The law books contain clues that indicate that the five books we have today could not have been written by a single individual (Moses, or otherwise). If Moses wrote a book, it would not be the first five books we find in the Bible. Moses is supposed to have written the book of the law (Genesis to Deuteronony) in one night and read it the next morning (Exodus Chapter 24 verse 4) One could argue that he was a fast writer and an even fast reader. However, we are also told that the entire law code was carved into the sides of a single altar, but it is hard to imagine the whole of those five books carved into the side of a single altar (Deuteronomy Chapter 27, Joshua Chapter 8 verse 35). The text would have to be microscopic and who have taken a long time.
A long list of Kings of Edom who reigned in centuries after the death of Moses is found in Genesis Chapter 36 verse 31. Place names are referred to that did not exist until long after the death of Moses. In Genesis, Abraham went to Dan, a place name given long after Joshua. The tribe of Dan migrated to the northern most part of the country and took over some land, which they then renamed >(Judges Chapter 18 verse 27) . In the Genesis account Abraham goes to the city of Dan in Genesis chapter 14, but 'Dan' is not born until a later chapter, which takes place after the death of Abraham. "When Abram heard that his kinsman had been taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen of them, and went in pursuit as far as Dan." (Genesis Chapter 14 verse 14)"Abraham breathed his last and died in a good old age." Genesis Chapter 25 verse 8)"Then Rachel said, "God has judged me, and has also heard my voice and given me a son"; therefore she called his name Dan." (Genesis Chapter 30 verse 6)
Moses died without ever being allowed to cross the Jordan, and the writer, who as the statement implies, is on 'The other side of the Jordan' looking back in the following sentence: "Beyond the Jordan, in the land of Moab, Moses undertook to explain this law." (Dueteronomy Chapter 1 verse 5). Similarly the writer surfaces repeatedly in the manuscript to insert commentary which clearly indicates a later date of composition. There are phrases such as "the Canaanite was then in the land." (Genesis Chapter 7 verse 6) and "...and the Canaanite and the Perizzites dwelled then in the land." (Genesis Chapter 3 verse 17) and "And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem,...and the Canaanite was then in the land." (Genesis Chapter 12 verse 6)
In the following passage the author is
writing after the time that Israel had conquered the land, long after
the time of Moses. "The Horims also dwelt in Seir beforetime; but the
children of Esau succeeded them, when they had destroyed them from
before them, and dwelt in their stead; As Israel did unto the land of
his possession, which YAHWEH gave unto them" (Deuteronomy
Chapter 2 verse 12) .."And these are
the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any
king over the children of Israel." (Genesis
Chapter 36 verse 31) ... "The sceptre
shall not depart from Judah nor a lawgiver from between his feet,
until Shiloh come." (Genesis
Chapter 49 verse 10)
Both of these passages indicate a time of
composition no earlier than the time of the first kings of Israel
(Saul and David). The first lists the Kings of Edom who reigned
'before there were any kings in Israel', which implies that at the
time of the composition there were kings in Israel, and the second
assumes that Judah had 'the sceptre' (referring to a time no earlier
than that of King David). Note that the following passage refers back
to the time when the Israelites were 'in the wilderness' suggesting
that the author was writing at a time when they no longer were there
(and this could not have been Moses, who was not allowed to leave the
wilderness with the people). "And while the children of Israel were
in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the
Sabbath day." (Numbers
Chapter 15 verse 32) It is then stated
that no one knew what to do with the man who had gathered sticks on
the Sabbath.
Now, if we follow the traditions in Exodus, while Moses
was on the mountain, and long before the Israelites went wandering
through the wilderness, God had given Moses laws explaining exactly
what to do in such a situation. "Whosoever does any work in the
Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death." (Exodus
Chapter 31 verse 15)According to
Exodus, the matter had been determined on Mount Sinai, and according
to Numbers 'no one knew what to do,' and Moses had to go and find
out. Therefore it is obvious that Moses could not have been the
author of what to do in Exodus 31. The alternative tradition of the
Sabbath law in the book of Numbers continues: "Those who found him
gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the
congregation; and they put him in custody because it had not been
declared what should be done to him. Then YAHWEH said to Moses, "The
man shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone
him with stones outside the camp." So all the congregation brought
him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, just as
YAHWEH had commanded Moses." (Numbers
Chapter 15, verse 33)
There are numerous passages that indicate knowledge of the existence of the temple. These are particularly numerous in Deuteronomy, where one of the main themes is centralization of worship, a concept that was unknown and not practiced in earlier manuscripts, where sacrifices and offerings were made in diverse places, and the practice presented no problem. Other examples include: "The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring into the house of YAHWEH thy God." (Exodus Chapter 23 verse 19)No 'house' or temple, existed until after the time of King Solomon. "I have not dwelt in any house since the time that I brought up the children of Israel out of Egypt, even to this day, but have walked in a tent and in a tabernacle." (2 Samuel Chapter 7 verse 6)
Let us now examine the following scriptures -
"For only Og the king of Bashan was left as the sole survivor of the
Rephaim; his bedstead of iron was nine cubits was its length, and
four cubits its breadth. It can still be seen in the Ammonite town of
Rabbah." (Deuteronomy
Chapter 3 verse 11)"All Bashan used to
be called Rephaim. Jair son of Manasseh captured all the region of
Argob as far as the Geshurite border. There are still tent villages
there bearing his name." (Deuteronomy
Chapter 3 verse 13) .
