Brian Welch of Korn Accepted Jesus

How are we supposed to understand testimonies, like Brian Welch's, formerly a member of the alternative metal band Korn very popular in the 90's? Welch is open about his previous addiction to methamphetamines, apparently using it for 700 days straight before accepting Jesus.

As frum Jews, what are we to make of such a testimony? One thing is for sure, you won't ever find me knocking somebody's decision to improve his life, especially when it comes to quitting drugs and straightening out. I am a serious proponent of peoples' dignity and self-respect and find it very encouraging when people break bad habits and become better people.

What is strange to me is that while Jesus may be the reason Welch found himself free of the desire to take drugs, it may also be that when a person commits to a position of self improvement, deliberately detaching himself from harmful influences, what often follows is a lack of a desire for the things that previously ensnared him. And all of this happens without Jesus.

For example, when I started becoming observant 21 years ago, I too found myself in a renewed positive frame of mind where I desired good things and was repulsed by bad ones. While it's true that I was not addicted to hard drugs, my decision to turn my life in the more positive direction of observance changed me from the inside-out. I can assure you that accepting Jesus had nothing to do with that very pivotal set of transformations.

Committing to a track of self improvement while eschewing harmful influences turns out to be very relevant. According to the Rambam, teshuva is encapsulated by the following four steps:

1. Regret
2. Cessation
3. Confession
4. Future resolution

When the Beis HaMikdash stood, the fifth step required bringing a sacrifice.

Notice that the "rock bottom" effect that many former addicts experience lines up with regret and cessation (stages 1 and 2), and that committing to a track of self improvement lines up with future resolution (stage 4). This means that a person can experience a sense of renewal and liberation from his sin without Jesus stepping in to help him. The above process was designed to break a person away from his sin, and if he engages in it, he shouldn't be surprised that it works.

Having said that, and I've seen this happen with people who've come Christians for this reason, accepting Jesus is an important step in helping them to knock a very bad habit. It helps get them out of the proverbial mud or destruction into which they've fallen. However, while it does wonders in the short run, in the long run it requires them to accept that their nature as human beings is wretched and underserving of redemption. They sign on the dotted line to become free from whatever mental or spiritual ailment they're suffering from, while committing to a theological position that describes them as being fundamentally corrupt and disgusting in the eyes of God. The medicine seems just as bad as the disease.

And so it doesn't actually pave the path to genuine rectification - it simply enforces the destructive self image that subconsciously drove them to sin in the first place. It doesn't actually teach them that they are good people who are capable of actual change, but that they are helpless against their evil human nature, and hence need Jesus. It is for this reason that I reject the testimonial repentance narrative.

In Genesis 4:7 God says to Cain very clearly, "Sin rests at the door, it's desire is toward you, yet you can conquer it." You actually possess the ability to change, not in the way that Christianity proposes, i.e., in your acceptance that you cannot change and therefore need Jesus, but rather that you inherently possess the ability for positive change. And if you possess this ability, as God seems to be imploring Cain, you are expected to express that ability.

God's Unity and the Menorah

March 3, 2023 - 27 Adar, 5783

And you shall make a menorah of pure gold. The menorah shall be made of hammered work; its base and its stem, its goblets, its knobs, and its flowers shall [all] be [one piece] with it. (Exodus 25:31)

It is arguably so that one of the most important aspects of our avoda (service of God) as Jews and humans being in general is our ability to comprehend God's absolute Oneness. While God takes care to relate His Oneness to us in explicit terms in the Torah, it nevertheless seems that humanity has historically struggled to fully accept and apprehend this concept.

The above verse is an interesting and useful metaphor to aid us in understanding the correct way to ascertain God's absolute Oneness, perhaps even a meditation. When God instructed Moses to build the original Menorah to be placed in the Mishkan (tabernacle), He said that it must "be made of hammered work." Rashi explains "hammered work" to mean that it must be constructed entirely from one block of gold, without constructing each piece individually and then assembling them together into a unified whole.

Rashi explains that Moshe Rabbeinu found it difficult to understand how to build the Menorah from one piece of gold. It is curious that a prophet on the level of Moshe's caliber found it difficult, and impossible, to construct the Menorah according to God's specifications.

Nevertheless, God promptly solved the problem by telling Moshe to throw the gold into the fire and that He Himself would form it into its required shape. This is evidenced by the Torah's use of the passive verb (it shall be made - תֵּֽיעָשֶׂ֤ה) in contrast to the active verb (you shall make - וְעָשִׂ֨יתָ) used earlier in the chapter, indicating that Moshe did not make it on his own.

Perhaps Moshe's struggle to understand how to construct the Menorah from one piece of gold speaks to the majority of humanity's struggle to understand God's absolute Oneness. The human mind tends toward complexity, being a complex object itself composed of many separate domains. And nevertheless God reveals His true nature to use as a unified whole Who cannot be correctly apprehended as an assembled composite of separate elements.

As with Moshe, the solution to this conundrum required him to throw the gold into the fire, and God Himself constructed the Menorah in its correct unified form. We must likewise resist the temptation to form our understanding of God as a complex unity. We can do this by subjecting our finite understanding to the purifying fire of God's superior understanding, and He will produce for us the correct understanding of His absolutely unitary nature.

As a side note, notice the eerie similarity between the method used to construct both the Golden Calf and the Menorah. In Exodus 32:24, Aharon says to Moshe, "I said to them, 'Who has gold?' So they took it [the gold] off and gave it to me; I threw it into the fire and out came this calf.'" Both were made by throwing gold into a fire, indicating the apparently thin line between an incorrect and correct understanding. The people were convinced that they were doing the right thing, but alas, they were in error.

If you find yourself struggling with God's Oneness, recall His reassurance to Isaiah, "'For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways,' says the Lord." (Isaiah 55:8) It is as if God is saying, "Just as you may seek to understand Me as you would from the perspective of a finite and complex human, recall that I am an Infinite and Simple Being."

What Makes God Great?

April 1, 2021 - Nisan 19, 5781

How Can There Be a Trinity?

This question was posed to Frank Turek during one of his live question and answer sessions: how can there be a Trinity if God is infinite? See below for his answer.



Response

God and the Trinity are both incomprehensible, but for different reasons. The human mind can't comprehend God because He is great beyond measure (like the ocean), but it can't comprehend the Trinity because it's logically invalid and undefined.

This is like the difference between thinking about infinity (God) and thinking about dividing a number by zero (the Trinity). We can define infinity (as an endless set of numbers) even while being completely unable to apprehend it any real way. However, while we cannot define an undefined logical contradiction, in addition we are incapable of apprehending it.

You can actually ponder infinity, but you cannot ponder dividing a number by zero. This is because your mind can grasp the idea of adding another number forever, but it cannot grasp the idea of dividing a number by zero. For example, ten divided by five equals two, so the answer (two) multiplied by five must equal ten. However, this operation doesn't work with zero; if ten divided by zero is some number, that number times zero must be ten, which is impossible. Because this operation cannot be replicated when dividing by zero, mathematicians say that dividing something by zero is undefined. You cannot place your faith in something that is undefined.

Being a mystery is not what makes God great; being great while being apprehensible is what makes God great.

If God Is Three, Why Am I Not?

March 31, 2021 - Nisan 18, 5781

What Does It Mean to Be Made in God's Image?

If God is Triune, and we are made in the image of God, why are we not triune? Why are we not one being made up of three distinct elements?

Many Christians will immediately respond by pointing out that human beings are made up of three distinct elements: body, spirit, and soul, or body, emotions, and intellect. Judaism agrees that a human being is composed of three distinct elements; nefesh, ruach, and neshama.

However, if we use Dr. William Lane Craig's description of the Persons of the Trinity as "three centers of self-consciousness," are we able to say that every human being is also made up of three distinct centers of self-consciousness?

When you think about the experience of your own existence, do you relate to yourself as one center of consciousness, or three? What would life be like if you were composed of three simultaneously and perpetually activated centers of consciousness? Would you be able to function normally?

What may be alarming to realize for Trinitarians is that your sense of being is intricately synchronized with one center of consciousness, that is, simply speaking, "you." In fact, Christianity is careful to define the Trinity as "one Being with three Persons," (with Person meaning "center of consciousness"), but if we are made in the image of God, and we are one being with one center of consciousness, it seems sensible that God is also one Being with one center of consciousness.

