Horizontal Menu Bar

Yeshua for (Orthodox) Judaism

Yeshua for (Orthodox) Judaism (Psa 110:1-7|Matt 22:41-46)

The Bible Evidence Why Jesus was/is the Bible’s Prophesied Messiah (cf. John 10:25, 37-38; 14:10-11; Matt 7:15-20)

            Alright, after several months now of endeavored work on this blog post, as it increasingly involves each answer to be given, literally deserving to be in a full blown dissertation/thesis in themselves, also involving the deeper exegetical study of many OT and NT passages, and thus requires much more of the needed resources than what I presently have and/or can expend, I have decided that rather than wait for the manifest several more months to complete this blog post, I’ll instead just post my written work thus far and also the ca. 140 pages of notes and jotted down answers and lines of countering arguments that I have produced thus far. So the following posting is as rough a draft, including brainstorming stage notes, as it can be. I recognize that not everything stated thus far in that “working thesis” stage may be polishedly accurate, but that is only a small minority of what is posted here. Further study and expounding may prove and better substantiate those points and statements.
            So here goes with my responses (thus far) to the ca. 45+ hours of “Counter-missionary” material found on “Jews for Judaism” (and certain other) websites:


            It will likely/naturally be the case that the authors of the content to which I am responding to here will more readily understand the responding statements and succinct notes being made here, even if they are not yet fully developed. Someone who is not familiar with the initial material here would be greatly benefited by first viewing the resources from the above links. The specific resource under discussion is many times cited as (highlighted) headers below.

Note: As involved in the chosen Title Verse, as Jesus’ trumping card statement in Matt 22:41-46; the discussion of Psa 110 included in these discussion is most pivotal to understanding and recognizing the Messiah as it generally explains many of the key objections still being claimed by Jews against Christianity.
            And as with all other acts of God in both the OT and NT, right through today, if one is refusing to involve faith combined with also loving righteousness (=right doing), then it literally becomes impossible to “see the light” (Rom 9:30-33; cf. Rev 3:18 -see here).
            I’ll also generally say here, in regards to an also key/pivotal passage on this topic of the Messiah, as God’s Israel had been started by one person, and then following the Babylonian Captivity was revived by a small remnant, the related Servant songs in Isaiah 40-54, particularly Isa 53 can validly apply to the experience of a single (establishing) person and also a (later) preserving and re-establishing Remnant.

___________________


            This blog post was literally triggered by me coming across the following promoted video on Youtube [while looking for a documentary on the Auschwitz Concentration Camp] entitled: “6-MINUTE COUNTER-MISSIONARY Crash Course”. Frankly/Sincerely, as it can be seen in this earlier posted commenting on Judaism, (cf. here) just like the existing concept of a cultural, agnostic secular/atheistic Jew had all been concretely foreign to me before my first job back in 1993, I did not actually know that some (particularly Religious) Jewish people (still) had Bible, even OT reasons for rejecting Jesus Christ. So since I have watched/heard over 45+ hours of various Orthodox Jewish presentations, most of the by the “counter-(Christian)-missionary” “Jews for Judaism” organization posted here, here and here, as well as several other online postings from other Jewish “Outreach” organizations also working to disprove the claims of Christians that Jesus was the Biblical Messiah, and the following post is a, succinct as possible, answer to those claimed/posited counter points.
            A main presenter in the presentations I have found/viewed, “Rabbi” (i.e., Matt 23:8) Michael Skobac, likes to, based on Pro 18:17, compare such countering work as the trial procedure of “cross-examination”, well as also involved in trial procedures there can then be a follow up “redirect/re-examination” where: “the party who offered the witness has a chance to explain or otherwise qualify any damaging or accusing testimony brought out by the opponent during cross-examination” (which may then be followed up by a “recross”). Well in this blog post that follow up “re-examination/redirection” is made. It is all part of that necessary “making an informed decision” and “looking both ways before crossing” analogy to see/verify if the first considerations were properly/accurately deemed and assayed.
            (Again, due to the amount of material that needs to be covered here, I’ll be getting right into the points without much background detailing, indeed mainly, straightly providing the answer to the raised objections in those “counter-missionary” presentations.)


Truthfulness of the Tanakh [henceforth, for, at least, succinct reasons, called the Old Testament (OT)] vs. the New Testament (NT).

The claim that the OT is “true” or objectively more true than the NT is not at all that clear cut for the following reasons (and I most solemnly disclaimingly preface here that I strongly believe in all of the Old Testament):

-2,000,000 people witnessing the Divine Act of the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai vs. at most, 500 people (1 Cor 15:4-8) witnessing the resurrection is not more reliable given that documented completely different behavior of those said, in person witnesses. Namely, the Israelites who are there said to have heard the majestic and terrifying voice of God themselves that day, soon after hearing this explicitly stated Will and Law of God plunged into most debase and effectively “atheistic” conduct, claiming that a Golden Calf they made was actually their god, -all led by the brother (Aaron) of the one who had been the leader in the great miracle of the Exodus (Exod 32). Not to mention the repeated acts or unbelief manifest in the wilderness journeying (Num 14:22) Contrary to this, in such a context, completely antithetical behavior, we have independently historically-verified testimony and evidence that the people who witnessed the bodily appearances of the resurrected Jesus did not at all mind being marginalized, physically suffer, and even be killed for holding this belief. That starts with the 12 disciples/apostles of Jesus and then the many converts to whom they actually simply shared this testimony. Basic logic is that people just do not suffer for something they know as a fact is not true, nor especially for merely the claim of someone else, unless, with this latter ‘secondary group’ they have a corpus of satisfactory testimony and/or corroborating evidence (with most of this extended group, living through ca. 165 A.D., having had, at some point, some firsthand/in-person interaction with at least one of Christ’s 12 Apostles and/or Paul), that verifies what they were told. So in the case of the early believers who did not see the resurrected Christ themselves, they most likely already knew first hand of all that Jesus had miraculously done while ministering and thus understood that His own resurrection from the dead was not something that God could not do, with especially Him, particularly if they also knew of the non-validity and unfairness of His capital charges and trial.
            So 2,000,000 OT eye-witnesses vs. most likely +2,000,000 Christian martyrs in the first three centuries, the resulting “testimony” of Christian believers, unrecantingly/knowingly/willingly sealed, by an optionable choice (cf. e.g., Acts 4:18-20), with their own blood, speaks volumes louder than the effectively “non-believing testimony” of the Israelites.*


________________________


*Some follow up discussion on this point above from a responder [edited mainly for anonymity]:

Responding Email:
February 23, 2013

bs"d
Shalom[...]:
I have not read through your entire response to our videos, and probably will not have a chance to. Part of the reason is because I have already read dozens of serious Christian books and hundreds of articles on these topics, as well as listened to hundreds of hours of lectures for the past 35 years. At some point, I have to say to myself that I've made an honest attempt to understand their point of view.

I will say that your piece gets off to a very bad start on the question of establishing the veracity of revelation. No one disputes that over 2 million Jewish people heard G-d with Moses at Mt.Sinai. (Scripture, by the way, says that several thousand worshipped the calf, not all 2 million, but we'll leave that aside for now).

The point is regarding how we know that Moses was a true prophet. He didn't receive a private revelation from G-d and then convince everyone else to believe that G-d spoke with him. When it comes to the prophesy of Moses, we know with crystal clear clarity that he was a true prophet.

Rather than look at those Jews who were disloyal to fully obeying G-d, why not look at the fact that for the past 3300 years, there have been at least a remnant of Jews who have been loyal to follow His Torah, even while they were mercilessly persecuted in the world. I would not want to judge Christianity based upon those who represent it the worst. And over the past 2000 years, I don't have to educate you regarding how many were so-called "real Christians".

The clarity of Moses' revelation is absolute, and it is the bedrock of Judaism. A worthwhile question is how we know that later prophets also spoke in the name of G-d. How do we know that Jeremiah and Amos were true prophets? Who was given the responsibility for making the decisions regarding those questions?

But you are comparing apples and oranges. Whether 500 people or 5 million people witnessed Jesus' alleged resurrection is quite irrelevant. At question is, if we are comparing the credibility of the revelation of scripture is: How many people witnessed a divine revelation to Paul or Matthew?

I should also point out to you that our videos are not meant to be exhaustive or even comprehensive. Each treats highly complex issues in 90 minute presentations. Each topic deserves much longer treatments. If you are interested in a resource that explores many of these issues further, I'd refer you to the blog by Rabbi Yisroel Chaim Blumenthal called 1000 Verses.

All the best, and with Torah blessings,
[...]

My response(s):
February 23, 2013

Hello [...],

How are you? First of all I want to personally say that I have appreciated your presentations, particularly for the mindful way it is presented in regards to the knowledge and understanding the “other” (i.e., Christian) side. I assume, from having heard you testimony prior to become a (fully) practising Jew and Rabbi, that it is borne out of having had at first similar views in regards to Judaism.

I can fully understand your reason stated here of not wanting to engage into ‘yet another’ study on these issues, however, perhaps the fact that I am of “Seventh-day Adventist background” (now following the deeper truths in the Bible), and since SDA’s with their understandings and/or observation of the Sabbath, Sanctuary, State of the Dead, as well as the valid Prophetic Gift, (wherein I have seen several “mysteries” of the Old Testament been best resolved), SDA’s are probably closest to Orthodox Jews, (except of course for Messianic Jews). Forthcomingly stated, I also see that my “deepertemporal, Christian Zionism perspectives which both SDA’s and Messianic Jews don’t have may be a key difference and contribution here. But the tangible proof would still need to be in the substance of statements, such as here: the ‘revelation witnesses of the Old vs. New Covenant.

First of all on that issue, I would specifically say that no Bible/OT believer disputes that over 2 million heard the revelation to Moses, however, the key here is one having a belief in the Bible and/or the generational testimony of people who followed after. My main point was that despite having both witnessed the power of God in the Exodus and then the revelation from Sinai, the Bible is clear that only one tribe, the Levites, chose to side for God when given the chance. It further seems clear to me from Exod 32:28-35 that the 3000 who were killed in that first day of punishment was just a beginning, but Moses stayed the further effectuation of this punishment by choosing to seek forgiveness and atonement from God instead. I am not sure how exactly God then “smote” the rest of the rebellious people in Exod 32:35, but it may have been by something imperceptible or spiritual which did not overtly manifest itself right away but may have physically and spiritually contributed to the result of the utter rejection of that in Num 14, I.e., a deliberate spiritual deficiency or outright “blindness” as well as a health condition which resulted in all of the 20+ year old adults non-normatively dying within 40 years. Perhaps God had already, but secretly decreed an early death for the generation which rebelled with the Golden Calf, (so that even if they made it into the promise land they would still die soon thereafter and themselves not live long and enjoy that promise), and then explicitly revealed and perhaps also accelerated that type of ‘early death’ punishment at the Num 14 rebellion.

Interestingly and tellingly enough, I reckonedly see that of the “ten times” that God said Israel had tested Him in the wilderness (Num 14:22) (i.e.: ) the Golden Calf episode was #7 (=perfect representational effectuation) and the spies report faithlessness episode was #10 (=complete effectuation):

(1) Exod 14:10-12 - Faithless crying out at the approach of the pursuing Egyptian Armies.
(2) Exod 15:22-24 - Grumblings at lack of freshwater
(3) Exod 16:1:3 - Grumblings for no food
(4) Exod 16:19-20 - Not following manna non-stashing command
(5) Exod 16:27-30 - Going out to gather manna on the Sabbath
(6) Exod 17:1-4 - Quarrelling with Moses for water during journeying
(7) Exod 32:1-35  - Making and Worshipping of a Golden Calf
(8) Num 11:1-3 - Complaining for encountered adversities
(9) Num 11:4-34 - Weeping for flesh meat to eat
(10) Num 14:3 - Lifting Up Voices/Crying/Weeping/Grumbling at the faithless report of 10 spies

All this to say that God may have indeed punished to some extent all of the people who had acted rebellious with the Golden Calf, and not only 3000. (Even the Levites may have also participated at first but then took a stand for God when called to do so by Moses. The rest of the people evidently did not want to repent. Evidently only the intercession of Moses spared them from full and swift punishment.

So I see that my argument still stands that the people from at least 11 of the 12 tribes, and perhaps initially all of the twelve tribes engaged in that apostasy...yet they had just heard God Himself speak from Heaven. Again I do not doubt that they had because I believe in the inspiration and veracity of the OT, I am just saying that making an argument on that point in contrast with the NT, is not objective or conclusive proof in itself. Like I said, the actions of the 12 Apostles and the Early Church who by the million chose to suffer for what they had seen/witnessed and heard, and on a first hand testimonial basis for several decades, is equivalent, and even better, proof for the Christian, to this day, of something supernatural having occurred i.e., the ministry, miracles, and especially/sealingly the resurrection of Jesus. Of course Christianity has since been corrupted, but that is besides the key issue, as that has occurred over time.

In fact, and to probably bridge the views here, I actually can see that, seeing that God always involves the key element of faith in whatever He does, especially for people on this (fallen) Earth, I can see that the people may not have actually distinctly heard and understood the actual voice of God at Sinai, but as Exod 20:18 seems to suggest and involve, merely the sounds of thunder and it was only Moses who, for some perhaps spiritual closeness reason, especially as the people had already murmured against God at least 6 (major) times by then (see listing above), was able to decipher what God was saying then. (A similar thing happen in the NT: John 12:28-30 - And as discussed in my blog, the NT prophecy of the 7 Thunders (Rev 10:3-4) is based on this type of veiled revelation: See starting from here: http://njkproject.blogspot.com/2010/12/message-of-seven-thunders.html) .

So the evidence of a faithful remnant is indeed a valid explanation, as it actually also is for Christianity (Rev 12:17), but, again, a wholesale/majority apostasy is quite normative for generation long after the initial fact, and not within a short period after. So to me, as stated above, this is at least evidence that the people then had not really heard the voice of God distinctly speaking, but merely thunders, (which actually frightened them into not wanting to hear anything at all after that!)


In regards to (e.g.,) Matthew’s and Paul’s inspiration and witnessing, first of all, I agree with you that Matthew’s “fulfilment” claims are not conclusive, nor objective, perhaps even valid, in themselves. As one (SDA) author said of his initial reaction to them: “If that’s the kind of proof that establishes Jesus as the Messiah, no wonder the Jews rejected him!” (Alden Thompson, Inspiration, Review and Herald 1995. p. 206). But as he later states, as you do, that may all be “valid” midrashic applications, which I gather was just starting to become popular around that time. So I do not see Matthew as actually involving direct inspiration for his writings, but mostly merely a factual/testimonial account of what he had witnessed in person, including the resurrection.

Paul however involved much more prophetic experiences, and in regards to the validity of his claims, I would respond by asking, who witnessed the calling and message of Elijah?? As Paul himself states in 1 Thess 5:19-22, any prophetic message, which God says he would mainly do in (private) dreams and visions (Num 12:6), is to be substantively tested by the already established and fulfilled word of God (=Isa 8:20; cf. Deut 13:1-5), and the test of fulfilled prophecy (when determining conditions are met (Jer 18:1-10)), is also another way to verify a prophetic claim. (Deut 18:22). So passing both of these tests is determinative in knowing who is being used in a prophetic capacity by God. And in ways which cannot be (fairly) demonstrated here, I see that, e.g., Jesus and Paul have passed that test when the issues of the promised “law-in-the-heart” New Covenant (Jer 31:31-34) are accurately understood, including the crux of Paul’s teaching that God had actually wanted a people who had arrived at the righteousness and faith level that Abraham had, and the Law only served to help guide the people to that ideal level of godliness.

Just in passing, a working thesis view that I have, judging by the fact that the Law was only given 1000's of years after Creation, that God actually wanted a relationship with Man which did not need to involved a codified Law, but by people being so loving that they would know to avoid doing unrighteous things. The (codified) Law is indeed there because of increased unrighteousness, -to explicitly and clearly remind people of what sin is. But prior to that people, such as Abraham, Joseph, quasi-naturally knew when something was against God’s Will and Law, even if there was no written codes to indicate this. (That too is a whole dissertation issue/topic in itself.)

* Relatedly, as I discuss here: http://njkproject.blogspot.com/2010/12/unrolling-of-scroll.html#oathmaking  the SDA Prophet(ess) Ellen G. White was shown in vision something about Elijah appearing before Ahab (1 Kgs 17:1) that is only alluded to in passing by Josephus (apparently based on Jewish tradition), [in the Greek of his text]: namely ‘that Elijah raised his hand towards Heaven to make his oath-statement to Ahab’. As I said earlier, there is a wealth of such complimentary vision revelations on also OT episodes in the writings of this SDA prophet E.G. White, (as well as for the NT), which all may uniquely/distinguishingly be of interest to you in such discussions. I personally see them as contributively comparable to certain aspects of Jewish Talmudic writings and claims.

I may have come across Yisroel C. Blumenthal’s 1000 verse website during my research. As I said in my blog post, I was not too impressed by Blumenthal’s arguments because, unlike other presenters, he seems to be knowingly not mentioning or addressing at all the valid Christian arguments on an issue. Of course, not everything can indeed be covered in short presentations, but demonstrating a consideration of those points, particularly Hebrew exegesis/syntax ones, which I can only presume that as a Native Jew and Rabbi he should (doubly) fully be aware of, came across to me as being (deliberately) disingenuous. (Actually I have seen in some of those Youtube videos his colleagues trying to get Blumenthal to engage those major opposing views. He seems to have a default, ‘“frankly who cares” about opposing claim’, disposition/attitude which he actually explicitly states on his resurrection article: http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=369:resurrection&catid=72:scriptural-studies&Itemid=507 , and such default/indifferent “head in the sand” dismissiveness is actually not the sign of someone who is actually confident about what he claims to be the truth. Perhaps you can share this “complaint” of mine with him. I’ll nonetheless read through his 1000 verses website.

I have beneficially learned much from the Jews for Judaism presentations, including how to better present, substantiate and understand my Christian Faith. I appreciate your work!

God Bless, and Joyful/“Peaceful” Sabbath!
[NJK Project]

February 23, 2013

Hello [...],

It would probably be helpful if I elaborated slightly on the prior points which I had made in regards to the witnessed foundation of the OT vs. the NT so as to clarify them and more pointedly address the objection in your email.

While ca 2,000,000 were present when the Sinai Covenant was given, as stated before, I now do not see from Scripture that they actually heard any else than thunderings, and that because, as I see it, by then, they had increasingly been distancing themselves from God through faithlessness and murmurings. Now according to my deeper studies on the New Covenant, it is evident to me that Jesus came with the full intent on establishing it with all of Israel/Judah then. However, there evidently was still an issue of sinfulness in Israel that first had to be dealt with, and which John the Baptist preparing prophetic ministry did not manage to achieve. So that is why Jesus’ first ministry message involved (as also John’s): ‘repentance’ (Mark 1:15; cf. Matt 3:2).

From what I have read/heard from Jews for Judaism, I see that you similarly also see that there was a problem of genuine/“heart” religion with the Jewish generations leading up to the Destruction of Temple. And that is indeed a main issue that the Gospel state that Jesus had with that early First Century Jewish leaders and people (Matt 15:8-9). Literally every sin that Jesus rebuked in his ministry involved this aspect of being outwardly/technically seemingly justified, but being inwardly/spiritual in effective violation of God’s Law, i.e., the Spirit of those Laws. So, as seen in the “Sermon on the Mount” (Matt 5-7), Jesus sought to redress those wrongs. (cf. Matt 5:20). So Jesus did not indeed come to destroy the Law and the Prophets, something which I gather you actually agree about him, and thus did not actually have to come as a Moses per se right then, but merely, at least initially, in the capacity of any OT (reforming) prophet. So we should not expect Jesus to come on the scene and assemble all Israel and have God pronounce the New Covenant as it was done for OT Israel, as there was first a great reformatory work to be done.

Now the tangible issue really is that very few heeded that reformatory message. And as repeatedly seen in the Gospels (e.g., John 6:66) even the many who initially and increasingly were following him, few continued to do so, when, as Jesus had perceived, He no longer was meeting their (merely base/physical) expectations (John 6:26). And by the incident of his attempted “Triumphal Entry”, he then saw that it was not right to establish the new covenant with a group of people who were not spiritually ready, as their hearts were still not what God expected, as that New Covenant would require. (Jer 31:31-34). So literally in mid procession, Jesus decided to instead allow himself to go to the Cross despite all of the prophesied consequences that this rejection and crucifixion of the Messiah this would entail. (Dan 9:26-27; Luke 19:41-44).

Not having a proper heart religion was indeed a “covenant wrecker” for God as clearly stated in the pivotal chapter of Isa 29. It was indeed reason for God to instill Spiritual blindness upon these rebelling people (see Isa 29:13-14), and lead to actual physical destruction as it had for the First Temple and Jerusalem (Isa 29:1ff).

So really the same thing occurred with Jesus, who was the “messenger of that (new) covenant” (Mal 3:1ff). So as stipulated in Jer 18:1-10, if conditions are not met, then God does not have to follow through with any promise or prophesy and can also work them over to have them be fulfilled and applied however he deems best (See Jer 18:1-6 cf. Isa 29:16). So Jesus was actually left with no better choice than to first establish the New Covenant with the faithful 12 disciples (e.g., Mark 14:24) but that covenant was later made with several other people who came to believe the relating testimony of the 12.

And in a very similar way I am not seeing in the OT that anyone but Moses heard the actual words of the Sinai covenant, including the initiating 10 Commandments in Exod 20:1-18. That was certainly the case for all the words/instructions of that covenant that were stated after Exod 20:19 where now it was officially Moses who was doing the relating. So I actually do not see anything different with Jesus hearing directly from God about that New Covenant, (which in reality were merely notions already found throughout the OT), and then Jesus relating this to the 12 faithful ones, establishing that New Covenant, and then them relating it to the rest of the people, and these people then freely choosing whether or not they will ascribe to it. (Cf. Exod 24:3). Of course some did, and some did not.

And a major point here is that, though I do not see that this was the case, one part of the Old Covenant which, as many Christians believe, passed on intact into the New Covenant, is the 10 Commandments (which should include the 7th Day Sabbath (Saturday)). Well Christians can equivalently point back directly to Sinai for that Covenant cornerstone. So they too have quite explicit proof of that revelation being directly from God. The rest of the OT Covenant, as well as the further aspects in the New Covenant then came through quite publicly attested messengers of God, and both in non-publicly understood ways. Both the OT people and those in the time of Christ merely heard “thunders” at best and had to take these relating messengers at their words.

In fact, as a working thesis, I theologically see that the further stipulations can be summarized and fulfilled by always seeking to ‘glorify the name (=Character” of God’ (cf. Matt 22:34-40) and as such, the brief thundering which was publicly spoken to Jesus in John 12:27-30ff fulfilled all that was attempted to be done in the many stipulations of the “guiding” OT Laws, -all culminating in the ‘further glorification that would occur through the sacrifice of Christ. (John 12:31-36).

Just some, further, hopefully clarifying thoughts,
[NJK Project]

P.S.:
As an aid to you, I would like to succinctly, directly present a couple of key points I have made thus far on my blog post which you may find interesting, presuming that you have not yet encountered them:

-Since the Written Law was most evidently completely forgotten in (e.g.,) the generation in time of King Josiah, including by the High Priest (indeed even Passover), then is it not also conceivable/possible that the unwritten Oral Law was also completely forgotten, and it actually was not reconstituted as there was no written record of it? So the present Oral Law is based on newly formulated laws following at least the days of Josiah.

-I think I have resolved the issue of the differences and “errors” in the genealogy of Matthew and Luke. My conclusion is that Matthew presented a wrong one following Zerubabbel; and Luke, through better research, got it right. See: http://njkproject.blogspot.com/2012/04/yeshua-for-orthodox-judaism.html#genealogy
My conclusion: “the most accurate genealogy of Jesus back to at least David would be a composite one of Matthew and Luke. I.e., one which, reckoning backwards, follows Luke’s from Joseph to Zerubbabel and then Shealtiel; and then Matthew’s from Shealtiel to Solomon and then David.  (Thus Luke 3:23-27; and Matthew 1:6-12)”

By the way, as a Rabbi perhaps you may most readily address the next distinct issue/question I have. Some Christians ( http://www.worldslastchance.com/yahuwahs-calendar/the-lunar-sabbath.html ) teach that the Sabbaths in the OT were observed according to a Lunar Sabbath cycle. I.e., every New Moon would start a new weekly cycle irrespective of what day of the week it fell. Is that the case? I have not seen such evidence in the OT, indeed to the contrary. (See http://www.bibletruth.cc/LunarSabbath.htm )


(Similar) Discussion (thus far) with another responder:
February 22, 2013

[...]

