[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 5 KB, 569x510, achansfacewhen.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14217811 No.14217811 [Reply] [Original]

How am I suppose to read the Old Testament in conjunction with the New Testament? God just commanded Joshua to stone a man.

>> No.14217828

>>14217811
read the OT then the Qur'an

>> No.14217834

Instead of pea braining your way through life, try looking at professional analysis of certain passages you are confused about. The God of the OT is the SAME God as the new.

>> No.14217843

>>14217811
You don't.
t. Marcion

>> No.14217851

>>14217811
Jesus wasn't even Christian. He was just a Jew who had the novel idea of empathy.

>> No.14217853

>>14217811
*supposed
Just think of the New Testament as the sequel.
God mellows out quite a bit in the sequel and kind of goes back on his anti-human sacrifice trip.

>> No.14217858

>>14217843
t. Heretic
>>14217851
t. Never read Cain and Abel

>> No.14217859

Joshua took the promised land, OP. Do that in your own life, with the same power and zeal showed by Joshua and his people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVCBpp4otVs

>> No.14217864

>>14217858
>t. Never read Cain and Abel

Who did Cain marry?

>> No.14217866

>>14217858
>t. heretic
dieu reconnaîtra les siens...

>> No.14217880

>>14217864
Probably someone from the city he founded.
Who did Seth marry?

>> No.14217888

>oh no no no don't sacrifice your children!
>just hang a sec while I create MY kid and we'll sacrifice him instead

>> No.14217899

>>14217888
>I create MY kid
the son wasn't created by the father

>> No.14217900

>>14217811
Yes, and Jesus said that when he returns he will have his enemies slain (Luke 19:27). The Jesus of the Bible is not the lovey-dovey Jesus of popular media.

>> No.14217904
File: 188 KB, 800x887, 800px-Fra_Angelico_024.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14217904

>>14217811
In hindsight, the fate of man may be worse than death after Jesus. Death means nothing for those who follow Jesus. Even the ones who came before Jesus had a chance because of the Harrowing of Hell.

>> No.14217914

>>14217900
he also said he would return during the lifetime of the apostles
>this generation shall not pass till all these things be done

>> No.14217918

>>14217899
Oh right, sorry
>while I magically inseminate a virgin who will give birth to my kid (who is also me, lol), wait for him to grow up and become a great guy, and THEN sacrifice him

>> No.14217926

>>14217914
Apostles are working today anon.

>> No.14217934

>>14217926
Are you one of those people who beleive John never died?

>> No.14217936

>>14217900
>Yes, and Jesus said that when he returns he will have his enemies slain (Luke 19:27).
You should read the full verse before implying dumb stuff, even people like Richard Dawkins have said Jesus was a good moral man.
https://www.quora.com/Did-Jesus-command-Christians-to-kill-non-believers-in-Luke-19-27

>> No.14217945

>>14217918
>who is also me, lol
But the father isn't the son. They are different entities that together (along with the spirit) form the godhead. I'm not a believer by the way. Just repeating what trinitarian christians believe.

>> No.14217950
File: 13 KB, 799x155, 858799489448444.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14217950

>>14217914
Stop being lazy.

>> No.14217957

>>14217904
yet dante still places the greek philosophers in hell

>> No.14217961

>>14217945
Yikes, that sounds polytheistic. Remember, they are one in essence.

>> No.14217962

>>14217936
I did read the full parable. The king who returns and calls for his enemies to be slain in the parable represents Jesus who does the same at the end times. Any good conservative commentary should tell you this.

>> No.14217967

>>14217950
>dude it actually means something totally different and most definitely doesn't contradict our beliefs bro

>> No.14217971

>>14217945
>trinitarian christians
Are you UPC?

>> No.14217976

>>14217961
They are one in essence but are seperate entities. Just like your fingers are seperate and exist on their own but belong to the same hand.

>> No.14217978

>>14217957
Dante wrote fanfiction.

>> No.14217983

>>14217967

Yeah, but this one is pretty obvious.

>> No.14217986

>>14217971
>UPC
what is that?

>> No.14217992

>>14217978
the harrowing of hell isn't in the bible either

>> No.14217995

>>14217986
United Pentecostal. They are Christians who do not believe in the trinity.
Non-trinitarian. I juat thought it was interesting that you made the distinction.

>> No.14218005

>>14217992
It is, but
>sola scriptura
don't do that, friend.

>> No.14218012

>>14218005
Hell is from Dante, friend.
Even Hades was just another place to live.

