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.

890 Comments
  1. Rabbi B.,

    And can you please answer whether or not waiting for and then listening to that Prophet that the LORD commanded through Moses is part of the 613.

  2. Sheila
    i remember our conversation – I thought you forgot it. that being the case please don’t quote Christain Scripture to explain Daniel 7:13 (as per post #725)
    Would you agree that verses 7:15-28 are the angelic explanation of 7:2-14?
    How would a pre-Christian Jew have understood the term “holy exalted ones” or “nation of holy exalted ones”

  3. Sheila
    In response to # 750 – certainly – but we have a different understanding of that passage – plus we have a different way of sorting out the true prophets from the frauds.

  4. YB

    that the people bowed to God as it is approrpriate to bow to God (as an act of complete submission) and they bowed to the king as it is appropriate to bow to the king (as an act of limited submission – with the recognition that both they and the king are equally subject to God)

    Agree. When I wrote “as God” I mean as representatives of God. And actually those texts you use make the unitarian point that just because scripture is said to “worship, serve & pray” to others apart from God does not make them God. Anymore than Moses was “god” to both Aaron and Pharaoh in Ex 4.16; 7.1.

    So I don’t have a problem with people worshiping, serving and praying to Jesus as who he claimed to be, the promised Messiah, unique Son of God. You, on the other hand, believe they are still wrong but not blaspheming, right?

  5. Rabbi B.,

    The world view I got from reading the Sriptures was that God only really cared for the Nation of Israel. That was my understanding. The rest of us were chopped liver. That was the world view I got from it.

    I never said I stopped reading when I got to Malachi and Messiah still had not come. So I turned the page…and what a slap in the face–He had only come for the Jews!! What in the world was going on?

    It wasn’t until I got to the epistles that I finally found a place for me in the Kingdom. So, I really don’t mind playing second fiddle, it was God’s plan not mine and who was I to complain. After all, I got just as good a deal as those who had the first crack at it.

  6. Rabbi B.,

    There is proof to back up my previous post. Does this ring a bell?:

    Mat 15:22 And behold, a Canaanite woman from that region came out and was crying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David; my daughter is severely oppressed by a demon.”

    Mat 15:23 But he did not answer her a word. And his disciples came and begged him, saying, “Send her away, for she is crying out after us.”

    Mat 15:24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

    Mat 15:25 But she came and knelt before him, saying, “Lord, help me.”

    Mat 15:26 And he answered, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.”

    Or this?:

    Mar 7:26 Now the woman was a Gentile, a Syrophoenician by birth. And she begged him to cast the demon out of her daughter.

    Mar 7:27 And he said to her, “Let the children be fed first, for it is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.”

    Mar 7:28 But she answered him, “Yes, Lord; yet even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.”

    Mar 7:29 And he said to her, “For this statement you may go your way; the demon has left your daughter.”

    Perhaps this resonates with you?:

    ESV – Mat 10:5 – These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans,

    But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

    No?

  7. Rabbi B.,

    I may not get to the question about Daniel 7 until later this evening, but let me correct one thing–I “never” quote Christian Scriptures–there is no such thing!

  8. Rabbi B.—

    “Would you agree that verses 7:15-28 are the angelic explanation of 7:2-14?
    “How would a pre-Christian Jew have understood the term “holy exalted ones” or “nation of holy exalted ones”’

    I see your point clearly and to that I would ask you, would someone trying to understand quantum physics stop at algebra? Would you ever get a full understanding of the mechanics of the universe? No, you couldn’t possibly. Let’s just suppose the Bible “is” a mystery novel, if you stopped reading midway through the book would you ever find out “who dun it?”

    Concerning the saints. The interpretation is those who are holy (set apart) to the Most High. Qaddiysh is an aramaic word that is only used in the book of Daniel. It’s Hebrew equivalent is qadowsh which carries the same meaning as in pure, clean, holy and set apart. It is first used in Exd 19:6 when He makes the Nation of Israel a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. Those are the most used meanings of the word saint.

    In the Nation of Israel being a kingdom of priests can we say then that the Jews would have understood it that your portion is the Lord, as the priests had no inheritance among the children of Israel?

    That is exactly what the New Covenant reiterates, nothing more, nothing less; those who trust in the “Lord our rigteousness” are declared wholely pure and righteous through Him and we are made “priests unto our God” as He is our inheritance. We “inherit” our portion in the Lord when He returns. The Jews will inherit their portion in the land as well, as it was given to your ancestors and their descendants forever. The wealth of the nations will come to you and for your sorrow and shame you shall have a double portion; the remnant of Israel will grow and prosper for a thousand years.

