Old Testament?

[albertagirl]

Well basically, the Bible is a progressive revelation.
If you skip the first half of any good book and try to finish it; you will have a hard time understanding the characters, the plot, and the ending. In the same way, the New Testament is only completely understood when it is seen as being built upon the foundation of the events, characters, laws, sacrificial system, covenants, and promises of the Old Testament.  If a person only read the New Testament, we would come to the gospels and not know why the Jews were looking for a Messiah.  Without the Old Testament, we would not understand why this Messiah was coming (Isaiah 53); Christians would not have been able to identify Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah through the many detailed prophecies that were given concerning Him (e.g., His birth place (Micah 5:2); His manner of death (Psalm 22, especially vv. 1,7-8, 14-18; Psalm 69:21, etc.), His resurrection (Psalm 16:10), and many more details of His ministry (Isaiah 52:13.; 9:2, etc.).

Furthermore to this - the Old Testament containts prophecies that are cruicial to all Christians and are then fulfilled in the New Testament.  The Old Testament contains numerous lessons for us through the lives of its many fallible characters.  I won't go on and on about those lessons.  But Job and Daniel are some good ones that Christians study. 

As for the posting about why God would kill armies, and such in the Old Testament - there are seperate answers for that - I just provided a general one for the Old Testament. 

You can't "agree" with the New Testament and "not agree" with the Old Testament.  It's a package deal. 

[albertagirl]

I thought I would add more to better explain.  Sorry these are broken into two posts, but once I posted the last one I had a few more thoughts that would address the whole "war" and "rules" thing within the Old Testament. 

As I said previously, the whole Bible is considered true and believed by Christians and can't just be divided in half. 
At the same time, Christians have always believed that many of the laws of the Old Testament no longer apply to them the way they once did - and the reason is because Jesus has fulfilled them. They pointed forward to the coming of the Messiah - and once He came, they were no longer needed.

Let me give an example. In Old Testament times, the priests carried out animal sacrifices every day to make atonement for the sins of the people. But through death on the cross, Christians believe that Jesus paid the final price for our sins - fully and completely. No more sacrifices are needed, because He is a final sacrifice for sin. Our sins have been forgiven because all our sins were placed on Christ, "And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin" (Hebrews 10:18).

So it bascially means that no one should just ignore those parts of the Old Testament.  They teach
just how seriously God takes sin, I think - and they remind people of what it cost God to make salvation possible.

Anyway, that's my attempt at a Christian standpoint on this. 

[albertagirl]

Even the degree to which we should assume the OT was even intended to be historically acurate is debatable.

I have to jump in again here.  I have a degree in Classics from Uni - I spend some time studying Old Testament from a basic academic standpoint - (at a non-religious uni, for the record).  It's completley false to say that the OT is historically inaccurate - and most secular historians even use its accuracy to timetable events from that period.  It's one of the few written records the world has in many cases for certain periods of time and rules of various kings. 

Of course, archaeology and classical study cannot always answer that question of "is the OT 100% true" . Nothing material remains from Elijah’s ascension into heaven, for example. Therefore, if anyone is to ask archaeology to “prove” that the entire Bible is true or false, we are faced with the fact that archaeology can neither prove nor disprove the Bible’s validity. However, even though it cannot conclusively prove the Bible’s veracity in every instance, archaeology can provide important pieces of the past that consistently verify the Bible’s historical and factual accuracy.
 
And although I could go on and bore you with history and findings of "bullae" (or small clay tablets), I thought it might be worthwhile to mention the Moabite Stone. This was considered a great find by the archeology community - more can be found on it by searching.  But bascially, the written inscription on the stone provides a piece of outstanding evidence that verifies OT accuracy. Mesha, had the stone cut in c. 850 B.C. to relate his numerous conquests and his reacquisition of certain territories that were controlled by Israel.  The Mesha stele cites Omri as the king of Israel, just as 1 Kings 16:21-28 indicates. Furthermore, it mentions Ahab, Omri’s son, in close connection with the Moabites, as does 2 Kings 3:4-6. In addition, both the stele and 2 Kings 3:4-6 list Mesha as King of Moab. Later in the inscription, the stele further names the Israelite tribe of Gad, and the Israelite God, Yahweh. While the references to the Israelite kings are quite notable in and of themselves, this reference to Yahweh is one of the few that have been found outside ancient Palestine.

Another famous artifact from Classical Study is the Cyrus Cylinder.  Cyrus, King of the Medo-Persian Empire, is among the most important foreign rulers of the Israelite nation. In fact, many Old Testament prophecies revolve around this monarch. The prophet Isaiah documented that the Babylonian Empire would fall to the Medes and the Persians (Isaiah 13; 21:1-10). Not only did Isaiah detail the particular empire to which the Babylonians would fall, but he also called Cyrus by name (Isaiah 44:28; 45:1-5). Amazingly, Isaiah’s prophecy was made roughly 150 years before Cyrus was born (Isaiah prophesied in about 700 B.C.; Cyrus took the city of Babylon in 539 B.C.). To add to Cyrus’ significance, Isaiah predicted that Cyrus would act as the Lord’s “shepherd.” In fact, Isaiah recorded these words of the Lord concerning Cyrus: “And he shall perform all My pleasure, even saying to Jerusalem, ‘You shall be built,’ and to the temple, ‘Your foundation shall be laid’ ” (Isaiah 44:28).

Look there are lots of other examples from acheology.  A simple google search also produced this article:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1557124/Tiny-tablet-provides-proof-for-Old-Testament.html

The individual books of the Old Testament were written with a different objective in mind, (a faith based, rooted in a belief in God) which does not mean that the narratives in the Old Testament have no historical value. They are recognized, even by secular historians, as one of the most reliable sources available for reconstructing the history of the time and for the Hebrew people.