Can one exclude the OT and still be Christian?

[Voco_proTatiano]

I don’t accept “Jews” as a modern mistranslation because I am not familiar with the original text.

I do know that at the time that John’s Gospel . . . . as Christianity developed as a Gentile religion.

I also know . . . . for fear of offending the rulers of the day.

As far as specific interpretations of the Gospels go, I prefer the translations in which* ioudaios* is rendered “the Jewish authorities” in order to distinguish it from the Jewish race (which of course included Jesus, Mary, the apostles, and most of the early disciples).

I am unable to agree with this. I don’t know of any identifiable group of Judeans marked out as quislings, and I have read some interesting things suggesting that Jesus himself might have been a member of the Pharisees.

Dear Talmida,
Let me enlighten you. You are, I hope, aware that Samaria, Gallilee, and Judea were all Roman occupied principalities, with puppet princes, There were actually four principalities, hence the term tetrarch, or rule by four. In Samaria and Galilee, this was accepted with scorn as an imposition, and indeed there was much trouble over it. The arrest of John was part of a greater discontent. In Judea however, the Pharisees, in order to protect their hegemony co-operated with the occupation. You only have to read the Gospels carefully noting thie feeling of the words to see that Jesus was in greatest danger in Judea, and especially in Jerusalem. Indeed remember, the Samaritans turned their backs on him when they discovered he was going there: they knew what to expect.
Read the words of the chief priests and elders, repeatedly they complain that Jesus will cause trouble for them, and by antagonising the Romans, will bring disaster to their nice little arrangement with Pilate. They were plainly Quislings.

This may be the cause of our misunderstandings. You distinguish between religious faith and race and nationality, and yet I don’t think there was much of that in Jesus day. The idea of religion was not the same as our idea. It was not as distinct from politics or identity as it is today.

Mosaicism was riven with sects, and the schisms were very deep.
Judeans would not even tread on the same ground a Samaritan had walked on. The different sects even used different calendars, and began and ended their days differently.
Jews will pretend that their Lunar Calendar is ancient and G_d given. It is not. It is a relic of Babylon. The G_d given calendar is described in the Book of Enoch, and is a solar calendar, having a year of exactly 52 weeks, with leap-weeks added in accordance with a rule which is now only conjectured.
In this Calendar, the Passover was celebrated on a Thursday, whereas in the modern Jewish calendar, it can be most any day, but happened to be on the Sabbath for the Passion, Hence Maunday Thursday was the Galilean Passover.
It should be noted that the Galilean day started at sunrise, and the year in Spring, whereas the modern Jewish system starts the day at sunset, and the year in Autumn. Hence Galileans living in Judea had a 36 hour Sabbath! Read Mary coming to the tomb before Dawn, as the Sun was about to rise to the First Day.

And the question of the atheistic Jew is an interesting one. . . . . . Just living in Israel guarantees his identity.

A Jewish friend once remarked to me that he didn’t need faith to believe in God, he had knowledge: his x-times great-grandfather Abraham has spoken with God. It wasn’t faith, it was family history. And was completely independent of whether or how he worshipped.

Jews describing Jewishness, seem to describe whatever they want to describe, and that description has little to do with any reality.
It is not racial, not all Jews are Semites, and not all Semites are Jews.
It is not religious, for there are secular Jews, and Jewish Athieists.
It is not nationality, for the land is called Israel, not Judea.
All I can see uniting them is a political fremasonry, an attempt to define som etherial unifying bond, which clearly does not exist, beyond lip-service to Mosaic Law.

This is going far far off topic, but I think that the Gospels are a very poor source of history - particularly of the history of Judaism!

Yes indeed, it is way off, but I contend with you that the Gospels are bad history. They form some of the best written social history in existance. Yes, you have to read between the lines, and ask, why did such and such say that.
Yes, the tales have been politically bawdlerised.
Some of the tales are in code to get past the Roman censor.
The point remains, it is excellent social history, and a good window on to the politics of the Judean establishment.

 

[Deacon_Joseph]

You should know WHY God sent His Son to Earth to die for us. Why Jesus is here is important, and by reading the OT you would have a better understanding of why God did what He did.

The basis for Jesus’ teachings are rooting in Judaism. To understand the culture that Jesus was taught and what His mortal life was surrounded by brings you closer to Jesus. I could sight hundreds of examples if I had the time.

 

[richardeekw]

Other than refuting those who don’t believe that Christ fulfilled the OT and is the New Covenant, why does anyone place such emphasis on it? Once one believes the Good News (NT) why isn’t the New Testament solely sufficient to be the Christian Testament?