The reference to Manasseh is a reference to the conquest of the land
as described in various ways in Joshua and Judges. Moses did not live
to enter the land and these events took place after his death. The
author is also writing about events in the past, for Manasseh is said
to have captured these places at some time in the past, and now 'in
the present time' there are 'still towns bearing his name.' The
wording indicates that a considerable amount of time had passed, for
it would not be remarkable or worth mentioning that 'towns still bear
his name to this very day,' if the events described were not already
part of distant history. Similarly the 'giant bed' could still be
seen, another fact worth noting if one wishes to 'prove' that some
historical event took place by directing readers to the location of a
religious relic
There is abundant evidence to support the
testimony of the prophet Jeremiah who testified that the laws
concerning burnt offering and sacrifice were not brought by Moses. He
also testified that the Levites were forging the laws of God
(Jeremiah 8: 8) and his testimony is consistent with the evidence
that the Bible itself provides.
There is abundant evidence that Levitical regulations were unknown
early in the period of the two kingdoms, as recorded particularly in
the books of Samuel, the earliest 'historical' manuscripts in the
Bible. For example we know that the judge and prophet Samuel was from
the tribe of Ephraim. The lineage of his father was described in the
opening passage of the books. "There was a certain man of
Ramathaimzophim of the hill country of Ephraim, whose name was
Elkanah the son of Jeroham, son of Elihu, son of Tohu, son of Zuph,
an Ephraimite."
(1 Samuel Chapter 1 verse 1)
The rules regarding the priesthood and priestly duties, such as
sacrifice or burning incense restricted the practice to only Levites,
from the tribe of Levi. Later the definition of a priest was narrowed
even further, by restricting it only to those Levites who were
considered linear descendants of Aaron the Levite. The law code is
quite explicit and clear on these matters. "And of Levi he said, Give
to Levi thy Thummim, and thy Urim to thy godly one. They shall teach
Jacob thy ordinances, and Israel thy law; they shall put incense
before thee, and whole burnt offering upon thy altar."
(Deuteronomy Chapter 33 verse 8)
The book of Leviticus, closely connected to the Aaronite cult in the
Jerusalem temple, defines a priest more narrowly, as an Aaronite, and
also describes their duties. "And the sons of Aaron the priest shall
put fire on the altar, and lay wood in order upon the fire; and
Aaron's sons the priests shall lay the pieces, the head, and the fat,
in order upon the wood that is on the fire upon the altar."
(Leviticus Chapter 1 verse 7)
The regulations are so strict that any 'Aaronite' Levite who tried to
perform the priestly functions would be put to death (in the Aaronite
Numbers source). "And you (Aaron) and your sons with you shall attend
to your priesthood for all that concerns the altar and that is within
the veil; and you shall serve. I give your priesthood as a gift, and
any one else who comes near shall be put to death."
(Numbers Chapter 18 verse 7)
In the early works of Samuel, we are told
that "David's sons were priests.'
(2 Samuel Chapter 8 verse 18) It was
a law that only Levites from the tribe of Levi were allowed to be
priests, however they allowed David's sons, who were from the tribe
of Judah, and also of 'mixed origins' (Moabite-Israelite) to serve as
priests, even though the Law stated, "No Ammonite or Moabite shall
enter the assembly of YAHWEH; even to the tenth generation none
belonging to them shall enter the assembly of YAHWEH for ever ... You
shall not seek their peace or their prosperity all your days for
ever."
(Deuteronomy Chapter 23 verse 3) .
The regulations then specify that an Egyptian or Edomite could enter
the assembly after a few generations. (But Moabites were banned
forever.) "You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother;
you shall not abhor an Egyptian, because you were a sojourner in his
land. The children of the third generation that are born to them may
enter the assembly of YAHWEH."
(Deuteronomy Chapter 23 verse 7)
David's sons were disbarred from the priesthood both by being from
the tribe of Judah, and by being of mixed origins, and were also
barred, by Levite regulations, from even participating in the
assembly of the people at the Temple, much less being priests, for
the reasons of being both of mixed origins, and specifically of
Moabite lineage
We know that Samuel was from the tribe of Ephraim. He was not a Levite, and he certainly was not an Aaronite Levite (depending on how strict you want to get about those rules.) Nevertheless he proceeded to build an altar. Samuel did not restrict himself to sacrificing on his personal altar in Ramah, but he also sacrificed at the High Places in Gilgal (1 Samuel Chapter 10 verse 8) . Samuel is portrayed as knowing God personally and in very good favor with God. "And Samuel grew, and YAHWEH was with him and let none of his words fall to the ground. And all Israel from Dan to Beersheba knew that Samuel was established as a prophet of YAHWEH. And YAHWEH appeared again at Shiloh, for YAHWEH revealed himself to Samuel at Shiloh by the word of YAHWEH." (1 Samuel Chapter 3 verse 19) But according to the Torah, Samuel should have been put to death. "And you (Aaron) and your sons with you shall attend to your priesthood for all that concerns the altar and that is within the veil; and you shall serve. I give your priesthood as a gift, and any one else who comes near shall be put to death." (Numbers Chapter 18 verse 7)
Samuel also practiced the priestly rites of
consecration. "And he said, "Peaceably; I have come to sacrifice to
YAHWEH; consecrate yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice."
