Click Here to go to site!
Click Here to go to site!
Well, did he? Did Jesus add to God’s law?
Why is this important? Because according to Deuteronomy 4 and 13, it is forbidden to add to or take away from God’s Law to Moses. No exception is given to this law, not for priests or anointed kings/messiahs.
So did he add to it?
What did Jesus in the gospels teach? No man gets to God except through Jesus, except through accepting Jesus. He teaches that if a man denies Jesus, that man will be rejected by God.
Is this message explicitly recorded in the Torah, that a man must accept Jesus to be right with God? No, numerous times in Deuteronomy, God revealed what he requires from not just his people, but everyone. He requires commitment and obedience to the instructions he gave to Moses.
So Jesus says “no, that’s not enough; you must accept him, the supposed son of God.”
So Jesus does add to Torah, he adds the necessity of believing in Jesus. That makes him one who broke the law and not some sinless person.
It is impressed upon the christian that he and she are no good, that the deeds of any person is seen as filthy rags before God. It is a necessary building block in the structure of the necessity of sacrifice, payment for sins. As Paul said in Galatians, if righteousness could come from obeying what God says (deeds of the law), if all our deeds were not filthy, Jesus would have died for nothing (Galatians 2:21).
What is the right response to this claim?
God told Cain as very early in human history that, although sin desires Cain, Cain can rule over it (Genesis 4:7). God said through Moses that obeying the law would be righteousness for Israel (Deuteronomy 6:25), that he gave Israel a choice of good and evil, and that good and life was accessible and possible by keeping God’s way of doing right (Deuteronomy 30). God showed Ezekiel that a person changing his ways to do good merits forgiveness and life (Ezekiel 18).
Again and again and again, the Jewish Bible says that the acts of a person is what is needed and sufficient. Again and again, the God who made humanity reinforces the idea that man is not helpless. God has given man the ability to come closer to him by doing what he says.
Our acts only become filthy when we reject God. Our goodness is like rags when they are wicked acts. But God tells us what is required and it is not the doctrine of Paul. God does not say that the ONLY or even the best way to come approach him is with blood. He never even says that a perfect blood sacrifice is what he wants.
How shall I approach God, to bow to the God of heaven? Shall I approach him with ascent offerings, with calves a year old? Does God find pleasure in thousands of rams, with a multitude of rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my womb for the sin of my soul? It has been shown to you, oh man, what is good and what God requires of you …”
That’s Micah 6:6-8a. It’s what God is saying to any man. Does God require the death of God, or the death of a perfect man? Does Micah preach that a man can do nothing to approach God because man is but a sinner and God is so holy he can’t even look at sin? Does he preach the “altogether dirty” doctrine?
It’s been shown to you, O man, what is good and what God asks of you, if only to act justly, to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God. (Micah 6:8)
The simplicity of the Jewish Bible, the direct message of the prophets show Paul to be the deceiver he is.
Yet even up until today, people are repeatedly told what contradicts God’s foundational revelation and accept it as if God has said it. What a contemptuous doctrine Paul promulgated, one of his many sins against God!
A person earnestly prays “please, Jesus, come into my heart.” Who can refuse such innocence, the desire to reach out to one who is promised to understand, to save, to fulfil a deep need?
But after a number of years, a person can look back on that devotion and wonder why, wonder how he or she could have made such a mistake? How could such faith have been put in a man, a broken cistern, a lie? Having placed all their energy in a black hole that was believed to be a star, the victim is left hollow, angry and even casts a suspicious glare at God as the author of such confusion and delusion.
Although we can make decisions with the best intentions, when they are based on a need, rather than information, that is when pure irrefutable sincerity becomes the way that seems right to a person but the end is the ways of death.
Jesus seemed right to me. He was the answer I knew. I had given the lion’s share of my talent to his cause. But then information came. Study came. A deeper knowledge of and appreciation for God’s Law and the Jewish Bible came. The knowledge of God replaced faith in Jesus.
Israel was told not to believe in, but to know God. It was such knowledge that would protect them from idolatry and lies.
Just read the whole chapter of Deuteronomy 4 and see such statements as the following:
You have been shown, in order to know that the Lord He is God; there is none else besides Him. (v.35)
And you shall know this day and consider it in your heart, that the Lord He is God in heaven above, and upon the earth below; there is none else. (v.39)
By obeying God and knowing him that Israel would be kept safe and avoid lies, and also be an example to the peoples of the nations.
Lord, Who is my power and my strength and my refuge in the day of trouble, to You nations will come from the ends of the earth and say, “Only lies have our fathers handed down to us, emptiness in which there is nothing of any avail! Can a man make gods for himself, and they are no gods?” (Jeremiah 16:19,20)
Although the initial sincerity led to a deception, that of accepting Jesus as messiah and/or God, the devotion that can grow from it can also lead to the sort of attitude that causes one to delve into the Jewish Bible, thereby unlocking the potential for escape.
So although the initial sincerity can lead to the ways of death, accepting the fiction of Jesus as truth and idolatry, it can also be the gateway to finding out about God’s truth which leads one to abandon that fiction.
That’s the oddity in life: The same thing that imprisons you can end up being the key to setting you free.
So don’t be so hard on yourself if you come to realise that you went wrong and spent so long believing a lie. Sometimes humiliation must come before honour. Sometimes the humiliation is needed to make the honour more honourable. And sometimes, if you look closely, you may even see precious jewels when you look back on the “wrong” path, things you needed to go through in order to learn and to help someone else or even yourself.
Having to deal with frequent contact with christians and their things, I’ve noticed another common theme.
They keep talking about Jesus fulfilling the law, the law bring a curse, being under grace not law, yet there is a deep and far too common ignorance about what the law of God given Moses actually is and what it says.
I’ve quizzed christians to name four commandments in the law that are not in the Decalogue. I asked a whole church one time and they could barely come up with two. Not even two. Even the christian scriptures does a better job. This is not an isolated incident.
There is a reason why people accept the claims of the christian bible, that the death of a man can remove their sins and “sin nature,” and too many times, it’s not due to knowledge of what God has said before, but rather an utter ignorance of it.
It was almost inevitable that I was going to share one of these videos. I’m not a Muslim, but the way the lack of coherence and consistency in Jesus worship is highlighted by the Muslim’s questioning is too share-worthy.
Jesus is not the only difference between the Torah worldview and the christian one. One resource I can point to you is as follows:
Judaism and Christianity the differences /c by Trude Weiss-Rosmarin – https://archive.org/details/judaismchristian00weis
I found this book very insightful.
There is a facebook page/group called “Judaism is not christianity minus Jesus” (https://www.facebook.com/nojesus4jews/). That point is very very true. Think about it. Jesus is not simply messiah for many christians and messianics … hmmm … I essentially said the same thing twice; they’re both just christians. Anyway, Jesus isn’t simply the messiah. What is messiah according to the Jewish Bible? In a very basic sense, he is just the future anointed king of Israel, much like king David. He is just the sign of the fact that God himself is causing a restoration on the earth. That’s why the Jewish Bible doesn’t focus on the identity of the character but just what will happen in his times. Plus the clear statements about him are very few. The emphasis of the Jewish Bible is God and our connection to him by means of our righteousness or our wickedness.
So what is Jesus to a christian? Let me speak for myself. I remember the songs I used to sing. “Jesus, you’re the centre of my joy.” “Blessed assurance, Jesus is mine.” “Nothing but the blood of Jesus.” I remember the songbook that I used to have in the church I used to belong to. Once I started recognising that there was a distinction between God and Jesus, my eyes were then open to the fact that the songbook was full of songs about Jesus but not many at all about the Father, about God. Paul’s focus in his letters is the importance of belief in the Jesus he was preaching about. The fact is that Jesus is the centre of devotion. It’s called CHRISTianity. It’s called MESSIAnic “Judaism” (even though it’s not). The focus is not God, it’s Jesus. Can you be forgiven without Jesus? No! Can you get to God without Jesus? No. What is your life without Jesus as a christian? You will be dead in your sins! Jesus is painted over the whole Jewish Bible even where he is not mentioned. Who is Joseph? A type of Jesus. And Moses? A type of Jesus. What about David? A type of Jesus. All the prophets supposedly only spoke of Jesus. In John’s eyes, “Abraham rejoiced to see [Jesus’] day.”