    Your question–“Would you agree that verses 7:15-28 are the angelic explanation of 7:2-14?”

    Yes, I do.

    Funny thing that—Messiah is conspicuously “absent” there too. (from your point of view)

  9. Rabbi Yisroel,

    1. Just because power, might spirit and breath are closely related doesn’t mean that they don’t each deserve separate incarnations.

    They are the same thing, as it is plain to see for anyone.

    2. The underlying problem is that you read Scripture as if it were an algebra equation

    Actually, I have endured many harsh rebukes from strict Bible-believers (including Dr. Michael Brown) — and been banned from a Christian site (in part) — for putting the Scriptures to the test [1 Th 5:21 and common sense tell me to] : I do not read them as an algebraic equation. Please duly-note this, sir. Do not gloss over this.

    3. and you will piece the puzzle together from all of the passages

    Sir, you present an irreconcilable version of the Scripture — based on the generations of Rabbis’ interpretations that came before you — and then accuse ME (a person who has been rejected by many Christian brothers for QUESTIONING and going against the mainstream thought of “Christians”) of piecing the puzzle together according to some sort of preconceived notion?
    Do you not see how utterly invalidated your empty presumption is?

    4. – all the while pretending that you are not biased by your Christian education.

    Pretending? You have authored a LIE — God has no Image — and you tell me I am pretending? You “pretend” that you don’t see what Scripture is saying. You have added and subtracted from TNK — despite your supposed love for it — and this is plain for anyone to see.

    5. God made things clear for us before He gave us Scripture – don’t you acknowledge that Israel was already in a covenant relationship with God before they got the Bible?

    Conclusion: You refuse/negate the obvious meaning of the TNK, erring/straying from and replacing the Truth of TNK with your “devices” (interpretations). May God have mercy and open the eyes of all participants and readers.

  10. YB

    if one does not attribute divinity to Jesus only Messiahship – he or she is mistaken but not idolatrous

    Does that mean that people like me are just wrong but not yet damned? 😛

    And what if we’re right? Have you thought about the implications of that for your people?

    Lastly, I noticed that some of your posts seem to be against what some term ‘Pauline Christianity’. Could you expand on that please?

  11. Sheila
    In response for #755 – did you read Tzephaniah 3:9? (concerning the Gentiles)
    Post #759 – I don’t see the Jewish Scriptures as a mystery novel – do you think that the Jews before Jesus saw it that way? – is there any indication that the coming of the Messiah is something of a “mystery”?
    Why would I think that the nation of holy exalted ones is anything but Israel as per Isaiah 61:6
    The absence of Messiah in the angelic explanation fits with my understadning perfectly I see this part of the vision (the kingdom being given to the nation of holy ones) as a direct parallel to Isaiah 60:12 – where the Messiah is not mentioned either.
    Could you answer the question – how would a pre-Yeshua Jew have understood the nation of holy exalted ones mentioned in Daniel 7?

  12. Chuck
    I didn’t say anything about being “damned” – God is the only judge – and I believe that He judges everyone according to their capabilities and according to their opportunities
    I considered the implications of your claim being true for my people – but every indication that God has given us – tells me that it is not true.
    My point about Pauline Christianity is that my reading of the Christian Scriptures tells me that Paul and not Jesus fathered Christainity – you can read my arguments in point #11 of my critique of Dr. Brown’s fourth olume.
    Question for you – if you agree that deifying Jesus is idolatry – thus a terrible sin – why is it that Jesus – who you beleive was a saintly man – had this happen to him? That people should misunderstadn him to the degree that they idolized him?

  13. Rabbi Yisroel,

    1. Before we proceeded any further, I wanted to point out that you presumed things about me — and were utterly in error about those things.

    2. God was in Covenant with Abraham; He made good that Covenant in His actions with the Israelites — in a sense, then, yes, He was in Covenant with Israel before the Law came: the Israelites are descendents of Abraham, with whom God was in Covenant. I agree with you — in part. What is your point?

  14. YB

    if you agree that deifying Jesus is idolatry – thus a terrible sin – why is it that Jesus – who you beleive was a saintly man – had this happen to him?

