One of the persuasive tactics employed by evangelicals is the use of a falacious question to convince non-Christians that Jesus can only be L-rd. They offer to the unbeliever that Jesus was not a liar, nor was he a lunatic, so then he must be L-rd. The question is falacious because it gives only three options to the opposing party. So when there are actually a multitude of possibilities, by giving only three options, the unbeliever is forced into admission that Jesus could only be "lord" because the other two options are assumed not possible....or are they?
Naturally, if one chooses that Jesus was a liar, then not only would that be insulting to the Christian (which most nice people would not want to do) but they are also pushed into a spot of having to prove that he was a liar and then also having to convince the Christian of it. Of course, the latter is an impossibility when a mind is enslaved by a cult. Proving that Jesus was a liar is very possible using the New Testament as a testament. The same is true with proving lunacy.
The fact that Jesus was a liar (or a deciever at best), can be shown over and over again. Jesus said that he would return "in this generation," but never did. He said he would raise up the Temple in three days, but he did not. (Of course the New Testamet has an interpretation of why not.) Jesus promised that every least Commandment of the Law of Moses would be practiced "until heaven and earth disappear," yet they are not. (At least not by the Christians.) And these are just a few examples. The point of the matter is, if the Christian interpretation of the New Testament is correct, then Jesus was a liar.
What is easier to prove is that Jesus was a lunatic. For why would Jesus tell his followers to follow everything that an anti-christ body of men instructed? Would a leader of the Baptist movement tell the Baptists to follow the Catholic leaders or Mormon leaders? Would the head of the Mormons teach you to follow the leaders of the Churches of Christ? But Jesus does just that. For in Matthew 23, verses 1-3 we find the following message: "Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, saying: "The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them."
Following this passage, there is a series of anti-Pharisaic remarks, as well as the ending of the passage itself: "but do not do according to their deeds, for they say things and do not do them." These remarks were intended to nullify the first two verses of this passage and when you visit with a Christian, you will see that they yave have done so successfully. Ironically, the resulting Christian interpretation proves that Jesus himself was a lunatic.
"I never knew you..."
Those who rebel against the Torah think they are believing in Jesus who in truth affirmed the Law's eternity. Even the New Testament testifies that such people do not truly accept Jesus or the New Testament. For those who reject the Law of Moses are the ones described in Matthew chapter 7:
Note that in this passage, these are people who are said to make true prophesy, do righteous works and perform true miracles, all the while claiming that they believe in Jesus. Despite such demonstrations, Jesus is said to profess to such people, "I never knew you, depart from Me you who practice (live) without Torah!" (Matthew 7:23) Popular English translations hide this message by using for the phrase, "practice without Torah," other words such as "evildoers," "iniquity," and even a very close word, "lawlessness" (without the capital "L"). The Greek word here is anomian. It really means "without the Torah (Mosaic Law)." The New American Standard is the only translation that uses the word "lawlessness." Though this is a milestone for traditional Christian translating, it still hides the real meaning of the passage--that Torah, the Law of Moses, is specifically the subject. This is done by replacing the "L" with "l." "lawlessness" is not "Lawlessness" any more than "god" is "G-d." "Lawlessness" is Torahlessness while "lawlessness" is secular, religious, etc. The NAS uses all small font capitals. If they were capitalizing it the font used for the "L" would be larger than the font for the rest of the letters. This would be the normal practice in printing. But they choose not to do this. The root nomos means only and solely "Torah" (the Law of Moses), not any other kind of law. The "alpha-" prefix in the Greek is like our "a-" prefix in English. It means "without." You will find in English that "pathy" means "feeling" while apathy means "without feeling." "Theist" means "G-d," while atheists means "without G-d." Gnostics are "knowledged" while agnostics are "without knowledge." In Greek, a nomian lives by Torah while an anomian lives "without Torah."
From this passage, it is clear that even in Christianity, Torah observance is going to be a factor in G-d's judgement at the "end of days." In the New Testament New Covenant, Jews are still obligated to observe all the Law. Gentiles will be judged by the Torah--but only though the Commandments applicable to them--the Noahide Commandments. ("For they have become
to the Torah themselves," wrote Paul.) All will be judged by the Torah. The Torah remains forever, until heaven and earth disappear. It is not "nailed to the cross" as many claim. G-d has worked His Plan despite the corruption of people, despite the Church's interpolation of the New Testament.
Paul wrote passages which at casual glance seem to contradict Jesus--passages which seem to state "you are not under the Law." When reading Paul, one must understand that he wrote to the Galatians, to the Romans, to the Corinthians, to the Ephesians, to the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, and to the Philippians. In other words, he wrote to gentiles and was addressing gentiles only. It is of no surprise that he taught them not to circumcise--not to make themselves Jews. (This is what circumcision really means.) It is no wonder we can find passages that read "you are not bound to the Law." Paul taught Pharisaic Judaism. This Judaism exists to this day and even modern rabbis teach this.
In the early Church, when Gentiles accepted what they thought was the Jewish Messiah, they also accepted the G-d of Israel. Along with it, they also accepted the Torah (that is, its Noahide message) and the Jewish idea of Jesus. Through their new "messiah" Jesus, the Paul brought the Gentile and Jew to a common understanding, a common frame of mind. Jew and Gentile became unified. They became one. No wonder Paul wrote things like "for there is neither Jew nor Greek, for they are both one in the Messiah (Jesus)." Paul taught that with regard to salvation and righteousness, G-d sees no difference between Gentiles as Jews: But regarding obedience to the Commandments, the accountability of Jew and Gentile was different. This was the same teaching that Pharisees taught and what Orthodox Judaism teached this day.
We must all realize that we stand before the Master of the universe. We must examine ourselves regarding idolatry and blasphemy, namely who and what Jesus was and stood for. Surely there is a righteous multitude in every faith--Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, and so forth--who will find favor with G-d despite their own personal misconceptions. My prayer is for all people of all faiths. Let it be that they have received knowledge of YHVH--the G-d--as Master of the Universe, Governor of all things. Though the righteous people of different faiths may not realize it while here on earth, in the next world, they will discover that they have a share in the World-to-Come.
Copyright (c)2004/(c)5764 mattityahu@yahoo.com
This site updated on 2-10-04
A test of a true follower of Jesus
Who is really following the New Testament?
Get your own Free Home Page