Dr. Brown Answers the Rabbis (including a recent video by Rabbi Asher Meza)

[Download MP3]

It’s time again for Dr. Brown to answer the challenges raised by Jewish Rabbis to Jesus as the Messiah of Israel! Join Dr. Brown as he sifts through some of the questions raised by Rabbi Asher Meza and others.

Hour 1:

Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: Jesus the Messiah can withstand the criticisms and questions of the honest searching of heart and mind and soul. Don’t be afraid to ask the questions: for the truth will set you free.

Hour 2:

Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: Our God, the great God, said to Moses, “I will be who I will be, I am who I am, I will do what I will do.” Let’s bow down and worship at His feet, and say, “God, be all that You can be, in me and through me, for Your glory.”

Featured Resources:

60 Questions Christians Ask About Jewish Beliefs and Practices and Jesus: Messiah or Not? (DVD Debate with Rabbi Gold)

Other Resources:

Dr Brown Debates Rabbi Tovia Singer on Sid Roth’s Radio show “Time is running short”.

Dr Brown and Rabbi Tovia Singer debate on a variety of topics, from the Messianic fulfillments of Yeshua to the core foundations of Christianity and Judaism.

This fascinating debate has a surprise ending!

Dr. Brown Answers the Rabbis (Part 1)

Dr. Brown Answers the Rabbis (Part 2)

Dr. Brown Answers the Rabbis (Part 3) (and an interview with David Brickner of Jews for Jesus)

Dr. Brown Answers the Rabbis (Part 4)

Stand With Israel [mp3 Series]

INCLUDES: 1.) Israel Shall Be Saved 2.) Intercession, Israel, & Miracles 3.) A Baptism of Tears for Israel 4.) Israel and the Last Days 5.) The Rising Tide of Anti-Semitism 6.) Are the Rabbis Right? (Brown vs. Singer Debate) 7.) Who is Jesus? Part 1 8.) Who is Jesus? Part 2

Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus Volume 3: This third installment of Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus looks specifically at questions raised about messianic prophecies in Isaiah, Daniel, Psalms, Haggai, and Zechariah.

and Volume 4: In this volume of the Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus series, Dr. Brown counters the arguments that the New Testament mistranslates, misuses, and misunderstands the Hebrew Scriptures, also addressing the objections that Jesus or Paul abolished the Law.

Jesus: Messiah or Not [DVD Debate]: A question asked and debated for centuries. Can we know for sure? Featuring Dr. Michael L. Brown and Rabbi Michael Gold.

Countering the Counter-Missionaries [22 mp3 set] : An important resource will be a great faith builder for those who are struggling, a great outreach tool for those who are seeking, and a great source of edification and enrichment for those who are involved in Jewish evangelism.

  1. Rabbi Blumenthal,

    I obviously owe you an apology. I do apologize for assuming that you had never read the New Testament. I suppose it’s because you’ve not brought any passages from them at all and laid them out as taking issue with them. I don’t recall you quoting any.

    Is it because the NT is in to neat a package? Is it because everything fits together too perfectly that it must be contrived? I don’t know, I’m trying to understand you but we haven’t stepped foot away from Sinai yet.

    I hear the LORD saying; “I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, that is My name forever.” But, it seems you’re saying He’s only the LORD from Sinai, and we’ve not moved forward from there.

  2. I see what I did a few posts back–this is what I posted: “That is, that we cannot truly “know Him” without the Talmud and the extra Biblical writings.”

    I edited to much of that thought out. Sorry about that it changes everything. I was wanting to say something like this: “That is, that we cannot truly know Him” other than the revelation at Sinai and that the Rabbinic teachings are the only full revelation, so concerning your tradition, the world cannot truly know Him “without the Talmud and the extra Biblical writings.”

  3. Rabbi Blumenthal,

    Isn’t that closer to your point of view, that the Orthodox hold the only true revelation of God? Whereas my point of view is that anyone at all can come to know God simply by reading and studying what is written in Scripture. I believe the fuller revelation is only given after we step away from Sinai. I believe as you do that Sinai is the foundation of God’s perfect standard but we need to move from there into the promised land and start building on that foundation. The revelation is not a stagnant one but an ever increasing revelation. The revelation is that Messiah has become the chief-corner stone and until we are building on the foundation that He laid for our salvation, whatever we build without Him will all come tumbling down.

    The Lord is taking us from point A to point B. And from B to C, until we arrive at last where He wants us to be–back in communion with Him.

  4. Brian Lasater,

    1. You are not in a new covenant: A)The new covenant is for the house of Judah and Israel. You are neither.
    -I am grafted in to Israel:
    .Rom 11:17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were GRAFTED IN among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree,
    Rom 11:18 do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you.
    .Hos 2:23 … I will say to them that were not my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, ‘Thou art my God’.
    Psa 2:8 Ask of me, and I will give thee the nations for thine inheritance…

    2. The days of the new covenant has not arrived.
    -Yes, this is what this whole discussion is about: you think it hasn’t. That is why we are discussing this.

    3. Do ALL know the LORD from the least to the greatest?
    -“All” — where? If you said, “all in Israel”, that excludes all other nations; “all” who are in Covenant with God and are keeping that Covenant (not breaking it) do know Him, and are taught by Him, through Yeshua, Who speaks the Words of God to us [John 6:45].

    4. New covenant does not mean New Torah.
    -We contend that we are released from the mizvos through becoming unified to Messiah Yeshua in His death ( even as one of your own Rabbis — Dr Emmanuel Schochet — teaches http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Odhy5eq5qqY&feature=BFa&list=UUbdRcrHmpGp7K_btT8PLSIQ&lf=plcp ): the Law is only for the person who has not been released to the Law through dying.
    .Rom 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also were made dead to the law through the body of Christ; that ye should be joined to another, even to him who was raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit unto God.

    5. The Jewish people still are under the law!
    I know.

    6. Ezekiel 11:19 and I will (A)give them one heart, and put a new spirit within [a]them. And I will take the (B)heart of stone out of their flesh and give them a (C)heart of flesh, 20 that they may (D)walk in My statutes and keep My ordinances and do them. Then they will be (E)My people, and I shall be their God. 21 [b]But as for those whose hearts go after their (F)detestable things and abominations, I will (G)bring their conduct down on their heads,” declares the Lord GOD.
    -What about after the resurrection, when you are released from the mizvos? I agree, however, that the “righteous requirement” (the core requirement, which can be applied to any and every situation) is eternal…
    .Mic 6:8 It hath been told thee, O man, what is good, and what the LORD doth REQUIRE of thee: only to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.

    The essence of any of the mizvot is this — “do justice, love mercy and walk humbly with God.”

  5. Blasater,

    I base my faith on the Tanakh and the NT, which is I see as a seamless whole, and the God of the Tanakh is the God of the NT. He is Spirit, but He interacts with us in many ways, He does have a form (but not a physical one), and on occasion He can appear in earthly form. All this I see laid out clearly in the Tanakh, as expressed in many of the previous posts. Also, I see the Maimonidean description of God as unscriptural in certain ways (as do some other Jewish scholars). I encourage you to read vol. 2 of my series Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, where I address these issues in some depth. As for your comments about the new covenant of Jeremiah, I address this in vol. 4.

    Thanks for your questions!

  6. Blasater,

    One more quick point (since I didn’t specifically address your question sufficiently in the previous post, although I address it in vol. 2). These Jewish parallels can help you understand my view of the incarnation, excerpted from vol. 2.

    — The rabbis spoke much about the Shekhina, the Divine Presence, corresponding also to the feminine, motherly aspects of God. They taught that the Shekhina went into exile with the Jewish people, suffering with “her” children in foreign lands. According to this concept, God cannot be “whole” again until his people return from their physical and spiritual wanderings and the Temple is rebuilt. The rabbis based this idea on verses that spoke of God being with his people (corporately or individually) in their trouble, distress, and exile (see Mekhilta deRabbi Yishmael, Massekhta dePiskha, 14).

    In fact, Rabbi Akiva went as far as saying that, according to the Scriptures, when God redeemed his people, he had, as it were, redeemed himself (ibid.). Some Hasidic Jews, joining the concept of the Shekhina with the mystical concept of the Sefirot, took this one step further. They believed (and still believe) that,

    “the purpose of the performance of the mitzvot [commandments] is to help the Shekhinah to unite with Tiferet [the Sefira of glory or beauty], the male principle. The sins of Israel hinder this union and prevent the “reunification of worlds,” which is a necessary prerequisite for the coming of God’s kingdom.

