mcdowella wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2:28 am, jpesterfi...@centurytel.net wrote:
>> Early Christians decide that since they are diverging from Judaism
>> much doesn't apply anymore (Levitacus, the chapters with all the
>> begats, etc.) and decide to make a clean break. Christian scripture is
>> now the New Testament only. It'd probable need a new name so people
>> don't keep asking "New compared to what?".
>> What impact on Christianity?
>> Related WI: Considering it's influences from Judaism and Christianity
>> the Koran gets tacked onto the end the Old/New Testament(though Jesus
> (trimmed)
> There isn't much New Testament to base a religion on. My guess is that
> they would want to add a lot of rules e.g. replacing the 10
> Commandments, starting off by including the Didache, or some version
> of it, replacing references in it to the Old Testament with
> equivalents. With these carrying as much weight as the New Testament,
> the religion would probably fossilise, forcing its proponents to live
> with the culture whenever the rules were made, just as the odd-looking
> dress of many religious orders is often the usual dress of respectable
> workers whenever the order was founded. You too can have arguments
> about whether operating a light switch is allowed on Sunday!
> One reason to keep the Old Testament is the passages in the New
> Testament arguing that Christ is the fulfillment of Old Testament
> prophecy. I have never looked at these seriously as arguments, or as
> examples of methods of argument, or coming to conclusions. I wonder
> what influence these have had?
There really isn't much OT in the practice of Christianity. When you get down
to it it is the morality of the peasants not the elite. The sabbath is about
the only unique thing while it adopts Greco-Roman monogamy instead of OT
polygamy. Sure one can find some of the Christian rules in the Torah but when
you consider how many rules there are and how few are adopted (mixing linen
and wool is OK) it barely rises above trial and error.
OTOH the ritual Mikva is all over the OT and public baths are condemned by
Christians. One would at least expect them to teach how to do a bath correctly
if they were paying attention to the OT.
I agree it is popular to say they are closely related but that is the theory.
The practice is much more closely related to Greco-Roman religious practices
and morality than to the written version of the Judean tradition which did not
become important until after the failure of the Bar Kokbah revolt which
appears to have been after the Christian movement got started.
For those into sci.archaeology or soc.history.ancient ...
In the last few years there was been a lot of talk in the last few decades
about synagogues and rabbis before the destruction of the temple. It is all
fantasy based upon no physical or historical evidence whatsoever. There is an
entire class of religious fable that is created to cover the absence of
evidence. This is one of them. There is no evidence of rabbis in biblical
times and in fact what makes for a rabbi these days? A name related to Cohen
meaning priest. Without a temple there were out of work priests who became
local teachers, nothing more.
--
If a man criticizes Israel he will be condemned as antisemitic.
What does a condemned man gain from restraint?
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4213
http://www.giwersworld.org/bible/sewer-bible.phtml a15
Wed Jan 27 21:33:29 EST 2010 |
