Silencing the Prophets – a Response to David

Silencing the Prophets – a Response to David


Thanks again for taking the time to contribute to this discussion. I recognize that you are not happy with my habit of making new posts out of my responses to your comments, but this blog is my responsibility and I need to do things the way I understand. The purpose of this blog is to give people a forum to argue things out respectfully because such arguments ultimately lead to clarity. I have a responsibility to manage this blog in a way that I believe most effectively brings clarity to the discussion.

This post is in response to the following comments

This discussion is about Trinitarian Christianity. It is you who are trying to whitewash that form of idolatry by saying that the Scriptures never explicitly prohibit this form of idolatry and that the Scriptures never provide an example of someone worshiping idols in this way. It is not I who has created a new class of idolatry it is you.

It is my contention that the Scriptures explicitly prohibit the idolatry of Trinitarian Christianity and that Scripture has provided examples of idolatry which shares some of the mitigating factors that are present in Trinitarian Christianity.

In order to make my case I will be repeating myself so please bear with me but I will not be ignoring your responses.

I pointed out that Deuteronomy 4:15 reminds Israel that they saw no form at Sinai and it is for this reason that they should make no idol. This reminder only makes sense if Israel would one day want to worship God together with an idol. Because if Israel is planning to completely turn their backs on God and on the Sinai covenant then the fact that they saw no form at Sinai would not discourage them from making an idol. It would encourage them to make an idol because if you want to turn your back on someone you go and do what that person told you not to do.

To illustrate let us imagine two different scenarios. In one scenario a person decides that he has enough of God and the Bible and he wants to worship ba’al. His friend tells him; hey, don’t you know that at Sinai we were shown no image?

Scenario 2 A fellow decides that its ok if he worships God through the golden calf. His friend tells him; hey, dont you know that at Sinai we were shown no image?

In which of these two scenarios do you think that the fact that we were shown no image will impact the decision to worship idols?

Nothing that you wrote mitigates this argument. Cutting and pasting your previous comments does not add clarity to the discussion. Please try to understand what I said before responding.

Now for the examples. But before I begin let me state that even if Scripture would not provide one example it would not mitigate the sin. As far as I can remember, Scripture does not provide one specific example of someone committing the sin of bestiality (Leviticus 18:23). This does not make it a lesser sin.

I just happen to believe that Scripture did provide examples of people worshiping idols and in some confused way mixing that idolatry with worship of God.

I already stated that the worship of the golden calves that the Northern Kingdom engaged in was associated with worship of God. I believe that I provided ample evidence to this theory and I will add a detail that I did not mention previously. In 2Kings 17:28 it tells us that a priest from the Northern Kingdom taught the Samaritans how to fear God. What kind of priests did the Northern Kingdom have? They only had the priests appointed by Jeroboam see 1Kings 12:31; 2Chronicles 11:15 where we see how Jeroboam appointed his own priests and 2Chronicles 11:13 how all the authentic priests and Levites abandoned the Northern Kingdom. It is clear that this priest was one of the worshipers of the golden calf but he was still someone who was considered knowledgeable in the fear of God.

This factor coupled with the evidence of 2Kings 10:16 where a golden calf worshiper describes himself as “zealous for God” or 2Kings 13:14 where a golden calf worshiper humbles himself before God’s prophet, all lead us in the direction that the worshipers of the golden claves were confused and they did not clearly identify their worship as a rebellion against God and as a rejection of God. The Scriptures however teach us that regardless of their self-delusion, their worship was indeed a rejection of God and a rebellion against Him.

You seem to have a problem understanding the concept of self-delusion. I see this happen all the time. You have people who think that they are motivated by kindness when in fact they are motivated by a craving for recognition. There are people who think that they are motivated by zealousness for righteousness when in fact they are motivated by an enjoyment of lording over others. There are people who tell themselves that they are motivated by a love for God when in fact they are motivated by an unhealthy fear of death.

Man is capable of self-delusion but the Scriptures speak the searing truth, cutting through all the delusions of men. So the worshipers of the golden calves of Jeroboam may not have consciously identified their worship as a rebellion against God and a rejection of Him, but the prophets come along and tell us that that is exactly what they were doing.

It is for this reason that the prophets were often persecuted, it is because they spoke the searing, uncomfortable truths that tore through the self-delusion of the people. I believe that it was for this reason that the authors of the Christian Scriptures needed to demonize the Jewish people. It is because the Jewish people saw through their self-delusion, that the man that they were idolizing was simply a man.

Throughout history, the Church has attempted to silence the voice of the nation that God appointed as His witnesses for the same reason that some Jewish people moved to silence God’s prophets. The Jewish people testify to the world that God hears all prayer and that He is close to all who call upon Him. The Jewish people testify that every heart belongs to the Creator of all hearts and to Him alone. The Jewish people testify that no being that walked God’s earth can rightly claim the devotion of our hearts. And the searing truth of this testimony disturbed the Churchmen and they moved to silence God’s witneses. Ironically, as they attempted to silence God’s witnesses the Church accused these same witnesses of being “prophet killers.”

David, God’s witnesses will continue to testify. And my prayer is that this humble blog serve as a fraction of a fraction for that testimony.

If you found this article helpful please consider making a donation to Judaism Resources by clicking on the link below.

Judaism Resources is a recognized 501(c) 3 public charity and your donation is tax exempt.

Thank You

Yisroel C. Blumenthal

This entry was posted in Correspondence. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Silencing the Prophets – a Response to David

  1. Concerned Reader says:

    A Parable.

    From the time of Abel onwards there were men (albiet imperfect men) who sought G-d’s favor to the point of great risk to themselves, to the point of death, saying “I will serve G-d and him only,” men like Noah, Shem, Enoch, and others. These men were deemed by G-d as capable at the time of godliness that G-d gave to them, and G-d gave them blessing because of their obedience of their free will.

    He said to them. “If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”

    One day a prophet named Abraham came among them. He said to the men of his generation, “my friends, last night G-d himself and two of his angels came to me and broke bread with me and my family. G-d is now staying by my side living in my dwelling. He told me, “Tomorrow, you will take me to the mountaintop and offer me as a burnt offering that everyone may know that I truly love them, and am abounding in grace to forgive them. So Abraham did as the lord commanded and slew this visitor, the lord, the one who bore G-d’s express image. Now, being G-d, death could not hold the visitor. He said, it is finished, and I will now ascend to return at a later time.

    Abraham, experiencing this great miracle, and feeling the profound sense of love, forgiveness, and faith sought to teach others of his generation. “Brothers, I have experienced the most profound love of G-d! He loves you all. Yesterday, he died for us. You too can experience this blessing if you will immerse and accept this profound gift.” The men of Abraham’s generation answered and said to him: Is G-d like us that he should die? Has not g-d shown already his abounding love to our fathers? why his need of dying? To Noah whom he saved from the flood, To Shem the righteous, to Enoch who ascended, and to the others besides did he not show grace without such a price? Has he not preserved us to this day without this price? Abraham answered, “yes, it is true these things happened, but they were merely a shadow of what was to come. This new covenant is better, its blessing more manifest.

    The men answered: Why then did our fathers struggle so hard? Why, if G-d was to do this great thing at this time did only one family survive the great flood? Is G-d not just? Abraham answered and said: The love that the fathers offered was not truly fit for G-d’s justice. It was a love offered only by callous hearts, out of selfishness, and so great judgement came on them all, even upon the righteous after the flood it did come when Noah grew his vineyard.”

    “Is it not rather that the fathers stumbled?” Is it not in the nature of free agency to have the option to stumble? In allowing men to fall short, godliness is more manifest among the godly, and sin among sinners, righteousness now being a man’s very meaningful gift of service to G-d.

    “If it be as you say Abraham, that none of the works of the fathers was sufficient to please G-d, why did he bless them so? “It was only an earthly blessing!” “But Abraham, isn’t G-d just to all who call on him? ” “True, but only truly to the elect who hear this message I now preach is true godliness attainable.” “Not so brother Abraham, for G-d has said, “I the lord do not change.” “If G-d be partial now only to the elect, as you say, then he has changed his mind.

    The death of those countless numbers in the flood was for naught, and G-d has become partial in his judgement of various persons. “The righteousness of men is now filth to G-d!” said Abraham.

    Abraham, do you not hear your words? You say that G-d’s actions until now were only mere shadows of his love. Aren’t shadows of love only a form of cruelty? “If I say to my spouse with whom I made a vow, I am for you in all things forever, only to change my mind later, is that not the epitome of cruelty?”

    “Of what profit then is godliness if G-d has done everything for us by dying?” Man’s impetus for goodness, the concept of reward and punishment flees the earth if G-d operates thusly.”

    Abraham said, “Snakes, vipers, white washed walls, you are now not worthy of the love G-d has shown you, you resist the gift and you will now die as did your fathers in the flood.”

    “Brother Abraham, now that you have believed this thing, your once renowned humility has fled from you, and you place yourself in G-d’s seat inadvertently.” I

    f it was good enough for hashem in the past to trust in reward and punishment for our acts, it is good for all time, it cannot change. Unless Abraham, do you hold this parable to be true? “The parents have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.'” Is it not written oh Abraham “everyone will die for their own sin; whoever eats sour grapes–their own teeth will be set on edge?”

  2. jasonannelise says:

    When people believe in tje trinity they begin to speak strangely. They say God sent Jesus, and then they say God is Jesus. They say they are waiting for Jesus to return and then they say he is the One who is most present everywhere. They say there is no division in God but then speak as if, by not praying to one member of the ‘trinity’, that one would be ignored. It seems that they have taken the concept of manifestation and turned it into incarnation, whereas in truth God doesn’t ‘become’ anything and the creation with which He clothes Himself in order to be seen remains a garment, a created servant.

  3. Here’s the main issue that I have seen with christian excuses for their worship of jesus, despite the fact that Deuteronomy 4:9-19 explicitly states that we are to not worship Hashem in ANY FORM…

    What I have seen most commonly is that the christian will insist that Deuteronomy 4:9-19 only refers to “man made forms” that are made of stone, wood, brass, etc. Of course, this would allow for the potential worship of forms that are not made by man, such as the moon, the sun, and the stars, of which G-d explicitly forbids worship of in Deuteronomy 4:19. It would also allow for the potential worship of human beings, such as the prince of Tyre, (In the book of Ezekiel, he claimed to be G-d, just as christians believe about jesus…) Needless to say so the christian position falls flat…

    But their next excuse is that their jesus is an “uncreated form that pre-exists creation.” As oxymoronic as it sounds, this is precisely what christian apologists such as Dr. Michael Brown teach to their robotic apologetic minions. But most importantly, the assertion that jesus is an “uncreated form that pre-exists creation” is a completely baseless assertion…Even if jesus did make such a claim, (which is questionable at best…) the claim should be treated in the same way as any other human being who made such a claim, such as the prince of Tyre.

    But let’s hypothetically assume that jesus actually was an “uncreated form that pre-exists creation.” (He’s not obviously, but lets entertain the idea for a moment.) This would STILL fall into the category of idolatry for us to worship him, as Deuteronomy 4:9-19 doesn’t make any exceptions for “uncreated forms that pre-exist creation.”

    Of course, the next step for the christian is to go on the “great jesus angel hunt” and falsely dub every unnamed angel in the Tanach as a “pre-incarnate jesus angel.” Never mind the fact that jesus never claimed to be any of these angels. Also, never mind the fact that the false book of Hebrews claims in Hebrews 1:6 that ALL THE ANGELS WORSHIP “the son.” (jesus)…That would include “the angel of the Lord.” That means that “the angel of the Lord” and jesus are mutually exclusive, even according to the writer of the book of Hebrews!

    And of course, after the christian realizes that they have no support for their “jesus angel theory” in light of the Tanach and even the NT, the christian will accuse the Jew of “limiting G-d” by not entertaining the possibility that G-d “could” assume the form of a man.

    But the christian is asking the wrong question and is attempting to make a strawman argument. The issue isn’t about what G-d “can or cannot” do. No…Rather, the issue is about what G-d WILL OR WILL NOT DO.

    We can ask the question, “COULD G-d take on the form of a golden calf?”

    Answering such a question is irrelevant to the discussion concerning what constitutes idolatry according to G-d Himself. A more appropriate question is this:

    “WOULD G-d take on the form of a golden calf?”

    In light of Deuteronomy 4:9-19, we can assert that G-d would not and will not take on the form of a golden calf.

    We can also ask this question:

    “WOULD G-d take on the form of a man?”

    In light of Deuteronomy 4:9-19, we can assert that G-d would not and will not take on the form of a man.

    Thus, jesus cannot be Hashem, even if he claimed to be…


  4. Sharbano says:

    The question would be no different by asking, if G-d can create a stone so heavy He cannot lift it.
    The question of “limiting G-d” is a non-question. It’s about as valid as asking what color is the number 3.

  5. David says:


    Thank you for responding.

    I suppose this debate between us could continue ad infinitum. And I wouldn’t mind to continue at least for a while longer even though I have to admit I’m tiring of this particular topic. But having said that, if I felt there was any prospect of anyone gaining anything from further discussions that haven’t already been said in one way or another I would continue.

    As for me, at this point, I’m bowing out and leaving you with the last word in the debate between us.

    Thanks again; I know that you sincerely believe in your argument and you presented it well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.