Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I found my tiny 15 yr old green New Testament only bible.
If the page NEW TESTAMENT wasnt in the bible, would we look at the bible different as a entire book of different covenants that applied to different generations, rather than say 66% of it is irrelevant.
The NT is based off the OT and shows how all the prophesies were fulfilled, yet so many will just straight dismiss the OT. Isaiah 53 describes the Messiah, which we know by comparing OT and NT, that it is Jesus when we look at all he fulfilled, so we know he is the true Messiah.
Covenants in the bible:
The Adamic Covenant, The Noahic Covenant, Abrahamic Covenant, Mosaic Covenant ,Davidic Covenant
New Covenant
Do you think Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, and the apostles went around saying, im under my current covenant, so everything before me in scriptures is irrelevant.
So do you think if the bibles we have now was the same but never had the word New Testament in it, would people still try to divide the bible or look as it more as a whole book?
I found my tiny 15 yr old green New Testament only bible.
If the page NEW TESTAMENT wasnt in the bible, would we look at the bible different as a entire book of different covenants that applied to different generations, rather than say 66% of it is irrelevant.
The NT is based off the OT and shows how all the prophesies were fulfilled, yet so many will just straight dismiss the OT. Isaiah 53 describes the Messiah, which we know by comparing OT and NT, that it is Jesus when we look at all he fulfilled, so we know he is the true Messiah.
Covenants in the bible:
The Adamic Covenant, The Noahic Covenant, Abrahamic Covenant, Mosaic Covenant ,Davidic Covenant
New Covenant
Do you think Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, and the apostles went around saying, im under my current covenant, so everything before me in scriptures is irrelevant.
So do you think if the bibles we have now was the same but never had the word New Testament in it, would people still try to divide the bible or look as it more as a whole book?
Why not simply call them the Hebrew Scriptures and the Greek Scriptures as two divisions of the same "Book", the Bible or Holy Scriptures?
Testament is the same as Covenant and while and old and new covenant exists that is not the main differences between each "section". The only thing that is a true division is the language they were written in.
I suspect the term "Old" was used to imply of no value which is absolutely false.
It's pretty obvious that making the division between the two "books" (when neither is just one book in the first place), plus the firm designation "Old" v. "New," was designed to imply that one was outmoded and the other was a replacement. It's sort of a psychological thing. IMO.
It kind of gives free license to take the Jewish Bible - or if you prefer, the OT - and apply or not apply verses, sections of books in order to fit Christianity better.
How important is the OT to Christians? I thought Christians read and believed both the OT and NT, but then someone once told me that Christians mostly read the NT.
How important is the OT to Christians? I thought Christians read and believed both the OT and NT, but then someone once told me that Christians mostly read the NT.
It is as important as the NT, but some don't know that. Lousy teachers.
I found my tiny 15 yr old green New Testament only bible.
If the page NEW TESTAMENT wasnt in the bible, would we look at the bible different as a entire book of different covenants that applied to different generations, rather than say 66% of it is irrelevant.
The NT is based off the OT and shows how all the prophesies were fulfilled, yet so many will just straight dismiss the OT. Isaiah 53 describes the Messiah, which we know by comparing OT and NT, that it is Jesus when we look at all he fulfilled, so we know he is the true Messiah.
Covenants in the bible:
The Adamic Covenant, The Noahic Covenant, Abrahamic Covenant, Mosaic Covenant ,Davidic Covenant
New Covenant
Do you think Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, and the apostles went around saying, im under my current covenant, so everything before me in scriptures is irrelevant.
So do you think if the bibles we have now was the same but never had the word New Testament in it, would people still try to divide the bible or look as it more as a whole book?
Would Paul have written Romans 10:4 stating that Jesus is the end of the Law for righteousness?
The fact of the matter is....we are NOT under the Mosaic Covenant. We no longer have to observe the Law.
But yes--it certainly IS relevant to us. It's our history, and it tells us WHY we need a savior. Paul wrote in Romans that the Law is a schoolmaster -- pointing out to us that we NEED a savior.
The 'Old Testament' sets the stage and provides a frame of reference for the 'New Testament.'
Suppose Jesus had simply dropped down out of the sky into, perhaps ... China, and said, "I have come to give my life to take away the sin of the world" ... without an OT history. Instead, the OT provides the history of mankind and the relationship between God and man (through a single nation, Israel). The OT is every bit as important and indispensable as the NT --- and just as relevant today as it was then, to one who truly seeks and knows God.
Jesus came into the world, through the tiny, yet, highly traceable and distinct nation of Israel (a people/nation with a long-standing relationship with God, and said, "I have not come to abolish the law (OT), but, to fulfill it." Without that history and the law, one has no basis for truly understanding mercy or grace ... or their own desperate need for a 'Savior.'
The "NEW" Covenant is a NEW beginning for those willing to love, trust and depend on God through Jesus Christ; instead of on their own 'goodness' or 'law-keeping', ... which has never really been all that "good."
Suppose Jesus had simply dropped down out of the sky into perhaps ... China, and said, "I have come to die for the sin of the world". The OT is every bit as important as the NT --- and just as relevant today, if one knows how to read it. The OT provides the history of mankind and the relationship between God and man - and also provides a frame-of-reference for the NT.
Jesus said, "I have not come to abolish the law (OT), but, to fulfill it." Without the law, one cannot fully understand grace ... or their own desperate need for a 'Savior.'
'Fulfill' is speaking to God's purpose for mankind from the beginning: Life in a personal relationship with Him - which came not through the law, but, 'by faith through grace' ... in Jesus Christ.
In this respect, the law was never given so that people would become rule/law-keepers, but, to demonstrate the inability of all to keep the law, and thus, recognize their need for God's grace.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