Now it is true that you may identify three distinct and natural elements of your being, but you do not experience them as three separate centers of consciousness. It's true that your body, emotions, and intellect filter information to you in three different ways, but they filter that information to one center of consciousness, to "you."

In other words, it is as if you are surrounded by a screen with three different openings, and stimulus from the environment reaches you from each of those openings. You are not in fact identical to those openings, but interact with them.

In fact, if you were to experience within yourself three centers of consciousness you may be described as suffering from split personality disorder, which is "a mental disorder where a person has two or more distinct personalities." It's disturbing to think that you cannot assume a likeness to a Triune God without becoming mentally ill.

To Be Like God, Think Like God

During Pesach we say the Hallel prayer every morning (Psalms 115:3-9):

But our God is in heaven; whatever He wishes, He does.

Their idols are silver and gold, the handiwork of man.

They have a mouth but they do not speak; they have eyes but they do not see.

They have ears but they do not hear; they have a nose but they do not smell.

Their hands-but they do not feel; their feet-but they do not walk; they do not murmur with their throat.

Like them shall be those who make them, all who trust in them.

וֵֽאלֹקינוּ בַשָּׁמָ֑יִם כֹּ֖ל אֲשֶׁר־חָפֵ֣ץ עָשָֽׂה:

עֲצַבֵּיהֶם כֶּ֣סֶף וְזָהָ֑ב מַֽ֜עֲשֵׂ֗ה יְדֵ֣י אָדָֽם:

פֶּ֣ה לָ֖הֶם וְלֹ֣א יְדַבֵּ֑רוּ עֵינַ֥יִם לָ֜הֶ֗ם וְלֹ֣א יִרְאֽוּ:

אָזְנַ֣יִם לָ֖הֶם וְלֹ֣א יִשְׁמָ֑עוּ אַ֥ף לָ֜הֶ֗ם וְלֹ֣א יְרִיחֽוּן:

יְדֵיהֶ֚ם | וְלֹ֬א יְמִישׁ֗וּן רַ֖גְלֵיהֶם וְלֹ֣א יְהַלֵּ֑כוּ לֹֽא־יֶ֜הְגּ֗וּ בִּגְרוֹנָֽם:

כְּמוֹהֶם יִֽהְי֣וּ עֹשֵׂיהֶ֑ם כֹּ֖ל אֲשֶׁר־בֹּטֵ֣חַ בָּהֶֽם:

Pesach Kasher Ve'Sameach!

---

God Is One - The Word "Echad" in the Torah

March 21, 2021 - Nisan 8, 5781

Table of Contents

1. Does The Word Echad Mean A Simple or Complex Unity?
2. Echad Can Be Used To Indicate Simple Unity
3. The Words Echad and Yachid Mean Different Things
4. Examples of Echad Meaning Simple Unity
5. Why Doesn't Echad Appear in Genesis 1:26?
6. Conclusion

Does The Word Echad Mean A Simple or Complex Unity?

As of late some Christians have made the argument that the Hebrew word echad, meaning "one," actually connotes a "complex unity." "Complex unity" refers to something that is one in essence, but is comprised of separate parts. This is in contrast to the word yachid, which they claim refers to a "simple unity," meaning something that is one unified whole not composed of any parts. The purpose of this claim is to show that the Trinity is found in the Tanakh, which they maintain is the true meaning of the Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4:

Hear, O Israel: The Lord is our God; the Lord is one.

This is largely taken to be based on the first two instances of the word echad in the Torah, Genesis 1:5 and Genesis 2:24, as well as other verses. These verses refer to particular things or people that are composed of several parts, but are nevertheless one thing, such as the first day being composed of "evening" and "morning."

The following are examples of the word echad used in the Torah:

Genesis 1:15 - And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night, and it was evening and it was morning, one day.

Notice that the day is composed of two elements; evening and morning. In this way Christians argue that the word echad refers only to things that are made up of more than one element. This argument is used as the central proof for the Trinity - if the Torah refers to God as echad, then He must be a compound unity.

Genesis 2:24 - Therefore, a man shall leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

Numbers 13:23 - They came to the Valley of Eshkol and they cut a branch with a (one) cluster of grapes. They carried it on a pole between two [people] and [they also took] some pomegranates and figs.

Ezekiel 37:17 - And bring them close, one to the other into one stick, and they shall be one in your hand.

While the above is a good observation, all four examples are used as descriptions of created things that exist in the environment, and not to the uncreated God, Who does not exist in the environment. Because God is fundamentally different than anything else that exists, the descriptions in the above verses cannot be used to describe God.

Further, the examples above refer to things that were initially separate entities that were joined together; the evening and night were joined to create the first day, and Adam and Eve joined together to create "one flesh." This joining of separate entities is not the Christian view of the Persons of God, who are said to have existed together eternally in hypostasis. Therefore this application of the word echad in the Torah may accurately describe several finite things, but does not apply to God.

Back to top


Echad Can Be Used To Indicate Simple Unity

In fact, the word echad is also used in Genesis in one place to indicate simple unity, the opposite of joining, as in Genesis 2:10:

And a river flowed out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it separated and became four heads. The name of one (echad) is Pishon; that is the one that encompasses all the land of Havilah, where there is gold. And the gold of that land is good; there is the crystal and the onyx stone. And the name of the second river is Gihon; that is the one that encompasses all the land of Cush. And the name of the third river is Tigris; that is the one that flows to the east of Assyria, and the fourth river that is the Euphrates.

The verses above indicate that a river flowed out of Eden and broke into four separate and smaller rivers. Notice that the cardinal word "one" is used for the first river, and the ordinal words "second," "third," and "fourth" are used for the rest. This is reminiscent of the usage of the cardinal number for "Day One" and the ordinal numbers for the rest of the days (day one, second day, third day, etc...). If echad means complex unity, that word should have been used to describe the group of four rivers, but not to describe one of the rivers in that group.

In other words, the word echad in this verse is used very differently from its use to describe the first day. In Genesis 1:15, the word echad indicates two elements coming together to form one thing. In Genesis 2:10, the word echad is used to indicate something that is not composed of many parts, and stands alone. While we know that rivers are certainly composed of many elements, for the sake of the argument we are not focusing on what we know of rivers, but of what the Torah tells us in this particular verse. This use of the word echad demonstrates an example of echad used to show simplicity instead of complexity.

Back to top

The Words Echad and Yachid Mean Different Things

Interestingly, some Christians make the argument that the word echad is to be distinguished from yachid, only the latter of which means a simple, inseparable unity, while the former indicates complexity:

The following are examples from the Tanakh of the word yachid:

Genesis 22:2 - And He said, "Please take your son, your only one (yechidchah), whom you love, yea, Isaac, and go away to the land of Moriah and bring him up there for a burnt offering on one of the mountains, of which I will tell you."

Genesis 22:12 - And he said, "Do not stretch forth your hand to the lad, nor do the slightest thing to him, for now I know that you are a God fearing man, and you did not withhold your son, your only one (yechidchah), from Me."

Genesis 22:16 - And he said, "By Myself have I sworn, says the Lord, that because you have done this thing and you did not withhold your son, your only one (yechidchah)...

Judges 11:34 - And Jephthah came to Mizpah, to his house, and behold, his daughter was coming out towards him with timbrels and with dances, and she was an only (yechidah) child, he had from her neither a son nor a daughter.

Jeremiah 6:26 - O daughter of My people, gird yourself with sackcloth and roll in ashes; make yourself a mourning [as] for an only (yachid) child, a bitter lamentation, for suddenly the plunderer will come upon us.

The above examples are used to demonstrate that when God sought to describe simple unity, He used word the word yachid. Notice that every instance of the word yachid above indicates simple unity; in none of these examples does the word describe something that is composed of many parts. It can therefore be reasoned that God uses the word echad to describe a complex unity.

However, this distinction is not as simple as we may think. Note that Genesis 22:2 actually includes both the words yachid (your only son) and echad (one of the mountains), indicating that both words can mean "one" in the simple sense. The word echad here refers to one mountain; it does not refer to one mountain formed of many elements as in "day one" formed of evening and morning. This teaches us that the word echad does not have a fixed, formulaic meaning as some Christians advance, but that the word is in fact used in different contexts to describe either simplicity or complexity.

The above argument also overlooks the high volume of verses in which the word echad is used strictly to describe simplicity, discussed in the next section.

