Get rid of 39 books of OT - or accept all as scripture - the Word of God for the saints?

trophy33

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2018
9,262
3,694
N/A
✟150,481.00
Country
Czech Republic
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
What is your point??
My point is that the NT scriptures you provided cannot be used just for some selection of the OT scriptures, like "just the ten commandments" or "just the Sabbath".

My point is that the OT text itself is accepted by NT writers as scripture for NT saints.
And what is your conclusion then? What is the purpose of this thread? That we should obey the whole OT?
 
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
5,174
1,389
Perth
✟127,647.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Some would argue we need to dump 39 books of the bible - since the rise of the NONES (those that walk away from religion) has risen to 20-29% in America these days - maybe we should should not tether Christianity to the Bible so closely. Allow for things to drop off -- like the entire OT or the Gospels before the cross or the creation week or ... (it is pretty much endless).
Evangelism need not involve great huge gobs of bible passages from the KJV quoted at people. Some use such techniques. It may work for a few.

Evangelism works better when it piques interest, a wall-poster with an issue that is seen as offering an answer to a common difficulty such as finding a vocabulary for morals oriented discussions. And seeing that a church is alive and active while also being filled with ordinary people may help much more than seeing one that is filled with dour moralists with a very religious vocabulary.

Having a bible with 39 old testament books ought not be an impediment for evangelism, my bible has 43 old testament books and it presents no problems in evangelism. But, maybe some are embarrassed by the old testament.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,466
26,895
Pacific Northwest
✟732,554.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
And what is your conclusion then? What is the purpose of this thread? That we should obey the whole OT?

Just the parts the OP's sect says we're supposed to obey. Totally and completely arbitrarily. Because a 19th century false prophet said so and if you don't, you are worshiping the Beast.

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Winner
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
28,317
13,539
72
✟370,314.00
Faith
Non-Denom
The New Testament is many books with 100's more commandments than the OT. What is your point??

True - it says "all scripture" - and that is specifically including the scriptures known to Timothy prior to being converted to Christianity according to Paul in 2 Tim 3: 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus

Context is king when it comes to interpretation

1. I never say that here and have not said it anywhere else. Have you read the OP?
2. My point is that the OT text itself is accepted by NT writers as scripture for NT saints. Have you read the first page?

2 Tim 3:
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
As someone once said, "Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones." The SDA has no more real intent of obeying all of the OT commandments than any other denomination. Like all others, it picks and chooses which commandments it considers to be valid.
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,194
5,710
49
The Wild West
✟476,728.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
The OP has a point, for as @HTacianas pointed out, it is true there are False Gospels as St. Paul warns in Galatians 1:8-9, specifically, in Greek, St. Paul used a word that can mean “traditioned” so the verses can be read that if anyone preaches against the Gospel handed down from the Apostles and thus the Early Church, essentially, the traditional theology of the Christian Church we find expressed most clearly in the liturgical churches, such as Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and Continuing Anglicans of the Anglo Catholic persuasion, some of whom recognize seven sacraments (I am curious if my friend @Shane R falls into this category).

Thus, building on the above, one of the ancient heresies that preached a false gospel was Marcionism, founded by a shipping tycoon named Marcion who unsuccessfully tried to buy his way into the Roman Church, who refunded his donation after he began preaching his heretical doctrine, that the God of the Old Testament was different from the Father of Jesus Christ. Later he published his own “bible” consisting only of mutilated versions of the Gospel of Luke and some of the Pauline Epistles with all references to the Old Testament eliminated, which is ironic, since the authentic Gospel of Luke concludes with our Lord revealing that the entire Old Testament is about Him. Likewise the Gnostic heretics believed that God in the Old Testament was an incompetent demiurge who created the material world, which is a prison which Christ was sent to liberate us from, so we could ascend to the spiritual Pleroma, or fullness.

It is a fact, as @BobRyan asserted, that there are neo-Marcionists and crypto Marcionists who downplay the Old Testament, because of its prohibitions of homosexuality and other moral transgressions, and they also downplay the Pauline Epistles. These ultraliberal theologians in many cases would probably be most satisfied with a Unitarian Universalist sort of false gospel, something like the Jefferson Bible, Thomas Jefferson’s grotesque edit of the canonical Gospels into what is called a Gospel Harmony, which makes the mediocre Diatessaron edited by Tatian before the latter embraced Gnosticism and founded his own cult, which was used by Orthodox Syriac speaking churches in the East until the translation of the Vetus Syra*

