This is depressing.

[gnostic]

The Old Testament was a foreshadowing of Jesus, it prophesied Jesus, and they realized this.

Old Testament, or more precisely the Hebrew Scriptures, thus the Tanakh, is a totally different set of collection of books to the New Testament.

The NT taught completely different teachings.

The prophecies of Jesus in the OT is actually debatable. Personally, I don't think the so-called prophecies is totally certified and verified. The readings of the prophecies I have read, can be open to more than one interpretation. And there others that seem to be not prophecy whatsoever.

The problem with interpreting prophecy is that often, either Christian or Muslim will only use selected passage - a very small section of text, which he would use to promote his agenda, namely to name either Jesus being his messiah or Muhammad being Islamic prophet. They would force meaning into the passage.

If you read the same passage plus the surrounding text, or even the whole chapter, you will often find that small passage has totally different meaning. The original meaning is lost, because of Christians and Muslims choose to ignore or to change the original context of the text.

Either the the surrounding text (or even whole chapter) is a prophecy or it is not.

 

[sojourner]

The church only existed before the New Testament. And the first Christians were actually Jews, who relied upon the Old Testament, which is still Scripture. So your statement is only half-way right. It was the very first Christians' knowledge of Scripture that opened up their eyes to Who Jesus really was, and what He had done for them. The Old Testament was a foreshadowing of Jesus, it prophesied Jesus, and they realized this. It's not a coincidence the Jews practiced substitutionary atonement in their sacrifice of animals. These sacrifices were but a foreshadowing of the perfect and ultimate substitutionary atonement of Christ.

So I think the very first Christians---some of whom then proceeded to write what we now call the New Testament----had the clearest understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and therefore their writings are the most trustworthy. It wasn't until later that the teachings became distorted. So, no, still don't buy into your argument.

And it really doesn't matter to me how many professing Christians today share your opinion. Popularity does not equal validity. I don't buy into that argument either.

Peace...

True, but the Protestants do not include all of the OT writings into their Bible. It was the very first Christians' understanding of who Jesus was (not what the scriptures said) that opened their eyes. Remember, Jesus' teachings include a whole lot of "It is written...but I say to you..."

The OT can in no way be proven to be a "foreshadowing" of Jesus. We Christians like to read it that way, but it just ain't true from the writers' prespective. The tradition out of which these writers came are, by and large, still waiting for their prophecies to be fulfilled.

The sacrifices were not a "foreshadowing." Hindsight just doesn't work here. Most Christians today are the ones who are part of the continuing early tradition of the Church. If you want a clear understanding of what the "early Church believed," you can look to these people. They understand that it's not a substitutionary atonement at all. That's what makes Xy fundamentally different from 2nd Temple Judaism.

As an aside, the earliest Christians didn't write the NT. The earliest book was written by Paul, ca. 50 c.e., and Paul never knew Jesus.