Question: Was Jesus sinless?

WAS JESUS SINLESS?
Shmuel Silberman


When we claim that Jesus did not live a sinless life, this is not to single out Jesus for special condemnation. Ecclesiastes 7:20 says, "There is no righteous man on earth who does good and sins not." Having a flaw is no disqualification for being a rabbi or prophet. This essay is rather to challenge the Christian doctrine of a "sinless Jesus" because of its significance for Christian theology.

In the New Testament Paul maintains it is not possible to keep the Law, and that flawless fulfillment of the Law is necessary to please G-d. For this reason Jesus as man-god had to fulfill the Law for everyone and die a sacrificial death to atone for a sinful humanity. This theology rests in part on the belief that Jesus was sinless.

When one examines the Gospels and compares the stories with the commandments of the Torah (Hebrew Bible) this doctrine of a "sinless Jesus" is not supported. Instead we find that Jesus in fact violated a number of Biblical commandments:

1. Procreation
"Be fruitful and multiply" (Genesis 1:28). This obligates a person to marry and have children. Jesus remained single his entire life. He also encouraged others to disobey this commandment by recommending celibacy (Matthew 19:12)

2. Sabbath Observance
"The seventh day is a Sabbath to the L-rd your G-d. Do not do any work" (Exodus 20:9). Jesus defended his "hungry" disciples when they plucked grain on the Sabbath. This is agricultural labor and is unquestionably a violation of the Sabbath.

Christian apologists insist that Jesus was revealing the true meaning of the Sabbath when he said, "The Sabbath is not made for man; man is made for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27)." This is untenable. Deuteronomy 17:8-13 says that we are to follow the Jewish High Court in disputes of Jewish law and this requirement is recognized by Jesus himself (Matthew 23:2). With whom is he arguing in Mark? It is the same Jewish legal authorities who are Biblically authorized to interpret the Law!

If Jesus meant that they were starving and their lives were threatened, the Gospel account must be fictional.1 Talmudic (Pharisee) law agrees this would be a reason to violate the Sabbath (Talmud Yoma ch.8). The Rabbis would not have quarreled with Jesus if this were the case. If there was no danger to life, then plucking grain violates the Sabbath and the apostles were probably guilty of theft for eating from a field not theirs.

3. Not Honoring a Torah Sage
"Honor the face of an elder [zaken] " (Leviticus 19:32). Zaken does not simply mean an old person; for that is the subject of the first half of the verse ("You shall rise before an old person [seiva]"). This is a commandment to respect Torah scholars. Judges and religious leaders are typically called zaken in the Bible (Exodus 24:14, Leviticus 4:15, Numbers 11:25, Deuteronomy 22:16, 25:7). If Jesus did not violate this by calling them "vipers," no one ever did (Matthew 23:13-33).

4. Hand Washing-Failure to Obey the High Court
(Deuteronomy 17:8-13): The obligation to follow the High Court includes rabbinic law. Jesus defended the failure of the apostles to follow a rabbinic requirement ? to wash their hands before eating. Jesus rejects rabbinic law as the "traditions of men (Mark 7:8)." He also defied the Rabbis regarding the Sabbath (see #2)

5. Insulting a Human Being
Jesus insulted a gentile woman by calling her a dog (Matthew 15:22-27). This is hardly befitting righteous and holy people. Whatever his pedagogical purpose, such a designation is inappropriate.

6. False Prophecy
Deuteronomy 18:20 prohibits false prophecy. The same passage defines false prophecy: "the word does not materialize or come to pass." As the New Testament asserts that Jesus is a prophet (Acts 3:22) one must regard as false prophecy the following statement: ".this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place." (Matthew 24:34).

This statement follows a description of signs of the End of Days. "This generation" of course died about 2,000 years ago and the prediction was never actualized. Here is how a prominent Christian commentary (NIV Study Bible p.1613) defends Jesus' "prophecy:"

a. Jesus may be referring to the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE.

b. Jesus may be referring to a future generation alive at the beginning of "these things."

This is hardly convincing. Jesus explicitly describes his Second Coming: "At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky and all the nations of the earth will mourn (24:30)." It will involve suffering "never to be equaled again (24:21)." This did not happen when the Temple was destroyed.

The idea that Jesus is referring to a future generation fails too. Throughout this speech Jesus refers to his audience as "you." When Jesus says, "when you see.. (v.15)" the NIV itself explains this as referring to events that happened long ago. Jesus tells his audience they will live to see "all these things" and "all" includes past events and the Second Coming. Obviously Jesus falsely predicted he would return in his audience's lifetime.

