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.
The life of Jesus as portrayed in the NT follows the pattern of the Torah, and theologically follows Jewish theology closely, so one who believes can say the OT and NT aren't two separate books. The chiastic structural relationships between the OT and NT link them as well. The Gospels are the core of the 'new covenant', so yes, they would belong in the 'New' testament, obviously, even if they purport to be based on 'Old' testament prophecies. The other 23 or so 'books' are histories and the like, but the three synoptic Gospels and John's writings and Revelation could stand alone without Paul's letters theologically.
Actually, while the four Gospels are the first four books of the New Testament, and while they were written after the Church-age began, their content deals with the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus, all of which took place during the age of Israel prior to the beginning of the Church-age. In that sense then, the four Gospels are Old Testament.
Yes Jesus preached on the Holy Spirit , as He taught that people must worship God in spirit and in truth in a new covenant .... Where He said the Israelites almost always forgot the Holy Spirit .. The gospel are four testimonies of the Messiah Jesus Christ
Hebrews 9:15 "And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
Hebrews 9:16 "For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
Hebrews 9:17 "For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Hebrews 9:18 "Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood"|.
so the bulk of the gospels are OT, until the Lord Jesus died. all things afterward from his death are NT. even that which recorded in the gospels themselves.
Sounds to me that this is a school assignment, and you're wanting to shoose the best answer to turn in as though you came up with it. Count me out . . .
Actually, while the four Gospels are the first four books of the New Testament, and while they were written after the Church-age began, their content deals with the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus, all of which took place during the age of Israel prior to the beginning of the Church-age. In that sense then, the four Gospels are Old Testament.
Interesting point. The last of the 'OT' prophets died some 200 years before the Christian era though, so there is a dividing line of sorts, that works well as a convenience. Theologically of course the Gospels are indeed Old Testament. Christians should probably not make the distinction except for convenience, outside of separating the new covenant books from the old covenants.
Sounds to me that this is a school assignment, and you're wanting to shoose the best answer to turn in as though you came up with it. Count me out . . .
Interesting point. The last of the 'OT' prophets died some 200 years before the Christian era though, so there is a dividing line of sorts, that works well as a convenience. Theologically of course the Gospels are indeed Old Testament. Christians should probably not make the distinction except for convenience, outside of separating the new covenant books from the old covenants.
I would disagree that Christians shouldn't make a distinction for the simple reason that Christians should know the Bible and should have a knowledge of history as it relates to the Bible. I am a dispensationalist and recognize the distinctions between the Old and New Testaments. And it should be recognized that the four Gospels cover events which fully occurred prior to the beginning of the Church-age which began on the day of Pentecost, 50 days after the resurrection of Jesus. Christians who are not dispensational in their thinking and understanding of the Bible perhaps will deemphasize the point of the Gospels belonging to the Old Testament in terms of the material being written about.
Regarding the OT prophets, the last of the OT prophets was actually John the Baptist who Jesus called a prophet (Matthew 11:9-11) and who was regarded by 'everyone' to be a prophet (Matthew 14:5; Mark 11:32). John however was not a writing prophet. The last of the writing prophets was Malachi. Most scholars date Malachi to c. 450-430 BC.
The time between the writing of the last of the OT books and the NT has been loosely called 'the 400 silent years'. That time of course was anything but silent in terms of the important historical events which took place during that period, but refers to the silence of the prophets. Josephus was of the opinion that there had been no succession of prophets since the time of the reign of Artaxerxes, the king of Persia (Against Apion, book I, section 8), to his own time. Artaxerxes reigned from 465 BC to his death in 425 BC which matches up with the dating of Malachi. But again, going by what Jesus himself said, John the baptist was a prophet.
Still there were some 10,000 Jews who converted to Christianity in the first century after the cross of Christ.
Since you didn't answer this question in the other string (Why Jews Don't Believe In Jesus), I am going to ask you again, right here. WHERE DID YOU GET THIS FIGURE? Did you pull it right out of your... umm... thin air?
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.