What is the general consensus about the Old Testament?

I think I know what you mean.
Both Testaments are extremely closely related.
As St. Augustine said it (look at this too OP ):

Yep. If everyone were smart enough to understand Augustine and Aquinas the world would be a much better (and less aggravating) place.

There's quite a few parts of the OT that are hard to swallow for me. And I'm not talking about supernatural elements and miracles, I'm talking about things like numbers of people. It reads like parts were originally written with hundreds and thousands and got changed by later scribes to hundred thousand and millions.
Cities and kings not allowing 10,000 jews exodusing to pass through their land on the road sounds like they could've been more accommodating, 2 million sounds like a horde of locusts. How the hell would you even stop them if you were a kingdom of 15,000 people? Battles between impossibly large armies for the time, ten of thousands of tonnes of gold for a tribute, etc. And it's all just boasting, later writers (because scrolls disintegrate and have to be rewritten every few decades if you're using them) thinking bigger numbers would sound more impressive.
So while I might look at the morals and foreshadowing and view it as inspired, I don't take everything word for word. Men are fallible. The limited, oldest copies aren't much older than the NT but cover prior millennia. With the NT we have hundreds of copies of epistles from with a few decades of the original being written, all saying the same thing.

It's the other half of your bible. Your religion. (not sola scriptura)

Right, Christ said that he came to FULFILL the prophecy, not to throw the OT out.

Whenever I think about Aquinas/Augustine, it makes me sad that atheists won't even read a page of their work.

Trips of truth. They were two of the greatest logicians the white race has ever produced. I am very logical myself and a computer scientist, but I also like reasoning through philosophy and religion and it fills me with joy that I can consult their works to find better expressed arguments for things I already figured out on my own.

Augustine was from North Africa. Not sure he was white exactly. If Algerians are the same as he was.
That said, a lot of the fathers were keen on this. Especially since they contended with Gnosticism, which saw the OT as a bad thing and taught it was a different God. The Church fathers from all circles set out to show Christ in every bit of scripture. I wish more modern commentaries would use this method. It's completely absent, and commentary is usually just full of background "factoids" these days.

He*… blaspheming twice in one thread, not a good sign…

What blasphemy? I don't get it.

More of a joke, I didn't capitalize he.

Augustine was a Berber. Berbers are genetically diverse (some have white skin, blonde hair and green eyes and some have dark skin, black dreadlocks and brown eyes, most are somewhere in between) but they're generally put in the same category as semitic races (Arabs, Hebrews, etc).
I mean, I'm a Berber. I'm generally recognized as a white person (although people think I'm an Arab when I let my beard and hair grow) and I don't have a problem with that, but literally everyone in my family is from North Africa. The idea of a "white race" alone is flawed since even white Europeans are genetically diverse, but if it even extends to North Africans it doesn't mean much anymore at this point, does it?

Reading Nehemiah 9 should be a must for every new born, so to give them an overarching picture of the OT, and have the correct attitude of our Father.

Anti-OT is Anti-Christ

He was probably a Roman

He was from the Roman aristocracy and North Africa was whiter before muslim conquest
Are all of these blue? Is "the blue color" flawed because of internal variation?

Attached: blue.jpeg (600x450, 57.42K)

A Christian without the Old Testament is like a husband without his wife. Incomplete.

Ah, I was under the impression that Augustine and Cyprian of Carthage were both Berbers. I take back what I said then.

Roman citizen became civil privilege over time. Even St. Paul, a Jew from the Turkish/Asian Minor disaspora, was a Roman citizen. And that was already in the 1st century. And his mother, St. Monica, has a name that's more Phoenician in origin apparently (and also was from North Africa).

So no more pork?

Lets not eat pork because some sheep herders in the desert were told not to most likely because of parasites specific to that location, but who cares let’s not eat it anyway xDDDD
Jk, if you really want to go vegan or whatever that’s fine but I’ll still be eating meat.

ALL FOODS CLEAN

“Any living creature that moves about shall be yours to eat; I give them all to you as I did the green plants.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭9:3‬ ‭

Why does nobody read Mark, Acts, or Galatians? They’re not bad books.

Do people here actually read the bible ? And what about Christians in general ?
What % of Christians read the bible in the world you think ?
And is it a bad thing to not read it (you are a "bad" christian ?) or it is ok if you behave like the christian tradition ?

You are the retarded one.

Modern Christianity is nothing like the Bible. Ruddy King David and Paul speaking against free will in Romans 9 would probably trigger most Christians into suffering an instant stroke. Or maybe they would simply reject the OT and Paul and finally admit to being the gnostic heretics they always were.

There’s your problem.