Back to top

Examples of Echad Meaning Simple Unity

There are many places in the Torah where the word echad is used in the traditional sense of meaning one, undivided or indivisible thing. The following list shows the 29 instances of the word "one," echad, in Genesis alone. Out of those 29 (orange), only 13 (green) can be understood as indicating a complex unity, or one referring to a grouping of other items:

1. Genesis 1:9 - And God said, "Let the water that is beneath the heavens gather into one place, and let the dry land appear," and it was so."
2. Genesis 3:22 - Now the Lord God said, "Behold man has become like one of us, having the ability of knowing good and evil, and now, lest he stretch forth his hand and take also from the Tree of Life and eat and live forever."
3. Genesis 4:19 - And Lemech took himself two wives; one was named Adah, and the other was named Zillah.
4. Genesis 10:25 - And to Eber were born two sons: one was named Peleg, because in his days the earth was divided, and the name of his brother was Joktan.
5. Genesis 11:1 - Now the entire earth was of one language and uniform words.
6. Genesis 11:3 - And they said to one another, "Come, let us make bricks and fire them thoroughly"; so the bricks were to them for stones, and the clay was to them for mortar.
7. Genesis 11:6 - And the Lord said, "Lo! [they are] one people, and they all have one language, and this is what they have commenced to do. Now, will it not be withheld from them, all that they have planned to do?
8. Genesis 19:9 - But they said, "Back away." And they said, "This one came to sojourn, and he is judging! Now, we will deal even worse with you than with them." And they pressed hard upon the man Lot, and they drew near to break the door.
9. Genesis 21:5 - And the water was depleted from the leather pouch, and she cast the child under one of the bushes.
10. Genesis 22:2 - And He said, "Please take your son, your only one, whom you love, yea, Isaac, and go away to the land of Moriah and bring him up there for a burnt offering on one of the mountains, of which I will tell you."
11. Genesis 27:38 - And Esau said to his father, "Have you [but] one blessing, my father? Bless me too, my father." And Esau raised his voice and wept.
12. Genesis 32:9 - And he said, "If Esau comes to one camp and strikes it down, the remaining camp will escape."
13. Genesis 33:13 - And he said to him, "My master knows that the children are tender, and the flocks and the cattle, which are raising their young, depend upon me, and if they overdrive them one day, all the flocks will die.
14. Genesis 34:16 - Then we will give you our daughters, and we will take your daughters for ourselves, and we will dwell with you and become one people.
15. Genesis 37:20 - So now, let us kill him, and we will cast him into one of the pits, and we will say, 'A wild beast devoured him,' and we will see what will become of his dreams."
16. Genesis 40:5 - Now both of them dreamed a dream, each one his dream on the same night, each man according to the interpretation of his dream, the cupbearer and the baker of the king of Egypt, who were confined in the prison.
17. Genesis 41:5 - And he fell asleep and dreamed again, and behold, seven ears of grain were growing on one stalk, healthy and good.
18. Genesis 42:11 - We are all sons of one man. We are honest. Your servants were never spies."
19. Genesis 42:13 - And they said, "We, your servants, are twelve brothers, the sons of one man in the land of Canaan, and behold, the youngest is with our father today, and one is gone."
20. Genesis 42:16 - Send one of you and let him fetch your brother, and you will be imprisoned so that your words will be tested whether truth is with you, and if not, as Pharaoh lives, you are spies!"
21. Genesis 42:19 - If you are honest, your one brother will be confined in your prison, and you, go bring the grain for the hunger of your households.
22. Genesis 42:27 - The one opened his sack to give fodder to his donkey at the lodging place, and he saw his money there it was, in the mouth of his sack.
23. Genesis 42:32 - We are twelve brothers, the sons of our father; one is gone, and today the youngest is with our father in the land of Canaan.
24. Genesis 42:33 - And the man, the lord of the land, said to us, 'With this I will know that you are honest; leave one of your brothers with me, and [what is needed for] the hunger of your households, take and go.
25. Genesis 44:28 - The one went away from me, and I said, "He has surely been torn to pieces, and I have not seen him since."
26. Genesis 48:22 - And I have given you one portion over your brothers, which I took from the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow."
27. Genesis 49:16 - Dan will avenge his people, like one, the tribes of Israel.

If the word echad is used in the simple sense in the majority of its uses in Genesis, we can expect a similar pattern in the rest of the books of Tanakh, such as the following;

Joshua 17:14 - And the children of Joseph spoke to Joshua, saying, "Why have you given me one lot and one portion for an inheritance, seeing I am a numerous people, forasmuch as the Lord has blessed me thus?"

2 Samuel 13:30 - And I, where shall I lead my shame? And [as for] you, you shall be like one of the profligate men in Israel. And now I beg of you to speak to the king, for he will not withhold me from you.

2 Samuel 17:12 - And we shall come upon him in some place where he is found, and we shall light upon him, as the dew falls on the ground; and there shall not be left of him, and of all the men that are with him, even one.

Zechariah 14:7 - And it shall be one day that shall be known to the Lord, neither day nor night; and it shall come to pass that at eventide it shall be light.

Ecclesiastes 4:8 - There is one, and there is no second; yea, he has neither son nor brother, and there is no end to all his toil; neither is his eye sated from wealth. Now for whom do I toil and deprive my soul of pleasure? This too is vanity and an unhappy affair.

Back to top

Why Doesn't Echad Appear in Genesis 1:26?

What is also telling is that Genesis 1:26, held by Christians as a reference to the Trinity, does not use the word echad, instead opting to use "Us" and "Our."

Genesis 1:26 - And God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness, and they shall rule over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the heaven and over the animals and over all the earth and over all the creeping things that creep upon the earth."

If God wanted to tell us that the word echad is a complex unity, that word would have been very hard to deny used in Genesis 1:26, the context of which is supposedly the Trinity. Imagine Genesis 1:26 as follows:

"And God said, 'I am One. Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness...'"

That would have added fuel to Christianity's argument, although still not explicit. Because Genesis 1:26 is not written in this way we can safely assume that its intent was not to refer to the Trinity.

Back to top

Conclusion

In a world of separation and classification, it is more awe-inspiring that God can be completely and seamlessly unified than being a complex unity, which wouldn't make Him very different from the created world. Interestingly, William Lane Craig, “an American analytic philosopher and Christian theologian, apologist, and author" and "Professor of Philosophy at Houston Baptist University and Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology,” describes God as a simple Being, which contradicts the view that He is a complex unity.

Admittedly, Craig is referring to God's lacking any physical components, but his argument can be applied to God's nature as well. Further, God's taking a physical form as a man therefore introduces complexity into an otherwise simple Being by Craig's own reasoning.

Craig says, "When you reflect on the idea that God is an immaterial entity - a spirit, He is a mind without a body - then God is a remarkably simple entity, because He has no parts. There's no composition in God's Being. An unembodied mind is an entity that is startlingly simple in its nature."

If God's being immaterial is the condition that makes Him simple, His assuming a material form must make Him complex. "Becoming Jesus" turned God from a simple into a complex being, His human form fragmenting His otherwise perfectly simple nature.

Zechariah 14:9 - And the Lord shall become King over all the earth; on that day shall the Lord be one, and His name one.

Back to top

Yield of the Field

March 19, 2021 - Nisan 6, 5781

Just as one polytheistic system was tolerant of a multiplicity of gods within its own framework, polytheistic systems tended towards tolerance of other polytheistic systems. Polytheism's fundamental assumption was the complex and variegated manifestation of the cosmos, which led it to permit and tolerate other peoples' deities on principle alone. This tolerance wasn't simply a matter of expanding a pantheon, it was the essential view that all deities were equally valid manifestations, even if different, and were therefore theologically agreeable and inoffensive.

Monotheism was the exact opposite to the point where it achieved a "theological singularity." Beyond rejecting the natural and perpetual expansion of the total set of mutually compatible gods, it rejected the underlying proposition that powered the entire process in the first place. In other words, it didn't just reject the quantity produced through expansion (although it certainly did), it rejected the quality of a continuum that permitted classifiable and independent powers. It understood the assumption of shared multiplicity of creative forces powering reality as a gross and even repulsive error. It fathomed that the observable complexity of the environment owed itself to a singular consciousness that could not be expressed at all, and certainly not with any degree of accuracy, within the environment that it created.

Therefore, it would be totally inaccurate to describe monotheism as "the belief in one god," and not even as the non-existence of any of the gods of polytheism, but that one "centrally located" administrative and completely integrated force is responsible for the creation and functioning of every aspect of existence at all times in every way. This position on principle alone does not allow for any fundamental "theological activity" of any perceivable independent forces or beings, all explained as necessary aberrations observed by entities occupying the environment, known as "human beings." Grossly put, if the continuum of reality is a film running through a projector, any independent beings perceived by viewers are smudges on the film.