As my mission has always been to the Jewish people (I was sent for the lost sheep of Israel), I would like to ask about your Jewish background.

One point I would like to state at the outset, the book of Matthew is not the word of God and so any proof from that (unless you can prove it's divine sanction) is invalid.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

[...]

February 22, 2013

Hello [...],

[...]

I find it interesting that you seem to be quoting Jesus’ statements/theme in Matt 10:6; 15:24; Luke 15:4-6; cf. John 10:16 in regards to the “lost sheep” of Israel, but evidently this notion, including Jesus’, may all be based on Jer 50:6. Whatever the case, I myself do not have an ethnic Jewish background, but I think that my Seventh-Day Adventist background, along with my current, deeper, temporal Christian Zionist (=my NJK Project*) are quite close and comparable to Judaism, arguably next to a Messianic Jew, though I do not see that they have a temporal Christian Zionist view.


I actually fully agree with you about Matthew. As I (typically) say:

“Matthew’s “fulfilment” claims are not conclusive, nor objective, perhaps even valid, in themselves. As one (SDA) author said of his initial reaction to them: “If that’s the kind of proof that establishes Jesus as the Messiah, no wonder the Jews rejected him!” (Alden Thompson, Inspiration, Review and Herald 1995. p. 206). But as he later states, as Jews also do, that may all be “valid” midrashic applications, which I gather was just starting to become popular around that time. So I do not see Matthew as actually involving direct inspiration for his writings, but mostly merely a factual/testimonial account of what he had witnessed in person, including the resurrection.”

As presented in my blog post, I rather see the key substantiations of Jesus as the Messiah revolving around Psalms 110; Daniel 9:24-27 and Isaiah 53. In regards to Isaiah 53, understanding now better the Orthodox Judaism view, I have seen, as stated in my blog post, that the contextualizing understanding is indeed found in the rest of that Servant Songs portion of Isaiah, but that would necessarily involved a detailed exegetical examination of Isa 40-54. So perhaps focusing first of Psa 110 and Dan 9:24-27 would be more efficient for starters. You can see my statements on Psa 110 in that post, and on the 70 weeks of Dan 9 in this one: http://njkproject.blogspot.com/2008/07/biblical-interpretation-of-daniels-70.html

[...]

February 23, 2013

I am not sure if it is a widely held basis, but, at least from “Jews for Judaism”, I have seen a greatly deal made for a claim of “OT” superiority to the NT based on a claim/belief that ca. 2,000,000 people heard the Sinai Covenant being proclaimed while this was not the same for Jesus and Christianity. I have made arguments along the lines of ‘quantity (OT) vs. quality (NT) in the first parts of my blog post, but I have since seen an issue that may have been overlooked which would actually complete nullify the claimed quantity advantage:

From reading Exod 20:18ff* (cf. Exod 24:3), I am actually (now) seeing that it manifestly was only Moses who actually distinctly/clearly heard what God was saying and the rest of the people on heard thunder. And that thundering actually frightened them so much that they soon preferred to hear nothing at all. So at best, they may have actually only distinctly/clearly heard God speak the 10 Commandments, but nothing else after that. They only heard the rest of the Law/Covenant through what Moses related to them (Exod 24:3). Is this also the understanding of Judaism, if not what is the textual evidence to the contrary?

To me, based on similar incidents in Christ’s ministry (John 12:27-28ff) and also incorporated in NT Prophecy (Rev 10:3-4), that would have been the case because the Israelites back then had long engaged on a course of faithlessness and growing rebellion towards God, where by Exod 20, they had already tested God 6 out of the 10 times mentioned in Num 14:22 (See Chart in Endnotes below**) and so only Moses was Spiritually in tune enough with God to perceive the actual words that were being said in that voicing of God.

Now if that is the case, that would mean that, since most Christians actually believe in the continuance of the Ten Commandments (as did Jesus (Matt 5:17-20ff; Luke 10:25-28; Matt 22:34-40) and Paul: e.g., Rom 3:31; 7:7), [but of course with very few (ca. 30,000,000) fully observing it, pointedly in regards to the 7th Day Sabbath], that would mean/involve that both Jews and Christians draw the rock-foundation basis for their Covenant directly from what God [or really the, or through, “Angel”/Messenger of the Covenant (Jdg 2:1; Exod 3:1-6ff; cf. Mal 3:1ff -which Christians understand was the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ; -a whole other topic/issue)] had Himself spoken at Sinai!
The rest of the covenant would then be in elaborating statutory/civil law, and also ceremonial, sanctuary service, etc, laws. So in that regards, Jews and Christian would have the same basis for their covenant, and would have similarly directly “heard” the same limited amount of instruction from God Himself. And in regards to the rest of the Law, (and this also is an entire other discussion, it can be seen that it could actually all be fulfilled through righteous living, thus by living out the law writing on the heart as stated in Jer 31:31-34. I.e., the OT patriarchs and founding fathers of God’s Israel were all stated to be righteous by God without the expanded Law (including Feasts) and elaborate sanctuary service, but it is seen that they still lived according to the 10 Commandments (as well as, since Eden, basic blood/lamb sacrifices).

All this to say, as involved, but really not properly explained/defended in Christian Theology, God’s ideal religion (after sin) consisted of His Moral Law, the Ten Commandments, and ideally “on the heart” and not even in codified/written form, and also a tangible, object-lesson, even necessary means of providing penalty-paying, and thus life-sustaining, atonement for sins, which should otherwise be resulting in immediate death (Gen 2:16-17)

I also have a (presently) working thesis view that shows how John 12:31-36 which speaks of God glorifying His name (=character) again through evidently what would happen to Jesus at the Cross, would focus on the other key part of Christ’s ministry in comprehensively providing the way/example back to God’s ideal (heart) righteousness that God wanted to have done through Israel through the rest of the Law (i.e. all that followed the giving of the Ten Commandment in that Sinai Covenant), and that, through Faith in God’s provided way. [And this alternative covenanting approach was actually according to what Israel had ‘rightly/well’ requested instead (Deut 18:15-19)]

So really the crux of my view here revolves around whether or not the Israelites at Sinai heard anything more than the 10 Commandments, -if they actually even heard these at all, and not all thunderings instead. There is much theological substantiation in Christian Theology and Prophecy for the view I have advanced above, and in my added SDA+ context, this issue of the significance in God’s Thunderings is continued through what was prophetically revealed to the SDA Prophet(ess) Ellen G. White***. (For your understanding, I would compare her contribution to Jewish Talmudic contributions, though for her, on a, many times, directly inspired, i.e., prophetic level.) An example would be in her statement from a vision:

“The mighty shaking [=Ezek 9] has commenced and will go on, and all will be shaken out who are not willing to take a bold and unyielding stand for the truth and to sacrifice for God and His cause. The angel said, "Think ye that any will be compelled to sacrifice? No, no. It must be a freewill offering. It will take all to buy the field." [=Matt 13:44*4*] I cried to God to spare His people, some of whom were fainting and dying. Then I saw that the judgments of the Almighty were speedily coming, and I begged of the angel to speak in his language to the people. Said he, "All the thunders and lightnings of Mount Sinai would not move those who will not be moved by the plain truths of the Word of God, neither would an angel's message awake them."  {Early Writings p.50 par. 3}  ”

Tellingly enough, SDA who are not in tune with God’s Full Sabbath teaching of Isa 58 (=e.g., Christ’s teaching in Matt 25:31-46), are indeed not understanding the “voice of God” here, but are merely seeing all this as inconsequential thunderings. (I discuss this issue of God’s “thundering” in my blog post: http://njkproject.blogspot.com/2010/12/message-of-seven-thunders.html

So like I said, the specific question/issue I have for you is, according to Jewish understanding, did the Israelites at Sinai actually hear more than just the 10 Commandments, if even that?

[...]

Endnotes
* [Note: Due to my own familiarity, all my Scriptural references are according English Bible Chapter reckonings]

**Num 14:22 Ten Testings
(1) Exod 14:10-12 - Faithless crying out at the approach of the pursuing Egyptian Armies.
(2) Exod 15:22-24 - Grumblings at lack of freshwater
(3) Exod 16:1:3 - Grumblings for no food
(4) Exod 16:19-20 - Not following manna non-stashing command
(5) Exod 16:27-30 - Going out to gather manna on the Sabbath
(6) Exod 17:1-4 - Quarrelling with Moses for water during journeying
(7) Exod 32:1-35  - Making and Worshipping of a Golden Calf
(8) Num 11:1-3 - Complaining for encountered adversities
(9) Num 11:4-34 - Weeping for flesh meat to eat
(10) Num 14:3 - Lifting Up Voices/Crying/Weeping/Grumbling at the faithless report of 10 spies




August 29, 2015
Hello Mr. [...],

I was just listening to your (post-August 2014) presentation:
A JEWISH CRITIQUE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT_ Why Judaism Doesn’t Accept Christian Scripture  at: [08:09ff]

I would just briefly add something in regards to your claim that Jesus’ prophetic ministry was not valid because, “unlike Moses”, He had received a private revelation. In Deut 18:15-22, when God is speaking of future prophets that He will raised in Israel, He clearly states that, ‘just as the people had “rightly” requested in Exod 20:18-21, He would no longer speak as openly to all of the people, but privately to/through the prophets that He would raise.’ (=Num 12:6ff) So this would also apply to Jesus even if He would be the prophet through whom God would reveal the New Covenant promise that He had made ca. 600 years before through Jeremiah (Jer 31:31-34; cf. Mal 3:1ff). So even when God openly spoke to Jesus, the best that the people around Him would hear would be, as with Moses, only thunder. (John 12:27-30ff; Exod 20:18).

-Another succinct response to a claim you made is that Heb 2:2 is correct in saying that even the Torah was revealed through an Angel as Judges 2:1 seems to imply that it was the “Angel of the Lord” who had set/communicated the Covenant with Israel (cf. Exod 3:2|Acts 7:30 & 23:20-23). (I believe this Angel/Messenger to be Michael (=“who is like God”), the pre-incarnate Christ. See more at: http://njkproject.blogspot.com/2009/11/michael-archangel-cf-rev-312d.html

-For me, the most objective and concrete proof that Jesus was the promised Messiah of the OT Scriptures is from the prophecy of Dan 9:24-27. I have also viewed to your presentations of your (‘2nd Temple’) interpretation of it. I have posted a succinct summary of my 440+ pages of research, and I would like to hear how you would refute them. See: http://njkproject.blogspot.com/2008/07/biblical-interpretation-of-daniels-70.html

-Another key point is that the term “forever” in Hebrew does not only mean “eternally”, but it can mean: ‘until it comes to its end’ (e.g. Jon 2:6; Exod 21:6). So Laws in the Torah could come to an end if God so decided to end them, pointedly when they achieved their goal/end of instilling heart righteousness. (=Jer 31:31-34|Heb 8:7-13; cf. Isa 42:20-21)

God Bless,
[…]
WBSC & NJK Project


August 29, 2015
bs"d

Shalom […]:

Thanks for taking the time to write. Because of the avalanche of emails that I am receiving, I don't have time to respond to all the critiques of my teaching. I only really have time to engage with people who are genuinely seeking and not with those who have a point of view to which they'd like to win me over.

All the best, and with Torah blessings,

--
Rabbi [...] [...]
Director of Education and Counseling
Jews for Judaism


August 30, 2015

Hello Mr. […],

Thanks for this explaining response. I certainly can understand your constraint of time and prioritizing. With that surely in mind, I sought to keep my points on what I saw were most fundamental and pivotal issues to your Orthodox Judaism Faith. I personally don’t require an immediate answer, so if you have time over the next while and in the future, you can respond to me then, at your convenient.

(By the way, my interpretation on Dan 9:24-27 is not at all according to Futurist-Dispensationalist (=typical “Missionary”) principles and understandings, which is actually quite heretical to True/Biblical Christianity,* -(and in fact a sly, and successful, Jesuit canard upon (later) Protestants**), but according to (~SDA) Historicist*** ones).




Sincerely,

[…]

End of email discussion thus far
__________________


-the account of founding/foundational OT stories is based on a single documenting source whereas the comparative NT founding Gospel account comes from 4 sources.

-the presence of some differences in the Gospel accounts, (most of which have been satisfactorily explained in NT scholarship, -with some of these later presented) is actually a testimony that no collusion was done in writing these accounts.

-The book of Genesis, as commonly understood, written by Moses, covers over 2600 years of key foundational history where the writer was not a physical eye witness of any of those event. [Though my own understanding is that these were shown to him in vision, as well as the story of Job (3BC 1140.3)]. That is physically not the same with the Gospel which, as commonly understood, were written by, directly, two eye-witnesses (Matthew and John), and an indirect one (Mark, from the preaching/recounting of Peter), and with Luke stating that he had ‘carefully followed the testimony of eye-witnesses’ for his own work. (Luke 1:1-4) And evidently, from the fact that he presents many unique episodes in the life and ministry of Jesus, he had done much more than simply rely of Mark and Matthew’s Gospels.

-The statement of the Gospel author John in John 20:31 is patently cited by Jewish opposers as, and really quite circularly, (“self-confessed”) “proof” that ‘John (as well as other Gospel writers) was/were making up fantastical stories about Jesus so that people would fully believe in Jesus Christ’. Well given that the very same motivation is similarly found in/for at least foundational book of the Jewish Bible, the book of Genesis, it can at the very least be said of John: ‘at least he was honest and transparent about this.’ Indeed, and with the above stated argument/demonstration of Ancient Israelites that their ensuing actions and lives did not at all corroborate that they had had ‘an unmisconstruable supernatural encounter with the God of Heaven’, it can easily be perceived that since Moses always thought himself to be the “Deliverer” of the Israelites from Egypt (see Exod 2:11-15); a sort of Messiah for them), and as they were by then steeped in centuries of living in the land/religion/culture of Egypt (as it would repeatedly come up later on), and as seen in Moses expressed fears upon His Calling in Exod 3:13-18ff that the Israelites were then not too well knowledgeable and/or in tune with their Divine religion and Chosen identity, then Moses who it could be argued had been of himself planning to try to convince Israel to come out during those forty years in the wilderness, therefore composed in the book of Genesis, a “fantastical” account about this God who he would be acting in His name in order that ‘they may believe in God.’ (And at least for the book of John, we have it on explicit understood authority that it was an actual disciple of Jesus, thus an eye-witness, who wrote that account (John 21:20-24). Not explicitly/documented so for the stories of Genesis.
            So unlike what Jewish opposers may want to biasedly believe the texts and accounts of the OT are not more reliable than those of the NT.

-And it must be relatedly/pertinently stated here that the lack of quantitative textual evidence for the canonical OT as compared to the NT is quite significant. Just seeing in the NT era how it was texts which were considered unreliable and dubious which did not have much quantitative textual “testimony”, i.e., e.g., the Jewish-Christian Gospels, (the Gospel of/to the Hebrews, Ebionites,  Nazarenes), as compared to the canonical Gospels, the fact that there is not much, and widespread textual evidence for the OT, especially as it surely was not the case that Jews of the Diaspora did not have to travel to Jerusalem to read their Scriptures, then the thousands of, especially early NT manuscripts that can be found make it a much more reliable book, as it has more than just one, or a few, “witnesses”. Furthermore, the various key substantive changes that the Jewish scholarly authors for the Septuagint would naturally actually implicitly suggest that the original text was not as (at least Divinely) trustworthy/reliable as, especially claimed/believed today.

-To cap it all off, as God Himself advocates, once the “Law” (i.e., God’s Will), has been established, Prophecy (i.e., fulfilled prophecy) can then be used as proof of what had been claimed. (E.g., Isa 46:9-11). For Christians, the prophecies in Christ’s Olivet Discourse (Matt 24|Mark 13|Luke 21) and the book of Revelation (also from Jesus Christ) provide such Divine confirmation (cf. John 14:29). Of course, the diffusing claim has been made by e.g., the Jews 4 Judaism organization that all of the Gospels were written after the Destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70, and so the Olivet discourse were not actually prophecy, but that is not at all a valid dating claim. In regards to the prophecies of Revelation, most Christians will actually not be able to accurately present them as prophetic proof since they are not correctly interpreting them, but when this is done, as it was begun to be done from early Reformation times, which is way too complex to do within this present blog post, (however do see e.g., in this post and this one; (cf. this methodical organizational chart of the prophecies of Revelation) and from the TOC index here) they indeed show that the NT events and testimony is the Truth of, from, and about, God.
            Furthermore, as it was understood by Jesus (Matt 24:15) Paul (see 2 Thess 2:1-6ff), the prophecies of the OT book of Daniel would find their fulfilment during the development of the NT Christian Church. And they indeed have. So I personally cannot here dumb myself down and ignore 2000 years of accurately fulfilled and understood Bible prophecy, including in the NT.

            Pertinently enough, the evidence for the Talmud which claims to be the writing down of Oral Law, where many cited “authorities” there do not agree with each other, actually would not settle one’s faith that the mostly single-source OT writings are trustworthy. I.e., if there is so much disagreement in the supposedly concurrent Oral Law, then how can it be believed that the single-source Written Law (and Testimonies) (i.e., the OT) cannot similarly be questioned. (More on this topic of the Oral Law later).

            All this to say that there is more documented and multi-sourced support for the accounts which establish the religion of Christianity, than what establishes Judaism. (Of course the specific substantive claims in these accounts will be examined throughout this blog post).

Duplicitously selective NT citing as proof
            A recurring theme in the counter-missionary claims is that Christians fabricated the many parts of the Gospel accounts, such as the resurrection and the doctrine of the Second Coming, as already stated above, it is hard to believe that people would accept to be killed for a lie they have concocted. Indeed they would have to be completely Godless by that point as they would be deliberately sealing their fate as unrepentant liars. The issue of the biblical validity of a Second, Triumphant, Coming of the Messiah teaching will later be discussed, but here it is the actual duplicity in counter-missionary claims which is being exposed.

E.g., and most emblematically, while it is claimed that there was no resurrection of Jesus, (with it even being said that the Second Coming would involve, at best, Jesus being raised from the dead and not, as the NT teaches, Him coming down from Heaven where He has been living for the past 2000 years), to try to prove that Jesus Himself did not believe that He was God, (which was not at all the case), His statement in John 20:17 is cited....but that is a statement that Jesus made soon after His resurrection and just as He was about to ascend to Heaven. You can’t have it both ways!!

            Similarly it is also wholesalely claimed that there is no proof that Jesus did any miracle (a claim that is, as later discussed, quite debatable from both OT and Talmudic statements about the Messiah, and Jesus (Yeshu/a), respectively), however to try to show that: ‘Jesus, contrary to Isa 53:9b) did violence”, it is said that he had made a fig tree wither up (Matt 21:18-22), thus doing violence to nature’. Well if someone curses a tree and it immediately withers up... that by definition is a supernatural act...a miracle. So, if one is truly honest with their general claims, it cannot be used a proof. And if it is (of course conveniently) accepted, then all of the other accounts miracles of Jesus must be accepted.

            This disingenuousness and duplicity is quite constant and recurring in those counter-missionary presentations where they pick and choose what they subjectively and arbitrarily will accept as true/fact in the Gospel accounts and of course these citations are only whatever validates their Christianity refuting claims. To me and any honest observer, the very fact that you can find any element, statement or incident in the Gospels which can be used as a proof against it, is a most objective evidence that what was being related was most candidly and thus honestly, and not, as claimed in regards to John 20:31, “manipulatively/dishonestly done”. Indeed if the Gospel writers were engaging in doing a propagandizing work, you would not find anything in the Gospels account from which ‘one would not (also) believe’ (E.g., Matt 28:16b; - in fact it may have been only the 120 mentioned in Acts 1:12-15 out of the most likely 500 gathered there (=DA 818.3-819.1) who had actually believed).
           
Conditionality of Promises and Prophecies
            -First of all, most foundational here, is the theological statement which God revealed to His People in Jer 18:1-10. “Infinitely” more crucial to a promise, as these cited passages all are, or even prophecies, per se, being fulfilled or not is whether or not the conditions set out by God are first met. This revelation/statement of God through Jeremiah was key here because the main argument against Jeremiah was that God could/would not destroy what He had allowed and guided to be established (such as the Temple). But God was here stating that He was not obliged to fulfill a promise or prophecy if/when conditions were not being met.
            Such a condition was quasi-explicitly stated in the Law, in the curses and promises jointly stated there (Deut 30:15-20). And in Deut 30:2, most pertinently enough, in regards to God’s promised Act to restore Israel from priorly effectuated curses judgement, as it says: ‘and if/when you return to the Lord your God and obey Him with all of your heart and soul (=being) according to all that I command you today...’: then the promise of captivity restoration of Deut 30:3 (cf. Jer 29:13-14).
            So a belief that God must fulfill the promises and blessings which He has stated, no matter what, is not Biblical. God has merely stated that He will be faithful in accomplishing what He has said and promised, but only if the covenant’s conditions are satisfactorily met.

The Incarnation of God
            Can God become a man?? That concept is at the crux of the difference between Judaism and (Mainstream) Christianity, for Christians indeed believe that God (the Son) incarnated Himself as a son of man in Jesus (e.g., Phil 2:5-8ff; Gal 4:4). And as “reasoned” here by, among others, “Rabbi” Yisroel Blumenthal here and here, Orthodox Judaism views that as an inherent, mutually exclusive, impossibility. And that is fundamentally based on the denial that God is a Godhead of 3 beings as most Christians Biblically believe. Prooftexts such as Num 23:19; 1 Sam 15:29; Hos 11:9 are cited to claim that ‘God is not a man’, but these are indeed “prooftexts” because the intent in those passages is not to preclude that God would, or could, not ever take on human form, but that He does not act like man. He does not ‘take reversing actions without a justified reason’ as fickle and untrustful man does (Num 23:19; 1 Sam 15:29); or solely out of hurt or obstinate pride (Hos 11:8-9). Indeed in passages like Gen 6:6, 7; Jer 18:8, 10; 26:13; 1 Sam 15:11, 35; 1 Chr 21:15; Joel 2:13; Amos 7:6; Jon 3:10, the same Hebrew word nacham (#05162) is used to say that “God can and/or does “change His mind”. So, as contextual exegesis bears out, Num 23:19 and 1 Sam 15:29 are pointedly, only saying that God will not ficklely change, or not change, His mind as man typically does. And this all corroborates the understanding of Christians that when God (the Son) incarnated Himself in Jesus Christ he would not defaultly have a sinful character, and could remain with a sinless and perfect character, just as God has, if He chose not to sin, which Christians believe Jesus was able to do. (Heb 4:15)
            Most interestingly enough, there is an episode in the OT which concretely, Biblically substantiates the concept of: God becoming a man, and also, exactly why. And that is found in the encounter of Abraham with the three “men” who came to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 18 & 19). The incontrovertible Biblical testimony is that, at the very least, one of those men was Yahweh (Gen 18:1-2, 13-14, 17, 19, 22; 19:27), and Abraham, and immediately, fully, as variously demonstrated, recognized/knew/understood this (Gen 18:3, 25, 27). Now the fact that Yahweh here was not merely a Spirit is that He and the two other “men” ate what both Abraham and Lot served them (Gen 18:8b; 19:3). Christian believers at the very least will readily understand this to be a concrete proof of tangible “flesh and bones/blood” incarnation vs. spirit apparition (cf. Eph 6:12; Matt 16:17) since the resurrected Jesus use this as “proof” that He was bodily resurrected (Luke 24:36-43; Acts 10:41; cf. John 4:24).
            Now while the common, at least Christian, understanding here is that only one of those 3 people visiting Abraham was Yahweh, with the other 2 being mere accompanying angels, there is actual quite suggestive Biblical indications that these three people could, more accurately, have been God the Father and the two covering Cherubs, with the foremost in ranking being the “Angel of the Lord”, Michael, the ‘one who is like God’, “one of the chiefs of princes” (Dan 10:13 = one of the Archangels (cf. Jud 1:9)), which many Christians understand to be God the Son (the pre-incarnate Jesus), and the other one being Gabriel (the ‘mighty man of God’). First of all, at the very least, the other two “men/angels” who went on to visit Lot while Yahweh stayed behind with Abraham (Gen 18:22) accepted the worship of Lot who evidently also immediately recognized them as being more than mere men. (Gen 19:2). Like Abraham, Lot also defaultly called them his lords (adonay) and knew that he was their servant (Gen 19:3, 18-19). Angels should know that only God should be worshipped by any of His creation, including angels, as two of the 10 Commandments say (Exod 20:3-5), and in the NT we see that they fully understood this (Rev 19:10; 22:8-9). And the clinching verse to this view that the other two incarnate men were not merely angels but also of divine nature is seen in Gen 19:24 when Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed as it clearly/specifically says, (and keep in mind that this is (most likely) Moses writing out this story through Divine/Prophetic revelations), that:

Yahweh caused it [through an agency] to rain [= Hiphil verb] brimstone and fire from {direct object} Yahweh out of heaven’

            The fact that Gen 18:33 had stated that Yahweh who had stayed behind with Abraham had already left before this, make it thus likely that He had then returned back to heaven. So Gen 19:24 could then be easily saying that someone, here also called Yahweh, was causing fire and brimstone to rain from Yahweh out of heaven. That would involve that one of the two angels who had gone to see Lot was also a Divine being named Yahweh (=Exod 23:20-21 [cf. Mark 2:10]), and as seen below in the discussion on the Angel of the Lord, that easily could/would be the Archangel Michael, the one who is like God (later incarnated, for more than one day, and through birth in a woman, as Jesus).

Why did/would God Incarnate Himself?
            A, perhaps justified, question here would be, why would God ever choose to incarnate Himself as a man. Well in the Abraham episode, the answer is given right in the text. In Gen 18:20-21. God was going to see whether or not the outcry about Sodom and Gomorrah that He was hearing in Heaven was as it sounded. The obvious thing here is that God surely, could easily have seen whether of not the people in those cities were acting as wickedly as it “sounded”. Perhaps God did not allow such abominable wickedness to be “viewed” in the realm of Heaven, and in order to make sure that this was as it sounded, He came in person, as an incarnate man, to see this. Perhaps that incarnation would afford Him the possibility to later excise whatever He would have seen from His being when He de-incarnated Himself. However the pointed purpose here may actually have been that God wanted to Himself test the people of Sodom and Gomorrah to see if they would act as the sound of their abomination and perversion was. Indeed just like God would similarly, tangibly test Abraham, to “know” what was in his heart (Gen 22:12); as He can do with any man (Deut 8:2; cf. Exod 15:25; 16:4; 20:20; 2 Chr 32:31); it is manifest that in that Gen 18 & 19 episode, God acted this way in order to carry out a test. In today’s world, we would see a similar thing being done by Law Enforcement as a “sting operation” to have irrefutable proof that the subjects of police surveillance are indeed guilty as suspected. So here God decided to bait/test the people of Sodom and Gomorrah. Indeed the two “angels” actually wanted, and I believe seriously so, (unless they were simultaneously testing Lot then), to spend the night right in the “middle” of the city, in the city’s gathering place, the square (Gen 19:2b). Whatever was their pointed intent here in regards to Lot, their evident testing scenario was still effectuated when the men of the city came after them at Lot’s house. And it is manifestly at the instance that the angels struck all of the men present (probably all the ones in the city) with blindness, and yet they were still persisting to try to find the doorway of Lot’s house (Gen 19:11), that it became evident that these men were beyond any redemption (=Gen 19:12ff), for they persisted in their abominable intent despite then a clear manifestation of Divine/Supernatural presence and power. So they had failed that tangible testing of God, and thus God then “knew” that they could not be saved from their perverse ways, and so decided to proceed with the intended utter destruction.
            And furthermore, by the fact that the men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to mistreat complete strangers, and that by violently raping them, proved to the testing God/Godhead that (1) they would not hesitate to spread their corruption and (2) through violence. It was pointedly for violence that God had previously decided to destroy all flesh on the earth (Gen 6:11-13), so as that, manifestly utter limit threshold was being crossed, God had no other option left but to act, for both quarantining reasons, -whether merely for spiritual reasons, or also physical ones (i.e., an outbreak of a specious disease), and also as necessary defensive reasons, to protect the righteous and innocent. Perhaps it was this utter-limit threshold of “wanton, violent disposition” that God wanted to ascertain and have concretely “fleshed out” before effectuating the then necessary judgement and destruction.
            So from that story it is seen that God can, and has incarnated Himself when He is about to effectuate an irreversible utter judgement, and He “testingly” does so in order to provide the people who are about to be judge one last, and most clear cut, chance at redemption. That is precisely the NT teaching in regards to why God incarnated Himself as a Man (see Matt 21:33-46; Matt 23:29-38; Acts 7:9ff, 17ff, 35ff, 51-53) among other also involved reasons (Heb 2:14-16). And so, if/since God Himself, through the witnessing testimony of Abraham and then by recalling inspiration through (most likely) Moses himself, has said that He can and has incarnated Himself as/in the form of, a Man, (and evidently was/is none the lesser still Almighty God, then I am going to fully go by His demonstration and testimony in His Word, rather than by the obliviously defensive, circular, and moreover philosophical, (=wishful) reasonings of a man/rabbi!!

The Angel of the Lord
            The topic of the often and specifically manifested “Angel of the Lord” in the OT is a very interesting one due to the various quite grand claims that this personage makes about Himself. IN short He does not at all hesitate to most literally and fully personally take the place, honor, worship and credit due to Yahweh Himself. This is most explicitly stated and seen in the following OT episodes.

-Starting with the more explicit ones, in Gen 16:7-13, after Hagar is sent away by Abram and Sarai, that Angel of the Lord, does not merely tell her to return to her masters, but then adds the “He” (=”I”), and not, as it should have been otherwise said, “Yahweh”, will greatly multiply her descendants. Indeed that is the very same thing that Yahweh had promised to Abram just one chapter before (Gen 15:5). How then could a simple angel personally make such a, moreover competing, (as still effective today), promise to Hagar and the son she was carrying. Then the Bible says that it was Yahweh who was speaking to, (and being seen by), Hagar (Gen 16:13; cf. 11b).

-The Angel of the Lord is also most unmistakably identified as God in the episode of the testing sacrifice of Isaac. (Gen 22:11-14) First of all it is the Angel of the Lord who is speaking here from Heaven and not Yahweh Himself, as He can also do (e.g. Gen 7:1; 12:1), and, after telling him to stop, personally says in the first person, instead of the third person, that Abraham had not withheld his only son from “Me”. Then this Angel of the Lord calls to Abraham again in Gen 22:15-18 and continuing with even more emphatic, personal first person statements, goes on to “swear by Himself’ to Abraham that He will make him a great nation.

-In the Burning Bush episode (Exod 3:1-9ff), it can actually be understood that it was the Angel of the Lord, here also called Yahweh, as this was seen to be possible in the Gen 18 & 19:24 accounts, who was doing all of the interacting with Moses. This is concretely supported by the fact that by stating in Exod 3:8 that ‘He had come down to deliver’ combined with other passages stating that it was the Angel of the Lord/God who had been sent to free and guide the children of Israel (see Exod 14:19; Num 20:16; Exod 23:20-21; 32:34; 33:2; Judge 2:1-5; cf. Isa 63:9).

-Judge 2:1-5 also states that the Promise and Covenant made to/with Israel, originated from that Angel of the Lord.

-Throughout the episode of Judges 6:11-27 there are many statements and indications that the Angel of the Lord/God was synonymous Yahweh (Judges 6:14ff).

-In Josh 5:13-15 Joshua see a “man” who later identifies Himself as the captain of the host (=angels/creation) of Yahweh, and declares to Joshua that He is standing on Holy Ground in His presence (as in Exod 3:5) and accepts worship from him. As this is right before the conquest of Canaan, it can be understood that this is in tangible (or tangibly demonstrated) fulfilment of the prior promise that the Angel of the Lord would, (albeit substitutionarily, i.e., instead of Yahweh Himself), go before Israel to fight for them as they took possession of their promised land (Exod 33:2-3; cf. 23:20-21). As already seen from Gen 18-19, Yahweh can easily take the form of a man, and certainly an angel can do so, as manifest in this case. But here it was clearly the highest ranked Angel of God, the captain of all of His host, who was making an encouraging, pre-Conquests, appearance to Joshua.

Proper Exegesis of Psalms 110
            First and foremost, I find the dismissive attempt in this Judaism explanation that the lamed (la) preposition in the Psalmic title there as “Psalm of David” (Heb.: laDavid), does not actually mean a ‘Psalm written by David’, but rather a ‘Psalm written about David’, to be head-scratchingly disturbing, because I feel like I am being most dishonestly hoodwinked. (Or is it actually that these Jewish expositors do not actually know their own Scriptures, but merely what they are preferentially, generally choosing to limitedly assume about them??)
            First of all, to debunk the claims made in that explanation, citing Psa 72:1, 20 as proof that Psa 72 was not actually written by Solomon, but by David, is, all pertinent things considered: flimsy and obtuse, at best. In Psa 72:1 Solomon, (the Psalm’s straightforwardly/patently ascribed author), could here easily be speaking of his own son, (or to the future sons in this Messianic Royal line in general). Then, with the statement in Psa 72:20 speaking of “prayers” in the plural, and with the Psalms, when explicitly considering a (single) Psalm as a “prayer” patently only stating this in the singular (see Psa 17:1; 86:1; 90:1; 102:1; 142:1; cf. Psa 4:1; 39:12; 54:2; 55:1; 61:1; 65:2; 69:13; 88:2; 141:2; 143:1, etc); and since the Psalms divisions of Book 1, 3, 4, and even Book 2 in question here (=Psa 42-72) end with quite similar: ‘blessing to the Lord’ and/or ‘Amen(s)’ (see respectively Psa 41:13; 89:52; 106:48 & 72:19b); and also with similarly Book 5 ending with a redundant “Praise the Lord” (Psa 150:6b), then it is exegetically evident that the statement in Psa 72:20 is not actually an intrinsic part of Psa 72 itself, but rather a part of an already begun indication started in Psa 72:19b, that this Section/“Book” 2 of the Psalms, with its included “prayers of David”, is here ending. And in that Section/Book, not all of the Psalms found therein (specifically 13 of the 31) were written by David himself. (See Psa 42; 44-49; 50).
            So this Section may (originally) have been specially dedicated to the thematically explicit ‘“prayers” of David’ (e.g.,  Psa 51; 54:2; 55:1; 61:1; 65:2; cf. 69:13), but later similar “prayer Psalms” from other composers were also included. So there is here no valid argument to not straightforwardly understand that Psa 72 was written ‘by Solomon’ himself, as stated in that title.
            In regards to a second of only 2 substantiating points made in that Judaism explanation, in Psa 144:10 (cf. 2 Sam 22:51), David may have referred to himself in the third person, but that substantively proves, nor disproves, anything about the stated ascribed authorship...i.e., David still did write that Psalm himself !! Indeed throughout both of these chapters David elsewhere, consistently only uses 1st person pronomial referencing (i.e., my, me, I). So the key “my (lord)” in question in Psa 110:1 is not at all altered by this straightforward meaning that: ‘David himself was referring to his own lord (=ancestral and/or regnal superior.)’
            Indeed, with those flimsy pre-emptive dismissive attempts debunked, (and if that is the best arguments that can be made, Jews here indeed do not have a valid case to explain away this most indicative Messianic Psalm), in the several other times when this title occurs with other Psalms, and many along with an explanation of what David was going through then (e.g., Psa 7:1; 18:1; 34:1; 51:1; 52:1; 54:1; 56:1; 57:1; 59:1; 60:1; 63:1; 142:1; cf. Psa 3:1; 23:1; 32:1; also used in Hab 3:1), it is most transparently clear that this means a Psalm which was personally written by David himself.[1]1 It can also be seen in Psa 132 which does not have this David ascription in its title, that the statements in Psa 132:11, 17 are clearly someone else writing about David.
            So this typical dismissive claim by Jewish expositors is most clearly vacuous at best, (as in: an attempt to (defensively/desperately) “pick at straws”), and therefore Psa 110 was straightforwardly clearly written by David. And as Jesus further pointed out in Matt 22:43, David was actually “in the Spirit” then, i.e., he was having an inspired (Messianic) revelation/vision (a common way of saying this in the NT: Luke 2:27; Acts 19:21; Eph 3:5; Rev 1:10; 4:2; 17:3; 21:10).

Son of Man in Dan 7:9-14


The Three Entity Godhead

The Divine Plurals
            As it was emphasized in this online exposition to try to identify and understand the “Genesis”/Divine Plurals in the OT, which occur in Gen 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isa 6:8; 41:21-23, proper exegesis is indeed the key. And proper exegesis most foundationally involves the full consideration of the pertinent context. Just like God did not want Israel to be confronted by Philistines, lose faith in God and return in fear of a war to Egypt (Exod 13:17-18), God may have similarly withheld many fuller explicit truths from the ‘paganistically sensible’ minds of Israel, and only gradually revealed this over time. And thus, all pertinent things, in the applicable wider OT context considered, as already presented in preceding sections, it is manifest that in those Divine Plural passages, God was not explicitly revealing to Israel that He was actually more than just one Person, but, as seen from the Abraham Theophany, a Godhead of 3 People.
            To be a little more pointed here in responding to the actually more plausible claim that the “Divine Plurals” involve a Single God and other Angels in a council, if that was to be true, then those Divine Plural occurrences would have to unbiblically involve angels having attributes which are elsewhere said and shown to be God’s alone. Namely:

Gen 1:26 - Creation of Man - Gen 2:7 gives details on how God had proceeded to create man, and no where is the assistance of angels stated.
            Similarly one can see that only God was involve in the effectuation of the Gen 11:7-9 action, particularly as what would be involved then was an affectation of merely the minds of the people then. (I.e. no large scale physical work to be done, which then would necessitate the tangible “assistance” of angels. In fact, Christians have the converse miracle of Pentecost in Acts 2:1-22ff, as a demonstration of how God can (directly) do such a language affectation work, and as also understood in that episode that was all the work of “God the Holy Spirit”.

Gen 3:22 - Knowing Good and Evil - If it is wrong for man to know evil and be trusted to live eternally, then how can it acceptable for other created and not all-wise beings as angels. Clearly only God can be “trusted” with such a knowledge. As demonstrated above, Satan and other Fallen Angels also could not be trusted with this knowledge and similarly have a pending death penalty to pay.

Isa 6:8-10 - Senses Affectation - Interestingly enough, the specific work that Isaiah is asked to do in that commission is, as stated in Isa 6:10, to variously affect and effectively render null the senses, perceptions and understandings of the people, for ‘“otherwise”, they would naturally see, hear and understand’ and thus return/repent and be healed’. On one Theological hand, this actually demonstrates that God does not Himself get involve in the work of overriding one’s personal Free Will, unless, as it was the case with Pharaoh, a Divine Judgement is incontroversibly due. So, as it was sought for by God in the 1 Kgs 22:19-23, God was here needing a contrarian spirit which would render null even any good will that His, quite typically, “half-in/half-out” professed people (cf. 1 Kgs 18:21; Rev 3:15-16) then, may have had. But God did not want this to so ‘non-deservingly’ happen.[2]2 So this task of “confusing and hardening” those spurious and insincere “believers” in Israel was given over entirely to Isaiah instead of being done through God’s Spirit.

Isa 41:21-23 - Declaring the Future - In Isa 46:9-11 God states that He alone declares/plans what the future will be and then acts to do it. He does not say, nor at all hint that angels can do this. So He sequiturly would not have been involving angels in the prognosticating processes or effectuated actions mentioned in Isa 41:21-23.

            So, most Theo-logically, none of the OT Divine Plural can be understood to also involve Angels as the actions involved there are all solely within the feasance realm of the Divine.


Messianic “Peace on Earth” Requirement
            Not sure if it is in a desire to be politically inert/correct, but to hear various Jewish Messianic expositors speak of the peaceful messianic age that will occur before, when or after the Messiah comes (I have not encountered a definite statement as to this temporal detail), it seems that they expect this “Utopian Peace of Earth” to occur through zen-like “osmosis”. However you just need to read each and every delineation in the OT prophets who speak of this ‘Messianic Triumph Age’ and you’ll most clearly see that it will be preceded by a major oppositional/adversarial upheaval against the Messiah (=Psa 2). The prophetic fact of the matter is that the Messiah will not be welcomed with open arms by most of the rest of the world, (nor for many of His own people for that matter), and these then fearful and even enraged nations will come together in order to put out this perceived threat. And it will actually have been God who will have drawn them to that “summit” (=Ezek 38:4-9ff, 14-16) However God says that they will not triumph in these attempts with God even turning their own weapons and oppositional warfare implements against them (e.g., Ezek 38:21-23). And through this development, God will thus be calling the nations of the world to a “decision” for or against him, = Joel’s “Valley of Decision-Making” (Joel 3:12-14). There they will make their choice and also be judged, and all those who choose to stand against God’s restored Zion will be punished (=Zech 14:16-19). So while the effect of the Advent of the Messiah will indeed bring about a “peaceful Earth age” it will not be through a sudden, forced, mass conversion of the rest of the world, but by a literal confrontation wherein people all over will then choose sides, and God will then variously punish the remaining rebellious ones until they are no more. (cf. Isa 66:24).
            The Christian understanding is that under, actually an “of last resort” scenario, Jesus will return to provide that final deliverance, however with Jesus actually expecting His followers to work to effectuate that “Kingdom of God on Earth (Matt 6:10) and “Valley of Decision-Making” scenario by preaching and living out His teaching throughout the world, there is a Biblical scenario where this can indeed be done, to a merciful extent, prior to His Second Advent. The merciful extent is that God will not, unless forced to by the lawless action of those opposing that development, directly, forcefully intervene to execute judgement on the rebellious and thus Jesus will not have to personally return until that Decision-Making opportunity has been fully exhausted, and then it will most likely actually be because indifferently rebellious people then will decide to take lawless, fatal measures against His righteous ones.
            So Christianity is fully in line with all of Scripture to understand God’s long-suffering mercy here by allowing the message of the already come Messiah, Jesus, to do its Zion-restoring work. This is all in harmony with the outline of Messianic events stated in Psa 110.

Oral Law vs. Canon Law
            I’ll cursorily say that there indeed was an Oral Law in/by the days of Jesus, even Jesus recognized this fact (e.g., Matt 15:3) the real issue was whether it was official and/or authoritative. I.e., did God Himself state (all) them.
            First of all, I find the attempts by certain Orthodox Jews to substantiate an Oral from supposed omissions in the Torah to be somewhat disingenuous as certain supposed examples require one to really dumb themselves down. E.g., claiming that the stipulation to “remain in ones place” in Exod 16:29 would cause a confusion as to whether or not people could go out of their house on the Sabbath with an Oral Law further explaining this makes not common sense. Clearly that stipulation was in relation to not going out the field in order to collect manna, and nothing more/else. The extrapolated claim about idolatry from Deu 4 is also another example as being really unnecessary in the light of the First and Second Commandments. (Exod 20:3, 4-6) So the Oral Law necessity from this is merely a converse “straw man” claim. That said, I personally would not discount that God did state many instructions outside of the written Canon. However I would say that much of that Oral Law included Judicial Decision on unclear matters by Israel’s historical High Court. This is what is today known as Case Law. Manifestly also included in this corpus of “Oral/Unwritten Law” were various practising “traditions” which came to be seen as the best ways to conduct certain aspects of the Written Law. This is documentedly seen e.g., with David’s organization of the Priesthood in courses, as well as Solomon expanding of the “blueprint” for both the Temple as well as its furniture/implements. This shows that there evidently was a known freedom in determining how to best execute even the Written Law, and that may indeed be what was entirely involved in formulating the Oral Laws, meaning that these did not have to be specifically stated by God, but were instead . So just as today, in the field of Law, Legislative, Case and Procedural Laws can all be generally called “Law”, this is probably also what came to be the case with Israel, especially over time. And with the Oral Law not being written down, and with Israel being unfaithful in observing even the Written Laws, and that for quite extensive periods of time. E.g., Josiah was completely shocked when the High Priest found the book of the Law that Passover Observance was required by God. (2 Kgs 22:8-13ff; 23:21-25). Now if apostasy could have become so pervasive and entrenched in Israel where neither the King nor the High Priest knew at all that the founding and so codified Act of/for the nation of Israel had to be celebrated, then it is not at all impossible that Laws and Customs which were merely orally passed on from (faithful) generation to subsequent generations were similarly, and even worse long forgotten. Indeed in a culture that had replaced the ordinances of God with that of Baal (2 Kgs 23:4-20), with the chief trustee of those practices, the High Priest, clearly being totally clueless here, then from whom would those Oral Laws be recollected from??! The most manifest fact is that they were long forgotten, and new ones had to be formulated from then on. And that probably contributed to many of them being skewed, in regards to harmony with the Bible. That all would explain the genuine difference within Judaism between Pharisaical and Sadducean Jews about the validity of the Oral Law. It evidently did not at all date back to the founding fathers of Israel.
            So at best, the Oral Law was merely common sense, reasoned and agreed upon “best practices” and this came to be the reset case upon every major apostasy of Israel. The lessons learned from the apostasy ended by Josiah may have led to the priesthood being much more careful to keep alive these laws during the Babylonian Captivity. And at worst, Oral Laws are merely unBiblical traditions. Only comparing them with the Written Law, as Jesus consistently did, could determine their authoritative validity. But in regards to being official, the trail for any such claim here had long been blurred and effaced by Israel's historic ignoring of them.
            It is claimed by Orthodox Jews that God did not want them to put the Oral Law in writing so that Gentiles would never be able to have Israel’s complete Law unless they had become part of Israel, but I instead rather see that such caution would have been done by God in regards to Israel itself. I.e., as seen from their historic apostasies, unless they remained faithful, they would permanently lose a significant part of their covenantal clauses and stipulations in these unwritten Instructions and Practices if they themselves were not most faithful from generation to generation. Again, if they could become completely oblivious to what was written, then how much more to what was not written.

Inherently Temporary and Circumstantial Oral Law
            Also the Oral Law, if originally existent and official, i.e., spoken, at least in part, directly by God, were probably merely “best practices” instructions, and that in regards to the conditions of the times. Future generations with, e.g., better equipment and more advanced knowledge would know how to implement the best practices available in their time in order to most efficiently execute the Written Law. So such Oral instructions were inherently intended to be upgraded, or entirely replaced, even discarded and no longer tangibly needed, over time. Again, the Temple Services improvements of David and Solomon can be seen as such revisionary actions. Further detail studies may substantiate this Working Thesis, but I see that there indeed is much Biblical data that corroborates it. In fact, the actions which were taken by Jewish leaders following the destruction of the Temple in regards to the Sanctuary Services is another demonstration of such an application of Judicial Decisions.

Righteousness & the Law
            The Bible, even as understood in the NT, does state that there is a righteousness from/according to the (keeping of the) Law. However, as Jesus pointed out in the Sermon on the Mount, that is far from God’s ideal (Matt 5:20) And he went on to state and show how there was also a spiritual aspect in God’s Law which far exceeded the requirements in the given/written legal stipulations. (Matt 5:21-47) It is through such deeper and spiritual law keeping that one comes to be more and more perfect/complete like God (Matt 5:48). As Paul states, God’s relational ideal was ‘a Righteousness apart from the Law’ (Rom 3:21), as it was the case with Abraham (Gen 26:5; Gal 3:6ff), indeed when the Covenant was made with him. (Gen 15:5-6ff; 26:4-5; Gal 3:6-9, 15-18; Rom 4:9-25) The Law was indeed given ‘in order to orderly deal with already manifested sin’ (Gal 3:19ff). A similar development in regards to the enactment of laws occurs in modern societies today where it is only after or in the foreseeable light of, a type of crime being committed that a law is passed. E.g., “cyber crimes” came, of course after the internet was invented and populously used, but actually some time after that invention date, when then people started engaging in criminal activity online. And in a similar way, a married couple typically do not set forth a set of rules of do and don’t when enter into their marriage covenant. Usually just a promise of ‘loving one another’ is explicitly stated. It is then naturally understood just what would violate the relationship without having a specific law for everything. In the same way, one can say that initially God simply had such an understanding of reciprocal love with Man, with Adam and Eve, and arguably a memorial, Sabbatical rest on the Seventh Day, following God’s own example (Gen 2:1-3; cf. Exod 20:8-11). And even after the Fall, even as, over time sins were more and more committed, and to ever increasing extent that, God still had a non-stipulated relationship with people who were faithful to Him. That is how Noah was righteous in God’s eyes, with any codified Law (Gen 6:8-9), and as the NT states, also tangibly knew just what constituted that righteousness (2 Pet 2:5), as, as stated above, it was also the case for Abraham (Gen 26:5). And that is the kind of righteousness that God wanted to ideally have in relationship with his people. Not one which had to be codified and technically observed, but one that flowed from a natural desire to most lovingly do what was right both in regards to God and Man (Deu 6:5; Lev 19:18b; Matt 22:34-40). Indeed, comparatively imagine the utter absurdity if marital vows included a public reading and vowing of all of the last 6 commandments specially tailored for a marrying couple. For sure the reaction of all would be: “Really??!!... You have to vow to each other that you won’t do these things to each other...” “Isn’t an expression of love and desire to be married enough??” Perfect Love does indeed fulfill the Law. (Gal 5:13-14; Rom 13:8-10)
            But with Israel coming out of centuries of living in ultra-paganistic Egypt and as slaves, God had to explicitly express as laws both what He would consider right and wrong and also how they could become a people that is set apart from the rest of the world for Him. So in that sense, as Paul states, the Law did serve as a tutor. (Gal 3:23-25) It did so in an effort to lead people back to the idealic Abrahamic mindset for, and level of, righteousness. One which actually merely “believes” God which, if it had been maintained by Adam and Eve in Eden, would have avoided the whole sin debacle (Gen 3:1-6ff). And NT believers see that Jesus sinless life thus most perfectly demonstrated how to return to such an uncodified perfect relationship with God.

‘Law Brings a Curse’
            Many get tripped up by how Paul most strongly correlates the Law and a Curse. Orthodox Jews cannot understand how many passages in the OT speak of the Law a perfect (e.g., Psa 19:7) and such strong denunciary statements by Paul. I see that the, actually harmonizing solution is in the fact that Paul actually did not say that the Law was, substantively, itself a Curse (see Rom 7:7, 12), but that it could only bring a curse and an automatically condemning penalty. (Rom 4:15) So he was not against the Law itself, but against the thinking that it was God’s ideal. As he states, where there is an explicit law, then there must be an incontrovertible penalty for violating it. () And that is what he was decrying, for God’s original relational ideal was a much better, even fairer way. Indeed did either Noah or Abraham really live as ‘sinlessly’ as God’s approval of them seems to imply (Gen 6:8-9; 26:5). I would lean on the side of no here, but because there was no explicit law that stipulated all rights (=righteousness -cf. Isa 45:19) and wrongs (unrighteousness), God was then able to deal with any sinful action by these people based on their actual intent, their mens rea. (Cf. Rom 7:9) And that naturally precluded actions which were clearly against common sense/natural laws, particularly with the chief clear knowledge then by them that it was God (alone) who had created the world (=Rom 1:18-32). Indeed “law” then was all based on common sense!! Now, if there were explicit laws for lesser levels of rights and wrongs, and which these Patriarchs clearly knew of, then an inherent automatic penalty would have to be executed if they violated them. That is the purpose and legacy of Law...to make most clear what is wrong in order to avoid any further transgression (=Rom 3:20b; 5:20) and also have a bolstering/backing up penalty to deter its transgression. This interchange is typically seen in Law Enforcement where a police officer, or even a judge later on, may not impose the penalty of a law if it is determined that the, nonetheless offender, had not been aware of a specific law or stipulation (e.g., specific speed limits, reduced speed limit after dark for wild animal safety reasons; a 'no trespassing' imposition, etc).
            In the same way, God knowing of the quasi-infinite possibilities if every single type of wrong was codified in law (as seen in the millions of laws in societies today, evidently saw it as best, both logistically and relationally, to instead operate on a level of love and common sense. It is only as sin and transgression progress, especially with people ignoring what could be naturally and obviously known, that God, with Israel, decided to help them in their spiritual journey back to His original ideal, as it was indeed the end purpose of the creation of a dedicated People for Him, by explicitly stating how they could be righteous and live righteously, and tellingly enough, pertinently addressing even specific bold or “greyed” sinful practices of the times. In fact it can be seen as most merciful on God’s part that He will evidently only judge Gentile Nations according to inherently evident/natural laws (Rom 1:18-32), and not e.g., unlike OT Israel, if they were faithful in practising the law which signified their special national covenantal relationship with God, such as circumcision. And as the NT teaches, ‘(practised) love covers a multitude of sins’ (1 Pet 4:8; James 5:20; e.g., Matt 25:31-46).
            So in summary here, the gist of Paul’s Law arguments was that, as great as it was, it was not the best means by which to have a perfect relationship with God. Indeed it was merely a tutor which tried to rotely/routinely instill that perfect relationship, but the true Teacher is in a God and Man loving spirit. (Rom 7:6) Indeed then, one does not do what is right by God and by others because “the law says so”, but because they want to. Sort of like one not speeding even when they cannot see or “detect” a patrol car, or opting to drive as slow as commonly understood as safe (e.g., 35 mph) when not knowing what the specific speed limit is for that area. And as stated by God in Isa 28:5-13 ‘only people with immature/infantile mindsets need to be given “line upon line’ instructions.’ (See here).
            Much more can be said on this pivotal issue here between Judaism and Christianity but I think the above introductory statements are sufficient to guide a proper understanding of it. Carefully reading the writings of Paul in particularly Romans and Galatians with that overarching view in mind should be most helpful.
           
Moral vs. Ceremonial Law
Spirit replaces ceremonial
Signs
Moral Law = Code Law
Ceremonial Law = Best Practices Laws to uphold Moral Law

Jesus and the Law
            The argument made in those Jews for Judaism presentations that Jesus also kept an oral law based on the incident in Matt 12:1-8 is particularly interesting with that law purportedly being that: ‘in cases of vital emergencies, any Law in the Torah can be violated to save life.’ I would suppose that is how self-defense killing can be pardoned, but while there may have been an oral law which states so, which I however see, as discussed above, would merely have been a “Case Law” stemming from an initial judicial case where it was then deemed so by the High Court of Israel instead of ‘something which God had explicitly said outside of the written law or OT canon’, I see that, also here, Jesus would have upheld that oral law as valid as it did not conflict with the principle in the Word of God which He saw made such a law acceptable (Mat 12:7 = Hos 6:6). Indeed, above all things, even “ceremony” and “religiosity”, God did not want the plight of the needy be ignored even in order to best serve Him, for the two were not mutually exclusive. Indeed a perfectly practiced religion by Israel would result in them avoiding all sin, and thus inclusively being generously helpful to people in need.
            Interestingly enough, Christ’s possible upholding of that Oral Law goes on to make his condemnation in the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-37) doubly impacting as the priest and Pharisee then chose to ignore the vital plight of a merely ‘half-dead’ man all so that they, according to their view, could keep the Law.
            So, yes, Jesus was ‘a most faithful Torah observer’, even in regards to Oral/Case Laws, when they were Biblically based, but He repeatedly showed that He was not going to allow Law prevent doing what was right, pointedly in regards to helping people in need, as it had become the sanctimoniously hypocritical norm in Judah in those times. So I therefore see that the Gospel which Paul preach, and which Paul says He got directly from Jesus, which put the law in its proper Love and Righteousness perspective was the chief part of the “many things” which Jesus had said would later be shown to His disciples when the Holy Spirit would be sent to “guide them into all truths” (John 16:10, 12-15)


New Covenant in New Spirit which includes all Law keeping

_______________________


...I mean I thought that Jesus had already fully debunked all of those objections. Well to hear the arguments made in that video, which quantatively more than less actually does not deny the factuality of the Gospel accounts, (i.e., what Jesus really said and did, except for certain parts), it would seem that He would not have. So this blog post is to examine those here presented arguments in their Biblical depth.[3]3
           
            As with any other Biblical study issue, exegesis is the key, and the most foundational/determinative part of (proper) exegesis is context, whether, as necessary, immediate, wider or general (=a whole book and/or the whole Bible). In the answers given in that video, I see that this contexting approach was used, as many supporting texts were cited, but really most of those contextualizing texts did not involve all or much of the pertinent background to the various circumstances involved in the pointed passages being examined.[4]4

            Note: As a key general point here, it must be said that this responding blog post was initially written in concurrent time to viewing and reading through the Jews for Judaism presentations and documents. This was done to be able to respond to things with the presentation/document in question being still fresh/recent in the mind. And so some points in response may be made by fleeting referring to a supporting passage, even simply citing it. However that passage may be later specifically covered in a later Jews for Judaism presentation. Well when it is later specifically discussion in a presentation, then that passage was more detailedly addressed. An example of this would be my citing of e.g., The Suffering Servant Passage in Isa 53 as a support of the Christian understanding of the Messiah. Well it is later fully/exegetically examined and discussed. In a corresponding way, the Jews for Judaism presentation actually do the same thing but in the converse. I.e., they have the prior fundamental belief that that Isa 53 or Dan 9:24-27 does not apply to the Messiah and so, if at all, dismissingly mention them in passing in prior presentations until they, again if at all, more pointedly and dedicatedly deal with them in a later presentation. So while both sides here do come with certain biases and preconceived ideas, that is actually quite normal and there is actually nothing wrong with that. The real proof of things is in what views will be ultimately Biblically/Exegetically validly, objectively and/or demonstrably sustained, and thus proven.

The Textual Sources
‘The Concept of the Messiah is indeed rooted in the Tanakh’ (=the Christian’s Canon/Bible Old Testament). With the 4 Gospel accounts about the life/ministry of Jesus of Nazareth not begun to be, at least formally, written and circulated until ca. 30 years after his death, when it is said e.g., that ‘Paul, (a Christianity converted-Pharisee (Acts 8:1-3ff; 9:1-9ff; Phil 3:5-6)), ‘reasoned with, pointedly, his Jewish synagogue-audiences from the Scripture (e.g., Acts 17:2; 18:4-5, 28; 28:23; cf. Acts 13:14-44), he was making his arguments from the Tanakh. How much more, as it will be later seen, was this the case for Jesus himself (e.g., Luke 24:27, 44).
            Relatedly here, it must foundational be established that, as I gather it is being done in this video, if not by Jewish people in general, the Gospel accounts themselves, indeed the entire New Testament, is factually true. I.e., what they say happened mostly based on in person-witness testimony, is indeed what occurred. And the typical self-convincing evidence of this is, as it was also manifested in that video, the several ‘adversarial statements’ recorded in these Gospel accounts, chief of which is indeed Jesus ‘forsaken’ cry on the cross (Matt 27:46). Indeed if you are trying to either convince, propagandize and/or lie to/deceive someone else, especially in order to save your own livelihood or life, a person typically avoids saying/revealing anything which speaks against their cause and/or could in any way be used against. But this is not actually done in the NT foundational Gospels. And on top of the fact that this was because it was the truth, anything that was not true could easily be disputed and disproven by the, also-gospel reported, tens of thousands of people who both heard and saw Jesus and/or heard about him from disciples-independent source. But you do not see a ‘Gospels-exposing’ writing being composed then, as it would be due, indeed from the many Jewish leaders who had not accepted Jesus as their Messiah.
            Arguably the only portion of the Gospels which could be claimed to be “fabricated” are the pivotal claim and account of Christ’s resurrection, with only as many as 500 people having been said to have seen the resurrected Jesus (1 Cor 15:6). An excellent comprehensive logically-based  presentation that I have come across about the veracity of Jesus’s resurrection is this one by David Asscherick; and this one by (converted (secular) Jew) Clifford Goldstein. I, thus far have not seen anything that could be added to the points made there, so I will simply make the reference to that presentation to address this issue of Jesus’s resurrection, even if this is, as it logically sequiturly due, after the remainder of the discussion here about whether or not Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled the criteria to be the Jewish Messiah is read through.

1. The “Ingathering of the Jewish Exiles”
            The first “criteria” brought forth is one which is, by claiming ‘an enduring 2000 unfulfilled return’, on several levels, both foundationally exegetically/historically and theologically (circularly) flawed. This is seen just by examining the following passages cited as a substantiation of that criteria, namely: Deut 30:3; Isa 11:11-12; Jer 30:3; 32:37; Ezek 11:17; 36:24.

Conditionality of Promises and Prophecies
So the key question that must be asked in did the scattered Jewish people, which first, starting in 723 B.C., were the people living in the 10 tribes of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, and then later, following the exile of the Southern, two-tribe Kingdom of Judah, ever meet that ‘repenting/turning and faithful obedience’ requirement. Just by the fact that, most manifestly actually, only a remnant (cf. Ezra 2:1ff|Neh 7:6ff [ca. 40-50,000]; Ezra 8:1ff [1496 men]), returned after the 70 years of Babylonian exile, it can seen that this had, at least up to then, never become the case with the scattered people of the Northern Kingdom. In other words, while there is a documented return of at least a remnant from the Babylonian exile, there is not such hint of a return from the Assyrian Captivity of the 10 northern tribes. It can be argued that there was not a similar need to physically “return” for those northern tribes as they had simply been occupied and subjugated by the Assyrians while remaining in their tribal territories, but there is still not even a historical/documented hint of a spiritual return. As far as I could see, the best that was done in terms of a spiritual return was the divergent form of the long-priorly-established (e.g., 1 Kgs 13:32) mixed worship that existed through to the first century A.D., and had been practiced by ethnically-halved, and/or spiritually-‘convert’, Jews (e.g., Ezra 4:1-3, 8ff, 17; John 4:19-22ff). So in order for that promise of total (i.e., Israel and Judah) restoration to be done, as it was begun to be done with the faithful returnees of Judah, thus allowing to be fulfilled what was pointedly promised to them (Jer 29:10-14), God needed to have the people, or at least, (as realistically expected by Him (Isa 10:20-23)),  a (tangible) remnant, of those northern tribes similarly repent and turn back to him. But instead, at best, the same split kingdom mentality persisted, all quite contrary to God’s desires and plans (e.g., Ezek 37:15-23).
            It is easy to assume that just because God states a promise in terms of ‘what He will surely do’, to think that He will do this no matter what, but His own qualifying terms in Jer 18:9-10 clearly state, that is not at all the case. (cf. Jer 18:11-12). God is clear that His promises to His people are all on condition of their obedience. His people have to continually “choose life” (Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:14-15) for God to be able to increasingly fulfill His promises to them.
            So in all of the promises of restoration made in the Old Testament, they were speaking to the restorations that could have been made in the immediate years following, at least, Judah’s Babylonian Captivity. Again, this was partly fulfilled with the Return of the Jewish Exiles under Zerubbabel, Ezra and Nehemiah, (and as seen in the prophecy of Haggai 2:20-23 (given in ca. 520 B.C.), God did indeed have great plans for/from that restoration involving Zerubbabel himself), but not even spiritually so with the people of the Northern Tribes. Perhaps these people self-deceivedly felt that since they were still living in their “Promised Land/Territory” then they were actually not in exile, and thus not under judgement by God, and therefore, unlike their physically transplanted Southern kinsmen/neighbors, they  had no need to “return”. And so they obliviously just maintained their present course. Therefore to claim that the restorations promises have not yet been fulfilled while ignoring the many opportunities that they had to be fulfilled,[5]5 indeed during at least the 538 years from the end of the 70 years of Captivity to the start of the First Century A.D., is to ignore a very significant segment of most pertinent and determinative Jewish History. The fact remains that God has redemptive plans to fulfill and will not allow himself to be forever stalled by people who refuse to repent and return to Him.
            So since those promised restoration could have long been fulfilled, and that most literally, with the Jewish people, with ca. 600 years indeed being a sufficient amount of time to fully fulfill all of God’s Messianic and Zion promises, that criteria cannot be imposed or considered in, effectively, a vacuum. There are many attending pivotal conditions which were not met, and as seen in the chronologically-rooted Great Messianic prophecy of Dan 9:24-27, discussed later, those conditions had to also be timely met.
            And most significant here, as all of those promises sequiturly state, the full restoration in obedience must indeed come first before the regnal reign of the Messianic King. Which indeed leads into the chief sub-objection next made under this first criteria.
Regnal Reign of Messiah
            It is there said that: ‘since Jesus never reigned as a king, then He could not have been the Jewish Messiah. However the Gospel accounts are unequivocally that Jesus had been given this mandate, as communicated by the angel Gabriel (Luke 1:32-33), and this was even a chief accusation against him (cf. Luke 23:2b; Matt 27:28-29, 37). So then the question becomes why did Jesus who actually believed this (Luke 19:28-40; 23:3|John 18:37; cf. Luke 23:37; John 19:21) deliberately refuse this as seen in John 6:15; Matt 21:9ff|Mar 11:10ff|Luke 19:38ff|John 12:13ff). The answer is found in Jesus what Jesus said as he aborted his deliberately orchestrated and accepted triumphal entry procession. In Luke 19:41-44 he restated what he had been saying of late in his ministry, in short: the Jewish nation had not met the pre-conditions of a full heart and mind obedient return to God for those promises of temporal kingdom blessing to be fulfilled. So instead would then be fulfilled the, as later more specifically seen, also here always present, other/flip side (=curses) of those promises.
            Could the Messiah do this?? I.e., could He have halted (prophetic) developments which were being fulfilled then? Well if/since He would be functioning under an unprecedented “Anointing” of God, He would have understood that: just as God had previously (in the OT), repeatedly halted even developing promises if His people became unfaithful and disobedient and rebelled (e.g., Num 14:11ff, 20-23; 26-35), then if similar acts were then done, it was actually imperative that any then fulfilling promises, however great they may be, also be halted and postponed, for however long they then need to be. (cf. John 5:19, 30).


2. Rebuilding the Holy Temple
Again here the arguments are, like the ones above, stated in a sort of circular vacuum which subjectively ignores ca. 600 years of Jewish History from the time of the Return from Babylon to the First Century A.D. And again, the conditionality principle of Jer 18:1-10 fully applies here.
            First of all, while it is understandable for people who reject Jesus as the Messiah, it is actually not proper to gauge the prophecies and promises of God through a selective filter where only what is favoring or supporting is taken into consideration. This is all see by the fact that when all of the here cited “proving” statements (Isaiah 2:2-3; 56:6-7; 60:7; 66:20; Ezekiel 37:26-27; Malachi 3:4; Zecheriah 14:20-21) were made, it long before the 70 A.D. destruction of the post-Babylonian rebuilt Temple. So all of those prophecies could and would have applied to the time when that Temple was standing. So if it is today not seen that a Temple is standing for these prophecies to be now fulfilled, it is not because God’s word is failing.
            It must be so obviously logical and clear that no power in heaven or on earth can do any harm to the Temple of God, the house where He has chosen to reside, if He does not allow it. (Cf. Isa 43:13) Indeed that was the staunch belief before the Babylonian destroyed in ca. 576 B.C., in fact similarly also during the time of Jesus, to the point where if anyone merely spoke of any harm being done to the Temple, let alone its total destruction, they were passable of imprisonment and even death as it was the respective cases for Jeremiah and Jesus. So if/since the (Second) Temple was most devastatingly destroyed in 70 A.D., it clearly was because God had so ordained it, just as He had done with the Babylonians centuries before. And unlike the Babylonian devastation then, not, even timed, promise of restoration and even vengeance against those assaulters (e.g, Jer 51) were made for the Second Temple destruction by the Romans.
            And though it was the blind obstinacy of the Jewish People who caused the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., by trying to make it a last gasp bastion, (which clearly also did not prove to be according to God’s will or plans), it was not them who actually solely caused that destruction. God clearly was not fighting to protect either them or His Temple then.
            And as seen with Uzzah and the Most Holy Place’s Shekinah glory, a person could not even enter and stand in the presence of God without being struck by death. So how then could indiscriminate fighting men, from both Jewish and Roman sides, just run all through and all over the Temple without any harm coming to them, let alone the Romans completely sacking the place and even looting its article and treasure, just like the Babylonians had done years before (cf. Dan 5:3). It was all because all this was being done according to the will of God, and by most physical and spiritual necessity, His glory had departed from the Temple, just as He had revealed to Ezekiel in vision that it had prior to the First Temple (Solomon’s Temple) being similarly completely sacked (Ezek 8:4; 9:3; 10:4; 11:22-23). God’s glory ended up completely out of the Temple and the City and rested on the Mount of Olives which is just East of the City.

Fulfillments by Jesus Christ
            God is clear that He never does anything (new) without first revealing it to His servants the prophets who then share it with God’s people (Amos 3:6-8). So since the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple is clearly an ordained and facilitated act of God, as it was during the Babylonian Captivity, and also all due because of the rebellious sins of His People, indeed certainly not for a whimsical reason by God, then we are to find as clear statements as was revealed through Jeremiah in a prophetic figure prior to that time, even up to forty years before that time, as it was with Jeremiah.
            And in the statements, actions and prophesying of Jesus of Nazareth, we clearly have this revelation and testimony, which found a most precise fulfilment in the 70 A.D. events. I.e., We have several parables which deliberately veiledly depicted that coming utter judgement of God (Matt 21:33-46; 22:1-7ff); we also have Jesus later more explicitly speaking of God leaving the then standing Temple and of a coming resulting doom on Jerusalem and its Temple (Matt 23:37-24:2) and the later, from the Mount of Olives, the same place where God’s glory had resettled once it had vacated the First Temple and Jerusalem in Jeremiah’s/Ezekiel’s prophetic ministry days (cf. DA 829.2a), we have Jesus delineating prophetic events which were to also involve the great opposition and destruction which was to befall the City and the Temple (Matt 24:15-22; Luke 19:41-44; 21:20-24).
            So it is incontrovertibly clear that Jesus did prophetically accurately speak on the destruction that would come to Jerusalem and its Second Temple, and while that alone/in itself is not necessarily a “proof” of being the work of God (Deut 13:1-3; though Deut 18:20-22), it cannot be ignored that only God could have allowed such a prophecy against His Holy Temple and City to come true. But, as it will be discussed later, the real “proof”, as stated in Deut 13:1-3, is in the Biblical validity of what was being taught in relation to that prophesying; -whether the teaching (i.e., the teachings of Jesus) was according to God’s word or not, for Jesus did state that it was all because of their rejection of him and his ‘peace-producing teachings’ that all of this calamity and judgement from God would come, (Luke 19:41ff), which all leads to the next objecting criteria.

Why No Temple Rebuilding
            By the way, the Bible is also clear that if prophecy has ceased with God’s people, it is because His Law is not being observed (e.g., Pro 29:18; Lam 2:9; Ezek 7:26; cf. Mic 3:6). Clearly today, the Jewish people have not since 70 A.D. been observing the Laws of the OT in regards to the sacrificial system, though they had ample time to rebuild their temple then between 70 A.D. and 125 A.D., even if being opposed by the Romans, for it God will for that to be done, then no force in heaven or on Earth could have prevented it. Similarly today, the presence of the Dome of the Rock on Temple Mount since ca. 600 A.D. is seen as a major obstacle to any rebuilding effort as its destruction will surely touch off a regional/global conflict between Jews and Muslims. But will God send a prophet, let alone the Messiah, before His claiming ‘chosen people’ return to full obedience to all of his already clearly stated laws. Jesus was rejected by the Jews for supposedly breaking the law of Moses, how then can it be accepted that the words of Rabbis which endorse a substitute, inexistent, sacrificial system, be then now deemed as acceptable. It is clear that the courage of the people during Ezra, Nehemiah, who also, under encouraging prophetic guidance through Zechariah and Haggai, rebuilt all of God’s Institutions, including the Temple, is complacently completely missing today with the Jewish people. Either God has no intention to ever have the temple rebuilt or there is a standing obstacle to His will being prophetically revealed with a Jewish people today who, at a ca. +40% rate, do not even believe in Him. This is also discussed in the 4th point where is admittedly brought up.
            Unlike the claim of Jews for Judaism, the greatest threat to Jews is not Christian missionaries, but the secular, agnostic, even atheistic influence that most Jews, particularly those living outside of Israel, have ascribed to. These are the people that should be targeted to be, at least spiritually “regathered” for they much outnumber Messianic Jews.

3. Worldwide Reign of Peace
            It is indeed clear that God stated that once the Messiah would have established God’s Zion on Earth that Global Peace would come to the world (Micah 4:1-4; Hosea 2:20; Isa 2:1-4; 60:18); but as discussed before, Jesus stated at the events of his trial and death that he would not be establishing his own kingdom in the present realm of Jerusalem and even the Roman Empire (John 19:36). Indeed, as also discussed earlier, he knowingly, deliberately aborted any such plans, as the people, the Jewish People, through which this would have been literally done, proved to be rebellious to his stipulated conditions. So clearly Jesus has not yet sought to do this. The Medieval Catholic Church has tried to do so, but it has proven to similarly be unfaithful to God’s and Christ’s own teachings and was thus not acting in his name. Today, America has tried to pursue such goals under a belief of Being a Christian Nation, but it too, like the Medieval Church, has proven to not be faithful to God’s and Jesus’s word, and thus not actually acting according to their will. Indeed Old and New Testament prophetic studies reveal that the Roman Catholic Church and the United States are two related phases of a Spiritual Babylon which is through various false practices and beliefs holding captive God’s/Jesus’s Faithful  People. (See details in here and here and in this post). So the faulting reason why those major powers made up of followers of God which have sought to establish a Kingdom/Country/Nation “under God” have indeed proven to be a scourge of the Earth, is because they have not been following the actual ways of God and Jesus. The fault is not at all with Jesus for if his Gospel was truly obeyed, that spoken of Global peace would have long been achieved and not even by the force or threat of arms, but, as stated in those Zion prophecies, by willful adherence.

4. Embracing of Torah Observance by All Jews
            To, at least effectively, claim that the passages of Ezekiel 37:24; Deuteronomy 30:8, 10; Jer 31:32; Ezekiel 11:19-20; 36:26-27 involve that ‘God will have forced people of a certain ethnicity to love and do His will is Theologically completely false. From the beginning God has never force any one to do His will. He may at best present sufficient enough evidence of what His will is, but the final choice is always freely left to the people. Indeed in Deut 30:10, which is cited about, that conditionality is seen by “if” (or equally “when”) statements. (Cf. Jer 29:13-14) Indeed Moses point in his Deuteronomy address was ‘if/when you choose God’s will and obey His voice, the spoken of blessing will be fulfilled, if not, then the curses.’
            Furthermore, God has never promised a forced, total restoration of all scattered people, but merely a free response of the willingly obedient, to the point where He actually only envisioned a remnant being restored (Isa 10:20-22a). As already seen above in the Ezra-Nehemiah returns, indeed only a remnant responded and returned. So to claim that all will forcedly return to God is not Biblical, for not even God does not expect, nor do, this.

5. Universal Knowledge of God
            The succinct Biblical answer to the claim and cited passages here (i.e., Zech 3:9; 8:23; 14:9, 16; Isa 45:23; 66:23; Jer 31:33; Ezek 38:23; Psa 86:9; Zeph 3:9) that the advent of the Messiah would result in all the peoples of the earth knowing about the Creator God is that this is actually done through tangible work and effort, indeed missionary work and evangelism. That is seen in the indeed one day mass conversion of the Ninevites under the preaching of Jonah. They surprisingly all genuinely repented when they heard God’s word, and God forgave them, but it first took Jonah to obediently go to that city and proclaim the word of God to them. Similarly, if the message of the Messiah is to reach all of the peoples of the Earth, it will have to be tangibly done through willing believers going out to preach it to them. (Isa 52:7 = Rom 10:14-15). God has never intangibly worked. Even to call unto Himself a people from the slaves of Israel then in Egypt, He did not reveal Himself to all of the Jews in Egypt at once, but worked through Moses and raised him up to make this call, indeed through most tangible means (Exod 3 & 4). And as later seen with Israel in the wilderness, God already then had aspirations of filling the Earth with His glory, thus with a clear knowledge of Him (Num 14:20), yet He was most limited by the People through which He needed this work to be done. He needed them to be faithful in all that He had commanded, including, later on, the evangelisation of other people, -which would actually be done by people being self-attracted by how glorious His People and Country would be.
            And as several passages/prophecies in the Bible clearly state, this age of a universal knowledge (which is not necessarily belief) of God, will only settledly occur when the vehement and acting enemies of God have all be assembled (e.g., Joel 3:9-13), judged (e.g., Joel 3:14-15) and put to death (Isa 66:15-16), thus after the “Day of the Lord” has transpired (e.g., Joel 2:30-32; Isa 11:4b), though it would have begun to develop before that punctuating day of Judgement (cf. Joel 3:1-3ff; Ezek 38:10-16)

Jesus’ Fulfillment
            Seeing that he had a very small group of believer in his Messianic message, and also seeing that Jerusalem and its temple were doom to destruction, Jesus instead instituted the missionary aspect to the teaching of the knowledge and glory of God to others, first starting with Jews (Matt 10:5-7) , then former/half Jews living in the Samaria area, and the then extending to all peoples throughout the world. (John 10:16; Act 1:8). So with Jesus sequiturly knowing that prophesied-as-also-possible judgements would come on the Jewish People, He not only postponed the establishment of a kingdom of God then within the realm of Jerusalem and Israel, indeed not having any other choice as the believers in his Messianic message were few and in the great minority, but, instead first sought to have that message preached to all and, as envisioned by God (Isa 56:6-8 - the issue of Sacrifices will be discussed later) similarly (John 5:19, 30) accept as part of His people anyone who would accept this message and adhere to its requirements.

6. From the Tribe of Judah and a Direct Descendant of King David and King Solomon
            It is interesting to see that the same claims against Jesus’s paternity (see John 8:41b) are here being made and that the entire father to son genealogy of Matthew (Matt 1:1-16) is summarily dismissed all on the ‘viewed here as truth’ Christian Gospel belief that Jesus did not have a natural father. It is being here claimed that the Messiah will be a natural, paternal descendant of David. (Citing: Gen 49:10; 2 Sam 7:12-14; 1 Chr 22:9-10; Num 1:1-18). Well then in that resurrected case, the same point made by Jesus then, (which was chosen as the chief theme verse of this entire post as this is indeed a most pivotal Messianic passage) is also made here. And that is the Psa 110:1 stipulation. As Jesus advancedly said in Matt 22:41-46|Mark 12:35-37|Luke 20:41-44) to gathered Pharisees then, and which “no one was able to answer”: “if the Messiah is only to be David’s son/descendant, then how is it that David, while under direct Spiritual/Prophetic influence/revelation of/from God says: “Yahweh said to my lord...” As Jesus pointed out, how is the Messiah to be David’s son since David calls Him “my lord”. Fathers, especially Kings, do not call their sons lord. God had clearly revealed to David then that the Messiah would actually be a father of his, just as God Himself is a Father to all of His People. That is more explicitly stated in the Messianic statement of Isa 9:6-7, which further qualified that ancestral identity as being an “Eternal” one (=Mich 5:2), thus closely resembling the Eternal Attribute of Yahweh, known by most Christians as “God the Father”.
            The same spiritual logic applies to statements in Psa 2. It similarly could not apply to David since Psa 2:7b says that this anointed king would be “begotten by God” (=Heb 1:5 ; also = 2 Sam 7:14), but David was begotten by Jesse and, as discussed here, apparently a woman named Nitzevet, the daughter of an Adael, and as also discussed there, evidently in sinful circumstances. Also, Psa 45, which speaks of a most righteous King, at the occasion of His wedding, actually refers to him as God, and distinctly adding that God Himself had anointed that other God, and all because of that God-King’s staunch righteous living. (Psa 45:6-7). So that OT passage is best viewed if understood to at the very least be Messianic, which then implicates that the Messiah would be Divine (=Heb 1:8-9)
            So, as it was clearly revealed in the Gospel accounts, the Messiah’s paternity would be of Divine and Preceding origins.

The Regnal Hiatus of the Messiah
            Psa 110:1ff is also most foundational and pivotal to the Messianic understanding as it also reveals that they Messiah will encounter great opposition. So great indeed that God would have to Himself intervene and bring the Messiah up (as physically done with Enoch, Moses and Elijah) to sit at His right hand while He then works to subjugate and ultimately destroy these manifested enemies. (=Psa 110:5-6; Rev 12:4b-5 = Acts 2:32-36; 7:56; Heb 1:13; Rev 5). Clearly God could have instantly done this, without calling the Messiah up to His throne, but by Him doing this, it shows that there would be a hiatus in the implementation of the Davidic reign of the Messiah. (=Micah 5:3-4; Acts 2:33-35; John 12:32-34ff) The NT Prophecies of Rev 12:6, show that this would be at least 1260 days (=3.5 years) which could also be 1260 years according to the year-day principle of Num 14:34; Ezek 4:6. The Christian Gospel indeed states that Jesus was taken up to Heaven following 3.5 years of public revelation and ministry (from the Fall of 27 A.D. to the Spring of 31 A.D.) And 40 days after His resurrection from the dead, He was taken up by God to Heaven (Acts 1:9-11). And as Jesus said, that taken up of His back to Heaven would last until He would gloriously return from God to this Earth to then establish a glorious kingdom. (John 14:1-3)

The Priestly Order and Work of the Messiah
            The Messianic Psalm 110 also reveals that during that hiatus time, the Messiah would then be functioning as a High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek, king of Salem (Psa 110:4; Gen 14:18)[6]6

            So the priorly discussed interruption of the establishment of a Messianic, Davidic Kingdom and Reign by Jesus who fully knew that this should be done, had actually been prophesied as a possibility by God in Psa 110:1ff. So Jesus was acting in perfect accordance to God’s word when he chose to do so, for the Jewish people had not properly responded to the message of God that he was proclaiming.
            As discussed later, Jesus got his natural/human/Davidic genealogy from a combination of his mother and father’s genealogies, but as it was to be the case for the Messiah, as involved in Psa 110:1, the actual Messiah’s paternal and regnal authority would be of Divine origin.

Other Claim and Objection
Ezekiel 37:24-27 - Now unless God is going to resurrect King David and make him to be the Messiah, which is not at all what God had revealed to David, stating that the Messiah would be of his lineage, yet also be an ancestor of his, something which only a miraculous “re-incarnating” and “re-birthing” act of God could do; and also since all of David’s Jewish ancestors, going back to at least Judah the son of Jacob (Matt 1:3; Gen 49:10) and really back three generations before to Abraham were, and moreover not even kings themselves, merely all told that the Messianic King would be a descendant of theirs, then it can be rationally understood that this necessarily miraculous Messiah would have to be of Divine origins. That means that when He would be born, He would be implanted from a Divine embryonic, even seed, source. So it is to be expected that the Messiah would be jointly born from God and also from a woman who at least was a natural descendant of King David. And of course that is exactly what is said to have occurred with Jesus (Luke 1:26-35ff; Matt 1:20), (even at the risk of the natural man’s disbelief in the Messiah), thus fulfilling the technical and spiritual necessity of that OT Messianic requirement. (=Rev 22:16)

Land of Jacob - Again the Jer 18:1-10 principle must be kept in mind here, and God is only bound to keep a prior promise is its conditions are met. If they are not, then He can easily annul that promise. And God had also said that He can easily dispossess His people of that promise land if they prove to be unfaithful.

Jesus’ Cry of Being Forsaken (Matt 27:46) - This most involved theological issue is discussed in detailed here, and all revolves around the full penalty for sin that the Messiah had to provide sacrificial atonement for (cf. Isa 53).
            And if David could genuinely/honestly/candidly express this exact same feeling (Psa 22:1-18) without this ‘completely discrediting and annulling his anointing, how would that become the case for the Davidic Messiah when going through a similar experience. (Yet, and most significantly here, neither David or Jesus turned their backs on God then as they eventually came to soon understand the will of God in this (Psa 22:19-31 & Matt 27:50 = Luke 23:46)

Second Coming Teaching - What is exegetically implied in Psa 110 of the Messiah being physically/literally taken up to Heaven until His enemies on Earth naturally become facilitators of God’s Zion Kingdom (Psa 110:1-2), -which will then be serviced by the willful and volunteering servants of the Messiah, who would then be on Earth (Psa 110:3), and which later also details that the Messiah will, all during that time, be involved in a Priestly Ministry while at the right hand of God, thus while in Heaven (Psa 110:4-5a), logically involves that the Messiah physically return back to this Earth to have this done, when His enemies would have been made ‘a footstool for His feet’. It is then said is Psa 110:5b-7 that this will all be culminated in a day of wrath and judgement of all of the nations on Earth, and a total dominance of the Messiah over all of the Earth, -all echoing the OT’s Day of the Lord theme and deliverance. All of those themes are found in the many teachings of Jesus in regards to His Second Coming. There therefore is not Biblical contradiction between the Messiah’s mission and what Jesus said it would involve. God can indeed halt and postpone any promise and/or prophecy as He sees fit and later resume its fulfillement, as the conditions on the ground make it necessary. And in such cases, He will reveal those alterations to His servants the prophets (Amos 3:7), and thus surely to His Messiah. Even beyond the prophetic Olivet Discourse of Jesus (Matt 24|Mar 13|Luke 21) which was intended to have a fulfilment before the end of the 1st Century AD, the Christian Bible more detailedly reveals these prophetic altered new plannings of God, for a then protractedly prolonged time, (due to the failures of the 1st century Christian Church in ushering in the Second Coming then), in pointedly the ca. 90+ A.D. book known as “the Revelation of (i.e., from) Jesus Christ” which God had then ‘given to Him in order to in turn reveal to Jesus’ faithful servants on Earth through an angel.’ (Rev 1:1).
            The teaching of a Second Advent by Messiah, and all due to great opposition, (all caused by the rejection of His own people (Zech 13:4-7)), is rooted in OT Messianic prophesying, all anchored by Psa 110.

The Messiah Failed in His Mission - Again God does not force anyone to do His will. He only, even supernaturally empowers anyone who has any genuine interest to pursue His will and His truth. But God will not be doing this supernatural assisting and aiding with anyone who chooses to close their eyes and ears to the truth (e.g., Acts 7:57; = Isa 6:9-10|Matt 13:14-16) which is a telling indication that there is an understanding that what is being said and done has convicting potential. So to claimed that Jesus failed in his mission while not taking into consideration that his Biblical message was spuriously rejected, is similar to claiming that God failed to bring the children of Israel into the promise land because it took over 38 years instead of the less than two weeks that it should have taken. The determining issue here is that the people in the in between time had rebelled against God. So it was the case with Jesus.

Miracles are not a Proof - Indeed miracles/signs alone are not a proof. It is just the very least that God can do for people who do not obey His commands/Law nor have faith in Him. When God called Moses to deliver Israel, it was only because Moses thought that the people would not believe him, that God then gave him a demonstration of possible faith-building, accompanying signs (Exod 4:1-9). As Jesus said, only an evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign (Matt 16:4). People who instead know and trust God’s word instead act solely according to faith in that spoken word. So Jesus’s miracles were only secondary to his teachings, which he said were God’s teachings. So his prophet and messianic claims should be examined in the light of all of what God taught in the already established Word and also all that God had said about the Messiah, including prophecies.
            It is however quite disingenuously duplicitous to hear here the objection that: ‘there is no evidence that Jesus did any miracle’ but not say anything thing of the summarily dismissive sort whenever something that it is believed could be held against Jesus is supposedly found in those very same Gospel accounts. As stated before those self-adverse statements in the Gospels, especially in regards to the disciples where such statements are indeed truly adversarial, such as all of them losing faith in Jesus when he was arrested, or how  they then did not understand much of what he was teaching, is demonstrated evidence in itself that the testimony is trustworthy as being candid and truthful. Even slight actual technical/detail discrepancies between the gospel accounts is also proof that a colluded and deceptive work was not being undertaken here, but a most honest retelling of what they had experienced.
            So this selective “upholding” or dismissing of statements in the Gospel is what is not reliable here. And to use this to make a summary dismissal of all of the miracles of Jesus, (which again/indeed is not the ultimate evidence that he was the Messiah, just something that can strengthen that already established faith due to His Biblical teachings), is similar to the Jews in Jesus day trying to silence the great sign of the resurrection of Lazarus, and resorting to unlawful and forceful tactic to do so, lest of course ‘everyone now surely believe in him.’ (=John 11:45-53)

‘Waiting for a Future, “Real” Messiah’
            Without going into the actually due and thrilling details here, God had in the OT set a most specific time for the advent of one who is to be known by two absolute titles “Messiah, (the) Ruler (=King)” in the incontrovertible 70 Weeks Prophecy, which is summarized here. People familiar with the Jewish language should be able to readily grasp all the accurate translation of that Hebrew passage done there. It is most telling that this prophecy which most Christians variously apply to Jesus as a proof of His Messiahship was not at all mentioned nor duly refuted in this “crash course”. But that is all in keeping with the Jewish Rabbinical tradition of avoiding to discuss, let alone trying to figure out the Messiah’s Advent time stated in that prophecy.
            But as seen in the Biblical and Historical summary of it presented there, that prophecy clearly shows that the life, ministry, events, timing and prophetic claims of Jesus were all the Truth, -the very Messianic Truth of God. And Jesus repeatedly demonstrated that He fully understood, and was acting according to the timing of, that prophecy. Indeed there, the ending of the sacrificial system by the new covenant of the Messiah as well as the destruction of the both the Jewish Temple and Capital City Jerusalem were injunctively prophesied by God to occur. There is no other valid interpretation and application of this prophecy than the one present there, -including, and especially, the popular Futuristic-Dispensationalist scheme. And I indeed am challenging anyone, including Jewish believers to do so.
            In fact, it is interesting that Jewish today believe that the Advent of the Messiah will result in the Temple being rebuilt and great glory for Jerusalem from then on, but the 70 Week prophecy clearly states that the Messiah will be put to death, and the Temple and Jerusalem will consequently be destroyed. So that surely cannot be speaking of a future glory.[7]7 Indeed it has already fully transpire, right at its decreed time, from the fall of 457 B.C. to the fall of 34 A.D., with Jesus acting the pivotal Messianic parts in the first 3.5 years of the final 7 years before being resurrected and taken up to Heaven in an hiatus of His Triumphal Reign, (-for the here prophesied to be killed Messiah (=Isa 53) had to be resurrected if he was to ascend to the right hand of God - Psa 110:1ff).
            God uses fulfilled prophecy to serve as a strong proof of His existence (Isa 41:21-24; 44:7; 46:9-11), and particularly in a context when dealing with claims of false god and/or man’s wisdom/power vs. His own. So in the case of Jesus of Nazareth, if he managed to so accurately and timely fulfill the 70 Week prophecy of God, which involved several unrelated things to have fallen into perfect place, including what would take place in timely complimentary fulfilment when he would no longer be on the scene for the final 3.5 years of that prophecy, it could not have been the cunning act of a man. Indeed even his own disciples were not aware of that fulfilled prophecy right through their death as none of the Gospel accounts explicitly claim any part of it to have been fulfilled by him. So that exact fulfillement could only have been an, indeed, “supernatural” act, either by God’s hand or by Satan’s hand (Deut 13:1-6). But as this is a prophecy of God Himself, the resolving proof is therefore to be found in whether or not the will of God was done not only in that prophecy being fulfilled as stated, but more widely in the rest of the life and actions of that person claiming to this Messianic figure. And this is where the chief theological themes of the Covenant, Sacrificial Death and Temple and City Judgement themes are to be considered as well as whether the good works that Jesus also did were also according to God’s will. And, with OT Messianic passages like Isa 42:21, 53; 58 delineating what the Messiah and His followers were to do, all of these actions by Jesus pass that substantive testing (Isa 8:20). As Jesus relatedly said when He was accused of doing His great miracles by the power of Satan: ‘if Satan is divided against himself then he cannot stand.’ (Matt 12:22-29)
            And the only way that Satan would do good miracles which are inherently against his destructive plans, is to draw a following to his falsehood (See Rev 13:13-18; 16:13-16). So it always come back to testing the actual teachings of a person claiming to be God’s prophet and/or Messiah, here Jesus, with the already established word of God. And there is nothing that Jesus said, taught or did which was in contradiction to what God had said, prophesied and/or done in the OT Scriptures. That is why false claims, including selectively dismissive ones today, have to always be fabricated in order to reject the Truth about Jesus of Nazareth, that He was indeed the Messiah.

Summary From 6-Minute Crash Course Discussion
            So it can be seen that none of the objections brought forth here do not preclude, nor disprove, as claimed, Jesus from being the Messiah of any believing Jewish People as well as any other believing people in the rest of the world, for when all related, wider Theological and Historical things are duly also taken into consideration, Jesus acted in perfect accordance with the Word/Teachings and Prophecies of God all revolving around the New and, form-wise, Different Covenant that God also said that He would establish with His people. (Jer 31:31-34 = Heb 8:7-13ff).
            So 2.3+ billion Christians living today are not wrong in believing the whole testimony of the word of God, including the many fulfilled and still fulfilling NT prophecies of, and from/through, Jesus, which all show that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, and also the Son of the Living God. (Matt 16:13-20).


Analyses and Responses to other “Jews for Judaism” Presentations
            What follows here are, as necessarily succinct as possible, specific and/or general points about the various objections to Jesus being the Messiah of the Jews raised by “Jews for Judaism” Presentations. With these videos are the more protracted presentations of the above discusses 6-Minute Crash Course Summation, some point may be revisited here in more specific details as necessary.

            First, generally stated here, it was indeed constructively welcomed to hear, (and as a first for me personally), people of the Judaism faith make a substantive defense of their belief, pointedly here in regards to why they do not agree with the claim/belief of Christians that Jesus was the Messiah. Now to those raised objecting points/views:

Responses to: #1 - “Battle For the Jewish Soul”

Correction of Some Key “Assuming” Claims/Statements
            As a general statement to this Introductory presentation on this presentation series, I’ll commendingly say that it was indeed most fair to point out the Megablock (ca. 4) and denominational (ca. 30,000) distinctions within Christianity because not all Christians have the same beliefs.[8]8 And while it was indeed personally imperative for the “Jews for Judaism” ministry to meet the pointed challenge of, chiefly Jews for Jesus” missionaries and other similar Christians who have ministries dedicated to try to convert specifically Jews. However the fact remains that there are much better specific and comprehensive arguments in support of Christianity and the Messiahship of Jesus Christ than what these ministries, which typically are of the spurious Futurist-Dispensational doctrinal and prophetic slant. And such understandings will be presented in the responses below. For starters, it may be prejudicingly relieving, even disarming, to know that: “No, the Bible does not teach that present-day ethnic Israel is “holding back the [Second Coming] show”.

The Final Words of Jesus [29:16]
            This claim about the (candid) words of Jesus on the Cross of feeling forsaken by God, were succinctly addressed above, and that mainly for the claim that the Messiah would not say this, which, all prophetic and theological things considered is not at all the “self-impeaching/condemning” evidence that it is being claimed to be. However it is here being (re-)addressed mainly for the claim that this was the ‘very last words of Jesus’. This is not the factual/chronological case.
            It is common and appreciated knowledge in Christianity that the 4 Gospel accounts do not strictly cover the exact same events and teachings in the life of Jesus and also, non-contradictorily, in not the same specific details. So to get the “full story” on any single episode it is important to see if it is covered elsewhere the gospels and do the sequential and detailed harmonization of the accounts.
            I pertinently discuss the final words and action of Jesus in this post’s section, and summarily/succinctly here it therefore can here be simply pointed out from the joint accounts of Matt 27:45-54|Mar 15:33-39|Luke 23:44-48|John 19:28-30, that the order of the last actions of Jesus on the Cross was that:

(1) He made his forsaken cry at the ninth hour (ca. 3 P.M.)
(2) He then said “I thirst’ (John 19:28) and was (now a second time = Luke 23:36) given a vinegar on hyssop, and as this was not a mixture with wine as in a prior time, while on his way to the cross (Matt 27:34), he received that mixture.
(3) Then Matthew, Mark and Luke (a.k.a. the “synoptic Gospels”) all say that Jesus then uttered (“again”) a loud cry (Matt 27:50; Mar 15:37; Luke 23:46) and this was his next to last, here shouting, words on the cross. In itself it was an expression of (renewed) trust that God had not forsaken him, indeed entrusting his spirit/breath of life back to God.
(4) Jesus then next states the “Mission Accomplished”|“‘Touchdown’” statement that it is being claimed in this presentation that he did not make. As John 19:30 in combination with the statement of the Synoptic Gospels say at this point, just prior to bowing his head and breathing his last, Jesus said: “It is Finished”.[9]9 Indicating that He knew that all prophesied things in regards to this probable outcome of the Messiah, if rejected (stated in e.g., Isa 53 & Dan 9:26a-27a) had ‘been accomplished’.
            So Jesus’s actual last two segments of words on the Cross were words of growing renewed confidence that God had actually not personally despising forsaken him, bu that all along prophecy was being, by sin-bearing necessities accomplished. As stated before many pivotal/ major people/prophets in the Bible such as Job, David, Elijah, Jeremiah, had such candid moments of feeling rejected by God but that was not actually the case. The issue of what Theologically happened on the Cross perfectly explains why Jesus had that feeling.

‘Paul Instituted Himself as “an Apostle to the Gentiles”
30:02 - Acts 13:46 is isolative quoted to claim that: ‘it was Paul himself who made himself an apostle to the Gentiles.’ That is a very significant claim because it seems to be an implicit effort to discredit, (as also similarly attempted (and later here discussed) a little later),  the astounding growth of Christianity amongst Gentiles. Well the book of Acts is clear that Paul received his commission to be the Apostle to the Gentiles from Jesus Christ Himself, in a vision which he saw while on the road to Damascus to continue persecuting Jewish Christians. (Acts 9:1-9; cf. 22:3-16; 26:9-18). So it was actually really “gravy” that Paul himself took any time and effort to try to also evangelize the Jews since that was not his specific commission. For pointedly him, it was only out of a love for his fellow countrymen (Rom 9:1-5; 11:13-14), that he ministered to them, and that first, wherever he went in his journeys and they were present. And the ministry to the Gentiles under the light of the Messiah, all in pursuance of the promise made to Abraham (Gen 22:17) was stated in the OT (e.g., Isa 9:1-7). Indeed with the Isa 9:1 mentioned lands of Zebulun and Naphtali being situated around the Sea of Galilee and/or having also the natural Israel border in the Jordan River, and with those territories being, by God’s approval/allowance, the first to be subjugated in the beginnings of the Assyrian invasion of Israel’s northern kingdom (2 Kgs 15:29), and that Messianic (see Isa 9:6-7) passage also saying that Israel will then be expanded beyond the Jordan, into the territory of the Gentiles (Isa 9:1b), then it was being indicated here that God will then be working to overturn the misfortunes of Israel even by then including the Gentiles (Isa 9:2ff). This is all something that was inceptively begun to be involved in the ministry of Jesus when He journeyed in order to begin to minister starting around the historic Northeastern limits of the territory of Israel (Matt 4:12-17; Mar 1:14-15; Luke 4:14, 31), though He himself, knowingly (Matt 15:24), deliberately predominantly (i.e., vs. John 4:1-26) limited his ministry to the Jewish people (cf. Matt 10:5-6). But when the ‘appointed time’ came (Acts 1:6-8; which specifically was the end of the probationary 490 years of Daniel’s 70 Weeks (Dan 9:27a)), Jesus then appeared to Paul and appointed him as the Apostle to the Gentiles.

View on the Supernatural in the NT
            Relatedly here, I’ll address something that I increasingly am seeing seems to be the underlying premise/mindset in these presentations. And that is, succinctly said here, that any Divine interactions in the Gospel and NT are default outrightly ignored. (Hopefully, and I do not think so, this is not out of a “Sadducean/Liberal/Progressive” Theological View (cf. Acts 23:8)) Yet, at the same time, nay statement which seems to be adverse to the Gospels and Christianity is expounded upon as an undeniable truth. That is duplicitous to say the least. It is either that everything in the Gospel accounts and the NT are accepted as being truthful, in the sense of the person did have that supernatural experience, or nothing is to be considered as factual or true. There is really no reason for such biasedly selective dismissiveness because the Bible is clear that the Devil has power to do supernatural things. E.g., when it was said that Samuel appeared to Saul at Endor through a witch (1 Sam 28:8-25), that clearly was not the power of God working since, and not actually Saul, because the Scriptures are clear that the dead defaultly do not know anything nor return to their former lives e.g., (Ecc 9:5-6), but actually because God had proscribed as a Capital abomination, trying to communicate with the dead through a witch. (Lev 19:31; 20:6, 37; Deut 18:11; Isa 8:19-20). And Saul perfectly knew this (1 Sam 28:3). And the key significance of the distinction being made here is because, the Scriptures also show that God has the power to resurrect the Dead. It would indeed be most mind boggling if a belief is held in Judaism that there will not be a resurrection of the righteous dead, because that would mean that only Enoch and Elisha who were taken alive to Heaven, and Moses, as it is manifestly commonly believed was resurrected and also taken to Heaven, from the OT will ever live/(are living) again, and not, e.g., Noah, Job, Abraham, Joshua, Daniel, etc, nor for that matter, any Jew who ever dies. So it should be a clearly understood belief that God can and will raise, at least, the righteous dead. And it would also seem that it is because God knew that the devil had this power to impersonate the dead, that he barred even merely consulting a spiritist/medium. If it was an outright impossibility for the, particularly righteous, dead to ever live again, then he would have just said that any such apparition cannot be seen as true. So it is pointedly to avoid being exposed to the overmastering delusions of Satan that such prohibitions were given.
            All that said to say that the many accounts and statements that ‘God resurrected Jesus from the dead’ cannot be defaultly dismissed, ignored and excised from the NT accounts because the OT shows that God, who originally created life to start with, does have this power and ability to resurrect the dead, and that can also be manifested through a prophet of His as seen with Elijah (1 Kgs 17:17-24) and Elisha (2 Kgs 4:18-37; cf. 13:20-21). In fact, this ability to actually, tangibly/ physically (vs. mere intangible spirit voices and/or apparitions) raise the dead may be the exclusive, trumping evidence that someone is indeed from God (see 1Kgs 17:24), which would explain why it was decided to put Jesus to death after the undeniable, post 4 death days, resurrection of Lazarus. (John 11:39-44, 45-53). Unlike for other instances, that most powerful miraculous ability and demonstration itself just could not be ignored nor dismissed as ‘being by the power of Beelzebul’ (Matt 12:24).
            So as is the instruction in the New Testament (1 Thess 5:19-22), prophetic claims,  and relatedly also supernatural signs should not be defaultly, summarily dismissed, but must be thoroughly tested to see from which spirit they are from. As Isa 8:19-20 similarly states: ‘“if” they do not harmonize with the Law and the Testimonies, “then” there is no light (of dawn) in them. And, as just stated, the ability to physically raise the dead may be something that only God, and the power of God, can ever do.
            So the many statements of Jesus being resurrected, alive in Heaven and appearing in visions to many disciples cannot be selectively ignored, but, as implied in Isa 8:20, must be tested to see if they actually contradict the Law and the Prophets/Testimony. Interestingly enough, the words of Jesus himself from Rev 22:12 are later cited by Skobac as being indeed Jesus himself claiming that ‘He will come soon [actually: “rapidly/quickly” as explained later]’, as ‘proof’ that the Christian belief in a Second Coming is logically erroneous/flawed. But that claim actually duplicitously assumes 4 things: (1&2) that the book of Revelation was being given by Christ, and  that it was Jesus himself saying these words and therefore (3&4) Jesus is both alive and also in Heaven!! Indeed you cannot honestly, selectively make a claim that: “Jesus made this false statement” while also deny as a fundamental premise that Jesus was resurrected and taken to Heaven.
            Indeed the real scrutiny that Jews should be making of Christianity is in a Biblical examination of all that Christianity states and claims, and not a subjectively select portion only. And to be fair, that examination must be made from an initially conceded premise that those claims are, at the very least, relating-wise, truthful and then their actual substantive truth/validity in, for Jews, the light of solely the OT Scriptures can be fairly done. That indeed is the instruction implied in Deut 13:1-6 where someone making a prophetic claim with even accompanying fulfillments and supernatural signs, must be determinatively tested as to whether or not what they actually claim and teach accords with the Word of God, and that is actually because fulfilled prophecy is a proof of prophetic genuine for God (Deut 18:21-22).
            So the claims of an apparition of Jesus to Paul appointing him as the Apostle to the Gentiles cannot be ignored, but must instead be substantively tested to see if it was in harmony with Scriptures then, and if so, as it indeed does, then it must be understood to have a ‘light of dawn in it” and thus from God (Isa 8:20).
            Notwithstanding, I would presumingly, understandingly assume that only adversarial statements are being claimed as true by Skobac here and/or other Jewish expositor, because that would contradictingly discredit/cancel out any other claims that had been made, as in: “See what is being said here, then that shows that what was said before was not true”, however it must first be thoroughly and properly be established that there actually is a contradiction, before these excising dismissals are done. Which lead into the next point below.

‘It was the Devil who was Hardening Israel’ [32:13]
            That claim immediately struck me as false since I knew of the many OT and NT passages, cited later which speak of God being able to do this, and that to even His own people when they are rebellious, and even for effectuating their doom. And then I saw in one of the passages that was being cited in support of that claim, namely 2 Cor 3:3-4, that it does explicitly say that it was the Devil (=’the god  of this age’) was blinding (actually) any unbelievers in the Gospel, and not only unbelieving Jews. To succinctly respond to this claim, as stated above, God can purposefully, and out of just reasons, harden people in unbelief. He himself repeatedly did it with Pharaoh whenever necessary during the 10 plagues (I.e., Plague #6 (Exod 9:12); #8-#10 (Exod 10:20, 27; 11:9-10; 13:15 (Exod 14:4, 8, 17); cf. 4:21), and as revealed in Is a 6:8-13, he commissioned the prophet Isaiah to do this for ‘them’ [=what Christians understand as the 3-person Godhead], all in order to just ensure that the destructive judgements and curses would come upon these rebellious people and they would never come into a position of priorly knowing the Truth, which God would then have to duly take into consideration and even forgive them. So God can himself harden people or have someone else do it for Him. And then, in 2 Kgs 19-28 it is seen that God can also give this hardening mandate to an evil spirit, evidently if this would “naturally” be “best” done through outright, already cherished, lies/falsehoods and deceptions (cf. Isa 45:7). So if 2 Cor 4:4 states that Satan was hardening Israel, then that is not at all outside of the OT documented modus operandi of God. Therefore this cannot be dismissed as false simply based on that fact. And so, in keeping with the blinding mandate given to Isaiah we see Jesus also doing the same thing, by merely speaking his teaching in parables (Matt 13:10-17; John 12:36-41). And as Jesus said, a “darkness” would then befall on those in Israel who were rejecting him (John12:35). And so it is not at all beyond the power of God to indeed allow the devil himself to (also) act in order to blind those who were resisting clear enough light.
            And so it can actually be seen that many different forces were acting to do this hardening. Jesus’ own “veiling” could have produced the ‘veiling-hardening’ of 2 Cor 3:13-15, as the Spiritual aspects of the Law of Moses as, actually plainly taught in Christ’s Gospel (e.g, Matt 5-7) had not been appreciated and heeded (=2 Cor 3:4-11, 16-18), leading to the subsequent shadowing veilings of teachings by Christ (Matt 13:1-3ff which chronologically is really the very first (at least, recorded) outright parable (vs. the explanatory ‘sermonic illustrations” of Matt 5:14-16; 7:24-27; 9:16, 17), -leading to the questioning of the (evidently new) method by his disciples (Matt 13:10ff); -an “underhand” teaching method that actually confused them also right to the very end of Jesus’ ministry (John 16:29-30). God can himself do so as actually stated for Rom 11:7, 25 in Rom 11:8, 21, 32-36. Or, most basically, the natural, free will, spirit of Man (=1 Cor 2:14) can, at the first least, indeed necessarily, begin this hardening process (e.g., Exod 8:15, 32; 9:34-35).[10]10
            And with 2 Cor 3:13-15 actually speaking any unbeliever, we do see that God can give any rebellingly unbelieving people over to influencingly and/or supernaturally searing/sealing power of Satan (Rom 1:24-32; Thess 2:8-12)
            So the New Testament’s Theological/Spiritual understanding that God (as likewise with Gentiles) variously hardened, or allowed to be hardened, the hearts of any unbelieving Jews, -for as recorded several times in the Bible, many Jews, even from the leadership, did believe in Jesus and his Gospel (John 3:1-2; 12:43-44; Acts 2:41, 47; 4:4; 5:14; 6:7), is fully supported by God’s doings in the Old Testament, and thus not a false, but most indicative, understanding. As Paul states God wanted to both enter into judgement with any persisting unbeliever, but also afford them an influencing “jealous” opportunity to repent by the way He would be greatly blessing the growth of Gentile believers. (Rom 10:19; 11:11) and as Paul himself quotes, that too was in fulfilment of the OT as it fulfilled what God had said through Moses He would do to His people in pouring out the stated Covenant-breaking curses on them (Deut 32:20-22), yet all in an fitting underhand effort to extremely save them if at all possible, indeed as done in the Babylonian Captivity to the risk of most people who had been exiled there not actually ever returning to live in Judah (cf. 1 Tim 1:20; 1 Cor 5:5). And in all of this God was actually doing this so that He could fairly have mercy upon the Gentiles (Rom 11:30-32) who had not sin against great light and opportunity as had the unbelieving Jews (John 1:9-11).

Historical claim that “Jews are the (children of) devil” [33:24ff]
            The Historical claim that Jews are literally children of the Devil is indeed most reprehensible and unfortunate for, as “authoritatively” promulgated by Martin Luther it desensitizingly led to German and Protestant anti-semitism, which, not farfetchedly at all, led to the horror of the “Holocaust” in both the Nazi Germany effectuating of it, and the Protestant initial, also anti-semitic fueled, insouciant indifference to reports of such ongoing and increasing atrocities. However, the blame-laying fact is, as usual with Christian aberrations (e.g., the Roman Catholic Crusades and persecutions of “heretics” and unbelievers), it is not at all Jesus himself who taught nor command this. Indeed when supporting-cited passage of John 8:44 is properly, exegetically viewed, it does not at all say that “Jews are literal children of the Devil”, for if that was the literal and general case, then Jesus himself being a Jews, would be this “son of the Devil”. Jesus was hear saying that since they were not doing the works of Abraham, then they could not be spiritual children of Abraham, but instead spiritually children of the devil. (cf. 1 John 3:9-10) Nothing literal involved here. And anyone who likewise is disobedience to the truth and will of God is a spiritual son of the devil, a ‘child of disobedience’ (Eph 2:2; 5:6)
            This spiritual implication here all harks back to, as discussed later, what had been said to Eve in Eden (Gen 3:15), where there would come to be two types of people in the world, those who prefer to hate God and righteousness and those who strive to be obedient and faithful to Him do righteousness, and who God will approvingly aid, resulting in this “enmity” between these two spiritual people groups.

Option 3 - “Jews were right in rejecting Jesus” [35:36]
            As introductorily stated, this forthright claim from Jews/Judaism adherents is really novel to me, as I had actually never heard a Jew make this pointed claim against Christianity. While on one hand it is, at least personally, refreshing to hear that the jews actually have a substantively- (versus: dismissively)-based reason for rejecting Jesus as the Messiah, that claim still needs to be proper substantiated. And again, for that to be judiciously done, as in a court trial procedure and setting, the testimony of both sides must be full heard and not allowing only certain, seemingly favoring or adversary-impeaching testimony from the other side. As an example, a person may be, by even strong evidence, guilty of having killed someone else, but if they claim that the circumstances were a matter of self-defence, then those claims have to first be thorough weighed and factored in before any sound and right decision can be made, either way.
            And so here, the claims of the Divine and the supernatural found throughout the NT in support of the gospel message from Matthew through Revelation, all have to be allowed to testify in any judicious examination of Christianity. And since in this pointed case, of a Jewish examination, it is the OT Scriptures which will be the final determiner of what is valid or not in the NT testimony, then that NT testimony can only be lawfully “thrown out” if it is found to be in complete and irreconcilable contradiction with that OT benchmark. Jesus himself, as well as the rest of OT quoting NT writers, fully accepted this type of OT-based and dependent scrutiny (e.g, John 5:39; Luke 24:27, 44)

“Gentile converts were easier to convert” [36:07]
            Apparently a rationale was being sought to also explain why there are now 2.3+ billion people who believe in Jesus as compared to the quite slow growth rate of Judaism, claiming that it was easier to convince, even ‘dupe’ people who had been living pagan lives than to do so with people (i.e., Jews) who actually knew the OT Scriptures. Well for starters, I do not see that Gentiles pointedly converted to Christianity on merely, if not, actually, the claim that the Jesus was the promised Jewish Messiah, because they could easily reject that claim by saying: “who cares!! What is that to us non-Jews?? Instead it was the teaching that Jesus was actually God-incarnate, and the Saviour from sin for the entire world. Both of these concepts the Jews did not at all accept although this is actually found in OT Messianic specifications. So proving this from the Scriptures, as Jesus and his Apostles would do, (and we do not have a record/transcript of all that they, especially “Rabbi Paul”, taught about this from the OT), to especially Gentiles was actually harder for them as they were not even aware of the OT accounts, prophecies and teachings as Jews were, and also did not have any other incentive, other than basic faith in trusting that what they were being said and thought was correct. That considered, it therefore becomes clear to me that it was the claim of Jesus’ resurrection, that no one (i.e., the unbelieving Jews) could convincingly, pointedly refute and deny (cf. Acts 23:6; 26:8 - i.e, they just generally argued that the concept itself was not possible, contrary to Scripture), which was that faith rooting and fostering catalyst. Therefore, of all things, the Christian evangelizing message to Gentiles was crowningly founded on the fact that Jesus had been raised by God from the dead. (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-10; as it was for the Jews (Acts 2:29-36ff)), and that in itself was actually an (OT-attested) possibility that was completely foreign to them Gentiles (Acts 17:18).
            Now in terms of the physical implications of an “easiness” claim, the simple amply-documented OT fact that shows that pagans and paganism were repeatedly quite successful in convincing God’s own people to live as debased as them, despite the Jews having seen and experience the glory and power of their God (e.g., the Golden Calf debacle just days after the Exodus and Red Sea miracle, is proof that it goes way beyond a matter of head/“Bible” knowledge. Even the most wise Solomon allowed himself to sink into paganism. So the greatest achievement is in seeing pagans abandon, not merely their idols, but their entire way of debauched and sinful living to instead choose to live according to the pure and righteous ways of a God that they could not see. And keep in mind that they Gentile Christians did so without any of the tangible object-lesson provisions found in the Jewish Religious Economy (i.e., a Temple visibly inhabited by God, and its Sanctuary Services). Indeed these Gentiles endeavored to live righteously simply by faith without the sanctifying works prescribe in the Law of Moses. And as seen throughout the NT, even throughout Church History to our day, these Gentiles still had to wage great battles against the pull of their flesh, indeed even Paul himself (Rom 7:21-25)
            So with Christians and Gentiles being, moreover, sent by Jesus into the heart of the evil world to spread His Gospel message (e.g, John 17:15-17; cf. Matt 10:16 which accurately says: “unmixed as doves”), which is all something that Jewish Christians were greatly leery of doing (cf. Acts 10:9-16ff), it most definitely was much harder for Gentiles to convert to the Gospel than for, pointedly First Century Jews, who did not have to make those same wholesale sinful changes to their life. And all theological things considered, by the New Covenant message authoritatively, supercedingly abolishing the Laws of Moses which involved sanctuary and ceremonial ordinances (=Heb 8:6-9:5ff;  Eph 2:13-16; Acts 15:28-29; cf. Exod 24:3; Neh 1:7), in favor of the Spirit of those Laws instead (2 Cor 3:4-17; Col 2:16-17), here fulfilled in the superceding Messiah (Mal 3:1-4ff; Isa 42:21), the argument that it was therefore easy for Gentiles to abandon “bug worship” (evidently an allusion to Rom 1:22-25, which actually generally speaks of pagans from the beginning of the world), it was, in mere forms, equivalently “easy” for Jews to accept that they no longer had to do their prior complex sanctuary service which required the bloody sacrificing and burning of various animals. And it can be argued that by the first century A.D. the pagan worship of Gentiles had “evolved” to not actually worship living animals and bugs, as variously did pagans before that, but now either grandiose/grandized and ornately elaborate, representations of them and/or as done by the more civil and intellectual Greeks and especially the Romans, actual human-figure gods, to the point where it was later believed with the Romans that their Emperors were, even while alive, actually gods. So it actually was not easier for these Greek-cultured and Greek-speaking and/or Roman socially indoctrinated/accustomed types people, (which were the principally-evangelized groups of Gentiles and converts in the first century A.D. (cf. Rom 1:16; 2:10) before the Gospel then began to make inroads with the lower civilized class of “barbarians” (cf. 1 Cor 14:11; Col 3:11), and which actually only was successful much later in Church History after the Roman Empire fell in 476 A.D.), to abandon their entire life and live entirely by faith in both God the Father and in Jesus Christ (cf. 2 Cor 5:1-10ff).
            Indeed the vast majority of Gentiles summarily rejected the entire Gospel claims as “foolishness”, pointedly in regards to a crucified/dying God (1 Cor 1:18-25) and/or of a resurrection from the dead (Acts 17:32a). And unlike the Gentiles, the Jews knew as a fact that God could resurrect the dead and also that Jesus Himself did. So nothing less/other than faith produced the great numbers of believers from amongst the Gentiles. (1 Cor 1:17, 26-31).

‘Jews Psychologically Trouble Christians’ [36:34-40:27]
            While in some circles this argument here of psychological guilt and fears of the Jews actually being right in rejecting Jesus leading to the motivation for Evangelism with some Christians, I actually don’t see this as applicable here. I fact I’ll say this would only be applicable for people who do not properly know their Bible, as it is the case of especially Christians who are of the Futurist-Dispensational view. That is all from the fact that in my own Christians experience, with it being (in regards to a commonly known faith) of a Seventh-day Adventist background (see here for my present, advanced, Biblical Beliefs and Faith), in understanding such key Biblical Christian teachings as the superceding Heavenly Sanctuary and Jesus Christ Priestly Ministry therein, the Continuation of the Ten Commandments and the Seventh-day Sabbath, the Spirit of Prophecy, God’s New, Spiritual Israel, etc., I, factually-stated, have never had any such psychological guilt or jealousy towards Jewish people or Judaism, but, frankly, rather a head-shaking disappointment of a wasted knowledge, favor and opportunity, and strictly in the sense that all of these key Christian teachings are rooted in the OT Scriptures which Jews can easily understand, and that, assumingly right from its original language there.
            So while that rationale may indeed accurately psycho-analyse and explain the motivation of, e.g., Jews for Jesus missionaries, I don’t see it as being even motivational for me. To be quite honest and frank, and only to dispel the generalized notion here, I actually find it a costly waste of time and effort to expend such resources on try to evangelize Jewish people, and pointedly because I had always assumed that “they knew better”. But since a comparatively valid, substantive case for objecting to Christianity was being made here by the Jews for Judaism ministry, I say it as worthwhile to address those much more thoughtfully, even outrightly tangible, advanced counter-points and claims. So it, as it actually is for many others, not out of a sense of (historical) guilt/shame, “phobia” and/or jealousy, but merely out of Christian duty, a love for especially the sincere and foremost, at least implicitly, a “fear” of God and His mandate (cf. 2 Cor 5:11).
            Having said this, I would (indeed) consider the Futuristic-Dispensational personal prophetic incentives as the actual main reason why they are variously, even exclusively/predominantly ministering to Jewish people.

