Wouldn't he have been speaking of the Torah and the TaNaKh?
If so, why do you christians say it isn't for today?
2007-04-03 07:07:22 · 9 answers · asked by Kallan 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Torah= 1st five books of the "old testament"
TaNaKh= the entire "old testament"
2007-04-03 07:08:00 · update #1
The New testament is filled with letters written back and forth.. Paul would not have considered them "scripture".
2007-04-03 07:08:43 · update #2
Nice!Logic is a beautiful thing.
Besides which, much was put down by scribes from aural or creative elaborations by the scribes themselves. You make sense to me! I read on with interest...thanks.
Onward! Horses lathered, bits between teeth! Find it!
2007-04-03 07:31:15 · answer #1 · answered by Jamie 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The New Testament wasn't put together until the 4th century. The books of the New Testaments were mainly written by Paul...otherwise they were written somewhere in the 1st-2nd century AD. I don't know what Christians say the Old testament isn't for today it most certainly is still used for teaching today. I am sure he referred many times to the Old Testament. You may be thinking of the Law, but the Old Testament is very relevant to today....
2007-04-03 14:17:49 · answer #2 · answered by chavito 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
too bad you didn't include the particular verse you're speaking of.I could have sent you to its counterpart in the old testament.but still im willing to bet it was one of he prophetic scriptures about Jesus. or maybe the one about abraham. ther are many refernces to the old testament.Paul ,was before becoming christian, a devoted old testament Jew.He would have acknowledged the old testament writings as did Jesus himself. He also quoted scripture. Jesus was the fulfillment of scripture (Old testament) it being the story of First man brings death into the world with sin ,separating man and God.Gods promise of salvation through a savior,the family history of the promised savior .the laws as school master preparing man for Gods answer(which is and always has been dependance upon God s power and grace.prophecies of the savior birth ,life death , at his death we have the end of the old testament.and the beging of the new.
I found this and pasted it .
(But all Scripture is divided into two Testaments. That which preceded the advent and passion of Christ — that is, the law and the prophets — is called the Old; but those things which were written after His resurrection are named the New Testament. The Jews make use of the Old, we of the New: but yet they are not discordant, for the New is the fulfilling of the Old, and in both there is the same testator, even Christ, who, having suffered death for us, made us heirs of His everlasting kingdom, the people of the Jews being deprived and disinherited. As the prophet Jeremiah testifies when he speaks such things: [Jer 31:31–32] "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new testament to the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not according to the testament which I made to their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; for they continued not in my testament, and I disregarded them, saith the Lord." ... For that which He said above, that He would make a new testament to the house of Judah, shows that the old testament which was given by Moses was not perfect; but that which was to be given by Christ would be complete.)
that should help you understand why we say we are not under the old testament laws anymore.Its called right division of the word.Jesus replaced old testament laws with his bringing of the new covenant.
but the old and new are important to us as christians hence they are both included in the HOLY BIBLE.
peace><>
2007-04-03 14:55:09 · answer #3 · answered by matowakan58 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Perhaps "you Christians" is a little too broad.
As a Christian I certainly don't think that the Old Testament is "not for today".
The only way I would agree with that is in reference to the many "legalities" concerning atonement for sins, lifestyle commandments, etc...
I believe that a lot of them became redundant after Jesus because He paid the debt for ALL of the sins of the world for all time with His death and ressurection.
Most of the ones regarding food and stuff were/are for health resons and aren't strictly necessary today because of different environments and medical advancement. Although I know that people who do follow the OT guidlines are much healthier that average.
Jesus did not abolish OT law, He fulfilled it.
2007-04-03 14:18:55 · answer #4 · answered by artist_soul_auslaut 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
He most probably made reference to the Jewish Holy Scriptures because he was a Jewish scholar. And as you mentioned it, what were to be components of the New Testament were only letters and accounts written during the first four centuries A.D.
2007-04-03 14:21:48 · answer #5 · answered by latinoldie 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
When Paul referred to Scripture, he was talking about the OT. When Jesus referred to Scripture, He was talking about the OT. I don't know if it was called the Torah then or not. The Scriptures weren't in a book, they were in scrolls, and I knew it was referred to as Scripture, "as is written", etc.
I don't understand your last question. God's Word is alive, and is as much for today as then.
That's my opinion.
2007-04-03 14:15:42 · answer #6 · answered by Dianne C 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Paul was referring to the Tanakh. There is no way Paul was referring to any of the actual teaching of Jesus. He only knew the myth about the risen messiah. Jesus said that it is not what goes into a man's mouth that defiles him yet Paul was deeply concerned with what went into a homosexual's mouth.
2007-04-03 14:23:42 · answer #7 · answered by NONAME 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Interesting...curious to see.
2007-04-03 14:15:05 · answer #8 · answered by vehement_chemical 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh, now they will get mad!
2007-04-03 14:12:49 · answer #9 · answered by Momofthreeboys 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