Poll: Is Christianity Based On NT or the Entire Bible?

rahmiyn · #31 8th October 2009, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by JTornado1

Although Christianity is based mostly on the NT, the NT quotes the OT approximately 300 times. For example, Revelation quotes heavily from Ezekiel, Isaiah, and Daniel.

But, still, when Jesus outright refutes "eye for an eye," he seems to be saying we can't trust the spirit in which some of the OT is written.

We have to measure every scripture against his two love commandments. It's what he he kept doing in his debates with the Pharisees, by telling the Good Samaritan story, and by most of what he taught in Matthew chapter 5.

I love the Old Testament, but when I read something I simply cannot square with Jesus' two love commandments, I leave it be and pray that God will honor my ignoring those parts and still accept me if my earnest desire is to follow Jesus on these things.

trentlogain2 · #32 1st November 2009, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by marlowe007

It's clear that Jesus himself didn't follow the OT, since according to the Gospels he repeatedly denied the law. He taught against the lex talionis, and against Moses' legislation concerning divorce. He abrogated the dietary laws (Mark 7:18-22). He prevented the law from being applied (John 8:7). He rejected the law and the prophets entirely, making them a thing of the past (Luke 16:16). He also violated the sabbath - that is, the 4th commandment - and defended his disciples when they did the same.

I realize I'm talking to someone who doesn't believe that The Bible is inerrant, doesn't believe in the reality of a physical place called hell, and who knows what else. I just wanted to God's word use us (at least me) with the following passage -

17"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." - Matthew 5:17,18

trentlogain2 · #33 1st November 2009, 03:07 PM

Lastly, I agree with what someone has already posted. I have a difficult time with people who call themselves Christian who deny the entire 66 book Bible.

I want to put Isaiah 53 out there. Who was the prophet talking about there?

TR1 · #34 20th November 2009, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by marlowe007

It's clear that Jesus himself didn't follow the OT, since according to the Gospels he repeatedly denied the law. He taught against the lex talionis, and against Moses' legislation concerning divorce. He abrogated the dietary laws (Mark 7:18-22). He prevented the law from being applied (John 8:7). He rejected the law and the prophets entirely, making them a thing of the past (Luke 16:16). He also violated the sabbath - that is, the 4th commandment - and defended his disciples when they did the same.

how can you say that jesus did not follow the law and with all your references you have shown that the law is basically void and no longer appropriate, very similar to norm and mainstream belief through pauls teachings...

what is your interpretation of the Matthew 5:17... jesus has said he comes not to abolish the law but to fulfill it... you cannot state that its is not viable if jesus says himself it is and in other places all the things you have qouted are contradicted... if the law is to be fulfiled and reinstated, i know historically people were going away from the message, then how can it be that everything is gone...

seems like another lost translation which is making us confused today... for me, both texts should be considered in its entirity or remove it from the chrisitian bible... is it only there to prove what mainstream christianity wants...???

be careful what selected qoutes you use or are taught as other qoutes show the absolute contrast, please.

TR1 · #35 20th November 2009, 02:56 PM

Originally Posted by trentlogain2

Lastly, I agree with what someone has already posted. I have a difficult time with people who call themselves Christian who deny the entire 66 book Bible.

I want to put Isaiah 53 out there. Who was the prophet talking about there?

i think it is the same as the prophet in dueteronomy 18:18 and throughout john 14, 16 and various other places...

the attributation of the holy spirit to the spirit of truth that jesus spoke of is not feasible which is why i dont believe it... the bible i full of attributes of this prophet, comforter, messenger, whatever you wish to call it based on your version of the bible... apply them all to historical figures and only one matches them all thus fulfilling the prophecy...

i urge you to try

marlowe007 · #36 21st November 2009, 07:14 PM

Originally Posted by TR1

what is your interpretation of the Matthew 5:17... jesus has said he comes not to abolish the law but to fulfill it... you cannot state that its is not viable if jesus says himself it is and in other places all the things you have qouted are contradicted... if the law is to be fulfiled and reinstated, i know historically people were going away from the message, then how can it be that everything is gone...

That verse might be spurious - many scholars doubt that it goes back to Jesus - but he does repeatedly and approvingly cite the Hebrew scriptures. He throws out what he doesn't like ("an eye for an eye," for example), but he's happy with "love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and all thy mind, and all thy strength." (Deuteronomy 6:5.) He abolishes kashrut, but he gladly quotes "Man does not live by bread alone." (Deut. 8:3.) He breaks the sabbath, but he calls the shma (Deut. 6:4) "the first of all the commandments." In short, the Gospels show Jesus taking a critical and selective attitude to the law. Of course that's a violation in itself, according to the Torah.