Christianity vs. Judaism Growth [40:29-41:45]
            This realistically candid point particularly struck me for the following added issue:
Why has Judaism not even come close to flourish and quasi-exponentially growing as Christianity, -a religion based pointedly on the teaching that ‘God died but was resurrected’, as compared to Judaism which, per se, as 4 times more “material” (=OT) to present as demonstrable proof for their faith than Christianity (for unlike Jews, Christians actually believe in the OT). And do factoring fatal persecutions [cf. 43:09ff], for Christians were persecutively put to death much more than Jews, starting with, actually Jewish and/or Jewish-incited persecutions, the Romans, -who persecuted Christians for much more “terrifying” lies (of cannibalism, blood drinking, religio-political (vs. merely “socio-economic”) disdain, dissidence and subversiveness, and active proselytizing/insurrecting, etc.) than what was claimed by the Nazis against the Jews. Not to mention the hundreds of millions of faithful (‘protesting’) Christians which were put to death by the Roman Catholic Church/Power (a type of bloody civil warring that Judaism actually never experienced). Did the death of Jews in History and during WWII cause Judaism to grow even more as it did for Christianity. Clearly No. So the pivotal question is why?? To me it is only a spiritual and super-natural thing (spiritually fulfilling Jer 31:27-28 in God’s New Israel), going even beyond the fact that “Jesus had said this would happen” because that is certainly not a hard-to-fulfill prophesying, even quite low-balling at that, and could be claimed to be a recognition of weakness and defeat. Rather I see that the proof of all of this is rooted in faith, and a faith which is bolstered by a most convincing “substance” of verified Truthfulness, unsurpassed Wisdom and Known Potent Power despite any adverse appearances, indeed as it was for OT faithfuls and blazed the way to God’s New Covenant fulfilment (Heb 11-12:2ff).

Christianity’s “creepiness” [55:20]
Given the also Historical fact of ‘blood flowing like rivers’ during, e.g., annual Passover in Jerusalem with those sacrifices then being wholly consumed by fire on altars, I do not see that a claim can be made that ‘Jews find Christianity and its emblems of [blood-less] Crucifixes and “Blood of the Lord/Lamb” songs, “creepy or gory. The converse in regards to Judaism is actually the tangible case. Christians commemorate a once and for all death, while Judaism, if their Tent/Sanctuary/Temple services had not been outrightly (unjustifiedly) abrogated, would annually be physically still be causing all of this bloodshed and burnings


New Testament “creepiness” [59:48]
            To do an actually pertinent pun and play on words here, the New Testament, which  means New Covenant, cannot be logically seen as “creepy” by Jews since it actually did not “creep” upon them but had been announced ‘in broad daily’ indeed by God in Jer 31:31-34, thus as Christians understand, ca. 600 years (cf. Dan 9:27a) before it came to pass. (Matt 26:26|Mar 14:24|Luke 22:20; (=Jer 31:34b) 1 Cor 11:25; Heb 8:7-13)

Responses to: #2 - “THE REAL MESSIAH & Why Jesus Doesn't Qualify! Part 1”

The Messiah in the OT [01:47ff]
            First of all, it must be honestly said that the opening premise which tries to discredit the Christian claim/belief that the Old Testament Scriptures (OT) speaks of a Messiah, with the argument that: ‘there is no place in the OT where the phrase “the Messiah” occurs, was somewhat of a red-herring/gas-lighting argument since “we” end up coming to the same conclusion that they Bible does speak of a specific figure which is to be the Messiah. So the real issue is indeed in figuring out exactly which OT Scripture make mention of this theme.
            The Venn diagramming that was used was illustrative helpful. I would agree with the A (=general Messianic passages) and B (specific/detailed Messianic statements) grouping representation, and do understand the C (Christian Messianicly-claimed passages) group distinction, but here is what I mindboggingly do not get. In all of this discussion about there not being a pointed statement of “the Messiah” what about, as already stated earlier, the mentions of both “Messiah” and “Ruler/King” in the Seventy Week prophecy. Indeed the mentions there trump all of the arguments along the lines of ‘non-specivity’ made in that presentation for there are two absolute mentions (i.e., no article or suffix involved) of that word, thus making it a proper name and/or formal/technical title. And with the similar absolute rendering of the word nagid, a mention is being clearly made here to that expected great Davidic King which is spoken in those cited B-type group passages (e.g., Ezek 34:23-24; 37:24-25; Hos 3:5; Isa 11:1ff).[11]11 And here also is the, almost literal, “missing link” and “holy grail” [and whatever the equivalent Jewish term would be here], that was said to be missing in the OT Scriptures: An explicit prophetic passage, and timed no less, which moreover specifically details what the Messiah would do and what would occur in His life/ministry and following His coming. And which also clearly ties the themes of the Messiah being the expected (Davidic) Ruler of God’s people. Indeed the amount of detail packed into the 4 verses of the 70 Week prophecy is simply amazing. (See a summary of it here).
            So, if nothing else could be found in the OT about the Messiah, Dan 9:24-27 would be, and indeed is, much more than abundantly sufficient. As many have recognized through proper study, that passage is the “cornerstone” of the theme of the OT-spoken of Messiah.
            For me, the complete non-mention nor discussion of that passage by “Rabbi” [i.e., Matt 23:8] Michael Skobac here in his presentation, can only be in a revered deference to the Rabbinic Talmudic ban to delve into this prophecy. But here would be validated the running admonition of Jesus that Rabbinical Oral Traditional Commenting, as documented/codified in the Talmud, are (literally) making “void”/obliterating the word of God (=the OT Scriptures). (E.g., Matt 15:1-6). Indeed such was the crux of the opposition and rejection of Jesus. Tradition is not inherently evil, but it absolutely must first be proven to be in harmony with the canonical word of God. No where in the OT does God say not to study, mention or try to understand Dan 9:24-27.
            So the OT does have a specific mention of the Messiah, the expected Great Davidic Ruler of God’s Israel.

“Supposed” Christian Belief in the Messiah’ [01:08:29-01:11:56]
            It is interesting to claim that the OT does not require people to “believe in the Messiah”, while Christians do so for Jesus (Acts 16:31; John 20:31; Rom 10:9; Gal 2:16; 1 Thess 4:14; 1 John 3:23; cf. Rom 3:22), but that is an understanding that is inherently, implicitly undivorceable with the Messiah. The chief example in the OT which presents this for the Messiah is Moses statement in Deut 18:15-19. There it is said that ‘one day in the future’ God will raise up a prophet (i.e., Divine spokesperson) like unto himself so that He could communicate further (legal) things of God as God had done through Moses at the request of the people (Exod 20:18-21). (And it may very well be at that point that the office of prophet was instituted by God, instead of God Himself directly talking to all of His people.) The notable thing here is that by then Joshua, the son of Nun had long been chosen and publicly designated by God to be the replacement of Moses (See Num 27:18-23; Deut 1:38). So in this chronologically later statement in Deut 18:15-19, Moses was not at all referring to Joshua, but to none other than the one which the rest of the Bible reveals is the Messiah figure. That is why, as seen in the NT accounts this person came to be known, and expected as, and in a Messianic context: “That/The Prophet” (e.g., John 1:21, 25). Yet here, Moses does clearly say that obedience to that prophet and his words will have to be an option that is exercised, at the pain of punishment for the disobedience. The intrinsic fact it that if someone does not obey something it is because they to some degree to not “believe it or in it”. If I see a sign which says press this button to open a (mechanical) door and I do not but instead try to push the door open, which does not open it, it is because I did not “believe” in the instruction given on the sign. I had thought I knew better how to open the door (e.g., I thought it could be manually bypassed.). So similarly, as Jesus himself taught in e.g., Matt 7:21-23|Luke 6:46-49 (cf. James 2:1), any profession of belief which does not also involve obedience, is not actually a belief. So the OT in the Messianic statement of Deut 18:15-18 did indeed inherently speak of this requirement of obedience to that Prophet whom God would raise up.
            And there is no record of God given instruction to Joshua as He had with Moses on Sinai, which came to be known as the Law of Moses. Yet the very first public sermon of Jesus included a protracted elaboration upon the Law of God/Moses, pointedly emphasizing its spiritual and honorary aspects, commonly known as “the Sermon on the Mount  (Matt 5:17-20ff = Isa 42:21). Therein would be those expected legal instruction from God through a Messianic Prophetic figure that Moses, evidently through prophetic understanding, spoke about. (See Acts 3:22; 7:37) Indeed no other prophetic figure in the OT, and also not even John the Baptist, the first NT prophet, even dared make sure “new” and elaborating statements on the Law of God/Moses. But if Jesus is the Messiah, and thus that Prophet, it would be perfectly proper to hear Him making such teachings as God had revealed to Him (cf. e.g,. John 7:14-18; 8:38a).
            So the only way that the Messianic Prophet was actually going to be heeded, incontrovertibly is if people believed in. And it is evident that Moses stressed this because God had apparently also revealed to him, as he related, that this grand “Moses-like” prophetic figure, was going to be, by God’s purposeful ordaining, “naturally”, thus imperceptibly, raised up from among them, as Moses was. (=Isa 53:1-2ff - and there too “belief” is the pivotal key (see John 12:37-38)). The OT Testimony actually teaches that the coming of the “that Prophet/God’s Servant” will be quite subtle, which is why the Bible says that He would be rejected. (E.g,. Isa 53:3ff; Dan 9:26-27)
            It is also quite likely that along with this evident prophetic revelation given to Moses about ‘a coming Prophetic Leader who would be given legal/spiritual instruction (indeed not just physically leading Israel, as Joshua would do soon), that Moses was also given an indication of what that message would entail. (=PP 330.2) He may have also been instructed by God not to communicate those elements for the later covenant as His people had to necessarily first be educated in and operate under that First Covenant (cf. Gal 3:24-25) until the proper time would come for that already planned “New Covenant”. And with that message being the New Covenant that God would later make with Israel (Jer 31:31-34), Moses was probably given a good idea of what that New Covenant message would be about, and seeing that it would involve much more faith than works of the Law, he saw how imperative it would be for the people then to carefully hear and heed what that Prophet would be saying.

Randomly Selected Messianic (C-Group) Prophecies [01:11:57-01:16:20]
            Admittedly, surfacely speaking, the three claimed “messianic passages” that were “randomly” chosen here from a Christian Bible’s Study on the Messiah, are not explicitly clear that the refer to the Messiah, but to be fair, being accustomed to such Christian studies, this is more “reveresed-engineeredly” done out of an already, and really independently- (i.e., from the available other clearer testimony, which includes the Gospel and NT account as a whole), -established belief that: (a) Jesus is the Messiah and (b) those Gospel accounts are true. So while they may not be the best objective proofing of the Messiah and of the fulfillment by Jesus of Nazareth, the are nonetheless valid/good secondary/supporting/corroborating evidence. So brief answers which show this, albeit, not outright, validity is:

Gen 3:14-15 - This speaks of a literal, and also spiritual, descendant of Eve, through which the Devil would be defeated, for when a serpent’s head gets crush, that kills the serpent, and that is indeed the best way to immediately kill off a serpent. But that victory would not come without a tangible affectation to that descendant. (See John 12:31-34) So in the line of Eve, we are expected to spiritually find people who will align themselves with the righteous side or the wicked side. And that is not necessarily between Seth and Abel, as commonly assumed, as e.g., Noah was in the line of righteous Seth (Gen 5:4ff, 30), but his own son Ham and grandson Canaan acted perversely and reprehensibly and Canaan’s line was unrevokedly accursed. (Gen 9:24-27). So that was going to be a spiritual enmity, applicable to any line of children of Adam and Eve, which prominently turned out to be Seth, and its instilling clearly depended on whomever wanted to receive this “spirit” of God. And in a emblematic way, the expected OT figure would who once and for all effectuate this end of Satan and the reign of his unrighteous seed is the Messiah. So that passage is thus understood to be Messianic, so Christians therefore most prominently see that Jesus fulfilled it.

Psa 118:22 - Through Spiritual inspiration, it is seen that if/since the notion of a stone is given tangible, Divine-like attributes and qualifications in other passages like Isa 8:14-15; 28:16 indeed representative of a testing, sifting and judgement work that God will tangibly do amongst His people (=Amos 7:7-9), then in that comprehensive spiritual context it is rightly acceptable that Jesus (Matt 21:42), NT people (e.g., Acts 4:11; 1 Pet 2:7; cf. Eph 2:20) and Christians today, who believe that those NT People made those associations under Divine Inspiration, find a similar depiction in ‘what God also will similarly did in righteousness and justice’ in Psa 118:19-23, all fulfilled in the type of work that the Messiah would do, and most pertinently enough, for a work of building up a new spiritual/priestly house/temple for God (=Psa 118:3ff; Matt 16:18; cf. Isa 8:14 ). So again/also here, a wider, comprehensive context bears this passage out as indeed having messianic overtones and implications.

Exod 12:46 - From a settled, Christian, New Covenant perspective, this is probably the easiest passage to explain, as it is understood from Isa 53 that the ‘imperceptibly raised up’ Messiah would also be a Lamb-like, sin and guilt bearing, Suffering Servant (=Deut 18:15ff; Isa 53:7-9ff; Dan 9:26-27) which would save His people (Isa 53:11). So Christian Belief and Theology has from the start seen that Jesus was the antitypical Lamb Sin offering of the Mosaic system, and therefore do see Jesus as that Passover Lamb (see e.g., John 1:29, 36; 1 Cor 5:7; 1 Pet 1:19).
            And so when Jesus’ own bones were not broken during his crucifixion since he was long dead by the time the Roman came to do that death-accelerating measure, John understood that this was a fulfilment of Scripture (John 19:31-36 = Psa 34:20), as indeed stated in the Law about the Passover Lamb. (Exod 12:46; Num 9:12). In fact with Psa 34:15-22 generically involving all themes and emotions that Jesus experienced on the Cross, it all responds to Christ’s genuine and candid concern of, though knowing himself to be righteous (see John 8:29; 14:30), yet then actually feeling forsaken/condemned. (Matt 27:46).


Genealogical Claims and Arguments [01:16:35-01:29:11]
            Right off the bat it is interesting to note in the light of the air of the genealogical arguments being made in the presentation against Christ that, if the Gospels had stated that he was naturally born from Joseph, who was in the line of King David, and even through David’s son Solomon (2 Sam 7:12-16) then there would not be any effort to discredit Jesus’ right to the throne of David. Furthermore, if it is claimed that the Jeconiah curse (Jer 22:30) ‘is an incontrovertible problem’, then there can any longer ever be a Messiah, even according to Jewish expectations today. So, as discussed below, as that curse was evidently revoked by God Himself, then that argument is not at all applicable, let alone sustainable.
            As discussed earlier about Psa 110:1, it is seen that the Messiah’s birth would have to be super-natural, as opposed to natural, as He would have to be both an ancestor and a descendant of David. It is also seen from Isa 9:2-7 that this “ancestral, eternal Father” would also be Divine. And so, succinctly said here the candid gospel accounts which speak of the Messiah being born of the Divine and of Mary (Matt 1:20-23) is in perfect harmony with such prophetic requirements.
            And it is interesting to see from Isa 9:7, that God will choose to do this in that “mixed way” out of “zeal”, i.e., a relative “indifferent” desire to get that Messianic fulfilment done where He does not mind bypassing natural birth/human laws to achieve that end. (cf. John 3:16-17) So, and pointedly in order to achieve His mission, the Messiah is to be expected to be given from birth a Divine nature. This all agrees with the Gospel accounts documenting of Jesus’ understandings and the NT’s (Christian) Theology that Jesus was not merely human, but also Divine. (e.g., Luke 1:35; Matt 16:16-17; Gal 4:4; Phil 2:5-11|Heb 1:6ff).
Christians and Jeconiah’s (possible) OT Repentance
-It was said that Christians cannot accept the Talmudic Traditional statement that Jeconiah had repented and God had forgiven him, which reverse his Regnal curse because (a) Christians don’t “believe” in the Talmud, and (b) Christians don’t believe that repentance/forgiveness is possible outside of Jesus Christ, thus not in the OT. But these claims are inherently, at least, effective, straw men claims.
            First of all, there is not necessarily a need to “believe” in the Talmud to accept as true something that it may claim. Whatever it “traditionally” claims can be accepted as true if it does not factually and/or spiritually contradict the Canonical word of God. I see the same principle is applied by Christians to, e.g., the, especially OT-covering “Antiquities” writings of Josephus (and even the Apocrypha for many). If/when something conflicts with the Bible, or proven history for that matter, then it, most logically is to be rejected as untrue or inaccurate. So, since the Bible actually says in Haggai 2:20-23 that “God had “chosen” a regnal descendant of Jeconiah to be ruler in Judah, and that in Messianic terms, then the statement in the Talmud of God having forgiven Jeconiah is not impossible to be true.
            Also, Christians do believe that repentance and forgiveness was possible and indeed done throughout the OT. There are indeed several explicit instances of this being done by God as seen with David and King Manasseh, and also not even in a context of them (first) offering a lamb then for this forgiveness. Indeed Christians believe that the OT sacrificial system was instituted as an object lesson for this process of repentance and, pointedly forgiveness, yet the OT Scriptures is also clear that many people (first) merely verbally expressed confession and repentance of their sins to God and God heard them and granted them this forgiveness and without any explicit mention of them offering the lawfully sacrifices. That type of heart-to-heart, faith-based dealing with sin had always been God’s ideal and that is why he longed to be able to implement that in a New Covenant once the due, anti-typical penalty for sin had been paid...by the Messiah (Dan 9:26-27; Isa 53).

Matthew's Genealogical Record Imperfections (For the following discussions, see the Genealogy Table in this Endnote[12]12)
            Though Matthew’s genealogy is not complete, indeed well short of Luke’s, it can be logically attributed to Matthew not having all of the needed genealogical information at hand, so he does skip some ancestors, as, oddly enough, given the fact that it could be found in the OT Scriptures themselves, seen in Matt 1:8 with the 3-4 successive monarchs of Judah who reigned from ca. 841-767 B.C. between Joram/Jehoram and Uzziah/Azariah, (namely: Ahaziah; [Queen Athaliah]; Joash/Jehoash, and Amaziah) (1 Chr 3:11-12; 2 Kgs 11:1-3, 20-21), but those genealogical lacunas do not at all break the ancestral line.

Levirate Marriages and Jesus’ Actual Line
            The lawful allowance of having male offspring through levirate marriages also resolves many of the related father-son issues found in Luke’s genealogy. Which all leads to the following key/point in the light of all that has been said thus far in addressing the genealogical issues of Jesus.
            As far as I could logically and genealogically reckon it, it seems to me to be an absolute impossibility for the genealogies of Matthew and Luke, which had earlierly diverged at the immediate sons of David, namely Nathan for Luke, and Solomon for Matthew, to ever again cross paths at a (common) descendant down the line as it does with Shealtiel, and then also Zerubbabel (Mat 1:12 & [in reverse ordering] Luke 3:27b) since that would “naturally” (i.e., but for by a male-female marriage), abominably, involve two males from those two lineages, namely Neri and Jeconiah, getting married and then impossibly having a child, Shealtiel, and then even more illogical, that Shealtiel then having a son by himself, namely Zerubbabel. Clearly, at least to my reckoning here, something is completely wrong here. However this begins to be resolved by allowing for the Num 27:1-11 & 36:1-9 lawful possibility that Neri, in Luke’s genealogy (Luke 3:27a), did not have any sons, but only, at least one, daughter and she married Jeconiah, (which evidently was in addition to other wives he had (2 Kgs 24:15)), and they had a son named Shealtiel. Then, as many commentators similarly lawfully (i.e., Deut 25:5-6ff) posit starting here, Shealtiel died (while living in Babylon), after he was married but before he had any sons, (or possibly, any children at all), and so his brother Pedaiah, (who would have an, albeit magnanimous, incentive to prolong that specific Davidic royal line (as his own line could be validly, substitutionarily apply being also the son of Jeconiah)), married his brother’s widow and had a son with her whom they named Zerubbabel, which means: “offspring of Babylon”, to reflect the fact that Zerubbabel was born in Babylon.[13]13
            That understanding would then satisfactorily explain why in some places Zerubbabel is said to be “the son of Shealtiel” (e.g., Hag 1:1; Ezra 3:2; Neh 12:1), but with 1 Chr 3:19 clearly stating that his father was Pedaiah. He therefore would have been Pedaiah’s natural son/descendant, but through that levirate marriage, (also) Shealtiel’s legal son/descendant. And it would seem that by Law, the legal father’s recognition was to officially take precedence over the natural father’s, and so that is why the name Shealtiel appears in both Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogies as the father of Zerubbabel. “Naturally” Pedaiah’s name should appear there. So by God’s injunctive provision in the Mosaic Law, the ancestral line of Jesus in Luke’s genealogy was not broken by the fact that Neri did not have a son.[14]14
            Now that “crossing/common descendant” issue is indeed lawfully, satisfactorily resolved here, but then that leads to the puzzling question as to why the two genealogies are not, from then on, the same, as they should be. The answer here is seen that, just as the genealogies had priorly diverged at David’s sons, it seem here that Luke’s reckoning went through Zerubbabel’s son Rhesa (Luke 3:27), but Matthew’s reckoning went through Zerubbabel’s other son Abiud (or Abihud). While that is likely since from Zerubbabel, or at least Jeconiah, it was not sure who was officially a king of Judah as the Jewish monarchy was never permitted to be reinstated after the Babylonian exile by overruling world powers of Medo-Persia, Greece or Rome. So it literally was ‘anybodys guess’. And apparently Luke went with Rhesa, while Matthew went with Abiud. However since in the Bible, the two sons of Zerubbabel are to be Meshullam and Hananiah (1 Chr 3:19), the problem then becomes who were either Rhesa or Abiud who are said to be, by Matthew and Luke, Zerubbabel’s sons?? The most likely answer here is that, as it was the case with Daniel and his 3 companions being given local names while in exile, and working in Nebuchadnezzar’s court (Dan 1:7; cf. Esther (Est 2:7)), that either had been the similar case with Zerubbabel’s sons, as the Apocrypha (e.g., 1 Esdras 4:13) claims that he similarly worked in the (Medo-Persian) King’s court as a body guard, or it could be that Zerubbabel had himself names his sons with the foreign names of Rhesa and Abiud, but then later, or even simultaneously had given them the Hebrew names of Meshullam and Hananiah (similar to Daniel’s friend (Dan 1:6).[15]15, [16]16. The book 1 Chronicles would therefore prefer to give the Hebrew names of those two sons.
            So then Matthew and Luke would have divergingly followed the descendant line of either one of those two sons. So this understanding here would eventually come to mean that both Matthew and Luke had literally been tracing the genealogy of Joseph himself and not, as commonly believed, Luke instead tracing Jesus’ genealogy through Mary. So when Luke had said in Luke 3:23 “(as was supposed) Joseph” he literally meant Joseph and not, as nonetheless also possible to avoid naming women as the main part of a genealogical reckoning, ‘Mary’s husband.’
            So that resolution would more widely show that Jesus actually had regnal bloodline rights in Luke genealogy, due to the common point in the genealogies at, interestingly enough, Zerubbabel, who God had made Messianic Regnal promises to (Hag 2:2-23). But then Luke saw it as more natural, especially for his Gentile reader Theophilus (Luke 1:1-3), to continue pursuing Jesus’s ancestry through the line of Shealtiel’s mother, the daughter of the sonless Neri, which to him back to David through Nathan’s line, but Matthew saw it as more rightful to make the jump here over to the Shealtiel father, Jeconiah, which then took him back to David, through Solomon and the then definite and existing Royal line. So both genealogies are of Joseph, and through the common point around Zerubbabel, lawfully both lead back to David. It then would not be genealogically explicit in Gospel accounts that Jesus had a physical human line in David and the Tribe of Judah as would be provided if Luke’s genealogy was that of Mary’s, although that is stated elsewhere throughout the NT (Luke 1:32; Rom 1:3; cf. Acts 2:30; 13:23; 2 Tim 2:8), but it can at the very least be believed that Mary, his birthing mother was a Jew.
            And with Matthew genealogy missing several names/generations after Zerubbabel, as compared to Luke, it may be that the records he depended on were incomplete and even inaccurate and so Luke’s genealogy would be the correct one, from Zerrubbabel to Joseph. If not, then, as with the circumstances which had produced the common/crossing descendant at Shealtiel, Joseph’s father Heli had no sons, and one of his daughters levirately married someone in the Matthew genealogy, possibly Jacob (or of course vice-versa in terms of who was childless), and that levirate-union-birthed Joseph.

