### Introduction Christian Trinitarians believe "that there is one eternal being of God – indivisible, infinite. This one being of God is shared by three co-equal, co-eternal persons, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit". The Hebrew bible book of Deuteronomy makes a few statements about the oneness of God: > **Deuteronomy 6:4** - "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, **the Lord is one**." > **Deuteronomy 4:35** - "To you it was shown, that you might know that the Lord is God; **there is no other besides Him**." These statements do not make distinctions between *being* and *personhood* and seem to point to a divine simplicity. ### "Gods you did not know" Deuteronomy later contains a stark warning for the Israelites about false gods and prophets, saying: > **Deuteronomy 13:1-3** - If prophets or those who divine by dreams appear among you and show you omens or portents, and the omens or the portents declared by them take place, and they say, **‘Let us follow other gods’ (whom you have not known) ‘and let us serve them,’** you must not heed the words of those prophets or those who divine by dreams, for the Lord your God is testing you... The key injunction being against *other gods whom you [the Israelites] did not know*. ### Question - Do Trinitarian Christians believe the audience of Deuteronomy 13 (Israelites) knew of a triune god? - If Israelites did not know a triune god, why do Trinitarians believe Deuteronomy 13 doesn't prohibit following after a trinity? *This question is not suggesting that the trinity added new gods, but potentially that a triune god is different ontologically from a unitary god such that they cannot have the same identity (example: Trinitarians likely believe that the Mormon god is not the same god as the trinitarian god because the Mormon god is a created man who was exalted to godhood, therefore the Mormon god's fundamental nature is different from the trinitarian god)*

It seems that Christian apologetics very much rests on the historical veracity of the resurrection. That is, if we can verify the resurrection, then we have an objective rationale to believe in the Christian faith. Let's assume for a moment that William Craig is correct that there is good evidence for the resurrection. Even so, does this conclude that Jesus was in fact who he said he was, i.e. the son of God? Deuteronomy 13:1-4 reads as follows: >If there appears among you a prophet or a dream-diviner and he gives you a sign or a portent, saying, “Let us follow and worship another god”—whom you have not known—even if the sign or portent that he named to you comes true, do not heed the words of that prophet or that dream-diviner. For the LORD your God is testing you to see whether you really love the LORD your God with all your heart and soul. Follow none but the LORD your God, and revere none but Him; observe His commandments alone, and heed only His orders; worship none but Him, and hold fast to Him. And the resurrection served as a sign: >Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered him, saying, “Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you.” But he answered them, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Matthew 12:38-40) As far as a Pharisee Jew is concerned, Jesus is certainly a god "whom you have not known"; Jesus and the Trinity were completely unknown to the Jews. Thus his sign should be disregarded. Now you might be tempted to respond that Jesus is indeed the same God that they knew, but he just didn't come out of the closet as Jesus until later. The question would then be: how are we to know that Jesus is, in fact, the same god? For that Christian apologetics has turned to the resurrection as evidence. But the verse clearly states: "_even if the sign or portent that he named to you comes true, do not heed the words_" thus excluding supernatural signs as evidence! (In fact, in Exodus 7:11 even Pharoah's sorcerers were capable of performing supernatural feats.) So we are back to square one; first, we need evidence that Jesus was indeed the son of God. Then and only then, does the historicity of the resurrection have any relevance to affirming Jesus. Without prior evidence, it seems justifiable to write Jesus off as a false prophet. Now many are quick to point out that Jesus claimed to be that very same god of the OT and even admonished Israel for not revering the god of the OT. Nonetheless, this doesn't prove that he is that very same god. Where are we to look for that verification? The resurrection? But that may just be another "sign" or "portent". It seems that the only acceptable form of validation must come from the Old Testament itself i.e fulfilled messianic prophecies. That is, the historicity of a supernatural feat has no place in the debate between Christians and Jews. Please note what I'm **not** saying: 1. Christianity therefore _must_ be false 2. Deuteronomy 13 by definition _must_ exclude Jesus 3. The purpose of the resurrection was to serve as "proof" What I **am** saying: The Resurrection _in and of itself_ can be evaded on supernaturalistic grounds.

Deuteronomy 13:1-4 [states](http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0513.htm) : >1. All this word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it. > > 2. If there arise in the midst of thee a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams--and he give thee a sign or a wonder, > > 3. and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spoke unto thee--saying: 'Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them'; > > 4. thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or unto that dreamer of dreams; for the LORD your God putteth you to proof, to know whether ye do love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. My understanding is that Christians believe that Jesus abrogated the Mosaic law (e.g. keeping the Sabbath, dietary restrictions, etc.) and they no longer feel bound by them. How, then, do they understand the above passage, which states that one may not subtract commandments from the Law, and which seems to imply that a true prophet will not do so?

> Remember and do not forget how you provoked the Lord your God to wrath > in the wilderness (Deuteronomy 9:7 ESV). It seems like this passage describes God being provoked (changed) by the people of Israel. This is a problem, because it contradicts the doctrine of divine immutability, that is often inferred from Malachi 3:6. > For I the Lord do not change... (Malachi 3:6 ESV) Is there a way to resolve this apparent contradiction?

Deuteronomy 33:26 is > "There is none like the God of Jeshurun, who rides the heavens to your > aid, and the clouds in His majesty." Biblical Unitarians take Daniel 7:13 to be a Messianic prophecy, and it has > "I saw One like the Son of Man coming with the clouds of heaven. He > approached the Ancient of Days and was led into His presence." If the Son of Man = God, then the fact the Son of Man in coming with the clouds of heaven is easy to reconcile with Deut. 33:26, where it seems to describe an exclusive activity of God - riding the clouds. How do Biblical Unitarians, who believe the Son of Man is a divine figure in a sense, but not God, reconcile these two verses?

this previous question asks for evidence that points to Deuteronomy being written during the reign of King Josiah. A lot of modern scholarship today suggests that Deuteronomy was a much later work, produced in a much later time period. So what evidence is there that points to Deuteronomy being written before this time? I am willing to accept that Deuteronomy may have some redactions and changes, but lots of liberal scholarship points to it being a much later text, with no relevance to Moses or the first four books of the bible at all. Any general answers that highlight evidence for an early date for Deuteronomy / before the reign of King Josiah are welcome. This question may also naturally lead to the question of authorship, so if that isn’t too broad, feel free to include that in your answers as well if you deem it appropriate.

The *Ten Commandments* is often shown as a nice list with ten short statements, whereas in the Bible it exists as a long block of text in Exodus 20:2–17 and Deuteronomy 5:6–21. For reference: > *Exodus 20:2-17 (HCSB)* > > 2 I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the place of slavery. > > 3 Do not have other gods besides Me. > > 4 Do not make an idol for yourself, whether in the shape of anything in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters under the earth. 5 You must not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the fathers' sin, to the third and fourth [generations] of those who hate Me, 6 but showing faithful love to a thousand [generations] of those who love Me and keep My commands. > > 7 Do not misuse the name of the LORD your God, because the LORD will punish anyone who misuses His name. > > 8 Remember to dedicate the Sabbath day: 9 You are to labor six days and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. You must not do any work—you, your son or daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the foreigner who is within your gates. 11 For the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and everything in them in six days; then He rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and declared it holy. > > 12 Honor your father and your mother so that you may have a long life in the land that the LORD your God is giving you. > > 13 Do not murder. > > 14 Do not commit adultery. > > 15 Do not steal. > > 16 Do not give false testimony against your neighbor. > > 17 Do not covet your neighbor's house. Do not covet your neighbor's wife, his male or female slave, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor. If I were given the above text **without paragraphs nor verse markers** (which are a later addition), I'd have trouble spotting how it should be divided to exactly ten commandments. This might be a reason that there are multiple "competing" divisions. The different divisions that I know of are (adapted from a better table on Wikipedia ): | | A | B | C | |-|:-:|:-:|:-:| | I am the Lord your God | pre | 1 | 1 | | You shall have no other gods before me | 1 | 1 | 1 | | You shall not make for yourself an idol | 2 | 2 | 1 | | Do not take the name of the Lord in vain | 3 | 3 | 2 | | Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy | 4 | 4 | 3 | | Honor your father and mother | 5 | 5 | 4 | | You shall not murder | 6 | 6 | 5 | | You shall not commit adultery | 7 | 7 | 6 | | You shall not steal | 8 | 8 | 7 | | You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor | 9 | 9 | 8 | | You shall not covet your neighbor's wife | 10 | 10 | 9 | | You shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor | 10 | 10 | 10 | For fun, see if you know which is used by whom! The answer is below, mouse-over to see it: >! **A**: Anglican, Reformed *(pre = preface)*
>! **B**: Orthodox; Jewish (Talmudic)
>! **C**: Catholic, Lutheran
>! As far as I know, almost all other denominations use A or B. What are the reasonings for these different divisions? Especially since the first division didn't stick, I'm quite sure the differences can't be arbitrary.

In Deuteronomy 18:16-18 God said to Moses that he will raise up a prophet like unto Moses from his own people or from among their brethern, Christians believe that that this verse is speaking about the Lord Jesus Christ, but in what ways is Jesus like Moses and what are the similarities between Moses and Jesus? > According to all that thou desiredst of the Lord thy God in Horeb in > the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of > the Lord my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I > die not. > > And the Lord said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have > spoken. > > I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto > thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them > all that I shall command him. Deuteronomy 18:16-18

In Deuteronomy Moses teaches to make oaths in the Lord's name: > Fear the Lord your God, serve him only and take your oaths in his name. Deuteronomy 6:13 NIV > Fear the Lord your God and serve him. Hold fast to him and take your oaths in his name. Deuteronomy 10:20 NIV The instructions surprised me because Jesus to take oaths at all and that we should simply say yes or no. > “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one. Matthew 5:33‭-‬35‭, ‬37 NIV God urges the people to do one thing and later the polar opposite thing. Surely, there must be something that I've missed. I recall learning that there was a silly opinion among people that it was okay to break oaths made on the temple gate but it's not okay to break oaths made on the temple coins. Jesus calls out the silliness of that. So is this related to that in a way or the Deuteronomy one needs to be viewed in some context? **How have various theologians resolved this contradiction?**

Deuteronomy 13:1-4 [states](http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0513.htm) : >1. All this word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it. > > 2. If there arise in the midst of thee a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams--and he give thee a sign or a wonder, > > 3. and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spoke unto thee--saying: 'Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them'; > > 4. thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or unto that dreamer of dreams; for the LORD your God putteth you to proof, to know whether ye do love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. The above passage seems to state that one may not subtract commandments from the Law of Moses which the Jewish people were commanded to obey, and seems to imply that a true prophet will not do so. Do Christians believe that Jews must still obey the Mosaic Law, and if not, how is that consistent with the above passage?

Deut 34:5-7 say that when Moses died at the age of 120 years, his eyesight or strength had not diminished. That implies that he did not die of age-related ailments. One is left to assume that Moses died a sudden death for reasons like heart failure, or in an accident. Anyway, the Old Testament is silent on the cause of his death. My question therefore: **Is there a traditional belief in Christianity or Judaism on the cause of death of Moses?**

Many modern bible translations are published with copyright claims. However published in the work is not only permission but a command to make a copy. This can be found in Deuteronomy 17:18: > And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that > he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is > before the priests the Levites: You might argue that this only applies to Kings. However Revelation 5:10 makes us all kings: > And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on > the earth. It seems to me that if the translators wanted to copyright their translations they would have to leave Deuteronomy 17:18 out. However they all include the verse and it appears, at least at face value, to supersede their copyright notice. Is this a valid legal argument? Has this has ever been tested in a court of law? And if so, what was the outcome?

Exodus 20:8-11 says > Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. 9 **Six days you shall labor** > and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD > your God, on which you must not do any work—neither you, nor your son > or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant or livestock, nor the > foreigner within your gates. 11 For in six days the LORD made the > heavens and the earth and the sea and all that is in them, but on the > seventh day He rested. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and > set it apart as holy. Similarly, Deuteronomy 5:12-14 says > Observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy, as the LORD your God has > commanded you. 13 **Six days you shall labor** and do all your work, 14 but > the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God, on which you must > not do any work Have any Christian theologians or denominations held that a 5 or 4 day work week, unlike the 6 day work week apparently proscribed in Exodus and Deuteronomy by God, is unscriptural and should therefore be replaced with a 6 day work week by Christians?

>The Lord will open to you his good treasury the heavens, to give the rain of your land in its season and to bless all the work of your hands; and you shall lend to many nations, but you shall not borrow (Deuteronomy 28:12 RSV). >For the Lord your God will bless you as he has promised, and you will lend to many nations but will borrow from none. You will rule over many nations but none will rule over you. (Deuteronomy 15:6) My question is specifically for the part of both scriptures where it says that the Israelites will lend to many nations but will not borrow. My question is when did Israel have all of this wealth and resources to be able to lend to other nations? I know that major blessings came to Israel during the days of Solomon but I can't find a particular scripture that outlines Solomon or some other king of Israel having nations borrowing money from them or lending to the nations.

A question that isn't really that important, however, it comes to my mind every time I read some Scripture verses. If the Mosaic Law forbids the consumption of pork meat, why do we see a pig farmer mentioned in the parable of the prodigal son, and some demons begging Jesus to send them in pigs (and it is mentioned that a swineherd man is taking care of them)? I know that Jesus states that nothing from outside (food) is unclean, or that no food is unclean unless you think is unclean, however, He told these parables to Jews so it means it was a common practice to keep pigs as livestock, and the swineherd that was taking care of the pigs, didn't know that Jesus announced that no food is forbidden. So the question is why did Jews at that time raise pigs if they don't eat pork, and pigs don't really have any other utility than consuming (maybe pork skin was used for shoes, however, this doesn't make it worth raising a pig to take its skin and to throw the meat away).

"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one!

> Deuteronomy 31:24-26 (NIV) After Moses finished writing in a book the words of this law from beginning to end, he gave this command to the Levites who carried the ark of the covenant of the Lord: “***Take this Book of the Law and place it beside the ark of the covenant*** of the Lord your God. There it will remain as a witness against you. This verse indicates that the Torah was placed ***beside*** the Ark of the Covenant and stood there as a witness. But this Wikipedia mentions the Torah was once kept inside the Ark. Was there any chance ever that the Torah was kept inside the Ark? Is there any verse supporting it? *(If the information in Wikipedia is not credible, someone must update it)* ***Note:** Readers should not be confused between Torah (book) and the stone tablets (10 Commandments). The question here is about the Book, not the tablets.*

I have copied these following quotations from a study section of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints website explaining the identity of the God of the Old Testament: > Elder James E. Talmage explained the special significance Elohim has > for Latter-day Saints: > > “The name Elohim … is expressive of supreme or absolute exaltation and > power. Elohim, as understood and used in the restored Church of Jesus > Christ, is the name-title of God the Eternal Father, whose firstborn > Son in the spirit is Jehovah—the Only Begotten in the flesh, Jesus > Christ.” (Jesus the Christ, p. 38.) Additionally the website says: > It is vital to remember the place of God the Father: He is the Father > of our spirits (see Hebrews 12:9) and is our God. The existence of > other Gods cannot alter that fact. He is the author and sponsor of the > eternal plan of salvation. It is equally essential to note, however, > that the agent by whom He administers His affairs on this earth is His > Firstborn Son, known as Jehovah in the Old Testament. It appears obvious that LDS views Elohim and Jehovah as two separate entities. Yet in Deuteronomy 4, in the midst of a passage wherein God is asserting yet again that there is no other God beside Him, we find: > Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the **LORD he is God**; there is none else beside him. - Deuteronomy 4:35 And the Hebrew beneath this passage is: 859 [e] אַתָּה֙ ’at-tāh to you Pro-2ms 7200 [e] הָרְאֵ֣תָ hā-rə-’ê-ṯā it was shown V-Hofal-Perf-2ms 3045 [e] לָדַ֔עַת lā-ḏa-‘aṯ, that you might know Prep-l | V-Qal-Inf 3588 [e] כִּ֥י kî that Conj 3068 [e] יְהוָ֖ה **Yah-weh Yahweh** N-proper-ms 1931 [e] ה֣וּא **hū He** Pro-3ms 430 [e] הָאֱלֹהִ֑ים **hā-’ĕ-lō-hîm; [is] God** Art | N-mp 369 [e] אֵ֥ין ’ên [there is] none Adv 5750 [e] ע֖וֹד ‘ō-wḏ other Adv 905 [e] מִלְבַדּֽוֹ׃‪‬ mil-ḇad-dōw. besides Him Prep-m, Prep-l | N-msc | 3ms In making the statement that there is no other God beside Him, God says, "Yahweh (Jehovah) He is Elohim." How does LDS understand this statement that Jehovah and Elohim are one and the same?

We read in Deut 32:11-12 (NRSVCE): >As an eagle stirs up its nest, and hovers over its young; as it spreads its wings, takes them up, and bears them aloft on its pinions, the Lord alone guided him; no foreign god was with him. The allegory of the eagle and how it rears its young, gives a picturesque presentation, on how the Lord cares for his people. I have heard it said that a particular kind of eagle which builds its nest on mountain-cliffs, does the base-work with thorny bushes, over which a soft layer of feathers is laid. When the chicks hatch, they have a smooth bed to sit on; but when they grow up and refuse to leave the comfort of the nest, the parent eagle stirs up the nest so that the thorny base is exposed which makes it impossible for the the chicks to stay put. There is more to the way the eagle trains its young to fly high. My question is: **Has any Catholic scholar fully explained the deeper meaning of the allegory of eagle in Deut 32: 11-12?**

As Christians are we allowed to believe in immigration control or want control as to who enters the country? If yes, then how do you interrupt verses such as these, which seem to support the concept of no borders?: > The stranger who sojourns with you shall be to you as the native among > you, and you shall love him as yourself; for you were strangers in the > land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God. **Leviticus 19:34** Love the sojourner therefore; for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt. **Deuteronomy 10:19** > Cursed be he who perverts the justice due to the sojourner, the > fatherless, and the widow.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen. **Deuteronomy 27:19**