OT vs NT

This is the place to discuss anything to do with scriptural doctrine. It is the primary purpose of this site, and most discussions will be here.
Forum rules
Matt 18:6; Eccl 7:9; 1 Pet 4:8 (If you're not sure what they say then please hover over them with your mouse or look them up in your own Bible before posting)
Message
Author
Orchid61
Posts: 654
Joined: 5 years ago

Re: OT vs NT

#11 Post by Orchid61 » 2 months ago

Photo:
Decades back 🙂

OT is Negative, NT is photo
Without the negative no photo.

Love to all
Maria 🌷

apollos0fAlexandria
Posts: 3394
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: OT vs NT

#12 Post by apollos0fAlexandria » 2 months ago

AmosAU wrote:
2 months ago
I do agree with your thoughts. It's the big picture that makes both testaments complete.

I've been saying for a couple of years now that we westerners are trying to understand an ancient Near Eastern book from a modern Greco/Roman mindset.
It's like trying to swim upstream during a flood. We are able to translate the words (not entirely) but still ned to understand the culture and mindset of the writers and their audience.

As anyone who has done any research using aone of the available concordances will kinow, there can be up to 10+ English words for just one Hebrew or Grek word.
Context is essential when trying to get as close as possible clarity of the passage concerned. I believe we need to learn how to understand the ancient mind, before we can get a true sence of the bible, particularly the OT.
Hi Amos

Yes. I have certainly shifted on this.

My reasoning used to hold me to a position whereby you find God by recognizing that the Bible is His perfect Word.

Perhaps its better to think in a different way e.g. finding God leads you to a recognition that His Word is perfect. Only when you see this through the lens of Christianity does it all make sense. I totally acknowledge that this is a form of eisegesis, but in this case not in the detail of a specific verse, but in the Bible as a whole.

Apollos

AmosAU
Posts: 1246
Joined: 7 years ago
Location: Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: OT vs NT

#13 Post by AmosAU » 2 months ago

Hi Apollos,

My whole understanding and belief is changing.

Over a dcade ago, I was prepaired to let the OT go, just concentrating on the NT. How foolish that was. I soon realized that the OT is the very record or document that underpins everything in the NT. Without the OT, the NT makes absolutely no real sense, and has nothing on which to stand.

In recent years, I've gone back to square one. I've been concentrating on the Torah, the five books of Moses. This has yeilded untold blessings in the form of a much deeper undrstanding of the whole bible, but particularly the NT. The Torah is the foundation for YHWH's provision of redemption. Once we can undrstand this, everything else slots into place.

The world of Christianity has its roots in the Catholic church that was largely founded on Pagan teachings, particularly those of Plato and Augastine. Modern Christianity is not the teachings of Jesus and the first century believers. It was very rapidly highjacked by the Pagan teachings of deamons. That's what I now believe. I've done studies of the foundations of religion and how pagandom infiltrated the true teachings of the early believers. Things aren't what they seem to be on the surface.

I went back to square one. That's the only way we are able to begin to see who we really are, and what has been very cleverly brought into the mix. It really is a mix of truth and demonic error. Sol started a thread titled; "What is a Christian." I was going to respond with additional information on that theme, but have decided to start a new thread. This will show what a Christian is not. Most believe that Christianity is the truth, but alas it's a smokescreen covering the bottomless pit.

BTW, we don't need the Levitical priesthood the observe the Ten Commandments or any of the OT writings.

Regards, Amos.

User avatar
menrov
Posts: 1909
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: OT vs NT

#14 Post by menrov » 2 months ago

Hi, I agree with Apollos, you will not find so-called THE TRUTH on this forum or any other forum or in any reglious organisation. It is all interpretation.

Regarding your question if you have to observe the sabbath, (or any other practice), I prefer to say, it is a personal choice. If you feel good to keep the sabbath, then it should be your choice. And do not try to convince others they should do the same.
This is what Paul tried to explain.

Personally, my view has changed over the years. I find it difficult to believe in a set of writings of whom I do not know the real writers, of which the originals are no longer available and of which there are multiple versions available which makes it even more challenging to see which one is more correct.
If someone comes to me and says he has a great, lucrative deal for me and I only have to sign one paper and it is done, would I be considered smart by just signing? Should I not investigate the persons involved, try to meet them etc?
This is what I believe happened somehow with the scriptures. Because it is said that this is the word of God, it must be true, right? So, when we read that God promised a new land for his people, full of milk and honey and they just had to remove the current inhabitants, it is justified because it is said that God wants this. It was heard in a dream or an angel came or ....
Same things still happen in the Islam.

I am not saying the scriptures do not also contain words from God but I cannot prove it nor deny it. So, then it becomes a personal view. And that is fine. There are people who talk to trees as they believe it gives them peace of mind. There are people who believe in other forces or ideas. My view is that all this is fine, as long as these views do not harm people. And if someone wants to share theiir view, that is fine and can be very interesting.

All in all, It has become my view that any view based on the scriptures, is just a view and should not be classified as The Truth. (I can imagine many would disagree with this statement :-) )

Stranger
Posts: 2241
Joined: 3 years ago

Re: OT vs NT

#15 Post by Stranger » 2 months ago

menrov wrote:
2 months ago
I am not saying the scriptures do not also contain words from God but I cannot prove it nor deny it. So, then it becomes a personal view. And that is fine. There are people who talk to trees as they believe it gives them peace of mind. There are people who believe in other forces or ideas. My view is that all this is fine, as long as these views do not harm people. And if someone wants to share theiir view, that is fine and can be very interesting.
Hi menrov,

That's the reason God gave us these complex brains, we all have billions and billions of neurons, hundreds of billions of interconnections, it can remember everything we've ever seen or heard. It can process more than two million bytes of information in one second.