Thanks,

The CHURCH has determined the unity of the Old and the New Testaments (CCC 128-130) and the CANON of Sacred Scripture.

Well Non-Catholic Christians & even Roman Catholics do choose to be :Buffet Christians) - choosing to believe what they want.

My recommendation:
If you sincerely want to be a SAINT even without the 46 + 27 books of the Bible; Live out Literally the Teachings in Matthew Chapters 5 to 7

 

[Lively_Stone]

Other than refuting those who don’t believe that Christ fulfilled the OT and is the New Covenant, why does anyone place such emphasis on it? Once one believes the Good News (NT) why isn’t the New Testament solely sufficient to be the Christian Testament?

Thanks,

Maybe this will help.

Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Psa 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Mat 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (Jesus Speaking)

Gal 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

It is necessary to understand the Old Testament in order for one to understand the sinful man, that no amount of sacrificing of animals or ordinances could redeem man for his abominations in the sight of God. Jesus was for-ordained from the foundation of the world to be the propitiation for our sins.

1Jo 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works

So you see that all scripture is where we get our doctrine, correction in our walk with God. We receive our instruction from the Holy Writ and it shows us the areas of our life that we should change to comform to the teachings of Jesus Christ.

I pray this sheds some light and helps you in your quest for truth.

Best regard,

Danny

 

[Lively_Stone]

No, No, No!
Jesus was not a Jew.
There were No Jews in the time of Jesus.
That word is quite recent, Post AD 300!

The most off base thing I’ve seen on this forum. All one has to ds is trace the linage of Mary in book of Matthew back to David. He was as much of a Jew as anyone. I can be a Jew if I choose to follow their doctinal beliefs and Jesus certainly did that to the letter of the Law. His bloodline was Jewish and He followed the Jewish Law.

Best regards

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

You should know WHY God sent His Son to Earth to die for us. Why Jesus is here is important, and by reading the OT you would have a better understanding of why God did what He did.

The basis for Jesus’ teachings are rooting in Judaism. To understand the culture that Jesus was taught and what His mortal life was surrounded by brings you closer to Jesus. I could sight hundreds of examples if I had the time.

Dear Friend,
You misunderstand Judaism. Judaism accepts the written Torah, and somewhat like Mother Church, a set of traditions.
Our Lord, however, accepted the written Torah, but rejected out of hand the traditions. This is made clear in the Gospel(s), especially in His damnation of ‘Corban’.
It is more useful to differentiate between Judaism which is the modern derivitive, and Mosaicism, which is a following of the written Torah, which Our Lord clearly accepted.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Voco proTatiano;2189420:

No, No, No!
Jesus was not a Jew.
There were No Jews in the time of Jesus.
That word is quite recent, Post AD 300!

The most off base thing I’ve seen on this forum. All one has to ds is trace the linage of Mary in book of Matthew back to David. He was as much of a Jew as anyone. I can be a Jew if I choose to follow their doctinal beliefs and Jesus certainly did that to the letter of the Law. His bloodline was Jewish and He followed the Jewish Law.

Best regards

Dear Friend,
You clearly misunderstand my words.
I am not making antisemitic claims.
I am just trying to be factually correct.
Jews claim direct descent from a Mosiacist ancestry.
What they mistakenly claim is that all of that ancestry is/was Jewish.
That is as false as a Pentecostalist claiming that all of his Christian ancestry, right back to Pentecost, were Pentecostalists!

Jesu’s blood line was accepted as Judahite, by descent from David. Judahite is one legal translation of the Latin word ‘Iudaeus’, poorly/incorrectrly translated as ‘Jew’
His belief system was Mosaicist, which is ancestory to Judaism, but is not Judaism per se.
In the New Testament, ‘Iudaeus’ is without exception used to mean ‘Judean’, as opposed to Galilean or Roman, not as Jew, as opposed to Gentile.
If you can’t accept these basic facts, many of the Gospel stories will remain a mystery to you.

 

[Pax_Tibi]

Other than refuting those who don’t believe that Christ fulfilled the OT and is the New Covenant, why does anyone place such emphasis on it? Once one believes the Good News (NT) why isn’t the New Testament solely sufficient to be the Christian Testament?

Thanks,

This forum has been “ziggin’ and zaggin’” a bit!

If you had never heard of the OT, would you believe in Jesus?

Paul converted a whole lot of gentiles who had never heard of it. Jesus’ message was good enough for them.

Someone suggested that if you don’t know history, you end up repeating it. If you know the history of the OT, you know that God the Father obviously knows it as well. That’s why He sent His Son so there could be no chance of repeating it.

