The Book of Psalms in my Russian Bible
Last week I was having coffee with one of my friends who is a member of the Orthodox Church. She told me earlier that she wanted to get together and ask me about the differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy. Instead, most of our conversation focused around Islamic apologetics. She’s from a Muslim country so this made sense to me. It was ironic because we were in a mall at a coffee shop and there was a Muslim at the next table. He seemed very knowledgeable. He was with a girl and it seemed that he was telling her about Islam. He was quoting sources like the Quran and the Hadith. I wanted to engage him in debate but I didn’t want to interrupt his conversation with this girl.
Earlier in the week I had a Protestant friend over and we were having a discussion about arguments for the Trinity. I told him the arguments that I like to use when debating Unitarians, Muslims, and Jews. He seemed impressed because he hadn’t heard a couple of them before.
Yesterday afternoon I was having a conversation with another Protestant. She told me about a conference that she had just been to. She wanted to discuss the second commandment and how Catholics reconcile it with iconography so I explained the Catholic position to her using the arguments from St. John of Damascus.
Last night when I was reflecting on all of these dialogues, the topics covered, and the arguments that I used, I came to a shocking realization. I realized that I quote the Old Testament quite a bit in my apologetics. As a Christian, I believe that the Old Testament is as equally inspired as the New Testament. Every Christian that I’ve ever met knows the New Testament better than the Old Testament. Few know them equally well and a larger(but still small) amount know the Old Testament well. A few years ago, I made it my mission to go deep into the OT. After all, if this was the Scripture that Jesus, Mary, Paul, and the disciples used, I wanted to know it well.
I recently read and reviewed Scott Hahn’s book The Fourth Cup which talks a lot about the Passover and connects it to many things in the New Testament. Many years ago, I read Michael Brown’s series on Jewish apologetics. His dialogue with Tovia Singer was also fascinating to listen to.
I think that one of the most ignored qualities about being involved in apologetics is knowledge of the OT. In reflection on these dialogues, I noticed that when I explain Christian doctrines like the Trinity, Original Sin, Purgatory, Transubstantiation and others, I usually start with their OT foundation. Yes, all of those doctrines and most others have a significant OT foundation!
Most young Christians learn apologetics from a NT perspective. While the NT is certainly important, the OT is crucial since it gives us the foundation. I find it sickening when Jay Smith debates Muslims and simply throws the OT under the bus because he thinks that he’ll have an easier time debating a Muslim going with the NT alone. Personally I think it’s shameful and dishonouring to our Lord who treasured the OT scriptures.
Studying the OT can be intimidating. It’s three times larger than the NT. It has a very large range of literary genres and can seem perpetual. However, when you learn it well, it’ll be your best friend in debate. We should all make it our goal to study at least a few OT chapters every day. It helps with apologetics and deepens our faith.
as salaamu alaikum,
I do not have a strong interest in the Old Testament. I may attend Mass sometimes to hear the Liturgy of the Word, and I would be exposed to an Old Testament reading. I also have an interest in Reformed theology, and they tend to use the Old Testament to support the notion that God has an elect people. Listening to James White should, insha’allah, give me some exposure to the Old Testament. A good Catholic apologist would try to find some parallels in the Old Testament and the Sacraments, for instance, Isaiah 6 and Revelation 4, and the Mass.
I found a book that was on sale called “The Christians as the Romans Saw Them”. (The author, Robert L. Wilken is a Roman Catholic according to an Amazon review that a saw a few minutes ago.) Some of the pagan polemicists, such as Emperor Julian, use the Old Testament as part of their arguments against Christianity. I think they have some substantial to say other than the OT God is a mean S.O.B. that is a common theme among New Atheists.
I don’t think many Christians really care much for the Epistles either. To me, I am more interested in the Pauline epistles than the Gospels since the directly expound upon theological issues. The professor that encouraged me to read Ehrman said that he once hung around Calvinists and Lutherans, and they tend to emphasize Paul, especially the Book of Romans.
Hi Latias,
Yes, James White uses the OT a lot for his Calvinist beliefs so you’ll get good exposure if you listen to his lectures on Reformed theology. I’ve never read that book by Wilken. Maybe let me know how it is?
Don’t care much for the Epistles? I really like Venerable Bede’s commentary on the epistles. He really exegetes them well in my opinion. Yes, Calvinists and Lutherans do like St. Paul but I believe they have read it outside of its original Jewish context and didn’t get the true meaning. That is how you end up with Sola Fide which Catholicism has always condemned as false.
