Archive for nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Nglreturns is a forum to discuss religion, philosophy, ethics etc...

NGLReturns Daily Quiz - Play here!
 



       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Bible study
Silver

The old testament

How much of the OT should christians read/be aware of? On the BBC board, you come across people who look like they started at Genesis and Exodus then went straight on to Matthew. Is the Jewish interaction with their god largely irrelevant to christians?
Lexilogio

Re: The old testament

Silver wrote:
How much of the OT should christians read/be aware of? On the BBC board, you come across people who look like they started at Genesis and Exodus then went straight on to Matthew. Is the Jewish interaction with their god largely irrelevant to christians?


Interesting.

The most important books are the Gospels. Most Christians would advise starting there, then reading the rest of the NT, and moving into the OT afterwards. Once in the OT, most begin with the more familiar stories - so Exodus is popular.

In Church, there is an OT reading read aloud each week - some parts more popular than others.
There are parts of the OT I am much less familiar with - particularly the later prophets. I would encourage all to read the Book of Job though - it's one of my personal favourites.
Farmer Geddon

Ahhhh but the problem is the gospels were created to negate the vast majority of the Jewish texts.

To keep the notion of the one god without the nastiness of some of it's 'laws'.

Which is why Jesus, as a Torah observant Jew, would abhor what is being taught in his 'name'........
Judders Lady...

Re: The old testament

Silver wrote:
How much of the OT should christians read/be aware of? On the BBC board, you come across people who look like they started at Genesis and Exodus then went straight on to Matthew. Is the Jewish interaction with their god largely irrelevant to christians?


I would ask of you, "what or who asked you to ask this question?"
The OT is the only true scripture of YHWH it is the only scripture to which the Apostles or Jesus Christ referred to as being the Word of God.

Two things you have to do is show what you have said to be correct.
There is nothing in Christianity which shows any believer to be able to go straight from Genesis and Exodus to Matthew. So where did you get this idea from?  As for the Jewish interaction with their God, they believe you cannot have a one to one relationship with their God.
This shows what you have asked does not come from knowledge of Judaism.
I have not seen anything on the BBC board which would really suggest
the above.
Silver

Re: The old testament

jesusislord wrote:
Silver wrote:
How much of the OT should christians read/be aware of? On the BBC board, you come across people who look like they started at Genesis and Exodus then went straight on to Matthew. Is the Jewish interaction with their god largely irrelevant to christians?


I would ask of you, "what or who asked you to ask this question?"



I can think for myself so don't need prompting. I asked this question based on the limited knowledge of the OT that many christians seem to display. They have a vague knowledge, knowing the bits everyone knows but seem to have wide gaps on most of the other stuff.

Job to me seems like a cross between a sermon and a rant. It has written it in the form of a story though, where god and the devil happen to meet one day and have a bet which of course, god wins. It's the sort of think I could imagine an ancient Rudyard Kipling writing.
Farmer Geddon

The thing is Christians cherry-pick the bits from the Jewish Bible they think they can attach to their version of God...

But with further reading you find that what they think it means falls woefully short of what it actually means..

The truth is what they have been taught absolutely contradicts what a real scholar of the Hebrew texts knows..

Incredulously christian scholars think they have the right countermand what the Jews know their texts mean...

Arrogance yes..  misinformation yes.... Truth?

They are taking the piss.....  christians wouldn't know the truth even if 'dog' pissed it up on their leg....
Judders Lady...

Re: The old testament

jesusislord wrote:
Silver wrote:
How much of the OT should christians read/be aware of? On the BBC board, you come across people who look like they started at Genesis and Exodus then went straight on to Matthew. Is the Jewish interaction with their god largely irrelevant to christians?


I would ask of you, "what or who asked you to ask this question?"


Quote:

I can think for myself so don't need prompting. I asked this question based on the limited knowledge of the OT that many christians seem to display. They have a vague knowledge, knowing the bits everyone knows but seem to have wide gaps on most of the other stuff.


I think your observation is lacking evidence. Would you care to relate the parts they miss and why they would be deemed necessary for the believer to know?

Quote:

Job to me seems like a cross between a sermon and a rant. It has written it in the form of a story though, where god and the devil happen to meet one day and have a bet which of course, god wins. It's the sort of think I could imagine an ancient Rudyard Kipling writing.


I guess you never understood the book of Job.
Your opinion does not surprise me.

The view from your home looked better in winter.
Truster

Re: The old testament

Silver wrote:
How much of the OT should christians read/be aware of? On the BBC board, you come across people who look like they started at Genesis and Exodus then went straight on to Matthew. Is the Jewish interaction with their god largely irrelevant to christians?


If you take into consideration that the Messiah, all His disciples, the apostles and the Jewish worshippers only had the Old Testament scriptures to refer to then you'll realise  the importance of the OT. Timothy learnt of salvation on his mothers knee being read the scriptures (OT) as a child.

Stephen used a passage from Isaiah to open the way for the eunuch. Stephen used the OT in his speech before being stoned and of course Messiah himself, on the road to Emaus, spoke of himself beginning with Moses and all the prophets.
Paul

Farmer Geddon wrote:
The thing is Christians cherry-pick the bits from the Jewish Bible they think they can attach to their version of God...

