Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Old Testament/New Testament | Matt 5:17 | ripken8os | 121518 | ||
What is the difference between the New Testament and the Old? Which are we to follow? I have noticed and heard that the Old Testament contains more extreme rules or guidance whereas the New is more up to date and suits our time at a better degree. | ||||||
2 | Old Testament/New Testament | Matt 5:17 | Rowdy | 121524 | ||
Kalos' advice is quite sound except for the following Col 2:13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions, 14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. 15 When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him. 16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day-- 17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. You see in accordance with Matt 28, God has now given ALL authority to His Son and thus ushered in a new era or dispensation called Christianity, where instead of being given the option of an easy divorce, a spouse must have actual evidence of adultery before divorcing. Instead of merely avoiding murder as per the Ten Commandments, we now must love our enemies and forgive them instead of seeking retribution as "eye for an eye, or tooth for tooth." Now instead of offering animals for sacrifice and clear us of our sins, we must worship the Perfect High Priest who once and for all was sacrified for ALL people everywhere instead of just the nation of Israel. The covenant of Christianity has better promises with a clear picture of Heaven when there no such provision in the Old Law. In Christianity, we ALL have immediate access instead of our going through another human being to intercede for us. There are a few other differences between these two eras, Judiasm and Christianity but I think these are sufficient. Now I need to emphasize I'm not saying we can dismiss the OT entirely. As Kalos has stated so eloquently, the OT is quoted extensively throughout the NT as Jesus was the fulfillment of the prophecies contained in the OT. What I am saying is that the OT has no place in our lives to speak with AUTHORITY about religious issues, especially with regard to the differences we see between the OT and the NT. Jesus and Jesus alone is the Authority as His Words AND the Words spoken and written by His official representatives, the Apostles were blessed as being authoritative by Jesus Himself and the Holy Spirit. Thus the OT is a wonderful and majestic document, compelling in its teaching and history, showing us how God dealt with His children then and giving us a glimpse of how He'll deal with us in our future. The OT helps us understand the NT for that's where most of the NT writers originated. Thus their background and their secondary motivation is better understood. BUT their primary focus and motivation was the Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Just as in the transfiguration, we MUST give our sole attention for authoritative matters to Jesus and Jesus alone. So we can learn a great deal from the OT but we must see ourselves as men and women of God and for God, and learn to graduate to the NT. For it is that portion of God's Word, where we find out the current requirements to become a christian and save our souls from Hell. Hope this helps and God bless. --Rowdy |
||||||
3 | Rowdy What part of the OT do you abolish | Matt 5:17 | Searcher56 | 121566 | ||
What part of the Law or the Prophets do you want to abolish? And since Christ did not, who are you? | ||||||
4 | Rowdy What part of the OT do you abolish | Matt 5:17 | countrypreacher | 121608 | ||
Jesus said, "that he came not to do away with the law, but though him it would be full filled. We can not do away with any part of the bible, new or old. He said that heaven and earth shall pass away but not one jot or tittle of his word would. | ||||||
5 | Rowdy What part of the OT do you abolish | Matt 5:17 | Rowdy | 121624 | ||
I'll answer your question with a question. Which portion of the OT are you NOT following? When and where do you sacrifice animals every day? How do you trace your lineage back to Abraham? Do you coordinate your sacrifices with the Levites? How do know they're true Levites? Do you support men's option to divorce their wives with a simple letter? No need for guilt of any kind? Do you support your fellow man's option to secure "eye for eye or tooth for tooth" in retribution for wrongs done to him? If you DON'T do these things? Please tell me how do you live by and enforce only a portion of the OT? Do you treat the NT similarly in spite of the Lord's command otherwise? And of course, please provide scriptural references for each of these points. How do you reconcile the verse above with the one I cited in my post, Col 2:14. How do you reconcile the contrast between the OT and the NT throughout the Book of Hebrews? As I stated in my post, I don't wish to abolish the OT but merely recognize It for what It was and this is the Law of Moses, notice the use of word Old vs. New. Even the group who organized the current Bible known