel” tells the story of a dishonest car dealer whose life is turned upside down when he commits to living with integrity and honoring God in his business practices.

For Christian filmmakers and content creators, Kendrick’s warning about pursuing personal glory comes at a critical time. As faith-based media continues to grow in influence and profitability, the temptation to prioritize acclaim, awards, and recognition over faithful stewardship can become increasingly powerful.

The Kendrick brothers’ model offers a different path—one focused on equipping others, sharing resources, and ensuring that God receives the glory for any success that comes.

This commitment to humility and servant leadership has characterized their ministry from the beginning, and it continues to guide their work as they expand their influence globally.

As the Philippine remake of “Flywheel” moves forward, it represents more than just a new version of an old story. It’s a practical demonstration of what happens when Christian leaders prioritize raising up the next generation over building their own platforms, and when they recognize that God’s Kingdom work extends far beyond their own projects and productions.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Faith

Seminary President Makes Unexpected Announcement About His Future

Published

4 hours ago

August 18, 2026

faithandfreedo

Faith Facts

Columbia Theological Seminary President Victor Aloyo Jr. announced his retirement effective end of 2025
Aloyo has served as president since 2016, leading the Presbyterian institution through significant challenges and growth
The president cited desire to spend more time with family as his primary reason for stepping down

Columbia Theological Seminary is entering a new chapter as President Victor Aloyo Jr. announced his decision to retire at the end of 2025. The announcement marks the conclusion of nearly a decade of leadership at the helm of the Presbyterian seminary.

Aloyo, who has served as president since 2016, made the first person of color to lead the historic institution. His tenure has been characterized by steady leadership through challenging times for theological education in America.

In his announcement, Aloyo emphasized his desire to prioritize family during this season of his life. The decision reflects the biblical principle of stewarding relationships and honoring the God-given responsibilities of family life, a value deeply cherished in the Christian conservative community.

“Led with wisdom, integrity and pastoral spirit,” colleagues noted in recognizing Aloyo’s contributions to the seminary. His leadership style has been marked by a commitment to both academic excellence and spiritual formation.

Under Aloyo’s leadership, Columbia Theological Seminary has navigated the evolving landscape of theological education while maintaining its commitment to training pastors and church leaders. The seminary has faced the same challenges confronting many Christian institutions in an increasingly secular culture.

The board and faculty praised Aloyo’s dedication to the mission of preparing ministers for service in Presbyterian churches across the nation. His pastoral approach to leadership has been particularly valued during his time at Columbia.

The seminary will now begin the process of searching for Aloyo’s successor. This transition comes at a critical time for Christian theological education, as seminaries across America work to equip the next generation of pastors to lead churches in a culture that increasingly challenges traditional Christian values.

Aloyo’s retirement provides an opportunity to reflect on the importance of faithful leadership in Christian institutions. His decision to step back for family commitments serves as a reminder that even in significant ministry roles, believers must prioritize their God-given responsibilities to their families.

The Columbia community expressed gratitude for Aloyo’s years of service while preparing to support new leadership in continuing the seminary’s mission of training faithful ministers of the Gospel.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Faith

Forest Service Officer Wins Religious Freedom Victory

Published

6 hours ago

August 18, 2026

faithandfreedo

Faith Facts

A U.S. Forest Service officer was initially denied religious accommodation to observe Sunday as his Sabbath but has now secured that right with legal assistance.
The officer’s request for exemption from Sunday work assignments was contested by his supervisors until First Liberty Institute intervened on his behalf.
This case demonstrates the ongoing need for federal agencies to honor religious freedom protections guaranteed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

A U.S. Forest Service officer has successfully obtained a religious exemption from mandatory Sunday work after initially being denied by his superiors. The victory came after the officer sought legal representation to protect his constitutionally guaranteed right to religious observance.

The officer, whose faith convictions recognize Sunday as the Lord’s Day, requested accommodation to honor his religious commitment to worship and rest on the first day of the week. Federal employers are required under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to provide reasonable accommodations for employees’ sincerely held religious beliefs, unless doing so would cause undue hardship to the employer.

Despite these clear legal protections, the Forest Service initially rejected the officer’s request, forcing him to choose between his livelihood and his conscience. The decision placed unnecessary pressure on a dedicated public servant whose religious convictions align with traditional Christian practice observed by millions of Americans.

With the assistance of legal counsel, the officer challenged the denial and ultimately prevailed. First Liberty Institute, a religious freedom legal organization, has been at the forefront of defending Americans whose faith is sidelined or penalized in the workplace.

This case serves as an important reminder that government agencies—like all employers—must respect the religious convictions of their workforce. Sunday observance has deep roots in American Christian tradition, and federal law explicitly protects employees who seek to honor the Sabbath according to their faith.

Religious freedom advocates have noted that cases like this should never reach the point of legal intervention. Reasonable accommodations for Sabbath observance are typically straightforward to implement and reflect the pluralistic values enshrined in our constitutional framework.

The officer’s perseverance in defending his faith demonstrates the courage required to stand firm when religious liberty is threatened. His victory not only secures his own right to worship freely but also reinforces protections for countless other Americans who face similar challenges in their workplaces.

As cultural pressure mounts against traditional Christian values in public life, cases like this underscore the critical importance of vigilant legal defense. Organizations dedicated to protecting religious freedom continue to play an essential role in preserving the rights our Founders guaranteed.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.