How has the New Testament been considered a "blueprint" for Western Civilization?
117264
It isn't.  The Jewish bible and its precepts were far more influential in the development of Western civilization.  Just look at all the universities with Hebrew lettering in their official seals.
864876
In large part you're correct as I see it,the new testament is essentially that which came after the birth of Jesus although there are basic elements of the Old Testament which will still exist in some manner within the New Testament. The Old Testament if you really wanted to get down to it is essentially the Torah with changes,or at least the basic story is the same. Except that the Christians had a wholly different view of Hell and of Lucifer who if I understand correctly the Jews did not view as Gods enemy so much as Gods way of testing us to make us worthy.
671238
BlackFedora wrote:\n"all of the new testament was written after Jesus' death"\n\n...and none of it by anybody who lived when jesus was alive.  It's all second-hand.  You can't prove it's credibility.
627168
Jesus did a lot just to fulfill the prophecy's of the old testament. It's good to question things. If the book can't stand up to our questions it's not worth the paper its printed on.
742226
The Old Testament, was transcended by the New Testament.  Hence the terms, old and new.  The Old Testament is about works and law, the New Testament is about grace and mercy.\n\nJesus says he desires mercy, more than sacrifice.\n\nAlso, He states that the 2 "laws" that fulfill all the others are to love the Lord with all the heart, mind, soul, and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself.\n\nThe rest of the ten commandments would most likely be ways we would act in loving our neighbor as ourself.  But it would not be because it was a rule, it would be because of love.\n\nI think because the first "Christians" had no written New Testament, and were Jews, the Old Testament remained as a teaching tool in the services.  Also, they used the OT prophesy to prove to others that Jesus was the Messiah.\n\nAs instruction in the way of life and faith, the teachings of Jesus supercede it, and the study of Jesus teachings alone, are beyond sufficient.
656717
The New Testament isn't an add-on like some of the people here have stated, but a fulfillment of the Old Testament in Jesus Christ.
734017
Paul is the chosen vessel of the gentiles..................\n\notherwise...\ntoss out the new testament.............
401462
No-one really knows what they're talking about, because everything these people know has been told to them by somebody else. They dont have the ability to think for themselves so they adopt someone else's belief system. Yes, a lot more crap went on back in the day, but people change what the bible means to humanity to suit their own needs at that time, which is why beliefs keep changing. Even the New testament was written by a bunch of people who never even knew Jesus. So you or I could just as easily write another new testament and go and call that the bible.
672666
Without sitting down and looking at all the specifics, I think I'm already doing what he commanded.  The beatitudes and golden rule are fairly good descriptions of how I live my life.  \n\nI'm highly skeptical of the supernatural claims of Christianity, but I agree wholeheartedly that Jesus was a wise man with very good ideas.\n\nEDIT:\nJeff, the text of the KJV is styled in medieval verse (no I don't believe that the translators were divinely inspired).  The beatitudes in particular are poetic in form, and not subject to strict interpretation.  By saying that the poor are blessed, Jesus identified with their suffering and said that it would be recognized.  The beatitudes as a whole are an exhortation to live well and love one another, with specific examples.  They are an example of how the world could be if we lived in peace: a beautiful concept and one I attempt to live.  (Occasionally I succeed, though not often).\n\nAs far as dying in order to live (I assume that you're referring to John 12:24), I've already stated that I'm skeptical about the supernatural aspects of Christianity.  I'm sure that Jesus and I differ on many matters of religion and theology.  That doesn't change how I feel about his philosophical and social ideas.  He's not my savior, but he's a very good example to the world.  I don't worship him, but I'd definitely buy him a beer and listen to what he had to say.\n\nHonestly, I'd probably do the same for you, if we ever met.
575223
Sure looks that way, don't it?  I mean, the Christians even include the entire Jewish Bible in their own, along with considering the divinity of Jesus in the light of old testament prophecies which he fulfilled.  He did indeed sound like something of a reformer, but the one who actually said it was no longer necessary to follow the old Jewish law was Saul of Tarsus aka Saint Paul.  That was after Jesus had died and gone to heaven.
543701
I assume you mean which book of the New Testament was written first, because there are no existing original manuscripts as far as we know.\n\nThe general consensus is that some of Paul's letters are the oldest known manuscripts. There are speculations of earlier ones (e.g., "Q") but they are just that: speculations.
622037
Those verses were included in the Greek manuscripts that were used to form the Textus Receptus, the esteemed manuscript used to translate the Bible until recently. The newer found manuscripts don't have those verses. Since they are reportedly older, it is assumed they are better. The logical assumption is that these were discarded by the theologians of the early days in favor of the better manuscripts that became the Received Text or Textus Receptus. The study of the manuscripts and the men behind their publication is pretty interesting and quite revealing.
797329
Look in your Bible New Testament
582454
Yes. My understanding is that the Book of Mormon is considered an add-on to the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. It was eventually consolidated into one book by Joseph Smith. The site below is the Mormon (Church of Latter Day Saints) description of the Book of Mormon.\n\nThe New Testament has the vast majority of Jesus' life and teachings.\n\nI hope this helps!
1101388
I recommend starting at the beginning. So much of the life and purpose of Christ is tied up in man's fall and inability to atone for his own sin that you really must understand that to fully appreciate the New Testament.
639644
God gave the Old Testament to "set the scene" as it were for the coming of His Messiah, which non-Messianic Jews still are looking for, and Christians including Messianic Jews would say is Jesus Christ.  The Old Testament is pretty well divided into parts.  \n\nFirst there is the Pentateuch, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, all of which are believed to be authored by Moses and are commonly referred to as the "Law."  God gave it to show us what His standard is so that in doing so we may realize how far we all fall short of it, and thus, that God alone is justified in judging or condemning, for we are all guilty.  As Jesus said, let Him that is without sin cast the first stone.  The Law in providing the basis for what we know to be wrong, thus shows us we need God's mercy.  \n\nThen come the historical books, like Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Samuel, Esther, and Nehemiah.  These chronicle much of Israel's history and God's interaction with people for hundreds of years.  It is often said, those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it.  I suspect these historical books are given not only that we may understand better God's interaction with people but also common mistakes made by people just like us.  \n\nThen there is the wisdom books, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Song of Solomon, and Ecclesiastes.  In these books is hidden a wealth of wisdom to apply to all venues of everyday life, written by David, Solomon, and Job.  David and Solomon were both 2 of Israel's greatest rulers, and Job was at one point the most influential man in the middle east.  \n\nAnd finally, the remaining books, Isaiah through Malachi, form what is known as the prophets, foretelling of that which is to come, with much about the coming Messiah and other future events.  Sometimes we can even figure out exact dates based on times given like that in Nehemiah 2 {month Nisan, in the 20th year of Artaxerxes the king, or 445 B.C.[1]).  Interestingly, that time allows us to precisely date, when comparing with Daniel 9:25, the exact time when the Messiah is to come.  Since the babylonian calendar time of 360 days was used, you then multiply 360 days * the 69 weeks of 7 years each, so 360 * 69 * 7 or 173,880 days unto "the Messiah, the Prince."  To get our current year we must then divide by 365 to get 476.38356 years, which when added to the 445 B.C. date we have from archeological evidence we get a date of roughly 21-22 A.D when the Messiah was to start His public ministry.  The 70th week which would account for 49 years is said in Daniel 9 to be when the sacrifice and offering would cease.  And in 70 A.D. the temple at Jerusalem was destroyed indeed by Rome, so that the offerings did cease, which today are no longer a custom by Israel.  To see a thorough elaboration of the points, you can see the Scofield note[2] on the topic.  At any rate, many of the prophecies have now been fulfilled, including many Messianic prophecies fulfilled by Jesus[3].\n\n\n\nAs for the New Testament, in it we find the fulfilling of the promises and hints of the grace to come by the Messiah.  We see the fulfilling of the prophecies and the revelation of which the Old Testament prophets could see and show only a shadow of.  It is small wonder then that the last book of the Bible is called "Revelation" for it is God's revelation of that which He has now made clear, known, and open about His long-ago promises.  Grace and truth are now revealed as being free to all in the person of His Son, Jesus Christ.
1177672
He....   darn it.  I thought I had the recipe sitting here but I seem to have lost it.\n\nGeez, what kind of question is that any way?\n\nLet's assume for a minute that you are asking about a just a mundane operation like walking from one town to another.  The inclusion of the word "exactly" in a question about a 2000 year old event makes one wonder what your epistemelogical standard is.   \n\nThe quick and the dirty of the situation is, I don't know.  I think it probably did happen though. I'm not a fundementalist, so therefore it's not necessary for the New Testament accounts, in this case the Gospel of John, to be completly inerrant for me to sign on.  They just have to be generally historically accurate, like any other set of historical documents from the time.\n\nSome people's a priori commitment to pure materialism aside, the story seems to be authentic to me.  It has specific details that a good old propaganda story probably wouldn't contain.  Such as Jesus's disagreement with his mother and his consequent quip at her.  And then he actuallly does what she suggested.  Propaganda created from whole cloth would probably contain less contraversy in it.  \n\nThe Gospel of John is actually the New Testament book that we have the earliest documentary evidence of.  Part of it was found in the Nag Hammadi (sp?) library in Egypt and has been dated to about 130 a.d.   That's pretty darn close to the events described compared to most ancient historical documents that are considered authoritative.