THE SONG OF MOSES WAS A WARNING — NOT AN ENDORSEMENT OF JESUS

A Challenge to Christianity’s Claims About the ONE TRUE GOD

The ONE TRUE GOD warned Moses that His people would rebel against Him, abandon His covenant, and turn to gods their fathers had never known.

That warning was recorded before Christianity existed.

In Deuteronomy 31:16, the LORD tells Moses that Israel will forsake Him and follow other gods. In Deuteronomy 31:19, He commands Moses to write a song that will stand as a witness against His people.

That song is Deuteronomy 32.

Deuteronomy 32:17 (KJV):

They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not.

And in Deuteronomy 32:39, the LORD declares:

See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me…

These are the words against which I believe every later claim of divine authority must be judged.

MOSES DID NOT PROMISE ANOTHER GOD

Deuteronomy 18:15 promises a prophet like Moses, raised from among Israel’s own people.

Moses was a human servant of the ONE TRUE GOD. His signs came from the LORD, not from any independent divine power of his own.

When Moses failed to uphold the LORD’s holiness before Israel at the rock, he was forbidden to enter the Promised Land (Numbers 20:10–12).

If even Moses was held accountable for failing to honor the LORD properly, why should anyone accept the elevation of another man to divine worship without examining that claim against the Torah?

The New Testament says Philip identified Jesus as the one Moses wrote about (John 1:45). It also portrays Jesus saying Moses wrote about him (John 5:46).

But neither statement independently proves that Moses meant Jesus.

Moses also warned about false prophets and religious rebellion.

THE NEW TESTAMENT’S PATTERN OF REINTERPRETATION

I believe the New Testament authors used the Hebrew Scriptures to construct a theological identity for Jesus that the original passages did not establish.

Consider the comparisons.

CREATION — Genesis 1:1; Isaiah 44:24 versus John 1:1–14; Colossians 1:16

Genesis attributes creation to God. Isaiah declares that the LORD created the heavens alone and spread out the earth by Himself.

The New Testament subsequently attributes creation to Jesus.

Where does Genesis identify Jesus as the Creator of Adam and Eve? It does not.

ADAM — Genesis 2:7 versus 1 Corinthians 15:45

Genesis describes the LORD forming Adam from the dust and breathing life into him.

Paul subsequently introduces Jesus as the “last Adam.”

That is Paul’s theological comparison, not an identification made in Genesis.

THE CHILD FROM EGYPT — Hosea 11:1 versus Matthew 2:15

Hosea describes Israel’s historical Exodus from Egypt.

Matthew applies those words to Jesus.

An account of Israel’s past becomes a claimed fulfillment in Jesus’ life.

THE VIRGIN BIRTH — Isaiah 7:14 versus Matthew 1:22–23

Isaiah addresses a sign in the historical setting of King Ahaz. The Hebrew word almah describes a young woman and does not necessarily specify virginity.

Matthew applies the passage to Jesus’ birth.

The original setting and the later interpretation are not identical.

THE SUFFERING SERVANT — Isaiah 52:13–53:12 versus the Gospel accounts

Isaiah describes the suffering and vindication of the LORD’s servant.

The New Testament identifies that servant with Jesus.

But Isaiah never names Jesus, and the identity of the servant has been disputed for centuries.

An interpretation is not the same thing as independent proof.

THE THIRTY PIECES OF SILVER — Zechariah 11:12–13 versus Matthew 26–27

Zechariah describes thirty pieces of silver in a prophetic symbolic action.

Matthew describes Judas receiving the same amount and subsequently attributes a related prophecy to Jeremiah, although its closest wording appears in Zechariah.

Why should this be accepted as demonstrated fulfillment rather than a Gospel narrative shaped by an earlier text?

THE DONKEY — Zechariah 9:9 versus Matthew 21:1–7

Zechariah uses Hebrew poetic parallelism to describe a king riding a donkey, a young colt.

Matthew describes a donkey and a colt.

This raises the possibility that the Gospel narrative was shaped by a particular reading of the prophecy.

THE DIVIDED GARMENTS — Psalm 22:18 versus John 19:23–24

Psalm 22 describes a suffering person’s garments being divided.

John presents the division of Jesus’ garments as fulfillment.

But the earlier psalm’s existence does not independently verify the later event.

THE VINEGAR — Psalm 69:21 versus John 19:28–29

A suffering psalmist describes being given vinegar.

John incorporates corresponding imagery into Jesus’ crucifixion.