Would God have given you something like that just so you can be a sheep and follow what someone else tells you to do, or to think for yourself?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24U9nbagjoU


Stranger, (Ro 8:27)

Kerry Huish
Posts: 410
Joined: 2 years ago

Re: OT vs NT

#16 Post by Kerry Huish » 1 month ago

menrov wrote:
2 months ago

All in all, It has become my view that any view based on the scriptures, is just a view and should not be classified as The Truth. (I can imagine many would disagree with this statement :-) )
Pretty much the same view that Pontius Pilate had, when confronted with Jesus: -

John 18:38 “What is truth?” retorted Pilate...

Jesus had a different view: -

John 17:17 Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth.

Jesus provided a parable in order that we might avoid developing a complacent attitude with regards spiritual assets or truths.

Luke 19:20 “Then another servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21 I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.’ 22 “His master replied, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then didn’t you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?’ 24 “Then he said to those standing by, ‘Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.’

If we are not careful then we could easily loose our sense of value in truth, if this should happen then even what we had will be taken away.

Matthew 25:29 For whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.

Imagine a pearl merchant - traveling far and wide - seeking fine pearls, imagine if he ever lost his sense and skills in being able to determine what is fine and what is not?

I am sure you will agree, he would turn out to be a pretty rubbish pearl merchant.

Truth can be found by ones who keep seeking, said Jesus: -

Luke 11:9 “So I say to you: Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 10 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.

This I have posted in order to encourage readers to seek and hold tight to any truth they have, as opposed to giving up and exchanging truth for what amounts to nothing.

Hebrews 12:16 See that no one is sexually immoral, or is godless like Esau, who for a single meal sold his inheritance rights as the oldest son.

Regards

Kerry
Revelation 10:7 But in the days when the seventh angel is about to sound his trumpet, the mystery of God will be accomplished, just as he announced to his servants the prophets.”

Bobcat
Posts: 3820
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: OT vs NT

#17 Post by Bobcat » 1 month ago

Good encouragement for us all, Kerry. Thank you.


Bobcat

AmosAU
Posts: 1246
Joined: 7 years ago
Location: Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: OT vs NT

#18 Post by AmosAU » 1 month ago

Bobcat wrote:
1 month ago
Good encouragement for us all, Kerry. Thank you.


Bobcat
I second this Bobcat!

Regards, Amos.

User avatar
menrov
Posts: 1909
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: OT vs NT

#19 Post by menrov » 1 month ago

Hi Kerry, you said (partly): ....a complacent attitude with regards spiritual assets or truths.

That statements is based on you conviction that the bible as you have it, contains spiritual assets or truth. I respect that. Nevertheless, consider the definition of "a complacent person" from Miriam Webster:
1 : marked by self-satisfaction especially when accompanied by unawareness of actual dangers or deficiencies : marked by complacency : self-satisfied a complacent smile. 2 : complaisant sense 1 complacent flattery. 3 : unconcerned.

Not sure why you applied this to me.

It remains surprising that if one does not agree with the entire contents of the bible or has valid questions about the validity of (parts of) the bible, that person is considered complacent, compared to Pontius Pilate or worse. Could be JW related where one is (continuously) taught that anyone who does not agree with the WT, is an unbeliever, worldly or other negative definition.
As Heb 11:1 says: Now faith is being sure of what we hope for, being convinced of what we do not see.
Faith is not based on facts but on conviction of seeing things that cannot be seen and that person has a hope. The point that a person is sure of his hope, does not mean that this hope is a sure thing (for others).

Taking Heb. 11:1 further, could it be that certain writers in the bible based their writings on the things they were convinced but were not seen and were focusing on their hope?

Kerry Huish
Posts: 410
Joined: 2 years ago

Re: OT vs NT

#20 Post by Kerry Huish » 1 month ago

menrov wrote:
1 month ago
Hi Kerry, you said (partly): ....a complacent attitude with regards spiritual assets or truths.

That statements is based on you conviction that the bible as you have it, contains spiritual assets or truth. I respect that. Nevertheless, consider the definition of "a complacent person" from Miriam Webster:
1 : marked by self-satisfaction especially when accompanied by unawareness of actual dangers or deficiencies : marked by complacency : self-satisfied a complacent smile. 2 : complaisant sense 1 complacent flattery. 3 : unconcerned.

Not sure why you applied this to me.
If you do not believe that the bible contains spiritual assets or truth that can be found.
If you do not believe that these truths can be further found, refined and shared by discussing spiritual matters with spiritual people.

Then you are self satisfied and unconcerned with spiritual things, totally unaware of the danger and deficiencies that such a disposition brings.

AKA complacent.

Some in times past developed a similar complacent attitude towards spiritual things, forsaking opportunities to gathering together to discuss spiritual matters, maybe even using such occasions to discourage rather than encourage.

Hebrew 10:25 And let us not neglect our meeting together, as some people do, but encourage one another, especially now that the day of his return is drawing near.

I wonder where these 'complacent ones' were when Jerusalem was destroyed?
Jesus said that the reader would need to acquire or use understanding. This can be found by discussing spiritual matters with spiritual people.

Matthew 24:15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel —let the reader understand—

Proverbs 27:17 As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.

Regards

Kerry
Revelation 10:7 But in the days when the seventh angel is about to sound his trumpet, the mystery of God will be accomplished, just as he announced to his servants the prophets.”

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests