Was
the Old Testament YHWH actually Satan, and did Jesus teach that His Father was
NOT that YHWH?
Date originally posted: Oct 26/2018 (intro + parts 1-7) ||
I have a dear friend on
the eastern seaboard who recently contacted me about a young friend of his who
somehow became influenced by some 2000+ year old heresy, being taught by a
modern-day teacher on you tube.
The basic position is one of early Marcionism (and its precursor
among the pre-Christian gnostic) that the descriptions of the OT YHWH and the
NT Father was so different that the OT YHWH must have been evil and the OT
scriptures—therefore—could not be trusted.
This is basically the “God is the Devil” position, with the
difference being that it is only the OT GOD that is ‘the devil’ – not Jesus or
the Father.
So far, I have written 7 long installments on this (with more to
come, Lord willing).
Below is the outline of the points made, issues raised, and
evidences advanced. The outline points to just the aggregate sources—so you
have to go to the appropriate part and then look WITHIN for the specific point.
(Documents are both in HTML and PDF).
In part 1
[html,
pdf]
, these
were the Topics we covered:
1.
As
I understand his (or hers?) position, they seem to be saying that when Jesus
speaks of the Father, that Jesus cannot be speaking about Yahweh from
the Old Testament. Likewise, if Jesus says good things about ‘God’ (theos),
then this could not be Yahweh, the ‘god’ of the Old Testament.
2.
There
is an easy way to test this theory that when Jesus speaks of the Father, that
Jesus cannot be speaking about Yahweh from the Old Testament. Likewise,
if Jesus says good things about ‘God’ (theos), then this could not be
Yahweh, the ‘god’ of the Old Testament.
3.
First let’s look for verses
using the word FATHER and see if there are any EXPLICIT ties to the OT. YES
there is—in John 6.45
4.
Second, let’s note that Jesus
connects “Father” to “God” interchangeably in many places, as does the
very phrase “Son of God
5.
Third, are the passages tying
Jesus’ “God” to the YHWH of the OT—in approving ways (some dups again). In
some cases there are direct quotes from the OT. Most of the words
translated “Lord” in these have YHWH in the Hebrew originals. Note especially
the first one – the Shema – Jesus says that the greatest commandment is love
YAHWEH will all your being!
6.
There can be no
confusion here
– Jesus constantly states that His Father is God, and that His Father God is
the God of the Old Testament. The passages point to ALL of the HEBREW WORDS
translated God or Lord (YAHWEH, EL).
7.
Fourth, we should also note
how APPROVINGLY Jesus spoke of “God” (not just “Father”). He
consistently points His followers to trust in God, and to obey Him. In here
also are the verses describing Jesus as being WITH GOD (not just “FATHER”) and
going TO GOD (not just ‘FATHER”).
8.
So,
if we go on the EXPLICIT WORDS OF JESUS
ONLY ABOUT THE OT GOD--and not just a comparison of descriptions--we cannot describe Him as
anti-YAHWEH, or disapproving of YAHWEH, or calling YHWH evil, or even as a
rival or ‘better than YAHWEH’. He honors YAHWEH and challenges us to be ‘more
like our Father in heaven’—His father, YAHWEH (according to him).
In part 2
[html,
pdf]
, these
were the Topics we covered:
9.
Jesus
said explicitly: “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgement.”
10.
If we ONLY use appearances (like much of YS’s arguments are
based on), we would also have to believe
Jesus to be a liar, and to ‘change his mind’ (unlike the Father),
to use curses, and to speak under oath – based on NT data.
11.
As
students trying to know the Father better, we must align OUR BELIEFS about the
scriptures with JESUS teachings (either in the gospels or through his
student-emissaries).
12.
Jesus
trusted and used the OT as being truthful and accurate (even in
passages ascribed to YHWH), and affirmed that the scripture could NOT be
‘broken up’ into God-given and Satan-given parts. He never hinted at such a
bizarre notion.
13.
Who did Jesus think gave the 10 Commandments (the NT God or
Satan)—The NT GOD.
14.
Is only PART of the OT ‘breathed out by the NT god’ or ALL of
it? ALL OF IT was breathed out.
15. Was ANY
prophecy in the OT produced by ANYONE other than the Holy Spirit? NO
16.