    First of all, the NT wroters do not describe Jesus just as some “saintly man” but as the miraculously created thus, unique Son of God [Mat 1.18-20; Luke 1.30-35], promised Messiah of the Hebrew scriptures [John 1.49]. And as such, the supreme representative of the one God of Israel, YHWH.

    Now to answer your question, how did Jesus become God? There are many a book and biblical scholars which detail the influence Greco-Roman culture had on earliest Christianity. I would suggest When Jesus Became God: The Struggle to Define Christianity During the Last Days of Rome by Richard E. Rubinstein.

    Recently I was reading John 3.13; 6.38 and many use the “coming down from/out of heaven” sayings by Jesus to prove that he literally existed before his birth. These verses are found in the context of Jesus identifying himself as the Son of Man figure of the Hebrew scriptures. So my question is this…was this figure of the Son of Man from Dan 7 believed to somehow have been God the Father, YHWH? If so, does this mean that Jesus preexisted as a human being before [once again?] becoming a human being?

  15. CORRECTION: “the NT writers do not describe Jesus”

    Other good books on the subject of how Jesus became God:

    Jesus wars by Philip Jenkins.

    AD 381: Heretics, Pagans and the Christian State by Charles Freeman.

  16. Although, as stated, I am staying out of this thread in terms of major posts, everyone should realize that Chuck’s position is absolutely against the NT — which does NOT state that Jesus was “created” — and absolutely against the writings of the first disciples of the apostles, who also spoke of Yeshua’s deity. Moreover, the Jenkins book does not affirm Chuck’s erroneous theology but rather talks about “Church” conflicts about related doctrinal issues centuries after the NT. And, to reiterate, in verse after verse in the NT, the preexistence of the Son is affirmed and reaffirmed. Yes, Jesus describes Himself as the Alpha and the Omega in Revelation; He is the “I am” in John; and the one who existed in the form of God before entering this world in Paul’s letters; the Lord who made the universe in the beginning in Hebrews — the list goes on and on — and the one who often appeared in the Tanakh.

    So, the ongoing dialogue here between Rabbi Blumenthal and Chuck — no disrespect to Rabbi Blumnenthal intended, since he is only interacting with fairness with someone who holds to a heretical and unbiblical position — is no more relevant than if they were discussing whether Yeshua could be the Messiah if He had been a Martian woman.

    Again, the defenders of the heretical notion that the Son of God was created with the birth of Jesus had ample time to defend their views when we debated publicly, and to all unbiased viewers, it was clear that the truth of the Word was against them.

  17. Dr Brown

    everyone should realize that Chuck’s position is absolutely against the NT — which does NOT state that Jesus was “created”

    Could you explain for us the usage of words like genesis [origin] & gennao [to come into existence] in relation to the birth of Jesus in the Synoptics then [Mat 1.1, 18; Luke 1.35]? Words that are used throughout the Bible to signify the birth of a human being. Or do you believe that we existed prior to our births? In a literal sense of course. This is why even to this day trinitarians are split between those who hold to the eternal generation of the Son due to verses like Ps 2.7, used by the NT writers to GROUND the existence of the Son at his birth:

    The designation of this relationship by words with a temporal notion [“this day have I begotten you”, Ps 2.7] has troubled theologians, who have proffered various explanations.

    Origen understood this as referring to the Son’s relationship within the Trinity and was the first to propose the concept of eternal generation. The Son is said to be eternally begotten by the Father. Others have viewed the language more figuratively and connected it with Christ’s role as Messiah. The Complete WordStudy Dictionary, gennao in Mat 1.20.

    History verifies the fact that Origen INVENTED the doctrine when he wrote that the Son’s “generation is as eternal and everlasting” as of God the Father [De Principiis, 1.2.4].

    the Jenkins book does not affirm Chuck’s erroneous theology but rather talks about “Church” conflicts about related doctrinal issues centuries after the NT.

    The books cited are in response to the Rabbi’s question…how did Jesus become God? Written by historians more than theologians. Just the facts Dr Brown.

    Yes, Jesus describes Himself as the Alpha and the Omega in Revelation

    This claim is ambigous to say the least. Since it has been noted from earliest times that the texts have been tampered with:

    And Ambrose to prove the Omnipotence of Christ cites Apoc. 1.8 in these words. “I am Alpha and Omega saith the Lord Iesus, who is, & who was, & who is to come, the Omnipotent.{“}The true reading is not, “the Lord Iesus” but “the Lord God” – that is “God the Father”.