The OT should be used as proof of God’s participation in human history and the truth of Jesus’ divinity and be used apologetically to refute agnostics, atheists, Muslims, Buddists, Zoroastrianists, Hindus, Confusianists, etc. etc. etc. etc. Maybe even heretics? But to Christians who already believe in Jesus and all that He is, why do we need it for doctrine? In my view it became a history book when God established the FINAL COVENANT in JESUS.

My position has nothing to do with denying the efficacy of the OT or its Divine inspiration or its value in God’s plan leading up to Jesus.!!! God spoke to those people, then.God’s plan for us now, is the NT. The NT completes and supercedes the OT. It should be our teaching and preaching document.

Since Jesus, what more could we possibly need to be called Christian?

Thanks,

 

[NotWorthy]

Since Jesus, what more could we possibly need to be called Christian?

Thanks,

What does the NT teach about contraception?

 

[Pax_Tibi]

What does the NT teach about contraception?

I would have thought it was post NT church teachings. But, I’ve got a feeling that you are going to tell me its from the Old Covenant. If its not in the New Covenant, maybe it should be looked at a little more closely.

But it would be interesting to know what we believe that is only found in the OT. If it isn’t found in or corroborated by the NT, a whole new way of looking at Christianity would be opened to us.

Thanks,

 

[NotWorthy]

I would have thought it was post NT church teachings. But, I’ve got a feeling that you are going to tell me its from the Old Covenant. If its not in the New Covenant, maybe it should be looked at a little more closely.

Look up Onan in Genesis, somewhere around Chapter 45. There’s other passages in the OT that help form this teaching, such as “God created life… and found that it was good” (paraphrasing). But Onan is the most stark reason behind the teaching. In fact, contraception was called onanism 100 years ago.

But it would be interesting to know what we believe that is only found in the OT. If it isn’t found in or corroborated by the NT, a whole new way of looking at Christianity would be opened to us.

Thanks,

OK, here is where you’re really scaring me.

You are saying that God would change His mind about something like contraception? (I thought that was other church’s jobs in the 1930’s - 1960’s )

God is perfect, and He has always been perfect. Hence, God can’t change.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Look up Onan in Genesis, somewhere around Chapter 45. There’s other passages in the OT that help form this teaching, such as “God created life… and found that it was good” (paraphrasing). But Onan is the most stark reason behind the teaching. In fact, contraception was called onanism 100 years ago.
OK, here is where you’re really scaring me.

You are saying that God would change His mind about something like contraception? (I thought that was other church’s jobs in the 1930’s - 1960’s )

If G_d is guiding a process, then it would be expected that as that process develops, the nature of the guidance will develop. While Mankind was recovering from a disaster that had all but wiped out all of humanity, then it makes sense that every effort be made to repopulate the planet quickly so that genetic diversity might quickly develop, but when a recovered and stable population is in place, then the sensible aim would be to reduce the population pressure.
We see this taking place in nature, so the process is not un-natural, though the method may be.

God is perfect, and He has always been perfect. Hence, God can’t change.

You misunderstand perfection. You see it as finishedness and unchangeability. You say G_d cannot change, but G_d is ALMIGHTY, and is therefore unbound. It is not for us to say what G_d can or cannot do.
G_d has in the past done what we might today perceive as evil. There is no shortage of examples if inhumane actions by G_d in the OT.
You cannot judge G_d, neither can you bind G_d.

 

[NotWorthy]

If G_d is guiding a process, then it would be expected that as that process develops, the nature of the guidance will develop. While Mankind was recovering from a disaster that had all but wiped out all of humanity, then it makes sense that every effort be made to repopulate the planet quickly so that genetic diversity might quickly develop, but when a recovered and stable population is in place, then the sensible aim would be to reduce the population pressure.
We see this taking place in nature, so the process is not un-natural, though the method may be.

It would seem to behoove the Holy Spirit to make this distinction that you’ve seemed to come to understand so that future generations would understand. Let me get this straight. Yahweh will kill a man for not re-populating the world.

And yet, the Holy Spririt guieded people to understand that this was sinful for the next 4000 or so years, until the last 80 years?

You misunderstand perfection. You see it as finishedness and unchangeability. You say G_d cannot change, but G_d is ALMIGHTY, and is therefore unbound. It is not for us to say what G_d can or cannot do.
G_d has in the past done what we might today perceive as evil. There is no shortage of examples if inhumane actions by G_d in the OT.
You cannot judge G_d, neither can you bind G_d.

You misunderstand my point. ALL Christian Religions translated this, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to mean that Onanism or contraception is sinful until the 1930’s. Then, Divine Revelation caused nearly every faith to remove the sinfulness of this action, or these religions changed due to public pressure.

I happen to think it’s the latter.

