Time for a newer testament?

Contrary to what some people here may think, I do have an interest in the Bible, even as an agnostic/atheist. My interest is more in the historical, philosophical, and sociological realms than spiritual, of course.

I want for the moment to regard the old testament vs. the new. Often when a Christian is questioned as to why these two parts contradict each other, they mention that the old worked for a more ancient time period, and the new replaced it because it better related more to what people could understand at that point in time. When the old and the new conflict, most look to the new for the answer. This is all good and well. It makes sense to look to more current thought on a subject after all.

I started thinking about when the bible was written. Most people agree that the oldest surviving part of the Old Testament was written in the middle of the 2nd century BC. The New Testament was written between 50-110 AD. That's a span of 200-300 years between the two Testaments.

A whole lot can happen in that time frame, to be sure. Much can change in society. The world saw the end of the Iron Age, and the rise of the Roman Empire. Big events indeed! The times were changing, and scripture apparently adapted to the times in order to have its teachings understandable in the modern context. This is a good thing. People understood more, and attempted to capture this understanding in new scripture.

I'm sure you can see where I'm leading with this. It has been 1900 years since the "New" Testament was written. What changes has civilization seen in that time? The the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, the Printing Press, Humanism, the Scientific Revolution, the Telegraph, the Industrial Revolution, Electricity, Krakatoa, World Commerce, The Stock Market, Hitler, E=mc², Hiroshima, Age of Technology, Television, the Space Age, the Computer Revolution, online communities, 911, ... etc, etc, etc.

The obvious question becomes, "where is our update?" If the Old Testament became outdated in 200-300 years, aren't we way overdue? Where is the version we can relate to in this day and age? Is it possible it's been written and ignored? Would you recognize it if you saw it? And if you did, would you accept it if it threw out as much of the New Testament as the New did of the Old?

Read the book of mormon, rofl, thats the newest testament of JC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

Read the book of mormon, rofl, thats the newest testament of JC.

---

I assumed this response would come up. The book of Mormon can't really compare to the transition from Old Testament to New. I am not saying that this is NOT necessarily the newest testament, but obviously the task of recognizing the testament is insurmountable, given that your belief is in the very small minority.

So let's assume you are correct. What happens in another few hundred years when God gives us another one? Will only 10% of Mormons follow that one? And 10% of those the next? Is Christianity becoming more inclusive, or less?

And of course I'd love to hear from the non-Mormon Christians on your take of this.

I'm not mormon, silly. I don't have a religion!

Sorry... didn't recognize the Devil's advocate here. Still worth discussing, I suppose.

^ WHat's that supposed to mean?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

^ WHat's that supposed to mean?

---

"Devil's Advocate" is a term that means you are speaking as if you believed in the other side of an argument in order to make a point. It's a good debate tactic, and you did it just fine... I just didn't recognize it because I assumed you were a Mormon.

I was speaking for technical facts, sorry, rofl.

The LDS church is growing at an amazing rate, I'd say we're anything but exclusive.

i was wondering that too. When i debate most Christians will say the OT doesn't apply anymore, although i'm pretty sure 10 of the commandments are in that section. Sometimes it is the same with the NT as well, they will say well that was a long time ago, they were different rules.

Well it's been over 1000 years! I mean when people were telling me i was wrong to be an Atheist. I was at least expecting good old Jesus to come down on 2000 to give us another book, that would be by only proof and i thought it would be a logical and necessary thing to give proof of Gods existence and maybe sort out some problems in the Bible and such, but oh well. I guess we has SKY Tv now, and probably like 100's of extra channels then we do, so i guess he couldn't be bothered to miss Lost series 123345934 or something.:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 27

The LDS church is growing at an amazing rate, I'd say we're anything but exclusive.

---

I was speaking of the splintering of Christianity, not about LDS in particular. The fact that there so many different brands of the religion suggests that people (as a whole) are becoming less and less sure of what road to follow. A Newer Testament(tm) should help direct all Christians, as the previous two have.

I don't really agree with "they mention that the old worked for a more ancient time period, and the new replaced it because it better related more to what people could understand at that point in time". That might be kind of true but I really don't think that's the main reason that the New Testament was written.

What seperates the two is that the Old Testament contained a lot of the law, the rules that God had made for us. (Or the Jews?) It also told about God and had a lot of prophecies. The New Testament was written when Jesus finally came into the world. It mainly contains the 4 gospels about Jesus, and the rest is mostly letters written to churches. Almost all of it focuses on Jesus.

The Old Testament laws don't apply anymore, but they are still sins. Like we don't give people the death sentence for doing "little" things like the Old Testament says to do, but we still follow its laws because we don't want to sin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeremysr

I don't really agree with "they mention that the old worked for a more ancient time period, and the new replaced it because it better related more to what people could understand at that point in time". That might be kind of true but I really don't think that's the main reason that the New Testament was written.

---

Actually that point of view has come up a number of times on these very forums when the Old Testament has been quoted to show the bible has some questionable teachings in it.

Quote:

---

The Old Testament laws don't apply anymore, but they are still sins. Like we don't give people the death sentence for doing "little" things like the Old Testament says to do, but we still follow its laws because we don't want to sin.

---

And I say the New Testament's laws also don't apply. The point is, if you buy into one testament "expiring" and another replacing it, what determines what a valid replacement is? How do you know if what you're reading hasn't in fact outlived its usefulness?

Quote:

---

And I say the New Testament's laws also don't apply. The point is, if you buy into one testament "expiring" and another replacing it, what determines what a valid replacement is? How do you know if what you're reading hasn't in fact outlived its usefulness?

---

The Old Testament didn't "expire". It is still there, and is God's Word.

The writers of the Bible never seem to say anything directly to the reader like "You shouldn't kill anyone". It's all written in the form of telling a story. A true story. Instead of the Bible telling the reader that you should not murder, it says that a long time ago Moses went up to a mountain and God told him "You shouldn't murder." So when God said to punish certain people by stoning them, he was not talking to people who read the Bible, but the people he was talking to in that story, and at that time.

(I guess some of the New Testament is written as letters to churches so maybe not all the Bible is written as stories... but all of the Old Testament is.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeremysr

The Old Testament didn't "expire". It is still there, and is God's Word.

---

You're missing the point of this thread. It is not to point out the failings of either testament, rather to point out the failings of those who use the argument of the old testament no longer being valid to justify the new testament. If you are not one of those people, that's fine. I was not addressing you in the original post.

My Grandpa used to have a book which contained only the direct quotations of Jesus Christ, and nothing else. Evidently it was a short book. I'd like to find again though as he sold it a while ago, sounds interesting.

Anyone else heard of a book like that?