Conversely, we also have the problem of Christians who overvalue the Old Testament relative to the New and forget what St. Luke wrote in his inspired Gospel, that the risen Lord Jesus Christ showed the Apostles how the Old Testament, the Law and the Prophets as our Lord tends to call it, is entirely a prophecy concerning His incarnation, passion and resurrection. This corresponds to certain sects in the Early Cnurch like the Ebionites, who insisted on observing the entire Torah, contrary to Acts 15, also written by St. Luke interestingly enough. Whereas the Gospel of Mark tells the basic story of the Incarnation, and the Gospel of Matthew shows where the events of the Incarnation were prophesized, and the Gospel of John reveals who Jesus Christ is, being a work of high theology and Christology, it is the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles that, written in beautiful Greek with Luke 1 and 2 containing the wonderful songs known as the Evangelical Canticles sung at Morning and Evening Prayer in the Anglican, Roman and Orthodox traditions, the Benedictus, Magnificat, and Nunc Dimitis, that is also most useful when it comes to correcting errors and also the heresies spread by wolves in sheeps’ clothing, as our Lord calls them. For example, the rejection of the veneration of the Theotokos is refuted by the Magnificat, and a non-Christological reading of the Old Testament is refuted by Luke 24:25-49

*This was the Old Syriac translation of each of the four Gospels, supplementing the Syriac Aramaic Old Testament included in the Peshitta but dating from the second century, and the Aramaic Targumim, which were interpreted paraphrases originally read in the Synagogues during the Second Temple era after the Hebrew scriptures were read, as the Jews by that time no longer used Hebrew as a vernacular language and predominantly spoke and understood Aramaic.

The Vetus Syra Gospels are particularly interesting because unlike the Peshitta, the main Syriac Bible which mostly agrees with the Byzantine text type, they follow the Western Text Type also used by the Vetus Latina, the original translation of the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) and the Greek New Testament into Latin, which was mostly replaced by the Vulgate translated from Henrew, Aramaic and Greek by St. Jerome, due to the transition from Classical to Vulgar Latin and a desire for a more robust translation. However, parts of the Vetus Latina remain staples of the liturgy of the Western Church even today, for example, “Gloria in Excelsis Deo,” from the Latin mass, and also a prominent feature of a popular Protestant Christmas hymn, is from the Vetus Latina, as the stylistic elegance of its Classical Latin far outshines the Vulgate rendering of the same “Gloria in Altissimus Deo.”

Of course, the differences between the three ancient text types (all of which refer to the New Testament), the Western, the Byzantine and the Alexandrian, are frankly overblown, and the historical dominance of the Byzantine text type due to the KJV and its use in the Greek Orthodox Church and influence on the Peshitta, the Coptic Bibles and the Vulgate, is not to be fretted about; neither is the current preference among translators for the “Minority Text” which is to say the Alexandrian text type derived from three manuscripts, that much to be concerned with, since the differences are subtle. A much more severe problem with some recent translations like the NRSVue is politically correct translation which is inaccurate on the basis of Formal Equivalence, but sneaks in through the back door opened by accident through the initially well intentioned approach of Dynamic Equivalence, but of course the latter is truly valid only when it agrees with the former, and merely renders certain phrases and idioms in a manner more comprehensible in modern languages.
 
Upvote 0

Shane R

Priest
Site Supporter
Jan 18, 2012
2,282
1,102
Southeast Ohio
✟567,760.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
some of whom recognize seven sacraments
Yes. In fact, Melancthon too had an inclusive view of the sacraments and suggested that 8 or more could be counted. He counted preaching as the 8th sacrament, though I don't recall what he identified as the visible sign in that instance.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,194
5,710
49
The Wild West
✟476,728.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Yes. In fact, Melancthon too had an inclusive view of the sacraments and suggested that 8 or more could be counted. He counted preaching as the 8th sacrament, though I don't recall what he identified as the visible sign in that instance.
Fascinating. That said it also sounds like he may have had a low or Zwinglian view? Or perhaps the word “sign” in a sacramental context makes me excessively jumpy for fear of accidental Zwinglianism, except, for example, when we make the sign of the cross over the Chalice and Paten during the Anaphora.
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,844
1,311
sg
✟217,941.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
At the end of Matthew we find this statement in Matt 28
Matt 28:​
. 18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them

What is the difference between this "them" and the other "them" in Matthew 19:28?

And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

If we are so sure that the "them" in this verse cannot possibly be referring to us, how come we are so sure that the "them" in Matthew 28:18-20 refers to us as well?
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,371
10,611
Georgia
✟913,276.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
What is the difference between this "them" and the other "them" in Matthew 19:28?
In Matt 28:19
Matt 28:
16 But the eleven disciples proceeded to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had designated to them. 17 And when they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful. 18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. 19 Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to follow all that I commanded you; and behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.