    Again in Apoc. 1.11. the words of the Son of Man “I am Alpha & Omega the first & the last” have crept erroneously into some few Greek MSS, out of one of which Erasmus printed it, & into the Arabic version. For they are wanting in the Alexandrin MS & most others & in the Syriac, Latin, & Æthiopic, & in the Commentaries of Arethas & Primasius, & in the Complutensian Edition. Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture, Isaac Newton, part 5: ff. 85-101

    And if we note the last mention of the title in Rev 22 it is the angel who says these words.

    I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things…fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had been showing them to me. But he said to me, “Don’t do that! I am a fellow servant with you and with your fellow prophets and with all who keep the words of this scroll. Worship God!”

    Then he told me…“Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what they have done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

    Even if this particular title were attributed to the Son we know that it is because he represents God the Father as his agent. Just like the angel of YHWH is said to do throughout the scriptures. And we know that Jesus is not an angel according to Heb 1 nor did God speak through a Son before his birth since he did not literally exist!

  18. Dr. Brown,

    Yep; Sir Anthony didn’t even attempt to answer SEVERAL major points White & yourself made — it was a one-sided debate. Even with his position, Sir Buzzard had to concede that there were two clear trinitarian verses (did he forget that “every fact is established in the mouths of two or three witnesses”?). Sir Buzzard is impotent to respond.

    ——————————
    Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    +
    Php 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,
    Php 2:6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
    Php 2:7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
    Php 2:8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

    Clearly, Yeshua
    1) existed before His Incarnation, and
    2) was in the Form of God; Equal with God
    ——————————

    Sorry for being off-topic.

  19. Dan1el
    Thanks for your response – So you agree that Israel was in a covenant relationship with God before they got the Bible
    I now have some more questions
    1) How did they identify God for purposes of worship at that point in time (before the Bible was given to them)?
    2) Who taught them to identify God in that way?
    3) How confident were they that the identification thatt hey possessed was correct?
    4) Did this identification of God tie in to their covenant obligations in any way?
    (Clue – The Bible provides clear answers to these questions)

  20. Chuck
    Why is it that when Jesus speaks of himself as the “son of man” taht Christians immediately assume he is talking of Daniel 7:13 – why not Ezekiel – where thsi expression appears so many more times?
    Getting back to the point I was trying to make – Imagine today – if some leader would have a following that looks up to him – at some point some of his followers exalt him so much – that they begin moving in the direction of deifying him. Wouldn’t you think that it is that leader’s responsibility to nip the mistake in its bud?

  21. YB

    Why is it that when Jesus speaks of himself as the “son of man” taht Christians immediately assume he is talking of Daniel 7:13 – why not Ezekiel – where thsi expression appears so many more times?

    Your a Rabbi and you do not know these things? 😛

    The son of Man in Ezekiel is Ezekiel. So how is that Jesus? Who else is the son of man of Daniel but the Messiah, who Jesus claimed to be?

    Wouldn’t you think that it is that leader’s responsibility to nip the mistake in its bud?

    First, no one was deifying Jesus while he was alive. The worst that could be said of him is that he made himself “equal to God” because he claimed to be the Son of God, i.e., the Lord God’s Anointed One!

    Second, the main controversy at the time of the Apostles was over Torah keeping and not whether Jesus was God or “God the Son” or how many the Gos of Israel was.

    Are you going to address some of my points?

  22. Chuck,

    Again, no need to address me, since I’m not debating issues with you that have been covered over and again, nor do I have the time. In my previous post I was simply reminding others here that the points you make are unbiblical and in denial of the total witness of Scripture. So, feel free to continue to interact with Rabbi Blumenthal in keeping with this thread. This much is clear: If Yeshua is not one with God, then the love and adoration we have for Him is, in fact, idolatrous. On that point, Rabbi Blumenthal and I agree.

  23. Rabbi Blumenthal,

    1. I would venture to say that the Israelites did not worship God, since they were all so unpleasing to Him that He destroyed all the adults, who worshipped other gods…

    Amo 5:25 “Did you bring to me sacrifices and offerings during the forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel?
    Amo 5:26 You shall take up Sikkuth your king, and Kiyyun your star-god–your images that you made for yourselves

    Their time of testing in the wilderness revealed that they were idolaters — so, He slew those who had learned to be idolaters, and raised up a generation that had not learned the idolatry of their fathers.

