# OT necessarily before NT?



## Leslie (May 6, 2008)

In the context of scriptural illiteracy, i.e. dealing with people with minimal or no Christian heritage, I have a personal aversion to presenting the NT stories at all without laying an OT foundation. Yet I see most mission groups focusing on the NT, handing out NT freely or highly subsidized to non-believers and new believers. Bible translators generally translate one of the gospels first; frequently the entire NT is published before the OT. Is it not an act of arrogance to reverse the divine order of revelation? Am I missing something?


----------



## Contra_Mundum (May 6, 2008)

I think it is person-, and possibly culture- specific.

There is much value in sending someone to the OT first. I used that recently with a man, who upon a lengthy reading came to realize much better the sinful condition of man, including himself. Which sets the stage quite nicely for the gospel message.

But many people can benefit from starting with John's gospel, or some other NT passage. Remember, Christ is in ALL the Scriptures. No matter where you start, you can find a way to him without contortions. Concerning the Law and the prophets, "These are they which testify of me."


----------



## toddpedlar (May 6, 2008)

Contra_Mundum said:


> I think it is person-, and possibly culture- specific.
> 
> There is much value in sending someone to the OT first. I used that recently with a man, who upon a lengthy reading came to realize much better the sinful condition of man, including himself. Which sets the stage quite nicely for the gospel message.
> 
> But many people can benefit from starting with John's gospel, or some other NT passage. Remember, Christ is in ALL the Scriptures. No matter where you start, you can find a way to him without contortions. Concerning the Law and the prophets, "These are they which testify of me."



In complete agreement, Bruce. Mary, one might look to Paul's various approaches as an evangelist - they very much depended upon his audience. To the pagans at the Areopagus, he didn't exactly start with Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses...


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (May 6, 2008)

I have found that the Gospel of Mark is a good place to start when witnessing or when studying with a new believer.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (May 6, 2008)

Out of curiosity why Mark?


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (May 7, 2008)

I find that the pace of the Gospel of Mark is such that it is useful in keeping the newer Christian focused. 

As an example, read through the first chapter. 

Note how many times the word "immediately" ("staightway," "forthwith," "anon"--all the same Greek word) is used in just the first chapter. Mark writes from the perspective of "Christ as Servant" and His service is one of almost non-stop action. In the first chapter we can study about John the Baptist, the Baptism of Jesus, His temptation, the Calling of His disciples, Casting out demons, preaching in Galilee, and healing a leper.

It does not contain the more difficult "theological" passages like John 6 (which, In my humble opinion is difficult enough for the mature Christian to grasp) or the mystery parables of Matthew13. But it is profoundly theological. 

In this book I find twin themes that run through out. Opposition to the Servant, and the Diety of the Servant. It is a wonderful little study, to go through this book with a non-christian, or a new believer and point out that every time the pharisees oppose Him, He meets that opposition with some aspect of His deity. (example: In chapter two...the Pharisees complain that the disciples ate picked some wheat on the Sabbath, Jesus declares himself "Lord also of the Sabbath.") When opposition comes, Jesus meets it with His divinity. His victories over opposition show so clearly that He is the second person of the Godhead that only a Pharisee could miss it. 

It really is a most profitable study, and by the time the new Christian gets to chapter 16, enough foundational truths have been laid, that it is easier after that to look at the Gospel of John, or some of the other more difficult Books.


----------



## bookslover (May 7, 2008)

Contra_Mundum said:


> Remember, Christ is in ALL the Scriptures. No matter where you start, you can find a way to him without contortions. Concerning the Law and the prophets, "These are they which testify of me."



Yes, that's true. But, for a new believer - especially one who wouldn't know a Bible from a Buick - sending him or her to the New Testament makes more sense, in my opinion, since that is where Christ is most obviously present. For a brand new believer, the Old Testament looks like a vast ocean of text. (Heck, for too many _Christians_, the Old Testament looks that way!) As with your reference to the Gospel of John, Bruce, I'd be compassionate on a new, biblically illiterate Christian, and send him or her to the New Testament first.


----------



## Leslie (May 7, 2008)

It seems that opinions are unanimous that I'm off-base on insisting on OT first. I stand corrected and appreciate it. This will impact the curriculum that I'm developing for using the scriptures to teach disadvantaged children English, using the scriptures. 

I also like the idea of using Mark first. In addition to those cited, there aren't so many references to OT stories as what there are in Matthew, nor the theological complexities of John.


----------



## Pergamum (May 7, 2008)

No, I do not think you are off base.

I see that you are in Ethiopia, and I am also in another place and many people are not grounded in Bible stories and to start at teh New Testament is not enough to lay the groundwork.

Many mission groups start in Genesis, the fall, Noah, Abraham,and then go to the birth fo Jesus.

This is standard fare for New Tribes Missions and the Firm Foundations course of teaching and is very effective for tribals.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (May 7, 2008)

Personally, I'd follow God's revelaed revelation in that regard. 

A Muslim came to a Christian Bible study to inquire and listen. Previous to that, he had never read the Bible. They gave him one in his own language. By the next meeting, he had read it three times all the way through and new the order of the books better than the Christians in the study.

Don't think that its too much for someone to read the bible from the beginning through to the revelation of God's Son.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (May 7, 2008)

Leslie said:


> It seems that opinions are unanimous that I'm off-base on insisting on OT first. I stand corrected and appreciate it. This will impact the curriculum that I'm developing for using the scriptures to teach disadvantaged children English, using the scriptures.
> 
> I also like the idea of using Mark first. In addition to those cited, there aren't so many references to OT stories as what there are in Matthew, nor the theological complexities of John.



I certainly didn't get this impression from reading the posts, Leslie. I thought they were pretty balanced. Some prefer one or the other, most think starting with the OT is fine, if that's what's appropriate.


----------



## Leslie (May 7, 2008)

I started with creation and am currently through Noah and the flood. I like the idea of going through the life of Abraham at least before going to the NT. It's just too time-consuming and too easy to be derailed, going through the entire OT history to the captivity, before turning to the NT.


----------



## aleksanderpolo (May 7, 2008)

There is a series of books called "The Gospel according to Old Testament", going through some of the narratives in the OT and show how they are related to Christ. Perhaps those will be helpful when you are going through the OT with unbeliever, while keeping an eye on Christ the whole time. 

Here is a link to wtsbooks:

Westminster Bookstore - Reformed Books - Low Prices - Flat Fee UPS Shipping - Gospel Acc. to the OT

Blessings,


----------



## Contra_Mundum (May 7, 2008)

Young Christians in places where there are fewer opportunities to get early education can often benefit from materials aimed at younger ages in our "educated" cultures.

This is no less true in our own "educated" churches. I think the children's catechism should be reviewed by adults frequently, to remind themselves how "elementary" is the faith. Even their faith should, after all, be "childlike."

In addition to other studies mentioned, Nancy Ganz' new series of children-oriented Bible commentaries might be useful. Amazon.com: Herein Is Love, Vol. 1: Genesis: Nancy Ganz: Books


----------



## Pergamum (May 7, 2008)

Wow! That's a really neatcommentary set.


----------

