Runboard.com
Слава Україні!



Runboard.com       Registered Members Will See No Ads - CLICK TO REGISTER FOR FREE  LOGIN

Page  1  2  3  4 

 
Riane Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Member
 


Registered: 04-2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 87
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???


I can provide a basic response to your question, Addi (although the question really does require extensive research).

Firstly, as this is something you've brought up, here is the verse in Deuteronomy 22:28-29 ~ If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for her has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

The first thing to note is that this is a culturally-specific social law. At this time in Jewish history, women were dependent on either their father/family or their husband for protection and material provision, and a woman who was unmarried and not a virgin would most likely end up destitute. The law is not saying that rape is permissable, but is simply providing a form of social justice for a woman who would otherwise have no way of providing for herself, who would have had to suffer the consequences both of rape and of poverty. We can see here that rape is certainly a wrong - a sin, if you will (that is, it is sexual immorality) - but this law speaks specifically to provide provision for the victim of the crime in the cultural setting.

The following verses in Matthew give a general statement of the point I've been attempting to make about Jesus coming to fulfill the Law:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. Matt 5:17-20

Some background here is probably necessary: in Jesus' day, the Pharisees and the teachers of the law were incredibly legalistic and hypocritical; they were lovely and pious on the outside, but their hearts were full of sin (they wanted to kill Jesus, they weighed the people down with tradition and ritual as if that alone would save them). In the section of the book of Matthew following this (up to the beginning of chapter 7), Jesus expands on the statement he has given here by moving from the externals of the law to its heart.

In the verses above, Jesus is confirming that he didn't come to do away with the law because it was relevant or outdated, but that he came to fufill the law and see that it's deeper purpose was fulfilled. The last verse in the above extract about righteouness needing to be greater than the Pharisees is advocating that true righteouness goes beyond the outward sham that the Phraisees portrayed to real, deep, inner righteousness. Not surprisingly, the only way this kind of righteousness can be achieved is through Jesus sacrifice on the cross (which is explained elsewhere in the NT).

A specific example of the kind of the teaching Jesus put forth about the law can be found in Matt 15, where Jesus was confronted by the Pharisees who wanted to know why his disciples broke with tradition and did not wash their hands before they ate. Jesus responded: "Listen and understand. What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean', but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean'." Here, Jesus was going beyond the teaching of the law that said a person must wash themself before eating and showed that what was more important was that a person's heart (and hence what comes out of their mouth) will make them unclean more than what is on their hands will make them unclean. Hence, he showed the deeper and more important significance of that particular law.

In a sense, the standard that Jesus called his followers to in the NT is higher than that of the OT, because it required inward righteousness rather than simply outward righteousness. The result of inward righteousness is, of course, that this will be reflected on the outside also - and not in whether a person keeps the ritual aspects of the law (although there is nothing inherently wrong with doing so), but rather in whether the person demonstrates an understanding of the spirit of the law that was summed up in 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart, sould and mind; and love your neighbour as yourself'.

There are numerous other places in the gospels and other books of the NT where issues of ritual and social custom came up as points of contention, but in each case either Jesus or the apostles pointed again to the more important fact: that a person's heart is right before God.

In regard to the difference between the moral law and the ritual and social laws found in the first five books of the OT (which were regarded by the Jews under the title of the 'Law'), the biggest distinguishing factor I can see between the Ten Commandments and the dietary and social laws is that God himself is recorded as writing the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone with his fingers, and the dietary and social laws were given to the people through Moses. I do believe that the OT laws given by Moses were divinely inspired, but I think it is important to take into account the New Covenant revelation and the issues discussed above in regard to the fulfillment of the Law by Jesus. Jesus did state that the greatest commandments were those mentioned above about love; but he also used the Ten Commandments to bring about the knowledge of sin in individual lives.

With regard to the difference between the social law about rape victims and that regarding homosexuality is that homosexuality is also mentioned in the New Testament as being unnatural and sexually immoral. I know that many here would not agree with that assessment, but I'm simply pointing out the difference between the two examples you gave - in the Bible's framework the former is viewed as a social law providing for victims of rape, and the latter as sin.

---
Reading: Burn Bright by Marianne de Pierres
My writing blog
The Fantasy Writers' Library
30/Nov/05, 4:05 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
Addi Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
 

Runboard user emeritus

Registered: 11-2004
Location: US
Posts: 681
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???



Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. Matt 5:17-20



I see nothing in this passage that condones ignoring parts of the original testament. Quite the opposite - it states "until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

What that says to me is that the old testament laws are to be followed, completely, until the Apocolypes ('as I checked, heaven and earth hadn't disappeared yet. though with the day I've had, it's possible... emoticon ).