    The hasidim, in accordance with this belief, adopted the formula (much deplored by their opponents), ‘For the sake of the unification of the Holy One, blessed be He, and his Shekhinah,’ which they recited before the performance of mitzvot.” (Quoting here from the Encyclopedia of Hasidism)–

    VeHaMaskil Yavin. 🙂

  7. Dr. Brown
    With respect for wish to bow out of this conversation – I will just say the following concerning your counterpoint to the point I brought up from Contra Brown – I am completely satisfied to encourage the readers to read your point about teh exaltation of the Davidic king in volume 2 – and my counter point in Contra Brown

  8. Dan1el
    I wonder if you believe that God has seven eyes that come out of their sockets and wander through the earth – based on Zechariah 4:10 – and that God has wings of an eagle/vulture based on Exodus 19:4 – God rides on a cloud based on Isaiah 19:1 – and sometimes he rides on horses – based on Habakuk 3:8
    By the way – where do the Scriptures describe Moses worshipping a form?

  9. Sheila (Dan1el – you might find this helpful as well)
    In order to help you understand my position a bit more clearly – try the following.
    Take a Bible and open to the first page. Let us read together. In the beginning God created heaven and earth.
    Let us pause for a moment. Who is God? Did the Author of this book expect us to know anything about God before we got to this verse? Or did He expect us to say – wait – we know nothing about this “God” – so let us just put an “a” there as we do in algebra – and figure it out as we go along?
    My position is that the Author of the book expected us – not only to know God before we open the book – but to already find ourselves in a deep, intimate and committed realtionship with this God before we open the book.
    Yes, the book is here to teach us – and as human beings we constantly need to grow in our understanding – that is not a question.
    But we must build on the foundations that God set down for us.

  10. Blasatar
    Your comments are right on target and it doesn’t seem that you need my help. But you may be pleased to know that I responded to Dr. Brown’s assertions about the New Covenant in my critique of his volume 4 (it is the last section) and I responded to his quotations from Jewish sources in the Council of My Nation
    You might find this article useful as well

  11. YB

    Agreed. As bad as Bart Ehrman is to the Christian faith I found the following to be most informative when it comes to the way the Hebrew scriptures personify the attributes of the one God, YHWH. Where personification does not mean a person!

    ‎The author of the fourth Gospel, like some others in the Jewish tradition [see the Targums], imagined that the word that God spoke was some kind of independent entity in and of itself. It was ‘with’ God, because once spoken, it was apart from God; and it ‘was’ God in the sense that what God spoke was a part of his being. His speaking only made external what was already internal, within his mind. The word of God, then, was the outward manifestation of the internal divine reality. It both was with God, and was God, and was the means by which all things came into being. Jesus, Interrupted, pg. 75-76.

  12. Rabbi B.,

    I strongly disagree with this comment:

    “My position is that the Author of the book expected us – not only to know God before we open the book – but to already find ourselves in a deep, intimate and committed realtionship with this God before we open the book.”

    Those who came out of Egypt and to whom the oracles of God were committed would have been the only ones who had any knowledge of who God is. It is impossible for anyone to build a “deep, intimate and committed relationship with” someone that have never encountered before.

    It would be like marrying a wife that you had never met, talked to or walked with and saying we have a very deep, and loving relationship. She only exists in your mind and is nothing more than a virtual idea. Sounds pretty illogical to me.

    It’s putting the cart before the horse.

    p.s. My somewhat emotional response some posts back was colored by one of your posts on another person’s blog which, even though I have never responded to anything written on it, I nevertheless still follow it. I was wondering if you were the same person I was in dialog with on this forum. I shouldn’t have let it taint my responses here but once our words are “out there” we can’t call them back. Well, except in repentance and forgiveness can we pray to be set free from them.

  13. And I’m a very strong believer in repentance and forgiveness as I’ve been on both ends of it. Making peace with others is more important than agreeing with them, or being right. I’m already at peace with you once more as that is our reasonable duty to others.

  14. David,

    When you mentioned the Angel of the Lord, I was reminded of something that I couldn’t quite put my finger on. I’ve located it again and this is what it was:

    “The Angel of the Lord and the Angel of the Covenant

    “The ancient Jewish commentary by Rabbi Bechai (col. 1, p. 35) that describes Abraham’s obedience to God’s call for him to sacrifice Isaac provides an extraordinary insight into the writer’s appreciation of the Trinity. Moses records in Genesis 22:11 that “the angel of the Lord” was the person of the Trinity that intervened to prevent the sacrifice of Isaac. “And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.”[21] This portion of the deepest teaching of the great sages of Israel provides powerful evidence for the fact that some of the Jewish writers in ancient times understood the mystery of the Trinity:

    “It is necessary that thou shouldest understand what in this section (Abraham’s sacrifice) is related; namely, that He who is tempting is God, and He who is restraining is the Angel of the blessed God. . . . The eyes of Abraham’s understanding were opened, that this Angel was not one of the intelligences, but one of the Inherent Ones, which cannot be separated, nor cut off one from the other. If this Angel had been one of the intelligences, Abraham would not have obeyed his voice, when restraining him to do what God had commanded him; yea, an Angel would have no authority to say, “Thou hast not with holden thy son from Me, but would have said, from Him.” But this Angel was one of the Inherent Ones, the great Angel . . . and in fact it was that Angel of whom it is said, “for my name is in Him.”

    “Another famous sage, Rabbi Moses ben Nachman, wrote about this mysterious Angel of the Lord, the great Lawgiver, that appeared to Moses in the flames of the burning bush. Rabbi Nachman points out that the Bible refers to this appearance of God to Moses as the Angel of the Lord in Exodus 3:2: “And the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush.” However, only two verses later Moses declared that it was the Lord God who was speaking to him from the burning bush: “And when the Lord saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I” (Exodus 3:4). These Jewish sages obviously understood that the Scriptures taught that the Angel of the Lord was truly God. Rabbi Nachman commented as follows:

    “It is said: “An Angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire,” and (Elohim) Myhla, “God called unto him.” This is all one, namely, whether he saith “The Angel, or (Elohim ) Myhla, “God spake to him out of the midst of the bush”. . . Therefore be not astonished that Moses hid his face before this Angel; because this Angel mentioned here is the Angel, the Redeemer, concerning whom it is written; “I am the God of Bethel;” and here, “I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” It is the same of whom it is said, “My name is in Him.”[22]”

    21. Rabbi Bechai, col. 1, 35.

    22. Rabbi Moses ben Nachman.


    I don’t know anything of Grant Jeffrey other than his book, “The Signature of God.” It was facinating to read.

  15. Rabbi Blumenthal, sounds like a fair deal. They can read what I wrote and how you responded. Indeed, you provide many telling parallels with the future prophesied veneration of the Jewish people, but that’s what underscores the differences re: the veneration of the Messiah, especially when it comes to being enthroned as King.

  16. Daniel- You Said:-“I am grafted in to Israel:”
    .Rom 11:17 Rom 11:18 do not be arrogant toward the branches.

    a)The greek testament has no authority over the Tanakh b) you clearly from your posts are arrogant to the branchs and not following the teachings of your testament.

    .Hos 2:23 … I will say to them that were not my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, ‘Thou art my God’.

    This quotation of Hosea is ripping out of context a clear reference to Israel and the Jewish people. Read chapter 1 of Hosea to get context. Hosea never addresses the gentiles.

    Psa 2:8 Ask of me, and I will give thee the nations for thine inheritance…

    The nations have not been given to a Jewish King for an inheritance. There are hundreds of nations following all sorts of religions. Islamic, Christian, Buddist, Hindu etc…only one Jewish nation. YOu are not grafted into a covenant. Again, House of Judah and Israel. only.

    2)3) You are lost in your understanding of “no longer will they teach…” Today all must be taught and Jsus has not changed that one iota. Furthermore, If you back up 2 verses (and this is still in the dialogue of the new covenat) you will find the Christianity is the exact opposite of what the prophet is putting forth. The prophet says each will be die according to his own iniquity. Christianity teaches no one is responsible for their own sin because Jsus took it for them and died in their place. Human vicarious atonement (Ezk18 also) is forbidden.

    6) Micah 6–Yes of course but notice what it does NOT say. Believe in a hypostatic god-man, “God” in the flesh..or else.