That Is Christ telling His disciples to teach everyone else on planet Earth -- what He taught the disciples.

(Which is what Luke is doing for example - in the Gospel of Luke).

In Matt 19:28 we have -
27 Then Peter responded and said to Him, “Behold, we have left everything and followed You; what then will there be for us?” 28 And Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or farms on account of My name, will receive many times as much, and will inherit eternal life. 30 But many who are first will be last; and the last, first.

Peter is with the 12 in Matt 19 asking Christ about the group following Christ - and Christ said "to them" - those with Peter. But in Matt 28:19 the "them" are those who hear through the preaching of the disciples.

If we are so sure that the "them" in this verse cannot possibly be referring to us, how come we are so sure that the "them" in Matthew 28:18-20 refers to us as well?
The them in Matt 28 is all who would be reached by Gospel preaching.

The "Them" in Matt 19:28 is the group standing their with Peter - but then it goes on to include all that make that same decision to forsake all and follow Christ.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,371
10,611
Georgia
✟913,276.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The OP has a point, for as @HTacianas pointed out, it is true there are False Gospels as St. Paul warns in Galatians 1:8-9, specifically, in Greek, St. Paul used a word that can mean “traditioned” so the verses can be read that if anyone preaches against the Gospel handed down from the Apostles

On the contrary. He says "though WE (apostles) or an angel from heaven" should preach anything other than what we have as the NT teaching of the first century apostles in the NT - then let them be accursed.

In 2 Thess 2:1-3 Paul is very concerned that fake letters claiming to be written by an apostle such as himself might be received and accepted. He warns the church not to accept them by giving them that letter of 1 Thess and 2 Thess. Those NT letters protect us from all the fake stuff that floats around.

IN Mark 7:6-13 Jesus flat out condemns all traditions of the magesterium of the one true nation-church of his day that fail to pass the sola-scriptura test of scripture that He applies in Mark 7:6-13.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,371
10,611
Georgia
✟913,276.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
It is a fact, as @BobRyan asserted, that there are neo-Marcionists and crypto Marcionists who downplay
I am pretty sure I never use such terms.. just for the record

the Old Testament, because of its prohibitions of homosexuality and other moral transgressions, and they also downplay the Pauline Epistles.
Yes that is true - I see evidence of a lot of skeptics and doubters and it is not just Sam Harris but also those that read him even in Christian communities it seems.
Conversely, we also have the problem of Christians who overvalue the Old Testament relative to the New and forget what St. Luke wrote in his inspired Gospel, that the risen Lord Jesus Christ showed the Apostles how the Old Testament, the Law and the Prophets as our Lord tends to call it, is entirely a prophecy concerning His incarnation, passion and resurrection.

Luke reminds us in Luke 24 that the OT scriptures are to be trusted and that they are in what Luke calls "all the scripture" - a term used by Luke and known to his readers.

Luke 24:25 And then He said to them, “You foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to come into His glory?” 27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the Prophets, He explained to them the things written about Himself in all the Scriptures.​

But the really interesting part of this according to Luke - is that Christ does NOT reveal THE CHRIST who is speaking to them - He leaves them uninformed as to who it is that speaks to them so that they ONLY Focus "The scriptures" and NOT the CHRIST that is directly speaking to them. Jesus wanted their faith based in the OT text first.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,371
10,611
Georgia
✟913,276.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
What are you trying to say?

The Old Testament Scriptures are many books with hundreds of commandments.

The New Testament is many books with 100's more commandments than the OT. What is your point??
2 Tim 3:16 does not say "Only ten commandments are God-breathed"

True - it says "all scripture" - and that is specifically including the scriptures known to Timothy prior to being converted to Christianity according to Paul in 2 Tim 3: 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus

Context is king when it comes to interpretation

. You cannot use this verse for adding just keeping the Sabbath to Christianity.
1. I never say that here and have not said it anywhere else. Have you read the OP?
2. My point is that the OT text itself is accepted by NT writers as scripture for NT saints. Have you read the first page?

2 Tim 3:
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
As someone once said, "Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones." The SDA has no more real intent of obeying all of the OT commandments than any other denomination. Like all others, it picks and chooses which commandments it considers to be valid.
Aside from a few false accusations - did you have a point?
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,371
10,611
Georgia
✟913,276.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Just the parts the OP's sect says we're supposed to obey. Totally and completely arbitrarily. Because a 19th century false prophet said so

Please quote that section of the OP that references a 19th century prophet (of any sort -- false or not)... or do you really claim to believe the scriptures quoted in the OP were all written by a 19th century prophet?

