DO JEWS BELIEVE IN THE “OLD TESTAMENT?” ― NO WAY!
Hugh Fogelman
Rabbis,
Sages, and learned Jews refer to the Jewish Bible as the “Hebrew Bible,”―the Tanakh―not the "Old Testament."
The
words Old Testament imply “Superceded
Covenant” as “New Testament” implies a covenant that replaced a previous one.
Paul claimed the “old covenant” with God is no more, “In that he [G-d] saith, A
new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.” (Hebrews 8:13) Paul, WHO NEVER MET JESUS, was misquoting the
prophet Jeremiah: "Behold, the days
come, said the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of
Christians
believe that anytime a prophet uses the word will, implying the future, it automatically means Jesus. Christians
do not use logic, such as why didn't Paul mention the following verses in Jeremiah: "This is the covenant that I will
make with them after those days, I will put My laws into their inward parts and
write it in their hearts and I will be their God and they shall be My people.
And they shall not have to teach anyone about God because they shall all know
Me and I will forgive their iniquities, I will remember their sin no more"
(Jeremiah 31:32-34).
Why
did Paul make it a secret of what exactly the new covenant was going to
be? Very simple, it would have made his
message meaningless. There was not going to be a new covenant. Jeremiah clearly says that it will be a
renewal of the old covenant. Where does it say God told Jeremiah that the Torah
was "waxed old and ready to vanish away"? These
are only Paul's thoughts and words.
A close examination of these verses show that the new covenant is none
other than a renewal of the old covenant of law with one innovation,
that the law is now to become an internal part of Israel's consciousness rather
than something imposed externally.
Notice
that God told Jeremiah that once remission is done, there will be no more sin
offering. Paul couldn't tell the Hebrews that all they had to do was to follow
the Law and repent. Why? Because that would not have
been the "new religion." Why didn't Paul quote the previous
verse when Jeremiah said: "But every one shall die for his own
iniquity" (Jeremiah 31:29)? Why? Because Jesus would not
have had to die. And that was the whole concept of Paul's new religion
called Christianity.
The
“Old Testament” is a Christian book based on a Greek translation of the Hebrew.
Even though the Greeks translated most of the Hebrew text correctly, there are
just too many instances where the Greeks couldn’t find the exact word in Greek
to make their translation trustworthy. The
World Book Encyclopedia says the Septuagint is the oldest Greek Bible
written in 250 BCE. Septuagint comes
from a Latin word meaning 70. Webster's Dictionary says the Hebrew Bible, was
translated into Greek in 70 or 72 days by 72 Palestinian Jews for Ptolemy II,
King of Egypt several centuries BCE. This in not correct.
Only the “Torah”
(Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy) portion of the Hebrew
Bible was translated by the Hebrew Sages. The rest of the Hebrew Bible, the
“Writings” (Nevi'im) and the “Prophets”(Kethuvim) were translated by the
pagan Greeks.
The
Christian NIV Study Bible says that Jeremiah's Verse 31 is actually quoted
incorrectly. The NIV states that this verse contains the only Old Testament use
of the phrase "new covenant," which has come down to us, via another
Latin translation as "new testament," the name that would later be
applied to the distinctively Christian part of the biblical canon. Again, there
was no new covenant―just
a renewal of the previous covenant―no New Testament, therefore, no Old Testament. This is just another Christian
misinterpretation.
When
the
As the world learned from Hitler, if you tell lies
over and over again, soon those lies are accepted as truths.
Just look at any modern dictionary. There are so
many new words, new meanings, and new concepts – many using bad English or cuss
words – that have been accepted today ONLY because it had been used by many.
The useage does not take into account whether the word
is proper or not, or if it is bad English, going against what had been taught
in schools for so many years. If you use bad English long enough, it becomes
accepted. By having Jews and Noahides accept the term
“Old Testament” and smile or wink at those who say it – they were condoning the
lie that Paul started.
Read any newspaper ads or listen to any TV
advertising. Do any of these ads claim their OLD product is better than the NEW
improved product? Of course not! The advertisers know that the “new” ALWAYS
replaced the “old”.
The Hebrew Bible should never be referred to as the
"Old Testament (OT)." That term is derogatory. OT should be read as: "Only Testament,"
or “Original Text”, because there is only one authentic
"testament" from G-d, and that is the text known as the Torah – the
SOURCE. The entire theme in the New Testament is to make the “old” scriptures,
the Jewish Bible obsolete by claiming that God replaced His old covenant with a
New one, the Christian one!
Hebrew is referred to as Leshon HaKodesh, meaning THE HOLY
TONGUE, implying it was the language that God chose to compose the Torah.
Jews
know that when Churches use the words “Old Testament,” it really is a put-down
of Judaism and a subtle form of Anti-Semitism.