And he consecrated Jesse and his sons, and invited them to the
sacrifice."
(1 Samuel Chapter 16 verse 5) But
Samuel was not the only one offering sacrifices. Everyone was
offering sacrifices. All the people offered sacrifices. "So all the
people went to Gilgal, and there they made Saul king before YAHWEH in
Gilgal. There they sacrificed peace offerings before YAHWEH, and
there Saul and all the men of Israel rejoiced greatly."
(1 Samuel Chapter 11 verse 15)
David's family sacrificed as well, every year. "If your father misses
me at all, then say, ?avid earnestly asked leave of me to run to
Bethlehem his city; for there is a yearly sacrifice there for all the
family.'"
(1 Samuel Chapter 20 verse 6).
David also sacrificed. He also wore the priestly ephod. "And it was
told King David, "YAHWEH has blessed the household of Obededom and
all that belongs to him, because of the ark of God." So David went
and brought up the ark of God from the house of Obededom to the city
of David with rejoicing; and when those who bore the ark of YAHWEH
had gone six paces, he (David) sacrificed an ox and a fatling. And
David danced before YAHWEH with all his might; and David was girded
with a linen ephod."
(2 Samuel Chapter 6 verse 12)
And Absalom sacrificed "And while Absalom was offering the
sacrifices, he sent for Ahithophel the Gilonite, David's counselor,
from his city Giloh."
(2 Samuel Chapter 15 verse 12)
King Solomon sacrificed. He also burned incense, which the priests
also forbade. "Three times a year Solomon used to offer up burnt
offerings and peace offerings upon the altar which he built to
YAHWEH, burning incense before YAHWEH. So he finished the house."
(1 Kings Chapter 9 verse 25)
There is an explicit reference to the ban on being concerned for Moabites found in (Deuteronomy Chapter 23 verse 3) "No Ammonite or Moabite shall enter the assembly of YAHWEH; even to the tenth generation none belonging to them shall enter the assembly of YAHWEH for ever ... You shall not seek their peace or their prosperity all your days for ever." which is a direct attack on the 'half breed Moabite' David dynasty. The highest officials are presented as the ones most guilty of the offence. Keep in mind that the entire book of Deuteronomy takes place in Moab, and that the Moabites were friendly with the Israelites, indicating that the anti-Moab polemic in Deuteronomy is a later addition
Was The Levitical-Deuteronomic juridical, hygienic and liturgical codeThe law books specifically state that the laws of sacrifice were part of the Laws of Moses which he received while on Mount Sinai. "This is the law of the burnt offering, the grain offering and the sin offering and the guilt offering and the ordination offering and the sacrifice of peace offerings, which YAHWEH commanded Moses at Mount Sinai in the day that He commanded the sons of Israel to present their offerings to YAHWEH in the wilderness of Sinai." Leviticus Chapter 7 verse 37.
According to Jewish teachings, which have been accepted without question by the Christian church at large, all the juridical, hygienic and liturgical code as recorded in the Torah (Genesis to Deuteronomy) was given to God by Moses on Mount Sinai. Hoeever The prophets, Paul and even Jesus questioned the belief that God via Moses was not the author of the Levitical laws found in the Pentateuch, at least not all of it. Rather, they called these Levite regulations human commandments, added later by the Jewish leaders (scribes, pharasees etc). They even went so far as to call some of the laws found in books like Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, 'the doctrines of demons'. Let us examine what they said.
JeremiahIn the book of the prophet Jeremiah we read that not only was Moses not the author of the Torah, but that the sacrificial system was a form of rebellion against God, and that the laws of God represented as coming from Moses were actually forged by the priesthood. "Thus says YAHWEH of hosts, the God of Israel, "Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices and eat flesh. For I did not speak to your fathers, or command them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But this is what I commanded them, saying, "Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you will be My people; and you will walk in all the way which I command you, that it may be well with you? Yet they did not obey or incline their ear, but walked in their own counsels and in the stubbornness of their evil heart, and went backward and not forward." (Jeremiah Chapter 7 verse 21).
A common 'apologetic' dodge is to insist that 'animal sacrifices were not ordained when the people came out of Egypt, but rather later. But Leviticus 7: 37 states that the laws of sacrifice were part of the Laws of Moses that Moses supposedly received while on Mount Sinai; "This is the law of the burnt offering, the grain offering and the sin offering and the guilt offering and the ordination offering and the sacrifice of peace offerings, which The Lord commanded Moses at Mount Sinai in the day that He commanded the sons of Israel to present their offerings to The Lord in the wilderness of Sinai."
