Testaments - Old versus New

[aka CAT]

One theory as to why the Old Testament (OT) differs from the New Testament (NT):

God speaks to people on their level of understanding.

The Old Testament addresses barbaric peoples,

barbaric because of their having been enslaved.

Abused as brutal, they're illiterate, superstitious as fearful,

and they know no restraint upon they're being liberated.

They are very much like uncivilized children

who, no longer contained, struggle to adapt.

The New Testament speaks to citizens evolved in

methods of reasoning.

[+and-then]

Paul the apostle of Christ wrote much of the N.T. and he mentions many times the "mystery" being progressively (my word) revealed, new revelation from God. Your reasoning seems sound.

[libstaK]

You can only give people as much as they are capable of comprehending at any given time. The evolution of humanity is apparent in the evolution of the Word in the bible.

[Kenemet]

I think you may want to check some of the history again.

The Old Testament addresses barbaric peoples,

barbaric because of their having been enslaved.

Abused as brutal, they're illiterate, superstitious as fearful,

and they know no restraint upon they're being liberated.

They are illiterate, yes, but some of the books of the Bible were written pre-enslavement and during the time when THEY ruled the land and in fact killed off the Ameklekites on YHWH's command. They were the dominant people of the area for quite some time. The most sophisticated books (Song of Songs, etc) come after the enslavement in Babylon.

The New Testament speaks to citizens evolved in methods of reasoning.

Actually, they were illiterate farmers, for the most part. The people were under the thumb of the Roman Empire, which controlled and taxed them, and were judged by the Sanhedran.

The ministry wasn't to priests and to the educated but to the rural people, villagers, and the illiterate.

[+DieChecker]

One theory as to why the Old Testament (OT) differs from the New Testament (NT):

God speaks to people on their level of understanding.

The Old Testament addresses barbaric peoples,

barbaric because of their having been enslaved.

Abused as brutal, they're illiterate, superstitious as fearful,

and they know no restraint upon they're being liberated.

They are very much like uncivilized children

who, no longer contained, struggle to adapt.

The New Testament speaks to citizens evolved in

methods of reasoning.

I've heard much the same before. That there are different rules for different eras. Adam had one set of rules. Noah another set of rules. Abraham another set of rules. Moses another set of rules. King David another set of rules. And Jesus another set of rules. And many people say the Holy Spirit continues to revel/edit the rules to us to this day.

Edited May 19, 2014 by DieChecker

[aka CAT]

I think you may want to check some of the history again.

I'll check yours:

They are illiterate, yes,[...]

initially.

but some of the books of the Bible were written pre-enslavement and during the time when THEY ruled the land and in fact killed off the Ameklekites on YHWH's command.

The Jews have always been quick prove themselves resourceful.

They were the dominant people of the area for quite some time.

Over-domineering in ways, sometimes, self-compensating.

The most sophisticated books (Song of Songs, etc) come after the enslavement in Babylon.

Solomon was yet overmuch a libertine to appeal to me.

Actually, they were illiterate farmers, for the most part. The people were under the thumb of the Roman Empire, which controlled and taxed them, and were judged by the Sanhedran.

Ruralism was the rule...we're pretty much in agreement so far...

The ministry wasn't to priests and to the educated but to the rural people, villagers, and the illiterate.

I spoke too soon--

"The ministry wasn't to priests" but to, by then, educated Rabbis.

[aka CAT]

DieChecker et al,

I wish I'd writ:

The New Testament speaks to citizens evolved in reason

and not methods of reasoning, as reason suggests higher purpose.

[...] And many people say the Holy Spirit continues to revel/edit the rules to us to this day.

The Holy Spirit speaks to the individual--

through him, in him and with him.

We are won in the 0:-) Holy Spirit.

[aka CAT]

Kenemet et al,

I found myself being too agreeable minus any context.

Jesus, concurrent with Caesar's and Cleopatra's heyday,

was no stranger to great civilizations associated with cities

of learned men availed of great libraries, e.g. in Alexandria

(destroyed by Ptolemy).

Edited May 20, 2014 by aka CAT

[DeWitz]

Kenemet et al,

I found myself being too agreeable minus any context.

Jesus, concurrent with Caesar's and Cleopatra's heyday,

was no stranger to great civilizations associated with cities

of learned men availed of great libraries, e.g. in Alexandria

(destroyed by Ptolemy).

@aka Cat--I find your way of expressing yourself to be extremely simple (not simplistic), to the point and refreshingly direct. I agree with your matrix for understanding biblical realities as stated with a tone of conviction, not a bone of contention.

Edited May 20, 2014 by DeWitz

[Imaginarynumber1]

of learned men availed of great libraries, e.g. in Alexandria

(destroyed by Ptolemy).

Just to get facts straight, Alexandria, and the library especially, flourished under the Ptolemaic dynastys. It was Ceaser, Gaius Julius, that set it aflame the first time, then Emperor Aurelian, then it was finally destroyed by Pope Theophilus of Alexandria, a christian.

[+Paranoid Android]

Just to get facts straight, Alexandria, and the library especially, flourished under the Ptolemaic dynastys. It was Ceaser, Gaius Julius, that set it aflame the first time, then Emperor Aurelian, then it was finally destroyed by Pope Theophilus of Alexandria, a christian.

And just in keeping with the facts, when it was destroyed by the Christians there were no books kept in the library - they had been moved to another building. The destruction of the library was regrettable, but it was an attack on the pagan gods depicted in the library, not an attack on ancient knowledge.

[Imaginarynumber1]

And just in keeping with the facts, when it was destroyed by the Christians there were no books kept in the library - they had been moved to another building. The destruction of the library was regrettable, but it was an attack on the pagan gods depicted in the library, not an attack on ancient knowledge.

The serapeum, which may or may not have been filled with the remaining works that were left. There is no way to know. But that last librarian, Hypatia got it worst. Flayed alive by a christian mob in the midst of a civil war between two bishops.

[aka CAT]

Just to get facts straight, Alexandria, and the library especially, flourished under the Ptolemaic dynastys. It was Ceaser, Gaius Julius, that set it aflame the first time, then Emperor Aurelian, then it was finally destroyed by Pope Theophilus of Alexandria, a christian.

Bold added:

Cleopatra

Cleopatra, one of the Ptolemies, loved to go and study in the Alexandrian Library. Cleopatra and her brother Ptolemy, had been at war in order to get the crown of Egypt. Julius Caesar heard of the war and ended up getting involved in it helping Cleopatra. Caesar and Cleopatra grew fond of each other and visited the library together almost everyday (Hornblow 50). The people who were on Ptolemy's side of the war ended up destroying most of Alexandria with fire, including the library. Rome's forces joined Cleopatra's troops and helped to stop Ptolemy and his people. Caesar made the people reconstruct whatever was lost, but years of priceless information about Egypt and ancient history went up in flames. The entire library, however, was not destroyed.

http://www.richeast....ry/library.html

Re: Caesars -

The

Gospel of Luke tells us that Caesar Augustus ordered a census taken of the entire Roman world, possibly for tax purposes. Palestine was part of that world, so Joseph, earthly father of Jesus Christ, took his pregnant wife Mary to Bethlehem to register. Joseph was from the house and line of David, who had lived in Bethlehem.

Historians agree that Caesar Augustus was one of the most successful Roman emperors. Born in 63 B.C., he reigned as emperor for 45 years, until his death in A.D. 14. He was the grand nephew and adopted son of

Julius Caesar and used the popularity of his great uncle's name to rally the army behind him.

http://christianity....ar-Augustus.htm

Edited May 20, 2014 by aka CAT

[Imaginarynumber1]

Ceaser set fire to the city when his arm was trapped.

[aka CAT]

@aka Cat--I find your way of expressing yourself to be extremely simple (not simplistic), to the point and refreshingly direct. I agree with your matrix for understanding biblical realities as stated with a tone of conviction, not a bone of contention.

Thank you.

I try to be concise,

though hastiness often leaves me editing

phrases, correcting grammar and double-checking sources.

You are too kind

as I can only rise to your expectations.

0:-) MGby.

[aka CAT]

Ceaser set fire to the city when his arm was trapped.

Source(s), please.

[Imaginarynumber1]

Source(s), please.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Caesar+set+fire+to+alexandria

[+Paranoid Android]

The serapeum, which may or may not have been filled with the remaining works that were left. There is no way to know. But that last librarian, Hypatia got it worst. Flayed alive by a christian mob in the midst of a civil war between two bishops.

I was simply clarifying that this wasn't a crusade against knowledge. When I first came to this site (nine and a bit years ago now) there were a bunch of posters talking of the Library at Alexandria and saying that the Christians were responsible for the loss of so much ancient knowledge because they were afraid of what books had to say. It was repeated so often that I simply accepted it as fact that the Christians led a book-burning crusade. Several years later when I was reading a website about the events, you can imagine my surprise when I found out the reasons for the library's destruction and the noted lack of actual books on the premises.

That's all I was saying, attempting to clarify that Christians here weren't responsible for the destruction of countless valuable ancient texts. This isn't a "who's been the bigger meanie in history" comment, so there's no need to fire back with examples of what Christians have done in the name of Christ throughout the centuries.

[Imaginarynumber1]

I was simply clarifying that this wasn't a crusade against knowledge. When I first came to this site (nine and a bit years ago now) there were a bunch of posters talking of the Library at Alexandria and saying that the Christians were responsible for the loss of so much ancient knowledge because they were afraid of what books had to say. It was repeated so often that I simply accepted it as fact that the Christians led a book-burning crusade. Several years later when I was reading a website about the events, you can imagine my surprise when I found out the reasons for the library's destruction and the noted lack of actual books on the premises.