Do you see it yet? Do you see that this isn’t simply about another Jewish king? This is about the core of devotion, a most beloved and elevated object. God said “don’t put any other god in front of me.” Yet christians have put Jesus in front of God, between them and God, so that the glory that irradiates the concept and truth of God shines around Jesus. It’s a deception, a dementing deception. It’s a devotion, and to let go of something you are wholly devoted to is no simple thing. (I may make an article out of this. I hope you don’t mind.)
Remember, you can change no one. If you have family that is christian, all you can do is present the evidence if the opportunity presents itself with wisdom and the appropriate attitude and then leave it to them. That’s it. The role of the watchman is only to warn the people of danger, not to force them out of the city. If the people don’t listen, then it’s their own responsibility. You are responsible for your own life. I know, it’s not easy when all your family is on one side and it seems as if you’re on the other. My father, mother, brother, sister and wife are christian. My wife’s family are mainly christian. If I focus on that it can be quite maddening. All I can do is focus on what we do have in common and work with that while maintaining personal relationships. I get along quite well with them because they know where I stand, I don’t come across as judgmental and I can still have a nice conversation about many biblical subjects, even the Jesus notion, whilst being clear about where I stand. The best thing I can do for myself is study for myself and get intimate with Torah to make sure I’m protected, not just against christianity but also against the atheism, secularism, statism, postmodernism and other religions and beliefs that look to subtly work their way into my mind.
I hope this can be a help to someone.
I think, with this article, I have to put forward the specific claims of the muslim. I’m gonna quote an article called “What does the Bible say about Muhammad …” by Shabir Ally at whyislam.org.
According to the Bible, God said to Moses, on whom be peace:
“I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him.” (The Holy Bible, New International Version, Deuteronomy chapter 18, verse 18).
The prophet described in the above verse must have the following three characteristics:
1. He will be like Moses.
2. He will come from the brothers of the Israelites, i.e. the Ishmaelites.
3. God will put His words in the mouth of that prophet and he will declare what God commanded him.
Let us see which prophet God was speaking of.
What this writer as well as other muslims will do is then list ways in which they think their “prophet” is similar to Moses.
They here make two assumptions. They assume that this passage refers to a particular prophet. The other assumption they make is that the way this specific prophet is similar to Moses is not in the text, therefore they look for different parts of Muhammad’s like and the things he did that was similar to Moses.
Now it’s very important for those who actually respect what the Jewish Bible says and its divine source to actually read the context of the verse so we can see what the intention or the contextual understanding of the verse is.
Let’s start from Deuteronomy 18 verse 9 and go all the way to the end of the chapter. I’ll highlight certain parts of the text that help us see the contextual understanding of the verse.
When you come into the land which the LORD your God gives you, you shall not learn to do according to the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one that makes his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that uses divination, or sorcery, or interprets omens, or is a witch, or binds [special] bindings, or enquires of the Ov and Yidoni, or consults the dead. For all that do these things are an abomination to the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD your God does drive them out from before you.
You shall be whole hearted with the LORD your God. For these nations, which you shall possess, have listened to sorcerers, and to diviners: but you, the LORD your God has not allowed you so to do.
The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet from your midst, from your brothers, like me; to him you shall listen, according to all that you asked of the LORD your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Don’t let me continue to hear the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, so I won’t die. And the LORD said to me, They have done well in what they have spoken. I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like you, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whoever will not listen to my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
But the prophet, who shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.
And if you say in your heart, “How shall we know the word which the LORD has not commanded?” when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing doesn’t happen or come about, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken, but the prophet has spoken it presumptuously: you shall not be afraid of him.
I remember, when I was a christian, taking up the task of not only reading the bible all the way through, but also having it read to me through an online audio bible. It was amazing how many times I’d come to a passage that was supposed to contain some awesome prophecy or doctrinal point, but when read in context, those special connotations seemed to totally disappear. In passages like Job 19:25 and even Psalm 22 which were supposed to hail about messiah, those hails were rendered mute by the context.