Check back for more at a later date or time... This is a work-in-progress...

Seven Common Muslim Questions About Judaism

March 3, 2021 - Adar 19, 5781

---

The Questions

1. Did God Take Prophecy Away From The Jews For Their Pride?
2. Does Deuteronomy Foreshadow Muhammad?
3. Does Psalms Foreshadow Muhammad?
4. Does The Torah Say That Ishmael's Descendants Will Be Great?
5. Does The Q'uran Restore the Corrupted Parts of the Torah?
6. Does The Torah Say That God Regrets Things?
7. Does Judaism Monopolize God by Limiting Prophecy to Itself?

1. Did God Take Prophecy Away From The Jews For Their Pride?

In short, Jesus was the last prophet sent to Israel, since the Jews had reached a point where they, after having numerous prophets sent to them over the centuries, purely saw this blessing in a prideful and ethnically arrogant way and thus had forsaken their duty to spread the message of Pure Monotheism to all of humanity. Thus it was time to move the blessing of prophethood, which was in essence a duty, to a people who would honor and fulfill it.

The idea that prophecy had to be transferred from the Jews due to their apparent pride and ethnic arrogance makes sense, but it is not Biblically (Tanakh) or logically supported.

It isn't logically supported for a few reasons.

The first is that for much of Jewish history the polytheistic nations absolutely rejected Jewish attempts to introduce them to "their God," and often times oppressed them greatly for it. So it isn't necessarily that the Jews kept God to themselves, it's that the polytheistic nations would have nothing to do with Him. In other words, they had not necessarily forsaken their duty to spread the message of monotheism, but that they were in many cases barred from doing so, and were unable to persuade the "stiff-necked Gentiles" from abandoning their gods. In any case, being barred was not always an effective deterrent for the more stubborn individuals among the Jews, many of whom persisted at great cost to their personal well-being, and in some cases their lives.

Secondly, how the Jews understood their gift of prophecy has nothing to do with the fact that God provided it to them: there are no conditions attached to receiving prophecy that one must humbly accept it (although that would be ideal). First of all, we are speaking about individuals within the nation that received prophecy, not the entire nation. Therefore the general attitude of the nation would not be a valid impetus for God to withhold prophecy from individuals that were worthy of receiving it. Secondly, one purpose of prophecy was to provide needed guidance in the face of deviance; withholding or abolishing prophecy at those pivotal junctures would defeat the purpose of prophecy in the first place. It would also be reckless, which we cannot attribute to a perfectly knowing, wise, and compassionate God. 

Thirdly, there seems to be a misunderstanding in Islam as to the function and/or scope of prophecy, at least in the way Jews understand it. A nation's access to prophecy does not define its role as a representative of monotheism; if you think about it you may see that these elements don't really have anything to do with each other. Instead, this role is defined by their ability to teach and impart divinely revealed principles to other people; once an initial prophecy has been received (i.e., through Moses), monotheism can be disseminated with or without prophecy and is not reliant upon it. Using prophecy to teach people about God is like using a flamethrower to light a candle.

The continued prophecy that God gave to the Jews was not designed to continuously confirm the truth of monotheism; it was sent to correct people who had deviated in one or more ways. Having said that, other nations don't need to receive prophecy of their own in order to understand that monotheism is the way to go; they can be exposed to its truth by gaining access to the Torah and/or being taught about it by Jews, who themselves have access to the Torah. This is part of what it means that the Jews are "a light to the nations." It is not something to boast about or be prideful, it is our prime directive and the reason that we were created. Any Jew who contemplates it seriously would be forced to come to that conclusion, and if not, then he is in error.

Fourthly, even if we were to assume that the purpose of prophecy was to represent monotheism, there are no verses in the Torah in which God says that He would transfer this role to another nation in response to a surpassed threshold of either arrogance and/or sin. In fact, there are several verses in the Tanakh supporting the unconditional eternality of the covenant between God and the Jews, which I will currently spare for the sake of brevity; even though we may break it, He does not reciprocate by breaking it Himself because He is faithful. 

In addition, transferring this role to another nation is the most radical way of ensuring that monotheism be properly disseminated; there are other, less radical and equally effective, ways of achieving this. For example, it can be appended to the Ishmaelites so that they too play a role in spreading monotheism; it is not necessary to assume that the Jews must lose their position in order for somebody else to acquire it. Consider fire, for example, which spreads from place to place without drawing away from the original flame. It smacks of human thinking to assume that God "moves prophecy around" from nation to nation due to any imperfections, alleged or real, found in the original representative.

Back to Table of Contents

2. Does Deuteronomy Foreshadow Muhammad?

Although the Jews clearly expected this prophet, they were seemingly closed to the idea that he could or would be a non-Jew even though it is stated that he will be raised "from your brothers"—meaning the brothers of the Jews, thus the Ishmaelites, as stated in Deuteronomy 18:15-19. So even though the implications of this verse are now clear in the aftermath of the advent of Islam, up until the time of Jesus the Jews were still interpreting it in a very narrow and self-serving way—and they still are.

Regarding Deuteronomy 18:15-19, as long as we are taking the "family" route, a "brother" is more closely related than a more distant relative or next of kin. If the descendants of Isaac have the same father (Abraham) and same mother (Sarah), then they are more closely related to each other than to Ishmaelites, who have the same father (Abraham), but not the same mother (Hagar). It therefore stands to reason that "from your brothers" more likely refers to another Israelite than to an Ishmaelite. Our understanding is that this is contextually referring to Joshua (from the tribe of Ephraim) right before the death and succession of Moses (from the tribe of Levi), and not to a future prophet (from Ishmael from the tribe of Quraysh).

The verse in Deuteronomy also says, "A prophet from among you, from your brothers...," The words "from among you" pretty clearly refer to someone who is among the Jews, i.e., with them, which cannot then mean somebody from the Ishmaelite line, who were certainly not living among the Jews and occupied their own region of land quite a distance away. In other words, and I say this respectfully, nothing in this verse indicates that this prophet would be an Ishmaelite. This doesn't mean that Muhammad wasn't great, it just means that this verse is not about him.

Back to Table of Contents

3. Does Psalms Foreshadow Muhammad?

Indeed, at the time of Jesus, these Ishmaelite prophecies were still begging to be fulfilled—since all of Abraham's descendants were yet to be truly blessed by God. And what does "The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone" (Matthew 21:42 / Luke 20:17) mean if not this?

This verse is found originally in Psalms 118:22. One of our understandings is that it is a reference to the Jews themselves, who were rejected by virtually everybody, but then accepted. This speaks of what their status would be in the Messianic kingdom, when people will say, "This was from the Lord; it is wondrous in our eyes. This is the day that the Lord made; we shall exult and rejoice thereon." (118:23-24) It is a projection of what people will say in the future: "This," this unexpected turn of events, "was from the Lord."

Interestingly, Christians believe that this verse was a reference to Jesus. I would like to see a discussion between a Christian and Muslim as to the identity of this individual.

Back to Table of Contents

4. Does The Torah Say That Ishmael's Descendants Will Be Great?

"Being that our Ummah went from being a relatively small, uncivilized, and unremarkable group of largely nomadic tribes to being a "Great Nation" (Genesis 17:20) that adheres to and spreads the Pure Monotheism of Abraham throughout the globe..."

The term "great nation," in context, seems to refer to quantity and not necessarily spiritual stature (which Ishmael's descendants may rightfully deserve to be called). You don't even need to look at the original Hebrew to see this; you can look at a standard translation:

"And regarding Ishmael, I have heard you; behold I have blessed him, and I will make him fruitful, and I will multiply him exceedingly; he will beget twelve princes, and I will make him into a great nation."

Interestingly enough, these same words are used in Genesis 1:28 with the Divine command to populate the earth: "And God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and rule over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the sky and over all the beasts that tread upon the earth."

The verse above clearly indicates greatness in numbers and conquest (fill the earth and subdue it...). It is my observation only that perhaps the use of identical verbs in both verses indicates an association between them. Having said that, the Hebrew word for "great" in Genesis 17:20 is gadol, which refers to "large." The word adir is a more accurate word to connote spiritual greatness, nobility, or might. All of the adjectives above in bold connote population or quantity, not necessarily spiritual greatness. As with Muhammad, this is not to say that greatness was not imparted on Ishmael's descendants, but just that this verse doesn't mean that.

