The following in this post is a condensation of my arguments against the claims of the OP, for the sake of convenience for people who may not have
noticed my earlier posts.
He quotes the actions of the Old Testament God as the actions of his own God
He quotes the words of the Old Testament God as the words of his own God
Those are things self evident.
The world exists so someone made it.
Men and women exist, so it was made that way.
Those would be true of any religion.
Jesus was a Jew, so he quotes the Jewish scripture.
That is not so clear (that the person Moses was dealing with was the same person responsible for the world's creation), so I think Jesus avoids
getting into that.
I have to think that this was why the Son of God was a Jew in the first place, because they had that (commandment to love your neighbor) in the Law.
Here were people who had the right idea, if you were someone like Jesus who could highlight the good parts.
In comparison, you had the Roman Imperial cult that said basically it is their own private city gods who tell them to loot and plunder their
He quotes the prophecies of the Old Testament God as the prophecies of his own God
He does not clearly identify the Old
My personal belief goes along with the New Testament where it says that the old covenant was administered by angels.
I think that when Jesus meets the devil in the wilderness, it is an allusion to Moses meeting the angel in the burning bush claiming that he was the
sole representative of God.
Jesus was replacing that angel, so did not "remove his sandals" in his presence.
Jesus was making an argument (on the resurrection) and using a quote from the book of Exodus (on the “god of Abraham”) to illustrate the point. He
could have made the exact same claim without the quote but he was dealing with people who only accepted the literal interpretation of the scripture.
He quotes from it but does not verify the veracity of it, but goes on to make his own independent claim about who and what he thinks God is.
He is quoting the Prophets in both cases (“I desire mercy and not sacrifice” and “My house shall be called a house of prayer…but you have made
it a den of robbers”).
Jesus tells the Samaritan woman that they do not know what they worship.
They had practically the same Torah as the Jews, but did not accept the Prophets, so to Jesus, they had it backwards.
Jesus was not like a Pharisee who studied scripture to figure out theories, he knew these things, and did not come to that knowledge through
He accepts the laws of the Old Testament God as the laws of his own God
This (tells the healed leper to “offer for
cleansing what God commanded”) emphasizes the nature of the ruler-ship over the temple, that these people were excluded because of medical
conditions that were looked on as being the result of sinfulness on the part of the afflicted.
(He complains that the Pharisees neglect the commandment ) Just to show their hypocrisy.
He was requested specifically to give an analysis (which are the most important of the commandments) of that Law.
He brings out things that are fundamental to a law by a just God.
He identifies the Jews as the children of God
I think what he is
saying is that the metaphorical keys are being taken out of their hands.
They were too busy excluding people rather than opening it up for more people.
Jesus says that this is "the kingdom", meaning Israel.
But, the "kingdom" of what?
Keep in mind that Jesus' gospel was proclaiming the kingdom that was at hand.
That was the kingdom of God.
The Jews themselves don’t understand him as offering a different God
Jesus told the teachers of the law
and the high priests, in the temple that they did not know God.
Every time he uses the word “God”, he fails to say that he means a
He is also in gentile Galilee speaking in Greek, saying, "Theos", and fails to mention that he isn't talking about Zeus.
edit on 26-5-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)