Interesting to hear that you still sometimes attend Mass.
Thanks for sharing as always.
God Bless,
Allan
The OT is crucial as the basis of the NT. Without it, where are the Scriptures and prophecies that are fulfilled by Jesus? Without Isaiah, why would Jesus cite His miracles as a sign to John the Baptist’s followers, when John asked if Jesus was the Messiah? What is even the Messiah without all His traits foretold by the Jewish prophets?
The OT also differentiates between Christianity and Islam, because it contains typology that is fulfilled only in Christian theology.
Perhaps the best example is that of Abraham’s near sacrifice of his son. You all know the story, Abraham was told to sacrifice his only son (Isaac in the OT, usually taken as Ismail by Muslims). At the last moment, God stopped him and provided a male sheep in the son’s place.
In Christianity, this whole exercise was a foreshadowing of God giving His only Son as a sacrifice – the male lamb of God.
In Islam, what significance does Ibrahim’s act have? Islam doesn’t even have a blood atonement system, which is present in the Old Testament and fulfilled by Jesus in the New Testament. The only animal sacrifice is Eid al-Adha, but using that example is circular because it celebrates the Abraham incident.
Note also, the Passover Lamb of Exodus: Why are the bones not to be broken? Why waste the delicious and energy-rich marrow inside the bones? Psalm 34:19-20 John 19:31-36 hold the answer.
Note too again, the signs that Jesus told John the Baptist’s followers to report are also repeated in the Quran – but without understanding of the Messianic context and meaning.
Overall, the NT seamlessly flows as the fulfilment of the OT. A direct sequel by the same director, if I may. The Quran feels more like a reboot of the OT by a different director several generations later.
Further expanded here:
https://scottthong.wordpress.com/2013/06/17/do-islam-and-the-quran-have-typological-connections-to-the-old-testament/
https://scottthong.wordpress.com/2013/06/24/jesus-of-the-quran-is-without-meaning/
I have not studied the Old Testament much. It was listening to Sam Shamoun that demonstrated to me in that it is relevant, and also consistent with the New Testament. (The OT appears to be his particular interest.) Your article is a reminder that I ought to study it properly.
My approach in studying any text is that of a historian (history is my main interest). What I see in the Bible is a gradual progression of faith and understanding of God from something quite primitive to something more and more sophisticated, until God and His plan is revealed to us in the person of Jesus Christ the Divine Son of God.
Basically Moses was inspired to develop an idea of monotheism and a plan for the Hebrews. It was the way God chose to gradually reveal himself to all Men, starting with the Jews. So we have evidence of primitive beliefs and descriptions of cruel acts (for cruel and primitive times) along with the conquest of the so-called Promised Land (a bit like the United States’ Manifest Destiny) i.e. it happened so God must have planned it.
What listening to Sam Shamoun has done though (in the light of listening to the readings from the Old Testament during Mass) is show to me that even those primitive (and historically-suspect) beginnings are plausibly consistent with a Divine plan and revelation.
The Gospel is of paramount importance – it must be so –and I enjoy reading all of them, but the Old Testament is vital to understand context.
(On the subject of the epistles and especially those of St Paul, it exasperates me when some Protestants speak of the teachings of St Paul as though they are Divine commands. St Paul is a wise counsellor and a learned man helps us to understand things, however he is not Our Lord Jesus Christ and his words to us are not commands. I suppose that a reliance on sola scriptura leads them to take that approach.)
Hi Christopher,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I also remember listening to Sam Shamoun lecture and remember being very impressed with his knowledge of the OT. I knew then that I wanted that knowledge. Few apologists know it better than he does. James White knows it pretty well also.
I wanted that knowledge for myself. I don’t want to sound like I’m bragging when I say this but I believe my knowledge of the NT is first rate. My knowledge of Greek is so so but I do speak several languages so I know how languages work and know that there is a lot of nuance. Overall, I have a very good command of the NT.
The OT is different since it’s much longer and doesn’t seem as relevant to Christianity as the NT. My knowledge of Hebrew is extremely minimal consisting of the alphabet, and some basic words. I have to rely entirely on English and French translations. However, knowing a text in translation is better than knowing the language and not knowing the text well.
I started by reading the five books of Moses. I want to get those down before I do the next several books. They lay the foundation for the remainder of the OT and the NT. It’ll probably be a bit before I start Joshua, but I want to make sure my knowledge of those five books is as good as my knowledge of the NT. It’s not easy, but who said being an apologist was easy.
God Bless,
Allan