IF so - I find your logic tragically flawed at that point.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,371
10,611
Georgia
✟913,276.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Evangelism need not involve great huge gobs of bible passages from the KJV quoted at people.
Thanks.

I was not sure you would be signing up for that at first.

Having a bible with 39 old testament books ought not be an impediment for evangelism,
one would think.

my bible has 43 old testament books and it presents no problems in evangelism
Well the "fear" that was being promoted by the speaker in question was that the "NONE"s in America were exploding to almost 30% of the population in something like 20 years. He was concerned that the Sam Harris's of this age might be getting the upper hand if he did not tell his church members to amputate the Old Testament and anything in the NT that Same might go after because Christianity just needed one of the Gospels to be true.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,371
10,611
Georgia
✟913,276.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
My point is that the NT scriptures you provided cannot be used just for some selection of the OT scriptures, like "just the ten commandments" or "just the Sabbath".
That is not how I am using them. I am using the examples to show that NT saints accepted the OT as scripture.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SeventhFisherofMen

You cannot fool Jesus
Christian Forums Staff
Red Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Jan 9, 2013
3,401
1,619
32
CA
✟401,989.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Separated
Politics
US-Republican
"Jesus loves me this I know - for the Bible tells me so" -


Some would argue we need to dump 39 books of the bible - since the rise of the NONES (those that walk away from religion) has risen to 20-29% in America these days - maybe we should should not tether Christianity to the Bible so closely. Allow for things to drop off -- like the entire OT or the Gospels before the cross or the creation week or ... (it is pretty much endless).

(For a video example of a guy slam-hammering the "Jesus loves Me..for the Bible tells me so" form of accepting the Bible -- see this post on this same page same thread #15 )

At the end of Matthew we find this statement in Matt 28
Matt 28:​
16 But the eleven disciples proceeded to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had designated to them. 17 And when they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful. 18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. 19 Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to follow all that I commanded you; and behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”​
That Matt 28:19-20 statement is NOT of the form
"forget all that I have commanded you... from now on make up a new set of teachings"

Some will say to take the scissors out at the point of - these verses to divide OT and NT (OC and NC?)

Matthew 27:50​
Mark 15:37​
Luke 23:46​
John 19:30​

Such that following the teaching that find prior to that point is to choose to be under the Old Covenant rather than the New Covenant.

Which misses the point that Matt 1:1 is years AFTER the ascension of Christ and is in direct response to the Matt 28:20 command of Christ.

And in Matt 24 we have this
14 This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.​
Not some other gospel - but the one Jesus was preaching in Matt 24.

And so years LATER after the ascension of Christ - they are doing that very thing by writing the GOSPEL of Matt, Mark, Luke, John.

Heb 1 says that in the past God spoke through prophets but in this New Testament His SON came directly to Earth and spoke to us. I.E those Gospel accounts that some views are so anxious to distance themselves from.

John 17 Jesus said that He promised life not just to those who heard him then but to all who would believe through their word as eye witnesses of Christ and His teaching.

No wonder then in Luke 24 when Christ appears to His disciples on the road to Emaus - He does not reveal Himself directly to them. Rather "beginning with Moses and the prophets He

25 And then He said to them, “You foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to come into His glory?” 27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the Prophets, He explained to them the things written about Himself in all the Scriptures.

In every case in the NEW Testament where we see the term "scriptures" it always includes all of the 39 books of the Hebrew Bible and in some cases it includes the NT Letters as we see in 2 Peter 3.

===================

In Genesis 1 - 3 we have the Bible teaching on marriage, on gender, on the weekly holy day, on the fall of mankind into sin, the need of the gospel , the doctrine on origins etc.
I haven't heard anyone say that we should get rid of over half the Bible. Who is saying this?
 
Upvote 0

trophy33

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2018
9,262
3,694
N/A
✟150,481.00
Country
Czech Republic
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The New Testament is many books with 100's more commandments than the OT. What is your point??


True - it says "all scripture" - and that is specifically including the scriptures known to Timothy prior to being converted to Christianity according to Paul in 2 Tim 3: 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus

Context is king when it comes to interpretation


1. I never say that here and have not said it anywhere else. Have you read the OP?
2. My point is that the OT text itself is accepted by NT writers as scripture for NT saints. Have you read the first page?