    Again, my answer is that the Israelites who came out of Egypt did not worship God — I don’t think they were noted worshippers of God any more than Esau was renowned for being a worshipper of God. Merely because they are of the loins of Jacob, all of a sudden, that means they are “set for life”? No. There will be Ishmaels; there will be Esaus — regardless if it is from Jacob’s loins, or some other father’s loins — there will be throw-aways, and there will be sons through whom the Promise is carried on.
    I believe that “the holy remnant” (the “Isaacs” and “Jacobs”) believed in Yeshua as Messiah — the rest (the disobedient to Truth) were “Ishmaels” and “Esaus”.

  24. Dr Brown

    Again, no need to address me, since I’m not debating issues with you that have been covered over and again, nor do I have the time.

    Thank you for making the time but you come and go accusing me of heresy and attacking my posts. So I feel compelled to address them as I am sure it is anyone’s RIGHT to do.

    Why don’t you just let your audience digest the information and check whether the books I cited are biased or not. One of the beautiful things about the Judeo-Christian faith is freedom of conscious. 😉

  25. Dan1el
    I didn’t ask you if they actually worshipped God (not that I agree with your assessment – but that wasn’t my question) My question was did they receive any teaching on identifying God for the purpopse of worship befoire they were given the Bible? Can you answer that question?

  26. Chuck
    Your last comment to me ended with your request to address your points – I apologize but I’m not sure which points you are referring to – if you could reiterate them – I’ll try to respond
    My point about son of man – was that in Ezekiel – it is referring to Ezekiel in his role as prophet – which I think would fit Jesus according to your belief as I understand it. Daniel’s son of man is referring to the people of Israel – not to an individual – so I don’t see the connection.

  27. YB

    Recently I was reading John 3.13; 6.38 and many use the “coming down from/out of heaven” sayings by Jesus to prove that he literally existed before his birth. These verses are found in the context of Jesus identifying himself as the Son of Man figure of the Hebrew scriptures. So my question is this…was this figure of the Son of Man from Dan 7 believed to somehow have been God the Father, YHWH? If so, does this mean that Jesus preexisted as a human being before [once again?] becoming a human being?

    Daniel’s son of man is referring to the people of Israel – not to an individual – so I don’t see the connection.

    Okay I did not know you saw that figure as somehow “corporate Israel”. Although at College I was taught that the INDIVIDUAL could be said to “embody…the saints [nation] of the Most High”. Just like Jesus is said to embody the corporate Church.

    In any case, Jesus believed himself to be that figure. And certainly the High Priest made the connection when he was horrified by Jesus’ answer during his trial:

    Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”

    “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” Mar 14.61-61

    Sure sounds like Jesus QUOTES from the Daniel 7.13 vision:

    I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days And was presented before Him.

    So just to clear it up so I understand your view, you’re saying that the Son of man of Daniel is not understood to be the Messiah? Or is this your PERSONAL understanding?

  28. (the fact that they cried out to Him in Egypt means nothing — many people pray to God all day [Muslims pray to “the God of Moses” — in their minds — and do not truly know God, their actions being the proof]; that isn’t proof that they know God [even though it can be proof that they want something from God])

  29. Interestingly enough, even if they did believe the prophecy, when Moses went to deliver them, expecting them to understand that he was the one sent to deliver them, they rejected him…

    Exo 2:13 When he went out the next day, behold, two Hebrews were struggling together. And he said to the man in the wrong, “Why do you strike your companion?”
    Exo 2:14 He answered, “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me as you killed the Egyptian?” Then Moses was afraid, and thought, “Surely the thing is known.”

    …just like they did the Messiah — who was to be “as Moses”.

  30. Dan1el

    Sir Buzzard is impotent to respond.

    Thanks for writing but unfortunately you are declaring your believe in 2 Who are Gods. Thus, in 2 Gods.

    There are 1300 references to the Father as God in the NT. It is quite unreasonable to deviate from the creed affirmed by Jesus in Mar 12.29.

    Just asnwer me this question: Does Jesus command you and me as Christian believers to believe in a unitarian or trinitarian creed?

    As to the 2 “clear verses” you believe I did not address I assume one of them was John 20.28? If so, here is a thought-provoking take on it:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-akFdi8bm3I&feature=related

  31. Dear Rabbi Blumenthal, thank you for your contribution to this discussion.

    Would you state for all of us please whether the Shema of Deu 6.4 & Mar 12.29 is a unitarian or trinitarian?

