Do you believe that to be a Christian, you need to believe everything that's in the Bible?

I ask because I have a lovely friend, although we've lost touch, and she's a fairly dedicated Christian. However, she once told me that she didn't believe in the Old Testament, it was a bit off-the-wall.

My question is, if you cast the Old Testament aside, dismissing it, then why would you believe in the New Testament? If there's no Genesis, no Adam and Eve (therefore no sin to make up for), then why believe that Jesus was sent to die to redeem us?

I'd ask her this question, but can't contact her... I know a few people who have said similar about the old testament though, and I just wonder how that can be?

__________________

I don't think so. Ther great thing about christianity is that the only thing you can do wrong is not believing in god and accepting him into your heart yadda yadda. It's quite a clever little scam they've got going.

i think the idea is that jesus established a new relationship between us and god. christians ignore a huge amount of old testament law. jesus said something about the law being written on the heart (rather than in a book, or tablets of stone, whatever), but then he also said do not think i have come to abolish the law or the prophets, so it's all very ambiguous (as usual for jesus).

i know catholics don't place much emphasis on the old testament, while protestants do. is your friend a catholic?

catholicism allows a belief in evolution, the big bang, etc. though with certain add ons: the soul was god's work, the impetus of creation was god's

__________________
they arrived dramatically at the space gun in an art deco-style autogyro

No, she's not... although I'm not sure what "branch" of Christianity she's with. I'd love to say I had a Pentecostal friend.

I don't know much about Christianity, or any other religion and that never really bothers me, but lots of it interests me. My boyfriend and I have some pretty nice religious debates, but I always feel massively uneducated - maybe because I am - and like I can't really account for my theories. And the fact that he has a first class degree in Religious Studies sort of helps me feel like a novice. Basically, I have a lot of questions about Christianity, and not an awful lot of knowledge about whether they're stupid questions.

Leviticus, though - I can see why people ignore that part. It's hilarious!

Edit: (In response to your edit) That sort of... flexibility, I guess, of Catholicism sounds fairly like her. I suppose lots of Christians are flexible in their beliefs, though. She's quite a scientific girl, very clever, which always struck me as off. I suppose I'm old-fashioned in not really seeing how religion and science can both be "right".

__________________

is that the bit about how you can sell your sister into slavery, but not until you've washed any mucus off of her?

__________________
they arrived dramatically at the space gun in an art deco-style autogyro

I must have missed that part... I only remember bringing your mildewed clothes to a priest for him to decide whether you can have them back or they must be burned. And don't eat eels: they are detestable to you - I am the Lord. Oh, and if you're unclean, you must grow your hair long, wear it over your face, wear dirty clothes and call out "Unclean, unclean!"

__________________

It depends. A lot of the New Testament voids the old. The very tone of the Old Testament is different.

Most of it (Old Testament) in my opinion seems to be, Gods chosen act up. He smacks the down with out mercy. Everything is ok for a while, then they act up again and he smacks them down. Sort of like whack a mole with Gods chosen.

The New Testament speaks of forgiveness and tolerance or more so than the old.

Far as believing in the story of creation I haven’t seen anything that says you have to believe in it.

You have to believe in and love God and his son.

You have to love your fellow human.

I'd consider myself Christian, but to me, its just a book. It is far from infallible. Evangelicals scare the shit out of me.

you can be fundamentalist or liberal.

fundamentalists take evry word of the bible to be factual, including genesis.

liberals believe the bible is more symbolic and spiritual.

that's a very basic description they are different degrees of each, then different denominations.

Not meaning to offend anyone's religious beliefs (apologies if I do), but is it not just better to try to treat everyone like an "excellent human being" (Bill and Ted rule), and not worry so much about the intricacies of the things written down in the Bible, which can be interpreted in any number of ways?

you can pretty much believe anything and call yourself a Christian anymore. Christian Scientist, Christian $cientologist, Christian Unitarian.... anything goes. It's a little wacky to say you're a Bible believing Christian, yet dismiss the Old Testement. It kind of throws out the whole, "Word of G-d" idea.

__________________
getting tired of the collective orgasm at the public declaration of the word "change"

Dr. Nathanson

Jesus believed in most of the old testament, afterall he was a Jew himself yet he didnt agree with the bible when certain occasions came up in conversation with the apostles, e.g. old testament permits divorce but Jesus said it wasnt the will of God and that harded human hearts made that rule up.

That's because by the New Testament, we no longer had to "prove" our worth by following strange rules...the whole thing was turned on it's head when Jesus came along.

You can be a Christian and have doubt in some of the Bible...it's God that you're supposed to believe to be a "Christian" (some would add on the end "and that he died for our sins") not necesserily the entire Bible (however most churches would act kind of weird about it...but most churches are weird anyway)

However if she's really into it, the Old Testament has a LOT of prevelance towards the New Testament...to understand one, you must know the other...if you look at it, it took a lot of "weird" to get to a certain point, without it, it would be totallly different. (Think of it as a progression...)

