Should the Bible contain the Old Testement?

2Ti 3:16 (KJV) All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness...Besides Messiah prophecies (as you realize), there are Messiah *portraits*, 'shadows', and 'types' from Genesis to Malachi. These portraits and types of Christ are employed by gospel preachers everywhere. They become part of the Gospel (NT) hope in that sense.Poetic books (Psalms, Canticles, etc.) expound out some of the *heart-felt groaning* (if you will) of Christ's vicarious sufferings (e.g., on the cross) and *sin-stricken consciences* of Christians (please go easy on my grammar guys).Then there are the pervading 'sacrficial' atonement(s) for sin in the OT, each providing some additional *detail* of the *great sacrificial atonement* (Christ) ... the Christian's mechanism for forgiveness.Or (I may be wrong) consider it (the Bible) as an enzyme. Change one of the thousands to millions of fitly-joined *dummy* (OT) atoms (excluding perhaps hydrogen) and the active site (the Gospel) may become decayed and/or destroyed.

Actually, this old commandment (testament) seems to me to have been replaced, modified, changed and/or re-worded by:1Jo 3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should (1) believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and (2) love one another, as he gave us commandment.Notwithstanding, I grant you that both simplifications may be argued as similar ... that is, if you somehow construe 'Love God' (with all heart soul mind & strength) as equivalent to 'Faith in the name of his Son Jesus Christ'.To me, Christ's simplification fails unless I believe on a Christ. For I might just as well say:Love the God of this world (Satan) and love one another.

Actually Jesus stated the opposite, that is, to hate oneself:Luk 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.Albeit, men and women argue and twist this scripture every conceivable way.More on topic: "Should the Bible contain the OT?" as per Jesus' words?.(1) From a legalistic viewpoint: That Jesus thoroughly quoted the OT (probably more than anyone) might be another indication for OT 'exhibits'.On the other hand:(1) I'm not sure the simplified OT Jewish religion (i.e., 'Love God and neighbor') is a viable mechanism anyway, as it denies Christ: that Jesus is not the Redeemer, the Atonement, the Gospel, the Resurrection, the New Life, etc.(2) The OT seems dead as far as carnal ordinances are concerned. It seems even dead to most Jews who don't observe and obey those fastidious sacrifical ordinances.(3) Evangelically, It might be argued that the NT Gospel does not require OT exhibits, at all. I.e., Romans, John, Revelation, and Hebrews are *key* evangelical writings.

...I'm Not trying to strain many knatts; here's a little feedback.Jesus, it seems to me, quoted OT more than anyone in the NT. Of course, all the other NT writers quoted it extensively, too. The point only being that they *fit* scriptures into gospel. (i.e., 1COR 15.3) ...this may require some clarification, ReverendOn the other hand, most AL X'tians (here in the Bible-belt) I know don't really get into either testament; but hymns seem more important (Amazing Grace, etc.).Another speculation seems somewhat valid to me: 'Phlegmatic personality' types don't really require *sound OT doctrine* as much as 'Choloric' or 'Melancholy' personality types might.