>> No.14218014

>>14217995
Literally anyone who isn't a flaming sectarian, i.e. the "Mormons/JW's aren't Christian" type, would make the distinction.

>> No.14218029

>>14217995
I made the distinction because the doctrine of trinity was heavily disputed in late antiquity and early middle ages. Iirc arianism was really popular for some time and even marcionism significantly influenced process of canonization of the bible books.

>> No.14218038

>>14218014
So what would call non-trinitarians?
Upc calls themselves "Oneness" Pentecostals, and are very hung up on "Oneness", I believe in the Sabellian sense.

>> No.14218042

>>14218012
Sheol is different from Gehenna. Sheol is the house of the dead. Gehenna is a place for punishment.

>> No.14218043

>>14218038
>So what would call non-trinitarians?
Unitarians.

>> No.14218050

>>14218014
Wait, wait, I glossed over that.
So you think that saying that Mormons aren't really Christians makes one a flaming sectarian?
Mormons?

>> No.14218057

>>14218043
Oh right, unitarians.
Many people in established churches think that Unitarianism is heresy.

>> No.14218074

Read the book of J and know that Jesus believed in that Yahweh

>> No.14218101

>the Son supposedly has existed eternally with the Father and was not begotten by the latter at some point in time and thus is not subordinated to the father
>yet the words "father" and "son" and their implied relationship are inherently hierarchical since a son comes forth from a father and the latter exerts authority over the former
i have a nagging suspicion that someone retconned christian theology in order for it to allign with their ideology

>> No.14218108

>>14218101
>yet the words "father" and "son" and their implied relationship are inherently hierarchical
Jesus's teachings inherently subverted that idea.

>For I have come to set a man against his father

>> No.14218113

>>14217843
reeee get out get out

>>14217811
The Old Testament is a mythological origin story (two of them), a chronicle that documents tribal history of exile, wars, and kingship, a book of laws, the words of prophets, poetry and music, and a prayer book. It's a huge book, and meant to be read multiple ways. Not everything in it is literally true. Not everything in it is figurative. And portions of it are from the Greek dark ages or earlier. Neat historical events are recorder like Cyrus the Great popping into Babylon to return the Jews to the promised land, or Alexander the Great as told in Macabees.

The New Testament is much shorter and in its own way documents the life of a man who was also divine, and the ministry that came afterward in the apostles. Reading the OT is a must if you're wanting to understand the allusions using to teach in the New Testament.

The question implied by your concerned wojak and observation about Joshua seems to be: how could Yahweh the jealous and vengeful God and Jesus the gentle carpenter who sacrifices himself by his Father's will be the same God? And that is a question that people have been asking since those times. There's lots of opinions, but most of the pleasure you'll get from reading the Bible is putting it together. Seeing the Hebrew Bible reinterpreted by Jesus to declare a new covenant with man. E.g. compare the characters of Abraham and Isaac to God the Father and the Son of Man. Abraham was willing to do it. Jesus prayed in agony in the garden Gethsemane before voluntarily accepting the cup his Father had prepared for him. That, I feel, is one of the cornerstones of Christian philosophy. That model of selflessness that destroys the cycle of vengeance. If you don't have faith, it's still a fucking great read. And even so, there are some contemporary answers to the same question like Jung's Answer to Job. Unconvincing but a good effort that only goes to reinforce the truth of what you've already read: God is beyond mortal judgment.

>> No.14218117

>>14218101
No way!

>> No.14218141

>>14218108
even if you rebel against your father or reject him altogether he still remains your direct biological ancestor from whom you have arisen unlike the trinitarian idea that the "Son" and "Father" have existed together since the beginning of time and that the "Son" wasn't begotten by the "Father"

>> No.14218209

>>14218108
>>14218117
based

>>14218101
>i have a nagging suspicion that someone retconned christian theology in order for it to allign with their ideology
Some early Christians thought Jesus was a god, and not Yahweh, but also not a Person of the Trinity because there was no such thing yet. He was kind of like a Hercules to his Zeus. The sneaky retconning someone you're thinking of is actually a bunch of people, from Origen and Philo to lads in the middle ages.

>> No.14218225

>>14218209
oh i know; it was just a matter of stating the obvious

>> No.14218265

>>14217834
Nice try Demi

>> No.14218312

>>14217811
God can do whatever it wants and me too if he let me

>> No.14218372

this is your brain on sola scriptura
theres obviously nothing wrong with wanting answers OP, but assuming it can and should come form your deduction alone would ignore and attempt to invalidate the entire pantheon of human wonderment. just read medieval philosophy lmao