Abraham

So, this post is backtracking a bit, but I thought it was important to include. It's about why, as an adult, I've preferred the "Old Testament" to the New Testament. I mentioned in one of my first posts that I took an English class on the English Bible. We read and analyzed the stories in the Bible as we would any other literary text, so we read without preference to a Christian or a Jewish or a Muslim interpretation. It was pretty cool. Anyways, before I decided to learn anything more about Judaism or any other religion, I took about a month to think and sort out what it is I really believe and how the scriptures I've read (and heard) play into that. I kept coming back to two stories, one from the "Old" and one from the New testament, and comparing them to each other. A lot of people would disagree that I should compare these stories, but it makes since to me.

From what I've read and heard in the New Testament, Jesus knew that he would be crucified and he predicted it to his followers. But that's not what is revealed in the text. In two of the gospels, Matthew and Mark, when Jesus is on the cross he cries out "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani" which is Aramaic for My G-d, my G-d, why have you forsaken (or abandoned, depending on which translation you read) me? The official interpretation of this moment is that Jesus is quoting David, thereby proving his Messiah-ship. No Christian views this as a test of faith. But how can it not be a test of faith? Here this guy is about to die, and he accuses G-d of abandoning him, even though he supposedly knew this would happen. The quoting David explanation is, to be perfectly honest, crap. Anyone could quote David for his Psalms were available scripture. Plus, why didn't Jesus quote something else, anything else? How about "The Lord is my shepherd..."? That would make a lot more sense. If he knew he would be crucified and went to his death willingly, why would Jesus accuse G-d of forsaking or abandoning him? Therefore, Jesus was without faith in his most vulnerable moment.

Then on the other hand, we have Abraham way back in the beginning of the Bible. G-d tells Abraham to sacrifice his favored son, Isaac, to Him. Abraham, though reluctant, takes Isaac up to Mount Moriah to do as G-d says. He was totally about to kill Isaac. He didn't know that G-d was going to stop him at the last minute. Talk about faith. Abraham had faith that G-d knew what was right and ultimately had control over him and what would happen.

So why do I compare this two very different events? Isn't it obvious? Jesus, who knew what would happen, lost faith in G-d. But Abraham, who didn't know what would happen, did have faith in G-d. The Jesus episode is just one of a billion contradictions that exist in the New Testament. From the decent chunk of the "Old Testament" I've read I recognize strong continuity in the text that is not broken like it is in the New.

 I guess I just naturally gravitate toward the stories and lessons in the Hebrew Bible and away from those in the New Testament.