Should the Bible contain the Old Testement?

That's a common modern theory. The Christians that collected the writings that make up our Bible wouldn't agree, and it's obvious by the copious OT quotes that the writers of the NT didn't agree, either.Here's the thought of the mainstream early church:Y'shua (Jesus) said he didn't come to abolish the Law, but to "fill it up." He said this in Matthew 5:17, and he spent the rest of the chapter explaining what he meant. "You've heard it said, don't murder, but I say, don't even be angry with your brother, etc." You can read the chapter for yourself.It's clear enough there that Y'shua believed he was bringing the OT to fullness, not completely wiping it out.Most people don't realize that's what everyone thought for a long time. Paul, for example, uses the law about not muzzling oxen to make a point about the support of ministers. He also says that Hagar and Sarah represent the old and new covenants.If you read through the early church writings, you'll find that when they quit keeping the Jewish Sabbath and quit keeping Jewish dietary laws, they saw themselves as keeping the spiritual Sabbath and spiritual dietary laws. How can one sanctify a day, they asked, except by living holy on it all day long? Thus, every day should be sanctified to God, and not by resting, but by working inside the rest of Christ. The real point of the dietary laws, they said, was that we are to ruminate on the word of God and part from the world, not worry about whether our food ruminates on cud or parts the hoof.Paul wrote that the new moons, feasts, and Sabbaths are a shadow of things to come, but the body that casts that shadow belongs to Christ.The reason the Old Testament was not thrown away is because the New Testament is the fullness of the old one. It's to the old one like a body is to a shadow, or to use Y'shua's terminology, like an inflated balloon to a deflated one.Also, while the old covenant was written on paper, the new one cannot be. The new one is written on minds and hearts by the Spirit of God, and those who belong to it can read the spiritual lessons, the fullness, behind what's written in the law. What's called "the New Testament" is not the New Testament at all, but is simply some letters, biographies, and an apocalypse that happened to be written by men who were under the New Testament.So the New Testament didn't replace the old set in entirety. It's not one book replacing another. It's one covenant replacing another, and the new one isn't a book. The new one is spiritual and makes use of the previous one by "filling it up," in Y'shua's words.