In fact, were the predictions of the Messiah’s sufferings
produced by Satan or by the pre-Incarnate Christ himself? By the pre-Incarnate Christ himself!
17. Psalms 2
and 110 are by David and refer to the Son of YHWH—the messiah—as ‘breaking the nations with a rod of iron’
and calling on the nations to ‘Do homage
to the Son, that He not be angry and you perish—for His wrath may soon be
kindled’. 110 refers to the submission
of enemies at his feet and the ‘shattering
of kings in the day of His wrath”. Do the NT teachers believe Satan wrote
this or the NT God of Jesus? They
ascribed it to the NT God of Jesus.
18.
Isaiah 6 is referred to several times in the NT. It speaks a
word of judgment on Israel, saying ‘make their hearts dull… so they will not be
healed’. Do the NT teachers believe Satan wrote this or the NT God of Jesus
through Isaiah? They ascribed it to the
NT God of Jesus.
19. Jesus and
the NT authors cite, reference or allude to at least 200 OT passages—without
once expressing a doubt about God’s authorship or expressing some belief that
Satan authored them. They ABSOLUTELY TRUST, quote, and reference passages in:
·
all the books
of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy),
·
all of the
historical books (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles),
·
all of the
poetical books (Psalms, Proverbs, Job, and Ecclesiastes),
·
all the
Major prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel), and
·
most of the
longer Minor Prophets (Hosea, Joel, Amos, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and
Zephaniah).
20.
They LIVED the reality that ‘all scripture was God-breathed’.
They submitted to it, delighted in it, accepted it—even the ‘hard passages’ we will look at below. They found it to be
beautiful in character—connecting the OT YHWH with the NT God of Jesus and the
disciples:
21.
The hypocrisy that Jesus called out against often was likewise found in the OT prophecies of Isaiah—ascribed
to the God of Jesus/NT:
22.
The promises of YHWH to David are ascribed to the NT God, with
David being called a prophet pointing to the resurrection of Christ:
23.
The Word of God – the OT
scriptures from YHWH – was food for life, eternal power, and the source of the New Birth:
24. We asked
the soul-searcher question: The reader should stop here and face these
verses before the Father – do you accept the teachings of the New Testament
about the inspiration of the ENTIRE Old
Testament scriptures? – Jesus and the NT authors DID – do you trust THEM or
your own (or YS’) opinions more?
25. The beautiful text of 2
Timothy 2:15 does not teach anything like us needing to ‘separate the bible’
into good and bad verses!
26. The injunction to ‘test
the spirits’ in 1 John 4.1 had nothing to do with sitting in judgment over
passages in the Word of God.
In part 3
[html,
pdf]
, we covered these:
27. Soul
searcher question again:
can I trust Jesus when he tells me to trust the Hebrew Bible He used, taught,
submitted to, and interpreted His life/mission by’…
28. It should be crystal clear that Jesus and his disciples
believed that ‘all scripture was God-breathed’ and that all prophecy
was produced by the Holy Spirit, and that at least all messianic prophecy was
produced also by the Spirit of the (pre-Incarnate) Christ. In other words, the entire trinity wrote the Old Testament!
– The New Testament God (God of Jesus and His students), the Holy Spirit
(both author of the OT, and promised by Jesus to guide the NT authors into all
truth), and the pre-incarnate “second person of the Trinity”—the Son of God,
the Word, the pre-incarnate Jesus.
29. You need to be clear on
this – Jesus was not ‘confused’ about
the God of the OT being the Person He address as “God” or “Father”. Jesus’ disciples were not confused either—because
Jesus had taught them about the Father—their writings will show the same
identification of the OT YHWH with the NT GOD/FATHER. Jesus was a successful teacher and the promised Holy Spirit ‘sealed
the deal’ (“He will bring all things I have said to you into remembrance”).
30. Did the disciples of
Jesus believe the YHWH of the OT was the God of Jesus and His disciples? YES
31. Did Jesus' disciples
identify the God (of Jesus and the NT) with OT YHWH, even in imagery or
commands? YES
32. Do the Gospels and
Epistles show a Theos (GOD) that acted
like the OT YHWH? YES
33. Who created the world
according to Jesus and his disciples, their GOD or Satan? The NT God.
34. Who SENT THE FLOOD
according to Jesus and his disciples, their GOD or Satan? The NT God.
35. Who SPOKE out of the
burning bush according to Jesus and his disciples, their GOD or Satan? The NT God.
36. Who gave the 10
commandments and the Law ‘out of the fire’—the NT GOD or SATAN—according to
Jesus and his disciples? The NT God.
37. Who used force to free
the Israelites from suffering in the Exodus event and led them through the
events of the Wilderness Wanderings– The NT God or Satan? The NT God.
38. In fact, the NT
students of Jesus taught that it was the pre-incarnate Christ that did the
Exodus and wanderings???? Not SATAN??? Yes,
it was CHRIST.
39. Who drove the nations
out before Israel and Joshua at the “Conquest” – SATAN or the NT God? The NT God.
40. Did Jesus and his
students repudiate all blood sacrifices? (as not being from GOD who gave the
LAW)? Or did they still use them in the gospels and Acts? NOT AT ALL
41. All of these references
to YHWH in the OT are connected to the New Testament speaker’s or writer’s
God—the God/Father that Jesus revealed to them, imaged to them, taught them
about, and commanded them to emulate! Jesus and his students do not seem to be embarrassed in the least by these
passages. Many of us are. What do they know about God that we don’t?!
How can they TRUST this God? How can the disciples accept that Jesus worshipped
and submitted to and approved and even claimed to be SENT by such a one? Was
the life He lived in front of them somehow in consistent alignment with
the picture of OT YHWH He taught and they knew from the Hebrew Bible? That the
image of the Father He showed them, was consistent with the image of the OT
YHWH?
42. YS and others can talk
all day about fire and death and lies and cruelty and horrors they want in
these passages– but at the end of the day, our/your
judgment had better line up with the EXPLICIT and CLEAR and CONSISTENT
teachings of Jesus—from His own lips and from the lips and pens of His trusted
Spirit-empowered disciples.
43. Once you see this
clearly, you will either have to
REJECT JESUS (and this students) as being DELUDED
and therefore worthless as guides to
knowing God, or as being IN LEAGUE WITH
Satan in trying to deceive us; or have
to REJECT sources of teaching that deny what our Lord believed, lived, and
taught – the implications of all these passages (and upcoming ones) we bring to
your attention in these write-ups.
In part 4
[html,
pdf]
, we covered this:
44. We explored: “How different was Jesus from the OT
YHWH?”—finding the answer to be YES to all of these aspects of the question:
·
Did
Jesus and His disciples ascribe OT events to both YHWH and the pre-Incarnate
Christ?
·
Did
Jesus ever require ultimate allegiance to him – at the same level as YHWH?
·
Were
Jesus' God and YHWH opposite on their attitude toward death?
·
Did
Jesus share imagery with the OT YHWH?
·
Did
Jesus share titles with the OT YHWH?
·
Did
Jesus align himself with the emotions of OT YHWH?
·
Did
Jesus align himself with the morality of OT YHWH?
·
Did
Jesus' teaching align with those of OT YHWH (even affirming the Law of Moses)?
·
Did
Jesus submit willingly to OT Yahweh?
·
Did
Jesus TRUST, PRAY to, and SUBMIT to the God who 'crushed him’ (Is 53) as
"Father"?
·
Did
Jesus tell others to submit willingly to OT Yahweh?
·
Who
did Jesus think made Him the cornerstone?
These all show the alignment and
continuity of Jesus’ life with the revealed life of YHWH in the OT—in its
beauty and grace and truth and faithfulness.
45. Jesus warned of
judgment, and judgments in which HE was a key participant and agent. His first
sojourn on the earth was aimed at getting as many people as possible OUT OF the judgement,
but if they rejected the offer, they would still face Him in less
pleasurable settings (e.g. courtroom).
46. God will right the wrongs
in the future, but that this will necessarily involve loss to the oppressors.
47. Did Jesus repudiate the
promise of Yahweh's to correct imbalances, remove evil doers from our
environment, and reward the good (judicial vengeance, social justice)? Absolutely not—the Meek (for example) will
have their stolen lands ripped from the hands of the powerful who stole
them in the first place. Is this violence?—Yes, but it is correction of social
injustice and wrongs that flowed from the fall from innocence and the effects
of moral anti-good.
48. Did Jesus ever indicate
that he would punish, reject or push people away, in his future kingdom? DEFINITELY.
49. Did Jesus ever see
himself in prophecies that included words of judgment, vengeance,
recompense-for-deeds, and death? DEFINITELY.
50. This role as judge in
the future—as based on the prophecies about Him—was communicated to the
disciples who also shared that sobering ‘reality-check’ with those they were
sent to.
51. Did Jesus' disciples
ever indicate that he would punish, reject or push people away, in his future
kingdom? DEFINITELY.
52. Jesus did NOT repudiate
the promise of Yahweh's to correct imbalances, remove evil doers from our
environment, and reward the good (judicial vengeance, social justice). In fact,
His ministry of forgiveness was aimed at
producing a people of righteousness, but some evils and adjustments will
require a sovereign God and a fair-but-pure Jesus as Judge.
53. At the end of the day,
when we ask the question of ‘image of the father’ – was Christ really so
different from the OT YHWH that somebody could believe Jesus’ Father could NOT
HAVE BEEN the OT YHWH Jesus and His followers worshipped, honored, and tried to
obey—the likeness of the Son to the Father (the express image) becomes more and
more pronounced….
In part 5
[html,
pdf]
, we covered this:
54. I realize that this is
a lot of material, but I wanted to show how a close reading of the text—and the
related texts—show that there is no contradiction here about “the Face of God”.
Noting the visual words from the auditory words, noting the contrasts between
direct and dreams, and observing the use of the word ‘form’ of something to
mean something different than the thing itself should be enough to help one
soften and modify any earlier understanding that might construct a ‘case
against the God of Jesus’. [CONTRADICTION ABOUT FACE of YHWH]
In part 6
[html,
pdf]
, we covered this:
55. We saw that the texts
themselves showed us how the two parts of Ex 6 about God's names EL SHADDAI and YHWH both were historically true, how
they fit together, and how they showed the good heart of YHWH. [CONTRADICTION ABOUT NAME of YHWH]
In part 7
[html,
pdf]
, we covered this about Jesus' remarks about OATH taking:
56. There are ZERO verses
in God’s word that He will ALLOW you to ‘ignore’ – whether you ‘like’ your
current understanding of those verses or not. He is the God of Truth and will
FORCE YOU to face up to them as divine revelation (honored by the Son) and your
conscience and other people will stand at the judgment to testify whether you
TRIED to find the correct understanding or just followed the teachings of
another and ASSUMED god was evil.
57. There are ZERO verses
in God’s word that He will ALLOW you to presume His ‘guilt’ and then issue
deceitful explanations/excuses for (along the lines of what ‘theologians’ are
being accused of). If you don’t give Him a chance to ‘clear His name’—and just
judge by appearances—you are silencing God’s word.
58. Oaths were like our
court language (“I swear to tell the truth, the whole….”). They were legal constructs
that carried a penalty (or even ‘curse’) with it.
59. Taking the Lord’s name
in vain included to ‘swear falsely or deceptively)”:
60. Oaths were either the
veracity of an account IN THE PAST, or the certitude of a promise concerning
something IN THE FUTURE:
61. The curse part of an
oath is the basic meaning of the biblical word ‘swear’ (‘ala). It is simply the
agreement that one would accept the curse/consequences if they failed in
promise or attestation.
62. Vows were promises
about the future—either to persons or to God. They typically involved taking an
‘oath’ to fulfill the promise, but not all vows mentioned such a formal
pronouncement. The vow of the Nazarite, for example, has ‘makes a special vow,
the vow of a Nazirite’ which possibly included a public statement of intent,
although the priest is not involved until the end (or in the event of a
problem).
63. Vows are about ‘giving
something up’ – abstinence.
64. And—since it is
generally YHWH/God who is the generous giver (not us!) -- Vows were NOT
compulsory at all!
65. Both oath and vows were
regulated by the Law.
66. “Rash vows” sometimes
had an ‘escape clause’, but normally vows had to be fulfilled. God expected
truthfulness and integrity from His people, as He had demonstrated to them.
