This is the latest opinion on the old testament theology. On the subject of Religion
136189
u will find some thing in here\nhttp://www.usefulwork.com/shark/archives/006008.html\nhttp://www.orgsites.com/mi/judah/
335361
Sparky First let me say I appreciate the 10 pts. I don't know what I did to piss you off though. I told you to look up the work "Qumran" because it is one of the best documented archaeological finds in the world and I knew that there would be plenty of info online (which would be convenient for you). Would you rather me refer you to the dozens of books that I know of offhand or to an infinite # of archaeological reports that are incredibly boring to read? I studied Qumran under Jodi Magness at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and she is the foremost American Archaeologist in the world concerning the "holyland." In particular, she is definitely the foremost authority on Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found.  In case you don't know, archaeology is SCIENCE, not religion, and archaeological reports and finds are scientific and are not at all connected to the Church or any religion.  \n\nNothing in my answer to you dealt with religious dogma, I simply tried to answer your question as to why SOME Christians see a threat in the DaVinci code. Now, as for your claim that the bible was written 200 years after Christ, well that's true for some of the later NT books, but not of the Gospels. Some of the gnostic texts were much later than the gospels, which is part of the reason they were rejected by the church. \n\nAnd lastly, you claim that the bible has changed so many times that it's all crap. What do you have to support this? Go see the Dead Sea Scrolls some time, which were written between 2500-2000 yrs ago (as I visited a DSS exhibit about a month ago in Charlotte, NC). And then compare that to the KJV or the American Standard Bible.  The Old Testament found in the 1950s in the Caves near Qumran is nearly word for word with what we have today.  It is amazing that in 2000 or more years the Jewish text has changed so little!  This means that we should all reexamine the amount of credit we have granted the Jewish oral tradition that was so important to the early Christian Church.  IT IS ACCURATE, whether you want to admit it or not. SCIENCE and HISTORY support that.\n\nAgain, I answered your question rather well... Let me try one more time in FIVE SIMPLE SENTENCES that will be very easy for you to comprehend this time:\n\n1.  It wouldn't be so bad if Jesus was married.\n\n2.  Christians are NOT offended or threatened by the possibility that Jesus could have been married.\n\n3.  It's simply not historically true or believable, from the bible and from the writings of two Roman historians Tacitus and Josephus.\n\n4.  However, Some Christians ARE offended by the notion that Christ was not Divine; and the "The DaVinci Code" claims his having a child is proof that Jesus was NOT divine.\n\n5.  Such a claim can be damaging to the mission field because people like you believe anything and everything you read in a novel or see on TV and are therefore hostile toward Christianity.\n\nSo, that's why some Christians are offended by the DaVinci Code and by the notion that Christ might have been married to and had a child with Mary Magdalene.  Because of the hostility towards Christianity that such false belief creates.  People like you work directly against anyone trying to bring people to Christ.  \n\nPS.. the whole "MM was a whore" lost in translation thing.. do your history research man, you don't know what you are talking about at all.  You speak fiction and pass it off as truth. \n\nAnd you wonder why people would be offended?  maybe some people just like the truth?\n\nLet me ask you a question.  Why are you so offended by Christianity?  What are YOU afraid of?  The Truth?
334454
I have read some in translation.\n\n"If so, what is your opinion on the similarities between them and the Bible?"\n\nClearly the authors of the Bible drew upon a stock of pre-existing stories and oral traditions in order to express their theological views.
425142
People might convert to Christianity by seeing how the prophecies of the Old Testament are fulfilled in the New Testament, but that requires a lot more education that most people care for.  Still, I can tell you that the OT changed my view of Christianity.  Before reading it, I always saw the religion as very dichotimized, with the OT God light years away from the NT God.  Having read it, I now realize that's not true.  There's a lot more of a loving God in the OT than people usually give credit for.  Likewise, the NT God is frequently harsher than Christians would care to admit.  It's given me a much more unified, clearer perspective.
13823
<*> The law was good, it led us to the cross, without it we would not have understood our need fo a savior.\nThe good news is that we do not have to depend on the law for salvation \nWe have a Savior who loves us and died for us.\n\nThe old covenant has been done away with we have a new and better one.
53723
As a Christian and Bible scholar, please believe me when I say that you have this all wrong--I mean you have truly misinterpretated practically everything.  \n\nI think though your points could be easily cleared up though if you were to sit with someone who has studied the Word. \n\nSince there is no way to address all of your questions and issues raised right now in this forum, why don't you go speak to a Jewish Rabbi or Bible Teaching Christian Pastor in your area.  \n\nYou don't want to hold on to misconceptions do you?  \n\nI'm sure you really do want the truth, right?  Good. You seem like someone that enjoys learning.  \n\nWell then if you want to learn the truth, you have an obligation to go and speak with someone educated in the Bible as well as someone that has a personally close relationship with GOD so that you can understand it from a different perspective.  \n\nYou're intelligent, and have obviously given this a lot of thought.  I'm sure you don't want to hold on to perceptions that are wrong right? \n\nSitting with someone one on one and going through each of your issues raise here, I believe that you will come away with a completely different view. You may still feel the same way, but at least you will have more and better information to draw more accurate conclusions.\n\nI can't begin to list the number of errors in your logic, or the number of times in your writings that you leaped to an erroneous assumption in this very short passage you wrote.  But I know that if you seek the truth, you will take the time to go speak to someone in person about your questions.  \n\nYou can even feel free to email me and I will be happy to talk to you more.  \n\nWe can walk through each passage here, and discuss the historical aspects that are recorded as well as what God is talking to us now about each of these passages.\n\nWe can discuss "What is the Mosaic Law", and how does it apply to the lives of God's people today.  We can also discuss spiritual warfare versus physical warfare and how it relates to the questions "Why would God kill innocent children? and order wars?"\n\nI welcome talking to you. I'm a Christian apologist.  We can debate, discuss, search and examine Bible history, teachings, prophesies, and hidden messages all day long, and it will not bother me, nor will I be offended if you don't agree.  \n\nI also welcome hearing about your religious beliefs. Although a devout Christian,  I enjoy studying other religions and beliefs as well.
423411
I'm not sure which "scholars" you're referring to, but I've never seen any support for your conclusions among mainstream Biblical academians. Could you give us some references on these "scholars"?\n\nFor what it's worth, I posted an entry about Haggard on my blog yesterday. Check out the link below.
667762
i think the bible is a good book yet fiction, religion is a money and war machine IMHO.  on the other hand people need hope and that is where many find it, we're best off never knowing
2970
To answer your question without preaching. Some people on this site have a real problem with doing this. Yes. There is a scholarly debate on what the bible taches on almost every issue. These debates are called Scripture Theology. This acedemic area has seen lots of exiting changes in the last 100 years because of our increasing knowlege of history, and the use of the Historical Critical model. Some Christians reject this view that the scriptures are open to interpretation based on science, histrical facts, theolgical discusion, and the movement of the spirit. While thye may not agreeon all interpreations, most main line churches reconginse there is no final authority on scripture.
584378
Well Its to bad they don't understand. I don't like to see any walk in darkness. What they should understand is there has been a steady attack on the scriptures for as long as they have been around and by much better scholars than most or maybe any who have ever visited this site. Higher Criticism subjected it to all kinds of scholarly attack along with most of today's "institutions of higher learning". No book has been examined more closely than the Bible and no work could ever stand under that kind of attack. Yet the Word stands and carries on and the old saying that the shovel always verifies the Word remains true.
634110
I agree!  However, I also see the Bible as the inspired Word of God, thus if we follow it only and don't add or subtract anything, then we are following a religion made up by God himself.  Problem solved.
336734
God is not Three...The old testament never mention that
218972
Very true indeed. If you want to see a host of differences read the Christian Bible (any of them) side by side with the Jewish Tanakh (Bible). The differences between and Old Testament and the Tanakh are very evident.
598396
Because those people cherry-pick the Old Testament, and pick out the bits & pieces that support their belief, and ignore the rest. My favorites are the dietary laws; if they condemn people for being gay because the Old Testament says so (and it does say that),  why do Christians eat bacon? Pork Chops? Shrimp? Why don't we sacrifice goats in church? The Old Testament clearly says you should sacrifice goats. There are long chapters regulating the capture & sales of slaves (including your own kids!), and one of the penalties for rape is making money restitution to her DAD, and another says you don't have to pay the restuitution if you marry her. Why aren't Christians advocating that rape victims marry their rapists; the Bible says so! Todays Christians also seem to have a beef with Polygamy, but the Old Testament clearly endorses it. It goes on and on and on.
560585
definetly... you cant pick and choose which parts of the bible to believe. it's an all or nothing game and the old testement is part of the bible.
257397
Good Lord. \nThe Old Testament was under the Law of Moses. As a christian today you should know that Jesus' death and resurrection removed us from the curse of the 'Law'. In the Old testament Israel was a fledgling nation. They were trying to seperate themselves from the 'pagans' Plus they were a lot less civilized than we are today. \nGod does not want you to kill your child, come on. If you truly believe that then you need psychological help and all your children should be removed from you care.
641399
I think the dead sea scolls are a wonderful find and give us great insight to the fact that the Old Testament has largly remained intact thruogh the centuries. Not to mention that they gives a lot as far as understanding lituature of the day. As for the Old Testamnet apocrypha they are good reading and give us useful information about many thing but they are in some cases not historicaly correct and should not be considered scripture. They were never canonized (met the standard) by the jewish people of that day and were recognized as religous material but not the word of God. Later scholar including Jerome,Melito, Epiphanius, and Origen make a distiction between these and the rest of the Old Testamnet. In addition to that Jesus Himself acknowleges the authority of the Scriptures and cite them often but He never cited or acknowledged the apocyrphal books