And what is the context?
The Lord warns the people against committing acts that the nations do, like divination. Most, if not all, of the deeds warned against have something to do with gaining mystical knowledge in a supernatural way, such as divination and enquiring of the dead. It is because of these acts that the Lord is driving out the old inhabitants of Canaan, and God didn’t permit the Israelites to use these forces; God was going to supply a prophet.
There are a few things to note so far. Firstly, there is no messiah in the context nor a special specific individual. Secondly, the text essentially says that God hasn’t permitted the Israelite to use one way of getting knowledge and that he is going to provide a prophet. Just as the nations listened to their wizards and soothsayers, Israel should listen to this prophet. But what else does this passage say?
So God is gonna raise a prophet “according to what the children of Israel asked” according to verse 16. Huh? Wait, what stuff did the children of Israel want or ask for? A messiah? A special individual who won’t show up for over a thousand years? Nope, the text tells us. The children needed someone to hear from God for them like Moses as they were afraid of a more direct communication.
So we have some info: his prophet would be listened to when Israel needed it, just as nations listen to their occult practitioners; and this prophet would hear from God as Moses did.
Did you spot that?
Did you spot the way in which the prophet would be like Moses?
Did the context just explain itself? That just like the Israelites wanted Moses to hear from God for them, they would have a prophet who would do that according to their request to God? I’m sure it did!
Now let me put something out there. Let me posit something. This isn’t a prophecy as such; it is law regarding how prophets should be dealt with in future. The context isn’t prophecy; it’s law! Therefore we’re not looking at a prophecy about a single special individual, like the Yeshu monster or Muslim Moe. We’re looking at a promise that God gives that, should the Jews need it, he’ll raise a prophet so that they can hear from him. This can be whenever they need it, i.e., God can send “a prophet” straight after Moses, like Joshua, and he can send “a prophet” at the time of Saul and David, like Samuel and Nathan. Because this is a promise about “a prophet” and not a specific prophecy about “the Prophet,” then it can happen as many times as needed. But because, during this time, false prophets could come, as this is law not prophecy, the people would need to know how to deal with false prophets. So God gave more law to guide them.
Do I have evidence for this “position” that I posited?
Of course I do. In that very same text, there is law on one way to check if a prophet is false or not.
You see, this is not a text telling you how to recognise Messiah; that concept is nowhere in this text. It’s a passage telling Israel that God will continue to talk to them after Moses, raising up for them a prophet as and when needed, and therefore Israel will also have a way to test the veracity of each prophet, be it Jeremiah or Hananiah.
It should be apparent here that, as can be expected of a religion that follows the errant stumblings of christianity, the muslim makes the exact same mistake as their christian brethren. Now I’ve avoided the hang-ups of the muslim and the christian because they are irrelevant to the context. Once the context is understood to be a law about how God will communicate with Israel, prohibiting occultists, but rather using prophets after Moses, then the notion of this passage only being about muslim Moe or the Yeshu monster fade into nothing.
“But David, what about the fact that the text says ‘from your brethren?’ Doesn’t that mean the prophet can be from the brothers or relatives of Israel like the Ishmaelites from whom muslim Moe (Mohammed) originate? Doesn’t the fact that Moses was talking to Israel on a whole mean that ‘your brethren’ cannot mean another Israelite but must mean an outsider who is related, like the Ishmaelite Mohammed?”
Let me put another question to you in order to answer that question. Did Israel sin against God when Saul and David were made king? I mean they were both Israelite, right? In fact all the kings of Israel and Judah were Israelites. So if the interpretation of “from their brothers” must mean and outsider who is related, then they must have sinned in that they only used Israelites as kings, right?
Let me show you what I mean. In just one chapter from Deuteronomy 18, in Deuteronomy 17 verses 14 and 15, it says this about the king who would rule Israel.
When you shall come to the land which the Lord your God is giving to you and you possess it and dwell in it, and shall say, “Let me set a king over me like all the nations which surround me,” you will most certainly set over yourself a king which the Lord your God will chose. You shall set over yourself a king from amongst your brothers. You can’t put over you a foreign man which is not your brother.
