• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Deuteronomy 18:18 Jesus?

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
In Egypt the Hebrews sheltered under the blood of the lamb.
Even Moses, perhaps the first born in his own family, was so
sheltered when all the first born in Egypt died.
I'm going to stick with the term "covenant" not appearing in that chapter, thanks.

Edit: Also, I had in my mind that you're Christian, but I see now that you're not, so feel free to disregard what I wrote in post #32 that you'll only believe the NT anyways.
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member


I will raise up for them a prophet from among their countrymen like you(Moses), and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them everything that I command him.

Why I believe Deuteronomy 18:18 is Jesus:

Why it has to be Jesus. . . In verse 20, Moses states that any prophet who presents himself as the one prophesied in verse 18, but who isn't that prophet, will die. Every other prophet, true, or otherwise, has died. Jesus is the only prophet in the Bible who the Bible claims overcame death.

Moses' litmus test for the prophet in verse 18 is that he cannot succumb to dying. There is only one person who though he was placed in the grave, rose out of the grave never again to die forever.



John
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
Moses' litmus test for the prophet in verse 18 is that he cannot succumb to dying.
Moses' litmus test for all Jewish people is in Deuteronomy 13. Jesus failed verses 6-8. Advocating for God incarnate as human ( himself as God ) is the Avatar concept from Hinduism. Verses 6-8 cast a wide net, from one end of earth to the other, when defining the prohibiton against foreign worship. Advocating for an avatar is forbidden. That's why I think Jesus cannot be the one described in Deuteronomy 18. He would have been disqualified 5 chapters back.

Why are you ignoring Deuteronomy 13:6-8?
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
I'm going to stick with the term "covenant" not appearing in that chapter, thanks.

Edit: Also, I had in my mind that you're Christian, but I see now that you're not, so feel free to disregard what I wrote in post #32 that you'll only believe the NT anyways.

So if the word 'covenant' is not in a chapter then the concept doesn't exist?
It seems strange that God would tell the Hebrews to take that male lamb
and daub its blood on the lintel - if all God wanted to do was save Hebrews
at that moment.
BTW chapters and verse didn't exist until recently.
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Moses' litmus test for all Jewish people is in Deuteronomy 13. Jesus failed verses 6-8. Advocating for God incarnate as human ( himself as God ) is the Avatar concept from Hinduism.

Do you, as a Jew, prefer God be manifest as a branch in Moses' right hand? Is that not "avatar" enough for you?

As I pointed out in the thread on the private parts of the Torah, having just cursed the hell out of the Egyptians by using his serpent rod as something like a lightning rod mediating for God's power to curse and kill his (and Israel's) enemies, God tells Moses (Exodus 15:25) to throw the rod that cursed and killed Egypt, into the bitter waters, at which time Israel is supposed to learn that the serpent rod that curses and kills can also be a savior, a healer too.

If that's still too opaque for you, in the next chapter, 16:33-34, Moses tells Aaron to take a pot of manna and place it before the face פני of the Lord. At which time Aaron dutifully lays the pot of manna before the face פני of the serpent rod (which gave its testimony concerning its power to kill, curse, or heal, and save). The last statement in the thread on the private parts of the Torah questioned just what the text of Exodus 16:33-34 is implying by saying that having just been commanded to place the manna before the face of the Lord, Aaron summarily places it before the "avatar" עדת of the Lord?

Naturally I've read ahead and seen what the rabbis and sages have said about this avatar, this branch, this face, of the Lord. And I can tell you it's like the scene in Planet of the Apes where Dr. Zaius tells Charleston Heston not to go to the forbidden zone for he won't like what he finds there. Exodus 16:33-34 is very much a forbidden zone for modern Judaism. There are skeletons there, skulls there, remnants of an earlier Jewish faith buried there, the unearthing of which would require a very real revolution and reformation of what's currently being practiced as authentic Judaism.

One man, Martin Luther, forced the Church to unearth the skull of true Christianity after the very bone marrow of the true faith was covered up by the Roman Church. Luther reformed Christianity, resurrected Christianity, and kept it alive to fulfill its God given destiny. Perhaps it's time for a Luther-like Jew to reform Judaism so she can fulfill her glorious destiny too. . . Get with it man. We need you. <s>



John
 
Last edited:

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
Do you, as a Jew, prefer God be manifest as a branch in Moses' right hand? Is that not "avatar" enough for you?
Did anyone worship Moses or his hands? If not then it's a poor comparrison. Apples and oranges...
As I pointed out in the thread on the private parts of the Torah, having just cursed the hell out of the Egyptians by using his serpent rod as something like a lightning rod mediating for God's power to curse and kill his (and Israel's) enemies, God tells Moses (Exodus 15:25) to throw the rod that cursed and killed Egypt, into the bitter waters, at which time Israel is supposed to learn that the serpent rod that curses and kills can also be a savior, a healer too.
I think it's a super creative approach to the story.
If that's still to opaque for you, in the next chapter, 16:33-34, Moses tells Aaron to take a pot of manna and place it before the face פני of the Lord. At which time Aaron dutifully lays the pot of manna before the face פני of the serpent rod (which gave its testimony concerning its power to kill, curse, or heal, and save). The last statement in the thread on the private parts of the Torah questioned just what the text of Exodus 16:33-34 is implying by saying that having just been commanded to place the manna before the face of the Lord, Aaron summarily places it before the "avatar" עדת of the Lord?
Again, creative. :)
Naturally I've read ahead and seen what the rabbis and sages have said about this avatar, this branch, this face, of the Lord. And I can tell you it's like the scene in Planet of the Apes where Dr. Zaius tells Charleston Heston not to go to the forbidden zone for he won't like what he finds there. Exodus 16:33-34 is very much a forbidden zone for modern Judaism. There are skeletons there, skulls there, remnants of an earlier Jewish faith buried there, the unearthing of which would require a very real revolution and reformation of what's currently being practiced as authentic Judaism.
It sounds like you agree that incarnating as God is an Avatar. If so, then I reassert:

If Jesus advocated for himself as God incarnate, then he would be liable for death per Deuteronomy 13:6-9. God incarnate is a Hindu God. Verses 6-9 prohibit advocating for other Gods, including Hindu God(s) and Avatars defined as God incarnate in human form, from one end of earth to the other. Therefore he cannot be a prophet in Chapter 18, because, he is liable for death in Chapter 13.

Why are you ignoring Chapter 13? Since no one worshipped Moses or his hands or the staff with the serpent. All three are irrelevant.
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Do you, as a Jew, prefer God be manifest as a branch in Moses' right hand? Is that not "avatar" enough for you?​

Did anyone worship Moses or his hands? If not then it's a poor comparrison. Apples and oranges...

. . . It's not his hand. It's what was in his hand when he placed it in his bosom (Exodus 4:6). And you may remember that when Moses told God that Israel would never believe he'd stood face-to-face with the God of Israel, God's very next commandment was for Moses to establish an avatar, a theophanic serpent branch, that would prove נסה to Israel that Moses was face-to-face with God.

Is that not avatar enough for you?

Ok. How about the fact that although the Masoretic text guards it from Jews, for it's too private, like skeletons from a past faith, the sacred Hebrew text makes it abundantly clear that this same avatar placed in Moses' bosom (Exodus 4:6), and which Asaph begs God to remove from his own bosom (Psalms 74:11), i.e., the avatar known as God's right hand, lent to Moses' right hand (Isaiah 63:11-12), is, get this, placed between the cherub on the mercy seat of the ark of the covenant, which is known to be the throne of God.

If that's not transparent enough for you, if that's not avatar enough for you, read just what it is Asaph claims God did with the now leprous branch in his bosom prior to it's unfortunate disease (Psalms 74:12-17). I mean this ain't no mere James Cameron kinda avatar. This is the avatar par excellent תפארת.



John
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
It sounds like you agree that incarnating as God is an Avatar.

Very much so.

If so, then I reassert:

If Jesus advocated for himself as God incarnate, then he would be liable for death per Deuteronomy 13:6-9.

. . . He was not only liable for death, according to the Law given to Moses, but he submitted willingly to that death. It's what happened next that uncovered some skeletons hidden beneath the swaddling clothes (the kittel) the Law was written on. . . The kittel seconds as swaddling clothes. The branch that kills, and dies, is lifted out of the grave, and lifts out of the grave.

The same kittel that wraps the Torah-Jew at the chuppah and in the grave, can be used to keep him safe and warm when he's born again.



John
 
Last edited:

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
So if the word 'covenant' is not in a chapter then the concept doesn't exist?
It seems strange that God would tell the Hebrews to take that male lamb
and daub its blood on the lintel - if all God wanted to do was save Hebrews
at that moment.
I'm confused as to why you expect this chapter to be about the creation of a covenant.
BTW chapters and verse didn't exist until recently.
Yeah, I know about chapters. Disagree about verses. But if I'd used the Hebrew word to describe this portion of the story, parshiya or parasha, based on the ancient Judaic division, you probably wouldn't understand...
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
I'm confused as to why you expect this chapter to be about the creation of a covenant.

Yeah, I know about chapters. Disagree about verses. But if I'd used the Hebrew word to describe this portion of the story, parshiya or parasha, based on the ancient Judaic division, you probably wouldn't understand...

Quote - "But if I'd used the Hebrew word to describe this portion of the story, parshiya or parasha, based on the ancient Judaic division, you probably wouldn't understand."
Why don't you explain yourself?
I see the motif of the sacrificial lamb/ramb as symbolizing many aspects of the Tanakh.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
I just did. The Hebrew words parshiya and parasha refer to portions of the Tanach, per the ancient Jewish division, before the Christian chapter division.

That doesn't answer my question.

And my next wo questions about Zechariah if I may:

You said you agreed this in bold text is the Messiah
And that He is both King and Redeemer.
So is the 'lowly' man riding upon a donkey the same as the man in bold text?


Rejoice greatly, Daughter Zion!
Shout, Daughter Jerusalem!
See, your king comes to you,
righteous and victorious,
lowly and riding on a donkey,
on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

I will take away the chariots from Ephraim
and the warhorses from Jerusalem,
and the battle bow will be broken.
He will proclaim peace to the nations.
His rule will extend from sea to sea
and from the River to the ends of the earth.

As for you, because of the blood of my covenant with you,
I will free your prisoners from the waterless pit.
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
You said you agreed this in bold text is the Messiah
And that He is both King and Redeemer.
So is the 'lowly' man riding upon a donkey the same as the man in bold text?
Yes. And?

So why do you think the Pesach lamb portion of Exodus refers to a covenant?
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
Yes. And?

So why do you think the Pesach lamb portion of Exodus refers to a covenant?

And is not an answer - you said you believe the Messiah is both king and redeemer.
Is this what Zachariah is referring to here?
Why will the Jews mourn when they see their Messiah?
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Therefore, he's not a prophet per the law given to Moses.

The Law of Moses implies that the prophet only speak what God tells him. In that sense God is really the prophet, and the so-called prophet merely an avatar of God. If the prophet takes it on himself to speak a prophesy that's not God's prophesy, then according to the Law that man is a false prophet.

So the children of Israel asked Moses the perfect question: if the prophesy is from God, and not the prophet, and the prophet is just the delivery boy, how will those receiving the delivery know if it's from the prophet himself, or from God, since God speaks to, through, the prophet, and not directly to those receiving the prophesy?

It's the problem of mediation. For instance did an angel deliver the Law on Sinai? If so, is he a mediator for God, or God himself? If the former, then, like a human prophet, might an angel deliver something not given by God, but devised by the angel? If you answer no, then the angel is not a mediator for God, but, God in the form of an angel; which would seemingly transgress your desire not to have a deified avatar?

Are angels deified avatars? For it would seem like without freewill of some sort, angels are merely divine avatars through which God's work is performed. Which perhaps begs the question why Moses parted the sea with a wooden rod as avatar rather than an angelic avatar coming down from heaven to part the sea?

Which segues back to the question of questions: what is the "testimony" עדת in Exodus 16:33 such that Aaron appears to be under the impression or misimpression it's the face of God? Is the עדת "testimony" a wooden angel? If so, how many forms do they come in? For we know that when God tells Moses to attach a seraph to the wooden testimony עדת (later named "Nehushtan," Hebrew for bronze-seraph) he chooses to make it (the seraph) out of bronze.

If angels come in bronze and wood surely Walmart sells them in plastic too? You know, like their Chocolate Jesus.

In truth, we should suspect, since the Bible makes it suspect, that there's a spiritual gradation associated with inert materials like metal, versus living products like wood. They appear to be juxtaposed in a way that's not just posing for the camera.

Which tells us that Moses turning his rod into יהוה נסי and נחשתן is extremely telling since in this one avatar he's shatnez-izing his divine avatar by mixing unlike materials and kingdoms, metal and wood, as though that avatar were a high priest (who can wear shatnez) able to enter into the very presence of God or else represent that Presence for those with perhaps circumcised eyes whereby the mohel cut deep enough to allow them to see that deep into the private parts of the Torah (Rosh Hashanah 29a).



John
 
Last edited:

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
The Law of Moses implies that the prophet only speak what God tells him. In that sense God is really the prophet, and the so-called prophet merely an avatar of God. If the prophet takes it on himself to speak a prophesy that's not God's prophesy, then according to the Law that man is a false prophet.
Again, this is ignoring Deuteronomy 13.

"In that sense God is really the prophet." -- No.
"the so-called prophet merely an avatar of God" -- No.

The topic is Deuteronomy 18. You agreed that Jesus intentionally broke the law as given to Moses. Advocating for a foreign god makes him apostate not a prophet.
So the children of Israel asked Moses the perfect question: if the prophesy is from God, and not the prophet, and the prophet is just the delivery boy, how will those receiving the delivery know if it's from the prophet himself, or from God, since God speaks to, through, the prophet, and not directly to those receiving the prophesy?
The answer is given in the text. Don't listen to or follow apostates even if the prophecy is true, even if they perform miracles, signs, and wonders. If they advocate for any foreign god or foreign religious concept that exists anywhere on the planet earth, then, that indiviudal's teachings are forbidden.
It's the problem of mediation. For instance did an angel deliver the Law on Sinai? If so, is he a mediator for God, or God himself? If the former, then, like a human prophet, might an angel deliver something not given by God, but devised by the angel? If you answer no, then the angel is not a mediator for God, but, God in the form of an angel; which would seemingly transgress your desire not to have a deified avatar?

"is he a mediator for God or God Himself?" "God in the form of an angel" -- Both are prohibited per Deuteronomy 4. So no, God is not a mediator nor in the form of an angel.
Are angels deified avatars? For it would seem like without freewill of some sort, angels are merely divine avatars through which God's work is performed. Which perhaps begs the question why Moses parted the sea with a wooden rod as avatar rather than an angelic avatar coming down from heaven to part the sea?
Angels are vessels. Why would someone want to worship a vessel? IDK, but it's prohibited for Jewish people per Tanach.

Moses didn't part the red sea in the story; that was God...
Which segues back to the question of questions: what is the "testimony" עדת in Exodus 16:33 such that Aaron appears to be under the impression or misimpression it's the face of God? Is the עדת "testimony" a wooden angel? If so, how many forms do they come in? For we know that when God tells Moses to attach a seraph to the wooden testimony עדת (later named "Nehushtan," Hebrew for bronze-seraph) he chooses to make it (the seraph) out of bronze.
It's a good question, but irrelevant to this discussion.
If angels come in bronze and wood surely Walmart sells them in plastic too? You know, like their Chocolate Jesus.
:rolleyes: How much do you know about bronze? It's impure, discolors over time. Depending on how it's made the fumes are noxious....
In truth, we should suspect, since the Bible makes it suspect, that there's a spiritual gradation associated with inert materials like metal, versus living products like wood. They appear to be juxtaposed in a way that's not just posing for the camera.
Deifying the raw materials is prohibited for Jewish people as well. That's in Exodus 20:4. Note that the verse prohibits: "anything in heaven or earth".
Which tells us that Moses turning his rod into יהוה נסי and נחשתן is extremely telling since in this one avatar he's shatnez-izing his divine avatar by mixing unlike materials and kingdoms, metal and wood, as though that avatar were a high priest (who can wear shatnez) able to enter into the very presence of God or else represent that Presence for those with perhaps circumcised eyes whereby the mohel cut deep enough to allow them to see that deep into the private parts of the Torah (Rosh Hashanah 29a).
This narrative requires layers and layers of assumptions, but, that doesn't make it false.

But it's still irrelevant unless you can find exmaples where the Jewish people are instructed and/or rewarded for worshipping an Avatar of God defined as God incarnate in human form.
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Advocating for a foreign god makes him apostate not a prophet.

It's the "foreign-ness" that's at the crux of the issue. Moses tells Aaron to place the jar of manna before the face of the Lord that's not foreign to him (Aaron). So Aaron places the jar of manna before the rod of Moses.

Is Aaron mistaking a foreign object as God? Or does the fact that modern Judaism doesn't recognize that Moses' rod is God imply that the Lord of Moses and Aaron is foreign to modern Judaism? If the latter, then perhaps the foreign God Jesus was advocating for is the God Aaron recognized by placing the jar of manna before Moses's rod; the foreign God that's foreign to Israel but not Moses, Aaron, and Jesus?


John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
"is he a mediator for God or God Himself?" "God in the form of an angel" -- Both are prohibited per Deuteronomy 4. So no, God is not a mediator nor in the form of an angel.

How do you know the tablets Moses received were written by the "finger" of God? Do you trust Moses that they were? Or were you there? If the former, then why do you trust Moses? Isn't he merely a mediator? Or, perhaps, his finger (Moses' writing hand) is the finger of God?

This is all a question of mediation. Why believe Moses that God gave him the tablets? Did God tell you personally that he gave the tablets to Moses? Or do you just believe it because Moses wrote it, and tradition seconds the motion? Why is Moses, or any other man, beyond repute to the degree that if he says he saw God, believe it? Worse, why, when Moses himself said Israel wouldn't believe it, did God fashion the serpent rod and imply that showing them that would make them believe?

Apparently it did make Aaron believe; since he put the manna before the serpent rod when told to put it before God. But it didn't seem to take for the rest of the children of Israel. Why?

The Talmud (Rosh Hashanah 29a) struggles with how, why, when a bronzed image of serpentine flesh is lifted up in Moses' right hand (Moses' rod) the children of Israel should be saved from death, and given life? Speaking on behalf of the Talmud, Rabbi Ellie Munk replies:

The answer given is that when the Israelites raised their eyes to Hashem they were healed. . . when the people looked at the serpent at the top of the pole and held the thought that Hashem alone could cause a wound or its healing, then the healing soon followed.​

And yet neither the Talmud, nor Rabbi Munk, engage the peculiarity of the reason why bronzed serpentine flesh should be the icon or image used to get Israelites to look up at Hashem? Perhaps Moses' rod, before and after it's wrapped in bronze, really does represent Hashem such that Aaron ain't any sillier looking placing the manna before it than the children of Israel were when appealing to it for salvation from death?

Which begs the question of why something so transparently the case is completely unknown, or rejected, by modern Judaism? I mean nothing is more transparent in the Hebrew text of the Torah than the fact that when Moses tries to get out from under the responsibility to lead Israel out of bondage by claiming they won't believe he's seen God face to face, God's response is to tell him the serpent rod will prove נסה it; the serpent rod will prove נסה to Israel that Moses knows what God's face looks like. The serpent rod, and not Moses, will prove נסה that God is with Israel.



John
 
Last edited:
Top