2 Tim 3:
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

There is no reason to repeat our conversation just few posts back in the past.
 
Upvote 0

trophy33

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2018
9,262
3,694
N/A
✟150,481.00
Country
Czech Republic
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
That is not how I am using them. I am using the examples to show that NT saints accepted the OT as scripture.
Christianity accepts that OT writings are Scripture. But your point is...? To keep Sabbath, I guess. And we get to the beginning of this thread, again.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,194
5,710
49
The Wild West
✟476,728.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
I am pretty sure I never use such terms.. just for the record

You didn’t, but that is the technical way of referring to someone who advocates the essential premise that the Old Testament is false or irrelevant to Christians or that it depicts a different deity, most closely associated with its chief proponent in antiquity, the heretic Marcion.

Thus, you and I are obviously not Marcionites, but any time you come across someone talking about how God in the Old Testament is different from in the New Testament and espouses negative values, for example, there was a famous English author who in blasphemous ignorance referred to God as depicted in the Old Testament as “the most unpleasant character in all of literature.” This is a classical expression of Marcionite heresy. A few years back I read a comment posted in reply to a very good Christian blog run by the Antiochian Orthodox theologian Archpriest Andrew S. Damick, in which the commentator expressed a Marcionite view of the Old Testament, prompting the blogger to ask in jest “How is the shipping business these days?”
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,194
5,710
49
The Wild West
✟476,728.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
I am pretty sure I never use such terms.. just for the record


Yes that is true - I see evidence of a lot of skeptics and doubters and it is not just Sam Harris but also those that read him even in Christian communities it seems.


Luke reminds us in Luke 24 that the OT scriptures are to be trusted and that they are in what Luke calls "all the scripture" - a term used by Luke and known to his readers.

Luke 24:25 And then He said to them, “You foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to come into His glory?” 27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the Prophets, He explained to them the things written about Himself in all the Scriptures.​

But the really interesting part of this according to Luke - is that Christ does NOT reveal THE CHRIST who is speaking to them - He leaves them uninformed as to who it is that speaks to them so that they ONLY Focus "The scriptures" and NOT the CHRIST that is directly speaking to them. Jesus wanted their faith based in the OT text first.

Indeed. The reason why our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ wanted the Apostles focused on the Old Testament text was so they could fully appreciate who He befoee He became known to them in the breaking of bread, and later invited the Apostles to see his wounds, and we know from the Gospel of John that St. Thomas the Apostle who evangelized Edessa, Mesopotamia and India, after expressing doubt, was invited to touch the wounds of Christ.

In a recent homily for St. Thomas Sunday, also known as Low Sunday or Antipascha, basically the first Sunday after Easter, that I listened to as I enjoy my fellow presbyter who runs that church, my colleague in his sermon spoke of how St. Thomas frequently appears in that role, appearing at the end of events in the Gospels in such a way as to validate their occurrence. He also noted that there were more than 500 accounts of the Resurrection, when as is widely known historians consider three independent accounts to be strong historical evidence.

It amazes me that people doubt the Resurrection given that the Hebrew Prophets predicted it and so many independent eyewitness accounts were preserved, not to mention second and third hand accounts, yet they accept without question historical statements about, for instance, the political intrigues of Octavius against Marc Antony or the execution of Socrates, or indeed the teachings of Socrates, when we have vastly fewer sources. Indeed concerning Socratic philosophy, most of what we think we know about it comes from Plato, and he and an obscure student of Socrates named Xenophon wrote slightly conflicting accounts of the execution of Socrates, but concerning the doctrine of Socrates, as this is contained in Plato’s dialogues, philosophers are forced to admit we do not know how much is actually Socratic vs. what Plato imagined Socrates would have said, that is to say, fiction.

This is in contrast to the sacred scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, which owing to their Divine inspiration, if one uses the correct translation interpreted correctly, are the most genuine expression of Divine Truth next to the incarnate Word of God they exist to prophesize, narrate the biography and doctrine of, and provide the basic information, through the Gospels and Apostles, on how to obtain salvation through the infinite and uncreated grace of the one God, who is Love.

Thus returning to your point, if we discard the Old Testament, we discard the prophecy of the Incarnation of the Word, which undermines the credibility of the New Testament, and we also discard an essential understanding of the optimal moral values we are to strive for, and why we need forgiveness from God due to our inability to live up to even the easiest of commandments, like “Don’t eat from that one tree,” and at the same time, the infinite mercy of God, who keeps helping Israel again and again despite their continual breaking of their covenants with Him.
 
Upvote 0