That's all I was saying, attempting to clarify that Christians here weren't responsible for the destruction of countless valuable ancient texts. This isn't a "who's been the bigger meanie in history" comment, so there's no need to fire back with examples of what Christians have done in the name of Christ throughout the centuries.

Oh I agree. I would elborate but I'm on a 6 hour drive back home and probably shouldn't be replying on here right now...

[aka CAT]

I was simply clarifying that this wasn't a crusade against knowledge. When I first came to this site (nine and a bit years ago now) there were a bunch of posters talking of the Library at Alexandria and saying that the Christians were responsible for the loss of so much ancient knowledge because they were afraid of what books had to say. It was repeated so often that I simply accepted it as fact that the Christians led a book-burning crusade. Several years later when I was reading a website about the events, you can imagine my surprise when I found out the reasons for the library's destruction and the noted lack of actual books on the premises.

That's all I was saying, attempting to clarify that Christians here weren't responsible for the destruction of countless valuable ancient texts. This isn't a "who's been the bigger meanie in history" comment, so there's no need to fire back with examples of what Christians have done in the name of Christ throughout the centuries.

I previously posted a link to clarify the fact "that Caesar Augustus ["the grand nephew and adopted son of Julius Caesar," was the Caesar who] ordered a census taken of the entire Roman world,

possibly for tax purposes[, wherefore Joseph...] took Mary to Bethlehem to register." So, at least, Christians cannot be blamed for "the library's destruction" during Julius Caesar's time.

Edited May 20, 2014 by aka CAT

[Bluefinger]

One theory as to why the Old Testament (OT) differs from the New Testament (NT):

God speaks to people on their level of understanding.

The Old Testament addresses barbaric peoples,

barbaric because of their having been enslaved.

Abused as brutal, they're illiterate, superstitious as fearful,

and they know no restraint upon they're being liberated.

They are very much like uncivilized children

who, no longer contained, struggle to adapt.

The New Testament speaks to citizens evolved in

methods of reasoning.

The Old Testament presents the promises of God to bless all nations through Abraham and the New Testament shows the fulfillment of those promises in the person of Jesus Christ.

Edited May 20, 2014 by Bluefinger

[Davros of Skaro]

Here are Yale course lectures on the OT & NT.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=266637entry5175773

[Kenemet]

I spoke too soon--

"The ministry wasn't to priests" but to, by then, educated Rabbis.

The first ministries are not to Rabbis. Jesus spoke to the people of the countryside (and fought with the Rabbis), and the Apostles went not to the temples to debate but to the people to preach.

So the first Epistles in the Bible (written by Paul http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_to_the_Corinthians#Composition) was about Corinth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Corinth#Biblical_Corinth) and written to church members who could read -- a minority. Peter acted as the Apostle to the Jews, but John and James and Peter joined Paul in teaching of the Gospel to non-Jewish groups: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostle_%28Christian%29#The_Apostle_of_the_Gentiles:_Paul_the_Apostle

If you check the lives of the Apostles, you will see that very few of them went to areas with large Jewish populations. They focused on converts from other areas. Most of the traditions from that time period are oral and ceremonial. They were not teaching or recuriting the already-literate.

[Kenemet]

Just to get facts straight, Alexandria, and the library especially, flourished under the Ptolemaic dynastys. It was Ceaser, Gaius Julius, that set it aflame the first time, then Emperor Aurelian, then it was finally destroyed by Pope Theophilus of Alexandria, a christian.

Strabo (who worked in the library) disputed the claim for Caesar, and it's known that both Caesar and Anthony gifted Cleopatra with tens of thousands of books for the library.

[aka CAT]

The Old Testament presents the promises of God to bless all nations through Abraham and the New Testament shows the fulfillment of those promises in the person of Jesus Christ.

:-D Welcome back, Bluefinger. How might that explain the contradictions between the OT and the NT?

The first ministries are not to Rabbis. Jesus spoke to the people of the countryside (and fought with the Rabbis), and the Apostles went not to the temples to debate but to the people to preach.

So the first Epistles in the Bible (written by Paul http://en.wikipedia....ans#Composition) was about Corinth (http://en.wikipedia....iblical_Corinth) and written to church members who could read -- a minority. Peter acted as the Apostle to the Jews, but John and James and Peter joined Paul in teaching of the Gospel to non-Jewish groups: http://en.wikipedia....aul_the_Apostle

If you check the lives of the Apostles, you will see that very few of them went to areas with large Jewish populations. They focused on converts from other areas. Most of the traditions from that time period are oral and ceremonial. They were not teaching or recuriting the already-literate.

Your explanation was helpful in my recognizing that I should have associated "first ministries" with the teachings of Christ. I was thinking about the young Jesus in the temple. Also, I'm glad you mentioned tradition in the sense of its having been oral as much as methodical. Thank you. Edited May 20, 2014 by aka CAT