An Account of My 2015 Email Debate with Two Jewish Apologists, Jared and May – Part 6 on Whether Worshiping Jesus Means Worshiping a False God

Jared April 22, to me, May
Hi Randall,

I’m going to let May respond to all of your points but reading through your response I did have a couple of thoughts:

You state with gusto:
“Jesus was living this life as we would have to live it, not depending on his deity but rather submitting to the Father and depending on the Holy Spirit for everything. He was purposely not accessing His omniscience. And of course he would talk intimately to His Father. The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit have been in intimate conversation for all eternity before we existed. We are social beings because we are made in the image of the social Being.”

The questions I have are as follows:

1)Wouldn’t you think if G-d had spoken to his son Jesus and the Holy Spirit for all eternity and before we existed (as you state) that he would have mentioned this somewhere in the Torah. It’s not exactly a minor detail you’d want to leave out when communicating with your chosen people.

2)If you believe in the New Testament than in Matthew 27:46 you read that Jesus says “my god my god why have you forsaken me”

Why would he use the word “God” here if he himself was God or one third of God as you seemingly believe.

Why would he not know the plan if he was connected with the almighty as you suggest? Wouldn’t he think “hey this is part of the process – I have to die now – no one is forsaking me?

The last point I want to make is that in your response you said something about looking for the mystery in torah – if this were required surely G-d would have instructed us to seek the mystery in his words. He didn’t, in fact he made it as clear as possible by giving us commandments…if we were to look for mystery than these would be up for interpretation. It’s a huge reach and risk in my eyes to be trying to find hidden meanings in very clear instructions (or ‘law’ as the Torah is translated as)

Randall Johnson April 22, to Jared, May
Yes, I have some gusto. As to your points:

1. Why would you suppose that God would have to reveal everything about Himself in the Old Testament? And given the proclivity of Israel to idolatry it might have been too much for them to handle. But I would not presume to say I know why He didn’t reveal all this. Certainly there was expectation that with the coming of Messiah there would be new revelation and new practices, or there should have been. Frankly, for most of us, it took knowing Jesus to be able to embrace these changes. The very fact that there is a “New Covenant” predicted in Jeremiah says that the Old Covenant is obsolete and growing old and ready to vanish away (to quote the author of Hebrews). Why would you not expect new understanding rather than the same old way of thinking. The very writing of the law upon hearts and minds is a huge shift in and of itself. Besides, the hints found in the Old Covenant about multiple Yahwehs and identification of Yahweh with the messenger of Yahweh are substantial and must be wrestled with in our understanding of who God is. [And may I ask you a cultural question: Is my use of Yahweh offensive to you in any way?]

2. Jesus, as you know, is quoting from Psalm 22. So he is identifying with David’s life experience and applying it to himself, showing, I believe, that he sees the psalm as messianic in a typical fashion, as I have explained in some of our earlier interaction. But even so, this doesn’t have to be a matter of simply adopting the language of Psalm 22 because Jesus, as I indicated, willingly gave up the use of his divine nature in submission to the Father and the task of securing our redemption. He naturally related to the Father as God, which He is, and the use of “God” in the New Testament is often tantamount to “Father” in its usage. And of course, he did know the plan, as evidenced by his prayer in the garden of Gethsemane. That doesn’t mean he was not anguished by it and his words quoting Psalm 22 reflect that same anguish, the very anguish David felt as his enemies seemed to gain victory over him. And as our sin substitute God was really “forsaking” him for the moment as a judgment, causing Jesus to be our substitute so that we would not be forsaken.

3. I don’t know about looking for mystery, but the mystery is thrust upon us and the “plain” reading of the texts I have offered about 2 Yahwehs in Genesis 18&19 and the texts about the Angel of Yahweh are key ones, as is Psalm 110, which strongly asserts that David’s authority (his adonai, his master, who could be none other than Yahweh) was told by Yahweh that he would make his enemies his footstool. This is a clear prophecy about Messiah, David’s son, who is nonetheless David’s Lord. You’d better wrestle with that “mystery” or you are not doing justice to the Word of God. The same may be said about the Daniel 7 prophecy about the one like a son of man who shares glory and worship with the Ancient of Days.

Jared April 22, to me, May
There is no offence taken – Yahweh is a term that some choose to use and I don’t believe you’re intending to offend.

The thing is, in many of the passages I’ve referenced in previous emails – G-d makes it specifically clear to keep these commandments for eternity – and one of those is to have no other gods besides him. There really isn’t much wriggle room there. When G-d instructs us to observe his commandments and laws forever – especially to have no other gods beside him (forever) we as Jews keep to that , we take it very seriously.

The messiah is much further down the pecking order – he’s a king like many who have come before… The word Moshiach means anointed. He is not and will never be G-d. The Torah speaks more about the state of the world when Moshiach comes, rather than his personal attributes – it certainly never says he will be Divine.

If we are strictly speaking about the Moshiach – nowhere in the scriptures does it say the Moshiach will come and then die and then return. If you believe I am mistaken then I would be grateful if you could share the Torah passage that says that.

If Jesus was the Messiah – he did not fulfil the requirements and since there is no place where it states the Messiah will die and return to fulfil the requirements – I have to assume that this too is an attempt by Christianity to create some kind of mystery as you call it into these sacred texts.

 

Randall Johnson April 22, to Jared, May
I don’t put any gods before God. I would direct you to the responses I sent to May for my justification that Jesus did fulfill the prophecies concerning Messiah. The aspect of his coming and dying and coming again is definitely implied in the passages that speak of his suffering and then reigning. God didn’t have to be that specific for you to believe His Messiah when He sent Him, especially since He attested Jesus’ was from Him by his miracles and authoritative teaching, and then most powerfully by his resurrection.

Jared April 22, to me, May
By worshipping Jesus, Christians are praying to another being. When g-d said you shall have no other gods beside me there was no mention of “oh and my son in the future will be excused from this list”

Let’s go with your logic for a moment and assume (as you do) that this was ‘implied, as was the idea of the Messiah coming back to life. What do you think G-d’s purpose was be to be so explicit about all of his commandments yet obscure about these details? Wouldn’t you think making that clear would be important?

Furthermore you said: “the Old Covenant is obsolete and growing old and ready to vanish away (to quote the author of Hebrews).” See this covenant you call old was G-d’s word… He was the author. You seem to disregard that and rely on words written by man (author of Hebrews). By doing that you are putting man above G-d. G-d makes it clear that the Torah or what you call Old Testament is eternal:

Deuteronomy 11:1[Therefore] you shall love the Lord, your God, keep His charge, His statutes, His ordinances, and His commandments, all the days. (All the days… Meaning forever)
27The blessing, that you will heed the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you today;
28and the curse, if you will not heed the commandments of the Lord your God, but turn away from the way I command you this day, to follow other gods, which you did not know.

It’s worthwhile reading the whole chapter but effectively you have said to me that you think G-d had a change of heart from his instructions. Ponder that for a moment…Is that what you believe the Almighty does (changes his instructions)? If so you would have to then believe it’s possible for him to change his mind again in the future? So for all intents and purposes you believe then it would be possible for the Almighty to change his mind about what you feel he instructed you to believe about Jesus? If this is unclear – my point is that by suggesting (as you have that G-d changed his mind )- he could do it again and it would then be possible for Jesus to be invalid one day?

Clearly we as Jews believe G-d never changed his mind and we try to keep the Torah eternally. The only thing ‘Old’ about our Torah is that it was delivered to us a few thousand years ago – everything else about it is not old in our hearts – rather eternal.

Jared April 22, to me, May
I want to reiterate that no offence is meant in any of this correspondence and I admire the passion you have for your faith. We can agree that having faith (providing it does not encourage violence or evil) is certainly better than atheism.

All the best

Randall Johnson April 23, to Jared
I’ll try to respond as I did in the document I sent, which I believe has already addressed some of your comments.

[You, Jared, wrote] By worshipping Jesus, Christians are praying to another being. When g-d said you shall have no other gods beside me there was no mention of “oh and my son in the future will be excused from this list”

If the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one being, as Christianity teaches, then we are not worshiping another being than God.

Let’s go with your logic for a moment and assume (as you do) that this was ‘implied, as was the idea of the Messiah coming back to life. What do you think G-d’s purpose was be to be so explicit about all of his commandments yet obscure about these details?

I suppose it might be kind of like raising kids. At first you have rules adapted to their childhood, like, love your brother and sister, love your parents, obey your parents, don’t go into the street without your parents holding your hand, don’t play with the blue ray player, etc. As they mature some of these rules remain the same (love for family), some change (look both ways before you cross the street, be careful with the blue ray), and some new ones are added (brush your teeth twice a day). In adulthood you still expect love for family, obeying parents gets dropped, needing help to program the blue ray gets incorporated and you begin bugging them to make you grandparents. There is a developmental factor that needs to be considered but your purpose all along remains the same. You are trying to raise kids who will become independent, responsible adults who love the Lord.

I think God has done the same with the human race.

[Jared responds] I think that is a nice picture you have painted, however you are comparing raising a family which is something humans do, to the work of the Almighty. We are flawed, we make mistakes, we are imperfect. G-d our creator is Almighty, and to suggest that he had to develop his laws because he didn’t get them right the first time is insinuating that G-d makes mistakes. We simply don’t believe that and it is here I feel I have to say we disagree and probably can’t move on from this point because your belief as outlined above is clearly that G-d’s laws needed to develop and change. Again whether you are intending to or not you are putting human traits into G-d with these examples.

[I respond] This is not saying God didn’t get it right the first time, it is saying we aren’t ready for all He needs to teach us. There is a maturing of the human race that takes place just as much as in a child. God is entirely consistent in what He is doing. He is the one who has created families and parenting to follow His model as a Parent. It is not giving Him human traits but living out the pattern He gave us in Himself. Everything we are and do is analogous to something in Him. We are made in His image.

Wouldn’t you think making that clear would be important?

It is important, but that is why God told us through Moses to look like a prophet like him who would make clear to us what we need to know, and Jesus was that prophet, and so much more.

[Jared responds] There were plenty of other prophets who told us what we need to know – he didn’t suggest any would be his son (as Christianity teaches). That is a big detail that I guess with your response you are acknowledging G-d decided to leave out.

[I respond] I think that is exactly what He suggested. Psalm 110 very clearly describes the Messiah as David’s Lord and yet distinguishes Messiah from Yahweh (personally, I would argue, and not essentially). Of course, in this prophecy it is Messiah’s priesthood that is being taught more so than his prophetic role. This is another strong evidence from God that the Aaronic priesthood is not the last word.

Furthermore you said: “the Old Covenant is obsolete and growing old and ready to vanish away (to quote the author of Hebrews)”

See this covenant you call old was G-d’s word… He was the author. You seem to disregard that and rely on words written by man (author of Hebrews).

I’m actually relying on God’s words. He is the one who labeled it the New Covenant and explained that the old covenant did not work. And of course it didn’t work because Israel couldn’t make it work, because Israel failed to keep it, because despite free will there was no commensurate ability to be obedient. God’s new covenant is the application of the unconditional promise to Abraham to circumcise our hearts to love the Lord and obey Him, it is the pouring out of the Holy Spirit into our hearts, a future action that Joel describes in chapter 2, a new thing, if you will, that the Old Testament anticipates, the writing of the commands on our hearts and minds. Of course the Old is obsolete, and the writer of Hebrews is absolutely correct about that and as one of the prophets we recognize as from God he speaks for God.

[Jared responds] This is an incredibly bold statement – The New Covenant was written by man not G-d. Plenty of Jewish people are able to keep the law – but you bring me to an interesting point. Christians believe that the only way to atone for sin is by belief in Jesus. Yet G-d made it very clear that sin atonement comes in the form of prayer and charity. When speaking about Yom Kippur, A day dedicated to sin atonement he says”

“This shall be an eternal law for you: On the tenth day of the seventh month you must fast and not do any work … This is because on this day you shall have all your sins atoned, so that you will be cleansed. Before God you will be cleansed of all your sins. (Lev. 16: 29-30)”

G-d uses the word ‘eternal’ – which means forever. I guess you have to ignore the word eternal (meaning forever) or come to the belief that G-d made a mistake. Again, this seems to be a common theme here.

[I respond] I am confused by this. The New Covenant is Yahweh’s idea, not man’s, as Jeremiah 31, Ezekiel 36&37 and other passages makes clear. He is the one saying there is a need for a New Covenant, not me, and that powerfully testifies to the obsolescence of the Old Covenant which He specifically says Israel could not keep. No one keeps the covenant perfectly and so no one escapes the penalty for failure to keep it.

