Name:Shlomo •
Title: Was Jesus A Deus Focia? •
Date posted: 03/09/07 4:52
Q: If the new covenant is a continuation of what Christians and Muslims call the old covenant, it must harmonize with the old covenant completely without the slightest error of interpretation. False comparisons will not do nor will contextual elimination. The new covenant authors can not pick and choose what suits them in order to make Jesus a guilt offering, a messiah, a prophet or a g-d.
Name:Beth •
Date: 03/09/07 18:16
A: I agree! I left organized Christianity after a two year study of the Torah because I found that the teachings of the church did not constitute a continuation of the "old covenant", but rather a re-write of Judiasm itself. Therefore, it defeated it's own purpose.
Name:mistagnerd •
Date: 04/19/07 22:44
A: It is not a continuation persay.
because covenant is another word for contract I will use contract instead.
The New Contract, is a makeover using the same basic principles of the Old Contract.
The Old Contract had a set of rules that called for sacrifice after the jews committed a sinful act. This can be found in the book of Deuteronomy believed to have been given to the jews by moses.
The New Contract is based on similar rules, but calls for redemption and a belief in the ultimate sacrifice.
Now as far as other differences, I would hope that some of you will give information as to a specific contradiction in from the Old Testament to the New Testament.
Name:Shlomo •
Date: 04/20/07 4:22
A: mistagnerd,
Differences? That would be easy, but where to begin? The differences are numerous. A very simple contradiction, is the contextual elimination of the Hebrew word "young maiden" [wife-specific] and replaced with the word "virgin" in Yeshiyahu 7 to satisfy a prophecy, that had already been fulfilled, to support the new covenants theology of a messiah virgin birth. It is obvious the new covenant is not a make over using the same basic principals, in fact, it immediately violates the first two commandemnts.