Back to Table of Contents

5. Does The Q'uran Restore the Corrupted Parts of the Torah?

"The Jews corrupted parts of the Torah, and God revealed the Qur'an to restore them."

If somebody claims that the Qur'an restores the portions of the Torah that had been corrupted, I would say that the Torah warns against people in the future who will tell you to change any part of the Torah. So really when a person says that part of the Torah has been corrupted, what he really wants you to do is adopt a version of the Torah that he believes is correct. In other words, he is changing the Torah to fit his needs.

The following verse warns us against doing this, and against believing someone who attempts to:

Everything I command you that you shall be careful to do it. You shall neither add to it, nor subtract from it. (Deuteronomy 13:1)

In other words, Deuteronomy 13:1 is a built-in firewall against false claims, even when the person making it claims to have received it through prophecy. This is one of the ways that God has preserved the Torah through the ages, even though most Muslims claim that God only preserved the Qur'an and not the previous revelations.

Back to Table of Contents

6. Does the Torah Say That God Regrets Things?

"The Torah says that God regretted things that He did, which is an incorrect understanding of God that the Qur'an has been sent to correct. God can only regret His actions if He is not perfect, and so Judaism has reduced God to the level of human beings, as in Genesis 6:5-7:"

And the Lord saw that the evil of man was great in the earth, and every imagination of his heart was only evil all the time. And the Lord regretted that He had made man upon the earth, and He became grieved in His heart. And the Lord said, "I will blot out man, whom I created, from upon the face of the earth, from man to cattle to creeping thing, to the fowl of the heavens, for I regret that I made them."

"Regret" is only a loose translation. The Hebrew root of the verb וַיִּנָּ֣חֶם connotes reconsidering a course of action, which is the way it is used in other parts of the Torah. God was reconsidering what to do now that Man had become completely corrupted on the face of the earth.

To preempt, the question that will inevitably arise from this is predestination. While this is admittedly outside of the scope of human knowledge, let us consider this question in terms of prayer; when a human prays to God, He acts in accordance with the content of that prayer. If so, does this mean that the person's prayer has changed God's mind, and so that He can be changed? The answer is of course "no," but more accurately that God is "responsive" to changes in Man's behavior and determines the future based upon those actions. That is what the word "regretted" (a translation) means.

In this same way, God would have not destroyed the earth had Man not become completely corrupt, i.e., He would have continued with the initial program.

Back to Table of Contents

7. Does Judaism Monopolize God by Limiting Prophecy to Itself?

"According to IslamicAwareness.org, 'It is an Islamic viewpoint that every nation was sent a Messenger for their guidance. The important matter was the concept of Tawheed i.e., in oneness of Allah. The secondary matter was Shariah which kept changing from tribe to tribe and nation to nation. Allah, the most high, alone knows what is good for His creation.'

This is based on several verses in the Qur'an, the first of which says, 'And for every Ummah (a community or a nation), there is a Messenger; when their Messenger comes, the matter will be judged between them with justice, and they will not be wronged. (Qur'ân 10:47)'

The Torah gives us a rather different picture of prophecy, one that crosses national lines. In the Torah, prophets were often sent to other nations with an important message of monotheism and/or repentance."

The Prophet Jonah Sent to Assyria

A good example of this is the prophet Jonah (referred to in the Book of Jonah as a Hebrew), who was sent to the Assyrian capital Nineveh with the message that its residents must repent or be destroyed. In other words, he was sent to a nation not his own with a message of repentance:

And Jonah arose and went to Nineveh according to the word of the Lord. Now Nineveh was an exceedingly great city, a walk of three days. And Jonah commenced to come into the city, one day's walk, and he proclaimed and said, "In another forty days Nineveh shall be overturned!" And the people of Nineveh believed in God, and they proclaimed a fast and donned sackcloth, from their greatest to their smallest. And the word reached the king of Nineveh, whereupon he rose from his throne, took off his royal robe, covered himself with sackcloth, and sat on the ashes. (Jonah 3:3-6)

Abraham in Ur Chasdim (Babylon) and Canaan

This also occurs with Abraham throughout Genesis; he has interactions with, and can be said to have been sent as a messenger to, people from a range of other nations, such as the Philistines. The same can be said of Lot with the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, although Jews do not consider him a prophet.

In our understanding Hagar, who was Egyptian, was one of Abraham's and Sarah's first converts to monotheism, alluded to in Genesis 12:5:

And Abram took Sarai his wife and Lot his brother's son, and all their possessions that they had acquired, and the souls they had acquired in Haran, and they went to go to the land of Canaan...

One of our main commentators, Rashi explains that "the souls they had acquired," in addition to the plain reading meaning servants, means the converts that they "brought under the Divine presence," i.e., converted. One of these righteous people was Hagar, who although Egyptian, did not convert to monotheism through a prophet sent to her nation, but through her interaction with, and being persuaded by, Abraham and Sarah.

Moses in Egypt

We can also take the example of the Jews in Egypt. While God's primary goal was to take the Jews out of Egypt, Moses sent many warnings and signs to the Pharaoh, his servants, and the people in general, to repent. According to our tradition, the non-Jews who left Egypt along with the Jews were converts to Judaism.

The Prophet Amos to Non-Jewish Nations

The prophet Amos also addresses six non-Jewish nations in Amos 1:3-2:3 (Damascus, Gaza, Tyre, Edom, Ammon, and Moav):

So said the Lord: For three transgressions of Damascus, yea for four, I will not return them; Because they threshed the Gileadites with sledges of iron. And I will send fire into the house of Hazael, and it shall consume the palaces of Ben-Hadad. And I will break the bolt of Damascus, and I will cut off an inhabitant from Bikath- Aven, and one who holds the scepter from Beth-eden, and the people of Aram shall be exiled to Kir, says the Lord.

So said the Lord: For three transgressions of Gaza, yea for four, I will not return them; Because they carried away captive a whole captivity, to deliver to Edom. And I will send fire into the wall of Gaza, and it shall consume its palaces. And I will cut off an inhabitant from Ashdod and one who holds the scepter from Ashkelon, and I will return My hand upon Ekron, and the remnant of the Philistines shall be lost, says the Lord God.

So said the Lord: For three sins of Tyre, yea for four, I will not return them; Because they delivered a whole captivity to Edom and did not remember the brotherly covenant. And I will send fire into the wall of Tyre, and it shall consume its palaces.

So said the Lord: For three sins of Edom, yea for four, I will not return them: For pursuing their brother with a sword, and they destroyed their mercy and grasped forever their anger and kept their fury forever. And I will send fire into Teman, and it shall consume the palaces of Bozrah.

So said the Lord: For three transgressions of the children of Ammon, yea for four, I will not return them: Because they ripped up the pregnant women of Gilead, in order to enlarge their border. And I will kindle a fire in the wall of Rabbah, and it shall consume its palaces, with a shout on the day of battle, with a tempest on the day of the whirlwind. And their king shall go into exile, he and his princes together, said the Lord.

So said the Lord: For three transgressions of Moab, yea for four, I will not return them; for he burnt the bones of the king of Edom to lime. And I will send fire into Moab, and it shall consume the palaces of Kerioth, and Moab shall die amidst the tumult, with shouting, with the sound of the shophar. And I will cut off a judge from within it, and all its princes I will slay with him, says the Lord.

King Solomon and Non-Jews in the Temple

In Kings I 8:41-43 King Solomon prayed on behalf of non-Jews that came to the Temple to pray and offer sacrifices when he inaugurated the Temple to God:

And also to the stranger, who (is) not of Your people Israel, but will come from a far country for the sake of Your Name. For they shall hear of Your great Name, and of Your mighty hand, and of Your outstretched arm, and he will come and pray toward this house. You shall hear in heaven Your dwelling place, and do according to all that the stranger calls You for, that all peoples of the earth may know Your Name, to fear You, as (do) Your people Israel, and that they may know that Your Name is called upon this house that I have built.

The above indicates that non-Jews were coming to the Temple to pray and offer sacrifices. This gives us a glimpse into the reality at the time, that non-Jews had a relationship with Jews and Judaism without converting to it. We refer to those people as Noachides.

Back to Table of Contents

Is Belief In The Antichrist Monotheistic?

March 11, 2021 - Adar 27, 5781

What Is The Antichrist?

According to Christianity.com:

The word, "Antichrist," is only found in the Bible in 1 and 2 John and occurs both in singular and plural forms. It represents all that is hostile to God. In 2 Thessalonians 2, Paul refers to this person as the Man of Lawlessness. He puts himself in place of God’s law. That’s why he’s the Man of Lawlessness. And he’s a figure who the Bible repeatedly points to arising in the end times. There have been many, clearly, who are anti-Christ in one way or another, but here is the person who will be the distillation of opposition to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

This is basically identical to the Muslim view of the Antichrist (Dajjal), who is the "false messiah (al-maseeh al-dajjaal). According to Islamqa, he is:

...a man created by Allaah, who will appear at the end of time because of something that makes Allaah angry. He will spread corruption on earth and will claim divinity, calling on people to worship him. They will be tested by the extraordinary powers that Allaah will grant him, such as causing rain to fall, reviving the earth with vegetation and extracting the treasures of the earth. He will be a young man with a ruddy complexion, short of stature, with curly hair. He will be one-eyed; his right eye will be flat and his other eye will have a thick piece of flesh over it. Written between his eyes will be the word “Kaafir” (disbeliever). Most of those who follow him will be Jews. He will meet his end at the hands of ‘Eesa ibn Maryam (Jesus the son of Mary) who will kill him with a spear in Lod, which is in Palestine.

Why Is Belief In The Antichrist Not Monotheistic?

The problem is that belief in the Antichrist is rooted in a theologically dualistic understanding of God. Theological dualism is the "concept that the world is ruled by the antagonistic forces of good and evil." In our terms these antagonistic forces are God and Satan. In this worldview Satan is disobedient to God and seeks to overthrow Him. The Antichrist facilitates Satan's will and leads this battle against God at the end of times.

Judaism and Christianity differ in their view of Satan's relationship with sin. The Jewish view is that even sin falls under the domain of God's sovereignty, with Satan being the angel programmed to tempt humanity, and with angels having no free will. The Christian view is that Satan was the most supreme and beautiful angel who became proud and rebelled against God. Sin, therefore, is not a function falling under the domain of God's sovereignty, but is the attempt of a prideful free-willed angel to overthrow God's dominion.

If Satan rebelled against God and was cast out of Heaven, why does he have to follow particular rules? Either he rebelled and no rules apply to him, or he didn't and he has to follow all of the rules, but both cannot be true.

Islam differs slightly from Christianity and offers a description more similar to Judaism in which Satan's job is to tempt humanity. According to Islamqa's article Shaytaan’s Enmity Towards Man:

(Allaah) said: "Go, and whosoever of them follows you, surely, Hell will be the recompense of you (all) an ample recompense.

And befool them gradually those whom you can among them with your voice (i.e. songs, music, and any other call for Allaah’s disobedience), make assaults on them with your cavalry and your infantry, share with them wealth and children (by tempting them to earn money by illegal ways usury, or by committing illegal sexual intercourse), and make promises to them." But Satan promises them nothing but deceit. (al-Israa’ 17:62-64 – interpretation of the meaning)

Conclusion - If God Is Sovereign, Satan Cannot Be Disobedient

Even though Islam satisfactorily rejects certain theological errors in Christianity, such as the Trinity and the incarnation of God, its belief in the Antichrist commits the same theologically dualistic error as Christianity, although perhaps less dramatically. In Islam the Dajjal's job is to advance the goal of evil, but it isn't entirely clear that he is doing this on behalf of God's Will, but rather as a form of rebellion against Him. Anything that puts Satan's activity on earth outside of God's sovereignty falls outside the domain of monotheistic thought.

If Satan's job is to deceive Man, he is under God's control. But if he is disobedient to God, then he is not under God's control, which are mutually exclusive postulates. He cannot do his job properly while being disobedient to God any more than a rogue program can function correctly while inaccessible to the developer. Only God knows how to precisely oversee the process through which Man is tempted.

Therefore Satan's task of tempting Man needs to be performed without question to ensure that Man is tempted properly and to bring about the best good. Angels were therefore created without free will, including Satan. If they don't do their job properly, the system crashes, which can't happen as long as God is the Developer.

Exodus 20:3-5 - Prohibition Against Idolatry

Exodus 20:3-5

1) You shall not have 2) the gods of others 3) in My presence.

You shall not make for yourself a graven image or any likeness which is in the heavens above, which is on the earth below, or which is in the water beneath the earth.

You shall neither prostrate yourself before them nor worship them, for I, the Lord, your God, am a zealous God, Who visits the iniquity of the fathers upon the sons, upon the third and the fourth generation of those who hate Me..

לֹ֣א יִֽהְיֶ֣ה־לְךָ֩ אֱלֹהִ֨ים אֲחֵרִ֜ים עַל־פָּנַ֗י

לֹ֣א תַֽעֲשֶׂה־לְּךָ֣ פֶ֣סֶל | וְכָל־תְּמוּנָ֡ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר בַּשָּׁמַ֣יִם | מִמַּ֡עַל וַֽאֲשֶׁר֩ בָּאָ֨רֶץ מִתַּ֜חַת וַֽאֲשֶׁ֣ר בַּמַּ֣יִם | מִתַּ֣חַת לָאָ֗רֶץ

הלֹֽא־תִשְׁתַּֽחֲוֶ֣ה לָהֶם֘ וְלֹ֣א תָֽעָבְדֵם֒ כִּ֣י אָֽנֹכִ֞י יְ-הֹוָ֤ה אֱ-לֹהֶ֨יךָ֙ אֵ֣ל קַנָּ֔א פֹּ֠קֵ֠ד עֲוֹ֨ן אָבֹ֧ת עַל־בָּנִ֛ים עַל־שִׁלֵּשִׁ֥ים וְעַל־רִבֵּעִ֖ים לְשֽׂנְאָ֑י

---

Rashi

You shall not have: Why was this said? Since it says, “You shall not make for yourself, etc.” I know only that one may not make [graven idols, etc.] How do I know that one may not keep what was already made? Therefore, Scripture states: “You shall not have.” -[Mechilta]

...the gods of others: Heb. אֱלֹהִים אִחֵרִים, which are not gods, but that others have made them for gods over themselves. It is impossible to interpret this passage to mean: gods other than I, since it is a disgrace for Heaven to call them gods along with Him. Alternatively: strange gods, for they are strange to their worshippers. They cry out to them, but they do not answer them, and it appears as if it [the god] were a stranger, who never knew him [the worshipper]. — [from Mechilta]

...in My presence: Heb. עַל-פָּנָּי [This means] as long as I exist [signifying forever. God states this so] that you should not say that only that generation was commanded [prohibited] concerning idolatry. — [from Mechilta]

Ramban

You shall not have the gods of others in My presence: Rashi wrote, "Why was this said? Since it says, “You shall not make for yourself, etc." I know only that one may not make [graven idols, etc.] How do I know that one may not keep what was already made? Therefore, Scripture states: "You shall not have."

This Beraisa is indeed taught in the Mechilta. If so, this prohibition only means that a person is not allowed to have idols in his presence, for which he is not liable for the death penalty (because he did not actually make the idols). Therefore why did the Torah precede with the passive prohibition against having idols instead of the prohibition against bowing and worshiping them, which requires spiritual excision and the death penalty (i.e, the latter is more severe than the former. It would have made sense for the Torah to state the more severe sin before the lesser severe sin.)?

According to my understanding, this is not the intended halacha of this Beraisa, because it (20:3) is speaking about an individual's injunction, as is taught in Sifra (the beginning of Kedoshim), "...nor shall you make molten deities for yourselves," (Leviticus 19:4) implying that they can be made for him by others, and therefore the verse says, "nor... for yourselves" (to also prohibit you from having them made for you by others).

However, the verse says only "nor... for yourselves," which implies that you can make them for others, therefore the Torah uses the words "you (shall not make (plural)," to include both for yourselves or for others.

This is the basis of the principle that one who makes an idol for himself transgresses two prohibitions: 1) "you shall not make," and 2) "for yourselves." Rabbi Yosei's view is that making an idol transgresses three prohibitions: 1) "you shall not make" (for others) 2) "for yourselves," and 3) "you shall not have" (in your possession idols made by others). Therefore when Rabbi Yosei is among others, he is the one who says that "you shall not have" refers to the prohibition of owning idols, which is not the case according to the first opinion.

And this is also true according to the plain understanding from the wording (of the verse) "and the Lord will be my God..." (Genesis 28:21), and "...to be your God" (Leviticus 11:45). I.e, these are the positive injunctions opposite to the negative injunction discussed so far. That is to say that we shall not have aside from God any other gods from among any of the supernal angels or from among the hosts of the Heaven, which are called elohim (powers, forces). As it is said, "He who slaughters [a sacrifice] to the gods shall be destroyed, except to the Lord alone." (Exodus 22:19) The purpose of this is to prevent him from believing in any of them, to not accept any of them as his god, or to say "you are my god." This comports with the view of Onkelos, "Elah acherah bar mini."

Progressive Revelation

February 15, 2021 - 2 Adar 5781

What Is Progressive Revelation?

According to Blue Letter Bible, "The things that God revealed to humanity were not all given at once. His revelation was given in stages." This essay addresses four issues with the concept of progressive revelation. The first is that there are no indications of progressive revelation occurring within the Torah. The second is that progressive relation prevents people from knowing the truth in the present. The third is that the Trinity, a product of progressive revelation, is too similar to polytheism for comfort. The fourth is that once such a claim is made, it is repeatedly claimed by subsequent religions.

Issue 1 - One Does Not Observe Progressive Revelation In The Tanakh

It's easy to believe that progressive relation occurs as one crosses over from the Jewish Scriptures to the Christian Scriptures; this is exactly the argument you would expect somebody to make to authenticate their own scriptures. But progressive revelation indicates that it occurred either gradually or at certain intervals, with the Christian Scriptures being the final stage. That would mean that one would be able to identify progressive revelation occurring within the Tanakh, of which there are no genuinely satisfying examples.

The Blue Letter Bible says that the Tanakh is incomplete because it contains prophecies that remain unfulfilled: "In addition, the Old Testament records predictions that were still to be fulfilled. For example, the Old Testament ends with the promise of the coming of Elijah who will prepare the way for the promised deliverer - the Messiah." The unfulfilled status of the Tanakh's prophecies does not mean that it is flawed, it just means that those events have not occurred yet, and that their occurrence will not be canonized in the Tanakh. This is like saying that a teenager isn't perfect because they haven't reached maturity yet.

Out of a genuine respect for the Jewish Scriptures, the Blue Letter Bible assures us that being incomplete is not synonymous with being less true: "Progressive revelation does not mean to say that the Old Testament is somehow less true than the New Testament. The progress was not from untruth to truth - it was from less information to more full information." While this is a gracious nod to the Tanakh, equating "more" with "more correct" is nevertheless not always true. Sometimes less is more: "Do not add to the word which I command you..." (Deuteronomy 4:2)

Back to Top.

Issue 2 - It Prevents People From Knowing God In The Present

If God seeks people to know Him, why would He keep His true nature from His people and from the entire human race until a relatively late point in history? One explanation provided by Catholic.com relates the advice given to the author by a college professor: "A college professor of mine once said to be leery of someone who tells you everything about himself in the first five minutes you know him. Jesus did not do this, and neither has the Father."

While this may be true of strangers that you meet on the street or in the doctor's office, it isn't true of people with which you have a serious and intimate relationship. Nominally speaking, it's critical to discover the most important aspects of a person before, say, getting married to them. Insofar as the relationship between God and the Jews is like a marriage, it would be critical to have an accurate conception of God's Nature before going to the chuppah, which was Mount Sinai. It would be highly unfortunate to discover ten years into the marriage that your spouse was schizophrenic. Isaiah 55:8 says, "'For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways,' says the Lord." The way human beings do things is not necessarily the way that God does them.

Back to Top.

Issue 3 - The Trinity Is Too Similar to Polytheism

Perhaps God withheld the Trinity from the Jews due to the concern that they would confuse it with polytheism. This is another explanation advanced by Catholic.com: "In the Old Testament God needed to establish monotheism for the Jews to make them stand apart from all the polytheistic religions that abounded. Monotheism was almost unheard of, and if Yahweh had tried announcing that he is three Persons the people of the day might have misunderstood it as Tritheism, which is a heresy."

It does not evince much confidence in the Trinity to suggest that the Jews (or anybody else) would have mistaken it for polytheism. Surely the Jews had enough experience with said transgression, both from observing it all around them in a variety of forms, and from experiencing it first hand, to know the difference between polytheism and genuine monotheism. It is patronizing and insults peoples' intelligence to suggest that "God needed to establish monotheism for the Jews to make them stand apart from all the polytheistic religions" only to invite them into a relationship that was almost just as scandalous. If polytheism is prostitution, the Trinity is an escort service.

This site also argues that today "we have enough trouble trying to get people to believe in the one true God, let alone many. Thus the New Testament was a better time for God to have revealed his true nature, now that the danger of a polytheistic misunderstanding had been eliminated." What this ignores is that while polytheism is arguably not in fashion today, it was abundant in the era in which the New Testament was written and in the places that the Roman Empire occupied. The Trinity found itself in good company during that era and region and didn't overtly conflict with polytheism as Judaism did.

Back to Top.

Issue 4 - When Does Progressive Revelation Stop?

How do we know that progressive revelation has stopped on the Christian Scriptures? While Jews contend with Christians over the impossibility and error of progressive revelation into Christianity, Christians contend with more than one group, namely Muslims and Mormons. While the Muslim claim precedes Mormonism, Mormonism claims to be the correct understanding of Christianity. Each of these groups advances the notion that progressive revelation continued after the Christian Scriptures into their own scriptures; the Book of Mormon or the Q'uran. There is an old joke that Jews like to tell; Why did God create Mormons? So Christians would know how Jews feel.

According to the Mormon site The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints, "'The Book of Mormon is another witness of Jesus Christ and confirms the truths found in the Holy Bible. Far from undermining the Bible, the Book of Mormon supports its testimony of Jesus Christ. One passage says that the Book of Mormon “shall establish the truth” of the Bible “and shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the world; and that all men must come unto him, or they cannot be saved' (1 Nephi 13:40)."

According to Islamweb.net, "Allah, The Almighty, revealed the Quran to be His last, all-embracing Scripture containing the final manifestation of the Divine Law. This necessitates that it has to be safeguarded from the mischievous hands of men and from all corruption. This protection has been a reality from the time the Quran was revealed until today and will remain so forever." It also says that the "'Islamic Law is lasting, remaining suitable for every place and time, and embracing the goodness of the previous manifestations of the Law. Allah Says (what means): “And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it.' [Quran 5:48]"

The above explanations sound structurally similar to Christianity's description of the relationship between the Jewish and Christian Scriptures. According to Christianity.com: "The religion of the Old Testament is the embryo of Christianity. The Old Testament is the gospel in the bud. The New Testament is the gospel in full flower. The saints in the Old Testament saw many things through a glass darkly. But they all looked by faith to the same Savior and were led by the same Spirit as ourselves." It also says, "The relation between our Lord's teaching and that of the Old Testament is cleared up by our Lord in one striking sentence. He says, 'Don't think that I came to destroy the law, or the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill' (Matthew 5:17)."

What does the Torah say about this matter? Deuteronomy 4:2 says, "Do not add to the word which I command you, nor diminish from it, to observe the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you." While Christians, Muslims, and Mormons all understand this verse as a prohibition of adding to their own own scriptures, Jews see it in its original context of not adding anything to the Torah.

Back to Top.

Conclusion

A religion claiming to have received an updated vision will by definition reject all of its predecessor's objections. It rejects their objections on the grounds they were not the recipients of the new revelation. If they had received the new revelation then they would have no objections to it. This is a circular argument designed to prevent people from analyzing the contents of a prophecy critically.

There is therefore no good way to prevent new religions from forever claiming that they have received a new revelation, but there is a good way to prevent people from believing them. God explicitly inoculated the Jews against this form of deceit in two verses: Deuteronomy 13:1 through 6 and Deuteronomy 18:20: "Now if you say to yourself, 'How will we know the word that the Lord did not speak?' If the prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, and the thing does not occur and does not come about, that is the thing the Lord did not speak. The prophet has spoken it wantonly; you shall not be afraid of him."

In the latter verse, God legitimizes the Jews' suspicion that a prophet may be lying. This is demonstrated by the fact that He provides them with the criteria for distinguishing between true and false prophets. Claiming to have received prophecy to substantiate prophecy is considered to be an illegitimate means of verification. The only legitimate means of verification is empirical. In contrast to the Jews' complaining and rebelling against God in the desert, He does not see this question as a sign of stubbornness or rebellion, but as a sign of their willingness to follow Him.

