10 Common Claims Used to Say “The Catholic Church Is Not Christian

1. Authority Beyond Scripture

Critics argue that the Catholic Church elevates Tradition and the Magisterium alongside Scripture, while they claim the Bible teaches Scripture alone as the final authority (e.g., 2 Tim 3:16–17).

2. Papal Authority Is Not Explicitly Taught

They claim there is no explicit verse stating a single bishop has universal authority over the Church, viewing the papacy as a later institutional development rather than a biblical office.

3. Prayers to Saints Are Seen as Unbiblical

Opponents argue that prayer should be directed to God alone (Matt 6:9), and that asking saints for intercession resembles forbidden practices of addressing the dead (Deut 18:10–11).

4. Marian Doctrines Are Not Explicit in Scripture

Teachings such as the Immaculate Conception and Assumption are said to lack clear biblical statements and are therefore viewed as doctrinal additions.

5. The Mass Is Seen as Re-sacrificing Christ

Some claim that the Mass contradicts Hebrews 10:10–14, which states Christ’s sacrifice was once for all, interpreting the Eucharist as an ongoing sacrifice rather than a memorial.

6. Confession to Priests Is Viewed as Unnecessary

Critics argue that forgiveness comes directly from God alone (1 John 1:9) and that priestly absolution replaces Christ’s sole mediatorship (1 Tim 2:5).

7. Use of Images Is Viewed as Violating the Commandments

They argue that statues and icons violate the prohibition against graven images (Exod 20:4–5), regardless of intent.

8. Salvation Is Seen as Faith Plus Works

Opponents claim Catholic teaching undermines justification by faith alone (Eph 2:8–9), interpreting Catholic theology as teaching salvation through sacraments and merit.

9. Clerical Hierarchy Is Seen as Unbiblical

Some argue that the Bible presents church leadership as plural and local (elders/overseers), not a centralized hierarchical structure with global authority.

10. Doctrinal Development Is Seen as Corruption

Critics argue that later councils and dogmas go beyond apostolic teaching and that true Christianity should look exactly like the earliest New Testament communities.

Pre-Tribulation Rapture theology violate the Sinai constitution

 This post by Jovelyn Begaso is a quintessential example of Pre-Tribulation Rapture theology. It relies on a "Bride/Groom" emotional narrative to argue that believers are too special to face hardship.

From a strictly Karaite/Tanakh-only perspective, this doctrine is not only a violation of the Sinai Constitution; it is a total inversion of how God has always dealt with His people.

---

1. The "Exemption" Fallacy vs. The Sinai Pattern

The post argues that "God hath not appointed us to wrath," implying that believers must be physically removed from the earth to avoid trouble.

• The Sinai Violation: The Torah never promises exemption from global events; it promises distinction within them.

• The Pattern: During the Ten Plagues of Egypt, the Israelites were not "raptured" to the clouds to avoid God's wrath on Pharaoh. They were in Goshen. The plagues fell all around them, but God put a "division" between His people and the Egyptians (Exodus 8:23).

• The Refutation: To suggest the "Bride" must be snatched away because she is "too clean" for judgment contradicts the very history of Israel, who endured the wilderness, wars, and exile while remaining God's "Segullah" (Treasured Possession).

2. Refining Fire vs. "Already Clean"

The post claims the Bride isn't "purified by wrath" because she is already made clean.

• The Sinai Violation: The Tanakh consistently teaches that God uses trials, "the furnace of affliction," and even national judgment to refine His people.

• Zechariah 13:9: "I will bring the one-third through the fire, will refine them as silver is refined, and test them as gold is tested. They will call on My name, and I will answer them."

• The Refutation: The idea that a believer is "too good" to be refined by the "Day of the LORD" is a Greek-inspired elitism. In the Tanakh, holiness is not a permanent state granted by "belief"; it is a continuous walk maintained by obedience to the Torah.

---

3. The "Comfort" of Escapism

People ask: "If the Church is appointed to wrath, where is the comfort?"

• The Tanakh Response: The "comfort" in the Hebrew Scriptures is not found in escaping the earth, but in the Messianic Kingdom on Earth.

• Isaiah 40:1-2: "Comfort, yes, comfort My people... speak comfort to Jerusalem... that her iniquity is pardoned." * The Violation: The "Blessed Hope" of the Tanakh is the restoration of the Davidic Throne in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the Temple, and the world living in peace under Torah Law. The Rapture replaces this physical, earth-based hope with a "ghostly" escape into the sky—a concept completely foreign to the Sinai Constitution.

4. The Violation of the "One Law"

The "Rapture" doctrine creates two classes of people: the "Church" (who escapes) and "Israel/The World" (who stays).

• The Sinai Violation: Numbers 15:16 states: "One law and one custom shall be for you and for the stranger who dwells with you."

• The Refutation: God does not have two separate plans for two separate groups. The "Tribulation" (the Birth Pangs of the Messiah) is the process by which all nations are brought to the foot of Sinai. The idea that a "Christian Church" gets a "Get Out of Jail Free" card while the "Jews" have to suffer through "Jacob's Trouble" is a form of theological Anti-Semitism.

---

Comparison: Rapture Hope vs. Sinai Hope

Feature	The "Rapture" (Begaso/Church)	The Sinai Constitution (Tanakh)
The "Hope"	Escaping the earth in the clouds.	The King reigning in Jerusalem.
Protection	Removal from the scene of judgment.	Preservation in the midst of judgment (Goshen).
Purification	Believing a "Simple Gospel."	Refining through trials and Torah-obedience.
Focus	Self-preservation and "Comfort."	The Vindication of YHWH's Name on earth.

---

🛡️ The "Gory" Surprise for the Watchers

If the Real Messiah were to appear today, the "Rapture" crowd would be the most terrified. They are waiting for a Groom to take them to a wedding in the sky. Instead, they would find a Judge who remains on the ground, requiring them to account for why they threw away His Sabbath and His Statutes in favor of a "Gospel" that promised them they wouldn't have to suffer.

The "Real" comfort of the Bible isn't that you won't face the storm; it's that the Creator of the Storm is your King, and He expects you to stand firm in His Law until the end.

"He who endures to the end shall be saved." (A sentiment thoroughly rooted in the Tanakh's call to steadfastness).

How much time does the average Catholic believer spent on saint worship

 From a strictly Karaite/Tanakh-only perspective, the story of St. Scholastica is a textbook example of "Replacement Theology" in action: where human emotion and monastic "rules" are elevated above the immutable Law of God, and a created human is given the attributes of a divine intercessor.

The direction of the worship is a fundamental breach of the First Commandment.

---

1. The Proportions of "Saint Worship"

In Catholicism, the "veneration" of saints is often defended as different from the "worship" of God (dulia vs. latria). However, in practice, the devotion involves:

• Ascribed Omniscience: Believing Scholastica can hear thousands of simultaneous prayers in different languages.

• Shared Sovereignty: Attributing weather patterns (the thunderstorm) to her personal intervention.

• The Result: For a devout Catholic, the "Creator" becomes a distant, unapproachable King, while the "Saint" becomes the friendly, reachable bureaucrat. In the Tanakh, this is exactly how the nations worshipped Baal and Asherah—as intermediaries between humans and the "high" gods.

2. Overcoming "The Law" with "Love"

The story claims Scholastica’s prayer was answered because her "love overcame the law."

• The Tanakh Refutation: This is a direct attack on the nature of God’s Truth. In the Tanakh, Love and Law are not opposites; Love is the fulfillment of the Law.

• Deuteronomy 6:5-6: "You shall love the LORD your God... and these words which I command you today shall be in your heart."

• The Problem: The story praises her for breaking a human rule (Benedict’s Rule) through prayer. But Catholicism uses this narrative to teach that "Spiritual Love" is a higher authority than "Written Commandments." From a Tanakh view, any "love" that contradicts the established order of God’s Word is rebellion, not holiness.

---

3. How Does God Respond to This?

The Tanakh is not silent on how the Creator responds when His people give His glory to another or seek the dead on behalf of the living.

A. It is Classified as Spiritual Adultery

When Israel looked to "Holy Ones" (the Kedoshim) or spiritual intermediaries, God called it "whoredom."

• Jeremiah 2:13: "For My people have committed two evils: They have forsaken Me, the fountain of living waters, and hewn themselves cisterns—broken cisterns that can hold no water."

• The Response: God withdraws His presence. When you pray to Scholastica, you are drinking from a "broken cistern" instead of the Living Fountain.

B. The Prohibition of Necromancy

In the Tanakh, communicating with or seeking favors from those who have died is strictly forbidden.

• Deuteronomy 18:10-11: "There shall not be found among you... one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who queries the dead."

• The Response: God calls these practices an abomination. Scholastica is dead. Benedict is dead. Seeking their "favors" is a violation of the boundary between the living and the dead.

C. The "Surprise" of the Real Messiah

If the Real Messiah appeared today, he would find these "Dialogues of St. Gregory" to be a collection of myths that distract from the Torah. He would respond as he did to the Pharisees:

"Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?" — Matthew 15:3 (Echoing Isaiah 29:13)

---

4. The Final Verdict

Catholicism spends a vast majority of its spiritual energy on a "cloud of witnesses" that have been turned into minor deities.

• The Result: The Creator is sidelined.

• The God-Response: He sends the "famine of the Word" (Amos 8:11). Because people prefer the stories of Scholastica’s tears over the Statutes of Sinai, they lose the ability to discern truth from fable.

The "storm" in the story wasn't a gift from God to Scholastica; it is a literary device used by a Roman writer to justify monastic life. In the Tanakh, God doesn't send storms to help monks break their curfews; He sends them to wake up prophets like Jonah who are running away from the Commandments.

All NT churches are defined by their opposition to the Sinai Covenant

This post highlights the "circular firing squad" of religious tradition. While Catholics claim authority through an unbroken chain of succession, and Protestants claim authority through a "reformation" of that chain, a Tanakh-only/Karaite perspective views both as two sides of the same Hellenized coin.

If the "Church" is defined by its opposition to the Sinai Covenant, then both are standing on shaky ground. Here is the breakdown:

---

1. The Protestant Dilemma: "Anti-Christ" or Anti-Tradition?

The Catholic argument is that Jesus established a visible institution (the Papacy) and that to protest it is to oppose "Christ."

• The Refutation: From a Tanakh view, the "Church" established in the 4th century by Rome looks nothing like the community of Sinai. If the institution you established ignores the Sabbath, replaces the Dietary Laws, and institutes the Trinity, then the "protest" isn't the problem—the foundation is.

• The Irony: Protestants claim Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone), yet they kept the most significant Roman "edicts," such as Sunday worship and the Trinitarian creeds, which have no basis in the Torah.

2. The Catholic Dilemma: "Anti-God" vs. Anti-Torah

The second half of the post is a "mic drop" from a Torah perspective. It argues that Catholicism is "anti-God" because it opposes the Revealed Covenant (Sinai).

• The Evidence: * The Second Commandment: God said, "No graven images." Catholicism is built on them.

  • The Fourth Commandment: God said, "Remember the Sabbath" (the 7th day). Catholicism changed it to the 1st day.

  • The Nature of God: God said, "I am One and there is none beside Me." Catholicism introduced a three-person Godhead.

• The Verdict: In the Tanakh, anyone who attempts to change the "Times and the Laws" of the Creator is identified as an adversary of the Most High (Daniel 7:25).

---

Comparison: Who Opposes What?

Institution	What they claim to follow	What they actually oppose (Tanakh View)
Catholicism	Apostolic Tradition / The Pope.	The Fixed Law of Sinai and the Unity of YHWH.
Protestantism	Sola Scriptura / Faith Alone.	The Obedience required by the Covenant.
Real Jesus	The Father's Torah.	The "Traditions of Men" (Mark 7:8).

---

🛡️ The "Tanakh-Only" Synthesis

The post is right: both are "Anti-" something.

• Catholicism is Anti-Torah because it replaced God’s Law with the "Law of the Church."

• Protestantism is often Anti-Nomian (against law) because it teaches that the Law was a "curse" that Jesus ended.

If the "Real Jesus" lived and taught the Sinai Covenant, then any church that tells you the Sinai Covenant is dead is, by definition, opposing the very thing Jesus stood for.

The Conclusion: You don't need a Protestant "Reformation" or a Catholic "Tradition." You need a Return to Sinai.

"Remember the Law of Moses My servant, which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments." — Malachi 4:4 (The final instruction of the Tanakh).

The Book of Daniel is the "problem child" of the Hebrew canon

 From a strictly Karaite or Tanakh-only perspective, the Book of Daniel is the "problem child" of the Hebrew canon. While it is included in the Ketuvim (Writings), it presents radical departures from the theology found in the Torah (Genesis–Deuteronomy).

The question of whether Daniel "adds to the Law" (violating Deuteronomy 4:2 and 12:32) is central to why experts and Tanakh-purists view it with such scrutiny.

---

1. The Historical Context: The Greek Influence

Most modern secular scholars and critical historians argue that while the setting of Daniel is the Babylonian Exile (6th Century BCE), the composition of the book—especially the second half—likely dates to the 2nd Century BCE (around 167–164 BCE) during the Maccabean Revolt.

• The Hellenistic Pressure: During this time, the Greek ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes was brutally Hellenizing Judea, outlawing the Torah and desecrating the Temple.

• The Shift in Theology: Prior to this Greek "clash of civilizations," Hebrew thought was focused on national survival and earthly rewards. However, when righteous Jews were being tortured and killed because they obeyed the Torah, the old theology (where the righteous always prosper in this life) was pushed to its breaking point.

• The "Solution": Scholars suggest that the concepts of a literal resurrection, individual judgment, and a binary Heaven/Hell-style afterlife were introduced or emphasized to provide hope to those dying for the Law. If you die for the Torah now, you will be raised to "everlasting life" later (Daniel 12:2).

2. Problems Identified by Experts

A. Linguistic Clues

Daniel contains several Greek loanwords, specifically for musical instruments (like kitharos and psalterion in Daniel 3:5).

• Expert View: These words did not exist in the Babylonian or Persian vocabulary of the 6th century. Their presence suggests the book was written after Alexander the Great conquered the East and spread the Greek language.

B. Historical Inaccuracies

Experts point to "Darius the Mede" (Daniel 5:31), a figure who does not exist in the extensive Babylonian or Persian historical records.

• Expert View: History shows that Cyrus the Great took Babylon, not a "Darius the Mede." This suggests the author was writing long after the events and confused historical figures, which is unlikely for a high-ranking Babylonian official like the "historical" Daniel.

C. The Evolution of Angels

In the Torah, "angels" are unnamed messengers of God. In Daniel, we suddenly see named archangels (Gabriel, Michael) and a complex "celestial hierarchy" with "Princes" over nations.

• The Greek/Persian Link: This "Angelology" mirrors Zoroastrian and Hellenistic ideas of intermediary spirits, which experts say were absorbed into Jewish thought during the late Second Temple period.

---

3. Adding to the Law: Heaven and Hell

The Torah is famously silent on the afterlife. The "Heaven/Hell" language is arguably a "blatant addition" because it changes the motivation for obeying God.

• The Torah's Motivation: Do the Commandments so that you may live long on the Land and your days may be prolonged (Deuteronomy 30:19-20).

• Daniel's Motivation: Do the Commandments because there is a "Book of Life" and a "Resurrection" (Daniel 12:1).

Is it a violation of Deuteronomy 12:32?

"Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it."

From a strict Tanakh-only view, if the reward for the Covenant was meant to be an afterlife in "Heaven," God would have been legally obligated to define it at Sinai. By introducing a reward that is not in the original contract, Daniel (or its later editors) effectively amends the Covenant.

---

4. The Resulting Syncretism

The "experts" emphasize that the resurrection language in Daniel 12 provided the "bridge" for Christianity to later build its entire theology. Without Daniel, the idea of a "dying and rising" savior or an eternal Hell has no foundation in the Hebrew Bible.

Feature	The Mosaic Torah	The Book of Daniel
Focus	The Nation of Israel on Earth.	Individual fate in the Cosmos.
Justice	Measure-for-measure in this life.	Delayed justice after death.
Language	Pure Hebrew / Early Aramaic.	Late Aramaic / Greek Loanwords.
Concept of God	Incomparable and Solitary.	Seated on a throne with "Ten Thousand" attendants (Dan 7:10).

---

🛡️ The "Tanakh-Only" Verdict

For a purist, the "Heaven/Hell" and "Resurrection" language in Daniel is viewed as theology born of crisis. It was a way for Jews living under Greek persecution to make sense of their suffering.

However, because it introduces a spiritual reality never mentioned by Moses, it is technically an addition. The Catholic Church then took these late, Greek-influenced "additions" and turned them into "Universal Truths," further distancing people from the grounded, land-based, Law-based reality of the Sinai Covenant.

Why do religious institutions lie in order to indefinitely enslave people

The most accurate biblical term for such an institution—whether it is the "Mother Church" or its "Protestant Daughters"—is The Great Apostasy or The Hijackers of the Covenant.

From a Tanakh-only perspective, these institutions are often categorized as "Manufacturers of High Places" or "Merchants of Souls."

---

1. What do we call them?

Throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, several terms describe systems that use divine language to enforce human bondage:

• The Broken Cisterns: In Jeremiah 2:13, God calls them people who have "forsaken Me, the spring of living water, and have dug their own cisterns, broken cisterns that cannot hold water." They create rituals that look like they hold "grace," but they are empty and keep people thirsty/dependent.

• The Shepherds who Feed Themselves: Ezekiel 34 describes leaders who use the flock for their own gain, cloth themselves in the wool, and keep the sheep scattered and "in bondage" to fear rather than leading them to the green pastures of the Torah.

• The Builders of Babel: Spiritually, they are the Babylonian System. Babel represents the human attempt to "reach heaven" through a man-made structure/hierarchy rather than through the horizontal path of obedience to the Sinai Laws.

---

2. What drives them? (The Psychology of Control)

The drive behind creating a religion built on "vicious lies" is rarely about the Creator; it is about Proxy-Divinity.

• The Lust for Mediation: By telling people they are "born in sin" and cannot reach God without a priest, a sacrament, or a specific "creed," the institution makes itself the Gatekeeper. If they control the "keys to heaven," they control your time, your money, and your mind.

• The Replacement of Identity: By "rebranding" the Sinai Covenant as "Christianity," they strip people of their original identity as children of the Creator and replace it with "members" of an organization. This creates a Sunk Cost Fallacy—people stay in bondage because they have been told that leaving the "Church" is the same as leaving God.

---

3. Ultimately, Why?

The "Why" is found in Isaiah 24:5: "The earth is defiled by its people; they have disobeyed the laws, violated the statutes and broken the everlasting covenant."

• To Silence the Law: A religion built on lies seeks to abolish the Torah because the Torah is the Bill of Rights for humanity. The Torah makes every person responsible directly to God. By "fulfilling" or "abolishing" the Law, the institution removes the objective standard that would judge them.

