Ex-Church of Christ Support Board

My question for the board is this. It seems to me that the CoC is confused or ignores or just does not have a grasp on the new vs old covenant. It seems that they never even teach anything about this. It's like they take the bible from beginning to end and treat it all the same. If anything is taught about the new covenant at all, they immediately disqualify it by mixing in the old. I have so many examples of this but just wanted to find out if it's just my experience or is that how it is at all of them?

My experience has been sorta in between... There is a lot of speaking about the Old Covenant(OC) and how we are no longer under that, rather the New Covenant... BUT when they want to 'justify' their tradition they run back to the OC and cherry pick the text to support their doctrine.

From my point of view, the CoC causes a lot of problems for itself by the way they consistently mis-read the bible. They want to read the bible as a source book for blue prints and rules and regulations, instead of reading the bible as the story of God, Christ and the Holy Spirit. Basically, the OT is the story of how God refused to give up on a stubborn and rebellious people. (By the way, that could be MY story, too!) So much of what is written in the OT points forward to Christ, and the theme is then developed and continued in the NT along with the work/gift of the Holy Spirit.

Interesting, because as far as I've seen the CoC doesn't care about the old covenant, or the old testament at all. As BlessedWifeAndMama said, they use the old testament to cherry pic verses and twist them to support their doctrine (Nadab and Abihu are prime examples of this). I don't care what the CoC says, writes or claims. They will deny it with their lips, but their actions show do not care at all about the Old Covenant at all. As far as I'm concerned, the CoC Bible starts at Acts 2:38. The entire Old Testament has been "nailed to the cross". I've heard that too many times. But Nadab and Abihu is not "nailed to the cross". They let that slide to support their false doctrine on instruments in worship. Throwing the Old Testament away helps cover loopholes in their doctrine, and at the same time they can cherry pic verses to support their rules they have made.

Generally, the CofCs I've been in teach that the OT, as they will quote Paul, is "for our learning". In my experience, what that has meant for the conservative CofC is that the OT is a set of documents showing God struggling with an obstinate people, punishing them for their transgressions, and letting them back into His good graces when they straighten up and fly right (i.e., perform their worship practices just as they've been instructed). This is used to support their patternistic interpretation of the NT, that we are given a blueprint or a theological Robert's Rules of Order that we must follow to the letter for the church to be pleasing to God. There are, of course, minor variations on that understanding, but the hardline CofCs tend to stick to a doctrinal understanding that God gave His church direct instructions that are to be followed without exception - with the OT being used to prop up that paradigm. They will, of course, declare that the OT law was put to death on the cross, and does not apply to humankind any more.

Interesting, I can see so many similarities to what everyone is saying and the beliefs I have experienced. Paul is adamant about what our relationship is with the law. We are to have nothing to do with it whatsoever. Recently, at a service I attended, the preacher even said the same thing. He goes, we are not under the law (first time I've ever heard them say this) but the he follows it by saying. We are not under the law but..... We should try to keep it all the best we can. Is that not the same thing as putting yourself under the law?

If it helps, the Bible's writers often got confused and contradicted themselves as well.

Referring to OP....Then I would suggest not all CofC brands and types or congregations are the same. Because "rightly dividing" meant constant discussion about the new covenant and how it totally differs from the Mosaic. A good bit of NT is about "Judaizing" teachers and errors of apostasy of mixing in the Mosaic law. IMO, making a distinction between Old and New law was the identifying characteristic. Other denominations were enslaved to 10 commandments, Sabbath day error, instrumental music, tithing, clergy/priesthood, etc. The whole thing rested on this proper understanding and distinction between Old and New. So I guess we were just in different CofC circles or realms or experience.

In my experience with coc lots of double talk and mixed messages. No consistent clarity.

bnot wrote:Interesting, because as far as I've seen the CoC doesn't care about the old covenant, or the old testament at all. They will deny it with their lips, but their actions show do not care at all about the Old Covenant at all. As far as I'm concerned, the CoC Bible starts at Acts 2:38. The entire Old Testament has been "nailed to the cross". I've heard that too many times. But Nadab and Abihu is not "nailed to the cross". They let that slide to support their false doctrine on instruments in worship. Throwing the Old Testament away helps cover loopholes in their doctrine, and at the same time they can cherry pic verses to support their rules they have made.

This has been my experience. The old testament was nailed to the cross and you could only use the New Testament as your guide.