Do Christians need TWO Bibles?

[charles brough]

We all know there is a vast difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The older one is the Judaic Bible. It recounts the history of an historically obscure, monotheistic tribe which, in Numbers, Deuteronomy and other parts describes their invasions and slaughtering of the men women and children of the lands they stole.

 

In comparison to the brutal Judaic Bible, the New Testament is generally a beacon of pragrance and light---even though, of course, there are exceptions. Being only half as ancient and hence that much less out-of-date, the offensive parts are much less in number: such as the admonitions to hate your family (Luke 14:26), Kill Jesus's enemies (Luke 19:27 and Math. 10:34), regarding dealing with slaves (Eph 6:5) and the subjection of women (1Tim 2:11-12)

 

Since there is this vast difference between the two Bibles, why is the Jewish Bible considered part of the Christian Scripture?

 

 

 

[Dekan]

We all know there is a vast difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The older one is the Judaic Bible. It recounts the history of an historically obscure, monotheistic tribe which, in Numbers, Deuteronomy and other parts describes their invasions and slaughtering of the men women and children of the lands they stole.

 

In comparison to the brutal Judaic Bible, the New Testament is generally a beacon of pragrance and light---even though, of course, there are exceptions. Being only half as ancient and hence that much less out-of-date, the offensive parts are much less in number: such as the admonitions to hate your family (Luke 14:26), Kill Jesus's enemies (Luke 19:27 and Math. 10:34), regarding dealing with slaves (Eph 6:5) and the subjection of women (1Tim 2:11-12)

 

Since there is this vast difference between the two Bibles, why is the Jewish Bible considered part of the Christian Scripture?

 

Isn't it as absurd, as if Newton's "Principia", were published with Aristotle's "Physics" - bound together in the same book.

 

And the book was supposed to be an authoritative guide to science.

[Phi for All]

It's a Christian methodology to tie the religion to other beliefs in order to work its way into the mainstream. Look at all the pagan holidays it took over, like Christmas and Easter. If you come in and try a short-term denouncement of another religion, you get a defensive response. If you adopt the other religion and work alongside patiently as a long-term strategy, you eventually gain support.

 

Look at the way passive promotion of western long-term strategies overthrew the former Soviet Union, as opposed to aggressive western short-term military efforts to curb Islamic state governance.

[ewmon]

Most religions tend to have their own holy scriptures, and so, Christians have their Bible, which consists of the OT and the NT because Christ was a Hebrew, and his religion is the continuation of the Hebrew religion, which is open to both Hebrews and non-Hebrew alike.

[the asinine cretin]

I went to a conservative Catholic university years ago and remember being taught that the New Testament has a kind of interpretive priority over the Old. From this point of view the entire Bible is not taken to be a perspicuous guide for theology and morality but requires careful and learned interpretation. Basically (I imagine Jewish people may resent this), the idea was that the New Testament completes and sheds light on the Old Testament scriptures. Also, I remember taking a course on the Old Testament and we were taught about the importance of genre, source criticism, textual variants, historical criticism, and other things. I can also recall learning about Patristic and medieval exegesis and modern exegetical methodologies relating the Old and New Testaments, as well as elements of the larger Christian tradition (e.g., Apostolic Fathers, extra-biblical Jewish literature, etcetera). It was all pretty interesting anyway. Fundamentalists do a disservice to Christianity in my opinion.

[charles brough]

It's a Christian methodology to tie the religion to other beliefs in order to work its way into the mainstream. Look at all the pagan holidays it took over, like Christmas and Easter. If you come in and try a short-term denouncement of another religion, you get a defensive response. If you adopt the other religion and work alongside patiently as a long-term strategy, you eventually gain support.

 

Look at the way passive promotion of western long-term strategies overthrew the former Soviet Union, as opposed to aggressive western short-term military efforts to curb Islamic state governance.

 

Good point! Christianity didn't need to develop a new cosmology, It just adopted the Judaic one and then claimed it was "the LAST testament" of the same old God. It purported to bring Judaism up the the 2,000 year-ago then present. It was such a successful formula that the Muslims copied it. In our times, the same old now worn out forumla was adopted by Reverand Moon to build his cult. I suppose the Mormons and Christian Scientists used it also.

 

To develop a world-view system able to lead us into building a new civilization capable of replacing this declining one, we have to get a new and better formula!

By the way, is the pai free? Do you have any pumkin or, even better yet, key-lime?

[Aristarchus in Exile]

It's not two bibles .. it's two testaments .. the old and the new. One Word, but the New is the great change prophecied in the Old.

 

God's enemies are slain if they don't repent .. going against God is going against nature, and nature kills those who continue to abuse it, for instance, the present worldwide empire of greed which is destroying the earth, the people of the empire will soon be destroyed, are being destroyed now and North America ia s good example with one third dying of cancer, one third of heart failure. And the great tribulation has barely begun.