THE TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE
Yisroel Blumenthal
INTRODUCTION
Sola scriptura - Solely scripture. Scripture alone
and nothing else. This is the rallying cry of Protestant Christianity.
Protestant Christianity accepts no divine message other than the one that they
believe to be recorded in the Jewish and Christian scriptures. Consequently,
Protestant Christianity rejects any component of the national Jewish tradition
that is not recorded in the books of scripture.
Earlier in this work we articulated the Jew’s rejection of
this position. The same medium that informed the Jew that the Jewish scripture
is an authentic document also informs him that there is more to the teachings
of Moses. If God expected us to accept one portion of the testimony of our
ancestors, there is no reason to assume that He wants us to reject the other
portion of that same testimony. Furthermore it is only by means of the
unwritten teachings of Moses, that the Jewish scriptures were canonized. So the
Protestant insistence on rejecting any unwritten message from God is not very
rational.
The missionary activity of Protestant churchmen belies the
Protestant’s loyalty to the axiom of Sola scriptura. If the missionaries truly accepted the
principle of “Sola Scriptura”, their methodology would be entirely unlike the
methods they actually use. If scripture is truly the only authorized divine
communiqué as the missionary would have us believe, they would limit themselves
to distributing copies of scripture and would do nothing more. If the principle
of “Sola Scriptura” is the factual basis for Protestant Christianity, a plain
reading of scripture should teach the reader everything there is to know about
Christianity. All one would have to do is to pick up a copy of the scriptures,
and read them from cover to cover. The fact that the missionaries find it
necessary to go beyond the distribution of Bibles, tells us that they feel that
something is lacking in the axiom - “Sola Scriptura.”
One who fully accepts the Protestant position, that God
chose the books of scripture to transmit His message to the future generations,
to the exclusion of every other medium of communication, should educate his
children accordingly. He should teach his children
Hebrew and Greek, and hand the child the two books of the Jewish and Christian
scriptures. Any other educational tool should be forbidden. After all, the
Protestant argues that God did not authorize the usage of any method to
communicate His message outside of scripture.
The obvious absurdity of the aforementioned proposal
brings to light one of the obvious faults of the Protestant position. If we
were to take the Protestant principle “Sola Scriptura” to its logical
conclusion, no one could begin a relationship with God until they have covered
the 30,000 verses of the Hebrew scriptures. This is
surely untrue. Scripture clearly indicates that its message is relevant to a
living nation, and is certainly not limited to an elite group of scholars. It
is obvious that God expects natural human interaction to play a role in the
transmission of His words to the future generations.
It is not only the child who requires a human connection
to help him grasp the message of scripture. The wisest scholar also requires
living human interchange in order to approach the scriptures. In order to begin
to comprehend scripture, one must have a working knowledge of the language of
scripture. We must appreciate that language is more than a collection of words.
Language in general, and the language of scripture in
particular, will take an abstract and intangible concept and express it in a
single word. A necessary prerequisite to comprehension of scripture is the
understanding of concepts such as:
Each individual society has its own perspective, and its
distinct understanding of God, Holiness, law and Prophecy. These words have one
meaning for the Jew, another meaning for the Christian, and yet a different
connotation for the Moslem. Each society will read scripture using their own
particular dictionary.
A child who was taught that the
Church is the new
The fact of the matter is that God presented the Jewish
scriptures to the Jewish society. In these books God directly addresses the
Jewish nation. All others who read this holy book must bear this simple fact in
mind. Any non-Jew reading the Jewish scriptures is reading a record of God’s
directives to the Jewish nation. The only dictionary to be
used when reading this book is that of the society to whom the book is
addressed - the Jewish people. The true language of scripture,
is the language of the Jewish people. When scripture says the word “God”, it is
referring to the Jewish concept of God. When scripture makes reference to
concepts such as holiness,
The Protestant missionary would protest. The missionary
would argue that one should clear his mind of all preconceived notions, and
approach scripture with a blank slate. The Jew would point out that God never
expected scripture to be read that way. God Himself taught the Jewish people the
concept of “God” before He gave them scripture. Were the Jewish people to erase
from their minds everything that God had taught them before they began to read
scripture? Moses directed the nation for forty years before he gave them his
Five Books. Were the Jewish people to forget all that they had learned from
Moses before they began reading his books?
The Jew cannot accept the missionary approach to the
Jewish scriptures. It is clear to the Jew that God expected the scriptures to
be read in light of the previous teachings. Still, the Jew was always willing
to meet the missionary on his own turf. The Jew saw clearly that if one were to
read scripture without the benefit of the unwritten teachings of Judaism, they
would still recognize the errors of Christian doctrine. As long as one manages
to free oneself of Christian influence, they will find that scripture clearly
supports the Jewish belief system.
In the following chapters we aim to present the scriptural
evidence that supports the Jewish belief system. We will also analyze the
scriptural quotations that missionaries submit in their effort to validate the
Christian belief system, and the Jewish response to these arguments.
When scripture is being quoted as an arbitrator between
the Jewish and Christian belief systems, it would be helpful to become
acquainted with the framework of discussion. We must bear in mind that
Christianity is the accuser and Judaism is the defendant. The burden of proof
rests solely and squarely upon the shoulders of the missionary. If an analysis
of scripture proves inconclusive, then Judaism is vindicated and Christianity
is refuted. Unless the missionary presents conclusive evidence that scripture
unequivocally supports every Christian doctrine, Christianity must be a false
belief system. This is true for several reasons.
a. It is the missionary’s contention that
scripture is the sole guide that God provided in order to teach people the
doctrines of Christianity. According to the missionary, a plain reading of
scripture is all that is necessary to convince someone to accept Christianity.
What the missionary is in effect saying is that if one reads scripture and is
not convinced that Jesus is the Messiah, there can only be two explanations.
Either scripture was not read with an honest heart, or Jesus is not the
Messiah. There is no middle ground. If someone honestly believes that scripture
is not absolutely supportive of Christian dogma, then this person has concluded
that Christian dogma must be false.
b. The status quo is with Judaism.