  17. Chuck and Jig, (moved from the other forum)

    How can you say that the idea of God being triune is a later Christian doctrine when the Jews from the time of the Babylonian captivity of 586, and which was still taught in 70ad, give these explanations in the Zohar:

    “‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord.’ This verse is the root of our faith, therefore Moses records it after the ten commandments. The reason (that there is said hw:hoyÒ, Lord, !yhiloa>, our God, and hw:hoyÒ, Lord) is, because the word [mv does not here signify ‘Hear;’ but ‘to gather together, to unite,’ as in 1 Samuel 15:4, ‘Saul gathered together the people.’ The meaning implied is The Inherent-Ones are so united together, one in the other without end, they being the exalted God. He mentions the three names mystically to indicate the three exalted original Ones.”

    Rabbi Menachem. Commentary on the
    Pentateuch. Venice edition. pg. 267

    “How can they (the three) be One? Are they verily One, because we call them One?” “How Three can be One, can only be known through the revelation of the Holy Spirit.”

    Zohar. Vol. ii. written by Rabbi Simon ben Jochai and his son Rabbi Eliezer

    Rabbi Simeon ben Jochai commenting on the Zohar:
    “There is a perfect Man, who is an Angel. This Angel is Metatron, the Keeper of Israel; He is a man in the image of the Holy One, blessed be He, who is an Emanation from Him; yea, He is Jehovah; of Him cannot be said, He is created, formed or made; but He is the Emanation from God. This agrees exactly with what is written, Jeremiah 23:5-6, Of jmx dwd, David’s Branch, that though He shall be a perfect man, yet He is ‘The Lord our Righteousness.’”

    Rabbi Simeon ben Jochai. The Propositions
    of the Zohar. cap. 38, Amsterdam edition.

    Aside from Dr. Brown’s books, there is ample evidence that the Jews before the time of Christ understood the nature of God as something deeper than our limited understanding of His being of one essense. There is more information given on the ancient Hebrew understanding about the triune nature and identity of God here:


  18. Dr Brown- Can we try again regarding the nature of G-d from the Christian perspective not the Jewish?

    Christians maintain that Jesus’s humanity did not cease upon his accension. Christianity maintains a belief in a hypostatic union. 100%god and 100%man. Christianity maintain that Jesus is bi-natured.

    Therefore by definition, the Trinity is bi-natured and I find that problematic. Nowhere in Tanakh does G-d reveal Himself as bi-natured.

    One could also argue that the Trinity isnt really a Trinity but a Quadrinity. “God” the Father “God” the son Jesus the “man” and “God” the holy spirit.

    Since Jesus’s nature (100%god and 100%man) his human nature must also co-exist with the father and the holy spirit. Even though Jesus isnt two people, he has two natures and those two natures must be in harmony with the other two persons in the godhead.

    Your thoughts?

  19. Rabbi Blumenthal,

    1. “I wonder if you believe that God has seven eyes that come out of their sockets and wander through the earth – based on Zechariah 4:10”
    A. Do you really wonder that?
    The answer is “no”; I have “understanding” — the ability to distinguish — therefore, I understand some passages as inviting me to understand a mystery, and some as merely further-expounding upon themes which had already been set forth (i.e.: humans are made in the Image & Likeness of God {Who said He was an ‘us’/an Echad: this is another thing you willfully ignore}; so, when I see Him manifest Himself after a humanoid fashion {whether spiritually — in visions/dreams — or visibly, as when His “FEET” are seen in Exodus 24, or when He appears as a man to Jacob {leaving Jacob astonished that he’d seen God’s Face and lived}, it doesn’t confound me.
    B. If God didn’t have an “Image”, why say, “let us make man after our “Image”? Doesn’t that prove He has one? Furthermore, if man were made after the Image of a 100% “Imageless” God, man would be 100% invisible. What is “like” nothing? More “nothing”.
    C. I have duly-noted that God did not say of *any other created thing* in the earth or the heavens, “it is made in My Image” — ONLY HUMANS — and that He, then, proceeded to reveal Himself along humanoid lines in many instances: your arguments (which both ignore Scripture and attempt to skirt & resist the reality) fall utterly short of explaining itself in light of these things. It does not confound me that He reveals Himself along these lines; you, however, must resist the Scriptures to hold to your beliefs. You took one verse and made a doctrine of it, without respect to many others; now you are running up against problems.

