From a Karaite Jewish perspective, the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) and the New Testament are not merely different—but fundamentally incompatible at the level of law, theology, prophecy, and divine authority. This incompatibility is structural, not interpretive.
1. The Torah is eternally binding; the NT nullifies it
The Tanakh repeatedly states that the Torah is complete, perfect, and everlasting (Deut. 4:2; 13:1; Ps. 19:8). Any later revelation that alters commandments—dietary laws, Sabbath observance, circumcision, or sacrifices—automatically disqualifies itself. The NT explicitly sets aside or “fulfills” commandments (e.g., Mark 7:19; Gal. 3:23–25), violating the Torah’s prohibition against adding to or subtracting from God’s law.
2. The NT’s messiah contradicts Torah criteria
In Tanakh, the messiah is a human king from David’s line who restores Israel, gathers exiles, rebuilds the Temple, and brings universal Torah observance (Isa. 2; Ezek. 37). Jesus accomplished none of these. Redefining failure as a “second coming” has no basis in Tanakh and is viewed as post hoc theology.
3. Divine unity vs. incarnation
The Tanakh insists God is non-corporeal, indivisible, and incomparable (Deut. 4:15–16; Num. 23:19). The NT’s incarnation doctrine directly contradicts this. From a Karaite view, a god who becomes human violates God’s own self-definition.
4. Authority problem
Karaites accept only the written Tanakh as binding. The NT depends on apostolic authority, oral tradition, and reinterpretation of Hebrew texts—none of which the Torah authorizes.
Conclusion
Because the NT changes Torah law, redefines God, fails messianic criteria, and claims unauthorized authority, Karaites conclude the two testaments are not continuous revelation but mutually exclusive systems. Accepting one necessarily negates the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment