/lit/ - Literature

>>23076989
I don't know why Christians don't just have the new testament as the standard Bible that's handed out to people

Why does it have to be a massive thing thats just a chore?

You could even just do an abridged pocket new testament.
But I guess we've abandoned KJV so its all fucked. Nothing means anything and there's nothing more nihilistic than modern christianity

>>23076989
also they do its called san teria and a bunch of others

>>23076989
Jesus was Jewish. The Gospels were written by what would at the time be considered Jewish people. The very concept of a Messiah was introduced in Jewish text. Jesus claimed to be the son of the Jewish God. Jesus referenced parts of The Old Testament multiple times. It's not that hard to really understand.
Though I do sort of agree, as IIRC one of Christ's missions was to right some of the wrongs and clarify some things from The Old Testament. I really don't understand why some Christians not only take The Old Testament entirely literally, and also follow every little thing within it.

>>23076989
For much of history Christians saw themselves as the real Jews (part of the new covenant) and "jews" that didn't join the covenant are no longer part of the Jews.
Whether that is textually supported or not, I don't think so. But at the very least Christians see the Jews as spiritual predecessors in one chain of faith, so their stories are useful to understand Christianity and God. It's also useful to keep in mind that the split between Judaism and Christianity was not recognized in the early Christian days up through much of the medieval period, Jews were just seen as people that rejected the messiah. They weren't a seperate religion.
(Phoneposting while at work so it's shit)

>>23077015
>>23077018
Its just made a mess because Christians can't even agree if old testament laws should be followed and they just pick and choose at a whim
Its fucking dumb. I think all organized Christianity is dumb. It just doesn't make sense to me. It's not whats in the book
Where are they even pulling shit from

>>23076989
Because Paul, who barely knew about Jesus's teachings at all, doubled down on the whole "le ancient tradition" meme which Jesus almost certainly didn't teach.

The people who actually wrote the Gospels, which wasn't until after Paul had done his damage, then included a handful of verses explaining why the old traditional scriptures and values are actually good and relevant, instead of being the very thing Jesus was objecting to.

>>23077066
I don't get why Paul is included at all but trad guys say he's the most based one. His story is romantic I guess.

First of all, the Old Testament is not just about the nation of Israel. God creates Adam and makes a covenant with Noah first. Only later does Abraham appear in this story.
Secondly, Christians are the successors to the Jews of the Old Testament, not those who call themselves Jews today. The Church superseded the Jewish nation and now every baptised Christian is the chosen of God. Please read the basics of Christian theology, which you claim to “like”, before posting.
>Before the coming of this faith [ie. of Christianity], we were held in custody under the law [ie. the Jewish Old Testament] locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

>So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.
>>23077040
The Old Testament moral laws (except those allowing divorce) are to be followed, especially the Ten Commandments. But the ceremonial laws are not to be followed. Council of Florence:
>The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally…
> All, therefore, who after that time observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors. Therefore, it commands all who glory in the name of Christian, at whatever time, before or after baptism, to cease entirely from circumcision, since, whether or not one places hope in it, it cannot be observed at all without the loss of eternal salvation.
It’s that simple.

>>23077100
>its that simple
Makes no sense. Why should I care what the council of Florence says

>>23077015
>Jesus referenced parts of The Old Testament multiple times. It's not that hard to really understand.
You misunderstand. This is part of what I'm talking about. You have all these references to the old testament, and it's all in a jewish context, but if you aren't jewish and you're reading this stuff you feel a disconnect. Like it isn't written for you.

There's a lot of greek thinking in christian theology which doesn't bother me at all. There's an internal spiritual tradition of eternal life, which is mirrored earlier in Plato's philosophy of eternal forms, and is hellenistic. Even though I'm not greek this doesn't bother me. The thing is, the bible is constantly talking about the jewish people, or makes reference to things that happened to the jewish people, of whom I am not a part. This just feels weird.

>>23077018
>But at the very least Christians see the Jews as spiritual predecessors in one chain of faith
The thing is, a christian will agree with this, but the agreement seems more academic than religious in feeling. Despite being raised with christian parents who took me to church, and having a certain understanding of christianity through this osmosis, I don't feel a connection to jewish people or identity. I never actually had any idea what the jewish people believe or what they were about until I got older. I went to a bar mitzvah when I was younger and it seemed to me at the time that jews have a totally different religion and thing going on. What I'm saying is that I don't feel this continuity carries over to the modern day very well, in my personal experience.