But with further reading you find that what they think it means falls woefully short of what it actually means..

The truth is what they have been taught absolutely contradicts what a real scholar of the Hebrew texts knows..

Incredulously christian scholars think they have the right countermand what the Jews know their texts mean...

Arrogance yes..  misinformation yes.... Truth?

They are taking the piss.....  christians wouldn't know the truth even if 'dog' pissed it up on their leg....


The scriptures, including the Old Testament, belong to the Church and it it is only through Christ that the Old Testament can be properly understood. When we read the Old Testament we must constantly look for Christ and the Church. When it comes to the Old Testament I would also argue that we should look to the Septuagint first. The reason being that if the Hebrew texts was the first step in written revalation then the Greek represent a new and even better step (yes, I believe the Septuagint to be, as the early Church did including the Apostles, and inspired translation, which speaks even more clearly of Christ than the Hebrew).
Paul

Re: The old testament

Lexilogio wrote:

The most important books are the Gospels. Most Christians would advise starting there, then reading the rest of the NT, and moving into the OT afterwards.


Yes.
Truster

Re: The old testament

Paul wrote:
Lexilogio wrote:

The most important books are the Gospels. Most Christians would advise starting there, then reading the rest of the NT, and moving into the OT afterwards.


Yes.


After my conversion I wanted to know what had happened to me and why it was necessary. The first three chapters of Genesis provided the answer.
gone

Only if you believe it to be factual, which of course I don't.
Jim

Re: The old testament

agree with both Lexi and yourself on this, Paul.
I'd add, though, that the major and minor prophets are a must, as are the Psalms.
The O.T also contains theophanies and Christophanies which are markers to who God in Christ is.
Lexilogio

Re: The old testament

Truster wrote:
Paul wrote:
Lexilogio wrote:

The most important books are the Gospels. Most Christians would advise starting there, then reading the rest of the NT, and moving into the OT afterwards.


Yes.


After my conversion I wanted to know what had happened to me and why it was necessary. The first three chapters of Genesis provided the answer.


Interesting how different books speak to different people.
People who have known me for a few years know that the book of Job has always meant more to me than others.
Jim

Re: The old testament

I take it you're with me in assuming Job is poetic allegory - or parable writ large, Lexi?
I know that the more...extreme branches of our faith take it as literal.
Derek

Re: The old testament

Jim wrote:
I take it you're with me in assuming Job is poetic allegory - or parable writ large, Lexi?
I know that the more...extreme branches of our faith take it as literal.


So, would I be right in assuming that you believe Job to be allegorical and that Satan was not actually let loose on him and that he did not endure all the atrocities that he said he endured. If you think it is allegorical then what, may I ask, gives you that impression.
Jim

Re: The old testament

The style in which it was written?
The fact that pre-Christian Jews regarded it as scripture, but in an allegorical sense?
I do not negate or diminish the impact of Job, nor the many truths contained within it, but equate it with the semi-allegorical nature of the first few chapters of Genesis.
Derek

Re: The old testament

Jim wrote:
The style in which it was written?
The fact that pre-Christian Jews regarded it as scripture, but in an allegorical sense?
I do not negate or diminish the impact of Job, nor the many truths contained within it, but equate it with the semi-allegorical nature of the first few chapters of Genesis.


So, it is either your interpretation or the interpretation of the denomination that you belong to. Am I right is saying that their is nothing in Job that suggests it is allegorical, indeed, nothing in the scriptures suggests that Job is allergenic either. Would I be right in making that assumption?
Paul

Re: The old testament

Jim wrote:
The style in which it was written?
The fact that pre-Christian Jews regarded it as scripture, but in an allegorical sense?
I do not negate or diminish the impact of Job, nor the many truths contained within it, but equate it with the semi-allegorical nature of the first few chapters of Genesis.


I often here these claims regarding Genesis or Job but have seen little tl no evidence for it.
Jim

Re: The old testament

Paul;
Obviously, "allegory" is never a scriptural concept.
However, unless one subscribes to a complete, YEC literal interpretation of the first chapters of Genesis, I do not think that one can take allegory or parable out of the equation.
Certainly, Job was one of the earliest texts written which forms the Torah, the Pentateuch having been either written, or, in my opinion, very heavily edited, in the sixth/fifth centuries B.C.
Paul

Re: The old testament

Jim wrote:
Paul;
Obviously, "allegory" is never a scriptural concept.
However, unless one subscribes to a complete, YEC literal interpretation of the first chapters of Genesis, I do not think that one can take allegory or parable out of the equation.
Certainly, Job was one of the earliest texts written which forms the Torah, the Pentateuch having been either written, or, in my opinion, very heavily edited, in the sixth/fifth centuries B.C.


I never argued that the literal sense rules out the allegorical sense. For instance, it is possible to believe in both as indeed the Church always has, that is, whilst believeing something to be literallly true one can also believe that it has an allegorical meaning as well. What I believe can't be argued for is that the ancients never believed in Genesis in a literal sense. I have never seen any evidence for this. But neither am I arguing for a wooden literalness (ie. the meaning of "day" in the creation account or God "walking" in the garden).

       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Bible study
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum