Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

“Charity” Accused of Sex Abuse Coordinating ID2020’s Pilot Program For Refugee Newborns

By Whitney Webb | UNLIMITED HANGOUT | July 29, 2020

A biometric identification program backed by the ID2020 alliance will see its new “digital id” program rolled out for refugee newborns in close coordination with a charity tied to Wall Street and prominent Western politicians whose workers have been accused of sexually exploiting refugee children.

iRespond, an international non-profit organization that is “dedicated to using biometrics to improve lives through digital identity,” has begun piloting a new biometric program for newborns among the predominately Karen refugee population along the Myanmar-Thailand border, a program it soon hopes to “quickly deploy” at a greater scale and make available to the general global population. The pilot program is being conducted as part of the controversial ID2020 alliance, backed by Microsoft, the GAVI vaccine alliance and the Rockefeller Foundation, and with the International Rescue Committee (IRC), a non-profit organization deeply tied to the Western political elite and Wall Street with a controversial track record of silencing numerous sex abuse and fraud allegations.

The new program, an extension of iRespond’s “voluntary” biometric identification program in the Mae La refugee camp, “will create a record of a birth, attested by a trusted clinic, with a goal of changing the life trajectory for the participants.” Through the program, “a guardianship relationship between the newborn and the mother is established and linked to digital and high security physical identity documents.”

However, iRespond’s CEO, Scott Reid, told Biometric Update that these credentials do “not carry the same weight as a true birth certificate,” but asserts that the organization’s biometric “birth attestation” program “could leapfrog the traditional barriers to establishing identity.” Despite the fact that iRespond’s quasi-birth certificates would seemingly serve little purpose in areas where actual birth certificates are readily available, the organization notes that “once the pilot is completed, iRespond is ready to quickly deploy the solution at scale” for mass use around the globe. “Product development” on adapting their platform for newborns began earlier this year and Reid notes that having an iRespond-provided biometric “birth attestation” will enable “access to vital services such as healthcare, social protection, education and banking.”

The pilot program is being conducted at the Mae Tao clinic, which is largely funded by the CIA cut-out USAID as well as the governments of Germany and Taiwan, the Open Society Foundations and the International Rescue Committee (IRC). The IRC is very active in the day-to-day functions of the clinic (financed by a USAID-funded project) and it is also intimately involved in iRespond’s digital identity program, including its new pilot program for newborns and its earlier efforts to supply Mae La’s residents with biometric identity.

Food or Sovereignty

iRespond’s work in Mae La in conjunction with IRC was first announced by the ID2020 alliance in September 2018. The ID2020-funded pilot program, the announcement states, was to be “led by Alliance partner iRespond and will be conducted in close partnership with the International Rescue Committee (IRC).” It aims to provide biometric identities to the approximately 35,000 individuals inhabiting the area, with the newer program aiming to ensure that babies born in the community are also made participants by default upon birth. It notes specifically that “the pilot will offer blockchain-based digital identification, linked to individual users through iris recognition, for refugees accessing the IRC’s services in the Mae La Camp in Thailand.” Having a “digital identity” would allow refugees “to access improved, consistent healthcare within the camp” with plans for the same system to eventually “electronically document both educational attainment and professional skills to aid with employment opportunities.”

Migrant workers pass the Thai-Myanmar border in an official service truck as they leave Thailand from Mae Sot in Tak province in northern Thailand. Photo: AFP/Ye Aung Thu

A year later, the program, featured in a lengthy profile in Newsweek, was revealed to be “just the first step in an effort that aims to equip the camp’s entire refugee population with secure and portable “digital wallets” that will hold not just their medical records but also educational and vocational credentials, camp work histories and myriad other records,” ostensibly including financial activity. This is particularly likely given that iRespond is partnered with Mastercardanother ID2020 partner that is closely allied with the company, Trust Stamp, a biometric identity platform that also doubles as a vaccine record and payment system. In addition, IRC’s strategic plans for Mae La through 2020 include “expand[ing] micro-enterprise development and village savings and loans associations,” such as those offered by ID2020 partner Kiva, among others, who link biometric identity to the receipt of loans.

iRespond’s system, not unlike Trust Stamp’s, is also slated to serve as a vaccine record. Larry Dohr, iRespond’s head of Southeast Asia operations, told Reuters in April that “a biometric ID system can keep a record of such people [who have previously tested positive for Covid-19] and those getting the vaccine.” Dohr added that “we can biometrically identify the individual and tie them to the test results, as well as to a high security document. The person then has ‘non-refutable’ proof that they have immunity due to antibodies in their system.” Dohr then refers to such “proof” as a “very valuable credential.”

Notably, in press releases and news reports, iRespond executives emphasize how their biometric identity system, based on iris scans and powered by Microsoft, will “protect privacy” and allow “control and ownership of identity data belong to the holder.” However, the Mae La project does not offer this degree of control and ownership, with Newsweek noting that“Eventually, [iRespond and their collaborators] aim to offer the refugees a level of fine-grained control over what pieces of personal information are shared with others.” In other words, such control over their personal information has not yet been made available to them, despite the public portrayal that this functionality is a base component of iRespond’s system.

What is particularly noteworthy about iRespond’s and IRC’s digital identity efforts is that, while it is a “voluntary” program, destitute refugees wishing to access healthcare and other services IRC provides in the area, including access to clean water, must have their irises scanned in order to reap those benefits. It is highly unlikely that such individuals are not only uninformed about any potential risks of providing their biometrics for use in a pilot program, but are not in a stable enough state to make an informed decision on the matter, as their precarious position would see them choose urgent healthcare needs, etc. over privacy. It increasingly seems that Mae La was chosen as the pilot project because its residents were highly unlikely to decline participation, especially when healthcare access and other basic needs provided by IRC are dangled as carrots on a stick and only accessible upon participation in iRespond’s biometric identity program.

This program is remarkably similar to the World Food Programme’s recently implemented “Building Blocks” initiative, which  is funded by the US, German, Dutch and Luxembourgian governments. Building Blocks uses a blockchain-based biometric identity system “to expand refugees’ choices in how they access and spend their cash assistance” in Syrian refugee camps within Jordan. Now, “over 100,000 people living in the camps can purchase groceries by scanning an iris at checkout” as part of the checkout. Those who do not participate are unable to access their WFP “cash benefits” since they are available exclusively through this biometric system, leaving refugees the choice between surrendering their biometric data and food.

Equally noteworthy is the fact that those financially supporting the Mae La project and similar projects, particularly the ID2020 alliance, are “hopeful” that iRespond’s efforts in Mae La will some day be rolled out on a global scale. Indeed, Newsweek noted that “many of the funders [of the Mae La project]—part of what’s known as the ID2020 alliance, which includes Accenture, Microsoft and the Rockefeller Foundation—hope the Mae La project could eventually serve as a blueprint for the world’s millions of stateless people, as well as citizens of developed nations and everyone else.”

Biometric Enclosure

According to iRespond’s rather spartan website, their biometric identity platform “primarily relies on iris biometrics, the best modality after DNA for accuracy and reliability.” It further describes its platform as follows:

“When a new participant is enrolled, an encrypted biometric template is created from their iris scan and a randomly assigned 12-digit number is drawn from a pool of 90 billion numbers. On subsequent visits, the identity of the participant is verified when their template is matched and the system returns the original 12-digit unique identifier.”

iRespond’s platform also “easily integrates into healthcare, humanitarian aid, research, and human-rights applications,” and it has been used to grant refugees and other vulnerable populations access to food, healthcare, and other forms of aid provided by foreign NGOs operating in these areas. It has also been used to keep track of participants in clinical drug trials. iRespond’s platform in the latter case was used by the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in conjunction with Johns Hopkins School of Public Health (both are iRespond partners), to track participants in clinical HIV treatment trials in Senegal as well as an additional Johns Hopkins study in South Africa. It has also been used to track recipients of the controversial HPV vaccine in Sierra Leone, where it was used “to track patients who have not completed their vaccination series.”

It is also being used among “vulnerable groups” in Myanmar by the NGO Population Services International (PSI) to “track demographics and the timing of positive HIV tests.” By analyzing these details, “we uncover which groups are most vulnerable to becoming infected,” according to PSI’s country representative for Myanmar.

The non-profit’s platform is powered by its main tech partner and another ID2020 member, Microsoft. iRespond’s platform “couldn’t exist without the cloud,” according to its CEO Scott Reid, and Microsoft supplies iRespond with a $60,000 grant to its Azure cloud system, allowing the organization to use it free of charge. In addition, Microsoft donated 39 tablets to iRespond that are used by the organization in the various places it operates “to enable flexibility in the field.” “The number of people we have helped has rapidly gone from the tens of thousands to the hundreds of thousands, and we look forward to soon working on behalf of many millions of people. These Microsoft tools are helping to make it possible,” iRespond’s Larry Dohr stated in a Microsoft profile.

Eric Rasmussen, iRespond’s president and chairman of the board, is a particularly interesting character who has been quite frank about the rationale behind the creation of iRespond. “When you understand who someone is, you understand what they’re entitled to, whether that’s national citizenship, international refugee support, or simply food distributions,” Rasmussen told Microsoft last year.

In addition to his key role at iRespond, Rasmussen is a professor at the Google-backed “Singularity University” as well as chairman of the board at InSTEDD, a “global NGO specializing humanitarian informatics, particularly around health in resource-poor economies” that is partnered with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the CDC, Google and UNICEF. In addition, Rasmussen is also the CEO of a “profit-for-purpose” company called Infinitum Humanitarian Systems (IHS). IHS works closely with USAID and the State Department as well as U.S. military intelligence agencies and intelligence/defense contractor Booz Allen Hamilton. Prior to his roles at iRespond, IHS and InSTEDD, Rasmussen was the Principal Investigator in humanitarian informatics for the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and made multiple war time deployments to Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan.

“Charity” of the Predator Class

More troubling than the background and associations of iRespond are those of their partner in the recently announced newborn biometric identification initiative, the International Rescue Committee (IRC). The IRC describes themselves as responding “to the world’s worst humanitarian crises and help[ing] people whose lives and livelihoods are shattered by conflict and disaster to survive, recover and gain control of their future.”

Despite the IRC framing itself as a “humanitarian” venture, its board is stuffed with a sordid mix of Wall Street criminals and war criminals. For example, its board is co-chaired by Timothy Geithner, former Treasury Secretary during the 2008 financial crisis bail-outs and current President of Wall Street titan Warburg-Pincus, and Susan Susman, an Executive Vice President at Pfizer. Its board of advisers includes war criminals Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright as well as Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell. Also present are current and former leaders and top executives at McKinsey, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Kroll Associates (“the CIA of Wall Street”), PepsiCo, Bank of America, Lehman Brothers, Citigroup and the World Bank. Another advisor is former chairman and CEO of AIG Maurice “Hank” Greenberg, a name that will likely be familiar to those who have researched the September 11th attacks and Wall Street financial crimes in general.

Since 2013, the IRC has been led by David Miliband, the Tony Blair “protégé” who Bill Clinton once called “one of the ablest, most creative public servants of our time” and who worked closely with then-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton while serving as the U.K.’s Foreign Secretary. So close was Miliband to the Clintons, that he was being considered for a “top U.S. government job” if Hillary Clinton had won the 2016 election.

In the years since joining the IRC, Miliband’s salary as the group’s president has ballooned to nearly a million dollars annually (up from approximately $240,000 when he arrived at the organization in 2013). In addition, the group has been mired in scandal since Miliband became its president. For instance, it was revealed in 2018 that IRC was one of several U.K.-based charities where “workers [were] alleged to be in sexually exploitative relationships with refugee children” including through “sex-for-food scandals” where “sexual abuse was so endemic that the only way for many refugee families to survive was to allow a teenage girl to be exploited.” Reports further alleged that IRC and other charities named in the report, including Save the Children, had known of the egregious abuse for years prior to the allegations being made public and chose not to act.

Myanmar refugees, who crossed over from Myanmar to Thailand when a battle erupted between Myanmar’s soldiers and rebels, eat at the Thai-Myanmar border town of Mae Sot November 8, 2010. A clash erupted between ethnic minority Karen rebels and government soldiers in Myanmar’s Myawaddy town opposite the Thai border town of Mae Sot, Reuters witnesses on the Thai side of the border said. REUTERS/Chaiwat Subprasom (THAILAND – Tags: POLITICS CIVIL UNREST) – RTXUDI7

That year, it was also found that the IRC had “silenced 37 sex abuse, fraud and bribery allegations,” resulting in the U.K. government, which had previously funneled millions to the organization, cutting off its funding entirely. Despite the troubling revelations, no IRC workers accused of wrong-doing were ever prosecuted.

Given the fact that the IRC’s board and presidency is stuffed with professional exploiters, from Wall Street to the public sector, it is hardly surprising that this “charity” would be caught doing the same under the guise of providing “aid” to the world’s most vulnerable populations, who they apparently view as easy prey.

Foxes in the Hen House

In the several media profiles of the iRespond-IRC biometric identity effort, the initiative is described as helping to prevent the exploitation of the world’s most vulnerable, particularly forced labor and sex trafficking. However, if that really were the case, why is this program being executed by iRespond, whose president and chairman has close ties to the U.S. military and intelligence communities, and the IRC, backed by a legion of war criminals and financial predators?

The U.S. military, a close partner of iRespond’s Eric Rasmussen, is notorious for its role in the trafficking of persons for forced labor, while many of its key contractors – like DynCorp — have been the subject of numerous scandals regarding the sexual abuse or sex trafficking of war-torn or otherwise vulnerable populations. On the other hand, the IRC’s mix of backers like Madeleine Albright, infamous for her comment on the murder by sanctions of half a million Iraqi children being “worth it,” and Henry Kissinger, notorious for his words about using food as a weapon to force populations into subservience and to reduce third-world populations, is equally anathema to the publicly professed purpose of the iRespond-IRC biometric identification program.

Not unlike the “sex-for-food” scandal in which IRC was once embroiled, this new initiative is placing refugees in the position of taking part in a massive technocratic experiment if they wish to eat or access other basic services. Though certainly not as egregious as a sex crime, it is nonetheless another means of exploiting the world’s most vulnerable populations under the guise of “helping” them, when those really being aided are the technocratic elite who aim to take this biometric identification program global in short order.

July 29, 2020 - Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular |

5 Comments »

  1. many of the usual suspects

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by gepay | July 29, 2020 | Reply

  2. “The pilot program is being conducted as part of the controversial ID2020 alliance, backed by Microsoft, the GAVI vaccine alliance and the Rockefeller Foundation, and with the International Rescue Committee (IRC), a non-profit organization deeply tied to the Western political elite and Wall Street with a controversial track record of silencing numerous sex abuse and fraud allegations”.

    Religion, “Charities”, Western Politicians, and people like Jeffrey Epstein and his ilk(why hasn’t Roman Polanski ever been arrested by Interpol?), have a very nasty history of Paedophilia, and NOT being pursued by the Law. Yes, I know, Epstein was accused of Paedophilia, but he “mysteriously died” while in Suicide custody, in New York, and “escaped” trial(rather conveniently). He has since been spotted by drone, on his “Pedo Island”.

    And of course, The Catholic Church, who claim to have direct contact with someone called Jesus Christ, is also the “World’s Largest Paedophile Sanctuary”………..

    “Hell is empty, and ALL the Devils are here”…….Shakespeare(The Tempest.

    Like

    Comment by brianharryaustralia | July 29, 2020 | Reply

  3. the Catholic Church is NOT christian and they worship Mary. they are the most watered down of the religious faiths, where you can pay a sum to get out of “pergatory” or rather “remove your sin” . Christians do not believe in this! that is evil. I mean, where would that end? murder? then pay a sum? or rape? then pay a sum? and going to confessional is not going to wipe your sin away, either! Christians believe in NOT sinning. And if you do something wrong, you tell God about it, completely Turn from your sin and never do it again. REPENT means to Turn Around. Catholics believe–sin, sin, and then, sin again, because you can always go to confessional!

    Like

    Comment by Co Pa | July 30, 2020 | Reply

  4. Good Day, Mate,

    It’s vital that YOU read the Christian script, which is found in the New Testament and is part of the Jewish Bible!
    MOSES WAS A PSYCHOPATHIC WAR CRIMINAL
    “And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses”
    (Deuteronomy 34:10)
    Yahweh, a being of simple and bloody tastes

    “One night while Moses was in camp, Jehovah was about to kill him.
    But Zipporah [his wife] circumcised her son with a flint knife … So Yahweh did not harm Moses.
    Zipporah said, ‘You are a bridegroom of blood’.”
    – Exodus 4.24-26.

    NUMBERS 31:13-18:
    (13) Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the community went to meet them outside the camp.
    (14) But Moses was furious with all the generals and captains who had returned from the battle.
    (15) “Why have you let all the women live?” he demanded.
    (16) “These are the very ones who followed Balaam’s advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the Lord at Mount Peor. They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the Lord’s people.
    (17) So kill all the boys and all the women who have had intercourse with a man.
    ( 18 ) Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.

    JESUS ENDORSED MOSES:
    “Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, in whom you have put your hope. 46 If you had believed Moses, you would believe Me, because he wrote about Me. 47But since you do not believe what he wrote, how will you believe what I say?”…
    John 5:45 47

    JESUS ENDORSED THE TORAH
    For truly I tell you until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
    Matthew 5:18

    JESUS DEMANDED THE DEATH PENALTY
    “Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked,
    “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!”

    Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?
    For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ [Exodus 20:12; Deuteronomy. 5:16] and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’[Exodus 21:17; Leviticus. 20:9]

    But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’ they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:

    “‘These people honor me with their lips,
    but their hearts are far from me.

    They worship me in vain;
    their teachings are merely human rules.’[ Isaiah 29:13]”
    Matthew 15:1-9.

    WHAT NO CHRISTIAN UNDERSTANDS IS THAT THE BASIS OF THEIR RELIGION IS A MENTAL ILLNESS CALLED JUDAISM
    CHRISTIAN BELIEFS ARE NOT SANE BECAUSE THEIR BASIS IS ROOTED IN JUDAIC EVIL

    Judaism is morally bankrupt, it has nothing to offer us but out-dated plagiarized myths, about some angry judgmental god that is remarkably exactly like the Jews themselves. The anthropocentric supremacist myths of the Jews should have little appeal to a person of high consciousness; such exclusionistic ideas are an anathema to any decent human being. The idea that you need salvation from a Jew should go against ever cell in your being, if not you need to examine what great fault lies within yourself.

    JESUS A PROPHET LIKE MOSES

    The Old Testament contains hundreds of prophecies about the Messiah; where He would be born, His lineage, what He would accomplish, how He would die. We also know that He would be a king like David (Jeremiah 23:5-6), a priest like Melchizedek (Ps 110:4) and a prophet like Moses (Deuteronomy 18: 15-19). This article is about what it means for Jesus as a ‘Prophet like Moses’.

    What did Moses say about Jesus?
    Moses is one of the most revered figures in Judaism as he is the one that God chose to give the Torah (Law) to at Mount Sinai. The “Torah” is the first five books in what Christians call the Old Testament – Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.

    “To believe Moses” means to believe what he wrote.

    Jesus said to the Jews that did not believe in Him that if they really believed Moses, they would believe Him;

    “For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, because he wrote about Me. But if you don’t believe his writings, how will you believe My words?” (John 5:46).

    The Old Testament is so full of references to Jesus that He taught the disciples about Himself from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets on the road to Emmaus;

    “He said to them, “How unwise and slow you are to believe in your hearts all that the prophets have spoken! Didn’t the Messiah have to suffer these things and enter into His glory?” Then beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, He interpreted for them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.” (Luke 24:25-27)

    Moses said that God would send a prophet like himself and that we must listen to him — in fact says that if we don’t listen, God will hold us accountable;

    “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him.

    This is what you requested from the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said, ‘Let us not continue to hear the voice of the Lord our God or see this great fire any longer so that we will not die!’ Then the Lord said to me, ‘They have spoken well.

    I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. I will put My words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. I will hold accountable whoever does not listen to My words that he speaks in My name. (Deut 18: 15-19)

    Jesus was the Prophet like Moses that God raised up
    There were many parallels between Moses and Jesus; as infants both Moses and Jesus were almost killed by ruler’s edicts and both were protected from harm, both spent their early years in Egypt, both cured lepers (Numbers 12:10-15; Matt. 8:2-3) and both were initially doubted in their roles by their siblings. Moses lifted up the brazen serpent to deliver those that had faith and Jesus was lifted up on the cross to deliver all who would have faith. Moses appointed 70 elders to rule Israel (Num. 11:16-17); Jesus appointed 70 disciples to teach the nations (Luke 10:1, 17). But the most striking comparison between Jesus and Moses was that they were both prophets that taught the Law of God.

    Yes, Jesus like Moses taught the Law — the true meaning and practice of the Law as given by God.

    As a Prophet, He was calling the Jews back to the Law as God gave it, rather than what the Pharisees had made it. More on that below.

    The Standard of the Prophet
    As a Prophet, Jesus had to meet the same criteria that God set for all prophets; that is

    to uphold what God has said or be put to death.

    This ought not to be overlooked.
    Prophets in the Old Testament were to be put to death if what they said did not come to pass or if what they taught caused the people to stray from the way God had already spoken.

    The standard for a prophet is spelled out in the Law of Moses;

    “If a prophet or someone who has dreams arises among you and proclaims a sign or wonder to you, and that sign or wonder he has promised you comes about, but he says, ‘Let us follow other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us worship them,’ do not listen to that prophet’s words or to that dreamer. For the Lord your God is testing you to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul. You must follow the Lord your God and fear Him. You must keep His commands and listen to His voice; you must worship Him and remain faithful to Him. That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he has urged rebellion against the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the place of slavery, to turn you from the way the Lord your God has commanded you to walk. You must purge the evil from you.” (Deuteronomy 13: 1-5)

    The Teachings of Jesus and the Law

    Some people believe that the teachings of Jesus as recorded in the New Testament teach something different than what is taught in the Law of Moses or that He gave them new meaning or disregarded the Law; even breaking some of its commands. Finally, others would say Jesus fulfilled the Law and therefore the Law is no longer relevant.

    Let’s look at each of those a bit closer;

    1. Some people believe that the teachings of Jesus were very different than what was taught in the Old Testament; that the Old Testament was all about the law and the New Testament is all about grace. This idea is worth an article in itself at very least, but let’s look at this idea in terms of what Deuteronomy 13 says. If Jesus taught something different (e.g. grace) than what God had previously taught (e.g. Law), then He would have been leading us away from keeping God’s commands and this would have made Him a false prophet, deserving of death.

    2. Others say that Jesus gave ‘new meaning‘ to what was taught in the Old Testament but this too would have made Him a false prophet. If Jesus reinterpreted the Law of Moses, He would have been urging us to rebellion against the Lord and His commands and we would have been just to put Him to death.

    3. Still others say that Jesus broke all kinds of commands in the Law of Moses and often cite Him healing on the Sabbath as a common example. Jesus did not follow the “Oral Law” of the Pharisees and thus in their minds would have been viewed as breaking the Sabbath, but nowhere in Scripture are there any instances of Him violating any of the commands of the (Written) Law, as recorded in the Law of Moses. Furthermore, if Jesus had indeed broken the Law of Moses — the Law given by God, He would have committed a sin and no longer been the Lamb of God without blemish.

    4. Finally, others say Jesus fulfilled the Law and therefore the Law is no longer relevant. Jesus as the Prophet like Moses was calling the Jews back to a true observance of the Law of which He is the goal (Romans 10:4). Some translations use the word “end” for goal, but the word in Greek [telios] is more clearly understood in the context of Romans 10 as goal. In this context, Paul is referring to the Jews as disregarding the righteousness from God and attempting to establish their own righteousness. Again, this refers to the Pharisees insistence that the observance of “Oral Law” (i.e. ‘the traditions of men’) are equivalent in authority to the Written Law — which is the Law of God. Paul says that they [the Jews] have NOT submitted themselves to God’s righteousness [as embodied in the Law] — of whom Christ is the goal.
    None of the teachings of Jesus recorded anywhere in the New Testament teach something new or different than what is taught in the Law of Moses and at no time does Jesus ever break the commands of the Law, as given by God. In the following examples, we demonstrate that Jesus considered the Law not only relevant to teach, but to exhort believers to practice.

    Jesus upholds the Law

    Here are four examples as to how Jesus, as the Prophet like Moses, upholds the Law of Moses;

    1. Jesus and the Rich Young Man
    The synoptic gospels record the conversation between Jesus and the rich young man who wanted to know how to inherit eternal life.
    Jesus could have simply replied “follow Me” but He doesn’t. He reminds the man of the commandments of God in the Law forbidding adultery, murder, stealing, bearing false witness and honouring one’s parents (Mark 10:17-22; Matt 19:16-30; Luke 18:18-30). Jesus upholds the Law.

    It was when the young man said that he had kept these commands from the time he was a youth that Jesus said to sell all he had, distribute it to the poor and follow Him (Luke 18:18-23, Mt 19:19-21, Mark 10:17-21). Jesus continues to uphold the Law in His reply by telling the man to sell all his possessions. He was pointing out that money had become an idol to the man which kept him from keeping the first two commandments; which is to have the Lord as our God and no other gods before Him, and not to make an idol — which money had become to the man. Jesus upholds the Law all the way through this teaching.

    2. Jesus and the Jewish Lawyer
    In the conversation between Jesus and a Jewish lawyer recorded by Mark and Matthew, the issue of which is the greatest of the 613 commandments came up.
    A question had arisen among the Jews and was now put to Jesus as to which commandment was ‘the first of all’ (Mark 12:28), or ‘the greatest’ (Matt 22:34) — first and greatest both referring to the same thing.

    In Matthew’s and Mark’s account (Mark 12:31, Matt 22:39), Jesus replies to the Jewish lawyer saying that ‘the greatest and first commandment’ was to love God with all your heart, soul and strength (Deut 6:5) and adds ‘the second is this, “You shall love your neighbour as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18). Jesus upholds the Law.

    Like

    Comment by Dave Rubin | July 30, 2020 | Reply

    • G’Day. I’m sorry, but to be honest, I can’t be bothered with anything to do with
      Religious belief. I went to a Catholic school between the ages of 5 and 11, and when I went to high school I vowed never to have anything to do with religion again. It is completely illogical and utterly unverifiable.
      Religion makes about as much sense as Astrology to me.
      “Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intellect. It will fade away as we adopt Science and Reason as our guidelines”…..Bertrand Russell.
      “Religion is for people who are still afraid of the dark”…..Dr Stephen Hawking.
      “God didn’t create man, Man created God”….Anon.
      “All Religions are made by men”……Napoleon Bonaparte.
      “Hell is empty, and All the Devils are here”…..Shakespeare(The Tempest)
      “As far as I can remember, there is nothing in the Gospels in praise of intelligence”…….Bertrand Russell.
      “But who prays for Satan? Who, in 18 centuries has had the common humanity to to pray for the one sinner who needed it most”……Mark Twain.
      “I’d hate to be a member of a group whose symbol was a man, nailed to two pieces of wood”….George Carlin.
      “Who made God”?…..Bertrand Russell.
      “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities”…..Voltaire
      “If you want to control a population, give them a God to worship”…….Noam Chomsky
      “When one man suffers from delusion they call it insanity. When many men suffer from delusion they call it Religion”…..Robert Persig.
      “Religion is a Neurotic Delusion”……Sigmund Freud

      Like

      Comment by brianharryaustralia | July 30, 2020 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.