Back to Top.

The Seven Noachide Laws

Are The Seven Noachide Laws Written In The Torah?

In the post titled Gentiles and Jews, we described how the distinction between Gentiles and Jews came into existence and why. In this post we establish the veracity of the Noachide Laws, show where they are mentioned in the Torah, and describe them.

The first question that's on everybody mind is "How do we know that the Noachide Laws are legitimate and not human fabrications?"

The first point that needs to be made clear is that the Oral Law was Divinely revealed as well as the Written Law. Very briefly put, the way that the majority of the commandments are written in the Torah makes it virtually impossible to know how to observe them; the Torah presents many of them in a completely ambiguous fashion and omits many or all necessary details. One who seeks to observe them will find that he has to supply contextual information for himself. This is typically accomplished by creating interpretations usually based on extra-Biblical academic studies combined with one's own anecdotal information.

The Written and Oral Torah were designed to complement each other. The Written Torah will often refer to an idea or commandment in shorthand, and the Oral Torah will expound on it to explain its meaning. In short, whether one wishes to observe either the Mosaic or the Noachide laws, reliance on the Oral Law is critical. Technically speaking while there is no need for the Written Torah to refer to the Oral Torah, perhaps out of mercy for us God made actual references to it in the Written Law.

Interestingly enough, they were not revealed publicly all in one place and time as the Torah was, and pre-exist any written material; the verses that we read were not written until after the Exodus from Egypt. Instead, they were progressively revealed apparently within the context of events relating to them. The people in Genesis seem to have known them via communication with God and transmission of information, which indicates that they were "public knowledge."

For more information about Noachide resources, see the My Noachide Family YouTube channel, which is full of videos.

What Are The Seven Noachide Laws?

The Seven Noachide Laws are:

1. Do not deny God: Genesis 2:16. See Noachide Law 1.
2. Do not blaspheme God: Leviticus 24:15. See Noachide Law 2.
3. Do not murder: Genesis 9:6. See Noachide Law 3.
4. Do not engage in incestuous, adulterous or homosexual relationships: Genesis 2:24. See Noachide Law 4.
5. Do not steal: Genesis 2:16, Genesis 21:25. See Noachide Law 5.
6. Do not eat of a live animal: Genesis 9:4. See Noachide Law 6.
7. Establish courts/legal system to ensure law obedience: Genesis 9:6. See Noachide Law 7.

1. Do Not Deny God

Show/hide

Genesis 2:16 says, "And the Lord God commanded man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat." This text focuses on the Name Elokim to derive this commandment. The singular tense Elokim is one of the Divine Names for the One God. According to AskNoah.org, "But the same word is used in the non-holy plural sense to refer to physical or conceptual idolatries (other “gods”), as in the verse “You shall not have the gods of others in My presence.” (Exodus 20:3). Therefore, Genesis 2:16 implies that people are permitted to serve only Elokim, "...the One Who commands mankind..." but no idols.

2. Do Not Blaspheme God

Show/hide

According to Leviticus 24:15, "And to the children of Israel, you shall speak, saying: Any man who blasphemes his God shall bear his sin." The Hebrew for "any man" is written "ish ish," which literally means "a man, a man." The Oral Law explains that such textual anomalies indicate an embedded message, in this case the reference to any man, i.e., whether Jew or Gentile.

Further, Leviticus 24:10-16 indicates that violating this commandment is a capital offense. The root prohibition is found in Exodus 22:27.

3. Do Not Murder

Show/hide

The Torah says, "Whoever sheds the blood of man through man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God He made man." (Genesis 9:6)

The word "whoever" indicates both Jews and Gentiles.

This prohibition also seems pretty clear from Genesis 4:8-13 that Cain committed a sin by murdering Abel although God had not yet explicitly or implicitly stated that it was prohibited. God only pronounces the prohibition five chapters later after Noah and his family left the ark.

4. Do Not Engage in Sexual Immorality

Show/hide

The Torah says, Therefore, a man shall leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh (Genesis 2:24).

The verse above covers five of the six sexual unions forbidden by God to Gentiles, as follows:

1. Therefore, a man shall leave his father: the prohibition against union with his father’s wife. 
2. ...and his mother:  the prohibition against union with his mother.
3. ...and cleave to his wife: the prohibition against union with another man's wife.
4. ...and they shall become one flesh: the prohibition against union with another man, or with an animal.

The sixth prohibited sexual union for a Gentile is to have relations with his maternal sister according to Genesis 20:12: And also, indeed, she is my sister, the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife.

According to AskNoah.org, "Note that Abraham said this to appease Abimelech. It was actually only figuratively true in his case, since Sarah was the daughter of Abraham’s brother. They had the same paternal grandfather, whom people often referred to as “father”.) It was also universally accepted that father-daughter relations would be prohibited, as evidenced by the disgrace of Lot after he had relations with his two daughters, following G-d’s destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:29-36, and Rashi’s explanation of Genesis 20:1). Relations between females are likewise an abomination to G-d. This is one of the subjects of the verse Leviticus 18:3, which speaks against the immoral practices of the ancient Egyptians and Canaanites, and which Leviticus 18:30 refers to as “abominable traditions.” About these the Midrash specifies: 'A man would marry a man, a woman would marry a woman, and a woman would be married to two men.'"

Genesis 34:7 may also be a reference to this. Rashi explains that verse as follows: and such ought not to be done-: to violate virgins, for the nations (the general population) had refrained from illicit relationships because of the Flood. — [from Gen. Rabbah 80:7]

5. Do Not Steal

Show/hide

According to AskNoah.org, "The prohibition of theft is contained within the permission which God granted to Adam and Hava (Eve) in Genesis 2:16 to eat from the trees of the garden. This implies that if the permission had not been granted, they would have been forbidden to do so, since the property did not belong to them. This Noahide commandment is cited explicitly by Abraham in Genesis 21:25: And Abraham contended with Abimelech about the well of water that the servants of Abimelech had forcibly seized.

This and other related sins are also referenced in Rashi's commentary on Genesis 6:11: was corrupt: Heb. וַתִּשָּׁחֵת is an expression of immorality and idolatry. (other editions add: immorality, “for all flesh had corrupted (הִשְׁחִית) its way,” and idolatry), as in (Deut. 4:16): “Lest you deal corruptly (תַּשְׁחִיתוּן).” - [Sanh. 56b, 57a]

...and the earth became full of robbery: Heb. חָמָס, robbery. (other editions add: as it is said (Jonah 3:8): “and of the dishonest gain (הֶחָמָס) which is in their hands.”) - [Sanh. 108a]

Rashi's commentary on Genesis 13:7 also mentions theft: And there was a quarrel: Since Lot’s herdsmen were wicked, and they pastured their animals in fields belonging to others, Abram’s herdsmen rebuked them for committing robbery, but they responded, “The land was given to Abram, who has no heir; so Lot will inherit him, and therefore this is not robbery.” But Scripture states: “And the Canaanites and the Perizzites were then dwelling in the land,” and Abram had not yet been awarded its possession. [from Gen. Rabbah 41:5]

6. Do Not Eat The Limb of a Living Animal

Show/hide

Before leaving the Ark, Noah and his family were permitted only to consume plant life and vegetation; once leaving, God permitted them to consume meat, and hence added the commandment in Genesis 9:4: But, flesh with its soul, its blood, you shall not eat.

7. Establish Courts of Justice

Show/hide

The Torah says, "Whoever sheds the blood of man through man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God He made man." (Genesis 9:6) This commandment is the obligation to judge and penalize a murderer.

According to AskNoah.org, "This is explained as follows by the Talmudic Sages: “Whoever sheds the blood of man” (referring to the murderer), 'among man' (i.e., he is to be prosecuted in a court by a man who is qualified to testify as a witness), “his blood shall be shed” (if convicted, he is liable to capital punishment by the court). The Noahide Code commanded through Moses at Mount Sinai specifies that Gentiles are similarly obligated to bring transgressors of the other Noahide commandments to justice in a court of law."

References to the Oral Law in Other Parts of the Tanakh

Interestingly enough, the Written Torah includes references to the oral details pertaining to the following:

• The Oral Law in general - Exodus 18:13-22, Leviticus 26:46, Deuteronomy 17:8-11
• Mosaic laws - Jeremiah 17:19-24, Nechemiah 13:15-22, Isaiah 56:2, 58:13-14
• Noachide laws - I Kings 8:41-43