Why do Christians even read the old testament? God is completely inconsistent between both books...

You do realize that the New Testament extensively quotes and builds upon the Old Testament, both Jesus and Paul, right?

The New Testament doesn't make much sense unless you have an understanding of at least some essential Old Testament books.

>God 1.0 kills you and leaves it at that
>God 2.0 damns you for eternity
>compassionate

Good post. Christianity is a cosmic Stockhold syndrome.

read about Marcionism
It's one of the oldest Christian heresies, one of the first.

"Marcion believed Jesus was the savior sent by God, and Paul the Apostle was his chief apostle, but he rejected the Hebrew Bible and the God of Israel. Marcionists believed that the wrathful Hebrew God was a separate and lower entity than the all-forgiving God of the New Testament. .......
The premise of Marcionism is that many of the teachings of Christ are incompatible with the actions of the God of the Old Testament. Focusing on the Pauline traditions of the Gospel, Marcion felt that all other conceptions of the Gospel, and especially any association with the Old Testament religion, was opposed to, and a backsliding from, the truth. He further regarded the arguments of Paul regarding law and gospel, wrath and grace, works and faith, flesh and spirit, sin and righteousness, death and life, as the essence of religious truth. He ascribed these aspects and characteristics as two principles, the righteous and wrathful God of the Old Testament, who is at the same time identical with the creator of the world, and a second God of the Gospel who is only love and mercy.[9]

Marcionites held that the God of the Hebrew Bible was inconsistent, jealous, wrathful and genocidal, and that the material world he created was defective, a place of suffering; the God who made such a world is a bungling or malicious demiurge. ...........

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism
There really isn't anything new anyone can think about Christianity, everything was debated and fought over in the first centuries.
Even the protestant reformation was a rerun of old heresies.

I want to make an argument few people mention
Jesus himself contradicted the old testament, and implied Jewish law was wrong or at least very imperfect.
And he did it explicitely
Here he says Moses law is wrong:

2 Some Pharisees came, and to test him they asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" 3 He answered them, "What did Moses command you?" 4 They said, "Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her." 5 But Jesus said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart he wrote this commandment for you. 6 But from the beginning of creation, "God made them male and female.' 7 "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate." 10 Then in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11 He said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery."

And you could say he did pretty much the same thing when he stopped the crowd from stoning the adulterous woman, which was what the law commanded.

If Jesus came to fullfill the law, and contradicted Jewish law, that means the value of the Jewish legislation of the Old Testament is very relative (for Christians)

Stockholm*, dangit

>implying The LORD changes
>implying the New & Old Testament contradict each other
>implying The Messiah contradicted The Father
>implying The Messiah contradicted the Old Testament laws
>implying The Old Testament was just for Jews and the New Testament is for everybody when in reality it is all for the Jews
>implying I can’t back up any of this up with scripture

It’s almost like scriptural illiteracy is a requirement for posting anything relating to the Bible on Yea Forums.

Take this man for instance not only does he absolutely butcher the account, quotes it incorrectly and does not name the passage or version of the Bible he’s quoting from, but he takes from it a stance that The Messiah himself absolutely denies -

Matthew 5:17 (KJV)
>Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

As for the truth of the account, it was not lawful to put away your wife for any small matter, ever. Moses tolerated it because the Israelites are a stubborn hardheaded people, but it was not lawful, as stated here -

Matthew 19:8 (KJV)
>He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

On a list of all things maddening and infuriating, few tops seeing you gentiles discuss scripture with all the accuracy of a toddler deciphering a collegial textbook. Shut the fuck up!

Especially you neo-christians who were born again in this deprave wasteland excuse of a discussion board and only ever touched a Bible for the first time in the past 5 years. Stfu!

>>Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
A meaningless proverb, when he clearly no longer follows the actual laws.

>implying the Messiah contradicted the OT laws
What exactly is John 8, then?

And yes, YHWH is quite the inconstant God. Any laws, like the Levitical ones, that don't remain in place forever, but actually become annulled at some point, discard the quality of "immutability" from their lawgiver's profile, since a change occurred. Regardless of the theological reasons for it - the establishment of the New Covenant requiring the retiring of the laws undergirding the Old, etc - it means that you have no way to claim that your God is immutable, and no way to know that tomorrow another won't come down - say by the name Christina, claiming to be the Daughter of God, performing new miracles and preaching new teachings, while invalidating some of those given by Christ - and this figure being followed for the next however many millenia. It already happened once for you, and there's no basis, on that basis, to claim it could not happen again.