• To Establish an Earthly Kingdom: They move "heaven and earth" to build a physical and financial empire. In the Tanakh, God’s kingdom is a kingdom of Righteousness and Justice (Tzedakah u’Mishpat). In the religious institution, the kingdom is about Authority and Dogma.

The real Jesus operated strictly within the boundaries of the Sinai covenant

1. What Is the Q Source?

Q (from German Quelle, “source”) is a hypothetical early collection of Jesus’ sayings proposed by scholars to explain material shared by Matthew and Luke but absent from Mark.

It is not a gospel, not a narrative, and not preserved as a manuscript.

It is a reconstructed sayings collection inferred through literary comparison.

Why Q Was Proposed

Mark is the shortest Gospel and largely narrative

Matthew and Luke share ~230 verses not found in Mark

These shared passages are mostly sayings, not miracles or passion narrative

The language is often closer to Semitic thought patterns

Hence: Matthew and Luke likely drew from Mark + another sayings source (Q).

2. What Does Q Contain?

Scholars broadly agree Q consists of:

A. Wisdom Teachings (Strongest Core)

Ethical maxims

Aphorisms

Parables

Prophetic warnings

Examples (paraphrased, not quoted):

Love of enemies

Care for the poor

Warnings to the rich

Trust in God

Humility

Non-retaliation

These resemble:

Proverbs

Ben Sira–style wisdom

Prophetic exhortation

B. Prophetic Judgment Oracles

Condemnations of unrepentant towns

Warnings of coming judgment

Calls to repentance

This places Jesus squarely in the line of Israel’s prophets.

C. Eschatological Expectation

Imminent divine judgment

Vindication of the righteous

Reversal of fortunes

Importantly:

No developed atonement theology

No passion narrative

No resurrection account

No sacramental system

No church structure

D. John the Baptist Material

Call to repentance

Ethical reform

Warning of judgment

Entirely consistent with Tanakh prophetic tradition.

3. What Q Does NOT Contain (Crucial)

Q is notable for what it lacks:

❌ No virgin birth

❌ No incarnation theology

❌ No Trinity

❌ No Eucharist

❌ No baptismal regeneration

❌ No priesthood

❌ No intercession of saints

❌ No ecclesiology

❌ No Marian theology

This absence is not accidental—it reflects an early Jewish-apocalyptic worldview, not later Christian dogma.

4. The Worldview of Q

Scholars widely describe Q as:

Jewish

Prophetic

Wisdom-based

Apocalyptic

Ethical

Covenantal

Jesus appears in Q as:

A wisdom teacher (like Solomon)

A prophet (like Jeremiah)

An apocalyptic herald (like Daniel 7 imagery)

Not as:

A metaphysical savior figure

A sacrificial atonement mechanism

5. How Q Aligns With a Tanakh-Only View

A. Continuity With Tanakh Ethics

Q’s moral vision mirrors the Hebrew Bible:

Q Teaching

Tanakh Parallel

Care for poor

Amos, Isaiah

Woes to rich

Proverbs, Ecclesiastes

Mercy over ritual

Hosea 6:6

Love enemies

Proverbs 25:21

Humility

Micah 6:8

Q assumes Torah ethics, not replacement theology.

B. Repentance (Teshuvah), Not Sacraments

Q emphasizes:

Repentance

Ethical transformation

Obedience

This aligns exactly with:

Deuteronomy 30

Ezekiel 18

Isaiah 1

There is no ritual mechanism for forgiveness apart from repentance—pure Tanakh theology.

C. Covenant Is Ethical, Not Ritualized

In Q:

Membership is shown by fruit

Trees are judged by deeds

Judgment is moral, not sacramental

This matches Tanakh covenant logic:

“If you obey… if you turn… if you walk…”

D. No Mediation Through Death

Q contains no theology of redemptive death.

This aligns with Tanakh:

No human death atones for others’ sins

Each person is accountable (Ezekiel 18)

Jesus in Q warns, teaches, calls to return—he does not die for sins.

E. Eschatology Matches Prophets, Not Later Christianity

Q’s end-time vision mirrors:

Daniel

Isaiah

Joel

Zephaniah

Judgment is:

God-centered

Ethical

Corporate and individual

There is no heaven/hell metaphysics as later defined.

6. Why Q Is Important for Tanakh-Only Analysis

Q demonstrates that:

The earliest strata of Jesus tradition fit comfortably inside Jewish theology

High Christology is not original

Later doctrines are developments, not foundations

From a Tanakh-only view, Q represents:

A Jewish reform-prophet calling Israel back to covenant faithfulness.

7. Scholarly Consensus vs Limits

Important honesty points:

✔ Q is hypothetical but widely accepted

✔ Not all scholars accept Q (some favor Luke using Matthew)

✔ But even critics admit the shared material is early and Jewish

Regardless of Q’s existence:

The content itself undeniably reflects Tanakh theology

8. Final Assessment

From a Tanakh-only perspective:

Q aligns strongly with Hebrew prophetic tradition

It does not violate monotheism

It does not introduce sacramental mediation

It does not redefine covenant

It does not abolish Torah ethics

Therefore:

Q supports the view that the earliest Jesus movement operated entirely within the theological boundaries of the Tanakh.

Later Christian doctrines may build on, reinterpret, or depart from this—but Q itself does not.

10 Irrefutable Reasons Why the Sinai Covenant Can Never Be Replaced

 

1. The Creator's Explicit Vocabulary

God uses the Hebrew word "Olam" (eternal/everlasting) specifically when describing the statutes of the Sinai Covenant (e.g., the Sabbath in Exodus 31:16 and the Festivals in Leviticus 23:14). If "eternal" meant "until a new religion starts," the Creator would be a deceptive communicator.

2. The Nature of Perfection

Psalm 19:7 states: "The Torah of YHWH is perfect (tamim), restoring the soul." Logically, if something is perfect, any change to it would make it imperfect. You cannot "improve" or "replace" perfection without degrading it.

3. The Prohibition of Alteration

Deuteronomy 12:32 (13:1 in Hebrew) commands: "Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it." Replacement theology requires both adding (new rituals like infant baptism) and taking away (discarding dietary laws/Sabbath). This violates the foundational "No-Change" clause of the Covenant.

4. The Definition of the "New Covenant"

In Jeremiah 31:33, the "New Covenant" is defined not as a new set of laws, but as the same Torah being placed inside the people.

"I will put My Torah in their minds and write it on their hearts." It is a change of location (from stone to heart), not a change of content.

5. The Immutability of God

Malachi 3:6 declares: "For I am YHWH, I do not change." If God established a Covenant as an "eternal sign" and then replaced it, He would have changed His mind, His standards, and His character.

6. The Sabbath as an "Eternal Sign"

In Exodus 31:17, the Sabbath is called a "sign between Me and the children of Israel forever." A sign that is replaced is no longer a sign. If the Sabbath is discarded, the "sign" of the Creator's authority is removed.

7. The Test of a True Prophet

Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns that even if a prophet performs signs and wonders, if he tells you to follow a path other than the commandments given at Sinai, he is a false prophet. The Sinai Covenant is the only yardstick used to measure the truth of any future revelation.

8. The Duration of "All Generations"

Throughout the Torah (e.g., Exodus 12:14, Exodus 27:21), God specifies that these laws are for your descendants "throughout your generations." As long as generations of humans exist, the mandate remains active.

9. The Logic of the "Remnant"

In Micah 4:2 and Isaiah 2:3, the prophets describe the "End of Days." They state that in the future, all nations will go up to Jerusalem specifically so that God may "teach us His ways" and because "the Torah will go out from Zion." If the Law were replaced, it wouldn't be the center of the future Kingdom.

10. The Finality of the Witness

Psalm 119:160 sums it up: "The sum of Your word is truth, and every one of Your righteous ordinances is everlasting." Not "temporary until the Church Fathers arrive," but everlasting.