Again, resemblance to an earlier scripture is not independent historical verification.

THE NAZARENE — Matthew 2:23

Matthew says Jesus’ residence in Nazareth fulfilled what the prophets had spoken: that he would be called a Nazarene.

Yet no surviving passage in the Hebrew Scriptures states that exact prophecy.

THE PROPHET LIKE MOSES — Deuteronomy 18:15 versus Acts 3:22

Moses promises a prophet from among Israel’s people.

Acts identifies Jesus with that prophet.

But Moses does not describe this prophet as the Creator, an incarnate God, or an object of divine worship.

THE KING AND THE SON — Psalm 2:7 versus Hebrews 1:5

Psalm 2 speaks of a king whom God calls His son.

Hebrews applies this royal language to Jesus.

Being called God’s son does not, by itself, establish equality with God.

THE RESURRECTION — Psalm 16:10 versus Acts 2:25–31

Psalm 16 expresses trust that God will not abandon His faithful one to death or the grave.

Acts interprets it as a prediction of Jesus’ resurrection.

That identification comes from the New Testament’s interpretation.

JOHN’S TESTIMONY DOES NOT PROVE ITS OWN SOURCE

John 1:6–7 claims that John the Baptist was sent by God to bear witness to Jesus.

John 1:33–34 reports John saying that the one who sent him had revealed how he would recognize the Son of God.

But who independently verified the identity of the being John claimed had sent him?

The Gospel presents John’s testimony and tells readers that it came from God.

That is a claim of divine authority, not independent proof of divine authority.

Jesus likewise appeals to the Father as his witness in John 8:18.

And in John 17:3, Jesus addresses the Father as “the only true God” while describing himself as the one sent.

Why should those statements be taken as proof that Jesus himself is the ONE TRUE GOD?

THE TEST MOSES ALREADY PROVIDED

Deuteronomy 13 warns Israel that even signs and wonders do not establish a prophet’s legitimacy if that prophet leads people toward other gods.

This is the standard I believe must be applied to Jesus and Christianity.

The question is not merely whether the Gospels describe miracles.

The question is whether the worship that developed around Jesus remains faithful to the ONE TRUE GOD who delivered Israel from Egypt.

The LORD declared in Isaiah 44:6:

I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.

And in Isaiah 44:24, He declares that He created all things alone.

Christianity responds that Jesus shares the identity of that one God.

I reject that interpretation. I believe it elevates a human being into the position reserved for the Creator.

THE UNFULFILLED MESSIANIC EXPECTATIONS

The Hebrew Scriptures describe a future age in which nations cease learning war (Isaiah 2:4), the scattered people of Israel are gathered (Isaiah 11:12), and the LORD’s kingship is universally acknowledged (Zechariah 14:9).

These conditions were not fulfilled during Jesus’ lifetime.

Christianity explains their absence through a future Second Coming.

But a promise that something will happen later is not evidence that it has already happened.

MY CONCLUSION

I see a repeated pattern:

The Hebrew Scriptures describe the LORD, His covenant, His prophets, His servants, and His warnings.

The New Testament then applies selected passages to Jesus, presents claimed revelations as testimony, and uses those interpretations to support an extraordinary new understanding of his identity.

The writers’ belief that scripture was fulfilled does not prove that it was fulfilled.

I believe the Song of Moses deserves to be read as a warning about religious rebellion, not ignored when evaluating Christianity’s claims.

I am not asking anyone to accept my interpretation without examination.

I am asking them to open the Torah, read the complete passages in their original context, and compare them with the New Testament.

If the ONE TRUE GOD warned Israel about unfamiliar gods, false prophets, and future rebellion, why should any later religious movement be exempt from that warning?

The Torah must be allowed to speak for itself before the New Testament is allowed to tell us what Moses supposedly meant.

The ONE TRUE GOD who created Adam and Eve, who delivered Israel from Egypt, and who gave Moses His commandments is the God I believe humanity must worship.

My challenge is simple: Show me where the LORD Himself, in the Torah, commanded Israel to worship Jesus as God.

Until that can be demonstrated, I will not accept a later author’s interpretation as a replacement for the LORD’s own commandments.

THE SONG OF MOSES WAS WRITTEN AS A WITNESS. READ THE WARNING BEFORE ACCEPTING THE CLAIM OF FULFILLMENT.

— James R. Dunne

jamesd91846@gmail.com

jamesreturntoeden.com

https://www.facebook.com/share/g/1QFcTcDo5J/