Christianity and the Old Testament

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by ARDY, Jan 21, 2017.

  1. ARDY

    ARDY Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    8,386
    Likes Received:
    1,704
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I was wondering
    Is Christianity dependent upon it roots in the Old Testament?
    In other words, would it be possible to be a Christian while rejecting Judaism and the Old Testament?

    IMO I think that the two are inextricably linked. And so in order to believe in the divinity of Christ, I think one must also accept the Divine origin of the OT and the events within. And, Imo, the events in the OT seem no more credible than Homer's stories in the Odyssey.

    Then, since I find the OT to be not a reflection of GOD,I am forced to the conclusion that Christianity itself is also not the manifestation of GOD that it claims to be.

    Thoughts?
     
    DennisTate likes this.
  2. yardmeat

    yardmeat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    56,151
    Likes Received:
    30,617
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, there was a group of Christians who certainly tried to do without it -- the Marcionites. They believed that the God of the Hebrew scriptures was entirely different from the God of Jesus. I personally agree with the observation that any criticism of the OT should be valid when critiquing Christianity, but just thought I'd throw that out there.
     
  3. Diablo

    Diablo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I've often wondered why Christian sects don't ditch the OT, which is basically the history of the jews, and get rid of all the bad stuff it contains. It would make it much easier to sell their story without all that baggage.
     
  4. BoogyMan

    BoogyMan New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2017
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The OT is not in effect today as Christianity is under a different covenant with God. I cannot imagine why any effort to disregard the OT is needed, however, as it foretells the new covenants coming and presents the lineage of Christ. The OT also teaches much about the character of God that should be studied. Serious exegesis cannot occur in a vacuum without knowledge of history.
     
    Jonsa and yabberefugee like this.
  5. tkolter

    tkolter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,134
    Likes Received:
    598
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    BS the Bible in the OT says he is unchanging so the same OT god is the same NT god, so Jesus if he said his father changed his mind violated scripture so is clearly a false prophet. Of course being a Mythicist I don't believe there was ever an actual historical Jesus so it was a handful of men who made up him and all the scripture likely to get Gentiles into the cult and expand past the Jews started by Paul who was adding into the cadre of the early Church.
     
  6. BoogyMan

    BoogyMan New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2017
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Of course God is the same. I am not sure what about my commentary would have made you think differently. The covenant of the OT was with Israel, not ALL men as is the covenant of the NT. History matters, and it sounds like you might benefit from the actual study of some. :)
     
  7. sdelsolray

    sdelsolray Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2016
    Messages:
    1,322
    Likes Received:
    300
    Trophy Points:
    83
    You apparently assume the Bible is history and not religious myth. Is that the "history [that] matters" to you?

    - - - Updated - - -

    To many (most?) Christians, the NT is tied to the OT, except when it isn't. That way, they can have their cake and eat it too.
     
    FreedomSeeker likes this.
  8. sdelsolray

    sdelsolray Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2016
    Messages:
    1,322
    Likes Received:
    300
    Trophy Points:
    83
    If you get rid of the OT, you delete Genesis, delete Adam & Eve and delete original sin. Then there's nothing for the Jesus sky fairy to save anyone from, no need for his mythical sacrifice and no need for salvation.
     
    FreedomSeeker likes this.
  9. BoogyMan

    BoogyMan New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2017
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I freely admit that Bible history is important to me.

    Can you quote me the passages that Christians look to in order to bolster that belief? If not, you clearly have not done your homework, and therefore are not properly prepared for the discussion.

    - - - Updated - - -

    It would appear that you base your disdain for what you understand as Christianity on the teachings of John Calvin?
     
  10. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The problem is which lineage of Christ?
     
  11. BoogyMan

    BoogyMan New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2017
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am certain that you will expound on your commentary here.
     
  12. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Guno likes this.
  13. Diablo

    Diablo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That's true, I suppose. Maybe they could just edit the nasty bits out of the OT, then?
     
  14. trevorw2539

    trevorw2539 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Messages:
    8,218
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
    christianity relies on the OT for the so-called prophecies of the coming of Jesus. Take these away and you have just a Jewish preacher, which incidentally, I believe he was.
     