67. Oaths and swearing –
since they involved invoking a deity for enforcement – were restricted by God
to only Israel’s God YHWH. When oaths were required by the Law, they were
commanded to ONLY use the name of YHWH in the invocation:
68. The passages in
Deuteronomy occur right before Israel enters their first REAL TEST of fidelity
to YHWH – in the commands to avoid all OTHER “gods”. So the context of Deut
6.13 shows this clearly. The command is about not swearing in OTHER GODS’ names
– not about swearing itself:
69. This OT passage is just
a call to monotheism. God is the core, and anything involving a god (like
swearing) could only be done with YHWH. Again, it is no different than saying
that when you have to swear to testify in court, you cannot say “I swear to tell
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth—so help me Zeus”. You have to say
‘so help me God”. It is not telling you to go out making countless oaths, but
just that the oaths are regulated.
70. There is a special case
of swearing allegiance to God (or a king). This still involves an oath and is
even going to be a (theologically legitimate) part of the eschatological
future.
71. So:
·
Vows
were never commanded,
·
When
a vow was made, it must be faithfully done
·
When
you were required to swear in civil or religious ceremony, it could only be
done invoking YHWH as enforcer (and not another god)
·
When
you chose to create a legally-binding and theologically enforced covenant-level
verbal commitment, it could only be done invoking YHWH as enforcer (not another
god).
·
Any
swearing by YHWHs name must be absolutely truthful and performed (if a
commitment).
·
Any
swearing could only be in YHWHs name, in opposition to the names of other gods.
72. With that background
and looking at the passage now, the OT statement Jesus gives is this: You shall
not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord. The verses pointed
to by the first half are about NOT swearing – avoiding deceit – and there is no
‘command’ to swear there at all. (There are other situations in judicial proceedings
that require it, of course.). And the verses pointed to in the second half
explicitly say that the Israelites were NOT COMMANDED to make oaths/vows to
YHWH. So, it might be considered a false claim to say that “YHWH commanded
oaths to be taken”, whether in His name or not.
73. So, whatever Jesus is
referring to in this “but I say to you” statement, it cannot be considered a
repudiation (or vilification) of the two statements about oaths/vows referred
to in the opening slide.
74. So, what WAS His
antithesis about? Taking into consideration all the historical data between
Moses and Jesus, we see a strong parallel to His antithesis on divorce.
75. In our case, the abuses
of swearing had also proliferated hugely, even from OT times.
76. Swearing falsely can
only be done when you ‘swear’ and Jesus was cutting off much (but not all) of
that abuse.
77. In the OT, we see
YHWH’s displeasure at such deceit ‘in His name’.
78. So, these things were
problems in the OT itself, and between the testaments this growing use of oaths
and deceptive use of oaths was noted in the literature:
79. So, at the time of
Jesus we have a parallel situation to that of divorce: abuse of what was a basic
staple of covenant, court, legal, and diplomatic life: the oath, with an appeal
to God for witness and enforcement.
80. [The same motif can be
seen in YHWH’s frequent condemnation of ‘empty’ or ‘manipulative’ sacrifices in
the OT. Sacrifices offered with pure hands and heart were accepted and honored;
Israelites that offered sacrifices in malice or deception were ordered to NO
LONGER bring them. No contradiction—just a conditional.]
81. And this heightening of
the law’s intent was not in itself a new law, because we noted earlier that
Jesus accepted the high priest’s order to swear under oath, that there are
several legitimate oaths by believers in the NT, and that there will be oaths
of allegiance in the Kingdom of the Son. And we should note that Jesus’ own use
of “amen” -- (“truly, I say unto you”) even sounds more than a simple “YES” or
“NO” – and looks like a ‘solemn’ marker. Why did he use that word in front of
simple statements—instead of just the simple statements THEMSELVES? Why say
“Truly, I say to you…” instead of “I say to you…”?
82. Jesus never actually
said that those OT laws themselves were authored by the Evil one—only that
anybody using such devices in His time would be creating LESS TRUTH (e.g. evil)
than simply being honest.
83. In fact, the Greek construction
there is not clear on whether the reference is to “general evil” or to “General
Evil – i.e. Satan), so it is presumptuous to say that it is a CLEAR reference
to SATAN, when the text itself is not so precise:
84. At the end of the day,
the data indicates that Jesus was neither nullifying the use of oaths in
required settings, nor was He somehow vilifying the YHWH of the OT in this
passage. Like the divorce antithesis and the retaliation antithesis, He was
calling people back to the core VALUES in the OT
passages—truthfulness/transparency, fidelity/loyalty to one’s spouse, and
pre-emptive goodness as a deterrent to social evil—instead of ‘instant
revenge’. [OATHS.]