>>23077108
The Council of Florence is an authoritative council attended by most of the Christian bishops throughout the world to define doctrine. If you don’t care what it says you don’t care what Christianity says.

>>23077121
fyi that's someone else, not op, incase you confused them

>>23077121
Thats dumb. I'm Christian not Florentian

>>23077146
You’re not Christian
>The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.

>>23077155
I'm Christian

>>23077159
no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.

>>23077165
I'm Christian.

bump

>>23076989
the OT should be an appendix in the back of the bible to give the teachings of christ some context. Its incredibly immoral to cherry-pick parts of the OT to undermine Christ's message yet extremely common.

>>23076989
Read the sermon on the mount, Matthew 5-7. Your answer is in there. You're also slightly misusing terminology, but to explain it all would be too much for the return.

>>23077015
Luke was a gentile.

>>23077040
Speak for yourself. All you're doing is adding useless noise to a discussion.

>>23077066
There's nothing inconsistent in what he wrote with the Scripture before him. I could wait for your claims, but you guys just twist verses and deliberately misinterpret things to attack the Bible because you have the spirit of antichrist. You don't care for the truth. You can try and I won't bother with it, but someone else might feel like wasting their time with you.

>>23077100
>Holy Roman Church
That's funny. You don't really believe that, do you? C'mon, we're all adults here. It's not like they're going to torture and murder you these days for questioning them or owning a Bible, even if they'd like to (but you're probably unaware of what the Pope thinks about Bible societies or fundamentalists a.k.a. people who actually believe the Bible).

>>23077850
You're immoral. Read the sermon on the mount, Matthew 5-7.

>>23077899
>Luke was a gentile.
Okay?

>>23076989
Galatians 3:24-27

>Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Many Christians read the Old Testament because it is like an oracle. It gives context for why mankind needs a savior and can't be saved by following laws. Paul teaches much of the Gospel in his letters by contextualizing the Old Testament, such as Abraham's faith as a Christian one. Christians also believe it is full of prophecies that predicted Christ's life, ministry, death and resurrection.

>>23077902
>blessed are the merciful

what has that got to do with people cherry picking from the OT to undermine the teachings of christ?

>>23077899
>There's nothing inconsistent in what he wrote with the Scripture before him.
Speedreader detected. What Jesus himself taught is inconsistent with the Scripture before him, which he states explicitly in the parable of the old and new garment, and the old and new wineskins. He disregarded the old rules concerning the Sabbath too, he denounced the priesthood who used the old Scriptures, I mean, how much more obvious could it get? The Old Testament was an outdated thing of the past in the eyes of Jesus, and the traditional attempts to combine it with the New Testament and try and make the two consistent with each other has been a complete embarrassment.

By the way
>um uh you can make an argument but I won't engage with it
This is the most pure distilled cope I've ever seen. You may as well carry a sign that says "I have no confidence in my beliefs."

>>23077100
>christians are the real jews
holy based

>>23077899
>What the Pope thinks.
The Pope is a heretic in support of homosexuality, a sin. The Bible has warned about false prophets.

>>23077040
Have you ever heard (Or read, since it's also mentioned in the bible by Jeremiah and Paul) about the "new covenant"?

>>23076993
Some do that

>>23077066
Paul was likely referencing something that predated Christ. Christianity wasn’t the first religion, you know?

>>23076989
>typology, prophecy, 'foreshadowing'

Dual Covenant Dispensationalism et. al. is a very young heresy propigated at the British's isntigation on Southern revivials during the Great Depression and even before the turn of the century. The ultimate fruit of which was a perfidious president of this new confession, Lyndon Baines Johnson, and a hook to steer US foreign policy and run interference for elite capture & defense/tech espionage via Israelis and/or Russians posing as Israelis, including Warsaw Pact emigres to the Holy Land with dubious Right of Return bona fides


https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLYFBLkHop2akHMcr-TJzd0dbfys2xqDdr
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Mx6pHBAL4k&list=PLYFBLkHop2anlJ9wrDXdhugr95AJ3dMKA&index=4

bump

>>23076989
>written by jews
>witten for jews
>jesus was a jew
>christians: hate jews
I never understood this.

>>23076989
You can appreciate a document with major historical/literary significance without being ethnically descended from the culture that made it.

>>23078289
qrd on the new covenant foreshadowed in Jeremiah? I know Psalm 86 talks about all nations worshiping the God of Israel.

>>23077015
> The Gospels were written by what would at the time be considered Jewish people
False.

>>23078804
> witten for jews
It was written to save all of humanity. That’s the point.
> christians: hate jews
The New Testament is antisemitic in fundamental ways, I’m talking about Jews as a religion not as an ethnicity.

>>23076989
>>23076993
Most of what Christ taught came from one of the Mosaic books, Deuteronomy I believe

>>23077109
>The thing is, a christian will agree with this, but the agreement seems more academic than religious in feeling. Despite being raised with christian parents who took me to church, and having a certain understanding of christianity through this osmosis, I don't feel a connection to jewish people or identity. I never actually had any idea what the jewish people believe or what they were about until I got older. I went to a bar mitzvah when I was younger and it seemed to me at the time that jews have a totally different religion and thing going on. What I'm saying is that I don't feel this continuity carries over to the modern day very well, in my personal experience.
Because they're not part of the same religion! Modern Jews are NOT part of Christianity or their predecessors. They are a branch of pharisees that evolved alongside Christians, that's why they were hated and cursed by Christians until the aristocracy began protecting them for financial reasons in the late Medieval period.
Jews today are not the spiritual predecessors of Christians, only the Jews written of in the Bible. Jesus himself has a problem with the Jews that valued the "laws of men and not of God" (their Talmud and oral laws) and his quest was destroying that. The Jews that refused the Messiah were these (non-real-Jews, according to Christ and the Christians) and today Jews are the descendents of the (not-real-Jews according to Christ and the Christians).
So don't feel you owe anything to modern Jews, they are literally not the Jews according to actual Christian faith. They are Jewish in race, but because they did not accept their Messiah (according to Christians) they aren't spiritually. They are something completely different.

>>23079021
>jews are actually not the same as the ancient ones.
What?
That doesn't make any sense.
How can they be different, if they worship like they ancestors, have the same state as their ancestors, same practices, same days of worship, same religion, and same religious buildings.
So how are they in any way, different?
It just sounds like Christian cope to me.

>>23079111
A core part of the New Testament is Christ's criticism of the oral and rabbinical law. It's why Christians don't use the Talmud despite it being "part of Judaism."
The Judaism that is practiced today is the not-Judaism in the new testament. All of the actual religious Jews (according to Christianity) recognize the Messiah and became Christians.
And there is no distinction between a religious Jew and Christian in Christianity. Think of it more like God-loving, and in the old testament the God-lovers were the race of Jews, and during the New Testament the faith of God-loving was spread to gentiles. The Jews that did not accept the Messiah of God-loving became not-God-lovers, so they are not part of the same religion, and they're not part of the old religion either or else they would have recognized their Messiah and his order to quit the non-God-loving Talmudic practices.

>>23079111
Imagine it like starting a revolutionary movement, and 50 years down the line when you've succeeded and your government is being installed, you realize half of the members of your revolution supported the old government and are now trying to take your government down (they see you as an illegitimate ruler, and want to empower the previous ones).
Do you consider them to have been true revolutionaries, or something else, misguided or malicious?

>>23078830
There is a new covenant from God so the old covenant is not used anymore. That's why we don't circumcize children or we don't stone to death people to dress a skirt.

>>23080139
>>23078830
for dressing a skirt*
To add some bible verses:
2 Corinthians 3:7-11

7 Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was, 8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

bump

bump

>>23080139
This was never stated as such in the New Testament. Jesus "came to fulfill" the Old Testament. That is a forward looking statement. He wanted the Pharisees to actually follow the dictates of the Torah instead of finding clever legalistic ways around them. This suggests its continual validity.

>>23082039
It is said.
Hebrews 8:13
13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

>>23082039
>He wanted the Pharisees to actually follow the dictates of the Torah
I don't remember him saying that. I remember him giving the two Great Commandments, which supersede everything else.

>>23082104
this

>>23082104
That's Paul trying to convince the Hebrews.
Anyways it's obviously not "obsolete" and hasn't disappeared. What Jesus said superseded it but otherwise it remained meaningful

>>23082212
So then what was he always criticizing the Pharisees for

>>23082389
Do you believe in Jesus and also think that Paul isn't valid? Who gets salvation according to you then? Maybe some rare church of orthodox jews that also believe in Jesus as God, who sacrifice goats everytime they sin and the stone to death people?

>>23082389
>hasn't disappeared
Do jews still sacrifice a goat everytime they sin and stone to death sinners? Do jews still

>>23076989
But they don't? Christians ignore all the meme rules jews follow since Jesus redeemed them from all sin. Why do you think the latter seethe at the former?

>>23082438
>Christians ignore all the meme rules jews follow since Jesus redeemed them from all sin.
which is why it's weird to include the old stuff written for jews

>Why do you think the latter seethe at the former?
not what op said

>>23082435
The sacrifice chickens nowadays (Kapparot).

bump

>>23076989

"Christianity" is basically what Judaism formed into.

But the "Jews" as we know them today stole it

>>23076989
This is not a serious question. Not at all.

They wouldn't have any bible left otherwise.

>>23083085
>which is why it's weird to include the old stuff written for jews
If you don't include it, then what are you being redeemed about?

>>23076989
>parts of the bible that were written by and for the jewish people
All of it?

The problem in reality is Christians completely discarding the Old Testament. That part is of vital importance. If you had to order society based on only one of the two, the Old Testament might actually be better.

>>23082389
>what was he always criticizing the Pharisees for
For not loving God and not loving their neighbors as themselves.
He didn't say "the old Scriptures say this, so you should do it." He said "the old Scriptures say this, but I say you should do this instead."

>What Jesus said superseded it but otherwise it remained meaningful
No, not "otherwise." What Jesus said superseded it, and it's only meaningful insofar as it aligns with what Jesus said. The parts that don't align are not meaningful.

>>23084029
This. The Old Testament has a lot of weird garbage in it but it's still structured with the aim of teaching people how to run a conservative society, the New Testament is abstract hippy bullshit.

>>23084044
>For not loving God and not loving their neighbors as themselves.
He criticized them for more than just that. They were legalistic but ignored the spirit of religion. He wanted them to earnestly follow the religion outlined in the Old Testament, plus the updates he added.

>No, not "otherwise." What Jesus said superseded it, and it's only meaningful insofar as it aligns with what Jesus said. The parts that don't align are not meaningful.
You are saying the Old Testament is completely irrelevant. Most Christians throughout history have not taken this position and I don't think it is scripturally defensible.

Is there anything wrong with Perennialism in Christianity? The Catholic Church has a doctrine of “logia spermatakoi,” aka the “seeds of truth” in all the earth’s religions. I can’t bring myself to believe that the Jewish Old Testament is literally true, just that Judaism is the religion that was most directly fulfilled by the coming of Jesus Christ. They had the concept of a monotheistic God and prophecies for a messiah, and that’s true. The story about the Garden of Eden sounds like a simple creation myth. The great flood was likely based on the Younger Dryas 12,800 years ago. The Tower of Babel sounds like a real event that was mythologized through a Jewish lens, i.e. the tower was a real thing that collapsed and Jews thought “this is the work of God punishing man for his folly.” Like the Atlantis “myth” that was also likely based on a real historical event.
Reading about Buddhism, Daoism, Hinduism, they all contain elements that remind me of Christianity. Hinduism has Krishna, the supreme personality of the Godhead, a clear prefiguration of Christ. The Boddhisatva was also a prefigure for Christ. I think Christianity’s destiny is to be a global (catholic) religion, and it seems like a step back to focus on how it ONLY fulfilled the Jewish religion. But that may be heretical, I don’t know.

>>23084029
>>23084054
True, belief in a maniacal demiurge that smites you for slightly offending him is probably better for running a society of fat, stupid goyim. Belief that God is the sacrificial love exemplified by the torture of Jesus on the cross is a far more profound and transcendent idea, but it’s wasted on your average Amerifat. I hate contemporary Christian rock music so much.