You said to give you time on that one, and I shall. I've often wondered how Christians decide which parts of the OT are valid to their faith and which are not.

I won't get into translation issues regarding homosexuality in the NT - we'll save that debate for another day.

I will, however, point out that the story of creation is in the OT.
1/Dec/05, 0:54 Link to this post PM 
 
Riane Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Member
 


Registered: 04-2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 87
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???



I see nothing in this passage that condones ignoring parts of the original testament.


You're right - it doesn't talk about ignoring parts of the OT. But I wasn't advocating that this is what the New Covenant says we should do (and the New Covenant is what is revealed in the NT). Perhaps some definitions would be useful here to clarify exactly what this passage means.

The word translated 'abolish' comes from the Greek kataluo meaning to disintegrate, demolish, throw down. So looking at v17 of the passage in Matt, we can see that Jesus is first saying that he didn't come to demolish or disintegrate the Law or the Prophets (meaning the Pentateuch and the books of prophecy).

Additionally, the word translated 'fulfil' comes from the Greek pleroo meaning to furnish, satisfy, finish or complete. Keeping these in mind we can see that the verse is saying that Jesus did not come to destroy or remove the law, but to bring it's purpose to completion.

In various places in the OT and the NT (Lev. 18:5, Ezek. 11:19-20; Rom. 7:10), it is mentioned that God's purpose in giving the Law was to bring life and reflect his holiness. However, because sin entered the world, the law brought about the knowledge of what sin was (Rom 3:20 - Therefore now one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.) The law in itself was not enough to bring about the righteousness required by God. That is where what Jesus did on the cross comes in:

For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit. Rom. 8:3-4


I've often wondered how Christians decide which parts of the OT are valid to their faith and which are not.


What I've been trying to point out is that I don't consider any part of the OT invalid to my faith, but that because I am no longer under the Old Covenant (because what Jesus did brought in the New Covenant), then I am not under obligation to follow the letter of the law with regard to rituals and social customs. The book of Hebrews talks about this in particular, and it's worth quoting a decent section here (the first section is a quote from the OT which appears in Hebrews):

"The time is coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel... It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them... I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God and they will be my people... For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sin no more."

By calling this covenant 'new', he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon dissapear.
Heb. 8:8-13.

(Note: I realise that this passage in particular mentions Israel but not the Gentiles (non-Jews). However, as found elsewhere in the NT, the Gentiles are able to come under this new covenant and so in a sense become part of Israel in that the nation was designated as God's chosen people.)

The last section in particular (which I've put in bold) is what is particularly interesting here to our discussion. The word translated 'obsolete' from the Greek palaioo means to make worn out, or to make old. In this context, we can see then that there is reason for the Christian under the new covenant not to be bound by the OT law in terms of observance of rituals. There are various examples given throughout the NT of such rituals, including that mentioned in my previous post regarding the washing of hands, and other places that discuss circumcision, foods to be eaten and the like.


What that says to me is that the old testament laws are to be followed, completely, until the Apocolypes


In the light of what I’ve discussed above, the verse in Matthew above can be interpreted appropriately in the overall context of the NT. The following is from a commentary that explains how v19 works in particular (which talks about not breaking the law):

The commandments are to be obeyed as explained and fulfilled by Jesus' life and teaching, not as in the legalistic thinking of the religious authorities of Jesus' day. For example, sacrifice was commanded by the law, but it was fulfilled in Jesus; so we do not run the danger of being called least in the kingdom of heaven by not observing animal sacrifice as detailed in the law of Moses.

The law will serve its purpose up until the time when Jesus returns and everyone on earth faces the judgement, and once the judgement has occured then the law will no longer be necessary.

Pulling together what we've looked at from Matthew, Romans and Hebrews, the picture that emerges is that while the OT law is still useful for identifying sin in a person, what Jesus did completed the purpose of the law (that being to bring life). While the law wasn't destroyed by what Jesus did, it has become worn out and the new covenant has taken its place. That new covenant involves God writing his moral law on people's hearts through the Spirit (the Holy Spirit that is, the third person of the Trinity).

Now I do realise that for the uninitiated, a lot of what I've put above may well not make a great deal of sense. Having grown up in the Church, I know that there is much that I understand because I've been exposed to it for such a long time, and other things because I've done both formal and personal study on these things. If there is anything that needs clarification for the purposes of understanding this discussion, feel welcome to ask - or even read and do your own personal study.

---
Reading: Burn Bright by Marianne de Pierres
My writing blog
The Fantasy Writers' Library
2/Dec/05, 15:11 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
Nektamakin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Member
 


Registered: 11-2005
Posts: 14
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???


there were many long winded posts on this subject, it was great, lots of awesome points and good facts aswell as countless things to comment on. i cant possibly comment on everything so i'll get right down to the subject. most of today's christians use the OT for some kind of bed time story for thier kids. good morals like asops fables (correct spelling eludes me). all the best stories from childhood are there with everything you need to know about being a humble, god fearing adult.

some one asked how do they decide which parts in the OT to keep and which parts to take out. the U.S.A. has perfected this art with the constitution for hundreds of years. by careful, smooth white-out strokes, and simply turning away from the real problem. i have 2 things to comment on since i'm at the end of my two cents worth.

The Bible Code: Yes, there is something fishy about it and yes you can find the names of the most famous rabbi's of the OT in the text of Moby Dick by useing the bible code's method. i've researched this in some lenght. if the code is true, the world will end in 7 years and 10 months, or end as we know it. this just doesnt add up.

Morminism:(spelling) firstly, i have nothing against any other relgions. i study them as i do my own, with honor and respect, but the book of mormin is not something i've studied. i must know, how did you get around Revelation 22:18-19. which reads:
"18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

beware: some christians teach hate in their churches. the one i went to before i changed relgions preached that Jahovah wittnesses and Morminism is a cult. The scarey thing is, this wasnt some back woods one room church. This was the 2nd biggest church in my city, with one of the biggest steeples i've ever seen. thousands attend and most are the city elites.

my relgion: My words: the relgions of this planet use to be on the right track but human corruption and man's hunger for power and control tanted the words of the real one god. My one god is not the god of earth but the god of the universe. seeing over millions of planets with a googleplex of followers, and all can see god. from the stars in the sky to the spark of life in your dog's eyes, you will see and feel the ond god looking back at you. the spark of energy that moves my fingers to type is god, aswell as the energy to go make myself a TomCollins, is the one god. all this and minor Mysticism.
btw: some very old jewish sects of the OT had some of the same thoughts, theres the connection so i cant be wholely charged with being off-topic.
2/Dec/05, 20:07 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
Loud G Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Senior Member
 


Registered: 01-2005
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 273
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???



Nektamakin wrote:
Morminism:(spelling) firstly, i have nothing against any other relgions. i study them as i do my own, with honor and respect, but the book of mormin is not something i've studied. i must know, how did you get around Revelation 22:18-19. which reads:
"18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

beware: some christians teach hate in their churches. the one i went to before i changed relgions preached that Jahovah wittnesses and Morminism is a cult. The scarey thing is, this wasnt some back woods one room church. This was the 2nd biggest church in my city, with one of the biggest steeples i've ever seen. thousands attend and most are the city elites.




lol

This is usually the first question to pop up in any discussion and the easiest to explain.

What many people do not realize is that "The Bible" while it means "the book" was not written all at once. It is merely a compilation of the writings of many of the prophets. Indeed it is not eavy in chronilogical order :) (when specifically the NT)

That passage in Revelations is erroneously taken to refer to the Bible when in fact John is only talking about the Book of Revelations (Apocalypse). This book was actually not even the last to be written. After John wrote it he went ahead and wrote his take on the life of Jesus (the Gospel of John) and his epistles.

So obviously the heavens have not shut in terms of revelation and any who claims so believes in a God who changes :) which He does not ;)

Second. Twice in Deuteronomy, Moses writes almost the same thing as John (no adding or subtracting, etc.) Which means that everything after Deut is bunk? Of course not :)

The Mormons believe in the OT and NT AND Book of Mormon AND we even have other scriptures, and none of them outweighs the other in authority or negates the importance of the rest.

So the OT is important to us. We carry around the OT, NT, BoM, etc in one volume :) with cross linked verses and everything, it is great :D

(sorry to hijack the thread) ;)


Unfortunately there are many who think us a cult or non christian because we believe in continuing revelation (yes even today) and because ourt belief in a 3-distinct-people-Trinity who are one in purpose not body. But that is a discussion for another thread :)

---
Writing: Eriadhin

2/Dec/05, 22:07 Link to this post Email   PM  AIM  Blog
 
Nektamakin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Member
 


Registered: 11-2005
Posts: 14
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???


well done, further more knowlege is colorless, knows no relgion, and can come from anywhere. education is key, thanks for the info
2/Dec/05, 22:42 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
Ahlyssah Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Senior Member
 


Registered: 07-2004
Location: Lost in a dream of mirrors
Posts: 830
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???


Way to go, G. Now we need to invent a new crime to punish you for what you've done. And after that, we'll make a video game out of it. "Grand Theft Forum: Northern Virginia". emoticon

Now, when you say you carry them all around, do you mean that you reference them all often, or that you literally carry all those books around with you everywhere you go? emoticon

And I'm sorry people think you're a cult. The media only depicts the crazies, it seems. You don't seem like an egomaniacal religious extremist to me! emoticon Everyone is so suspicious of someone who goes to the next level. You paranoid dudes just need to chiiiiiiiilll ouuuuuuut . . . emoticon

You know what's really funny is that, under the definition of "cult", all Christians are guilty of such a crime, yet they toss that word around like a piece of brimstone. Maybe they should set aside their Bibles for a moment a pick up a dictionary before they start bashing other people and cultures.

---
There are things which Man can not understand. For everything else, there's a lie.

Let's see if we can't get to the truth of the matter, hmm?

'Lyssa was here . . . and she'll be back
10/Dec/05, 19:02 Link to this post Email   PM  AIM  Blog
 
Loud G Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Senior Member
 


Registered: 01-2005
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 273
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???



Ahlyssah wrote:

Way to go, G. Now we need to invent a new crime to punish you for what you've done. And after that, we'll make a video game out of it. "Grand Theft Forum: Northern Virginia". emoticon

Now, when you say you carry them all around, do you mean that you reference them all often, or that you literally carry all those books around with you everywhere you go? emoticon

And I'm sorry people think you're a cult. The media only depicts the crazies, it seems. You don't seem like an egomaniacal religious extremist to me! emoticon Everyone is so suspicious of someone who goes to the next level. You paranoid dudes just need to chiiiiiiiilll ouuuuuuut . . . emoticon

You know what's really funny is that, under the definition of "cult", all Christians are guilty of such a crime, yet they toss that word around like a piece of brimstone. Maybe they should set aside their Bibles for a moment a pick up a dictionary before they start bashing other people and cultures.




Grand Teft: Washington DC would be closer ;) (I live just north of DC)

No I don't carry them around where ever I go (unless I want to read)
I meant that we have our four different books all bound into one. :D

I have never truly understood the opinion that God can only have written one book. Especially when he already has two (IE. OT and NT) why stop there. Go for a trilogy :emoticons::

I believe all that God revealed in the past (OT, NT, BoM, etc) and I believe He probably revealed more stuff that we just haven't found yet.

I mean, Moses had to summarize tons and tons of history. Who says that Enoch or one of the other Prophets that Moses wrote about didn't keep a record too? and that Moses just summed it up? maybe we'll find that old record. would that not too be valid scripture??



---
Writing: Eriadhin

10/Dec/05, 19:15 Link to this post Email   PM  AIM  Blog
 
Alpha Centauri Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
 

Runboard user emeritus

Registered: 02-2004
Location: Athens, Hellas
Posts: 1988
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???



Loud G wrote:
maybe we'll find that old record. would that not too be valid scripture??

Judging from the way many other ancient records (say, fossils) are treated by a great deal of religious people, I'd say the obvious answer would be "NO"...

emoticon

---



10/Dec/05, 20:16 Link to this post PM 
 
Ahlyssah Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Senior Member
 


Registered: 07-2004
Location: Lost in a dream of mirrors
Posts: 830
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???


I love you, Alpha. emoticon

---
There are things which Man can not understand. For everything else, there's a lie.

Let's see if we can't get to the truth of the matter, hmm?

'Lyssa was here . . . and she'll be back
12/Dec/05, 2:01 Link to this post Email   PM  AIM  Blog
 
naruto4888 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

New Member
 


Registered: 12-2005
Posts: 1
Reply Quote
posticon Re: Do Christians need the OT???


all i have to say is that there are many things in the nt that you would be unable to understand the context of with out the old testament. there are many ot quotes in the nt in order to understand the nt
29/Dec/05, 1:58 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
ashmosh314 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Member
 


Registered: 02-2006
Posts: 42
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???


The most important thing to realize with the Bible is that it is a collection of books and all are important. God would not have given us these books if all were not important.

The heart of this though is the Torah or the Pentacheuch (5 Books of Moses). The reason why is that it is the ultimate revelation of God's infinite wisdom, everything comes from the Torah. It is the blue print of the universe. The Torah is what Christ became flesh... the Torah is the Word that Christ became because He fulfilled all the laws and prophecies.

The Tanakh or the Old Testiment is the Torah, Prophets and Writings which are fundamental. One should not put on their shoes without their socks. In order to understand Christianity, one must understand the Old Testiment.

Peace and Blessings


Last edited by:
ashmosh314, 20/Feb/06, 19:34
20/Feb/06, 19:32 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
praying4patience Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Member
 


Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 10
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???



"May I have a short and direct answer, here, F8? WHO wrote the Scriptures?"

various authors. The Catholic Church discerned the inspired books of scripture and its canon.

Do Christians need the OT? Absolutely!

The NT is concealed in the OT and OT is revealed in the New. The Word of God is Jesus.


---

17/Jun/06, 7:56 Link to this post Email   PM  Blog
 
ashmosh314 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Member
 


Registered: 02-2006
Posts: 42
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???



C Berenice wrote:

We know that the Old Testament has been established as a (wonderful in my opinion) book in which one can find anything from medicine to psychology to sociology, politcs, philosophy and laws. It is as much a record of the survival, values religion and culture of a nation as it is a "direction-guide" or Code Book created for that nation's preservation as such.

So, while the OT is, indeed, a book of great historical importance to the world it is of very little religious value to the Christians. Christians, as the followers of Christ, worship God not as a separate entity but through Christ whom they concider a part of God! ...They have created the Holy Trinity from the words of Christ in the NT which is the actual Christian "Bible".

Why, then, should the Christians value the OT in a religious way?...Indeed why use it at all in that capacity?
 




Christians are supposed to be following and studying the OT, unfortunately some how it doesnt happen today as it should.
20/Oct/07, 14:41 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
Zenas Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Member
 


Registered: 04-2003
Location: Aboard the Black Pearl
Posts: 20
Reply Quote
Re: Do Christians need the OT???


"Do Christians need the OT?"

Yes, I believe that Christians do need the Old Testament.

I believe that all Scripture (Old and New) is fully and wholly inspired by the Holy Spirit (aka God/part of the Trinity).

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:" (2 Tim. 3:16)

Most importantly, it is important because the Old Testament is one of the MAIN reasons why Jesus HAD to die on Calvary-to fulfill the Law and the Prophets. So that their word would not be in vain and their profecies in error, it was necessary that Christ die. His death not only brought forth salvation to all who believe, but it also fulfilled the Law of God, the prophecies, and completed the Word.

Without the Old Testament, then Christ's death would have been a choice. Instead, His death was a MUST. The Old Testament points to the coming of Christ. It is more than historical documents and Jewish facts of life. There are Pictures throughout the Old Testament that point to Christ and His sacrifice. Without the Old there is no New.

In fact, Moses was not allowed to enter the Promise Land because he ruined one of these pictures. The rock is a type of Christ. At one point while in the wilderness, God instructed Moses to strike a rock and bring forth water for them to drink. This was a picture of Christ dying for our sins. He is our living water.

There was a second time, and God instructed Moses to simply SPEAK to the rock. But Moses, in anger with the people, smote the rock. It still produced water because God made a promise to provide for His children and He cannot lie. But God was trying to paint the picture that once saved you have a God you can simply speak to.
Christ later on showed us how when teaching his disciples to pray.

To me, the Old Testament is more than just historical facts and figures. Stories for mere entertainment. They are God's words to me. If God didn't think the Old Testament necessary then He would not have included it and kept it safe thus far.

As for proof...that these books and 'stories' are accurate. You have history, artifacts...but most importantly....faith.

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." (Heb 11:1)

But above all else,

"For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day." (2 Tim. 1:12)

Jesus completed the Old and gave us the New...but all of it is for me. I have drawn lessons, encouragement, and even been disciplined by all Scripture including the Old. There are somethings in life that you can't explain according to human standards.

But I know whom I have believed in. And He is able to keep me until the day He returns. And all these discussions will cease. What's more important? Debating the need or accuracy of the Word, or reaching out to your neighbor with the truth of Salvation that you both may share eternity with Christ?

Don't worry bout quoting or responding to my add...please. I'll probably forget to even check back and I'd hate to disappoint anyone. Just know that in the Old you see a God who knows the condition of His people, a God who redeems by Blood and Power. And throughtout the old God set the tempo for the New. Plus, without that Old Testament...no one would have known to even look for Jesus. And Christ would have been a liar.

So for anything else, it is necessary just to prove Christ's case.

---

8/Dec/07, 19:44 Link to this post Email   PM  AIM  Yahoo  Blog
 


Add Reply

Page  1  2  3  4 






You are not logged in (LOGIN)