 

[CryptoCatholic]

Re the Post #1 question, Dei Verbum by Paul VI states that the New Testament is “hidden in” the Old. See Paragraph 16, DV. The vehicle is Old Testament typology. For example, Exodus 12:22-23 describes how using the hyssop bush to spray Paschal Lamb blood on the Israelites’ doors protects against the wrath of God. Imagine in your head the execution of the ritual: The door symbolizes Christ. See John 10:9, where Jesus says, “I am the door.” So, a man whipping the door causing Paschal Lamb blood splatters on the door Christ symbol is a picture of Christ’s scourging. The suffering of the scourged Christ deters God’s wrath. Get it?

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

It would seem to behoove the Holy Spirit to make this distinction that you’ve seemed to come to understand so that future generations would understand. Let me get this straight. Yahweh will kill a man for not re-populating the world.

If we are to believe the account in Genesis, then G_d did precisely that, for Onan was slain for ‘spilling his seed’ rather than raising up a son for his brother. Hebrew teachers assert that it was the spilling of his seed which was the primary sin, the failure to raise up a son to his brother was incidental.
Thus we are led to believe that the penalty for ‘spilling seed’, or otherwise wilfully wasting seed, is death. Do you believe that this is still the case?

And yet, the Holy Spririt guieded people to understand that this was sinful for the next 4000 or so years, until the last 80 years?

Well, were they guided, or did they just think they were guided. I cannot judge on that. As I said, G_d is not fixed, as one made of stone, and the Word of G_d is as alive as G_d, so as the needs of the universe change, the Word of G_d will change, or be irrelevant.

You misunderstand my point. ALL Christian Religions translated this, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to mean that Onanism or contraception is sinful until the 1930’s.

It was perhaps John Malthus who saw the writing on the wall, writing in 1798, and warning of things to come, if the planetary population continued to expand. He was well ahead of his time, and it is only now that his warnings are being taken seriously. Read his essay on the subject:
ac.wwu.edu/~stephan/malthus/malthus.0.html

Then, Divine Revelation caused nearly every faith to remove the sinfulness of this action, or these religions changed due to public pressure.

I happen to think it’s the latter.

Population will be controlled, either by means of rational control, or by catastrophic conflict. The choice is ours. We are not commanded by G_d to take either course oin rejection of the other. We are just told the consequences of our actions, or failures to act.
Clearly, John Malthus was a prophet. Can you deny with absolute faith, tat the warning he wrote on the wall was not inspired by the Holy Spirit?

 

[NotWorthy]

If we are to believe the account in Genesis, then G_d did precisely that, for Onan was slain for ‘spilling his seed’ rather than raising up a son for his brother. Hebrew teachers assert that it was the spilling of his seed which was the primary sin, the failure to raise up a son to his brother was incidental.
Thus we are led to believe that the penalty for ‘spilling seed’, or otherwise wilfully wasting seed, is death. Do you believe that this is still the case?

While it is still sinful, I’d hesisate to insert the death penalty for such as this. I’d have to die a 1000 deaths myself!

Well, were they guided, or did they just think they were guided. I cannot judge on that. As I said, G_d is not fixed, as one made of stone, and the Word of G_d is as alive as G_d, so as the needs of the universe change, the Word of G_d will change, or be irrelevant.

You would be opening a vast can of worms if you thought people can determine what is still relevant in Scriptures, and what has “changed according to the needs of the universe”.

Why, you would see something like 33,000 little denominations pop up, everywhere! Good Lord, I’d hate to see that happen.

It was perhaps John Malthus who saw the writing on the wall, writing in 1798, and warning of things to come, if the planetary population continued to expand. He was well ahead of his time, and it is only now that his warnings are being taken seriously. Read his essay on the subject:
ac.wwu.edu/~stephan/malthus/malthus.0.html
Population will be controlled, either by means of rational control, or by catastrophic conflict. The choice is ours. We are not commanded by G_d to take either course oin rejection of the other. We are just told the consequences of our actions, or failures to act.
Clearly, John Malthus was a prophet. Can you deny with absolute faith, tat the warning he wrote on the wall was not inspired by the Holy Spirit?

We are far, far, away from over population, no matter what the media claims. Because of that, (and more) I’m faithful that Mr. Malthus is not a prophet of God’s.

This is still a case of man “doing it what it takes to make me feel good”. It has caused the rise of more sinful things than just “spilling the seed”. In a discussion on “the Pill”, a Pope of ours (don’t know, maybe Leo in the 40’s?) stated that the pill would lead to increased promiscuity, a rise in venereal disease, and abortions.

Now, I ask you, who is more than like the prophet?