  15. trevorw2539

    trevorw2539 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Messages:
    8,218
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's simply the Christian teaching. I find nothing in the OT that foretells the coming of Jesus. A study of the OT shows it is self contained. I know all the so-called references to Jesus claimed by the Church. Taken in context none have any reference to Jesus but to Israel. Neither does the OT teach us much about God. Most of it is myth and stories. What it does teach us is the way that the Hebrews view their 'god' Jahweh. When they did wrong, he punished them. When they did right, he blessed them. Rather like christianity. If they ask for something and it doesn't happen - it's not God's will. If it does, then it is God's will.

    I will agree with you about the need to know the History of the time, but go further in that you need to know the culture and religions of earlier civilisations. This shows quite clearly that much of the early rules and regulations shown in the Pentateuch - particularly Leviticus - were already known and practised by earlier civilisations and assimilated into Judaism under the guise of God's instructions. Forms of the Day of Jubilee, 7th day rest and some Jewish Festivals are among these. And some of these have been translated into the church.
     
  16. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Un Nammu code is fascinating and so much older than Hammurabi.

    http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/Misc/Sumer/ur_nammu_law.htm
     
  17. trevorw2539

    trevorw2539 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Messages:
    8,218
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
  18. BoogyMan

    BoogyMan New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2017
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Reading through that it is interesting and highly assumptive. The most interesting is the unquestioning assumption that the name Jeconiah could not be held by more than one person.
     
  19. BoogyMan

    BoogyMan New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2017
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Isaiah chapter 7, Micah chapter 5, Zechariah chapter 9, Psalms chapter 22, Psalms chapter 41, Isaiah chapter 53 to name a few all refer to the One who would come to redeem all men who would come to Him.

    You choose to discount the lessons to be learned from the OT because there are things that took place outside of its context that are similar? You could justify ANY kind of thinking using that as a guide.
     
  20. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    
    Jehoiachin, son of Jehoiakim and Nehushta, was also called Jeconiah, and Coniah, became king at age 18, but only reigned for three months.

    During his reign the armies, of Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon besieged the city of Jerusalem. Nebuchadnezzar himself arrived during the siege, and king Jehoiachin, all of his officials, and the queen mother surrendered to him.

    The surrender was accepted, and Jehoiachin was imprisoned in Babylon during the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign (2 Kings 24:10-12).

    Then the king of Babylon appointed Jehoiachin's uncle, Mattaniah, to be the next king, and changed his name to Zedekiah.

    While in exile throughout the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Jehoiachin remained in prison, but after Nebuchadnezzar's death, he was brought to the royal palace by the new King Evil-Merodach (2 Kings 25:27-30), and he was treated as a royal hostage receiving daily rations from the king at whose table he dined.


    The story of Jehoiachin is found in 2 Kings 24:6-15. The name Jehoiachin means "God will establish."
     
  21. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This may help with Jeconiah:

    http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/jeconiah/
     
  22. BoogyMan

    BoogyMan New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2017
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am not certain where you are going with the quote from the Old Testament. Are you defending the only one person throughout history will have the name Jeconiah idea?

    Also, you ARE aware of the idea that the Christ had only one earthly human parent, correct? His earthly parent was Mary who was of the lineage of David.
     
  23. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, and we have just come back to two lineages.
     
  24. BoogyMan

    BoogyMan New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2017
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    We dispensed with that based on the lineage listed based on father or mother.
     
  25. trevorw2539

    trevorw2539 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Messages:
    8,218
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Jeconiah is listed as part of the lineage in Matthew. If it were another Jeconiah it would not be listed. In any case Matthews lineage is wrong. He misses out 3 kings who were particularly wicked, which gives us doubt as to the rest of the lineage. 70 years in Babylon without a king. Switching to High Priests after the Exile. Then 150 years of the chaotic Maccabean period, when High Priests switched regularly and ditto under the Romans. Matthews genealogy is partly factual, partly fictional.
    Luke's genealogy comes through Nathan who tried to trick Solomon and his line was excluded from producing any king. And Jesus is to be a King/Messiah.
    Matthew compiles his genealogy from what he has been taught as a youth. Many Jews do not now believe people like Abraham actually existed. And there is no evidence that they actually did. Luke from secondhand information.
     

Share This Page