Christianity acknowledges that before Jesus was born he was not a prophet, nor
had he fulfilled any of the messianic expectations. Christianity likewise
recognizes that before Jesus was crucified there was no atonement for sin
through the nailing of a human body to some old boards. Judaism believes that
these simple facts never changed. The fellow from
c. Judaism was here first. According to the
missionary, Judaism was the forerunner of Christianity. The missionary would
have us believe that God only established Judaism in order to lay the
groundwork for Christianity. If this contention is true then the sole purpose
of the Jewish scriptures (which the missionary claims is all there is to
Judaism) is to proclaim the alleged messiah-ship of Jesus. If an honest reading
of scripture reveals that scripture does nothing of the sort, then the
missionary contention must be wrong.
d. If Jesus was not who the Christians claim
he was, then worship of him would have to be idolatry, and loyalty to him would
be loyalty to a false Messiah. Until the missionary presents conclusive
evidence to support his claims, then it is immoral to commit oneself in worship
to a human being. The morally correct attitude is to wait and see.
The truth is that scripture is not all that ambiguous. A
plain reading of scripture will reveal that the missionary arguments have no
basis in the word of God. It is not merely a matter of Christianity standing in
contradiction to various isolated verses (although that would be bad enough).
SOLA SCRIPTURA
Our analysis of scripture will begin with the very basis
of Protestant Christianity. Sola Scriptura. This
principle that rejects any unwritten directive from God,
has no scriptural foundation. In fact, an examination of scripture will reveal
that God truly does use instruments of communication, outside of the written
words of scripture.
Probably the most important difference separating
Christianity from Judaism, is the Christian assertion
that one Jesus of Nazareth ought to be worshiped as a god. Judaism considers
the Christian deification of Jesus to be a form of idolatry. Christianity
considers this same activity to be the highest moral imperative. The basis of
the Jewish position is the revelation at
Protestant Christianity refuses to rely on the Jewish
nation’s report of that momentous event. The fact that the Jewish nation’s
understanding of God was impacted by that event means nothing to the Christian.
The Protestant rejection of the national Jewish testimony stands in direct
contradiction to the words of the Jewish scriptures.
Scripture records that God directed the Jewish people –
“you should make it known to your children and to your children’s children. The
day that you stood before the Lord you God at Horeb
(another name for
The words of scripture clearly testify to the fact that
God uses the collective memory of the Jewish nation as a medium of
communication. Scripture tells us that God trusts the testimony of the Jewish
nation, and that God requires of us to do the same. The Church position that
would have us ignore the testimony of the Jewish nation,
is clearly refuted by the words of scripture.
The living legacy of the Jewish nation is commissioned by
God not only to preserve the basic understanding of God’s oneness. God also utilizes
the national Jewish testimony to deliver to the later generations many details
of the Law that Moses did not record in the Five Books. It is only through the
living testimony of the Jewish nation that we can understand the spirit of
Sabbath, the practical application of the laws of kosher, as well as a host of
other scriptural directives. Christianity refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy
of the Jewish nation’s testimony concerning any of these matters. The Church
would have us believe that in the forty years Moses lived among the Jewish
people, he said not a word more than was recorded in the Five Books. Again, it
is the scripture that the Christians revere, that testifies to the falsity of
the Christian position.
Scripture records the divine directive to observe the
holiday of Passover. Any Jew who eats leaven during this seven-day holiday is
threatened with the heavenly penalty of having his soul cut off from the midst
of his nation. Scripture tells us that this holiday takes place, from the fourteenth
day until the twenty-first day of the first month. Scripture does not tell us
when this first month is supposed to begin. In fact, scripture says nothing
about the construction of a calendar. If we assume, as the Church proposes,
that Moses taught nothing more than the words he recorded in the Five Books, we
will find ourselves facing a serious problem. How are we to know when the
holiday of Passover is to begin?
Similar questions can be asked concerning most of the
scriptural commandments. At what age is a person considered responsible for the
practice of the Law? What exactly is meant by the term “betrothal” mentioned in
Deuteronomy 22:23? What is the court procedure to be followed in a case where
capital punishment is to be applied? What are the necessary qualifications
required of the judges presiding over such a court, and who elects these
judges? The scriptures provide no information on these matters, yet it is
obvious from the words of scripture that these laws are to be observed by a
living nation. Could it really be as the Christian argues? Is it possible that
Moses said nothing more on these matters? How could a nation be held
accountable to a Law that is so vague and ambiguous? How could people be
threatened with divine penalties for violation of a Law that leaves so much
unsaid?
It is quite evident that Moses did provide instructions
outside of scripture’s terse terminology. Clearly Moses guided the people in
the practical application of the Law. God expected that these instructions be
available to the last generation. The only medium that God provided for the
transmission of this information, is the living
testimony of the Jewish nation. This living chain, which travels along the
generations, father to son, teacher to disciple, is the means through which God
elected to transport His holy Law to the end of time.
Christianity refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the
rabbinical courts. The Church position is then, that no man is authorized to
render judgment in matters relating to the divine directives of Moses.
Scripture explicitly repudiates this Christian contention.
Chapter 17 of Deuteronomy records Moses’ injunction to the
people that they consult with the judges and the priests. The verse goes on to
say that the decisions of these men are to be followed. One who blatantly
ignores the court’s decision is to be put to death. Chapter 19 of second
Chronicles vividly describes how the righteous King Jehosaphat
established courts throughout his kingdom. Jehoshaphat makes reference to two leaders
to whom the judges can turn to with their questions. One of these leaders was
to direct the courts in matters pertaining to the Laws of God, while the other
officer guided the judges in matters relating to civil law. Scripture leaves
the reader with no doubt that these men were authorized to pronounce judgment
in the application of the Law of Moses.
Chapters 13 and 17 of Deuteronomy document Moses’
directives to the people in regard to idolaters. If a comprehensive
investigation reveals that an individual or a community is truly guilty of
idol-worship, the transgressors must then be killed. Scripture directs the
entire nation to participate in the execution of these idolaters. It is obvious
from the context of these passages that the guilt of these men was determined
by a court of qualified judges. Still, all the people must take part in the
implementation of their decision.
It is abundantly clear that not only does God authorize
people to make decisions in the application of his holy Law, but God also
commands His people to abide by those decisions. Scripture openly contradicts
the Christian assertion that no human is authorized to render judgment in
matters concerning the divine Law. The Christian position is not based on the
words of scripture. Instead the Christian doctrine stands in direct conflict to
the clear words of scripture.
IDOLATRY
The Jew equates worship of Jesus with idolatry. A Jew sees
no room for discussion of this issue. A man cannot be God and that’s all there
is to it. The missionary effort to present scriptural quotations as evidence to
support his devotion to Jesus, is wasted on the Jew.