 

[TOME]

When I read this question my mind immediately to to the many writing of our Holy Father on this subject. If I understand him correctly, the only way to fully understand - that is understand the New Testament’s revelation as fully as humanly possible - is to understand the revelation contained in the OT. Also, one cannot understand the OT unless seen in the light and understanding of the NT. Both are intrinsicly united and what unites them both is Christ Jesus.

I guess, one could be a Christian and still be ignorant of the OT, but that type of Christianity would be weak and very imcomplete, or to use a similie used by John Paul the Great on other aspects of Christianity, it would be like breathing with just one lung.

I am away from my books again so I cannot give anyone refrences to the Pope’s writtings but I am sure if someone is really interested in what our Holy Father teaches on this subject, he or she can certainly “Google” these references. Something I strongly everyone to do, especially all who consider themselves to be an apologist to some degree for what better source is there than the writing of this great theologian, teacher and now our Pope?

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

While it is still sinful, I’d hesisate to insert the death penalty for such as this. I’d have to die a 1000 deaths myself!

Oh dear.

You would be opening a vast can of worms if you thought people can determine what is still relevant in Scriptures, and what has “changed according to the needs of the universe”.

Well, no. To imagine that one can see into the mind of G_d is the height of blasphemy. But to imagine the Word of G_d is inscribed in stone, is also blasphemy. G_d built uncertainty into the universe. Without it, the universe would be utterly pointless, if indeed a universe without uncertainty were possible.

Why, you would see something like 33,000 little denominations pop up, everywhere! Good Lord, I’d hate to see that happen.

All of these sects arise from an illusion of certainty. If everyone accepted the uncertainty, they might in their humility, stop judging that which is different as that which is wrong.

We are far, far, away from over population, no matter what the media claims.

Perhaps in some areas of the USA, that may be the case, but there are many areas on this planet where population us controlled by famine or war. China has already been driven to extreme measures. You might see these measures as evil, but then, some might see the death penalty for ‘spilling seed’ as evil.

Because of that, (and more) I’m faithful that Mr. Malthus is not a prophet of God’s.

This is still a case of man “doing it what it takes to make me feel good”. It has caused the rise of more sinful things than just “spilling the seed”. In a discussion on “the Pill”, a Pope of ours (don’t know, maybe Leo in the 40’s?) stated that the pill would lead to increased promiscuity, a rise in venereal disease, and abortions.

Now, I ask you, who is more than like the prophet?

His Holiness gives advice on moral matters. However, the result of overpopulation, which is already the case in some areas, if not in the backwoods of USA, will have nothing to do with morality. It will be a matter of survival, or extinction. At the very least, it will result in the collapse of civilization.

 

[NotWorthy]

Oh dear.

Yes, you got it. It’s not exactly the most proud aspect of my past, either.

Well, no. To imagine that one can see into the mind of G_d is the height of blasphemy. But to imagine the Word of G_d is inscribed in stone, is also blasphemy. G_d built uncertainty into the universe. Without it, the universe would be utterly pointless, if indeed a universe without uncertainty were possible.

Yes, but until we receive Divine Revelation, we should not change His rules on sin just because we feel it is necessary. You’ve got to admit that the desire for contraception had nothing to do with population control.

All of these sects arise from an illusion of certainty. If everyone accepted the uncertainty, they might in their humility, stop judging that which is different as that which is wrong.

I’m not sure if you’re lumping all the other religious sects together - in that case Amen! But if your lumping the Catholic Church into that group, then that’s just so wrong!

Perhaps in some areas of the USA, that may be the case, but there are many areas on this planet where population us controlled by famine or war. China has already been driven to extreme measures. You might see these measures as evil, but then, some might see the death penalty for ‘spilling seed’ as evil.

There is no population problem. What there is, is a lack of logistics in food distribution. America’s heartland could feed the world if the delivery means were available.

His Holiness gives advice on moral matters. However, the result of overpopulation, which is already the case in some areas, if not in the backwoods of USA, will have nothing to do with morality. It will be a matter of survival, or extinction. At the very least, it will result in the collapse of civilization.

Abortion, Contraception, the rise in Venereal Disease are all moral issues, if you asked me.

 

[Deacon_Joseph]

Dear Friend,
You misunderstand Judaism. Judaism accepts the written Torah, and somewhat like Mother Church, a set of traditions.
Our Lord, however, accepted the written Torah, but rejected out of hand the traditions. This is made clear in the Gospel(s), especially in His damnation of ‘Corban’.
It is more useful to differentiate between Judaism which is the modern derivitive, and Mosaicism, which is a following of the written Torah, which Our Lord clearly accepted.

I stand corrected.