    2. – and that God has wings of an eagle/vulture based on Exodus 19:4
    “…how I bare you on wings and brought you to Myself.”
    i. Here, you are either allowing for our understanding — Echad: spirit, father and son — (inasmuch as He says, “I bare you” “and brought you to Myself”: He is both baring them, AND bringing them to Himself, Who is NOT the One bringing them to Him)
    ii. you must agree that the verse is simply stressing “it was through angelic ministry”, inasmuch as:
    a. some angels are said to have wings and faces of eagles
    b. God was “among” them (in a “special” way). In the Temple — another place He “was”, especially (a picture of His Heavenly Abode — cherubim are engraved throughout [: the angels are present when He was bringing them out of Egypt; it was through their ministry that many of the feats were being accomplished. He is ministered to by innumerable host of angels, which were present with Him in the midst of His people
    c. these angels are strong with a strength which is of Him

    i.e.: “I bare you on wings, and brought you to Myself” is more than likely pointing to the fact that He employed angelic ministers in the salvation of the Israelites from Egypt to Himself through angelic ministry.

    3. – God rides on a cloud based on Isaiah 19:1
    I don’t know how or why God does things — why wouldn’t He “ride on a cloud”? For that matter, why would God have angels to do His bidding, rather than do them, Himself? Why does He choose to create? If He wants to ride on a cloud, are you going to ask Him why He does it?
    You don’t even understand that when Elijah was taken up to heaven, he told Elisha “IF you are able to perceive when I am taken, I will give you the double-portion”, and when Elisha saw the “fiery chariots of Israel”, Elijah knew Elisha’s spiritual eyes were open — because, in the physical realm, the spiritual fiery chariots had appeared to natural eyes as cloud(s) — and gave him the double portion. You don’t even know that the “clouds” being spoken of in Isaiah 19:1 are speaking of the “fiery chariots of Israel” (2 Kings 2:12).

    4. – and sometimes he rides on horses – based on Habakuk 3:8
    Remember, Messiah is coming on a “horse”?
    Messiah is this God (of Habbakuk), and He is coming upon this “horse” [2 Kings 2:12]; neither, that when King David said Goliath “reviled the Armies of the Living God”, that he wasn’t speaking of the Jews, but of the Angelic Armies [Deut 20:1-4] of GOD [2 Ki 6:17].

    5. By the way – where do the Scriptures describe Moses worshipping a form?
    i. Moses was a worshipper of God; God’s Form was shown to him. In Ex 24, the rest of the men saw from afar off, and saw His Feet; Moses was allowed to go closer — I’m sure from that vantage point, He was able to see a lot more (Num 12:8 backing me — God’s Form Moses beholds), and I can guarantee He worshipped God, there (since he loved to worship God).
    ii. Why does it seem like this knowledge is so far from you? Maybe you don’t want to acknowledge it, since your “traditions” are endangered by them.

  20. *correction:
    2b. God was “among” them (in a “special” way). In the Temple (another place He “was”, especially; a picture of His Heavenly Abode) cherubim are engraved throughout [Ex 25:22; 26:1; 2 Ch 3:7]: the point was that the angels were present when He was bringing them out of Egypt; it was through their ministry that many of the feats were being accomplished. He is ministered to by innumerable host of angels — these ministering spirits surround Him as He moves among His people.

  21. *correction:
    *4 It was to us it was revealed Messiah was coming on a horse — to you, it was revealed that “He comes with the clouds of heaven”, ok? Sorry.

  22. Sheila
    In response to your post # 612 – Exactly! We cannot marry a spouse we never met – that is why Sinai comes before the first word of Scripture – it is the foundation – that is where we met God and came to know Him. So when we read Scripture in context of Sinai – we know who God is BEFORE we start. Please remember – Scripture is addressing the Jewish people – Deuteronomy 33:4, Psalm 147:19,20. You have to read it as a Jew would read it or else you are reading it out of context.

  23. Sheila
    regarding post # 617 – When you quote the books of people who would have died rather than worship as you do – people who identified your faith as idolatrous, don’t be surprised if your words are not taken seriously. This is not the only thing the authors of teh Zohar had to say about these subjects. If you read the totality of their words – you will realize that you are wrenching their words out of context.

  24. Rabbi Blumenthal,

    That was in response to Chuck who says that those ideas were made up by Christians a long time after the faith was established. I was asked by Dr. Brown to move it over to this forum so I did.

    I, too, would die rather than to deny that Jesus is the Messiah and that’s what I believe to be the absolute truth.

    I leave the trinity for others who know the “language” to use in that debate. That’s not my focus at all. My focus is on calling the members of the Church to prayer and repentance; to unity in Messiah as one new creation, born of the Spirit, that we may be one as He is One. And my prayer is that we would get back to the basics, the foundational truths that the Gospel brought to mankind–reconciliation with God.

    That may be one of the hardest to fatham revelations that Jesus’ disciples presented to the first century Jews. That the Gentiles had a place in God’s plan of salvation.

    And my focus is on studying the Bible every chance I get.

  25. Blasater,

    My apologies that you’re joining this discussion just as my schedule requires me to be dropping out — although out of the previous hundreds of posts, you should find ample food for thought.

    In short, though, I am not as concerned with credal Trinitarian formulations as I am with the witness of Scripture, upon which I base my faith.

    So, in the event that I’m able to respond at some point soon, could you rephrase your argument using scriptures instead, even if they are verses that you yourself do not embrace as Scripture? And may I assume you’re coming from the position of traditional Judaism, or is that incorrect?

  26. Blasaster, an immediate comment: I do not believe that God is bi-natured (although, again, I’d appreciate your scripture references for any points you’re raising). I do believe the Son took on flesh to reveal God to us and be the Savior of the world, but God is not flesh.

  27. Blasater

    Interesting points. If I may add the fact that there is a division among some trinitarians scholars regarding the Incarnation and the immutability of God. In other words, how the Godhead of Father, Son & HS added to itself humanity yet did not undergo any change.

    This is just one of many troubling implications wrought by this extra-biblical doctrine.

  28. Chuck,

    In the transfiguration, what was that meant to relay to the disciples? When we are changed into His image (if you believe that will happen) what does that mean to you?

  29. Blasater & Chuck,

    Why is it so “troubling”, when God is the Source of all flesh? Out of Him proceeded all Creation; therefore, there is no “addition” to Him from anything that proceeded from Him.

  30. Sheila,

    More succinctly…

    1Ch 29:14 But who am I, and what is my people, that we should be able to offer so willingly after this sort? for all things come of Thee, and of Thine own have we given Thee.

  31. Sheila

    In the transfiguration, what was that meant to relay to the disciples? When we are changed into His image (if you believe that will happen) what does that mean to you?

    I don’t know what this has to do with my last comment but what I think it was supposed to show his disciples is that Jesus was the promised Messiah. Who both superseded the prophets [represented by Elijah] and the Law [Moses].

    But to get back to point…do you believe that at the Incarnation and eventual exaltation of Jesus the Godhead of Father, Son & HS underwent a change? Since one of the “Persons” of the triune Godhead assumed for the first time “flesh” [humanity]?

  32. Chuck,

    It seems you have a problem with the way in which God chose to save us. Because you can’t wrap your mind around the mystery that is Father, Son and Holy Spirit–that is God– you have to build a new doctrine and understanding of the emamations of the Godhead that you “can” wrap your mind around. It seems to me to be wholely carnal knowledge and carnal can never be used to explain what is spiritual.

  33. Chuck,

    Do unies believe in the resurrection of the dead?

    What are we transformed into?

    What does it mean to “see and know Him as He is?”

    That in “that day” we will not need to ask anymore questions.

  34. Chuck,

    There’s a question that I asked on another blog–way back when–what of the Holy Spirit?

    When the Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost–Shavuot, did God then cease being God for a time? Or He left Heaven to sit on top of the Disciples heads?

  35. Sheila
    In response to post # 624
    Chuck is correct – the concept of a trinity was invented by Gentile Christians long after the original Jewish followers of Jesus were sidelined by the Pauline Church. Teh asme council that voted to accept the trinity voted to prohibit following the same Jewish calendar that Yeshua himself followed. The adoption of the trinity was part of a process of distancing themselves from Judaism – not bringing Christianity back to its Jewish roots.
    Your argument that Jews had a hard time believing that Gentiles have a place in God’s plan for salvation is also incorrect. The prophets explicitly predicted a time when all of mankind – Jew and gentile alike – will worship God together – this theme is at the center of the high-holiday liturgy much of which was composed before the times of Yeshua.
    What we do have a problem with is that the Chritsian preach a new election on the basis of loyalty to Yeshua – a concept that is the very antithesis of the Messianic predictions of the prophets.

  36. Chuck,

    Remember you have been welcomed here to interact with the rabbis about your beliefs, not to try to convince other Christians that their beliefs in the deity of Messiah are wrong. So, once more, please stay on topic.

  37. Rabbi Blumenthal and Rabbi Cohen,

    I was wondering what the two of you think about the Bible codes?

    Do you consider them an oracle that is “not” from the LORD? Or do you believe He would chose to communicate in that way to you?

    It seems a far cry from Sinai.

    With our enemy being a spiritual one who takes the word of God and twists it ever so slightly, I would think you would consider it a lying oracle.

    Just curious.

  38. Rabbi B.,

    I appreciate your synthesis of what the early Church members did in distancing themselves from the Jewish roots of our faith, but from your point of view, what would God’s plan of bringing the Gentiles in look like?

    I imagine there would be no mixing of Jew and Gentile into something spirtually “new” as far as eternal salvation. Is it just an earthly worship that you see in the future.

    I worship God. Jesus made this possible for all mankind to once more commune with God as Adam and Eve did before disobeying that one little commandment. What chance do we have in disobeying 50 or so?

  39. Rabbi B.,

    Another part of that is, when God “pours His spirit out on all of mankind” (Joel 2) there would then be no difference between us would there? Same Spirit, same God.

  40. Rabbi B.,

    (you may have noticed I have some extra time on my hands today… 🙂

    Another question:

    When God does pour His Spirit out, this is what I see from reading the prophets:

    We are either turned into ashes instantaniously, or we are set apart and spared and full of the knowledge of God. Do you read it like that?

  41. Rabbi Yisroel,

    You, yourselves, believe the Word existed before Creation, correct? We are adding nothing to the text; have you found any candidates for any other members of the Echad, yet, to qualify your Quadrinity concept?

    We believe the Spirit, the Father, and the Word are the Echad: can you think of any other in TNK that would qualify for your Quadrinity, to disqualify our belief?

  42. Of course there are those who live through the Millennium and they come to Jerusalem to worship the King and they bow at the feet of the Jews!!


    It’s God’s enemies that are consumed. We believe Messiah comes for those who are His and we then have jobs to do. (more or less)

  43. Rabbi Yisroel,

    And don’t say the angels — they are created; it is only a matter of when: if they aren’t from previous age, they were likely created on the same day as the stars:

    1. Gen 1:14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years,
    Gen 1:16 And God made the two great lights–the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night–and the stars.
    Gen 1:17 And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth,
    Gen 1:18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good.
    Gen 1:19 And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day.

    2. Job 1:6 Now it came to pass on the day when the sons of God came to present themselves before
    Jehovah, that Satan also came among them.

    Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

    3. Deu 4:19 and lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun and the moon and the stars, even all the host of heaven,

    4. Isa 1:9 Except the LORD of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, we should have been like unto Gomorrah.

  44. To anyone,

    I was thinking recently of the order of creation too. And if Messiah was not with God from eternity (even though Micah tells us He was) then that would mean that the satan “preceeded” Him.

  45. (cont.)

    Rev 12:1 And a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.

    Rev 21:12 It had a great, high wall, with twelve gates, an
    d at the gates twelve angels,

  46. Daniel- I was the one who posted about a Quadrinity. While I realize the Trinity defines Jesus as a single person with two natures, hence Tri-une, the truth is that this binatured G-d (Jesus) must be in harmony with the other two persons. Therefore,in Jesus (100%god and 100%man), the “man portion” must also be in harmony with the father and HS. So, “God” must be bi-natured by definition. This even though Jesus is one person, it requires both natures to be harmonized…Hence a Quadrinity. If one insists on not “looking or factoring” in the hypostatic union, at the very least, the Christian G-d is a Bi-natured Triune entity. Either way, not scriptural.

  47. Blasater,

    1. In #144 or #244 (??) Yisroel mentioned it, first.

    2. All flesh proceeded from God — nothing can be added to God from that which proceeded from Him.

    1Ch 29:14 But who am I, and what is my people, that we should be able to offer so willingly after this sort? for all things come of Thee, and of Thine own have we given Thee.

    3. Again, can you come up with a candidate?

Comments are closed.