7. Not Honoring Parents
"Honor your father and mother" (Exodus 20:12). Jesus ignored his mother when she came to visit. "Someone told him, 'your mother and brother are standing outside, wanting to speak to you' He replied to him, 'who is my mother, and who are my brothers?' Pointing to his disciples, he said, 'Here are my mother and my brothers" (Matthew 12:47-49).

Jesus caused his parents a whole day of worrying. His parents returned from Jerusalem, assuming Jesus was with them. In fact, Jesus stayed in Jerusalem without informing his parents. They returned to Jerusalem to look for him. "His mother said to him, 'Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you?' (Luke 2:48)."

8. Kosher Food (Leviticus 11)
Jesus permitted eating food that is not kosher. Although the beginning of Mark 7 addresses the issue of eating with unwashed hands, the end of that chapter goes much further. "It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles but rather what comes out of the mouth that defiles" (Mark 7:15) As if we may have missed the point, 7:19 reads, "In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean" [KJV reads 'purged all meats']." Biblical law teaches that what goes into the mouth indeed defiles (Lev.11:39). Ironically, Christianity maintains that the Original Sin was eating.

9. Failing to Rebuke
"You shall surely rebuke your fellow" (Leviticus 19:18). This requires correcting, not excusing, the infractions of others. We have mentioned that Jesus defended Sabbath violation (see #2) and the failure to wash hands before meals (#4), and permitted non-kosher food (#7). Ironically, Jesus said one who teaches others to break a single commandment "will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven" (Matthew 5:19)

10. Not to Add or Subtract From the Law (Deuteronomy 13:1, 4:2) Jesus changed Biblical law with regard to divorce. The Bible permits divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1). Jesus does not dispute this point, however, he maintains this law is no longer valid. Thus he subtracted from the Law. "Why then, they asked, did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away? Jesus replied, Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning [when G-d made them male and female (Genesis 1:27) and one flesh (2:24)]. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery (Matthew 19:7-9)."

Since Biblical law permits divorce and does not consider remarriage a form of adultery, Jesus is changing Biblical law. Jesus' reference to Genesis is of no avail, for Moses knew Genesis and still proclaimed divorce permissible. Also, Moses said that the Law cannot be changed. Jesus changed the laws of kosher food too (see #7).

11. Opposing a Biblical Commandment (Vows)
Jesus accuses the Pharisees of undermining the commandment to honor parents with the following statement: "But you say that if a man says to his father or mother 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is Korban (that is, a gift devoted to G-d)' then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother" (Mark 7:11-12). What Jesus is opposing is not rabbinic, but Biblical law! 2. The Bible grants human beings the power to bind themselves through vows and oaths. A pledge to the Temple is a valid pledge, however foolish or insensitive. This can be compared to a person who sold his entire property for $1 and has no more money to support his ailing parents. This is a foolish sale, to be sure, but a valid sale that cannot be revoked from the lucky buyer.

12. Truth-telling
"Keep far from a false matter" (Exodus 23:7). This verse obligates us to tell the truth. Jesus made a false accusation when he said the Pharisees bear the blood guilt of Cain's murder of Abel-in fact the guilt of all righteous blood shed on earth (Matthew 23:35). That is libel.



Footnotes:
1. Hyam Maccoby, The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity, p.40
2. Gerald Sigal, The Jew and the Christian Missionary: A Jewish Response to Missionary Christianity, p.256

Question: How do you define "everlasting"?

A question that must be asked a lot is how Christianity defines the word "everlasting" means?

Exodus 31:17 says: "The B'nei Yisrael shall preserve the Shabbos, to maintain the
Shabbos for their generations, as an everlasting covenant.

Why did G-d write that the covanent was everlasting if he did not mean it? Did He really mean that it was only temporary? Then why write that it is everlasting?

The definition is: "Lasting forever; eternal."

Instead we are suppose to observe a pagan ritual of worship on sunday??? And pray to Jesus who resembles pagan idols as seen in my article??? "Did Christianity violate copyright laws when they copied paganism?" It is illogical. Christianity is mere paganism.

Roman Pagan Religion: Attis was a son of the virgin Nana. His birth was celebrated on DEC-25. He was sacrificed as an adult in order to bring salvation to mankind. He died about MAR-25, after being
crucified on a tree, and descended for three days into the underworld. On Sunday, he arose, as the solar deity for the new season. His followers tied an image of Attis to a tree on "Black Friday,"
and carried him in a procession to the temple. His body was symbolically eaten by his followers in the form of bread. Worship of Attis began in Rome circa 200 BCE.

Greek Pagan Religion: Dionysus is another savior-god whose birth was observed on DEC-25. He was worshipped throughout much of the Middle East as well. He had a center of worship in Jerusalem in the 1st century BCE... He was viewed as the son of Zeus, the Father God.

Egyptian Pagan Religion: Osiris is a savior-god who had been worshipped as far back as
Neolithic times. "He was called Lord of Lords, King of Kings, God of Gods...the Resurrection and the Life, the Good shepherd...the god who 'made men and women be born again'" 5
Three wise men announced his birth. His followers ate cakes of wheat which symbolized his body. Many sayings associated with Osiris were taken over into the Bible. This included: 23rd
Psalm: an appeal to Osiris as the good Shepherd to lead believers through the valley of the shadow of death and to green pastures and still waters Lord's Prayer: "O amen, who art in heaven..." Many parables attributed to Jesus.

Worship of Osiris, and celebration of his DEC-25 birth, were established throughout the Roman
Empire by the end of the 1st century BCE.

Persian Pagan Religion: Mithra was a Persian Savior. Worship of Mithra became common
throughout the Roman Empire, particularly among the Roman civil service and military. Mithraism was a competitor of Christianity until the 4th century. Their god was believed to have been born on DEC-25, circa 500 BCE. His birth was witnessed by shepherds and by gift-carrying Magi. This was celebrated as the "Dies Natalis Solic Invite," The "Birthday of the Unconquered Sun." Some followers believed that he was born of a virgin. During his life, he performed many miracles, cured many illnesses, and cast out devils. He celebrated a Last Supper with his 12 disciples. He ascended to heaven at the time of the spring equinox, about March 21.

The Babylonians celebrated their "Victory of the Sun-God" Festival on DEC-25. Saturnalia (the Festival of Saturn) was celebrated from DEC-17 to 23 in the Roman Empire. The Roman Emperor Aurelian blended Saturnalia with a number of birth celebrations of savior Gods from other religions, into a single holy day: DEC-25. After much argument, the developing Christian church adopted this date as the birthday of their savior, Jesus. The people of the Roman Empire were accustomed to celebrating the birth of a God on that day. So, it was easy for the church to divert people's attention to Jesus' birth.

References:
B.G. Walker, "The Woman's
Encyclopedia of Myths and
Secrets," Harper & Row, (1983)
Copyright ©
1997, 1999, 2000 and 2002
by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance

Perception: The theory of evolution, eating beef and morality

from a great friend whose nickname is "the rav". He defends Torah everyday against the evils of "Jewish atheism", "Jewish Buddhism" and "Jews for Jesus" and all the others who attack our faith. Props to him, and his inspirations.

Researching into the theory of evolution I believe I can securely state that eating beef and believing the theory of evolution to be scientifically valid disclose that the individual is void of a system of morality, by his own standards.

What line can people who believe in the theory of evolution draw between eating beef and eating men?

If the criterion is mere power, and men may eat animals because they gained power by accidental evolution, then the evil Nietzsche was right when he approved the oppression of the weak by the strong; and thereby every evolutionist is ideologically a criminal. The murder of weak innocents is but a logical result of the theory of evolution, which can recognize no distinction between cattle-slaughter-houses and the German-Nazi Murder factories, except to the degree of “accidental evolutionary development”.

If a scientist finds himself alone on a desert isle with a weak old man who possesses a chest of diamonds, what is to hinder him from strangling the old man and taking the diamonds? His conscience? He does not admit the validity of conscience for he declared that men are animals which are descended from reptiles, who are descended from slime cells.

He debates inwardly: "True, I do not consider man sacred. I could kill him just as I killed a frog in the laboratory... But if law and order are not maintained, perhaps someone would slay me." Then as he visualizes the glittering stones, he thinks "But no one will ever know. No one will be influenced by my example. The fear that society may eventually be corrupted does not deter me, for the effect will be to far into the future to affect me. Since there is no right or wrong but only usefulness, then surely it is useful to posses diamonds."

Indeed, none of the academics have ever declared it was "scientifically" wrong to vivisect even a man; they have never stated that anything was wrong "scientifically".

The academics take their morals from the Homicide Squad. For the criteria of right or wrong the scientists have no recourse but to rely on the patrolmen and state legislature. If not for these unscientific people, then they could not condemn murder because then the professors who eat beef should be expelled! All I can ask is the same question: What line can people who believe in the theory of evolution draw between eating beef and eating men? Is it because we are stronger? Can anyone be morally secure with the belief that it is okay to eat something that you descend from or are "related to" because of survival of the fittest? We can oppress the weak in slaughterhouses because we are stronger and gained power because of accidental evolution? It is thought provoking.