FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-30-2005, 10:09 PM   #1
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: hell if I know
Posts: 2,306
Default Beliefs: Old vs. New Testaments

I have some questions about what Christians believe about the bible, namely the New Testament vs. the Old.

It seems to me the Christians I know either disregard or are even unaware of the "bad" stuff in the bible (esp. the Old Testament) and focus on the "good" stuff. At the same time I'm told that the entire bible is the Word of God.

So I'm curious about what various sects of Christians believe about the matter. Can anyone enlighten me, or know of good sources I can get the information from?
freemonkey is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 07:52 AM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: hell if I know
Posts: 2,306
Default

It occurs to me that i haven't been specific enough in asking what it is I wamt to know.....

Do Christians generally disregard much of the Old Testament (except for the more palatable stories), in favor of the New Testament? Do they view the Christ philosphy as a replacement or as an extension of the Old Testament?
freemonkey is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 08:38 AM   #3
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by freemonkey
Do Christians generally disregard much of the Old Testament (except for the more palatable stories), in favor of the New Testament?
I think you should change "disregard" to "reinterpret" with the understanding that Christians would replace it with "reinterpret correctly".

Quote:
Do they view the Christ philosphy as a replacement or as an extension of the Old Testament?
Both depending on the particular passage in question.

Christ offers a new covenant to replace the old but still represents a continuation of the original tradition.
Amaleq13 is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 09:05 AM   #4
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: hell if I know
Posts: 2,306
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13
I think you should change "disregard" to "reinterpret" with the understanding that Christians would replace it with "reinterpret correctly".
OK, so, in Deuteronomy, for instance, the warnings and details of how God will surely punish those who do not follow the Commandments could be reinterpreted to signify something about God's love & power?

I've been told numerous times that many, many Christians haven't really read a whole lot of the bible on their own, are there any statistics on this, I wonder?

Can anyone who's been to bible class tell me what is studied? Do they focus more on Old or New? Do they gloss over the more gruesome, shocking bits? Is there a patent explanation?

I have not been to a bible class since I was a young child and I don't remember even hearing about the ugly stuff.

Quote:
Both depending on the particular passage in question.
I have a feeling I'm gonna have to do a lot more reading to understand the nuances?

Quote:
Christ offers a new covenant to replace the old but still represents a continuation of the original tradition.
Are there any biggies you can tell me about? I think I'm curious about how believers resolve the dichotomy (I think that's what I mean) of a jealous, seemingly cruel, almighty god and who is also all love, light and goodness.
freemonkey is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 09:12 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: ,Iowa
Posts: 84
Default

My friend who is a Christian answered me this way about the Old Testament and about gods supposed cruelty by drowning innocent children in the flood "They were probably taken right into heaven and were better off than growing up with cruel people" of course that was God's judgment he said that we can notunderstand.


Copout of course
He also said that there was evidence of a worldwide flood at that time.I don't think so
popeye1 is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 09:43 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Land of Make Believe
Posts: 781
Default

It seems to me that Paul struggled with the overall question of what about the Jewish Law in the OT in light of the new convenant which pretty much said the Jewish Law no longer applies. Read some of his authentic letters in the NT to get an understanding of this.

Paul knew he had to resolve this somehow because the OT and the Jewish people clearly believed the Jewish Law was applicable forever. There are more than a few references in the OT to the Jewish Law being in force for all Jews for all time.

Paul basically explains the Jewish Law served a purpose in the whole plan of salvation which is ending with Christ. In other words, Paul reinterprets the purpose of the Jewish Law in light of Christ.
motorhead is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 10:24 AM   #7
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: SE
Posts: 4,845
Default

I occasionally browse www.worthyboards.com. I raised the question about why they thought old testament laws did not apply today (e.g. Send the menstruating women off by themselves). The answer: The teachings of Jesus in the new testament absolved mankind of having to follow the old testament laws. However, these people also believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis. Hypocrisy? Sure! But that’s religion for ya’.

As far as sources – go to the aforementioned website and get it straight from the horses mouth. You won’t be banned as long as you don’t get too far out of line.
ecco is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 11:11 AM   #8
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: hell if I know
Posts: 2,306
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by motorhead
Paul basically explains the Jewish Law served a purpose in the whole plan of salvation which is ending with Christ. In other words, Paul reinterprets the purpose of the Jewish Law in light of Christ.
Ah, so basically, there's a BEFORE and an AFTER? Hence, one of the basic differences between Jews & Christians...., other than the obvious?

Generally, do most Christians accept the same dividing line? Does it differ among the various sects? I wonder, then, how they choose the things they want to keep, like the creation story, the flood story, Moses, etc..., but not other stories.
freemonkey is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 11:11 AM   #9
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: hell if I know
Posts: 2,306
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecco
I occasionally browse www.worthyboards.com. I raised the question about why they thought old testament laws did not apply today (e.g. Send the menstruating women off by themselves). The answer: The teachings of Jesus in the new testament absolved mankind of having to follow the old testament laws. However, these people also believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis. Hypocrisy? Sure! But that’s religion for ya’.

As far as sources – go to the aforementioned website and get it straight from the horses mouth. You won’t be banned as long as you don’t get too far out of line.
Thank you.
freemonkey is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 02:38 PM   #10
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bli Bli
Posts: 3,135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by freemonkey
I have some questions about what Christians believe about the bible, namely the New Testament vs. the Old.

The old testament is before God became a Christian" (quote from 9 year old girl
when asked to comment on the differences between OT and NT versions of God.)

judge is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:54 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.