New Covenant Whole Gospel: How many modern Christians cannot honestly answer the questions below? Who is the King of Israel in John 1:49? Is the King of Israel now the Head of the Church, and are we His Body? Who is the “son” that is the “heir” to the land in Matthew 21:37-43? Why did God allow the Romans to destroy the Old Covenant temple and the Old Covenant city, about 40 years after His Son fulfilled the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34 in blood at Calvary? What the modern Church needs is a New Covenant Revival (Heb. 9:10) in which members of various denominations are willing to re-examine everything they believe and see if it agrees with the Bible, instead of the traditions of men. We need to be like the Bereans. It will be a battle between our flesh and the Holy Spirit. It will not be easy. If you get mad and upset when someone challenges your man-made Bible doctrines, that is your flesh resisting the truth found in God's Word. Nobody can completely understand the Bible unless they understand the relationship between the Old Covenant given to Moses at Mount Sinai and the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary. God is not now a “racist”. He has extended His love to all races of people through the New Covenant fulfilled by His Son’s blood at Calvary. The Apostle Paul warned against using “genealogies” in our faith in 1 Tim. 1:4, and Titus 3:9. If the New Covenant is "everlasting" in Hebrews 13:20 and the Old Covenant is "obsolete" in Hebrews 8:13, why would any Christian believe God is going back to the Old Covenant system during a future time period?
The scripture according to John makes it very clear that what Christ was saying was extremely provocative. Anyone with a traditionalist mindset would have rejected everything that he said or did out of hand.
Solid video. Yevamot 46b is interesting because it makes it seem like there were some opinions floating around that immersion was all that was needed to convert. The apostolic community seems to have treated the Gentile believers like a hybrid ger toshav/convert without circumcision. The baptism effectuates a cleansing of tumah and a somewhat Jewish status, while not circumcising them keeps them separate from the 613. They are only obligated in the 613 when circumcised (Galatians 5).
Thanks. I agree, and I think I can track the immersion connection you mentioned back to around the time of Hillel and Shammai. It seems to me a kind of precursor to the Apostolic ruling.
New Covenant Whole Gospel: How many modern Christians cannot honestly answer the questions below?
Who is the King of Israel in John 1:49? Is the King of Israel now the Head of the Church, and are we His Body? Who is the “son” that is the “heir” to the land in Matthew 21:37-43? Why did God allow the Romans to destroy the Old Covenant temple and the Old Covenant city, about 40 years after His Son fulfilled the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34 in blood at Calvary?
What the modern Church needs is a New Covenant Revival (Heb. 9:10) in which members of various denominations are willing to re-examine everything they believe and see if it agrees with the Bible, instead of the traditions of men. We need to be like the Bereans. It will be a battle between our flesh and the Holy Spirit. It will not be easy. If you get mad and upset when someone challenges your man-made Bible doctrines, that is your flesh resisting the truth found in God's Word. Nobody can completely understand the Bible unless they understand the relationship between the Old Covenant given to Moses at Mount Sinai and the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary.
God is not now a “racist”. He has extended His love to all races of people through the New Covenant fulfilled by His Son’s blood at Calvary. The Apostle Paul warned against using “genealogies” in our faith in 1 Tim. 1:4, and Titus 3:9.
If the New Covenant is "everlasting" in Hebrews 13:20 and the Old Covenant is "obsolete" in Hebrews 8:13, why would any Christian believe God is going back to the Old Covenant system during a future time period?
The scripture according to John makes it very clear that what Christ was saying was extremely provocative. Anyone with a traditionalist mindset would have rejected everything that he said or did out of hand.
Solid video. Yevamot 46b is interesting because it makes it seem like there were some opinions floating around that immersion was all that was needed to convert. The apostolic community seems to have treated the Gentile believers like a hybrid ger toshav/convert without circumcision. The baptism effectuates a cleansing of tumah and a somewhat Jewish status, while not circumcising them keeps them separate from the 613. They are only obligated in the 613 when circumcised (Galatians 5).
Thanks. I agree, and I think I can track the immersion connection you mentioned back to around the time of Hillel and Shammai. It seems to me a kind of precursor to the Apostolic ruling.