"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last"

"until the next time i decide to rape a virgin human"

it was lawful because it was a part of the law, it is still law, it's still law for Orthodox Jews

Diet Laws, stoning adulterous women, and divorce, are parts of the law that were contradicted by Jesus the "what makes you impure is what comes out of your mind, not what comes in" quote.

Cathars believed the Old Testament God was the Devil and the New Testament God was the true Christian God.

"of your mouth"

sorry

Metaphysically sure, but just as Jesus came in and made an offshoot from the existing tradition, why can't someone else arrive and make an offshoot from his own? There's no way to prove it couldn't happen, and Jesus's lines about "false prophets" don't count if he himself was never once mentioned by YHWH in the OT, only being prophecied of by human men, and could very well have been a stranger to YHWH entirely, which many Jews clearly thought he was, rejecting him as being any kind of Messiah.

You're ignoring the fact that the preincarnate version of Jesus appears throughout the OT, and is shown to be a part of YHWH. The holy trinity was very present in the Old Testament.

And that isn't to say anything of the bible being the word of God Himself, where the words, while written down by man, were of the divine breath of God.

It's perfectly consistent when you understand the Bible as one whole rather than two testaments. Everything in the Old Testament prophesies and makes way for Christ's coming.
Also everything God does is entirely good. Moral goodness is exclusively that which is of God.

Yeah, that is why Jesus a old man with many children that liberated Judea from the invaders and established the Kingdom of God and oh wait.

christians try and twist the OT to be more in line with the NT and fail badly. christians are just greek inspired idolatries mixed with centuries of plagiarism, ill translations, modifications.
the OT and quran have never been modified and that says a lot about the NT

>when you realize marcion was redpilled

You mean prophesies that the Gospel writers invented to say "hey look just like it was prophesied!" Such as jesus being born of a virgin or being born through the line of david?

Next question isn't for you specifically but for any Christian in this thread.

Is Joseph Jesus' father? If he isn't then why did the prophecy of the messiah coming from the line of david go through Joseph's lineage?

>Is Joseph Jesus' father? If he isn't then why did the prophecy of the messiah coming from the line of david go through Joseph's lineage?
Biological father no, guardian yes. Judean genealogy customs.
"According to R. A. Torrey, the reason Mary is not implicitly mentioned by name is because the ancient Hebrews never permitted the name of a woman to enter the genealogical tables, but inserted her husband as the son of him who was, in reality, but his father-in-law."

If you bothered to read the Bible or learn the most basic tenant of Christianity you would know that the answer is the fulfillment of the Old Covenant and the instituting of the New Covenant.

If you do not have a grasp of this concept you can not begin to understand Christianity.

Oh okay so Jesus wasnt actually from the seed of david. Thanks

user, you don't understand. It was progressive revelation. God didn't deem it necessary to tell the Israelites they burn forever if they disobeyed.

Jesus was an alchemist

Too bad it's completely wrong because Jesus constantly refers to the OT.

Holy, based.

Old testament god is the demiurge, that's why.

>insert comment about burning heretical gnostics at the stake

Abrahamic religion is collectively the Demiurge. Don't fall for any of it.

this isn't actually right

the oldest version of the Old Testament we have is the Greek translation of it, the Septuagint.
The oldest Hebrew bible we have is from the middle ages, 1100 years ago.

And from the Qumran scrolls we can see there were variants with small tiny differences. Some align closer to the Septuagint, some align closer to the OT of the Jews, and some align closer to the holy texts of the Samaritants.

the most famous example is an acrostic Psalm, 145

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psalm_145#The_"missing_verse"

Jews lack the verse which begins with the hebrew letter Nun
Nobody knows who is right regarding this, if it's the septuagint or the Jewish OT

But the Jewish OT has a very obvious mistake, in Psalm 22 they have a nonsensical line "like a lion, my hands and feet" when the septuagint and oldest translations have "they pierced my hands and feet"
All scholars agree it is "they pierced my hands and feet" and it looks a lot like Jews changing a letter of their holy text to "ruin" a prochristian text that could be taken as Christian prophecy

and the Catholics proved that they truly worshiped God by slaughtering everyone in the area and leaving it up to Him to recognize his own. The Catholic church is NOT the antichrist.

it's almost like Christianity btfo Judaism

(traditional) christianity =/= (evangelical) protestantism

>The old angry Jew God doesn't really compare to the compassionate NT one
You'd be pretty mad if you had to deal with Jews all the time too. He's more compassionate in the NT since Jesus is gathering the only remnant of Jews who are decent people and preparing to go to the gentiles.