Am I the only one who thinks it's strange that not even god and jesus could agree on how the bible should be interpreted? I'm not a christian and wasn't raised by them so I don't know a lot about it, but that seems to be what you guys are saying?

Most of the "rules" in the Old Testament (but not all) were temporary ones...basically because we had to do all kinds of crazy things to "cleanse our sins". (which some people still do)

When Jesus came along, he paid for our sins for us and we no longer had to do the crazy stuff to prove ourselves...we were covered...

That's the way I was basically taught (in a very basic form)...not sure if that helps...

And it's all subject to opinion of course.

Lemme take a stab at this...

I numbered them to answer them separately.

1) Yes, you need to believe that everything in the Bible happened. That every word in it is the word of God, every story in it comes from God. Or, is a story that God wants us to know about. That's why it's still one book. In every Christian Church that's even vaguely connected to the mainstream, the Bible is one tome made up of two books (with sub-"books" in the books). The old testatment and the new testatment. Now, as to WHAT those stories mean, whether they're literal or metaphorical -- that's the debate.


2) "Dismiss" it. That's the key right there. There's a reason that some Christians might dismiss it. Especially books like Leviticus.

Okay, here's the crux of the dismissal. It comes in two flavors. Two schools.

A) Jesus came to earth, as a fullfillment of the covenant the Jews were keeping with God. He is the promised Messiah. The Old Testament is the history of the chosen people, and the rules that they had to obey if they were ever going to have a Messiah delivered to them by God. Think of it as being good so Santa brings you a present.

Jesus shows up, fullfils the "law", meaning, since the Jews were good, the Messiah came, and now they can drop SOME (most? all?) of the old laws and start to live under the new teachings. The NEW TESTAMENT. In a specific example, that's why Christians can eat bacon and Jews can't. Jews are still waiting for the messiah, so, they have to follow the old laws. The old testament.

Since, the Old Testamant, for Chrisitians has lost a lot of its punch (since Christians were good, and Jesus came) it's not as relevant to Christians as a guidepost for HOW to act. It remains, however, as a history. A rationale for the Jesus stories. You can't understand that he's "fullfilling the law" if you don't know what the Law is/was.

Summing up "A" - Christians can ignore the "rules" (excepting the 10 commandments) of the Old Testament but they can't ignore the history.

However, some ignore the OT in total, for just this reason, since they don't have to live by the rules, they don't bother with the history. They stick with the New Testamant entirely. Which, in a pinch, Jesus says, is okay. As long as you follow him, and what he said to do, you'll get into heaven. On the whole, however, you can't REALLY figure out why he says what he says until you know the back story from the OT.

B) The other reason it's "dismissed" -- it's considered apocryphal or metaphorical. I'd say, that those that dismiss the OT as being, well, not very likely (floods, rains of fire, angry God, etc.) probably also view the New Testament with a jaundiced eye too. That is, they like the underlying meaning, but dismiss the fanciful stories. They're looking for philosophy, and not religion.

They like the "do unto others" but doubt the raising of the dead.

They like the "meek shall inherit the earth" but doubt, or don't see as necessary, the idea that Jesus fed the masses with a couple of fish and a loaf or two of bread

Those that doubt the OT probably don't have much liking for miracles in general.

But, on the whole, IF you believe in Jesus as a miracle worker, as divine, as the literal Son of God, then, it's highly likely that you do believe in the OT as a literal reference work for the history of the Jewish people and a foretelling of the birth and life of the Messiah.


3) Again, you could view the whole thing as a metaphor. If you do that, you're also likely to skip any metaphors you don't like. However, as you're pointing out, you're absolutely correct, that without Adam and Eve, Jesus' whole sacrifice doesn't make much sense. Well, any sense. What would he be cleansing us of if not from original sin?

In sum of the sum, you don't have to FOLLOW the OT if you're a Christian, since JC paid off your debt with God on the covenant tip, but, you sure as shit have to believe that it happened... unless you go the metaphor route. Then, you're free to believe none of it happened, per se, just believe in what the stories, in a non-literal sense, are trying to tell us.

"Once you've witnessed a miracle you'll never see things the same way again. Once you've lived a metaphor, or understand its meaning to the fullest extent, you'll never be the same again. Once a miracle has been manifest through you, and you tell the story to a friend, you'll never discard or dismiss any book with the power to heal broken lives. Until then, a healthy bit of doubt will serve you well."
~~carefulcarpenter

well, it dosen't really matter that much anymore, just as long as the church is making as much money as possible. they claim to not all be money obsessed gayshits, but they are. where i live, the church just bought a cinema complex worth millions of dollars.

Charity is tax deductable; who else but the church to be the outlet for a rich person without the generosity to create meaningful opportunities, nor the imagination and energy to distribute accumulated wealth? Mega theater? Movies are a wonderful creative outlet. The church has always supported great artists. I wonder if Michael Moore's movies will be shown there? "The Passion"--maybe a midnight showing on Christmas Eve? Or Easter? Maybe the church will slip in a couple promotional ads during the preview?


"Do not give to charity"
~~Jesus

note: I guess He was a visionary.