And it seems the whole point of Yom Kippur is that atonement is only acquired by the sacrifice of the two animals, one whose blood is carried into the Holy of Holies and the other that is taken outside the camp. He even emphasizes the inability to acquire this through self-effort by saying it is proceeded by fasting and not working. I can’t help but think that your appeal to prayer and charity being the way to atonement is that you don’t have a temple to offer sacrifices anymore. You have changed the message of the Old Testament to accommodate your situation.

By doing that you are putting man above G-d. G-d makes it clear that the Torah or what you call Old Testament is eternal:

Deuteronomy 11:1[Therefore] you shall love the Lord, your God, keep His charge, His statutes, His ordinances, and His commandments, all the days. (All the days… Meaning forever)
27The blessing, that you will heed the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you today;
28and the curse, if you will not heed the commandments of the Lord your God, but turn away from the way I command you this day, to follow other gods, which you did not know.

It’s worthwhile reading the whole chapter but effectively you have said to me that you think G-d had a change of heart from his instructions.

Ponder that for a moment…Is that what you believe the Almighty does (changes his instructions)?

I don’t believe He is changing His mind but is working out the thing He promised in the garden, bringing about the rise of the seed of the woman (not the seed of the man, you’ll note) who will bruise the head of the serpent, and doing that developmentally first through the administration of removing Adam from the garden and dealing with lawbreakers like Cain without the imposing of the death penalty, then after the flood imposing the death penalty through human government, then choosing one family of the earth alone through whom He would mediate His blessing, then rescuing Israel from Egypt after 400 years of slavery and having them oust other nations from the land promised to Abraham and giving them a written law to govern this nation. And in none of the changes in those administrations did He change His mind, though undoubtedly people thought He had because things seemed so new. But finally the seed of the woman came, proved by his miracles that he was from God and was the expected successor to Moses.

If so you would have to then believe it’s possible for him to change his mind again in the future? So for all intents and purposes you believe then it would be possible for the Almighty to change his mind about what you feel he instructed you to believe about Jesus?

If this is unclear – my point is that by suggesting (as you have that G-d changed his mind )- he could do it again and it would then be possible for Jesus to be invalid one day?

Clearly we as Jews believe G-d never changed his mind and we try to keep the Torah eternally.

The only thing ‘Old’ about our Torah is that it was delivered to us a few thousand years ago – everything else about it is not old in our hearts – rather eternal.

As I explained there are “eternal” aspects to the Old Covenant, but the imposition of the New Covenant requires that some aspects of the Old must be abrogated and new things introduced. Do not fail to reject the New Covenant that God is bringing out of unwarranted clinging to the Old.

[Jared responds] See my point above about how you must clearly believe he changed his mind on sin atonement: If need be I can quote you at least ten chapters off the top of my head that make it clear sin atonement can come in the form of prayer or charity. I’m assuming you also believe he changed his mind about dietary laws too.

One thing you did not address is my point about your belief opening the door to things changing again – if new things could be introduced in the past, by that logic they could be introduced again. Similarly if you believe keeping Kosher is a thing of the past and irrelevant then how can you be certain belief in Jesus will not be irrelevant in the future?

To go with that logic you have to assume change can happen at any time.

I think this is probably a good place to leave it – but I do appreciate your reply. I want to leave you with something to read

https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2012/01/12/forms-of-communication/

[I respond] The consistent message throughout the Old Testament is that faith in God’s promise is the basis for a saving relationship with God. Adam believes God’s promise and names His wife Eve, so God sacrifices an animal and clothes Adam and Eve (removing the clothes that represent their efforts to please God). Abraham believes God and it is reckoned to him as righteousness. David talks about the blessedness of the one to whom sin is not imputed. The Passover shows that believing what God says about the death of the firstborn and choosing to show that by blood on the lintels demonstrates this principle. The New Covenant itself conveys this (You can’t keep the Law, God must do a work in your heart and mind to make that happen). This will never change. We just see the fulfillment of it in Jesus, who is the Messiah and whose sacrifice is the obvious reality behind the animal sacrifices.

If God does choose to make changes yet, that is His prerogative is it not? But I believe all the changes He has introduced are consistent with His overall plan and well anticipated by the words of the prophets. Please especially interact with me about Psalm 110.