Modern Jews don't even follow the same books anymore, they worship the Talmud. I think I remember reading that evangelicals do it because their perspective of the end times needs Jews in Israel.
edition.cnn.com/2017/12/08/opinions/jerusalem-israel-evangelicals-end-times-butler-bass-opinion/index.html

>You'd be pretty mad if you had to deal with Jews all the time too
God wasn't forced to, and could easily have chosen another people.

>Yea Forums - Literature
>doesn't read and presumes instead

Sounds about right.

>Why do Christians even read the old testament?

Because it's cool? More people die in the Old Testament than in the Iliad.

So you admit Christianity is a death cult after all?

Nice goalpost luxury cruise there mate

TRUE!
the modern jew are pharisees, the synagogue of Satan.
Christians are grafted onto the tree of life, meaning they are """jews""" for the purposes of the covenant with God.

He is the living God.
When you try to box him in and use scripture for personal gain/wicked ends, you are doing what the pharisees did.
Following the legalistic letter of the law is not enough, the pharisees were experts at twisting the law to their own ends, glorifying themselves rather than the Lord, and Jesus rebuked them for it.

The Lord God is a living spirit of truth. The Christian seeks to embody perfectly the SPIRIT of the law, like Jesus did.

Actually the opposite

NT God isn't compassionate, read the book of Revelation.

For being a literature board, it's surprising how many people don't understand the text. The big gripe against the OT God was his genocidal wishes. But this is sorely missing context. The people that God demanded Israel to destroy were either Fallen Angel offspring tribes (if you're not familiar with this theory look into it, it's where the giants came from), or disgustingly pagan ones. These tribes would practice ritual human sacrifice of children. God used Israel to genocide them and punish them for their wicked ways. What has been the pattern throughout history? Savage tribes getting fucking BTFO by Europeans, probably partly because of this evil, among other factors such as us having way better technology. This ethnic cleansing God had the Israelites did was not unwarranted, as the people he did it against were wicked through and through. As for the seemingly silly laws of the OT, those were to make the Israelites an opposite to the world around them. No crops mixed together, no fabrics mixed together, etc etc. You can get mixed opinions on dietary laws, but pigs and shrimp and lobster are all nasty animals so I don't think it would be ill-advised to follow. And while there was the death penalty for many things in the OT, you find many characters in the OT violate laws that would bring them the death penalty. David basically murdered someone to get his wife. God forgave him (after taking his ill gotten son) and the people did not give him the death penalty. So even in the OT we see God forgive sins that supposedly get the death penalty. My take on this is that God instilled these laws to as a fear tactic so the Israelites would be less inclined to sin, but it would actually be rare for any of the crimes to get a death penalty. The jews agree on this. But, those Jews are not the Israelites anyway, which is a whole different topic. The Khazars and Ashkenazis of today are a separate people. They are the pharisees. The true israelites are something else, and my guess is they are the white europeans based on the prophecies that they've fulfilled.

>the jews who wrote the new testament said the old testy is not only still relevant but made MORE important by the new work.
dude, what?

but shrimp is so tasty though

This lad sounds based as fuck

>OT
>Christianity

it's actually a FERTILITY cult that's been bowdlerized but whatever.

*the writer who wrote was Jesus said.

>never in history has a jingoist tribe justified their war by lying about their enemy to dehumanize them

Attached: ob_427153_fig-17.jpg (325x500, 97K)

Both Mary and Joseph were descended from David

>mary was raped
You're too engrossed in the wordly. You can't see immaculate conception as anything but forceful and sexual from the eyes of the meterial.

Your language used in that sentence alone shows you have no intentions of talking seriously about christianity you care only to insult it.

>be it done unto me according to thy word
>rape
Even aside from the lack of sexual activity in the annunciation, it's blatantly consensual.
that wasn't the immaculate conception