This statement clearly conflicts with the version of events given by Jeremiah who makes his condemnation of the law books explicit in Jeremiah 8: 7: "My people do not know The ordinance of The Lord. How can you say, We are wise, and the law of The Lord is with us? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes has made it into a lie. The wise men are put to shame, they are dismayed and caught; Behold, they have rejected the word of The Lord, And what kind of wisdom do they have?"
IsaiahThis rejection of Mosaic authorship is echoed in the book of Isaiah. Chapter 1 verse 11 says, "What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices? says The Lord; I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams and the fat of fed beasts; I do not delight in the blood of bulls, or of lambs, or of goats. When you come to appear before me, who asked this from your hand? Trample my courts no more; bringing offerings is futile; incense is an abomination to me. New moon and Sabbath and calling of convocation (the people together), I cannot endure solemn assemblies with iniquity. Your new moons and your appointed festivals my soul hates; they have become a burden to me, I am weary of bearing them."
Every one of the practices condemned as abominations by Isaiah in the following passage is advocated in the law books and supposedly commanded by God to Moses.
Isaiah 66:3 says: "But he who kills an ox is like one who slays a man; He who sacrifices a lamb is like the one who breaks a dogs neck; He who offers a grain offering is like one who offers swines blood; He who burns incense is like the one who blesses an idol. These people have chosen their own ways and their souls revel in their abominations."
Isaiah refers to these practices as 'abominations' and, like Jeremiah, equates them with rebellion. They are all advocated in the law (Leviticus 9:4, Leviticus 22:27,, Exodus 29:41, Leviticus 2:1), supposedly delivered to Moses by God, the same God who then delivered messages condemning such practices to the prophets.
"...and an ox and a ram for peace offerings, to sacrifice before The Lord, and a grain offering mixed with oil; for today The Lord will appear to you." Leviticus 9:18 Then he slaughtered the ox and the ram, the sacrifice of peace offerings which was for the people; and Aarons sons handed the blood to him and he sprinkled it around on the altar."
"When an ox or a sheep or a goat is born, it shall remain seven days with its mother, and from the eighth day on it shall be accepted as a sacrifice of an offering by fire to The Lord."
"The other lamb you shall offer at twilight, and shall offer with it the same grain offering and the same drink offering as in the morning, for a soothing aroma, an offering by fire to The Lord."
"Now when anyone presents a grain offering as an offering to THE LORD, his offering shall be of fine flour, and he shall pour oil on it and put frankincense on it."
PsalmsThe tradition of rejecting Mosaic authorship of the law books is also found in the Psalms (Psalm 50:9) "I shall take no young bull out of your house nor male goats out of your folds. For every beast of the forest is Mine, The cattle on a thousand hills. I know every bird of the mountains, and everything that moves in the field is Mine. If I were hungry I would not tell you, for the world is Mine, and all it contains. Shall I eat the flesh of bulls or drink the blood of male goats?"
Psalm 40;6 - "Sacrifice and meal offering You have not desired; My ears You have opened; Burnt offering and sin offering You have not required."
Psalm 51;16).- "For You do not delight in sacrifice, otherwise I would give it; You are not pleased with burnt offering."
MicahDelivers a similar message in Micah 6:6: "With what shall I come before The Lord, and bow myself before God on high? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old? Will The Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does The Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God? (Micah quotes Deut. 10:12, 13)."
JesusThis prophetic tradition is carried on into the New Testament by none other than Jesus Himself. For example, in Mark 7:6-11, Jesus said of the Pharasees, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, 'This people honours me with their lips, But their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men. For you set aside the commandment of God, and hold tightly to the tradition of men - the washing of pitchers and cups, and you do many other such things." He said to them, "Full well do you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your traditions‚
Let us now consider the traditions surrounding the Sabbath found in the earlier law books, and ascribed to Moses. Exodus 20: 8 says; "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labour, and do all your work; but the seventh day is a Sabbath to The Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your manservant, or your maidservant, or your cattle, or the sojourner who is within your gates."
Exodus 31: 15 says; "Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to The Lord: whosoever does any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Therefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath forever throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever."
Exodus 35: 1 says: "And Moses gathered all the congregation of the children of Israel together, and said unto them, These are the words which The Lord hath commanded, that ye should do them. Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a Sabbath of rest to The Lord: whosoever does work therein shall be put to death. You shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations upon the Sabbath day. And Moses spake unto all the congregation of the children of Israel, saying, This is the thing which The Lord commanded."
Notice that the commandment is permanent and is said 'to last forever'. Failing to observe this instruction is reason enough to impose the death penalty as evidenced by Numbers 15:32-36: "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day ... And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as The Lord commanded Moses."
Jesus did not disagree with the principle of the Sabbath tradition, but had a totally different attitude and interpretation to it to that stated in the Jewish Law. Mark 2: 23 says: One Sabbath Jesus was going through the cornfields; and as they made their way his disciples began to pick ears of corn. And the Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?" And he said to them, "Have you never read what David did, when he was in need and was hungry, he and those who were with him: how he entered the house of God, when Abiathar was high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those who were with him?"
And he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath ... And they watched him, to see whether he would heal on the Sabbath that they might accuse him ... And he said to them, "Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do harm, to save life or to kill?" But they were silent. And he looked around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, and said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He stretched it out, and his hand was restored. The Pharisees went out, and immediately began plotting with Herod's men to bring about Joshua's death." (Mark Chapter 2 verse 23)
It is relevant here that corn does not have to be picked on the Sabbath. If one was unconcerned about the Sabbath, but wished to show respect for the traditionally religious, a person could, for example, make a point of picking all corn on the day before or the day after, thus avoiding controversy. However, as Mark's story shows, Jesus appears to have been deliberately provocative here, to make a point about the Law, what was actually given as the Law and why. After all, they were 'watching him' knowing full well that he would 'profane the Sabbath' and he certainly knew they were watching. And the Sabbath law was 'permanent' which was what one would expect since it was of 'divine origin.' If a man could be put to death for gathering a few sticks on the Sabbath, then certainly corn pickers and healers were guilty enough to die, especially when they were being provocative and flirting with death."
The Gospel of John picks up on this theme and is even more explicit. Here, Jesus healed on the Sabbath. John 9: 16: "Therefore some of the Pharisees were saying, "This man is not from God, because He does not keep the Sabbath." John 5: 18: "For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father." (John Chapter 9 verse 16, John Chapter 5 verse 18).
This theme is picked up in the book of Romans. "One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it for The Lord." (Romans 14:5). The writer of Hebrews 10:4 (many believe it was Paul the apostle) says: For [it is] not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. This is contrary to what the Law of Moses stated.
Matthew 15:6 further examines the stance Jesus took regarding the Law, but this time focusing on what is clean and what is unclean: "For the sake of your tradition, you have made void the word of God. You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: 'This people honours me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.'"
Immediately he turned to the people and said to them, "Hear and understand: It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a person." Then the disciples came and said to him, "Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?" He answered, "Every plant which my heavenly Father has not planted will be rooted up. Let them alone; they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit." But Peter said to him, "Explain the parable to us." And he said, "Are you as dull as the rest? Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and so passes on? But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a man. For out of the heart come evil thoughts."
This incident appears in Mark's gospel as well (Mark 7). Indeed, it is a common refrain in Mark's gospel that Jesus broke the 'Law of God' again and again, and each time Mark writes, "and they began plotting to kill him."
"How right Isaiah was when he prophesied concerning you, saying, 'this people pays me lip service, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain, for they teach as doctrines the commandments of men.' You neglect the commandments of God, in order to maintain your human traditions. How clever you are at setting aside the commandment of God in order to maintain your traditions...In this way by your traditions, handed down among you, you make God's word null and void. And you do many other things just like that. After He called the crowd to Him again, He began saying to them, "Listen to Me, all of you, and understand: there is nothing outside the man which can defile him if it goes into him; but the things which proceed out of the man are what defile the man. If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear." When he had left the crowd and entered the house, His disciples questioned Him about the parable. And He said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.)" (Mark Chapter 7 verse 6)
In this passage then, Jesus is literally saying that following the food laws showed one's 'lacking in understanding' of God's laws and that to practice the Torah's rulings is to follow a human tradition. Under such rulings, a rabbit for example could become an 'unclean animal' simply because it was mentioned as such in what is purported to be 'the law of Moses, given by God on Sinai'. There is nothing in human reason to make one think that a rabbit is in and of itself unclean.
The reference by Jesus to the passage in Isaiah about 'human commandments' is set beside the condemnation of laws about food and ritual washing to make the point that these laws, though they were found in the Torah, were actually human commandments and human traditions. In Isaiah we also find a condemnation of religious rote, and rule after rule (a little taken from here, a little taken from there, rule after rule) to create a form of worship. When understood in the context of the teachings of the prophets, Isaiahs words are obviously, once again, a condemnation of the law books:
"To whom would He teach knowledge, And to whom would He interpret the message? Those just weaned from milk? Those just taken from the breast? "For He says, rule on rule, rule on rule, Line on line, line on line, A little here, a little there." Indeed, He will speak to this people through stammering lips and a foreign tongue, He who said to them, "Here is rest, give rest to the weary," And, "Here is repose," but they would not listen. So the word of The Lord to them will be, "rule on rule, rule on rule, Line on line, line on line, A little here, a little there," That they may go and stumble backward, be broken, snared and taken captive. Therefore, hear the word of The Lord, O scoffers, who rule this people who are in Jerusalem, Because you have said,
"We have made a covenant with death, And with Sheol we have made a pact. The overwhelming scourge will not reach us when it passes by, For we have made falsehood our refuge and we have concealed ourselves with deception." Therefore thus says The Lord God, "Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a tested stone, A costly cornerstone for the foundation, firmly placed. He who believes in it will not be disturbed. I will make justice the measuring line And righteousness the level; Then hail will sweep away the refuge of lies And the waters will overflow the secret place. Your covenant with death will be cancelled, And your pact with Sheol will not stand; When the overwhelming scourge passes through, Then you become its trampling place. As often as it passes through, it will seize you; For morning after morning it will pass through, anytime during the day or night, And it will be sheer terror to understand what it means. The bed is too short on which to stretch out, and the blanket is too small to wrap oneself in. For The Lord will rise up as at Mount Perazim, He will be stirred up as in the valley of Gibeon, To do His task, His unusual task, And to work His work, His extraordinary work. And now do not carry on as scoffers, 0r your fetters will be made stronger." (Isaiah 28:9)
These are some specific rules regarding unclean' (prohibited) foods as found in the books of the law (Deuteronomy 14:3): "You shall not eat any abominable thing. These are the animals you may eat: the ox, the sheep, the goat. Every animal that parts the hoof and has the hoof cloven in two, and chews the cud, among the animals, you may eat. Yet of those that chew the cud or have the hoof cloven you shall not eat these, because they chew the cud but do not part the hoof, are unclean for you. And the swine, because it parts the hoof but does not chew the cud, is unclean for you. Their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch?"
PaulIn Romans 14:14, Paul picks up on the theme of the gospel writers in summary form: "Everything I know about Messiah convinces me that nothing in itself is unclean (prohibited); but only if someone gets the idea into their heads that a thing is unclean' (prohibited) then for them it becomes unclean." The idea is expressed again in the epistles, but this time in more radical form. You will notice in the following passages that 'the demands of the law books' are considered the work of 'powers in high places' and are even equated with 'elemental spirits' and, as in the gospels and in the prophet Isaiah, the specific laws being referred to are called 'human commandments.'
"Having cancelled the law which stood against us with its legal demands; this he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example of them, triumphing over them. Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon, or a commandment. Let no one disqualify you, insisting on self-abasement and worship of angels, taking his stand on visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God ... Why do you submit to regulations, "Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch" (referring to things which all perish as they are used), according to human commandments and doctrines? ... Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth."
Other epistles (Galatians 4:3, Romans 14:14, Philippians 3:1, 13) echo these same sentiments: "So with us; when we were children, we were slaves to the elemental spirits of the universe. But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!" So through God you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son then an heir. Formerly, when you did not know God, you were in bondage to beings that by nature are no gods; but now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits, whose slaves you want to be once more? You observe days, and months, and seasons, and years! I am afraid I have laboured over you in vain. Everything I know about Messiah convinces me that nothing in itself is unclean (prohibited); but only if someone gets the idea into their heads that a thing is unclean' (prohibited) then for them it becomes unclean."
"To write the same things to you is not irksome to me, and is safe for you. Look out for the dogs, look out for the evil-workers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh. For we are the true circumcision, who worship God in spirit, and glory in Christ Jesus, and put no confidence in the flesh. Though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If any other man thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; as to the law a Pharisee, as to zeal a persecutor of the church, as to righteousness under the law blameless. But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ.
"Indeed I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own, based on law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith ... Brethren, I do not consider that I have made it my own; but one thing I do, forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Let those of us who are mature be thus minded; and if in anything you are otherwise minded, God will reveal that also to you. Only let us hold true to what we have attained."
The Torah law was clearly a subject of hot debate within the early church, otherwise Paul would not have believed it necessary to go into such detail on the subject. In the epistle of Paul to Titus the dispute appears to centre around 'clean and unclean' regulations. The 'Cretans' were apparently teaching an opposing doctrine, and are roundly condemned (and this passage is the source of the popular appellation that states that someone is a 'cretin' if they are stupid or foolish.)
"He must hold firm to the sure word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to confute those who contradict it. For there are many insubordinate men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially the circumcision party; they must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for base gain what they have no right to teach. One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, "Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons." This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, instead of giving heed to Jewish myths or to commands of men who reject the truth.
To the pure all things are pure, but to the corrupt and unbelieving nothing is pure; their very minds and consciences are corrupted. They profess to know God, but they deny him by their deeds; they are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good deed. But as for you, teach what befits sound doctrine ... The saying is sure. I desire you to insist on these things, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to apply themselves to good deeds; these are excellent and profitable to men. But avoid stupid controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels over the law, for they are unprofitable and futile. As for a man who is factious, after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is perverted and sinful; he is self-condemned." (Titus Chapter 1 verse 8, Titus Chapter 3 verse 8)
"If any one teaches otherwise and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching which accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit, he knows nothing; he has a morbid craving for controversy and for disputes about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, base suspicions, and wrangling among men who are depraved in mind and bereft of the truth." (1 Timothy Chapter 6 verse 3)
"As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, nor to occupy themselves with myths and endless genealogies which promote speculations rather than the divine training that is in faith; whereas the aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith. Certain persons by swerving from these have wandered away into vain discussion, desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make assertions ... hold faith and a good conscience. By rejecting conscience, certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith." (1 Timothy Chapter 1 verses 3)
"Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, through the pretensions of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and enjoin abstinence from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving; for then it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer. If you put these instructions before the brethren, you will be a good minister of Christ Jesus, nourished on the words of the faith and of the good doctrine which you have followed. Have nothing to do with godless and silly myths. Train yourself in godliness; for while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come. The saying is sure and worthy of full acceptance. For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, but especially of those who believe. Command and teach these things." (1 Timothy Chapter 4 verse 1)
"Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. Avoid such godless chatter, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness, and their teaching will eat its way like gangrene." (2 Timothy Chapter 2 verse 15)
"They hold the form of religion but deny the power of it. Avoid such people. For among them are those who make their way into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and swayed by various impulses, who will listen to anybody and can never arrive at a knowledge of the truth. As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of corrupt mind and counterfeit faith; but they will not get very far, for their folly will be plain to all, as was that of those two men. Now you have observed my teaching, my conduct, my aim in life, my faith, my patience, my love, my steadfastness, my persecutions, my sufferings, what befell me at Antioch, at Iconium, and at Lystra, what persecutions I endured; yet from them all THE LORD rescued me. Indeed all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil men and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceivers and deceived. But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus." (2 Timothy chapter 3 verse 5)
As these letters record, the church was involved in a struggle with those who either accepted or rejected the prophetic tradition and the traditions handed down about Christ for the Torah and its regulations. According to the Church Testament Church writers, who wrote in the Pauline tradition, and followed the tenets laid out in the gospel of Mark, there were quarrelsome, dogmatic types who insisted on the divine nature of the law of Moses (and no doubt would have had to have made an argument in favour of 'the infallibility of the Torah' to support this position' - as the writers noted they were always quarrelling with people about words, a practice which only ruined everyone's faith).
In Paul's letter to the Galatians, he reminds the church that Christ was crucified for his resistance to The Torah, and he reminds them that God had already blessed them for having faith in Christ on this matter, so what ever made them decide to turn aside to falsehood (the falsehood in this case being the doctrine that the Mosaic law was eternal and binding'). He next employs a metaphor of slavery to the Torah and the elemental spirits, and compares this to freedom through having faith in Christ on the matter.
He then reminds them that those who are trying to get them to keep the law of Moses are only doing so in order that they can escape the kind of persecution that Jesus endured (for being 'heretics'): "O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law, or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? Did you experience so many things in vain? Is it really is in vain. Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith? Thus Abraham "believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness." So you see that it is men of faith who are the sons of Abraham."
"I could wish to be present with you now and to change my tone, for I am perplexed about you Tell me, you who desire to be under law, do you not hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave and one by a free woman. But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, the son of the free woman through promise. Now this is an allegory: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. For it is written, "Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear; break forth and shout, you who are not in travail; for the children of the desolate one are many more than the children of her that is married."
"Now we, brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now. But what does the scripture say? "Cast out the slave and her son; for the son of the slave shall not inherit with the son of the free woman." So, brethren, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman. For freedom Christ has set us free; stand fast therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. Now I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. I testify again to every man who receives circumcision that he is bound to keep the whole law. You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. For through the Spirit, by faith, we wait for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love. You were running well; who hindered you from obeying the truth? This persuasion is not from him who calls you. A little leaven leavens the whole lump. I have confidence in THE LORD that you will take no other view than mine; and he who is troubling you will bear his judgment, whoever he is. But if I, brethren, still preach circumcision, why am I still persecuted? In that case the stumbling block of the cross has been removed. I wish those who unsettle you would mutilate themselves!"
"It is those who want to make a good showing in the flesh that would compel you to be circumcised, and only in order that they may not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. For even those who receive circumcision do not themselves keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may glory in your flesh. But far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. Peace and mercy be upon all who walk by this rule, upon the Israel of God." (Galatians 3:1, 20, Galatians 6:12)
The only people Jesus ever criticised during his three years of ministry were those people who rigidly abided by the Torah's rules and regulations. If these rules were God-given, as the books of the Law indicate they were, surely Jesus would have applauded their faithfulness to the Law and its teachings? The belief that Moses (as God's primary prophet to the Children of Israel) was not the author of the Torah, and that this part of the Bible is 'infallible' is not unique to Jesus - it is (ironically) a recurring theme of the Bible. It weaves its way through the Bible, in the books of the prophets, in the gospels, and in the letters that compose the Church Testament. It is not a novelty, nor is it a 'heresy' but as the record indicates, believing that the Torah was not inspired of God and, as such, is ungodly doctrine, was taught by Jesus, Paul, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah and King David (author of many of the Psalms). It is also quite revolutionary - it was one of the hotly contested core doctrines of the very earliest church and history records that it was so devisive, it split the church in two.
ConclusionPoor old Moses, one of the great patriarchs, is the one person whose reputation seems to come out of this a little worse for wear; or does it? A quick look through the first five books of the Bible show that none of it was written in the first person, such as "and God told me ..." Moses in fact never claimed he received the juridical, hygienic and liturgical code as recorded in the Torah (Genesis to Deuteronomy) from God on Moses on Mount Sinai, so his reputation remains intact. The only ones with egg on their faces are the scribes and pharases who concocted these 'traditions of men', and Jesus made it very clear in Matthew 23 what they have coming to them for doing that.
