AskHistorians
QUESTIONS
- Be civil.
- Be specific.
- Historical topic must be from at least 20 years ago.
- Post questions in the title. Elaboration is for the text box.
RESPONSES
- Be civil.
- Provide comprehensive answers.
- Sources are welcome, but not required.
askhistorians is a community for academic answers to questions about history. Polls, opinions, bigotry, grammar pedantry, and personal insults will be removed.
Because the Old Testament was written as a code of law for an established elite which could enforce it on society; while the New Testament was written to appeal to the marginalized and outcasts.
Apparently YHWH changed who he favored.
Can you expound on this?
Sure thing! The Old Testament consists largely of laws to be enforced, because the followers of YHWH at the time did have control over their society, and could enforce laws on the weak and powerless. As YHWH desired!
The New Testament, on the other hand, was created in the context where the followers of YHWH did not have control over any polity, and thus preaching rules would mean either conflict with or acquiescence to the actual established power. Since neither were options, what with the Roman Empire not being followers of YHWH and being notoriously ill-disposed towards attempts to usurp the Empire's authority, instead YHWH chose to make an account which would appeal to the marginalized and outcasts instead of the authorities. Since the New Testament is all about being meek and humble and how good things are TOTALLY coming, just after you die as a good little drone for YHWH, it was not particularly threatening to the powers-that-be, while being appealing to marginalized groups without any hope in the real world.
YHWH was scared of the Roman Empire, apparently. :)
You're not looking for historians, you're looking for Biblical scholars, but you don't even need that.
The long and short of the Bible is, God created the world, but He was a jealous god, so he flooded the world after he got sick of sin. He decided that was maybe not the best course of action, so He instead sent His son to die for the sins of Man. That's pretty much it, with a lot of little details and contradictions (because, like the other comment says, humans wrote it).
But the answer to your question is, different managerial styles. In the Old Testament He tried to rule by fear; in the New, by love.
Capitalisations because that's how the people who wrote it pronoun God.
Wrong time-scale "lens".
Anyone who thinks that the next 6-decades ( "tribulation" aka "armageddon" aka "The Great Filter" ) are going to be soft, is delusional.
Ever noticed that toddlers need a different kind of parenting than-do teenagers??
The people of past-times were MUCH less critical-reasoning trained than we, of today, are, with programming & science.
The kind of management-of-them that was appropriate was fundamentally different from what is required for current humankind's "bootcamp", which the next 6-decades are going to be.
It'll be experience-induced-understanding that the LAW is, if any of humanity survive The Great Filter.
Instinct, not rote-learning or commandments-posted-before-all.
Instinct-that-cannot-be-argued.
It'll be humankind embodying law, not reading-about it.
Think about the difference between a soft armchair-"soldier" vs one who's lived real war, for real years.
THAT is the kind of difference between humankind's past condition & what's required by context of humankind for the next 6-decades, & then you'll understand that the fundamental-nature of "religion" changes from book-orientation to LivingSpirit-orientation when LivingSpirit-orientation's the only way of surviving when outnumbered 9:1 ( or whatever it is ) as the civilrights-loyal/LivingSpirit-loyal ones are, against the ideologues/supremacists/fanatics.
No more "i hold my holy-book, which holds/possesses God", but instead "I'm living IN my God", if you understand the difference-in-meaning that those 2 kinds are being..
_ /\ _