The Old Book

There is an ancient argument that started nearly two thousand years ago and lasted centuries. An issue argued vehemently by many sides and at times violently but was ultimately laid to rest by the victor which possessed superior political and economic resources. Today this issue is to be exhumed, brushed off, and reanimated as it is said Lazarus was to give new life to a doctrine that gasps for air in a relatively enlightened world. The issue I am referring to is relevancy of the “Old Testament” and ultimately if it deserves a place in the Christian Bible, or if a reasoned examination of Christianity’s past, present, and most importantly its future shows otherwise.

For those who believe in the Old Testament without refutation I ask that no offense be taken, as my aims are not intended as an attack of any personal nature, nor is it an attempt of subtle blasphemy. It should be taken into consideration that the Old Testament of the Christian Bible was first and foremost a collection of Jewish scripture and writings that at the time of Jesus had yet to be compiled. The truthfulness and validity of its “books” and their contents are not on trial here, but more-so are their place in the Christian Religion.

It is a modern fallacy that Christianity was a revolutionary tour de force of the ancient world, that the message was clear and the people unified. The truth is that the religion began with only a couple dozen followers and took centuries to gain lasting momentum. During this time there were hundreds of different versions of the religion that fought for dominance or survival. Furthermore, the modern view tends to proclaim its dominance as having always been preferred and as the truest version of Jesus' lessons and intentions. However, in the beginning there was no consensus as to how to proceed with the teachings of Jesus, not even among his very own disciples (Ehrman, 177-179).

There also existed disagreements among the disciples as to what Jesus meant, how to practice and preach it, and to whom the message was meant for, as well as debate on the very nature of Jesus and his message. Some forms of Christianity believed he was a man, some said he was God, and some said he was a spirit, or a prophet, or the messiah, and so on (Ehrman, 151-157). Furthermore, as Bart Ehrman describes in his book “Lost Christianities” there was no agreement concerning deities; for instance, if there one god or more. Most forms of Christianity included between one and three Gods, but some included hundreds of Gods and other powerful deities as well.

Who was worthy of Jesus' teaching was perhaps the very first debate of all. Immediately following his death, Jesus' disciples disagreed on the target audience. While it was accepted that other Jews were to be taught the new ways of Jesus as they were the question of whether gentiles (everyone else) should be converted as well. This is the point where canonical debate ensues.

In the centuries after Jesus’ death there were hundreds of scriptures that were written and followed. To the well established church in Rome it was clear that a definitive collection must be compiled. After much political and economic pressure on less powerful sects as well as a series of councils a list of scriptures were selected that resemble much of what we have today and orders were sent out that all non authorized books were to be found and destroyed along with their preachers if necessary. Though very successful, the fact that many dozens of these forbidden texts exist today is a testament to the strength and perseverance of faith.

Two competing philosophies of early Christianity were between the Ebionites who believed that Christianity was a new form of Judaism and all Jewish law and scripture must be followed and Jesus be considered a continuance of Jewish faith, and the Marcionites who believed that Jesus was the beginning of a new religion founded on new beliefs and principles and that the Jewish ways of the past did not apply and often conflicted with the teachings of Jesus. The Marcionites included no Old Testament books in their cannon and though they lost the battle the Marcionite view continues today.

In ancient Rome it was required that all citizens give sacrifice to the Caesar (emperor) usually in the form of incense, but not uncommonly by slaughtering an animal. It was an act of loyalty and adherence to the state’s code. There was only one exception and that was in the province on Judea where the Jews were not required to do so. This was because Judaism was already an ancient religion and Rome was a very religiously tolerant society; also Judea was a rather new acquisition to the empire and their hold on the province was shaky. When the Christian religion sprung up and the Romans didn’t know how to approach it, there was confusion as the sacrifices were expected and the non-Jews refused to do so. For Christians for some time to come this was their toughest struggle as they became blamed for natural catastrophes, lost battles, and anything else that might be a sign of punishment from the gods. Because of this conflict Christianity was forced to prove its Jewishness in order to justify not sacrificing to the emperor.

Today much of the Christian world accepts the Jewish books as their own but with the controversy being on the opposite side of the spectrum. In the modern world of enlightened though and science, technology, and liberalism the difficulties are those of clinging on to the beliefs of the Old Testament. Reconciling archaic ideas with rational thought forces old testament Christians to both defend conflicting doctrines and to alienate those who are faithful Christians who do not. Also estranged are those who would be believers but are forced to choose between science and religion; a decision that is not forced by science but by Christians who preach that there is no middle ground and no compromise.

Science is not the only area that Christians compete, there are also four billion other people on the planet that are Muslim, Hindu, and Buddhist who all offer different philosophies and theologies. While Islam and Buddhism are increasing in strength and numbers, Christianity suffers an identity crises with little unity or consensus and a prevailing doctrine that clings to old ideals that have little or nothing to do with Christ while simultaneously discouraging and alienating both current and potential believers.

The idea that the Old Testament can be disregarded is not blasphemous. In fact every Christian practices this in some way or another, picking and choosing the convenient, relevant, and more compatible parts over the lesser. Few practice slavery as allowed in Leviticus 25:44, or sell their daughters into slavery like in Exodus 21:7. We remain in contact with women while they menstruate which is against Leviticus 15:19-24 and even plant more than two crops in the same fields as forbidden in Leviticus 19:19. We also ignore the hundreds of different ways and reasons that we are to execute people and find things to suit our needs and goals of any situation we may need justified such as whether to turn the other cheek or demand an eye for an eye. Our women go unveiled and we work on the Sabbath (except for the Amish).

Not only are most of the social and economic laws of the Old Testament ignored, but much of the parables and mythologies have nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus Christ even though they are held as if they were Christian. Proponents of the Old Testament cite the fact that Jesus was first and foremost a Jew, but this is a better argument for the understanding of him as a man and not for the religious movement he initiated just as Richard Dawkins wisely commented that Jesus himself “was not content to derive his ethics from the scriptures of his upbringing. He explicitly departed from them” (Dawkins, 250). That is not to say that they have any lesser of a value, but simply that it shows Christianity is a clear break from Jewish law and such that the Old Testament commands.

The prevailing pro-Old Testament argument says that the scriptures are relevant in understanding how Christianity emerged and that Jesus was ultimately a fulfillment of the prophecies of the Old Testament; since Jesus is essentially the Jewish messiah, then the Jewish texts themselves are an essential backdrop. However, the Jews didn’t seem to think so and the great rapture as prophesized in the Old Testament book of Malachi following the return doesn’t seem to have taken shape. In fact, Christianity has instead created its own “end of days” prophecy; certain Christians such as Gnostics have different creation stories; the morals and ethics of Jesus are fundamentally different from those in the Old Testament. Even the stories and parables are not Christian in nature whether it is the creation story or the parting of the Red Sea.

Being Christian does not require that one believe in Jewish mythology even when all rationality and evidence suggests it is invalid, outdated, or contradictory. Though the meaning of being Christian is likely different for every Christian, it seems that all agree that the most important aspect is belief in Jesus Christ as the savior and his teachings, not the beliefs of the Pharisees and exclusion and condemnation of all other views. The Old Testament may be a great source of insight into the influences of Jesus and his teachings but should be considered encouraged literature, not definitive scripture for inclusion into the Christian Bible.

Work Cited

Barnstone, Willis and Marvin Meyer, ed. The Gnostic Bible. Boston: New Seeds, 2003

Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2006.

Ehrman, Bart D. Lost Christianities: The Battles For Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Holy Bible. New International Version. Colorado Springs: International Bible Society, 1984.