I agree. Matt’s attitude towards his fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, particularly his dialogues with representatives of other denominations is exemplary. Such a refreshing change from the finger pointing and criticism so often found on here and other social media platforms.
Hey Matt. I wanted to put the idea in your head of making a Christianity 101 playlist or some other Quickstart guide to Jesus. I'm currently advertising my podcast and the demographics are skewing surprisingly young. So it made me want to put this bug in your ear. It'd be nice to have a solid place to refer young believers to.
@zudduz "Hey Matt. I wanted to put the idea in your head of making a Christianity 101 playlist or some other Quickstart guide to Jesus." THAT, sounds suspiciously like A PLAN. :-)
Matt, first of all, you own a sweater? Secondly, you're awesome, and so is this vid. Thirdly, in case it's an encouragement to anyone scanning the comment section, I began reading the entirety of the Bible a few years ago and I legit can't quit. I adore the OT and have fallen even deeper in love with Jesus from the things I read there. It's hard to get started, to be sure, but it's oh so worth it. Thanks as always for all you do!
We aren't supposed to leave the old testament..... Jesus fulfilled the old testament. It's like a History book too. It's not just an instruction book on how to live. And if you read it correctly.... Isaiah and a few other books of the old testament are prophesying the coming of Jesus Christ. Isaiah 53 is Jesus
Guys it’s all apart of salvation. Getting rid of the OT is a really really old heresy. It’s interesting how they turn back up The NT is foreshadowed in the OT and the OT is revealed in the NT
Matt, I think you missed the mark here. The first thing I thought of was how Jesus amended the Law, for example by saying “Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” (Matthew 5:38-39) There’s also these verses: Hebrews 8:6-7 (KJV) 6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. Hebrews 8:13 (KJV) In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. Then there’s the question of why Christians generally don’t keep certain Old Testament laws like Sabbath, Feast Days, circumcision, kosher etc. I think these things are more along the lines that AggravatedLaw was asking about.
A really great commentary answering the question. I think that some of the uncomfortable sections in the Old Testament are a reflection of the actions of the people of God as they fail and reflect that 'human condition' you spoke about.
I think that maybe a large part of the rejection of the Old Testament involves Mosaic law. That is, if we're supposed to still be keeping the law of Moses, which of it is still applicable and which do we ignore? I mean, most modern Christians don't believe that eating shrimp is an abomination or that we should stone homosexuals to death, right? Seems kind of like maybe it has to be all or nothing, because we can't pick and choose, can we? I dunno man. It's something I really struggle with.
As a lot of others here have said, great explanation. The way you did this video makes me feel like I was listening to your TMBH podcast. In fact, I have often wondered what it would be like watching you do that podcast vs. just listening. Have you ever thought of putting the TMBH up on video?
The purposes of the two testaments are somewhat different, even today. For this reason, I always encourage new believers to start reading the New Testament (particularly John and Romans) before reading the Old Testament. The OT makes much more sense through the lens of the the NT.
My own opinion is that people have always interpreted God’s will in their own ways. Jesus came along to teach people how to really live God’s way. And I think that even Jesus’ teaching are still not followed the right way. Every translation loses things and different things/translations are added. Humans are, unfortunately, always ascribing human emotions unto God.
If professional chefs don't make mistakes, why do they wait until the water is boiling before putting the spaghetti in the pot? Consider the Old Testament putting the water on the heat, and the New Testament as putting the noodles in - both have a correct time and order in which they should be done in order to be correct, and the mistake would be in combining the steps, not in doing both as individual steps in the process.
The NT is not a correction of the OT but the fulfillment of it in Christ. The OT is about who God is, what he has done, what he is like and what his plan is. The NT is a continuation of all that leading to Christ. We need both the law and gospel in equal amounts. What amazes me is God gives us to Christ and Christ gives us to God. They are having a back and forth love fest with us as the beloved gift to each other.
For Pete’s sake! These questions beg one to make judgments on something that we as humans are unqualified to make! This is precisely the trap that those that are anti god set out to do, to create further confusion. We as humans aren’t really in a position to judge or make judgments on god! I’m not here to pass judgment on God and Jesus because It’s not my job to do so as a believer. I do think it’s fair to remember and remind those that do make those pronouncements of God is, that’s why we’re here in the first place, separated from God and not with God! God is after all GOD as JESUS IS ALSO GOD! Questioning the divinity of God will eventually lead towards and insuring one’s separation from GOD!
This has been on my mind recently. I think modern christianity has done a poor job expressing the old testament. It has concentrated on things like grace while ignoring the reason we need grace. It says we need to be saved, but ignores God's desire for justice. Says we need to repent, but ignores how truly depraved we can be. I like to think of the old testament showing us why we need Jesus and the new testament shows how we got Him.
Because it is people make mistakes that break the covenants God has with his people. Jesus was born to fix that with a new covenant in the New Testament with God.
Hi! Great video again. I like your topics, the questions and your podcast as well. To the violance in OT: the old testament contains the history of God’s people of that time. Just an analogy: if the NT would contain the history of God’s people in the last 2000 years - wouldn’t that be quite violent as well? Even within the church. But still: noone thinks that this happened BECAUSE of God, though He is the Lord of history. It happened because of men and caused by men, even though I think God is holding history in His hand. I think we can apply this to the OT as well.
There is a pretty good on the struggle between the various camps on how to deal with the Old and New Testaments at the same time. It is scholarly, but is widely accessible to those who ask questions about it. It is called Scripture Wars, which is an overly provocative title, but it follows the struggle of Justin Martyr to respond both to those who said that the Old Testament should be rejected and those who said the ceremonial and dietary laws had to continue. It's pretty recent and is available online or as a cheap soft cover.
Hi Matt, great video! Very easy to follow along with. One question that I think people have is actually the opposite: "If God doesn't make mistakes, then why is there an OLD testament?" By that I mean: If Jesus is the lamb slain before the foundation of the earth (Rev 13), why wait so long and initiate this other religious system? Galatians 3 is surely the key biblical passage for addressing this issue (the law was for until the Seed had come). But the question still remains for some: Why did God institute a "half-measure" sacrificial/legal system when it was never going to be good enough to save humanity? Was God giving Israel time to understand sacrifice and law, so that they would be ready as a people for the ultimate redemptive plan? The Jews mostly rejected him still and so the Gospel spread out to the Gentiles and took root there - and they had no Law! So having the Law is not a required precursor to coming to Christian faith. Hope this made sense - keep up the great work!
To show that we people fail....over and over. Sacrifice and Law...is constantly broken. (Look at our own man-made legal system). This is demonstrated in the OT, to show that we have weaknesses, and what really matters is God's steadfast grace and love....and His parental-like anger when we fail....But also demonstrating His everlasting forgiveness. We WILL always fall short without Him just forgiving us and loving us, and us being thankful and always trying...HTH?
@@useupwearout5029 All great points! Thanks for the reply. For the record, I don't personally struggle with this topic, but I have encountered it a lot. A video on it would be cool!
@@useupwearout5029I have some trouble believing that's the only reason. But I also believe the Old Testament actually happened, so maybe it's just unfeasible in my own worldview.
Great question considering traditional Christian theology really does seek to "correct" the Torah, either by abolishing, transforming, relativizing or assimilating Israel. All of this is called "fulfilment" in our theology but it's very clear that we mean to end the covenantal vocation of the People, Israel through our systems. The Dispensationalists tried to reckon with this but only imagined a more convoluted mess. The good news is you don't have to be a Dispensationalist to square God's eternal covenants with each other. You just have to believe Jesus and Paul when they insist they are faithful to every letter of the Torah as continuing Jews. The sooner the orthodox find their post-supersessionist bearings, the better they can deal with new pronomian heresies like Hebrew Roots theologies that make gentiles Jews. Every branch of the Christian tradition needs a post supersessionist realignment to the ongoing mission of Israel's land, people and torah in order to appreciate what is truly new about the Gospel.
@@davepugh2519 😂 ok, if you read the NT you’ll find that it wasn’t carefully written at all. And outside historians agree with the life death and resurrection of the Christ known as Jesus of Nazareth. Also the phenomenon which took place, the explosion of Christianity on the scene of world history in the face of so much persecution and hatred after He ascended is beyond convincing to anyone with common sense that the miraculous had happened.
With all due respect, and acknowledging this beautiful explanation *that* the NT and OT are connected, you dodged the question of *why* G-d needed the NT. This commenter is asking why He couldn't just redeem at the outset, or even not create sin in the first place?
If you showed me a Peter santanello and Matt whitman video back to back I would think it’s the same creator. Your curiosity, mannerisms and kindness is wildly similar. Also you look like the same person😂
Corollary: If God doesn't make mistakes, why are so many Christians mad at Adam and Eve? Wasn't Jesus the WHOLE PLAN all along? But if our First Parents had never fallen, why would Jesus have been needed? Since Jesus was (presumably) the plan from the Beginning, wouldn't the Fall have been God's intention the entire time?
The incarnation was the plan whether The Fall happened or not. The Fall was never God’s intention. God cannot will evil. Evil is a negation away from The Good. I wouldn’t say we are mad at Adam and Eve. They’re Saints in Heaven. Christ took them out of Hades.
@@MrWesford But if not for the Fall, what would Jesus be coming to redeem us FROM? The Fall introduced both Sin and Death, or at least that's my understanding, since they didn't exist in the world prior to Adam's and Eve's transgression. (My church teaches the idea of a "fortunate Fall", which I'm aware is not the mainstream Christian position, so I'm trying to understand your view of the interplay between the Fall and the Atonement, and the necessity or lack thereof of each.)
If we didn't call them the Old and New Testaments people would probably still be asking stuff like why Jesus was so different from the rest of the Prophets
Amen. One cannot say Jesus is the fulfillment of the original covenant unless you have the first covenant to read. Also, The Second Covenant makes no sense without The First.
It's the kind of question that can only be asked by someone who thinks the Bible consists merely of lists of rules and made-up stories. If you know that the Bible is mainly an HISTORICAL DOCUMENT that tells of real events that happened to real people, then OF COURSE it makes sense that when Jesus comes on the scene, that that is worth recording as the most important historical happening EVER. It's not at all God saying "oops, I gave you the wrong rules, so here's the edit."
This question just shows how little people understand the Bible, it has to be taken in context of time, place and the Hebrew culture. To understand you have to understand God's covenants with his people and the patriarchal fathers of the time. A good place to start to answer this question is Dr. Brant Pitre and his TH-cam channel. He is an expert on Jewish theology.
I have thought about this before, but in the reasoning behind the great flood, and God wiping out his creation for a massive reset. It makes me wonder why, and if it was a mistake. However, as Matt said, I think it shows the severe need for a savior and how there was no other way. The repeated attempts of man to be in relationship with God failed many many times, and that is why Christ came to fulfill and be the savior of the world.
Hey Matt, perhaps nit picky, but doesn't the word He used more often get translated to "inbody" as opposed to "fulfill"? Could be more read then that He came to BE the law or example for us...
I went through 7 translations (Message, NKJV, KJV, NASB, Amplified, Young's, and NIV) and they all used "fulfill" or synonym. Message used "complete" and one of the King James used "fulfil." Without having a concordance at hand, I don't know of other translations for the word. So 7 translation teams concur that "fulfill" best translates that word. However, I concur "inbody" would not be an incorrect choice either.
@IsYitzach in Matthew 5 :17 yes. But, I believe that in most other places that word is used, it is translated closer to embody (correct spelling 😆) more often. Definitely could be wrong. It's been a while...
@@MiscMitz at a glance of a couple other languages they all use either complete or fulfill words. The Greek in this verse is plerosai and I don't think embody fits as a good translation. Embody would imply that he would represent the law but the point here is a completion of the still yet hanging melody @MattWhitmanTMBH mentions. God did not come to represent the law crucified, but to complete the law's demand of life blood to atone for sin.
Some have said that Jesus had to die to save us from God. I wrestle with this, but I certainly haven't lost my faith. I just have too many unanswered questions. I tell myself that when we get to heaven, God will explain it.
Gosh. The old Testament has most of the prophets that have written prophecies that tell us our future. The Bible is the only book ever written that tells us what will happen, before it happens, so when it happens we will believe. There are prophecies that are coming true daily. Old and new testament both point to Jesus as Savior of the world. God makes no mistakes. We would be fearful without our OLD TESTAMENT. Instead it points us to our BLESSED HOPE, JESUS CHRIST
🤔 I've yet to watch the video all the way through, but here's my perspective on this. The Old Testament (Law of Moses) was a lesser covenant God made with the ancient Israelites, kind of like a parent would trust a child who knows less with less reward. The New Testament is God bringing about a greater covenant that He'd promised would happen eventually- kind of like how when a child grows older and is capable of more, a parent is willing to give the child a greater reward. Neither covenant is imperfect; they just serve different circumstances. Edit to update: You have a valid perspective!
Have you toured any synagogues? If not, you should make sure to visit a reformed synagogue, a conservative synagogue, an orthodox synagogue and - depending on where you live - an Hasidic synagogue. Each denomination has significant differences and I think you would find the roots of some of Jesus’ practices and exposition. I would love to hear your thoughts about the Talmud (translated into an English for you). In Judaism, the disputes and debate about faith is encouraged and considered obligatory.
the problem arises because of a relatively modern attitude to the bible as an "inerrant word of God" whose every word has absolute infallible divine authority. it only makes matters worse when we impose that attitude onto the people who appear in the bible and to those who wrote it. a more helpful approach is to see it as the record of people of faith struggling throughout history to work out what it means to be people of God. understanding of God evolved over time from a tribal warrior deity in a pantheon to the one and only God of the universe. people didn't always agree and some parts of the bible critique other parts. this didn't stop with jesus, and you'll see disagreements in the new testament, and as we know, this continues in the church to this very day. doesn't mean that God wasn't involved in the bible's creation. on the contrary, as jesus pointed out, it speaks of him, he fulfils it. where jesus is different is that he is God incarnate, God's self-revelation: in the past, you thought about me this way or that way, but this is what i'm really like, see heb 1.1-4. that's why God appears different in the old testament. it's because it's how people imagined God based on the limited understanding they had, but Jesus is God's self-revelation.
Every single thing in the Old Testament was a preparation for the new. God sought to establish the Jewish people, starting with Abraham, in the very first book, setting up this people for the Messiah to come from them. The reason why the Old Testament focuses on Israel is because God planned Jesus from the beginning. The New Testament isn't God's second plan. It's the culmination of His first, only, and perfect plan.
It is a good question and I would have to say, from a Christian prospective, is that God may not make mistakes, but people sure do. From my understanding, God gave the Israelites the Mosaic laws and commandments and told them that *IF* they could keep them, they could stay in the land of Israel. Interestingly enough, there is very little concern about an afterlife in the old testament, which makes me wonder if the whole hellfire and brimstone thing is an addition by the Greeks (who had the legend of Hades). I know, Christians out there would call me a Heretic for that comment., but I digress. Anyway, according to the Old Testament, the Israelites repeatedly fell away from the Mosaic laws. Repeatedly so, to the point where Jeremiah finally prophesized that the Israelites would be carried off to Babylon and remain in exile from the land of Israel until permitted to return. There is roughly 1200-1500 years of history in the old testament from the time of Moses until the time of Christ, so a lot happened that I'm kind of glossing over. (including the splitting of the kingdoms). in 538 BC, the Israelites return to Israel/Jerusalem and continue living there as before. Sometime between the return of the Israelites and the birth of Christ, were lead to think that God has changed his mind about how to keep his covenant. There may actually be scripture for this, so someone who is better versed with their bible can probably attest to this idea in scripture. As a final attempt to have the Israelites keep the covenant of God, he sends his son, himself in the flesh (the trinity is a difficult concept, so I'll leave that to the theologians to figure out) and he forms his ministry. The Pharisees (the priesthood of Israel) rejected the idea that God would become incarnate and that Jesus of Nazareth was *NOT* the prophesized Messiah (there was a prophecy in Judaism that a Messiah will come). After the Pharisees rejected Jesus Christ, He's crucified, the occupying Romans destroy the temple and scatter the remainder of the Israelites to the winds. This is viewed as a fulfilling of God's promise that he would take the land of Israel away from the Israelites. In the mean time, some new testament apostles and Christians have a doctrine, that the Gentiles (non-jews/israelites) would be welcomed by God with a new covenant (Christ) where his name would be exalted while the Israelites/Jews remain in exile (always with the invitation to partake in the new covenant, that's *VERY* important to remember and has led to persecution of Jewish people. but they remain His Chosen people in Exile) until about 1947. That was the year, and after the holocaust, where the UN decided to create the state of Israel (which *WAS* in opposition to people already living there -- See Palestinian conflict). Anyway, that's a really rough mix of History, Theology and Religion, but to have the complete picture, this is roughly the belief of most Christians today.
@@billbuyers8683 no, read the Old Testament. God tells the Israelites that they will be expelled from the land of Israel if they don’t keep His laws. He does say he will destroy the wicked etc. There is Sheol, which is translated from Hebrew to English as “Hell”, but the Jewish belief of Sheol differs somewhat from Hell (which is more akin to Hades)
God is amazing he has blessed me in ways I wouldn't believe if I'd not lived it that bible is the truth if you do your best to follow it life will be a blessing you will be a blessing
1-4 Maccabees explains a lot of the in-between period of what tradition calls “Old” and “New Testament”. There is no difference between the “Testaments”. It’s all the same story and the tones are the exact same, you just have to know the “Old Testament” better, believe it, comprehend it, drop tradition, and drop philosophy to see it. Doctrines, philosophies, traditions, poor comprehension skills, instilments, and installments of men have clouded believers minds and hearts to not even believe or properly comprehend the plainly written words of scripture. This, of course, leads to gross misconduct, misunderstanding, and irresponsibility. Henceforth causing disrespect to our inheritance that Yahweh has preserved through the Bible.
You have to admit that it's pretty striking that Christianity has discarded almost all of the original 613 commandments. "I did not come to abolish the law", "not one jot or tiddle will be erased", etc! Also, I think it's only the New Testament that claims that it's a part of a series 😅
The Jewish religion has the lights on but dimmed. In the Christian religion they are fully on. The voltage regulator has been turned from half to full.
I got a question for anyone. What does Jesus “Fulfilled” the Old Testament mean. Because the book says it didn’t end . It wasn’t over . If anyone teaches it’s over or changes it (the sabbath ;) will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven .
Nit picking, dunno if you maybe misread their comment, or it's really part of their post; but no- God is not everything. I do really like how BibleProject states it though, "We believe the Bible is one cohesive story from beginning to end-", so approaching it from the perspective of new/old being separate, contrary, or otherwise divided already kinda shows the person asking hasn't actually read the entire thing yet ^^;
Thanks Matt, really good explanation. The question doesn't capture all of the issues about mistakes though. In Genesis 6:6 God regrets that he made man, isn't that a mistake?!
To the point about throwing out the Old Testament, no, we don't do that. We recognize why it exists, but that the specific commands in it aren't to us, but to ancient Israelites in Palestine. Deuteronomy 12:1 "These are the decrees and laws you must be careful to follow in the land that the Lord, the God of your ancestors, has given you to possess-as long as you live in the land." (This is stated 2 more times in that book using various verbiage.) We aren't ancient Israelites living in Palestine, so these rules don't specifically apply to us. Obviously, some of these commands are the same commands everyone should follow, like "don't murder" and "have no other gods before me", but these commands aren't given to us. We follow the commands given to us in the New Testament.
The moral law applies as Jesus sums up the moral law into 2 commandments. So yes the 10 commandments are apart of the moral law and are to be followed. It is the ceremonial Jewish laws that were done away with such as the dietary laws and baptism replaces circumcision
@@catholicguy1073 Kinda right, technically wrong. The 10 commandments in Exodus 20 don't apply because they are to Ancient Israelites in Palestine. But, they correspond to God's moral law, and therefore 9 of them are repeated in the New Testament, and do apply to all Christians today.
@@acem82 the 10th commandment you’re saying we do not observe is about the Sabbath (3rd command) which we respect in the principle of it on the Lords Day so technically you’re wrong to only observe 9 :) The day to worship God for us is the Lords Day and if we can not work on that day we should not. It’s to honor God and spend time with family. Keep holy The Lords Day
@@catholicguy1073 Look, let's be clear here. The Old Testament law does provide us much to learn about doing what is moral, but it doesn't directly apply to us. So no, we don't have to "honor the Sabbath", but the principle is still good to know. That command is to Ancient Israelites in Palestine, and *not* commanded to Christians. Romans 14:5 "One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind." You may honor that day (which, honestly, should be Saturday, but who's counting) if you like, but it's not a command.
@@acem82 disagree. We are bound by the moral law which Jesus summed up into the 2 commandments so yes observance of the 10 commandments is necessary. That’s like saying to steal is not a sin or adultery is not a sin or to commit murder is not a sin. Which I am sure you agree those are sins. They are apart of the moral law and the 10 commandments is apart of the moral law. Lastly the Lords Day is the day for us not the Sabbath as it foreshadows the Lords Day. That was decided very very early on in Christianity because as you know Jesus rose on Sunday. The Lords Day has the principle of the Sabbath to respect the day to worship God. So yes it’s a command We are not bound by Jewish ceremonial laws and dietary laws. The moral laws we’ve always been bound to from the beginning. The only Christian’s who deny this typically are 7th Day Adventists. I’ve seen some non denominational Christians who do not understand the moral law and that’s always been apart of adhering to in Christianity but with Protestants they always got these new interpretations
What makes me wonder is, if Jesus and the NT was God’s intent, why wait a few thousand years of what isn’t actually the plan and makes no true difference.
I think there are a lot of reasons for this, but one of them that I spoke to in the video was the idea of exhausting the obvious Human Solutions to the problem, and demonstrating that it would take a much more profound solution to fix what ails humanity.
@@MattWhitmanTMBH So, the old need to be broken down before building back up. One of the greatest lies I have ever heard, the break down knows no bottom, and the building back up never comes.
@@nategraham6946 I think the point @MattWhitmanTMBH is making is that humanity had to try and fail in all its attempts to fix itself. When that failed, only God could fix it. Which He did. The issue is that what you're describing as the break down sounds like all the evil and awfulness that has happened in the world between then and now. And there's a tension there. There's a "now" and "not yet" regarding the redemption of humanity. We are redeemed, but that redemption comes through faith. God is giving every person the opportunity to accept Christ and be saved. He is not imposing Himself nor is he denying all the rest of us the chance to come to Him (or to not come to Him). The war is over. Evil and sin have been defeated, but the rest of humanity yet to be born has to have the opportunity to come to Him. Otherwise, He's made a wind up world where there is no choice at all and faith isn't faith, it's programming. Your reply sounds like you made your mind up before even watching the video. You stated it was a lie and used 2 assertions (the break down knows no bottom, and the building back up never comes) that can't be proved. If you're making your opinion fact and saying the things you assert are true while having no basis for asserting them other than your preconceived notion, then the whole thing is circular and pointless.
I find it helpful to discard the misleading appellation 'Old Testament' and instead refer to the Hebrew Canon as the Hebrew Bible or simply as the Bible. This forces a rethinking, since really the knock at the door during the Seder meal is not executed until several hundred years later, when the visitor to the Seder becomes not the visitor but the Seder itself, and He drinks from the Fifth Cup. The Hebrew Bible is brought to life at the Seder, which puts such heavy emphasis on Elijah that he cannot be understood as an equal within the family, nor even a divine messenger, but in some way embodies the Divinity. John the Baptist has to prepare the way, because as it turns out, the return of Elijah is an event far greater than even the Seder envisions. Elijah does not merely embody some peripheral aspects of I AM, but is the complete embodiment, the perfect Image described in Gn 1:27, thus Son of Man Who can only be Son of God. The Hebrew Bible, in essence, ends with the unsipped Fifth Cup, since there is always an unoccupied chair at the Seder. The Hebrew Bible is sufficient in itself, containing the full unfolding of the Covenant with God's people, and perpetually in expectation of the coming of Elijah. Jesus of Nazareth is the visitor, is Elijah, is the Ego Eimi, and drinks from the Fifth Cup which is at once the Cup of Socrates but also the Cup of Life, experienced sequentially in the Triduum. The Fulfillment is celebrated immediately at Pentecost, followed by Saul's conversion to the Apostle Paul, who writes in several letters about the new Seder, which we call the Eucharist, and only two to five decades later do the communities of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John commit to recording the event of the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Elijah, Son of Man, Son of God. But even here we must realign our thoughts, since the Christ is not capstone, and not even seminal cornerstone, but IS in a way that no created thing can be, in essence Tillich's Ground of All Being, which is easily distilled from the Gospel of John. So, call it the Hebrew Bible or simply the Bible, and call the Gospels and the Epistles the Good News, or Scripture Fulfilled. If we must apply a name to the collection of Hebrew and Christian Scriptures, how about Torah Ketuvim Nevi'im Hashlema or maybe Tanakhahsh. PM 2024
The central point of all scripture is Christ. The Old Testament is from the vantage point of looking forward to Christ. God is acting to bring about the pinnacle event of the arrival of Christ the Messiah. The New Testament is looking backward (for the most part) at the events of Christ. There is no fix. One God with one central theme from beginning to end. There is Israel the nation state in the Old Testament, but according to Paul there is also an Israel of sort that never ends - the Church. There is the Mosaic Covenant for the nation of Israel as a people. The Abrahamic Covenant is a completely separate and parallel promise that God institutes - the Church ruled by God's grace and mercy. This is one of Paul's points in Galatians 4 as he uses Hagar and Sarah as allegories to the two covenants: Mt. Sinai and Mt. Zion.
“Don’t bargain with God. Be direct. Ask for what you need. This is not a cat-and-mouse, hide-and-seek game we’re in. If your little boy asks for a serving of fish, do you scare him with a live snake on his plate? If your little girl asks for an egg, do you trick her with a spider? As bad as you are, you wouldn’t think of such a thing-you’re at least decent to your own children. And don’t you think the Father who conceived you in love will give the Holy Spirit when you ask him?” Luke 11 Jesus refers to the old testament in this quote and clearly critisizes blind "Jaweh" faith. I personally do not think, that Jesus would have used the old testament for the founding of his church. This decision was fought over a lot and long after Jesus death and resurrection. I doubt, that Jesus would have fed his children "snakes and stones" as Jaweh did, which means that Jesus does speak of another father when he preaches.
Jesus revealed his father ,our God in the NT with as much as revelation as the people can possibly understand.The OT is a display of evolution of the God concept,example is ,what nature did God was behind it,good or bad.Evolution of the nature,characteristics,and love vs fear of God progressed.The OT teachers taught what they understood at that time frame.Some did receive advanced knowledge but the majority did not.Moses said a prophet will come but he did not know exactly who it was.The bible has its share of embellishments and exaggerations to project an attraction to it.Jesus clarified much in saying God is spirit and no one has seen God as did John and Paul also stated ,as one example.The Trinity was explained to John but was not clarified and remains confusing .Revelation is as it says it is. Revelation does not stop as it clarifies the confusion and reveals new and formerly unknown truths of God and the universe.The OT is the stone ages compared to the Jesus revelation of God to man.The God of both the OT and NT are the same but man knew very little of God early on in his humanity.
1/3 of the entire Bible is prophecy. 90% of that prophecy is for the end time just prior to Christ’s return. The major and minor prophets are for the end time. Jesus’s first coming was to serve many purposes. His human birth was the arrival of the 2nd Adam. He came the first time to 1) to qualify to replace Satan, the former archangel Lucifer, on the throne of the earth, ruling with the government of God at His return. 2) To announce the future establishment of the KINGDOM OF GOD and teach that prophetic good news (gospel) to His chosen future apostles. 3) To take on Himself, as man’s direct Creator, the penalty for our sins by His death on the stake- that mankind might share in that supernatural Kingdom. 4) To be resurrected from the dead by God, His Father, making possible ETERNAL GOD-LIFE for the people of God and after His 2nd coming for all who have ever lived on this earth from Adam till that time. 5) To establish God’s Church, to be trained to rule under Him. He came also to reveal or declare The Father(John 1:18). The nation of Israel had only known of the one God of the Old Testament, who became Jesus Christ at His human birth, the Son of God (Luke 1:32-35; 1 Corinthians 10:1-4). The Church is built on the foundation of the apostles AND the prophets, Christ Himself is the Chief Cornerstone as He was the LOGOS revealing and inspiring the writers of the Old Testament (Ephesians 2:18-20) Christ is NOT the Ultimate Authority in the Kingdom of God. God the Father is the Head of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:3). Those called out of this world into the Church are required to overcome( conquer) the world as Christ did(John 16:33) in order to qualify to rule with Christ at His Return ( Revelation 3:12, 21).
@@MattWhitmanTMBHlol what a perfect response. I wonder if during Matt’s studies of scripture and religion if he ever thought about how his beliefs don’t align with Orthodox Judaism… did that ever cross your mind in your years of study? Haha!
It's simple. The old covenant was temporary and for the Israelites. The new covenant is the completion of the old and for everyone. Prophecies forfilled.
Because Jesus said it. Jesus called the new thing a "NEW COVENANT." Covenant = Testament. Learn some languages ... like Biblical GREEK and HEBREW and you'll get it. DON'T read into the Word instead read it in the original languages - you will be surprised that your Arminiocalvinism is a big lie.
Us Catholic Christians have a saying: "The New testament is hidden in the Old, and the Old testament is unveiled in the New"
may God bless you❤
I really wish you had more viewers. You're such a loving evangelist in this polarised culture.
I agree. Matt’s attitude towards his fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, particularly his dialogues with representatives of other denominations is exemplary. Such a refreshing change from the finger pointing and criticism so often found on here and other social media platforms.
He’s the first person I ever heard and thought “is this what being christ like means?”
Old testament is the description of why we needed Jesus. We're flawed and we need someone who's not to help us.
Succinct, well said!
Hey Matt. I wanted to put the idea in your head of making a Christianity 101 playlist or some other Quickstart guide to Jesus. I'm currently advertising my podcast and the demographics are skewing surprisingly young. So it made me want to put this bug in your ear. It'd be nice to have a solid place to refer young believers to.
@zudduz
"Hey Matt. I wanted to put the idea in your head of making a Christianity 101 playlist or some other Quickstart guide to Jesus."
THAT, sounds suspiciously like A PLAN. :-)
I would be interested to check it out, at least. Have you released any episodes yet? What's it called?
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
-Matthew 5:17
Matt, first of all, you own a sweater? Secondly, you're awesome, and so is this vid. Thirdly, in case it's an encouragement to anyone scanning the comment section, I began reading the entirety of the Bible a few years ago and I legit can't quit. I adore the OT and have fallen even deeper in love with Jesus from the things I read there. It's hard to get started, to be sure, but it's oh so worth it. Thanks as always for all you do!
great video. it's important to answer real questions like this sincerely and respectfully. good job
We aren't supposed to leave the old testament..... Jesus fulfilled the old testament. It's like a History book too. It's not just an instruction book on how to live. And if you read it correctly.... Isaiah and a few other books of the old testament are prophesying the coming of Jesus Christ. Isaiah 53 is Jesus
@allismama
"We aren't supposed to leave the old testament..... Jesus fulfilled the old testament."
NO!
Actually I got a question. What does “Jesus Fulfilled” the Old Testament meen .
@@Turn-The-Other-Cheek-1Kings22 they mean Jesus fulfilled the prophecies of the OT
im not sure how you dont think its ridiculous to say the OT does not give instruction on how to live
Guys it’s all apart of salvation. Getting rid of the OT is a really really old heresy. It’s interesting how they turn back up
The NT is foreshadowed in the OT and the OT is revealed in the NT
The Deuterocanonical books really fill in the gaps...😅
Matt, I think you missed the mark here. The first thing I thought of was how Jesus amended the Law, for example by saying “Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” (Matthew 5:38-39)
There’s also these verses:
Hebrews 8:6-7 (KJV) 6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
Hebrews 8:13 (KJV) In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
Then there’s the question of why Christians generally don’t keep certain Old Testament laws like Sabbath, Feast Days, circumcision, kosher etc.
I think these things are more along the lines that AggravatedLaw was asking about.
A really great commentary answering the question. I think that some of the uncomfortable sections in the Old Testament are a reflection of the actions of the people of God as they fail and reflect that 'human condition' you spoke about.
God never made a mistake, but we (humans) did. It is all a testimate to his boundless mercy and grace.
If god never makes mistakes, why does he have regrets?
@@davepugh2519 What actions does God regret making?
He regretted creating humans (Genesis 6:6) and he regretted making Saul king (1 Samuel 15:11)@@dl5244
I think that maybe a large part of the rejection of the Old Testament involves Mosaic law. That is, if we're supposed to still be keeping the law of Moses, which of it is still applicable and which do we ignore? I mean, most modern Christians don't believe that eating shrimp is an abomination or that we should stone homosexuals to death, right? Seems kind of like maybe it has to be all or nothing, because we can't pick and choose, can we? I dunno man. It's something I really struggle with.
You should attend an Orthodox Church to gain further insight into how this works on a practical level.
Because mankind has freewill and He loves us and wanted to give us another chance at a relationship with us. Thank God he did!
As a lot of others here have said, great explanation. The way you did this video makes me feel like I was listening to your TMBH podcast. In fact, I have often wondered what it would be like watching you do that podcast vs. just listening. Have you ever thought of putting the TMBH up on video?
The purposes of the two testaments are somewhat different, even today. For this reason, I always encourage new believers to start reading the New Testament (particularly John and Romans) before reading the Old Testament. The OT makes much more sense through the lens of the the NT.
My own opinion is that people have always interpreted God’s will in their own ways. Jesus came along to teach people how to really live God’s way. And I think that even Jesus’ teaching are still not followed the right way. Every translation loses things and different things/translations are added. Humans are, unfortunately, always ascribing human emotions unto God.
If professional chefs don't make mistakes, why do they wait until the water is boiling before putting the spaghetti in the pot?
Consider the Old Testament putting the water on the heat, and the New Testament as putting the noodles in - both have a correct time and order in which they should be done in order to be correct, and the mistake would be in combining the steps, not in doing both as individual steps in the process.
The NT is not a correction of the OT but the fulfillment of it in Christ. The OT is about who God is, what he has done, what he is like and what his plan is. The NT is a continuation of all that leading to Christ. We need both the law and gospel in equal amounts. What amazes me is God gives us to Christ and Christ gives us to God. They are having a back and forth love fest with us as the beloved gift to each other.
For Pete’s sake! These questions beg one to make judgments on something that we as humans are unqualified to make! This is precisely the trap that those that are anti god set out to do, to create further confusion. We as humans aren’t really in a position to judge or make judgments on god! I’m not here to pass judgment on God and Jesus because It’s not my job to do so as a believer. I do think it’s fair to remember and remind those that do make those pronouncements of God is, that’s why we’re here in the first place, separated from God and not with God! God is after all GOD as JESUS IS ALSO GOD! Questioning the divinity of God will eventually lead towards and insuring one’s separation from GOD!
This has been on my mind recently. I think modern christianity has done a poor job expressing the old testament. It has concentrated on things like grace while ignoring the reason we need grace. It says we need to be saved, but ignores God's desire for justice. Says we need to repent, but ignores how truly depraved we can be. I like to think of the old testament showing us why we need Jesus and the new testament shows how we got Him.
Excellent and understandable analysis! Thank you.
It all began with the call to Abraham. Christianity was in the gestational mode for a long time.
Because it is people make mistakes that break the covenants God has with his people. Jesus was born to fix that with a new covenant in the New Testament with God.
Hi! Great video again. I like your topics, the questions and your podcast as well. To the violance in OT: the old testament contains the history of God’s people of that time. Just an analogy: if the NT would contain the history of God’s people in the last 2000 years - wouldn’t that be quite violent as well? Even within the church. But still: noone thinks that this happened BECAUSE of God, though He is the Lord of history. It happened because of men and caused by men, even though I think God is holding history in His hand. I think we can apply this to the OT as well.
Jesus fixed our interpretation of it. He focused on parables that can always be applied and understood.
Thank you for a fruitfull conversation.
There is a pretty good on the struggle between the various camps on how to deal with the Old and New Testaments at the same time. It is scholarly, but is widely accessible to those who ask questions about it. It is called Scripture Wars, which is an overly provocative title, but it follows the struggle of Justin Martyr to respond both to those who said that the Old Testament should be rejected and those who said the ceremonial and dietary laws had to continue. It's pretty recent and is available online or as a cheap soft cover.
Being overly dogmatic is the reason people struggle with concepts like "how is Jesus God if God is God... etc"
Hi Matt, great video! Very easy to follow along with.
One question that I think people have is actually the opposite: "If God doesn't make mistakes, then why is there an OLD testament?"
By that I mean: If Jesus is the lamb slain before the foundation of the earth (Rev 13), why wait so long and initiate this other religious system?
Galatians 3 is surely the key biblical passage for addressing this issue (the law was for until the Seed had come). But the question still remains for some: Why did God institute a "half-measure" sacrificial/legal system when it was never going to be good enough to save humanity? Was God giving Israel time to understand sacrifice and law, so that they would be ready as a people for the ultimate redemptive plan?
The Jews mostly rejected him still and so the Gospel spread out to the Gentiles and took root there - and they had no Law! So having the Law is not a required precursor to coming to Christian faith.
Hope this made sense - keep up the great work!
To show that we people fail....over and over. Sacrifice and Law...is constantly broken. (Look at our own man-made legal system). This is demonstrated in the OT, to show that we have weaknesses, and what really matters is God's steadfast grace and love....and His parental-like anger when we fail....But also demonstrating His everlasting forgiveness. We WILL always fall short without Him just forgiving us and loving us, and us being thankful and always trying...HTH?
@@useupwearout5029 All great points! Thanks for the reply.
For the record, I don't personally struggle with this topic, but I have encountered it a lot. A video on it would be cool!
@@useupwearout5029I have some trouble believing that's the only reason. But I also believe the Old Testament actually happened, so maybe it's just unfeasible in my own worldview.
Great question considering traditional Christian theology really does seek to "correct" the Torah, either by abolishing, transforming, relativizing or assimilating Israel. All of this is called "fulfilment" in our theology but it's very clear that we mean to end the covenantal vocation of the People, Israel through our systems. The Dispensationalists tried to reckon with this but only imagined a more convoluted mess. The good news is you don't have to be a Dispensationalist to square God's eternal covenants with each other. You just have to believe Jesus and Paul when they insist they are faithful to every letter of the Torah as continuing Jews.
The sooner the orthodox find their post-supersessionist bearings, the better they can deal with new pronomian heresies like Hebrew Roots theologies that make gentiles Jews.
Every branch of the Christian tradition needs a post supersessionist realignment to the ongoing mission of Israel's land, people and torah in order to appreciate what is truly new about the Gospel.
In the Old Testament, The Time of Prophecy and Preparation.
In the New Testament, The Time of Fulfillment
The New Testament was carefully written to make it look as though the prophecies were fulfilled.
@@davepugh2519 😂 ok, if you read the NT you’ll find that it wasn’t carefully written at all. And outside historians agree with the life death and resurrection of the Christ known as Jesus of Nazareth. Also the phenomenon which took place, the explosion of Christianity on the scene of world history in the face of so much persecution and hatred after He ascended is beyond convincing to anyone with common sense that the miraculous had happened.
With all due respect, and acknowledging this beautiful explanation *that* the NT and OT are connected, you dodged the question of *why* G-d needed the NT. This commenter is asking why He couldn't just redeem at the outset, or even not create sin in the first place?
If you showed me a Peter santanello and Matt whitman video back to back I would think it’s the same creator. Your curiosity, mannerisms and kindness is wildly similar. Also you look like the same person😂
Corollary: If God doesn't make mistakes, why are so many Christians mad at Adam and Eve? Wasn't Jesus the WHOLE PLAN all along? But if our First Parents had never fallen, why would Jesus have been needed? Since Jesus was (presumably) the plan from the Beginning, wouldn't the Fall have been God's intention the entire time?
The incarnation was the plan whether The Fall happened or not. The Fall was never God’s intention. God cannot will evil. Evil is a negation away from The Good.
I wouldn’t say we are mad at Adam and Eve. They’re Saints in Heaven. Christ took them out of Hades.
@@MrWesford But if not for the Fall, what would Jesus be coming to redeem us FROM? The Fall introduced both Sin and Death, or at least that's my understanding, since they didn't exist in the world prior to Adam's and Eve's transgression.
(My church teaches the idea of a "fortunate Fall", which I'm aware is not the mainstream Christian position, so I'm trying to understand your view of the interplay between the Fall and the Atonement, and the necessity or lack thereof of each.)
Man put the labels of Old and New to the Bible. It's all one book.
If we didn't call them the Old and New Testaments people would probably still be asking stuff like why Jesus was so different from the rest of the Prophets
Amen. One cannot say Jesus is the fulfillment of the original covenant unless you have the first covenant to read. Also, The Second Covenant makes no sense without The First.
It's the kind of question that can only be asked by someone who thinks the Bible consists merely of lists of rules and made-up stories. If you know that the Bible is mainly an HISTORICAL DOCUMENT that tells of real events that happened to real people, then OF COURSE it makes sense that when Jesus comes on the scene, that that is worth recording as the most important historical happening EVER. It's not at all God saying "oops, I gave you the wrong rules, so here's the edit."
This question just shows how little people understand the Bible, it has to be taken in context of time, place and the Hebrew culture. To understand you have to understand God's covenants with his people and the patriarchal fathers of the time. A good place to start to answer this question is Dr. Brant Pitre and his TH-cam channel. He is an expert on Jewish theology.
The Old Testament is not complete without the New Testament.
The New Testament doesn't make sense without the Old Testament.
I have thought about this before, but in the reasoning behind the great flood, and God wiping out his creation for a massive reset. It makes me wonder why, and if it was a mistake. However, as Matt said, I think it shows the severe need for a savior and how there was no other way. The repeated attempts of man to be in relationship with God failed many many times, and that is why Christ came to fulfill and be the savior of the world.
Hey Matt, perhaps nit picky, but doesn't the word He used more often get translated to "inbody" as opposed to "fulfill"?
Could be more read then that He came to BE the law or example for us...
I went through 7 translations (Message, NKJV, KJV, NASB, Amplified, Young's, and NIV) and they all used "fulfill" or synonym. Message used "complete" and one of the King James used "fulfil." Without having a concordance at hand, I don't know of other translations for the word. So 7 translation teams concur that "fulfill" best translates that word.
However, I concur "inbody" would not be an incorrect choice either.
@IsYitzach in Matthew 5 :17 yes. But, I believe that in most other places that word is used, it is translated closer to embody (correct spelling 😆) more often. Definitely could be wrong. It's been a while...
@@MiscMitz at a glance of a couple other languages they all use either complete or fulfill words. The Greek in this verse is plerosai and I don't think embody fits as a good translation. Embody would imply that he would represent the law but the point here is a completion of the still yet hanging melody @MattWhitmanTMBH mentions. God did not come to represent the law crucified, but to complete the law's demand of life blood to atone for sin.
@@darklard okay. Thank you
Some have said that Jesus had to die to save us from God. I wrestle with this, but I certainly haven't lost my faith. I just have too many unanswered questions. I tell myself that when we get to heaven, God will explain it.
Gosh. The old Testament has most of the prophets that have written prophecies that tell us our future. The Bible is the only book ever written that tells us what will happen, before it happens, so when it happens we will believe. There are prophecies that are coming true daily. Old and new testament both point to Jesus as Savior of the world. God makes no mistakes. We would be fearful without our OLD TESTAMENT. Instead it points us to our BLESSED HOPE, JESUS CHRIST
🤔 I've yet to watch the video all the way through, but here's my perspective on this.
The Old Testament (Law of Moses) was a lesser covenant God made with the ancient Israelites, kind of like a parent would trust a child who knows less with less reward. The New Testament is God bringing about a greater covenant that He'd promised would happen eventually- kind of like how when a child grows older and is capable of more, a parent is willing to give the child a greater reward.
Neither covenant is imperfect; they just serve different circumstances.
Edit to update: You have a valid perspective!
The first thing that came into my head after hearing that question was "it's probably us humans that made it necessary".
The failure wasn’t Gods, it was man’s who couldn’t understand and follow Gods instructions.
Have you toured any synagogues? If not, you should make sure to visit a reformed synagogue, a conservative synagogue, an orthodox synagogue and - depending on where you live - an Hasidic synagogue. Each denomination has significant differences and I think you would find the roots of some of Jesus’ practices and exposition. I would love to hear your thoughts about the Talmud (translated into an English for you). In Judaism, the disputes and debate about faith is encouraged and considered obligatory.
the problem arises because of a relatively modern attitude to the bible as an "inerrant word of God" whose every word has absolute infallible divine authority. it only makes matters worse when we impose that attitude onto the people who appear in the bible and to those who wrote it.
a more helpful approach is to see it as the record of people of faith struggling throughout history to work out what it means to be people of God. understanding of God evolved over time from a tribal warrior deity in a pantheon to the one and only God of the universe. people didn't always agree and some parts of the bible critique other parts. this didn't stop with jesus, and you'll see disagreements in the new testament, and as we know, this continues in the church to this very day.
doesn't mean that God wasn't involved in the bible's creation. on the contrary, as jesus pointed out, it speaks of him, he fulfils it. where jesus is different is that he is God incarnate, God's self-revelation: in the past, you thought about me this way or that way, but this is what i'm really like, see heb 1.1-4.
that's why God appears different in the old testament. it's because it's how people imagined God based on the limited understanding they had, but Jesus is God's self-revelation.
it's always a pleasure listening to this Gentleman. Great work as always.
Because Jesus was a messenger!
Every single thing in the Old Testament was a preparation for the new. God sought to establish the Jewish people, starting with Abraham, in the very first book, setting up this people for the Messiah to come from them. The reason why the Old Testament focuses on Israel is because God planned Jesus from the beginning. The New Testament isn't God's second plan. It's the culmination of His first, only, and perfect plan.
What’s with the jerkiness of the video? Like the camera is on a lower FPS?
every great book has a sequel
I concur! Ithink the OT is still inerrant Bible, not a record of mistakes.
Glad to see you're still a champion of the manatees, Matt.
What if it's both?
haha Fair question! Alright - I don't believe it's a record of God's mistakes.
Powerful testimony. Compare Moses, Elijah and Jesus on Mt Tabor theosis. Got matzah?
I…genuinely thought you had a chocolate bar in your hand for the first full second of the video.
🤣😆😂
Jesus wasn’t fixing the Old Testament, he was making a new one.
It is a good question and I would have to say, from a Christian prospective, is that God may not make mistakes, but people sure do. From my understanding, God gave the Israelites the Mosaic laws and commandments and told them that *IF* they could keep them, they could stay in the land of Israel. Interestingly enough, there is very little concern about an afterlife in the old testament, which makes me wonder if the whole hellfire and brimstone thing is an addition by the Greeks (who had the legend of Hades). I know, Christians out there would call me a Heretic for that comment., but I digress. Anyway, according to the Old Testament, the Israelites repeatedly fell away from the Mosaic laws. Repeatedly so, to the point where Jeremiah finally prophesized that the Israelites would be carried off to Babylon and remain in exile from the land of Israel until permitted to return. There is roughly 1200-1500 years of history in the old testament from the time of Moses until the time of Christ, so a lot happened that I'm kind of glossing over. (including the splitting of the kingdoms). in 538 BC, the Israelites return to Israel/Jerusalem and continue living there as before. Sometime between the return of the Israelites and the birth of Christ, were lead to think that God has changed his mind about how to keep his covenant. There may actually be scripture for this, so someone who is better versed with their bible can probably attest to this idea in scripture. As a final attempt to have the Israelites keep the covenant of God, he sends his son, himself in the flesh (the trinity is a difficult concept, so I'll leave that to the theologians to figure out) and he forms his ministry. The Pharisees (the priesthood of Israel) rejected the idea that God would become incarnate and that Jesus of Nazareth was *NOT* the prophesized Messiah (there was a prophecy in Judaism that a Messiah will come). After the Pharisees rejected Jesus Christ, He's crucified, the occupying Romans destroy the temple and scatter the remainder of the Israelites to the winds. This is viewed as a fulfilling of God's promise that he would take the land of Israel away from the Israelites. In the mean time, some new testament apostles and Christians have a doctrine, that the Gentiles (non-jews/israelites) would be welcomed by God with a new covenant (Christ) where his name would be exalted while the Israelites/Jews remain in exile (always with the invitation to partake in the new covenant, that's *VERY* important to remember and has led to persecution of Jewish people. but they remain His Chosen people in Exile) until about 1947. That was the year, and after the holocaust, where the UN decided to create the state of Israel (which *WAS* in opposition to people already living there -- See Palestinian conflict). Anyway, that's a really rough mix of History, Theology and Religion, but to have the complete picture, this is roughly the belief of most Christians today.
@@billbuyers8683 no, read the Old Testament. God tells the Israelites that they will be expelled from the land of Israel if they don’t keep His laws. He does say he will destroy the wicked etc. There is Sheol, which is translated from Hebrew to English as “Hell”, but the Jewish belief of Sheol differs somewhat from Hell (which is more akin to Hades)
Great explanation, well told.
God is amazing he has blessed me in ways I wouldn't believe if I'd not lived it that bible is the truth if you do your best to follow it life will be a blessing you will be a blessing
Read the naghamadi library makes perfect sense .
1-4 Maccabees explains a lot of the in-between period of what tradition calls “Old” and “New Testament”. There is no difference between the “Testaments”. It’s all the same story and the tones are the exact same, you just have to know the “Old Testament” better, believe it, comprehend it, drop tradition, and drop philosophy to see it. Doctrines, philosophies, traditions, poor comprehension skills, instilments, and installments of men have clouded believers minds and hearts to not even believe or properly comprehend the plainly written words of scripture. This, of course, leads to gross misconduct, misunderstanding, and irresponsibility. Henceforth causing disrespect to our inheritance that Yahweh has preserved through the Bible.
You have to admit that it's pretty striking that Christianity has discarded almost all of the original 613 commandments. "I did not come to abolish the law", "not one jot or tiddle will be erased", etc!
Also, I think it's only the New Testament that claims that it's a part of a series 😅
The Jewish religion has the lights on but dimmed. In the Christian religion they are fully on. The voltage regulator has been turned from half to full.
I got a question for anyone.
What does Jesus “Fulfilled” the Old Testament mean.
Because the book says it didn’t end . It wasn’t over . If anyone teaches it’s over or changes it (the sabbath ;) will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven .
Are gentiles Jews?
There is a New Testament because that was God's plan all along.
Maybe it was part of the progression the labels are for man to differentiate time periods. Jesus is the Nehustan on a public scale?
I would love to see serries of videos on the trinity!
Nit picking, dunno if you maybe misread their comment, or it's really part of their post;
but no- God is not everything.
I do really like how BibleProject states it though,
"We believe the Bible is one cohesive story from beginning to end-",
so approaching it from the perspective of new/old being separate, contrary, or otherwise divided already kinda shows the person asking hasn't actually read the entire thing yet ^^;
Hebrews (author unknown, most likely the apostate paul) is the only time that the term"old testement" is used
Apostle*
Thanks Matt, really good explanation. The question doesn't capture all of the issues about mistakes though. In Genesis 6:6 God regrets that he made man, isn't that a mistake?!
Can I use this in my youth group?
You bet!
@@MattWhitmanTMBH thank you! I'm doing a series on why scripture matters and how to navigate it, and this is very timely.
Amen! Powerful Points🙏🏾❤
Great discussion!
Jesus does not make sense without the OT and the OT doesn’t make sense without Jesus.
Was Adam and Eve under the OT laws?
Was Noah under the OT laws ?
Was Abram, Isaac or Joseph under the OT law ?
To the point about throwing out the Old Testament, no, we don't do that. We recognize why it exists, but that the specific commands in it aren't to us, but to ancient Israelites in Palestine.
Deuteronomy 12:1 "These are the decrees and laws you must be careful to follow in the land that the Lord, the God of your ancestors, has given you to possess-as long as you live in the land." (This is stated 2 more times in that book using various verbiage.)
We aren't ancient Israelites living in Palestine, so these rules don't specifically apply to us. Obviously, some of these commands are the same commands everyone should follow, like "don't murder" and "have no other gods before me", but these commands aren't given to us.
We follow the commands given to us in the New Testament.
The moral law applies as Jesus sums up the moral law into 2 commandments. So yes the 10 commandments are apart of the moral law and are to be followed.
It is the ceremonial Jewish laws that were done away with such as the dietary laws and baptism replaces circumcision
@@catholicguy1073 Kinda right, technically wrong.
The 10 commandments in Exodus 20 don't apply because they are to Ancient Israelites in Palestine.
But, they correspond to God's moral law, and therefore 9 of them are repeated in the New Testament, and do apply to all Christians today.
@@acem82 the 10th commandment you’re saying we do not observe is about the Sabbath (3rd command) which we respect in the principle of it on the Lords Day so technically you’re wrong to only observe 9 :)
The day to worship God for us is the Lords Day and if we can not work on that day we should not. It’s to honor God and spend time with family. Keep holy The Lords Day
@@catholicguy1073 Look, let's be clear here. The Old Testament law does provide us much to learn about doing what is moral, but it doesn't directly apply to us. So no, we don't have to "honor the Sabbath", but the principle is still good to know.
That command is to Ancient Israelites in Palestine, and *not* commanded to Christians.
Romans 14:5 "One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind."
You may honor that day (which, honestly, should be Saturday, but who's counting) if you like, but it's not a command.
@@acem82 disagree. We are bound by the moral law which Jesus summed up into the 2 commandments so yes observance of the 10 commandments is necessary.
That’s like saying to steal is not a sin or adultery is not a sin or to commit murder is not a sin. Which I am sure you agree those are sins. They are apart of the moral law and the 10 commandments is apart of the moral law.
Lastly the Lords Day is the day for us not the Sabbath as it foreshadows the Lords Day. That was decided very very early on in Christianity because as you know Jesus rose on Sunday. The Lords Day has the principle of the Sabbath to respect the day to worship God. So yes it’s a command
We are not bound by Jewish ceremonial laws and dietary laws. The moral laws we’ve always been bound to from the beginning.
The only Christian’s who deny this typically are 7th Day Adventists. I’ve seen some non denominational Christians who do not understand the moral law and that’s always been apart of adhering to in Christianity but with Protestants they always got these new interpretations
What makes me wonder is, if Jesus and the NT was God’s intent, why wait a few thousand years of what isn’t actually the plan and makes no true difference.
I think there are a lot of reasons for this, but one of them that I spoke to in the video was the idea of exhausting the obvious Human Solutions to the problem, and demonstrating that it would take a much more profound solution to fix what ails humanity.
@@MattWhitmanTMBH So, the old need to be broken down before building back up. One of the greatest lies I have ever heard, the break down knows no bottom, and the building back up never comes.
@@nategraham6946 I think the point @MattWhitmanTMBH is making is that humanity had to try and fail in all its attempts to fix itself. When that failed, only God could fix it. Which He did. The issue is that what you're describing as the break down sounds like all the evil and awfulness that has happened in the world between then and now. And there's a tension there. There's a "now" and "not yet" regarding the redemption of humanity. We are redeemed, but that redemption comes through faith. God is giving every person the opportunity to accept Christ and be saved. He is not imposing Himself nor is he denying all the rest of us the chance to come to Him (or to not come to Him). The war is over. Evil and sin have been defeated, but the rest of humanity yet to be born has to have the opportunity to come to Him. Otherwise, He's made a wind up world where there is no choice at all and faith isn't faith, it's programming.
Your reply sounds like you made your mind up before even watching the video. You stated it was a lie and used 2 assertions (the break down knows no bottom, and the building back up never comes) that can't be proved. If you're making your opinion fact and saying the things you assert are true while having no basis for asserting them other than your preconceived notion, then the whole thing is circular and pointless.
This is a good explanation.
I find it helpful to discard the misleading appellation 'Old Testament' and instead refer to the Hebrew Canon as the Hebrew Bible or simply as the Bible. This forces a rethinking, since really the knock at the door during the Seder meal is not executed until several hundred years later, when the visitor to the Seder becomes not the visitor but the Seder itself, and He drinks from the Fifth Cup. The Hebrew Bible is brought to life at the Seder, which puts such heavy emphasis on Elijah that he cannot be understood as an equal within the family, nor even a divine messenger, but in some way embodies the Divinity. John the Baptist has to prepare the way, because as it turns out, the return of Elijah is an event far greater than even the Seder envisions. Elijah does not merely embody some peripheral aspects of I AM, but is the complete embodiment, the perfect Image described in Gn 1:27, thus Son of Man Who can only be Son of God. The Hebrew Bible, in essence, ends with the unsipped Fifth Cup, since there is always an unoccupied chair at the Seder. The Hebrew Bible is sufficient in itself, containing the full unfolding of the Covenant with God's people, and perpetually in expectation of the coming of Elijah. Jesus of Nazareth is the visitor, is Elijah, is the Ego Eimi, and drinks from the Fifth Cup which is at once the Cup of Socrates but also the Cup of Life, experienced sequentially in the Triduum. The Fulfillment is celebrated immediately at Pentecost, followed by Saul's conversion to the Apostle Paul, who writes in several letters about the new Seder, which we call the Eucharist, and only two to five decades later do the communities of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John commit to recording the event of the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Elijah, Son of Man, Son of God. But even here we must realign our thoughts, since the Christ is not capstone, and not even seminal cornerstone, but IS in a way that no created thing can be, in essence Tillich's Ground of All Being, which is easily distilled from the Gospel of John. So, call it the Hebrew Bible or simply the Bible, and call the Gospels and the Epistles the Good News, or Scripture Fulfilled. If we must apply a name to the collection of Hebrew and Christian Scriptures, how about Torah Ketuvim Nevi'im Hashlema or maybe Tanakhahsh. PM 2024
Your not explaing why the writing style difference. Obviously its different and theres a different continuity.
Great content!!
The central point of all scripture is Christ. The Old Testament is from the vantage point of looking forward to Christ. God is acting to bring about the pinnacle event of the arrival of Christ the Messiah. The New Testament is looking backward (for the most part) at the events of Christ. There is no fix. One God with one central theme from beginning to end. There is Israel the nation state in the Old Testament, but according to Paul there is also an Israel of sort that never ends - the Church. There is the Mosaic Covenant for the nation of Israel as a people. The Abrahamic Covenant is a completely separate and parallel promise that God institutes - the Church ruled by God's grace and mercy. This is one of Paul's points in Galatians 4 as he uses Hagar and Sarah as allegories to the two covenants: Mt. Sinai and Mt. Zion.
The New Testament is full filling the prophecy of the Old Testament.
“Don’t bargain with God. Be direct. Ask for what you need. This is not a cat-and-mouse, hide-and-seek game we’re in. If your little boy asks for a serving of fish, do you scare him with a live snake on his plate? If your little girl asks for an egg, do you trick her with a spider? As bad as you are, you wouldn’t think of such a thing-you’re at least decent to your own children. And don’t you think the Father who conceived you in love will give the Holy Spirit when you ask him?” Luke 11
Jesus refers to the old testament in this quote and clearly critisizes blind "Jaweh" faith.
I personally do not think, that Jesus would have used the old testament for the founding of his church.
This decision was fought over a lot and long after Jesus death and resurrection.
I doubt, that Jesus would have fed his children "snakes and stones" as Jaweh did, which means that Jesus does speak of another father when he preaches.
Jesus revealed his father ,our God in the NT with as much as revelation as the people can possibly understand.The OT is a display of evolution of the God concept,example is ,what nature did God was behind it,good or bad.Evolution of the nature,characteristics,and love vs fear of God progressed.The OT teachers taught what they understood at that time frame.Some did receive advanced knowledge but the majority did not.Moses said a prophet will come but he did not know exactly who it was.The bible has its share of embellishments and exaggerations to project an attraction to it.Jesus clarified much in saying God is spirit and no one has seen God as did John and Paul also stated ,as one example.The Trinity was explained to John but was not clarified and remains confusing .Revelation is as it says it is. Revelation does not stop as it clarifies the confusion and reveals new and formerly unknown truths of God and the universe.The OT is the stone ages compared to the Jesus revelation of God to man.The God of both the OT and NT are the same but man knew very little of God early on in his humanity.
Great video, well explained!
1/3 of the entire Bible is prophecy. 90% of that prophecy is for the end time just prior to Christ’s return. The major and minor prophets are for the end time. Jesus’s first coming was to serve many purposes. His human birth was the arrival of the 2nd Adam. He came the first time to 1) to qualify to replace Satan, the former archangel Lucifer, on the throne of the earth, ruling with the government of God at His return. 2) To announce the future establishment of the KINGDOM OF GOD and teach that prophetic good news (gospel) to His chosen future apostles. 3) To take on Himself, as man’s direct Creator, the penalty for our sins by His death on the stake- that mankind might share in that supernatural Kingdom. 4) To be resurrected from the dead by God, His Father, making possible ETERNAL GOD-LIFE for the people of God and after His 2nd coming for all who have ever lived on this earth from Adam till that time. 5) To establish God’s Church, to be trained to rule under Him. He came also to reveal or declare The Father(John 1:18). The nation of Israel had only known of the one God of the Old Testament, who became Jesus Christ at His human birth, the Son of God (Luke 1:32-35; 1 Corinthians 10:1-4).
The Church is built on the foundation of the apostles AND the prophets, Christ Himself is the Chief Cornerstone as He was the LOGOS revealing and inspiring the writers of the Old Testament (Ephesians 2:18-20) Christ is NOT the Ultimate Authority in the Kingdom of God. God the Father is the Head of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:3). Those called out of this world into the Church are required to overcome( conquer) the world as Christ did(John 16:33) in order to qualify to rule with Christ at His Return ( Revelation 3:12, 21).
Yeah, I didn't understand this relationship with NT and OT when I was younger either. I was kinda dumb back then though.
For the algorithm
There are those who recognize Christ. There are those who deny Christ. There are those who apostatized from Christ.
It's not hard to understand once one realizes the bible isn't the "word of God."
Right, Jesus is the Word of God - the Word made flesh.
The entire Old Testament is the story of god's failure to get the Jews to do what he wants.
I strongly suspect that most Jews would disagree with pretty much everything you say here. And I also think that you should think about that.
Yeah that's crossed my mind once or twice in my career.
@@MattWhitmanTMBH I mean, I'm an ex-JW atheist, so what would I know?
@@MattWhitmanTMBHlol what a perfect response. I wonder if during Matt’s studies of scripture and religion if he ever thought about how his beliefs don’t align with Orthodox Judaism… did that ever cross your mind in your years of study? Haha!
Thanks for the video, Matt.
Is it just me or does that figurine on the shelf bare a resemblance to Hillary Clinton?
It's simple. The old covenant was temporary and for the Israelites. The new covenant is the completion of the old and for everyone. Prophecies forfilled.
If you think God can make mistakes, you are assuming a wrong God....😂😂
Love the manatee…..
Nice catch. He's been in mothballs for a long time.
You guys need to look at the real origins of Christianity as well as the bible, not what you think it is. Quit fooling yourselves
Because Jesus said it. Jesus called the new thing a "NEW COVENANT." Covenant = Testament. Learn some languages ... like Biblical GREEK and HEBREW and you'll get it.
DON'T read into the Word instead read it in the original languages - you will be surprised that your Arminiocalvinism is a big lie.