OrphanCrow,
I've discarded the validity of the OT quite awhile ago, at least in the sense of allowing it to have any significant wheight on my wordview. Being a "Christian", my primary interest was to test the validity of the Christian wordview. To do so, one MUST investigate the historical Jesus, what he really said, what he really taught. The result is astonishing: We know not much about what the historical Jesus actually said. What we DO know, for the most part, is what the apostle Paul constructed from the Jesus movement. And nowadays, especially with the Dead Sea Scrolls from the Qumran [Essene] community, and the Nag Hamadi texts, we have a much better idea about the "Jesus movement", and what they stood for. I have to say the result of that isn't flattering for the faith in Jesus Christ.
To a fundamentalist Christian, which now I acknowledge that I was, as a Jehovah's Witness, the notion that the historical Jesus said and taught everything that the New Testament texts say is crucial; if Jesus isn't the son of God and he didn't teach those things, it's utterly damaging to your faith. It's what's happening to me. Some may have a more allegorical / philosophical reading of the NT; given my background, I can't do it. It either is, or isn't. Finding out it isn't is absolutely damaging to the 'christian' faith.
Eden