Whether we like to believe it or not, the Bible is at times contradictory (as appears to be that case here), and presents variant records of both historical events and doctrines, which on examination prove to be mutually exclusive. This is most obvious when considering 'history' as it is presented in the Bible (click here for examples). Let me give you a modern day example of mutually exclusive for those not familiar with the term. If one record of events said that I went out to buy milk on a specific Friday, and another record of events declares that on that same Friday I did not leave my house, the two records are mutually exclusive in that if one proves to be accurate, it excludes the other. Both cannot be true.
What appear to be conflicts in both recorded historical events and doctrine are found in the Bible (such as our case study), and they are also mutually exclusive. Thus, what passes for 'Bible based teaching' often consists of a process of selection and selective nullification, with the process of nullification submerged under the weight of controversial argument. Verses which contradict a certain dogma are said by those who support it to be 'misunderstood' or 'meant to be taken as metaphor rather than literally', while the favoured verse is always to be taken literally. An example is the number of days God took to create the world.
The fact that the same word 'day' is used in the creation story and by Jesus to declare "today is the day of salvation" does not deter them from believing that one reference is to a 24-hour period and the other is to an unspecified duration of time, even though the same word is used. The process of creating these 'theologies' is often strengthened by attacking and destroying certain offending Bible verses. Because of the contradictions, all theologians must nullify the Bible by upholding certain verses while destroying the authority of others. Whether they believe it or not, all theologians destroy Bible verses, but some are up front and direct in their attacks, while others attempt the slippery task of destroying Bible verses by way of subterfuge.
The Bible actually presents a range of positions on almost every issue. Many Christians don't want to believe this, but the fact remains that it is so. I think God allowed this purposefully to show us how easy it is to be sidetracked by human thought and ungodly conclusions when we cease to listen to, or more to the point, fail to recognise the voice of the Lord and to discern the difference between His words and the voice of human reasoning. The Bible is full of examples of such occurences, and are there, I believe, to warn us that these things happen in our quest for God. The Bible is, after all, a witness to man's contact with God over the ages, and will therefore include examples of people not getting it right. Fortunately, as is the case with the Torah, the truth is always revealed eventually, and it is by that revelation that we are able to determine truth from error. As Jesus said, by our fruit we are known.
The only time these contradictions cause us problems is when we take ever word we read in the Bible as having been literally spoken and authenticated by God. Nowhere in the scriptures or in Christ's teaching are we ever told to do this. Some people quote 2 Timothy 3:16 in support of that belief; "All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness". That verse speaks only of scripture being inspired and profitable - it says nothing about all scripture being the literal 'spoken words' of God nor does it define what is scripture and what isn't. Jesus, Jude and James all quoted doctrines found only in the Book of Enoch, one of the books of the Apocrypha.
Over a hundred phrases in the New Testament find precedents only in the Book of Enoch. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that Jesus had not only studied the book, but also respected it highly enough to adopt and elaborate on its specific descriptions of the coming kingdom and its theme of inevitable judgment descending upon "the wicked". Nevertheless, it was left out of the Bible when it was being put together, as it was not considered to be 'inspired by God'. Should Jesus, Jude and James have quoted doctrines from a book that was not inspired, or did the scholars who put the Bible together get it wrong? Martin Luthur wanted the books of James, Hebrews and Revelation removed from the Bible because they didn't proclaim Christ, and therefore were not inspired. Clearly, what is and what isn't 'inspired scripture' is undefined and it is a brave - dare I say foolish - person who dares to say which is which.
Many contemporary Bible teachers believe that the sixty-six books contained in today's Bible are the sum total of the 'literal spoken words' of God to mankind. By saying the Apocrypha is not inspired, they in fact saying that Jesus, Peter and James taught false doctrines. This belief in the 'infallibility of scripture' ('scripture' being the 66 books of the Bible) demands that one accepts that Moses wrote the Torah. Any deviation from this belief is then held by such persons to clearly demonstrate a turning away from the authority of 'God's word.' Moses 'brought the law of God' as scripture states, but what Moses brought and what men added to it are two different things. However it turns out that much is submerged, nullified and rejected in order to maintain this obviously erroneous position. Keeping the Torah as anything other that man-made traditions means nullifying an impressive line-up of prophets including Christ himself, and Paul, the chief writer of the New Testament. Discredit them and you don't have much left, apart from (ironically) the Torah itself!
It would seem that the best way to honour the Bible, then, and to treat it with reverence, is to acknowledge the ideological conflicts in its pages, as Jesus, Paul, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah and King David did in this instance, something that is never done by either those who claim to be defending the Bible (by 'proving' it is 'inerrant') or by those who attack the Bible (who never treat the diverse voices on its pages with any sort of respect). To re-state Paul's argument on this matter, the righteous will live by faith (in God, not in a book about him), and it is ironic that in the context in which he says this, what he is really saying is that the righteous will live by faith in Jesus, irrespective of whether or not the Law was given by God to Moses, because it was, after all, a temporal era established to tie the Jews through until Jesus came.
Earlier I said that the Bible presents a range of positions on almost every issue. I believe God purposefully allowed this so that its readers would be able to see both sides of the coin, as it were, and in doing so, determine what is truth and what is not.
Design by W3layouts