  32. Sir Anthony,

    Feel free to interact with the rabbis here, in keeping with the purpose of the thread. This is not the place to argue your other points — how many opportunities do you need, sir, to attempt to make the same point? — so feel free to refer Dan1el to other relevant threads where you and he can continue the discussion if you so desire.

    Also, Sir Anthony, I assume you will take Rabbi Blumenthal as being the authority on whether or not Jesus is the prophesied Messiah of the Tanakh? Or do you believe he is quite wrong in his interpretation of many relevant passages?

  33. Dan1el,

    Feel free to continue interacting with Sir Anthony, if you like, on a different, relevant thread (re: Yeshua’s deity or God’s triune nature), but please don’t continue the discussion here so we can still try to preserve the integrity of this thread. Thanks!

  34. Sir Buzzard,

    How do you interpret this?:

    ESV – Mat 28:19 – Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in* the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

    Footnote:
    * Or into

  35. Dr Brown

    I assume you will take Rabbi Blumenthal as being the authority on whether or not Jesus is the prophesied Messiah of the Tanakh? Or do you believe he is quite wrong in his interpretation of many relevant passages?

    Michael, I fully believe Jesus is the prophesied Messiah!

    I do not think that the Tanach says that the Messiah would “be God”. God’s anointed, yes. That is our issue with you, of course.

    But we fully support all you say about Jesus of Nazareth being the Messiah expected, i.e., the prophet like Moses and virginally begotten.

    There is no need to complicate this with a “compound one” and thousands of “compound singular pronouns” or “eternal generation” which is nonsense!

    We are convinced that the creed of Moses, Jesus and Paul is strictly unitarian!

    Mark 12:29 is a repeat of the Shema and the Shema is a non-Trinitarian creed. That is the point of the whole tradition from the Reformation (i.e., the biblical unitarian tradition).

    I will enquire of your good rabbi friends.

    BTW a certain Rosenthal is much mistaken when talking about the meaning of ECHAD! Do we really have to battle about such an easy word?

  36. Sir Anthony,

    Once again, I won’t be drawn into an argument with you here. You have sufficient opportunity to argue you points with me and others, and the witness of Scripture remains firmly against you. You can have your glorified man. I’ll have God and only God.

  37. Rabbi Blumenthal–“In response for #755 – did you read Tzephaniah 3:9? (concerning the Gentiles)”

    I think that Zec. 2:10-11, Zec.8:19-23, Isa. 2:2-5, better applies to the Gentiles than does Zeph. 3:9. Are you suggesting that the Gentiles who worship Yeshua are the ones burned up? Or, are we some of those standing shoulder to shoulder with the remnant that is spared? The Lord says He will remove the proud and arrogant and He will leave only the remnant who are weak and ignoble; those who possess humility and hope in His salvation. Psa 107:41, Psa 113:7, Job 5:8-16, all of Psa. 72, etc., etc.. This is the way of the Lord as He proclaims throughout Scripture and this is His controversy with all mankind.

    Rabbi B.—“Could you answer the question – “How would a Jew have understood the nation of holy exalted ones mentioned in Daniel 7?”

    The Jews would have examined it from the First Testament Scriptures only. I think that’s what you would like me to comment on.

    That both Jew and Gentiles are the focus of Daniel’s saints is given in 7:14 where “all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him.” That Jew and Gentiles will inhabit Messiah’s Kingdom is a theme in many prophesies so why wouldn’t they be part of those that Daniel saw? If we agree that Daniel is speaking of “that day” then it is “that day” for everyone and it is the culmination of all the prophesies that speak of it. Dan 7:27 – “Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of the kingdoms ‘under the whole heaven’ will be handed over to the saints, the people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him.'”

    The picture Daniel is painting for us is that of Messiah taking possession of His Kingdom. The language is in properly reading and understanding the image of who that “someone” being exalted to the right hand of God is.

    QUESTION: How did the Jews understand who the subject (person) was in Psa. 110? Who was it that the LORD named a “Priest forever after the order of Melchizedek”? What did the Jews think of that statement? In what way is Messiah to be like one who is “forever” the Priest and the King of Salem and of the “Most High God” who is named Melchizedek and who Abraham acknowledged as being the “intermediary” for God—to whom he paid a tenth? Or did they believe that a system of sacrificial worship was already in place in Salem (Jerusalem) during the time of Abraham?

    Daniel sees the same thing as David saw both in Psa. 110 and in 2 Sam. 22 and others. “Someone” has ascended to the right hand of God, the Father, who Daniel refers to as the Ancient of Days” If we look at Psa. 21, we see the promise fulfilled here in Daniel’s prophesy as well. In Daniel 7:27, it says “his kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom.” That language is used of Messiah time and time again and I’ll spare you my listing them all. It also says that the kingdom will be handed over to the saints, the people of the Most High. If the saints are now in possession of the Kingdom, it’s for certain that the Kingdom is now in the possession of Messiah! The Kingdom does not come to the people (saints) until Messiah is already enthroned. That is what Scripture says.

    Dan 7:14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

    Who are the saints? It seems to me to be “all peoples” from every nation and every language-who are “worshiping him.” When did they start worshiping this son of man who was led into the presense of and who was taken to stand before the Ancient of Days? Jer 30:21 – “Their prince shall be one of themselves; their ruler shall come out from their midst; I will make him draw near, and he shall approach me, for who would dare of himself to approach me? declares the LORD.” The peoples from every nation are worshiping him as He has been given all Authority, Glory, and Sovereign Power. No where does it say that this person came back down to earth. David says he is still seated next to the Father. Zec 2:8-13.

    If we were to read Dan. 7:14 as only the Jews then it seems you are implying that only the Jews are righteous, is that it? Perhaps that is the way that they understood it before the first century. Then Daniel would seem to say that the Jews will inherit the entire earth. Is that how you understand it? I understand it to mean that when the Lord apportioned the nations of the earth, He gave to Israel the land that He promised to them. The rest of the nations are residing where He wants them. He made the earth to be inhabited and alloted each their own portion. When Daniel speaks of the saints, I would think the Jews would apply those Scriptures that include all those who “in that day” turn to the Lord and are “worshiping Messiah” the “him” of Daniel. Psa 22:27, Isa 19:20-25, Psa 86:9-10, Psa 66:1-4, Psa 67, Psa 68:32, Psa. 97, 98, Isa. 19 and many such verses. The question is, who is the “Him?”

    I see how many of the Jews could have read it that way–as only speaking of them. Well, that is the Priests and Teachers of the Scripture that would have interpreted it that way as the average Josh didn’t have the luxury of taking a Bible off their shelf and looking it up. There was much they didn’t understand before it came to pass. After Messiah ascended into heaven they would have understood “many” things in a totally different light and as Daniel is speaking of the last days, they would have taken into account all of the prophesies concerning that time. That some were confounded concerning Messiah’s everlasting mission was evident even in the first century. We can now use hind-sight and all of the Scriptures to better see the truth.

    I do think Daniel understood it by way of the angel’s interpretation. Judgment was coming first on Jerusalem after the anointed one was cut off and after that a fearful looking forward to of the last and final judgment that was coming on all the earth by way of Messiah–but in the end Messiah and His saints, those who have trusted in His salvation and have waited for Him will live in His sight and be joined to Him in that day! We now have the book of the Revelation of Messiah, Jesus, which is the unveiling of the same vision that Daniel saw, that all judgment has been handed over to Him and if any of you would like to read the rest of the story, just turn the page…

    Isa 42:9 See, the former things have taken place, and new things I declare; before they spring into being I announce them to you.”

  38. Chuck
    The passage you quote does indeed prove that Jesus was referring Daniel 7 to himself. My question is – do you think that he was quoting that passage according to its contextual straightforward meaning – or as some midrashic (homiletical) application? The angel’s interpretation of the vision says nothing about an individual king.
    I realize that as a unitarian – the two of us could have a discussion that focuses exclusively on the Messianic claims of Jesus – without getting begged down in the issue of idolatry. Would you be willing to argue it out on this forum? – I propose that we each lay out what we think a Jew should have expected according to the Jewish Scriptures (Old Testament) before Jesus came on the scene – and how the OT would have taught him to evaluate the claims of Jesus. Would you be interested?

  39. Dan1el
    Yes I have Scripture in mind – Deuteronomy 4:35. That tells me that Israel was taught to know God and identify Him BEFORE they got the book of Genesis. It was God Himself who imparted this knowledge to them – and that subsequent teaching (such as the book of Genesis) ought to be read in light of what has already been taught.

Comments are closed.