Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
IF the Old Covenant had NOT failed, why was it necessary for Christ to institute the New Covenant and send the Comforter to guide us to the truth God has "written in our hearts" instead the words "written in ink" and stone????
It is ironic to be talking about the New and Old Convenants, when talking about the Church of Christ -and it's offshoot, the International Church of Christ.
Both claim pure traceback to the Disciples of Christ, and a purist New Testament church!
Hence the Discipling movement. (part of the Restoration Movement)
But then again, many Fundamentalists also claim such traceback as well as a counter to Catholics, so we cannot be sure which one is correct.
yes they are still around. the founder and leader Kip Mckean was forces to resign and he started a similar church called International Christian Churches. the ICOC fragmented where factions are getting rid of the cultic abuse and some still want to keep the cultic abuse and some want to unite with th mainline churches of christ
He was technically disfellowshipped by both, the mainline Churches of Christ and International Churches of Christ due to unbiblical beliefs.
He was technically disfellowshipped by both, the mainline Churches of Christ and International Churches of Christ due to unbiblical beliefs.
I thought he resigned from the ICoC because he could not keep one of his own, manmade laws.
One of his kids left the church, this can happen in any controlling religious environment, eg CARM's Matt Slick -his own daughter became an atheist as well.
Nothing to do with whether either church thought he was unbiblical or not.
IF the Old Covenant had NOT failed, why was it necessary for Christ to institute the New Covenant and send the Comforter to guide us to the truth God has "written in our hearts" instead the words "written in ink" and stone????
Once again. The Old Testament did not fail. The New Testament does not support that it did.
AnonymousDecember 13, 2015 at 10:33 PM
It has been confirmed that Kip McKean will continue to serve as the "lead evangelist" and continue to work on the "crown of thorns" project (in other words, he will still oversee and have control of all the churches) while Tim Kernan will take over the administrative duties in the L.A. "pillar church". So Kip McKean is still in control of the organization, he just lightened his work load.
I know you don't know what I mean because you are a JW.
Hebrews 8:7-13 King James Version (KJV)
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
<Snip>
13 In that He saith, A new covenant, He hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
<Snip>
Quote:
Originally Posted by cowdog
Oh no it does not!
You claimed the OT failed, the NT does not support that!!
It's plain you do not believe the word of God is from God!!
It is plain that you can NOT read.
IF the Old Covenant had NOT failed, why was it necessary for Christ to institute the New Covenant and send the Comforter to guide us to the truth God has "written in our hearts" instead the words "written in ink" and stone????
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rbbi1
And WHAT, pray tell, do you think it is He writes on our hearts??? The whole point was that the WHOLE COUNSEL OF G-d be written on the INSIDE OF US, as opposed to the outside of us/written in ink and stone, NOT that it all be chucked! The law didn't change, it's LOCATION did, alone with the addition of the Spirit to understand it in the first place. Which is why He said not one jot or tittle would pass away till all be fulfilled. How is it fulfilled? BY BEING WRITTEN IN YOU.....EVERY JOT AND TITLE. NOT by being tossed out. Yeshua was THAT WORD made flesh, and the servant is not greater than the Master. Peace
It is the bold that you are missing, Rbbi - the PRINCIPLE upon which the laws were based. The laws were not based on obedience -or else. They were based on agape love and the desire to foster love for God and each other. The laws forced consideration but only through the schoolmaster stage till sufficient self-control and consideration for others evolved. It is all about love of God and each other, NOT obedience, that is why those two commands encompass all the others. I repeat:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
It wasn't the "laws" that were written, it was the PRINCIPLE upon which the laws were based - agape love - concern for the well-being of everyone involved. The laws focused them on God and their self-interest served by their obedience, not the love of each other. That is why they failed. Christ's sacrifice was unambiguous, "No greater love . . .", and His instructions to His disciples given multiple times to love God and each other every day and repent when they didn't so that they would be known by their love for one another.
an article about the ICOC in 2012 based on the comments below looks like the old cultist ways still remain in some branches.
I have only just read this article, thanks for that, although it is a few years old now.
Also, I simply don't get this "non-denominational" claim, which is not only a ICoC claim, but many churches that are much smaller than this group.
Although not a fan of CARM, they give a fairly accurate summary/description of the group:
Of course water baptism gets special attention and the focus, but any church that does that, it will be a feature to CARM or Calvinist/ fundamentalists.
It is plain that you can NOT read.
IF the Old Covenant had NOT failed, why was it necessary for Christ to institute the New Covenant and send the Comforter to guide us to the truth God has "written in our hearts" instead the words "written in ink" and stone????
It is the bold that you are missing, Rbbi - the PRINCIPLE upon which the laws were based. The laws were not based on obedience -or else. They were based on agape love and the desire to foster love for God and each other. The laws forced consideration but only through the schoolmaster stage till sufficient self-control and consideration for others evolved. It is all about love of God and each other, NOT obedience, that is why those two commands encompass all the others. I repeat:
Removing obedience from the commands is not possible, because it is the SPIRIT we were given that makes it possible to be obedient and fulfill the commands in the first place. By virtue of what they are, they demand obedience; that's what a command entails, what a covenant consists of. A command is like a brief aspect of a much larger contractual agreement, between a greater and a lesser, and therefore it presupposes obedience from the lesser in favor of the greater's command. Peace
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