As you can see here, the text states that the king must be from amongst their brothers, much like Deuteronomy 18 says about a prophet that God sends. And here it makes sure to tell a person what a brother is not: it is not a foreigner, a non-Israelite!!! Just look at Exodus 12:43 where it says that a foreigner is not allowed to take part in the Passover, only someone who has become naturalised to become a full Jew or a full Israelite! That means it excludes the Edomites, even though they’re supposed to be relatives to Israel. This excludes the descendants of the other sons of Abraham, even though they may be relatives to Israel. Being a foreigner excludes Moabites and Ammonites although they are relatives to Israel. None of these, although being a relative of Israel, is counted as a “brother,” a person eligible to become a king. So in this text, which comes before Deuteronomy 18’s statement about a prophet, a brother means a fellow Israelite, a fellow Jew.
So to answer my question, no, those people of Israel who chose to put a king over all Israelites did not sin by choosing fellow Israelites, because that’s what the law states, that the person must be “from among their brothers” which means not a foreigner but a fellow Israelite.
So now, when the text of Deuteronomy 18 states prophets who speak what God commands them, these prophets are “from your brothers,” it should be clear that it is speaking about a fellow Israelite or fellow Jew.
Now, do you notice what has happened? The part of the text that muslims have used to say that “the special prophet” (a concept absent from the text) must be from among people outside of Israel who are related to them in actual fact is the part of the verse that disqualifies Muhammad, “muslim Moe,” from ever being classed as a true prophet for the Jews.
Now, the thought came across my head, “well, David, you said he can’t be classed as a true prophet for the Jews; but does that make him a possible true prophet for the Gentiles?” And the answer must be no! And why? For at least two reasons, even though there are more.
Firstly, if muslims are using Deuteronomy 18:15 and 18 to say that muslim Moe is a prophet, and those texts disqualify him, then they are relying on a lie or untruth to support him. A prophet whose claim to prophethood is based on an untruth, then that makes it much more likely that he’s not a true prophet.
Also, it’s forbidden by Torah law to add or subtract from the laws of God (Deuteronomy 13:1 [or the last verse in chapter 12 in christian versions]). If someone claims to be a prophet and makes a permanent change to Torah law, then he disqualifies himself from being a prophet for anyone. The muslims I have watched have made it painfully clear that Mohammad abrogated and annulled and changed the Law of Moses. They even think that the role of a prophet or “the prophet” in Deuteronomy 18 is to give new laws or change the law. That’s because they misinterpret the phrase “like Moses” to mean that, like Moses, this prophet shall give a new law. That’s a lot of stuff to put onto a little phrase like “like Moses” even though the text itself clarifies what it means to be “like Moses,” i.e., hear from God for the people. So the changing of the Torah law disqualifies him as being a true prophet for anyone.
So after all that I can conclude.
Muslims make the same mistake as christians in thinking they can lay claim to the Jewish Bible and then teach it to others as if they were the primary custodians and the rightful experts. They are neither! They also make the same mistake as christians in taking verses out of context to make awful conclusions that are either not in the text or are a misinterpretation of the text.
I’ve seen too often now watching muslims in debates with atheists, Jews and christians, that muslims treat the Jewish Bible quite badly. But you shouldn’t be surprised. Why? This is firstly because they make the same mistake as christians in thinking Jesus is a true prophet (and messiah) which is also based on distorting the Jewish Bible. A well-renowned muslim debater, Shabir Ally, stated that you can’t be a muslim without accepting Jesus or Isa. And this is also because they think the Jewish Bible is corrupted. I’ve seen muslims used illogical and irrational arguments to make such a claim and I personally have been in conversation with a muslim who used such mentally retarded arguments to show that the Jewish Bible and the books of Moses have fabrications in it.
Knowing the falsehoods that is part of Islam strengthens my resolve to keep away from it. Knowing these falsehoods inform me that christianity and islam are illegitimate children, ungrateful bastards who will happily tear down their “mother” in one way or another to lift themselves up.
For further reading you can check out the following: