Should Christians follow the old testiment?

I have seen many Christians claim, on this site, that the Old Testiment is obsolete and does not need to be followed. They say that Jesus abolished the old laws when he came to earth. But according to Christ himself, he came merely to fulfull the law, not abolish it. He also said that anyone who does not follow the old law and teaches others not to, will be seen as the least of all in Heaven.


MATTHEW 5:17-20
"Don't think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill. For most certainly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things are accomplished. Whoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and teach others to do so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but whoever shall do and teach them shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, there is no way you will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.


The bolded part is what I want to emphsise. To me, it is saying that until the end of time when Jesus returns, the laws of the old testiment should be followed. Now don't get me wrong. I am not saying we should go around stoning people have committ adultery or anything, but I think alot of the laws make since. I think rape should be a capital crime for example. I also want the day for cancelling debts to be brought into america law. For those of you who do not know, the day for cancelling debts is a day, which takes place every 7 years, when all debt, public and private, must be erased. According to the bible, it was made in order to prevent a creditor from being able to make financial slaves out of his fellow Israelites.

I know there are several people who feel that the old testiment does not need to be followed, I am simply saying that Jesus said otherwise.

 

Why would you even ask? The Levites invented the laws and purification rituals.. Have you actually read them? they have NOTHING to do with God or Moses and were compiled during and after the Babylonian exile.. 900 years AFTER Moses.

 

There is a difference between the old covenant and the new covenant. The Ten Commandments still apply, yet the path to heaven has changed under Jesus.

I am not a bible scholar, this is just my interpretation.

 

Should Christians follow the old Testament?

Yes, and the first thing that will be done under that law is stoning Daggdag to death for spelling it "Testiment".

As for marrying my brothers wife, no way under any circumstances.

 

You do know that Moses is commonly accepted by most sects of Judaism and Christianity as the writer of the Pentateuch right? There are copies of most of the books within the Pentateuch that are older than you claim, hundreds of years before the exile. They have been written down many times during that time and I'm sure some writers added or changed a few things, or changed the writing style, but the core books themselves, are old enough to have been written by Moses.

 

Couldnt be more explicitly stated.

Ephesians 2
15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations.

Hebrews 8
13By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

Romans 10
4Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.

Romans 7
6But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

2 Corinthians 3
13We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from gazing at it while the radiance was fading away. 14But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away.Galatians 3

13Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree."

23Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. 24So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ[h] that we might be justified by faith. 25Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.

 

LOLOL.. No he's not.. That's a fiction.. There was no Moses .. He is a literary construct.. just like the Exodus.

 

I hope you don't mind that I corrected your spelling. You should have included a political application in your OP to prevent this thread from being moved to religion.

Unfortunately I think you're approaching this like many Protestants, looking at the Bible and the teachings of Christ independent of the understandings of the early church. Jesus taught his apostles and told them to teach as they have been taught. The Apostles appointed bishops and passed the tradition on to them and so on. The very first Church council, recorded in the book of Acts, abolished circumcision, dietary laws, and many other customs applicable to Jews. With a mix of Jewish and Gentile Christians, the governing doctrines had to be universal, not catering to Jewish tradition. This is why the apostles only insisted that the gentiles not eat food sacrificed to idols.

Moreover, in the 1st century, Christians began to worship on Sunday instead of Saturday. Jesus called himself "Lord of the Sabbath" and so his resurrection was celebrated on the day he was resurrected, Sunday. If you can imagine the uproar this caused among many Jews that have come from traditions based on Levitical law, then you can understand what a radical position the Christians were taking. They were even bold enough to say that the Jews were no longer the oracles of God and that the Church was the vessel of revelation. This sentiment was expressed yet again in the canonical councils when the Jewish canon was rejected and the Christian Bible was made official using the Septuigent.

The problem, Daggdag, is when the gospels are isolated as the sole source of the teachings of Christ. One gospel writer even went so far as to clarify that if everything Jesus taught were written down, all the libraries in the world could not contain the books. So what we see is all the teachings of Christ, and the meaning of the recorded teachings of Christ in the gospels spelled out over the next few centuries in the sacred tradition that was given by the Apostles and passed down through the line of succession. Taken in its entirety, we have a better understanding of what Jesus taught and what his teachings meant to those generations in closest proximity to them.

 

The path to heaven did not change at all......We still need a sacrifice, and it was Jesus.

 

Which is why we are not to sacrifice.

 

Like Azazell?

Blood sacrifice was primitive and transitional.. ALL the bedouin carried their gods around on boxes in litters and they got a two fer in sacrifice. they couldn't afford to feed their captives and they "appeased" their gods..

 

I think a better question to ask here is should non-Christians be trying to tell Christians which parts of their own religion to follow.

 

I am a Christian, and my point was that some Christian beleive that they should not have to follow the old testament. So it is not their religion......Some have even went as far as to print bibles, only with the New Testament, leaving the old out completely.

 

I noticed you didn't respond to my first post on this thread even though it was the most thorough response you've gotten so far.

I think you're mistaken in thinking that Christians pit the OT against the NT or prefer the NT even to the point of printing Bibles with only the NT. The Gideons produce small, pocket sized NT bibles to hand out to prisoners and military personnel. These small bibles also contain Psalms and Proverbs. They're made that way not because the Gideons hate the OT but for the sake of economy. Having the gospel essentials in an NIV new testament allows them to get more Bibles into more hands. But when anyone becomes a Christian, they are encouraged to get a full Bible with both testaments in it.

You say you are a Christian, but I have to ask how long? There's nothing wrong with being a new believer, but it does pose some challenges that can be answered by those who have lived their entire lives in the Christian faith, such as myself. If you are a new Christian, I would suggest reading Hebrews. Over and over. That's what I did and my understanding of the relationship between the Old and New Covenants expanded rapidly. Hebrews spells out how we are beneficiaries of a better covenant, a better priesthood, better promises, and just why it is that we can "come boldly to the throne of grace." (4:16)

I strongly recommend it.

 

You're referring to Matthew's gospel here. His was the most Jewish of all the gospels and was written with the perspective that good Christians should continue to follow the Torah including the offering of animal sacrifices (there is also evidence from the writings of Paul - in Romans, I believe - that early Christians were still practicing animal sacrifice along with the rest of the House of Israel).

Matthew's Jesus is very different from say the Jesus in John's gospel who puts very little to no importance on Jewish prophecy, culture or religious practices instead preaching salvation through divine election. According to John's Jesus, you're chosen by God or your not. In Matthew's gospel, it's largely good works that gets you to heaven. Both gospels were written to different communities in different generations promoting different precepts which is why the Saviors of both gospels differ markedly from eachother.

 

So you think that animal sacrifice was still required? All the OT prophets warned the Jews that God didn't want burnt offerings and blood sacrifice, but a repentant heart.

 

Well calling myself a christian is inaccurate I suppoose....I beleive in the god of Israel, but I do not beleive in organized religion.....I feel that building a belief structure around a set of ideals simply allows a small elitist group of people, such as the pope and college of cardinals to tell everyone else what they can and cant beleive......Most of the Catholic laws, for example, are not found in the bible and were created seperate from god or the bible, including the moving of the Sabbath to from saturday to sunday, which was done simply to seperate Christianity from Judaism. Sunday, is which is known as Lord's Day, celebrates the resurection, and is supoosed to be completely seperate from the Sabbath, which is saturday.

 

Then you're in a vice of your own making. The very organized religion you despise is the organized religion that created the Bible along with the theology to understand that Bible well seasoned over 2000 years. Some of the finest minds in literary history have devoted themselves to the understanding of complex theological concepts. Their wisdom is preserved for us today because of organized religion.

You having rejected organized religion and spurned the wisdom of the deposit of truth that's acrued over 2000 years now strike out into unfamiliar waters having not even a basic understanding of the Christian world view. You don't even have an elementary understanding of the dynamic between the Old and the New Covenants, something that nearly every Christian understands, having those theological roads paved by organized religion. You think yourself wise by rejecting the accomplishments of the smartest theologians in Church history. You think yourself a renegade shaking your fist at the religious institution having yourself found a better way. But the truth is you're ignorant; stubbornly, volitionally ignorant. And when you set about a theological discussion, your bluster and your haphazard flailings reveal the folly of thumbing your nose at the very treasures vouchsafed to you by God's holy Church.

So you need to start with the fundamentals. Read Hebrews over and over. Get some study guides on it. When you can wrap your head around the concepts contained therein, I promise you'll have a much more intelligent conversation about it.

 

The bible was written long before the Catholic Church as we know it today came into existence......Most of the new testament was written either by the Apostles or by Paul. The catholic church as we know it today did not exist.

 

Christians have been using the Old Testament since the teachings of Jesus were institutionalized by later followers into a religious order. It baffles me how some Christians criticize other creeds like Islam for being violent, contending that Christianity is PURELY a religion of 'peace and generosity' and yet when asked, they'll tell you they support war and the like. Why is modern Christians deny the reality of their own religious institutions? Christianity has been just as violent as any other creed, why is the Old Testament's inclusion now under question? It never was before by mainstream Christian authorities.

 

They use the old testament when it suits their needs, when it doesn't, they claim that the old testament doesn't matter because Jesus destroyed thew law.

A great example is the number of republicans on this site who won't accept the Day of Cancelling Debts as true scripture...

Deuteronomy 15:1-15
1 At the end of every seven years you must cancel debts. 2 This is how it is to be done: Every creditor shall cancel any loan they have made to a fellow Israelite. They shall not require payment from anyone among their own people, because the LORD’s time for canceling debts has been proclaimed. 3 You may require payment from a foreigner, but you must cancel any debt your fellow Israelite owes you. 4 However, there need be no poor people among you, for in the land the LORD your God is giving you to possess as your inheritance, he will richly bless you, 5 if only you fully obey the LORD your God and are careful to follow all these commands I am giving you today. 6 For the LORD your God will bless you as he has promised, and you will lend to many nations but will borrow from none. You will rule over many nations but none will rule over you.
7 If anyone is poor among your fellow Israelites in any of the towns of the land the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward them. 8 Rather, be openhanded and freely lend them whatever they need. 9 Be careful not to harbor this wicked thought: “The seventh year, the year for canceling debts, is near,” so that you do not show ill will toward the needy among your fellow Israelites and give them nothing. They may then appeal to the LORD against you, and you will be found guilty of sin. 10 Give generously to them and do so without a grudging heart; then because of this the LORD your God will bless you in all your work and in everything you put your hand to. 11 There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your fellow Israelites who are poor and needy in your land.
Freeing Servants
12 If any of your people—Hebrew men or women—sell themselves to you and serve you six years, in the seventh year you must let them go free. 13 And when you release them, do not send them away empty-handed. 14 Supply them liberally from your flock, your threshing floor and your winepress. Give to them as the LORD your God has blessed you. 15 Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and the LORD your God redeemed you. That is why I give you this command today.

 

I think you would be hard pressed to demonstrate that Old Testament prophets rejected the five books of Moses. Some prophets (like Isaiah) may have said things that sounded like a call to abondon animal sacrifice but most (like Malachi) urged Israelites to continue with animal sacrifice but to do it with a contrite heart.

I believe Old Testament prophets spoke out against the hypocracy of Israel to offer sacrifices and continue to live in sin. I don't think they were attacking the institution of animal sacrifice itself. Most Jewish, Christian and secular scholars agree that animal sacrifice was fairly central to Judaism.

Early Christians most likely abandoned sacrificial offerings the same time most Jews did, after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem.

No, but it was the Catholic Church who compiled the books of the Bible into one volume. The word "Bible" simply means "library". The Church chose which books would be in the Bible and rejected others it deemed to be spurious or heretical. So if it wasn't for the organized religion of Roman Catholicism, Protestants wouldn't have a Bible to condemn Catholics with.

That being said, mainstream scholars doubt that Jesus ever really organized a church. The most popular theory is that Jesus was an ethical eschatologist who preached an immediate apocolypse and had no thought of creating an organization to last for ages. The organization of early Christianity into a church is generally believed to be the accomplishment of 2nd and 3rd generational Christians. Most of the books in the New Testament are accepted to have come out of these later generations and were not originally written by the people whose names they are credited with. Only about 7 or 8 of the epistles of Paul are thought by most scholars to be authentic and the book of Hebrews isn't one of them.

The teachings of Christianity are definately more pacifistic than Islam or Old Testament Judaism. While Christian theologians in the Middle Ages stretched New Testament scriptures to incredivle lengths to support sactified violence (the crusades), Islam had little theological problems finding justification for their holy wars in both the Koran and Islamic tradition.

But it is true that Christians and their leaders today have adopted a much broader theological pretext for war than their 1st millennium predessesors.

 

They should follow the Kroan or Korean. Somthing new to worship and obey for a few years, try it you might like it.

 

The bible is a collection of authors written by various people many years apart; it is not one consistent document.

Due to the many contradictory statements you can cherry-pick any verse and justify anything.

 

A new Book is out. It's called the God Delusion. Read it. Yee who can.

It will teach yee that yee have no soul to save. Yee can get on with enjoying yeeselves in the knowledge that yee have no sin except the sin of mistreating yee fellow man.

It's liberating. Like Chi (the flavour that satisfies itself).