Christianity teaches that by becoming brothers of Christ Himself we also become heirs to the promise God made to Abraham. God wants a Chosen People, and the Jews were chosen to cultivate that promise as if a vineyard. They failed to do so, and so as 1 Cornthians and Romans 12 talk about, they were like branches cut off a tree and the Gentiles grafted on. But as Romans 12 says the promise is the root of the tree, which goes back to Abraham.
The Old Testament is full of history, prophecy, wisdom, theology, and types and figures. The Jewish element is impossible to avoid if you wany to have a proper understanding of Christ

>>23076993
>I don't know why Christians don't just have the new testament as the standard Bible that's handed out to people
Lots of Christians actually do this, but the Old Testament is still essential. Jesus quotes the Old Testament directly. You can't understand salvation with the Garden of Eden Story. Pauls uses figures like Esau in Romans and Sarah in Galatians.
You may as well be telling Christians to preach an ahistorical form of their religion and turn it into some kind of christological gnosticsm

>>23083269
Judaism now (mainly the hassidim) are closest to the Pharisees of the New Testament. Christianity in Europe was closest to the Essene Jews who believed in brotherhood and monasticism (but it was obviously punched up with Roman solar iconography to some extent). Christianity today is basically unrecognizable compared to anything in the Bible and is completely unserious and goofy. Or at least in my experience.

>>23077121
Ew a C*tholic

>>23077165
Proof?

>>23084331
>Romans 12 talk about, they were like branches cut off a tree and the Gentiles grafted on. But as Romans 12 says the promise is the root of the tree, which goes back to Abraham.
But those are the words of Paul, a former Jewish supremacist, not the words of Christ. Is it possible he was biased in his interpretation of Christ’s message? In Matthew 9:16 Jesus says “No one puts a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch tears away from the garment, and a worse tear is made.” Sounds to me like Jesus explicitly arguing against Christianity being “grafted on” to the old covenant.

>>23076989
I can see why this is so jarring and confusing for someone who didnt read the bible but wants to sound like a pseud online. In Genesis (the first chapter im presuming youve read since you are confident enough to discuss this) we see that God chose the people of Israel to represent him (God) in the ensuing war of nations. After the flood and tower of Babel, the 10 tribes of Israel split into what become the mdoern nations and we are following the lineage of Adam and Eve's children through Seth. Seth means "will bring good things" so we are waiting to see which child of Seth will bring about the ultimate salvation that is promised in Genesis. Moses dies, Joshua tries and fails, then we get into Kings with King David, then prophets...chapter after chapter we see human incompetence and rebellion despite being given clear instructions Gods chosen people fuck up time and time again. So God intervenes, sending his Son, and that is the connection between the chosen people and The Nations (us) that was setup and prophesied since Genesis and delivered in what we call "The Gospels"
Hope that helps and clears up any confusion!

Hey I running a server for honest Bible loving frens who want to discuss scripture and shoot the shit. Or schizobabble on long religious rants, thats ok too. Just feel like there isnt honest space for this online, usually degrates into nastiness instead of fellowship. I feel like we get deep into the text and share good theories.
discord gg/ 3Ye9gWR6

>>23084377
No not at all. I'm glad you mentioned that verse actually.

Matt. 9:14
Then the disciples of John came to Him, saying, Why do we and the Pharisees fast much, but Your disciples do not fast?
Matt. 9:15
And Jesus said to them, The sons of the bridechamber cannot mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them, can they? But days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast.
Matt. 9:16
No one puts a patch of unfulled cloth on an old garment, for that which fills it up pulls away from the garment, and a worse tear is made.
Matt. 9:17
Neither do they put new wine into old wineskins; otherwise, the wineskins burst, and the wine pours out, and the wineskins are ruined; but they put new wine into fresh wineskins, and both are preserved.

Here Jesus is explicitly talking about the Law and Old Covenant being abrogated which is entirely consistent with what Paul said and no way contradicts Jesus. The Promise of salvation was intially given to Abraham, which Jesus reminds a Samaritan woman here

John 4:22
You worship that which you do not know; we worship that which we know, for salvation is of the Jews.

And also here

Matt. 15:24
But He answered and said, I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Matt. 15:25
But she came and worshipped Him, saying, Lord, help me!
Matt. 15:26
But He answered and said, It is not good to take the children's bread and throw it to the little dogs.
Matt. 15:27
And she said, Yes, Lord, for even the little dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.
Matt. 15:28
Then Jesus answered and said to her, O woman, great is your faith! Be it done to you as you wish. And her daughter was healed from that hour.

>>23077165
Rom. 10:13
For "whoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.''

I call upon the name of Jesus Christ. I am saved :)

>>23084340
>You may as well be telling Christians to preach an ahistorical form of their religion and turn it into some kind of christological gnosticsm
Most protestants already do that.

>>23084389
>So God intervenes, sending his Son
And apparently rips-off Homer, in the process.

>>23084482
>I call upon the name of Jesus Christ. I am saved :)
You may be saved, but you're still an idiot.

>>23084174
>bandwagon
I don't care about what "most Christians" think and I don't care about what's "scripturally defensible" outside of what it's written that Jesus said.

>He wanted them to earnestly follow the religion outlined in the Old Testament, plus the updates he added.
Quote where he said this. The parable of the old and new garments suggests the opposite. So does the fact that he said "I am the way," not "I plus the old Scriptures are the way."

>>23085912
>I don't care about what "most Christians" think and I don't care about what's "scripturally defensible" outside of what it's written that Jesus said.
You're assuming that what's written in the NT is an accurate record of what Jesus said, and not corrupted, misheard, or a rewrite by various partisans long afterward. Read some Bart Ehremann. Better yet, Robert M. Price.

>>23085292
Do you have a source for that claim? Or is it just more papist kvetching?

>>23085999
You've obviously never studied the preservation of the traditional text. And those men must not have either or are just willingly ignorant since they love their sin and hate God, what buffoons.

you will read the semitic tribal law and you will abide by it goy

>>23076989
Luke 24:27
>Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he [Jesus] interpreted to them the things about himself in all the scriptures.
Christians interpret the Old Testament through the assumption that it's all about Jesus. No matter how irrelevant it seems, it must be about Jesus somehow.

>>23086222
That is just a blatant lie. It's largely about it, much of it points to him as the ultimate sacrifice (i.e. the temple veil rent), the prophecies about the messiah are about Jesus of Nazareth. But nobody says that something like Cain slaying Abel is about Jesus.

But hey, you antichrists are all liars. Fitting digits for your post btw.
1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

It's odd how there's always an endless stream of lying assholes like you who will tell everyone what Christians believe, but of course you're not one. Do us a favor and speak for yourself you coward, you won't even share your beliefs I bet. All you do is bear false witness against others because you hate God and His Son. You wouldn't speak like this of any other religion or culture, that'd be too insensitive and offensive to lie about them.

>>23086245
>nobody says that something like Cain slaying Abel is about Jesus.
This was easy to find
https://biblelineministries.org/abel-was-a-type-of-jesus-christ/

>>23086277
>a type of

>>23086314
Atheists are illiterate.

>>23086209
>You've obviously never studied the preservation of the traditional text. And those men must not have either or are just willingly ignorant since they love their sin and hate God, what buffoons
You can be a Christian without insulting others, mind-reading their motivations, or sitting in judgment on their sins (God's job, I believe, not yours). As for these 'bufoons," Price has two doctorates in the New Testament. Ehremann's qualifications could fill this whole thread.
If you accept the 'preservation of the traditional text' as a matter of faith and miracle, that's fine. All the hard evidence says otherwise, but, hey, ignore it and call scholars names. Can't refute an argument like that.

>>23086314
?

>>23086326
>You can be a Christian without insulting others
You actually can't. Perhaps you should read what Jesus said or what the term Christian means.

Further, all atheists are fools (or buffoons). Liars, thieves, whores, whore mongers, murderers, deceivers, the list could go on, they're all idiots and fools. Insane even. Rebellion against God is insanity.

>mind-reading their motivations
Don't have to. You should read the Bible before talking, little boy.

>or sitting in judgment on their sins (God's job, I believe, not yours).
Okay, now I know you have never read the Bible, you absolute hypocrite, fool, buffoon, and idiot.

>Price has two doctorates
>Ehremann's qualifications
Don't care. That's completely irrelevant and you'll probably never know why no matter what I could say to a fool like you.

>All the hard evidence says otherwise, but, hey, ignore it and call scholars names. Can't refute an argument like that.
You're just lying. But hey, why wouldn't you lie, who's watching?

>>23086332
see >>23086320

>>23086326
>tRuSt ThE sChOlArS
>TrUsT tHe PrIeStS
>tRuSt ThE eXpErTs
NPC who doesn't even know God's promises.

>>23086357
It's so funny when someone judges that judging is wrong. It always goes over their head.

All they really hate is righteous judgment, which all Christians are called to do. They hate righteous judgment and love wicked and hypocritical and evil judgment.

>>23085292
No they don't you gross c*tholic.

>>23085893
C*tholicsm is just mental masturbation for pseuds to feel smug about being smart. It's entirely contrary to the Bible's teaching of humility.
>Rom. 1:21
>Because though they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God or thank Him, but rather became vain in their reasonings, and their heart, lacking understanding, was darkened.

>>23078804
It’s not complicated. First, Christian’s don’t hate Jews, the closest you will get is John Chrysostom. Secondly, Judaism today and its people do not resemble those in Jesus’ day in the slightest, it completely changed in AD 70 after the destruction of the temple, with only the Pharisee tradition — that which Jesus criticised the most, that survived and evolved into what we have in Judaism today

>>23077121
>>The Council of Florence is an authoritative council attended by most of the Christian bishops throughout the world to define doctrine. If you don’t care what it says you don’t care what Christianity says.
Only Jewsus as an authority on Christianity.

>>23087284
Still a mostly jewish religion,though.
No matter hobw much times, you say otherwise.

>>23077015
>Jesus was Jewish
Sure.
He also had radically different beliefs to the people we call jews today and likely came from a group with a different body of scripture than what is in the bible that christians read today.

>>23087376
Still a mostly jewish figure, though.
So stop these mindless technicalities and just say it as it actually is, Jesus was a jew.

>>23086314
Yes. Do you not know what that means? You got BTFO.

A Christianity thread which isn't just a thinly veiled /pol/ thread. How nice. On a different note I wish there was more academic talk on the two way influences of Dharmic religions and Christianity on one another.

>>23087381
>>23087351
>>23086474
Maybe I spoke too soon....

Because it's not *just* about the Israelites, it's everyone's story told through the Israelites. Anyone can be a Jacob. You don't really love God and got filtered, sorry.

>>23087730
But Christianity isn't Dharmic though.
So i don't know why you bring that.

>>23076989
Christians are supposed to be an offshoot of Second Temple Judaism, also the Old Testament is just better.

>>23087745
That's the thing, some scholars posit that there are influences between early Mahayana and other salvific religions that appeared in the Near East during that time period. Not sure if it's completely verified or not.

>>23087754
I could see some remote connections, but it's more likely its just mostly separated traditions.
Also those connections probably wouldn't enter Christianity, as they would get filtered by anything else.
It would take centuries, for Christianity to get syncretized by other regilons.
I find it hard to believe a Mahayana connection would happen that early.

>>23087782
I can see where you're coming from, and largely agree. I'm just always curious about the idea of religious syncretism, and my general field of study is in Chinese religion, and there is a LOT of that.

>>23087802
Oh yeah.
I also like religion syncretism.
Like the Greek-Buddhist in bactria.
They even reached a bit of han China.
I just think chistianity would probably not get a connection that big until centuries later, starting syncretized with platonism and then later other local religions.
I dont think there is that much connection to other traditions, which is probably why no scholars mention it.

>>23087782
The syncretism happened with Judaism before Christianity. The Essene sect of Judaism, which essentially became Christianity after the life of Christ, had been influenced by Buddhism beforehand. They practiced monasticism and had a culture of asceticism, and they’re the only major sect of Judaism that Jesus didn’t criticize by name in the gospels.

>>23087963
That's interesting.
The "Essene" sect indeed almost seems Dharmic.
I don't know if Buddhist, but...
Indeed that counts as syncretism.
Interesting.