so my nt colleague in stm (seminari theoloji malaysia) dr lim kar yong says the old testament is only a 'preface' to the new testament! well, imho, he's got it the other way round. the OT is complete in itself. obviously, the jews needed no further addition to their scriptures. although the jews compiled the targums and midrashes, these are not on equivalent level with the OT.
remember even jesus himself used the OT and he did not 'write' any book or gospel to further supplement it. neither were the apostles paul and others conscious that they were writing 'scripture' to be added to the OT when penning their epistles. the NT scriptures came into being due to the proces of Christian canonization just like the jews had their own canonization process which resulted in their scriptures.
so, how does one understand the NT then? of course, i jokingly said that the NT is a 'theological after-thought' to kar yong. strictly speaking, the NT is a Christian document and is added by the Christians to the OT which they adopted as part of their scriptures. 'theological after-thought'? maybe a tad too strong but still, the NT is a sort of 'appendix' to the OT.
remember even jesus himself used the OT and he did not 'write' any book or gospel to further supplement it. neither were the apostles paul and others conscious that they were writing 'scripture' to be added to the OT when penning their epistles. the NT scriptures came into being due to the proces of Christian canonization just like the jews had their own canonization process which resulted in their scriptures.
so, how does one understand the NT then? of course, i jokingly said that the NT is a 'theological after-thought' to kar yong. strictly speaking, the NT is a Christian document and is added by the Christians to the OT which they adopted as part of their scriptures. 'theological after-thought'? maybe a tad too strong but still, the NT is a sort of 'appendix' to the OT.
Comments
Another Msian OT enthusiast started a blog here:
http://ourreasonforbeing.blogspot.com/