God gave the Jewish people an understanding of Himself before He gave them the
scriptures. The Jewish people read scripture in light of their understanding of
God. It was God Himself who gave the Jewish people their conception of God, and
it is through the lens of this fundamental teaching that we understand all
subsequent revelation. The words of the prophets do not have the power to alter
that which God Himself has taught us. The exact opposite is true. Our
conception of God is the criterion by which the prophet’s words are evaluated.
God is a living reality in the Jewish world. The Jew who
follows the ways of his fathers will mention God’s name more than one hundred
times in a day. The ongoing relationship that the Jewish people have with God
is the path through which each subsequent generation of Jews is introduced into
a personal relationship with God. Jews recognize God as the Creator of all, and
as the One who constantly sustains all of existence. God is all-powerful and
all knowing, and it is to Him and Him alone that our devotion belongs. There is
no room for devotion to any other entity, for we receive everything from God.
There is no need to worship another being, because everything resides with God.
The Jew is missing nothing in the worship of God, and by its very definition,
nothing can be missing in the worship of God.
The missionary is not satisfied with the Jew’s worship of
the God who revealed Himself at
Since Christianity has been around for some time,
worshiping Jesus while decrying idolatry, much confusion has been generated on
this subject. People equate idolatry with the activity of bowing down to a
clumsy wooden statue, and that is where it ends. People fail to realize that by
scriptural definition, idolatry includes much more.
Idolatry consists of the adoption of an attitude of
self-negation and subservience (of the type appropriate only to the Creator)
toward any entity other than the Creator. This attitude of total submission
toward anyone but God, or any act that expresses this submission, is idolatry.
It is irrelevant if the one being worshiped is real or imaginary, a physical
object or a spirit. As long as it is not the God who revealed Himself at Sinai
as the only sovereign over every facet of existence - it is idolatry. It is
only toward the Creator, and the One who is constantly sustaining all of existence,
that one should bare his soul in recognition of total dependence. It is only
toward Him that we should devote our hearts, souls, and might in the fire of
all-encompassing love. And it is only toward Him that we pledge total
submission and subservience, for these belong to no one else. To direct such
devotion toward anyone else is the height of moral corruption.
Jewish scripture compares idolatry to adultery. Just as
the adulterous woman, by giving her heart to another man, violates the very core
of the relationship she shares with her husband. So it is with the idolater. By
baring his soul in submission to another being, the idolater violates that
aspect of his being that connects him to God. No other sin strikes at the heart
of one’s relationship with God, as does idolatry. Every other sin involves the
denial of connection to God. Idolatry is a violation of that sacred connection.
Idolatry is not limited to the worship of an entity that
is perceived by the worshiper as independent of God. The sin of idolatry
includes the worship of any being that stands as representative, or as symbolic
of God. By inviting a foreign entity into the sacred realm of a soul bared in
devotion to its Creator - one has polluted that devotion. Love of God should be
an all-encompassing experience, an experience that
leaves no part of one’s being untouched. There should be no room left for
anyone else to enter into this relationship.
This concept, which prohibits the usage of another being
to represent God in our devotion to Him, is clearly stated in scripture.
Deuteronomy 4:15,16. “Take heed exceedingly for your
souls, because you did not see any image on that day that the Lord spoke to you
from the midst of the fire. Lest you corrupt yourselves and make for yourselves
an idol, the image of any symbol, be it the likeness of a male or female, the
likeness of any beast of the earth.” God is addressing the Jewish people. He is
warning them not to use any image as a representation of the One who revealed
Himself at Sinai. God is telling us, that had He wanted us to use an image to
represent Him, He would have shown it to us at Sinai. God is stating in no
uncertain terms that no being may be used to represent Him in our devotion. The
usage of such a being is the corruption of idolatry.
Christianity’s worship of a long deceased resident of the
To its credit, Christendom does not deny the existence of
the God of Israel. This is a source of confusion for many people. Many people
equate idol-worship with denial of God. This is a mistake. Idolatry and denial
of God, are two separate sins. To underscore this
point, we ought to go back to the scriptural equation that idolatry is equal to
adultery. A married woman, who denies that her husband exists, is certainly
ignoring her relationship with her husband. But as long as she does not enter
into a relationship with another man, she has not defiled the essence of her
marriage. Conversely, a woman who acknowledges the fact that she is married to
her husband, but does not hesitate to have relations with other men, has
violated the essence of her relationship with her husband.
The same concept
applies to a created being’s relationship with his Creator. It is possible to
deny the Creator’s existence and not be an idolater, and it is possible to
worship idols, while openly acknowledging God’s existence. The aforementioned
verses (Deuteronomy 4: 15) made plain, that even if one worships any being as a
representative of God, he is guilty of the sin of idolatry. How much more so is
this true when one worships someone seen as “co-equal” to God? One who denies
God, but doesn’t commit himself in worship to another being, is not an
idolater. He is certainly sinning in the sense that he is ignoring his
connection to God, but he hasn’t violated that connection. It is only the
idolater, by submitting his inner being in devotion to another god, who
contaminated that aspect of his being which is his connection to God. So
although Christianity’s acknowledgment of God’s existence is commendable, it
cannot absolve them of the guilt of idolatry.
Another confusing factor relevant to the worship of Jesus, is the fact that for many years now, Jesus was not
visible in a physical sense. Many people assume that the idolatry condemned by
the Bible is limited to the worship of a physical body. Since Christianity
worships an invisible being, these people fail to identify it as idolatry. This
too, is a mistake. When condemning idolatry, God uses the
simple term “other gods” (Exodus 20:3). Worship of any being other than
the One who revealed Himself at Sinai, is idolatry. It makes no difference if
the idol is tangible or not. But in any case, Christianity does advocate
worship of a physical body. While Jesus was still alive, Christian dogma
contends that he was worthy of the worship, adoration, and devotion that is
appropriate for God - worship of a physical body. Would modern day Christians
picture in their minds, people prostrating themselves on the ground, in
religious devotion to a human being standing there in front of them, they would
find no difficulty in identifying the scene as raw paganism. Yet it is this
very scene that lies at the core of Christian doctrine.