as the canon recognized the Old Testament was obsolete as that expression must have originated with them. No, we dare NOT dismiss the OT but cling to It with every fiber of our being. As I stated in a previous post a month or more ago, without the OT we wouldn't be able to understand completely the NT nor would we have its beauty in the poetical books of Psalms or Song of Solomon. We would lose out completely by NOT knowing the creation of the world or how God dealt with His Family of Jews, sometimes kindly and merciful and sometimes with harshness and severity, at least by human standards. No dear friend, we must cling to our OTs so that we can know God more intimately than we see Him in the NT. Remember He gave Christ the preiminance as mentioned already in Hebrews. He also gave Him all authority. So how do you reconcile Matt 28 AND the transfiguration in Matt 17, Mark 9 and Luke 9? You might notice as I think it's quite significant that all three Gospel writers thought it was significant to mention the detail about God's instruction to them and to us, the whole world "Listen to Him." He didn't say anything about Elijah or Moses who were standing beside Jesus but God says "Listen to His Son." I don't see how I could any more clear about this subject. I've said all I can think to be germaine about this subject. But I'd be interested in what you think, especially the questions to the above. It all boils down to authority. Who are you, I and the rest of the world going to recognize as having authority in this dispensation? Just as Peter discovered while walking on water, if we'll keep our focus on Jesus, we're great, we can take on the whole world of sin. But if we listen to anyone else and take our focus off Him, then we lose our balance and have to depend on His mercy. He would much rather see us grow spiritually and learn to rely on Him instead of "falling into the hand of God" unprepared. I do hope this helps in your understanding and God bless. --Rowdy |
||||||
6 | Rowdy, NO, Answer my question first | Matt 5:17 | Searcher56 | 121650 | ||
What part of the OT do you abolish | ||||||
7 | Rowdy, NO, Answer my question first | Matt 5:17 | Rowdy | 121657 | ||
I think I've done that very clearly... "As I stated in my post, I don't wish to abolish the OT but merely recognize It for what It was and this is the Law of Moses, notice the use of word Old vs. New. Even the group who organized the current Bible known as the canon recognized the Old Testament was obsolete as that expression must have originated with them." Now will you please answer my questions? What questions? The same ones I posed to Countrypreacher and anyone else who would like to participate in the discussion. I really do want to carry on the dialouge here but it takes two. Tell me what you think. God bless. --Rowdy |
||||||
8 | Rowdy, NO, Answer my question first | Matt 5:17 | Searcher56 | 121676 | ||
You said ... "Even the group who organized the current Bible known as the canon recognized the Old Testament was obsolete as that expression must have originated with them" - Cite your sources ... Who was the group? ... Are you sure they used the word "obsolete"? - If you believe the Old Testament is obsolete, ... then why even look at it |
||||||
9 | Rowdy, NO, Answer my question first | Matt 5:17 | Rowdy | 122980 | ||
I'm not able to answer you first two questions as I don't know much about the cannonization process. I'll let you look that up. But I am convinced that the OT is obsolete as evidenced by God's Word as cited previously. The disignations Old and New are merely endorsements of that fact. However, I'll repeat myself yet again, this obsolete condition only applies to the OT's authority, especially as it applies to the few minor differences. The bulk of the OT is still an incredibly valuable document for study, and understanding the NT. Without the OT, we could never hope to understand most of the NT or to even understand our world. So I have tremendous respect for the OT. You might compare this respect to that of the top racers in today's auto races. Those drivers have much respect for the history of automotive industry in the past century but is it possible that one of those old jalopes with its old engine and transmission could overtake its modern counterpart? You say, that's a silly comparison, and I guess I'd have to agree but it's the best I could do at the moment. Remember all of us of drivers have respect for and appreciate the tremendous value the automotive industry meant to this country's industry and commerce. In the same way, the OT didn't have an "engine or transmission" to take care of sin completely. It didn't have a qualified "mechanic" or a good enough High Priest like we've got now to administer such a high powered "vehicle" or covenant like that of the NT. There may be other comparisons but I'm already stretching the envelope here so I need to hush. By the way, I apologize for the length of time it took for my response. I sincerely hopes this helps (instead of confuses) and God bless. --Rowdy |
||||||