Many of the worshipers of Jesus, who sense the corruption
inherent in the adoration of a mortal, take comfort in the assurance that
“Jesus and the God of Israel are one and the same.” These Christians are not
alone. Other idolaters also use these same empty words to justify devotion to
their idols. This is true both of Buddhism and Hinduism. These idolaters and
many others claim that the image they worship is the “physical incarnation” of
the one true God. But these words are meaningless drivel. If the Jewish worship
of the Infinite Being, who is the Creator of all, and upon whom all of creation
is constantly dependant for their very existence - if worship of this God is
not considered “one and the same” with worship of Jesus, Buddha, or Krishna,
then how can worship of these idols be considered worship of the one true God?
To illustrate the hollowness of this claim, picture the following: A woman runs
off with a man who is not her husband. She justifies her action by claiming
that this stranger and her husband are partners in a trinity that makes them
“one and the same.” She tells us that this man is the “incarnation” of her
husband. Is this not adultery?
With all of this in mind, the missionary would have us
believe that scripture itself advocates worship of Jesus. Nothing could be
further from the truth. A perfunctory reading of scripture will reveal that
idolatry is the greatest abomination in God’s eyes. The term scripture uses to
identify an idol (in the context of “idol-worship”) is simply “other gods.”
Other than who? - Other than the Creator of heaven and
earth, other than the One whom Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob placed their trust in,
other than the One who revealed Himself to the Jewish people at Sinai, other
than the God of Moses, David, Isaiah, and Jeremiah. Can anything be more clear? Did these people worship Jesus? Did Jesus create
the world? Was it a trinity that revealed itself at Sinai? Of-course not! So
scripture is clearly telling us that belief in the trinity is paganism, and
worship of Jesus is idolatry.
One of the verses that the missionaries are fond of using
to deflect the heavy accusation of idolatry is found in Isaiah 55:8. “For my
thoughts are not your thoughts nor are my ways your ways says the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth so are my ways higher
than your ways and my thoughts (are higher) than your thoughts.”
Missionaries teach that the message here is - that although to the human mind,
worship of a person appears to be an unforgivable absurdity - one should not be
so confident with the human assessment of the situation. God operates on a
higher, mysterious plane. We should not be holding God to our standards of
logic.
When the verse is examined in context, the irony is
inescapable. The verse is not talking about the correct method of worship, nor
is it discussing the true essence of God’s being. This verse is talking about
repentance. As we find in Ezekiel 28:29 and 33:20, people express disbelief
when the prophet presents God’s simple method of atonement for sin. Even today,
people (Christian missionaries) attempt to use all sorts of semi-logical
arguments to discount the efficacy of repentance as a method for atonement of
sin. But God tells us - don’t judge Me by your
yardstick. You may not understand how sin can be erased so completely, as if it
were never committed without someone paying the price (through blood
sacrifice). But that is how it is. If you repent, God assures you that He will
forgive. As long as your sense of honesty is satisfied that it is indeed God
speaking, then it is not for you to ask questions. God’s ways are not our ways
nor are His thoughts our thoughts. That is true as far as repentance is
concerned.
Conversely, when scripture does speak of the correct
method of worship, it makes reference to human logic, and sometimes scripture
even appeals to the human sense of humor to point out the evil of idolatry.
(Jeremiah 10:11) “Tell them, gods that did not create heaven and earth should
go lost from this earth and from under these heavens.” Scripture is pointing
out the inherent absurdity of idol-worship. Since no one ever claimed that
their idol or “god-incarnate” was the creator of heaven and earth - so get them
out of here. A god that operates in an arena that he did not create,
is no god. Similarly we read in Isaiah 2:22. “Cease yea of man that has breath
in his nostrils, for of what worth is he.” This verse demonstrates the
silliness of worshiping a human being. What worth can he have if he is
dependent on a constant supply of oxygen for his own mental and physical
well-being? (Daniel 5:23) “- and to the God who holds your soul in His hand,
and all your ways belong to Him, you did not attribute glory.” Again we are
being taught how foolish it is to direct worship towards anyone other than the
One who is constantly sustaining all of existence. It is very clear that if one
reads scripture in context, he will find that God expects the human mind to be
able to identify idolatry. If this type of worship is an abomination to your
conscience, then it is idolatry in God’s dictionary as well.
Another verse which missionaries tell us, is advocating
the worship of Jesus, is the one in Psalm 2:12. In most Christian translations
the verse reads as follows: “Kiss the son lest His anger flare up.” Missionaries
teach, that the “son” is Jesus, and “kissing him”,
means submitting oneself to him in religious worship.
The most obvious problem with this interpretation is that
the translation is wrong. The Hebrew words “nashku
bar” can be translated as – “embrace (or kiss) purity”, or it can read “arm
yourselves with purity.” Either way the verse is telling the kings of the
nations to cleanse their hearts lest God’s anger flare up. So the missionary
“proof-text” simply does not exist.
But even if we were to grant that the translation “kiss
the son” is correct (by assuming that the psalmist switched from Hebrew to
Aramaic in mid-sentence and immediately switched back to Hebrew again), still
the missionary “proof” is non-existent. For if we are to assume that the word
“son” is present in this verse, it must be referring to the “son” of verse 7 in
this chapter. (Where the psalmist uses the Hebrew “b’ni”
as opposed to the Aramaic “bar”) The “son” spoken of in verse 7, is an earthly
king who is being granted physical dominion over the nations. This king can be
either David, or his descendant, the Messiah. In both cases the submission
(kissing) mentioned in verse 12, is the type in which people subject themselves
to the sovereignty of a human king. There is nothing in the text that tells us
that the submission spoken of is the worship of a deity.
Scripture tells us that both David, and the Messiah, are granted physical dominion over nations. Concerning David
the psalmist tells us (Psalm 18:48) that God subdued nations under him.
In Isaiah we read of the physical dominion that will be
granted to the Jewish people in the messianic age. Isaiah
60:12 – “For that nation or kingdom which does not serve you (the Jewish
people) shall go lost, those nations will be utterly destroyed.” Again
in Daniel 7:27 – “and the kingdom and dominion and greatness of the kingdoms
under all the heavens, will be given to the nation of exalted holy ones (the
Jewish people), his (this nation’s) kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all
dominions shall serve and obey him.” In these verses we are being told how the
Jewish people as a nation will be given dominion over all nations. Since no one
attributes divinity to the Jewish nation, so submission to their sovereignty must
be a simple physical submission, and not the religious worship of a god. The
Messiah as the ruler of the Jewish nation in the end of days,
represents the government of his people. So submission to the Messiah as spoken
of in Psalm 2:12, does not mean religious devotion. It simply means that the
Messiah will be given physical sovereignty over the gentile nations. In
conclusion we can state that there is no honest way to read Psalm 2:12 as a
license to worship anyone in a religious sense.
Aside from this verse in Psalm 2:12, not one of the
missionary proof-texts can be read (even with the most biased translation) as
if we were commanded to worship Jesus. This fact is extremely significant.
Wherever scripture records that God demands our obedience through religious
worship, the message is always very clear. For example, the term used to define
idolatry in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:2) is “the One who took you out of
the
As for the texts within which missionaries see license for
idolatry, these fall into several categories. One type of verse exploited by
missionaries, speaks of God in an anthropomorphic sense. This means that
scripture is describing God, as doing something in a manner that cannot be
applied to the true essence of God. An example would be Genesis 18:21. God
says; “I shall go down and see.” The omniscient and omnipresent God does not
have to “go down” to “find out” what is happening. What is being taught here is
that although up until now God had given the people of
Missionaries point to some of these verses (including
these verses in Genesis) as examples of the “physical incarnation” of God. This
interpretation is the product of wishful thinking. There are many verses in
scripture that speak of God in an anthropomorphic sense. Many of these can in
no way be read in a literal sense, but are clearly speaking in a poetic and
allegorical manner. The famous “outstretched arm” of the Exodus is but one
example of this scriptural style. Another example is the verse in Isaiah (66:1)
where God speaks of the heaven as His throne and the earth as His footstool.
Even the missionaries admit that these verses are not to be taken literally. So
we would ask a missionary, pray tell, by what textual means do you determine
which particular verse is to be read literally, and which is to be read
allegorically? The answer is - none. There is no clue in the text itself that
will tell us if any one verse is to be taken literally or not. This arbitrary
division of the verses is only dependant on the simple question - will this
interpretation “prove” Christian dogma? If the answer is - yes, then presto,
this becomes “the only valid interpretation.” Otherwise things are left “as
is.” (That means that the general scriptural theme that God has no form is left
intact, and the verse in question is understood as a figure of speech being
used to describe God’s actions, not His essence.) To the Jew who has no need to
insert paganism into scripture, all verses are left “as is.”
Another type of verse used by missionaries as “proof” to
the concept of the “incarnation” of God, is one in which an angel speaks God’s
words. (See Genesis 22:11,12 for an example.)
Missionaries understand this to mean that God’s essence took on angelic form.
The missionary argues that if God could take on the form of an angel, then He
can assume a human form as well. But the interpretation is wrong. In all of
these verses the angel is referred to by the term “mal’ach”,
which means - messenger. This clearly reminds us of the subservient status of
the angel, who is merely doing the bidding of its Creator. So there is no way
that we can look at this angel as being “co-equal” with God. (According to
Christian teaching, the physical incarnation of God, is of equal status with
God.) No one ever believed that the prophet Haggai,
was an “incarnation” of God. Yet the Bible tells us (Haggai 1:13) “Then Haggai
the messenger (mal’ach) of the Lord, spoke in
capacity of messenger to the Lord (be’mal’achus) - I
am with you declares the Lord.” It is obvious that although the messenger is
speaking the words of God, he does not have to become an “incarnation” of God.
This missionary “proof” is no better than the others.
Yet another missionary ploy is the one that attempts to
use scripture to demonstrate plurality within the essence of God. One example
of this technique is the missionary reading of Hosea 1:7. The verse reads, “and I will have mercy on the house of
This argument only works with one who is ignorant of
scriptural usage of Hebrew. In Zechariah 10:12 we find quite a similar verse.
“And I will strengthen them with the Lord and in His name they shall walk -
declares the Lord.” Since this verse ends with “declares the Lord”, the same
name with which it began, even missionaries are forced to admit that in the
beginning of the verse the Lord is speaking of Himself in the third person. In
scripture we find people talking the same way. In Genesis 4:23 we have Lemech calling his wives by the title “wives of Lemech.” There is no reason to assume that God does not
speak this way as well. So the verse in Hosea (and others like it) cannot
honestly be used as proof to the “plurality” of God.
Missionaries exploit people’s ignorance of the Bible when
they point to people who are called by God’s name. Look - they say - if this
person has God’s name incorporated into his own, he must be God incarnate.
Jeremiah 23:6 (talking of the Messiah) “and this is the name he will be called
- the Lord is our righteousness.” Or Isaiah 9:5 (which missionaries claim is
talking of the Messiah, despite the fact that the text clearly indicates that
it is talking of King Hezekiah) “and this is the name he will be called -
wonderful counselor, mighty God, father of eternity, prince of peace.”
To one who has no familiarity with scripture, these verses
sound like solid evidence to the concept of a divine Messiah. But once one realizes
that the prophet bestows the name “the Lord is our righteousness”, not only on
the Messiah, but also on the city of
There is an interesting factor which all of these
proof-texts share. That is; even according to the missionaries, these texts do
not point exclusively to Jesus. What these verses say according to the
missionaries is that someone, or something out there
may be God incarnate. So if we were to go with the missionary interpretation of
scripture, any idolater could claim scriptural license for his idolatry. Yet
Christians condemn the worshipers of any idol other than their own as wicked
pagans. How can Christians accuse the worshipers of
OBEDIENCE AND PROPHECY
It has been previously mentioned that aside from one text
(Psalm 2:12), the missionaries were not able to find a verse in scripture that
can be twisted to read as a commandment to worship Jesus. This holds true not
only of the proof-texts that are used as support for the doctrine of the
trinity, but this is a fact across the board. All of the manpower Christianity
spent over the centuries combing scripture in search of support for their doctrines, could not lend it the appearance of duty. With
the exception of one other text, there is no way that one can see in scripture
that God demands obedience to Him through adherence to Christianity. The
significance of this fact cannot be exaggerated. The entire structure of
Christianity rests upon the notion that there is no remission of sin without a
blood-sacrifice. (This sacrifice is accessed through devotion to their idol).
But scripture clearly says that first and foremost, we should concern ourselves
with obedience. The words of the prophet echo down to us through the halls of
time: (I Samuel 15:22) “Has the Lord desire in burnt offerings as He desires
hearkening to His voice? Behold, obedience is better than sacrifice, to hearken
(to His voice is better) than the fat of rams.” The prophet is clearly warning
against the Christian attitude that focuses on salvation through sacrifice at
the expense of simple obedience. Since the quality of obedience is noticeably
absent from Christian dogma, all the claims to the sacrificial value of faith
in Jesus are quite irrelevant.
Before we examine Christianity’s claim of exclusive possession
of a blood sacrifice, (and the absolute necessity of this sacrifice for the
remission of sin,) we must look at the one other verse which missionaries use
to provide their actions with a semblance of obedience.
Deuteronomy 18:15, Moses is speaking. “A prophet from your
midst, from amongst your brothers like myself will the Lord your God set up for
you - hearken to him.” This commandment, to obey the prophet, is applied by
missionaries to Jesus. Missionaries claim that obedience to God requires
obedience to Jesus.
The missionary will have to agree, that before we apply
this commandment (to obey a prophet) to anyone, we must be sure that this
person is indeed a prophet. How can we know if a claimant of prophecy is
telling the truth? How does God expect us to examine the credentials of a man
who died thousands of years ago?
The answer to this question is quite simple. God gave
Moses the authority to decide on questions that may arise in relation to His
commandments. God also instructed Moses concerning the appointment of other
men, to whom the Jewish people can turn to with their questions about God’s
Law. The decision of these men is binding upon the entire nation. In
Deuteronomy 13:10, God tells us that the entire nation should participate in
the execution of a particular lawbreaker. It is obvious that only a few
qualified men were the judges who determined the guilt of this criminal. Yet
all of
Generally the traditional Jew found no reason to examine
the Christian scriptures. The same authorities that taught him that the Jewish
scriptures were written with divine inspiration told him that the Christian
scriptures were not. But a plain reading of the Christian scripture could help
us understand why the Jewish religious authorities did not see Jesus as a real
prophet.
God set down in His Law, three different criterions
through which we can determine if a claim to prophecy is or is not authentic.
One of these standards is that the predictions of the prophet come true (Deut.
18:22). It is not enough that some of the claimant’s predictions are fulfilled.
Every last prediction must be fulfilled to the letter or else we can be sure
that the man is a fraud. Luke 19:44 reports that Jesus turned to the city of
Another means through which we can identify a false
prophet is found in Deuteronomy 13:2-6. If a prophet arises and performs signs
and wonders, but he advocates the worship of a god who is not known to the
Jewish people, he is to be put to death. If the Christian claim is true, that
Jesus advocated devotion to himself, then he is a false prophet on this count
as well. Before he was born, no one knew of him as a god. Jesus was advocating
worship of a strange god.
The third standard that Moses taught through which the authenticity
of a prophet can be determined, is recorded in Deuteronomy 18:20. “And (the
prophet) who speaks in the name of another god shall be put to death.”
Christian scripture records no instance where Jesus fulfilled this criterion of
a false prophet, but the Christian scriptures clearly state that Paul fulfilled
this one meticulously. Paul never claimed that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob spoke to him. All his “revelations” are spoken in the name of Jesus. Paul
never claimed to have been visited by the God who revealed Himself to Moses and
to the rest of the Jewish prophets. His entire claim is that he saw the man
Jesus in his visions. Paul spoke in the name of a god who was a stranger (as a
deity) to the Jewish people. This is very significant when we realize that most
of Christian dogma is the product of these “revelations.”
It has just been demonstrated that the prophets of
Christianity showed all three signs which scripture gives us to identify a
false prophet. 1) Not having a prediction fulfilled. 2) Encouraging the worship
of another god. 3) Speaking in the name of another god. All these were fully
accomplished between Jesus and Paul.
There is still one more sign that accompanies a false
prophet. This sign is not mentioned in scripture, but historically, it has
always been the trademark of a fraud. A false prophet can immediately be
identified by his attitude towards those who are skeptical about the
authenticity of his mission. A true prophet acknowledges that his claim to
prophecy should be met by healthy skepticism. (Note Exodus 4:1). Yet a false
prophet never seems to grasp this simple concept. All the false prophets of
history were full of words of vicious condemnation against those who doubted
their claims. Conversely, these frauds showered upon their following words of
blessing and praise, although they had done nothing commendable aside from
joining their following. Never once does the false prophet acknowledge that the
morally correct attitude toward a claimant of prophecy should be one of
skepticism. A cursory reading of Christian scripture will reveal that both
Jesus and Paul adequately satisfied this criterion of the false prophet.
Christianity’s claim that the commandment to obey a true
prophet applies to Jesus, is without merit. The applicable commandment in his
case is the commandment associated with the false prophet; “you shall not
hearken to him” (Deut. 13:4). There remains no way to present scripture as
demanding our obedience to God through adherence to Christianity. On the
contrary, an honest reading of scripture leads one to the opposite conclusion -
That following Jesus is an expression of rebellion against God. With this in
mind we will approach Christianity’s claims concerning the correct method for
achieving atonement for sin.
ATONEMENT AND FORGIVENESS
The central thrust of the missionary sales pitch, is the
issue of atonement. In order to get someone to convert to Christianity, the
missionary will attempt to convince him of the veracity of Christian doctrine
as it relates to the subject of atonement.
The Protestant doctrine as it relates to atonement, can be summarized in four sentences. 1) As a
result of Adam’s sin, man is inherently sinful, and is therefore damned to
eternal punishment. 2) Because of man’s
sinful nature, no action on his part can be counted as righteous before God. 3)
The stain of sin can only be erased through a blood sacrifice. 4) The only
blood sacrifice that has the power to redeem mankind from the stain of Adam’s
sin, is the blood of Jesus.
We will now examine the Jewish scriptures to see what God
has to say about these ideas.
The first statement that tells us about the ill effects of
Adam’s sin upon the nature of his descendants, is
partially supported by scripture. But let us take a closer look at what
scripture teaches about this concept.
Scripture teaches that all created beings are imperfect
before God. Angels, the heavens, sun, moon and stars are all impure in God’s
eyes. (Job 4:17-19, 15:14-16, 25:4-6) How can the created being be justified
before its maker? Man, as a created being, is also inherently imperfect. There
are many verses in scripture that remind us of this concept. Missionaries often
quote Ecclesiastes 7:20 “For there is no righteous one on earth who does good, and does not sin.” But there is one verse that clearly
teaches this same concept, yet the missionaries seem to have forgotten about
it. Job 15:14 “How can one born of a woman be righteous?”
Judaism fully acknowledges the scriptural teaching of the
imperfection of man. But it is the missionaries who reject this basic concept.
By claiming the “sinlessness” of Jesus, they ignore
the word of God that tells us that one born of a woman can never be utterly
righteous.
With Adam’s sin, sinfulness was imputed into the very
fabric of human nature. As a direct result of this evil, man was cursed by God.
Scripture records that God pronounced three curses upon Adam and his seed: 1)
Death, 2) The pain of childbirth, 3) Having to work in order to obtain food. As
long as these curses are still in effect, we can safely assume that redemption
from Adam’s sin is yet to occur.
The missionary claim that as a result of Adam’s sin,
everyone is damned to hell for an unlimited amount of time, has no scriptural
basis (not even an imaginary one), therefore there is no need to refute it.
The Traditional Jew, who had faith in God’s word, was
never impressed by the missionary’s threats of eternal hellfire. God assures us
through the words of David – “And the kindness of the Lord is from everlasting
to everlasting upon those who fear Him, and His righteousness to children’s
children. To those who keep His covenant, and to those who remember His
commandments to do them” (Psalm 103:17,18).
The other three statements that we used to summarize the
Christian belief about atonement, are not compatible with scripture, and as
this is the case, are not accepted by Jews. The concept that no human action
can be counted as righteous before God, is as
non-scriptural as it is evil. It is difficult to think of an idea that would be
more contradictory to scripture. The most prevalent theme in the Jewish
scriptures is that God relates to people according to their deeds, both good
and bad. The sinful nature of man does not cancel out any good that we do.
God chose to save life on this planet through the
handiwork of the righteous Noah. Noah’s ark, which was built by Noah’s obedient
action, was the means through which God recreated the world. The message is
clear. “And the righteous one is the foundation of the world” (Proverbs 10:25).
The entire narrative about the patriarchs, demonstrates,
that even though we are under the curse of death still the actions of men find
favor in the eyes of God. (See Genesis 26:4)
The lesson of the tabernacle is the same. The fact that
the people’s dedication of their possessions, skills, and power, merited the
manifestation of God’s presence, tells us how God values these expressions of
love and obedience.
The very concept of blood-sacrifice, which Christianity
claims as its foundation, tells us how God looks favorably at human action. A
blood-sacrifice is essentially a human action that expresses submission and
humility towards God. According to the Christian doctrine that has God
rejecting every human action, the blood-sacrifice should be rejected as well.
The fact that scripture tells us that the blood-sacrifice can play a part in
the atonement process, refutes this Christian
doctrine.
God points to David as an example of righteousness that
others should follow (I Kings 11:38). This does not mean that he was sinless -
he wasn’t. But it does mean that his sins did not nullify the good that he did.
This teaching: that God allows the righteous to reap the
fruit of their deeds, (Isaiah 3:10) is rejected by the missionaries. They ask;
if no man is pure before God, (“how can one born of a woman be righteous?”)
then why are his actions meaningful to God? This question is an honest one, but
it does not give anyone a right to rip out pages and pages of scripture.
Scripture leaves no room for doubt, that in spite of man’s impurity, his
righteous deeds done with sincerity, will find favor in God’s eyes. Why indeed
is this so? The answer is simply because God willed it so. If
a man were to live a totally righteous life, a life of total dedication to the
service of God. And this man would voluntarily die a martyr’s death, for
the honor of God’s name. God would still owe this man nothing. This man did not
give God anything that did not already belong to God. To think otherwise is to
deny the absolute sovereignty of God. So if God were to act according the
strictest sense of justice, no living being is deserving of reward. But it is
God’s attribute of mercy, which rewards men for obeying Him.
Missionaries claim that good deeds on the part of man must
inevitably lead to pride. This being the case, human action can do nothing in
the process of achieving God’s favor.
Aside from the fact that this contention is bad
philosophy, it is also openly contradicted by scripture. In the book of
Deuteronomy (17:18-20) God provides an antidote for the sinful tendency of
haughtiness. God commands the monarch (who is obviously motivated to be
arrogant) that he read the Torah. The activity of reading the Torah, will lead
to fear of the Lord, which will lead to observance of the commandments. And it
is observance of the commandments that will shield the king from pride. So
instead of being conducive to pride, scripture tells us that performance of
good deeds will lead to humility.
Missionaries (led by Paul) point to the verse in Genesis 15:6, were it is recorded that God counted Abraham’s faith
as righteousness. They argue that it is only Abraham’s faith that earned him
the blessing of God’s favor. And (the missionary argument goes) it is only
faith and not works (good deeds) which can bring upon man the grace of God.
This argument is thoroughly dishonest. First of all this
verse does not say that anything else that Abraham did was not counted as
righteous before God. In fact God tells us (in Genesis 18:19 and again in Gen.
26:5) that the fact that Abraham obediently did God’s will was essential in
securing God’s favor. Furthermore Psalm 106:30 tells us that when Phinehas stood up and executed judgement,
that God counted it to him as righteousness. The exact same expression is used
in both Genesis 15:6 and Psalm 106:30. It is obvious that human action can be
counted by God as righteousness as well as faith. Last but not least is the
simple point that Judaism is the belief system which advocates faith in the
same one whom Abraham placed his trust. It is the Jew’s faith in the words of
the God of Abraham, which leads him to believe all that God has taught us. But
it is the missionary who advocates faith in someone whom Abraham never heard of, that is rejecting the simple faith of Abraham.
In spite of the fact that scripture is so crystal clear on
this subject, missionaries still try to bring scriptural support for this
doctrine of theirs. There are two verses quoted by the missionaries in order to
give themselves an appearance of being faithful to scripture. (Isaiah 64:5) “and all our righteousness (are) as filthy rags.” Missionaries
say that this verse is a clear indication that God does not value our righteous
deeds.
This verse is just one phrase of a long prayer of
confession. In the same prayer the prophet beseeches God, “return for the sake
of your servants, the tribes of your inheritance”(Isaiah
63:17). The prophet is asking God to have mercy in the merit of the righteous
sons of Jacob. Obviously Isaiah believed that these men were righteous before
God. It is only in reference to a sinful generation, and as part of a humble
confession, that Isaiah compares the righteousness of men to filthy rags.
The second verse quoted by missionaries in support of the
doctrine of the worthlessness of man’s action is from Psalm 14 (repeated in
Psalm 53). “The Lord looked down from the heavens upon the children of men, to
see if there were any that understood, and sought God.
They are all gone astray, they are all together become
filthy. There is none that does good, no, not one.” again, this seems to be
telling us that God can see no good in man. But the Psalm doesn’t end there. It
continues - “Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? Those
who eat up my people as they would eat bread, and call not upon the Lord.”
It is clear, that although the Psalmist uses the general term, “the children of
men”, or the word “all”, he is only talking about the “workers of iniquity”,
and is clearly excluding “my people.” So we can see,
that not only are these quotations being wrenched out of the general context of
scripture, but they are also being taken out of their immediate context.
Let us now focus on the missionary claim, that there is no
scriptural means for the remission of sin other than blood-sacrifice. The one
verse cited in support of this position is Leviticus 17:11. “For the life of the
flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar for atonement
for your souls, for it is the blood that atones for the soul.” (The closing
phrase of this verse can also read – “for it is the blood that atones with the
life that it possesses”). Missionaries tell us that this verse teaches that it
is only the blood that has the power to atone for the soul. The words “for it
is the blood that atones”, seem to be excluding any other means of atonement.
Let us now examine this verse in context. The passage in
which we find this verse is speaking about the prohibition to ingest blood. God
is telling us, that although He allowed us to eat the flesh of the animal, we are not to eat its blood. Since the blood
contains the life force of the animal, it is not for us to eat. The only usage
we may obtain from the blood of the animal is the expiation of sin. By putting
the blood on God’s altar as an expression of submission to God, we have used
the blood correctly. We have used it directly in the service of God (see also
Deut. 12:20-28). Indeed, this verse teaches, that of all the parts of the
animal, the only one that can effect atonement, is the blood. But does this
mean that outside the realm of animal sacrifice there is no means of atonement?
Certainly not! So the entire thrust of the missionary claim is without
scriptural foundation.
But this verse does tell us that the blood that effects atonement, is given upon the altar. This would seem to say
that blood placed anywhere else, is excluded from the atonement of which this
verse speaks. Since the blood of Jesus was never placed upon the altar, it
cannot be included in the blood atonement of Leviticus 17:11. (The claim, that
in a figurative sense, the cross can be considered an altar, is very original.
But the consequences of speaking in a “figurative sense” are,
that nothing has to mean anything, and anything can mean everything. In this
booklet we are trying to stick to the plain meaning of the text.) The
“sacrifice” of Jesus is disqualified by the words of the very verse upon which
it claims as its foundation.
The actual biblically qualified blood offering is
essentially meaningless to the Christian. The animal offerings of scripture
have no use to the Christian, other than serving as a crude symbol for the
demise of their idol. But for the Jew, animal sacrifice is as real as it is in
scripture. Jews pray every day that God reestablish this means of expressing
devotion to Him. God promised that this will indeed come to pass. Isaiah (56:7
60:7), Jeremiah (33:18), Ezekiel (20:41 44:15), Zechariah (14:21), and Malachi
(3:4) all predicted in no uncertain terms that God will restore the sacrificial
system to its place.
This makes no sense for the Christian. If the entire
system of animal sacrifice was only put there as a portent to the death of
Jesus, so what need is there for animal sacrifice in the messianic era? Many
Christians are shocked to learn that the sacrificial system is coming back.
Some try to avoid the implications of these prophecies by making the
preposterous claim that these prophecies refer to a temple of the anti-christ. This silly claim is clearly refuted by the texts.
So who is the one who has faith in God’s word concerning the blood sacrifice?
Is it the missionary who believes Paul when he says that the temple sacrifices
never atoned for sin? (Hebrews 10:11). Or is it the Jew, who faithfully awaits the day when our offerings will be pleasing to God as
in the days of old? (Malachi 3:4)
We shall now return to the missionary claim that there is
no scriptural means for effecting atonement other than blood-sacrifice. This
claim flies in the face of scripture. Even within the sacrificial system there
are methods of achieving atonement without the use of blood. The verses in
Leviticus 5:11-13, tell us that in some instances a flour offering can take the
place of an animal offering and bring about remission from sin. In Numbers
17:12, we see Aaron using an offering of incense to gain forgiveness for the
sins of the Jewish people.
But atonement is not limited to the sacrificial system at
all. Repentance, turning back to God, is what God desires from us. Repentance
is what wipes the slate clean. God’s promise to the sinner who turns back to
Him with a sincere heart, is that none of his sins will be remembered (Ezekiel
33:16). All the other scriptural methods of atonement (blood-sacrifice, prayer,
and charity,) are only part of the general framework of repentance. Time and
time again, the prophets remind us that the path to God is repentance. Some of
the scriptural references are: Isaiah 55:7, Ezekiel 18:21-23, 33:10-20, and the
book of Jonah. All of these passages tell us how God does not spurn a broken
and contrite heart (Psalm 51:19). None of these passages say a word about the
“necessity” of blood-sacrifice in order for God to grant forgiveness. The story
of
In Deuteronomy 30:1-10, Moses assures us that when the
Jewish people repent, God will bring them out of their exile, and restore them
to the
As an expression of a repentant heart, prayer,
can bring about forgiveness for sin (Psalm 107, Proverbs 15:8, I Kings 8:46-50,
II Chronicles 7:14). Truth, justice, and charity, also work atonement for sin
(Micah 6:6-8, Proverbs 16:6, Daniel 4:24, see Jeremiah 9:23, and compare to
Hosea 6:7). The verses in Micah are especially significant, because they tell
us that all that God requires from us, is justice,
loving-kindness, and walking humbly with God - nothing else is necessary. Some
of the more dishonest Christian translations of the Bible simply do not
translate all the words in the Hebrew, in order to avoid the implications of
these verses. But “the word of our God stands forever” (Isaiah 40:8). All of
the energy, which the missionary exerts in his effort to nullify the clear
message of scripture, is for naught.
There is yet another detail in the larger picture of
atonement as spoken of in scripture, and that is, suffering. Scripture teaches
that suffering has the ability to purify a person, thus bringing him closer to
God. (Some of the scriptural references are, Deut.8:16, Isaiah 48:10, Psalm
105:19, and Psalm 107) The refinement that is brought about
through affliction, effects atonement for sin. Refinement through suffering is stated as
being the purpose of
Another scriptural theme related to this subject, is the
concept that God sometimes uses the righteousness of a few, to counter the
iniquity of many. Ten righteous men in the city of