Grand Genealogical Resolution
            However, and as a, grand resolution here is that, given the crossing/common ancestors here, the most accurate genealogy of Jesus back to at least David would be a composite one of Matthew and Luke. I.e., one which, reckoning backwards, follows Luke’s from Joseph to Zerubbabel and then Shealtiel; and then Matthew’s from Shealtiel to Solomon and then David.  (Thus Luke 3:23-27; and Matthew 1:6-12).


The (Literal) Coming of Elijah [01:29:12-01:37:15]
            Much is (objectively understandably) made by the fact that John “the Baptist” (who indeed should instead be called: “the Baptizer”) had said, among other expectations denials (=Deut 18:15-19), that ‘he was not Elijah’ (John 1:19-25), yet Jesus had said in Matt 11:14 that: ‘if one is willing to accept it, that John was Elijah who was to come (before the great and dreadful “day” of the Lord)’ (Mal 4:5). From simply the qualifying statement of Jesus “if you are willing to accept it...” punctuated by “He who has an ear, let him hear” (Matt 11:15), it is obvious that Jesus did not believe that John was a reincarnation of Elijah. He was rather expressing a subjectively viewed understanding, thus seeing that ‘the coming of Elijah’ would not be literal but spiritual/symbolic, thus as a call to repentance message and preparatory/reformation ministry, as Elijah’s was. And for Jesus, this was evidently all based on the statement from God through the angel Gabriel in Luke 1:17 which had qualified the Mal 4:5 prophecy as something that was to be fulfilled in John in merely the “spirit and power of Elijah.” So for the Christian, as involved with Christ’s belief here, the word from God in Luke 1:17 through Gabriel is what makes it acceptable for them that Elijah would be sent as merely a spiritual thematically-emulating message and ministry. (Cf. this post).
            And even after it is related that Jesus had met with the literal Elijah (Matt 17:2-3ff), he continued to maintain that Spiritual belief (Matt 17:9-13), but manifestly, by first also adding: “Elijah is come and will restore all things” [and if not: ‘the land will be struck with a curse’ (=Mal 4:6; Deut 30:17-18; cf. 18:19], Jesus was applying that spiritually qualified Elijah-prophecy to also himself.
            But of course Jewish people do not accept any of these revelations as true and/or from God, and so here is my point: they actually do not believe that if God says something literally as in: ‘David His servant will be made King in the Messianic Age’ (Ezek 34:23-24; 37:24-25; Hos 3:5), that it precludes any spiritual fulfillement. E.g., that it will literally be David who will be king then. [Though, if not, since Jews do not believe in a “resetting time” as the Christian Second Coming belief, when it is said that God(/Jesus) will resurrect all the righteous dead, (the topic of a resurrection is manifestly still a touchy, dissentious “unresolved” issue in Judaism (cf. Acts 23:6-8)), that would imply that David is dead forever]. But since God had demonstrated in the OT Scriptures that He could raise the dead, and for Jews, according to merely Jewish tradition, had raised up Moses (presumably several days after he had died), then God could actually raise up David and literally make him that Messianic king. But the reason why Jews do not have such a literalistic, and certainly not reincarnational, belief about thoe “David my servant” statements is the other passages in the OT which speak of the Messiah as a descendant (yet also ancestor Psa 110:1) of David.
            But all things duly considered here, this topic of ‘Elijah’s Coming’ is not one that can be fairly concluded upon in isolation, as assumed for, in fact, that “day of the Lord” is repeatedly depicted as coming in ca. the early stages of the Messianic age. (E.g., Ezek 38:10-17). In other words, as seen in the possible chronological sequence of Ezek 34-39, the Davidic Messianic King first comes and restores the fortunes of God’s people amongst the nation. Then some of the world’s nations them, represented as Gog, here, decide to rise up against this upstart Messianic Kingdom, and it is then that God enters into that judicious (Joel 3:1-3) day of the Lord judgement against them. Christian Eschatological prophecy have been given a mirroring expectation directly derived from these OT prophetic backgrounds (=Rev 20:6-15).
            So when then does Elijah come? According to Mal 4:6, it is not necessarily/strictly “before the Advent of the Messiah”, but actually ‘before the day of the Lord’. Somewhat just like Elijah did not come on the scene to establish Israel, which had been done by Moses, but to, in due judgement (1 Kgs 18:40; 19:15-18) reform an already established Israel. Yet Elijah’s work was needed so that there can continue to even be an Israel, as it had sunk into apostasy and was nearly utter dispossession by God. And so since the eschatological “day of the Lord” is indeed not limited to only be effected on people who believe in God (cf. Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:7, 14), but to the whole world, (=Oba 1:15), then the Elijah reform ministry then would also apply to the world, -including a prior work to help prepare God’s people to avoid suffering the condemnations of that day (Ezek 13:4-5; Joel 1:14-15; 2:1, 11). Indeed the “day of the Lord” is generically applicable to any “day of reckoning” when God enters into due (and often delayed) judgement with people (E.g., Babylon Isa 13:6, 9; Egypt Ezek 30:3; and also Israel/Judah, even Zion (Joel 2:1, 11).
            So it can be seen that there are actually two main “Messianic” events which will warrant a coming of Elijah. A first “local” one in order to reform God’s own people, and then a second “global” one to likewise also prepare the rest of the world. And since God never does such major things without revealing it to His prophet then, it is expected that whomever He will raise up then to do this type of repentance/reform/preparatory work will be of a prophetic nature, indeed as “Elijah the prophet” was. (Mal 4:5). So we are to look for a “day of the Lord” development, with a begun and fulfilling Messianic development rather for a than fully established and developed Messianic Age, as this will only occur as such after the “day of the Lord” has been executed (cf. Isa 66:10-24).
            So there could indeed be two Messianic “day of the Lord”. One that focuses on God’s own people and the other which focuses on the rest of the world. Therefore, all in keeping with the Jer 18:1-10 principle that God can abrogately adjust any promise or prophesy that He had priorly made, depending on the conditions on the ground. And so, with God never actually having said that His kingdom of Israel was to ever be in a state of hardship and national subservience prior to the advent of the Messiah, but that was the from the return from the Babylonian Captivity through to the First Century A.D., then with the Jewish nation being ruled over by the Romans, it is self-evident that the conditions on the ground were not ideal. Therefore it is not an impossibility that God adjusted His Elijah prophecy in an typological way, by, instead of sending the “ace-in-hole”, literal Elijah, He instead sent someone in merely the Spirit and Power of Elijah. That then would have first been done with John the Baptist, and then with Jesus (Matt 17:11-13). So that would actually all be indicators that God had decided to postpone his “great and terrible day of the Lord”, but instead then decided to mercifully, yet still determinatively bindingly, implement an typological way. And, though the time of the Messiah had been set in Daniel 9:24-27 to transpire by that First Century A.D. this Messianic delaying had been long envisioned as a (likely) possibility by Him as also seen in Exilic-time prophecies, such as the timed ones given to Daniel the Prophet which could easily involve protracted long, day for a year, time (see Dan 7 & 8). In fact, the Dan 9:24-27 prophetic specification shows that God expected that to most likely be the case.
            So it is with that wider pertinent OT context that the Elijah prophecy must be considered. Therefore, in the Messianic development that would begin to occur in the First Century A.D. but was not actually expected to be completely fulfilled then, a corresponding and due “Elijah” fulfilment then in order to pointedly firstly ‘thoroughly’ prepare God’s own people then for their own “day of the Lord” judgement is to be expected to not be the literal Elijah, but a spiritual Elijah. And, as the NT reveals, that is precisely what an Angel from God said this would be and also how Jesus later fully understood it to be. Indeed He did not even consider Himself to literally be Elijah, but just also according to that Spirit, and that for His ministry which would, unlike John’s also work to reach and prepare everyone in the world.
            As mind blowing as it may be to the Jewish mind, and it is actually relatedly boggling to the thinking of most Christians, that Elijah-reform work started by Jesus is still endeavoring to be through this day done by all of His faithful disciples over the years since and to today. (=Matt 24:14). Then will the global day of the Lord come, and who knows, maybe, when God sees that conditions on this earth have reached a most challenging point where, as prophesied in NT Prophecy, Satan will be unlawfully using overmastering deceptive supernatural signs and wonders (e.g., Rev 13:13-14; 16:12-16); God will then respond “in (relative) kind” by sending the literal Elijah to, at least, warn, strengthen, inform/instruct His then faithful people (as the NT reveals in Luke 9:30-31 He did for Jesus in the face of the death ordeal (=“departure” = 2 Pet 1:15) He was now surely going to go through.), thus “steeling their mind” for those times.
            All this to say that, as simple as it may seem, and indeed is, the proper study of any theme in the Bible needs to involve a proper consideration of all of the pertinent exegetical, spiritual and/or historical issues at hand. In the case of the Elijah Coming Prophecy, this shows that it would not be in a literalistic way for that Messianic age that was to begin, but not necessarily fully end, in the First Century A.D. So the pertinent revelations in the NT expounding on that theme, and as understood, expressed/explained and experience by Jesus do not contradict those OT Scriptures, thus passing the Isa 8:20 validity test as they most literally do agree with the Law (e.g., Deut 30:17-18) and the Testimonies (Jer 18:9-10; Dan 9:24-27).
            Such spiritual issues, as especially prophecy inherently is, are indeed only spiritually appraised (=1 Cor 2:14), i.e., ‘examined, tested, considered in a comprehensive way’, and so it is much more important to first align oneself with the mind/spirit of God, i.e., view things as God comprehensively views things, and not have a base isolatively literalistic view on things. Thus by at the very least taking into account all of the testimony of Scripture. (cf. Luke 24:27, 44) The reason why OT Israel consistently oppose, reject even kill all of the, especially reformatory prophets who God would raise up, from Isaiah to Elijah to Jeremiah to Ezekiel, was all because they had that subjectively/fancifully, isolative, non-spiritually-minded, un-Theo-logical, view on things (cf. Matt 16:22-23), which all involved them not viewing, especially abominable, sin as God does (Ezek 9:4), and thus excusing or white-washing it. (e.g., Ezek 13). And so God’s spirit was not allowed to “disturbingly” breathe into that preferred base/natural/human mentality. (See John 3:3-12ff)

New Post

2 of 3 disciple who witnessed transfiguration followed closely in final trial

GC 667.1-2

Clear Definition of the Messiah
Anointed one
Psa 110
Jer 18 Hiatus principle


J4J = Make an informed decision
[-look both ways and back again]

Average Jew does not convert by Bible text
-hence this blog post for Orthodox Jews
-use bible like drunk not for illumination but support

Most Jewish thing a Jew can do is become a CHR
=CHR have God’s New Covenant (Jer 31:31-34)

“Har-Mageddon” - Rev 16:15

OT not factually established
LXX vs. MT
God will always leave room for doubt
No other accounts of Exodus than the Bible, not even in Egypt (Massacre in Bethlehem)
Many Flood stories outside of the Bible (Virgin Birth)
-even asteroid or ice age theory today


Isa 46:9-11 - God does not say to believe in Him because of historical speaking on Sinai, but because of fulfilled prophecy.
CHR have revelation (Historicism) - only those who now believe/understand Remnant Church and Time of the End. Priorly was the contemporary view of Church reformers till Catholic swindle
-
-wiki on SDA Interpretation

Full Church Triumphant View
Dual/Full Fulfilment of Prophecy
Ezekiel rejection pivotal - till ca. 1 century AD work by Hananiah ben Hezekiah

Jewish Messiah - “No need to believe in the Messiah”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_messianism#Ancient_Israel
how/why will world accept him - Jewish rule
how will he prove his messiahship in order to draw followers (miracles??)
Talmud Elijah prophecy and sickly Messiah
riding on an ass (Zech 9:9) - no white horse (=Rev 2:1)
-world peace will come as a result of his actions and not before
comes to an already built temple (Mal 3)
-messenger/angel of the covenant - New Covenant (mal 3; Jer 31:31-34)
Angel of the Lord at Sinai (Judges 2:1)
Jesus showed how law was to be placed in the heart - spirit
-comes to refine the sons of Levi (Mal 3)
OT rejection of God’s prophets - Jeremiah, Ezekiel
How will Davidic/Regnal Ancestry be proven
“In general, the validity of such claims — as that of most claims to royal descent after a considerable passage of time — is difficult to check. But it may be said that Jewish society taking seriously a person's claim to Davidic descent is a testimonial to that person's standing and prestige in his own time.”
How will he gather Jews back to Israel (Strike Zion)
-Palestinian obstacle - all borders to be cleared
Isa 9:7 - zeal of the Lord = how
have a male heir - not eternal?

Messiah told he is messiah
-will not change the law (Ezekiel at God’s revelation, new covenant)
-Moses was given signs powers to have people believe in him (no voicing of God)


Anointing by oil = anointing of one’s spirit (Zech)

“Jesus was a Pharisee”
-Supreme Teacher



Zech 11:7-12-14 - because of rejection no union of Israel and Judah (Ezek )


Websites of note

Cites Many Talmudic references in Support of Jesus as the Messiah


Responses to: #3 - “THE REAL MESSIAH & Why Jesus Doesn't Qualify! Part 2”

Doctrine of Second Coming [00:42ff]
Second Coming - Not Christian Doctrine but Christ’s own Jesus Preached it and before He died
Selective view on what is and is not Gospel Truth
All mentions of God’s intervention are ignored - secularized view

Gospel writer invented Second Coming Teaching and Jesus Speaking of death
-Because they had invested much in ministry
-despite ‘having abandonned all’ John 20: could easily turn back to fishing
-fear of the Jews - why persist then in false teaching, with “lies”
-What was Paul’s “incentive” He was persecuting Christians (1 Cor 15:8-9 cf. His pedigree Acts 26/Phil)
-why literally cause this cause to triumph and spread now
-Why would it be falsely reported that he or any of the other 12 disciples had suffered martyr’s death as this would demoralize all of their followers, as it did with the followers of other false messiah’s. That acceptance of theirs sealed the fact that what they had been proclaiming was the truth. That is what they had seen. So the solution here is not to dismiss/ignore this mere fabrication, but to seek to disprove it. I.e., the death and resurrection of the Messiah is not spoken of in the OT. (Dan 9:26-27; Isa 53; Psa 110:1ff)

It is Jews who have a circular notion that if something does not occur then it must be because it was not meant to occur then but in the future
CHR have Jesus’ word for Messianic postponement and Second Coming

Notion of God taking a righteous person to heaven is in OT
Moses - resurrected. (NT Statement Jude)
Elijah - before he completed judgement work

Second Coming in Book of Enoch, Jude


1- No OT Basis [01:50]
OT postponements

Messiah did not fail (Psa 110:1) He was hindered as God was hindered in OT by stiffneck people (Acts 7 sermon)

Jesus spoke of his own death and told disciples to keep this a secret (and they did not even understand this - Emmaus guys - even until after resurrection) - has same mentality
=Isa 53

Postponed Prophesies
Second Comings Postponed

2- No Hiatus in B Messianic Statements [03:55]
Psa 110:1 - Messiah was not supposed to have “enemies”

3- No Credibility for Jesus [04:21]
First have to convincingly say he was ressurected
Why Believe before now (faith is the key)
Matt 24:14 - Gospel of the Kingdom must be preached first
God cannot keep resurrecting or supernaturally protecting the messiah - as people would then only believe by sight not faith
=Isa 53 fulfillments by fellow servants/slaves of God.

4- Imminent Return Claims [05:11]
Matt 16:28 - Words put into Jesus mouth (why because of a mistake)
Matt 10:23
Matt 24:34
Rev 22:7 - not Jesus
Rev 22:10 - Rapidly quickly
1 John 2:18 = “last hour” Words of John
-My Children” = Gal 4:19; 1 Tim 1:2; 1 John 3:1-2; 3 John 1:4

5- [06:58]
Geneaology problem cannot be corrected.
Cannot be born again, why not??
If it is believed that he was not resurrected then moot point
If it is believe that he can be resurrected but then cannot be born again, they why could he have been resurrected back in 31 AD and taken to heaven like Enoch and Elijah (Acts 1:10) even sent back like Elijah
If not then he can be reborn, as he was the first time, but this time “correctly”. I.e., seed implanted in a Davidic male instead of female
Why is Elijah returning?? To restore all things - He did not finish his mission of reform but merely had executed judgements, by delegated proxy

Messianic Expectation
“Wise and Righteous” - ‘one greater than Solomon’
-play through the teaches of Jesus
-was not condemned for any good works (John 8:41)
-repeat stumping of Leaders (like Stephen later)
Day of the Lord within Messianic Rule
-many people oppose that movement and seek to overturn it


Late Gospel Dates [08:33]
None which mention the Olivet discourse written after 66-70 AD or else they
John saw Revelation as surpassing Olivet discourse and so did not mention it.

Mar 70 50's
Matt 80 during 50's, based on Mark
Luke 90 [60-61]
John 100

Ages
Mark - (Peter dead by 62)
Matt 80+20
-Finally, even Rabbi Gamaliel, the teacher of the apostle Paul, is recorded in the Talmud as having written a parody of Matthew's Gospel. Gamaliel died in the year 73, so this puts Matthew's original very early and in a language that rabbi could read - Aramaic!

Luke was with Paul/Wrote acts after Luke
John 120

Testimony of Dead Apostles before 70 AD except for John


Miracles of Jesus not a Proof of Messiahship [11:11]
Only an Attestation (Acts 10:37)
Recognized as a proof (John 3:1)
healing miracles are not prophetic signs -
Matt 8:16-17 = Isa 53:4 - Messiah would be a healer.
He wanted to help people in need and so God gave him supernatural ability (=Isa 58:7)
Jesus prayed for miracles (John 11:4?)
God gave Moses signs powers to convince Israel to follow Him (=Deut 18:15?)
Signs are for believers not unbelievers (1 Cor )
Jesus Matt 16:4 - signs for adulterous and generation (No (non-healing) signs needed)
Signs are merely an indicator of the presence of the Supernatural, therefore which one
Therefore did Jesus teach dangerous things (John not for good works but blasphemy)
Man=God Forgave sins and man was healed. Would Satan forgive sins Ezekiel (son of man) bearing sins of Israel for their restoration why him?? Jesus would later do the same on the cross.
Lamb forgave sins in advance (John 1:35?)
Isa 53:? - By knowledge justify many (just as if) thus removes curse of sin

signs also involved in Jewish Cultus
John 3:1 - signs of Jesus not rejected just its source disputed
Josephus testimony is credible.
Steve Mason p. 172ff
God responded by equally and more powerfully giving Jesus tangible and practical signs and miracle power
Objections to Veracity of Gospels [14:53]
If agenda to believe than did a very poor job
By same canon OT cannot be trusted
That you may believe
John 20:31 - Then he left out many good proofs
-Theological writings (Last Supper 4 Chapters John 13-17 - few hours)
2-3 of 4 Gospel Writers were eye-witnesses Luke research carefully.
If miracles not true then many of the people who are said to have witnessed and even believed in them would have come forward to dispute them (e.g., 12 year old boy)
Pontius Pilate wanted to appease people
He was a Roman Official
Josephus mentions Jesus
Jesus appeared defeated that is why they rejected him and wanted the stronger leader Barabbas instead
Jewish curse because they did think God would approve of Jesus (nothing to lose)
History shows Pilate had recent problems with Jews.
-Luke 13:1-3 - mingled blood with Sacrifices (in temple (Josephus ??)
Barabbas a thief among murderers not insurrectionist
Pilate mellowed out
Herod was a Jew an Edomite by citizenship and religious profession therefore threatened by a Messiah which he believed in - not Pilate
Matt 2:22 - Joseph was afraid of Herodians

Pilate did not see Jesus as a threat - Kingdom Question answer was satisfying to him
Had a dream by wife
Had Jesus Crucified because he feared the crowd not Jesus

Pilate (surely) Knew of Jesus
-Romans present near his works - Pilate informants
-Centurion (from where?) acknowledge him
Would probably have ceded his place
Wife’s dream tempered him (I am not going to kill him)
Believed he was a king
Only was to prevent threats to Roman Rule
Even Jews did not immediate send Jesus to Pilate
-he had twice refused to be made king

Since Matthew did shut up as he would it was because it was true (Matt 27:52-53)
Appeared to former believers (Like Emmaus disciples) the 500 mentioned by Paul
Made apparitions like Jesus not walking about


Jewish demonstration unlike Post-resurrection apostles did not validate veracity of OT
Rebelled at Golden Calf and in Wilderness
Num 16 resuming apostasy
Northern Apostasy
Southern Apostasy
[Acts 7 Sermon]

Not many Hebrew MSS
No Hebrew vowel pointings

Spirit of the Law = Rabbinic Laws
-contrary to spirit/law stated in the Bible
 -Jesus’ spiritual teachings much better

Miracles []
Matt 8:16-17 = Isa 53:4 - Messiah would be a healer.
Only today, in our more doubting world (though doubt has always existed) is proof being asked for miracles of Jesus
-why was not that asked for by Talmud writers who accepted them as true, but as stated in the Gospels, as sorcery
-if/since the Talmud is a writing down or oral traditions, then that shows that the miracles of Jesus were always considered as having been done. It was just the source which was questioned.
-Josephus [improved?] testimonium
-therefore all miracles of Jesus are to be considered as true (cf. John 3:1) especially since these are not proof in themselves of the work of God (Deut 13)
-However raising of the dead is most likely something that only the life giver can do.
-Satan can inflict diseases but not give/create life

On the eve of Passover they hanged Yeshu* [= Jesus].
And an announcer went out in front of him for forty days, saying: 'He is going to be stoned, because he practised sorcery and enticed and led Israel astray.
Anyone who knows anything in his favor, let him come and plead in his behalf.'
But not having found anything in his favor, they hanged him on the eve of Passover.

Commentary
Eve of Passover/Sabbath - wouldn’t do this unless forced to do so ()
hanged = Luke 23:39; Acts 10:39; Gal 3:13
stone Jesus = John 8:59; 10:31ff; 11:8
[Capital Punishment then probably not removed from Jews]
Mark 14:1-2 = sought Roman indictment to avoid riot
sorcery = miracles by beelzebub
apostasy = John 11:48 - led Jewish people away
40 days - since just before the miracle of Lazarus (John 11:16
precipitated after Lazarus miracle John 11:45-57 - “what are we doing to let him go on”
already had passed “absentee” judgement on Jesus long before his fake trial (Mark 14:1-2 = two days = Wednesday)


Resurrection [42:42]
1 Cor 15:17 - faith in vain
Resurrection greatest “miracle”
Synoptic Problem resolve
S 9 J 12
2 day 2 night
People who came to tomb
Matt

‘David is still buried’ but not Jesus (=resurrection) Argument was not contested
(1 Kgs 2:10|Neh 3:16)
Peter Acts 2:29
Paul Acts 13:36

Large and Fast Growth Religion
=Supernatural involved Evangelism
-Acts 5:39b = Fighting God (Isa 58:8-11, 12 = “The Way”)
Only the Case for Jews upon advent of messiah
Hindi = local religion
Muslim partly
Many Christians are Intellectual
Since death of eye witnesses and people who had met and talk to them,
Growth continues because of belief in Gospel accounts
-Believe more in message

Acts 5:38-39 - ‘Jews not Southern Baptists’ [01:19:00]
Spurious attempt to build a false dichotomy in Judaism
Sects are just like what exists in Judaism even CHR Denominations today
30+ million Sabbath Keepers today
God’s Israel was not to be limited to Ethnic Jews
Jews did worship Jesus as God
-John son of God
-Peter: You are the Christ, Son of Living God
ordered them to not even speak in Jesus name, still preached vs. 42 [later re-arrested them]
Book of Mormon

Peter (Acts 5:29) wrote to and ministered with Gentiles and had made the first Gentile Convert (Acts 10)
Christianity was not partitioned but understood to included both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 15)
Paul was also sent to “sons of Israel” (Acts 9:15) and did indeed preach to them and convert many and those who fully accepted his teachings did not revert to Judaism.
Acts 10:44-48; 11:17-18 - Gentile believers blessed just as Jewish believers were = Acts 15:7-11
Paul and James (Acts 15:13-20) was also present at that council (Acts 15:12) therefore it was a decision by the whole Church of Jesus to release the Gentiles of partitioning Laws in order to be accepted as God’s people.

James: ‘It won’t hinder the knowledge of the OT’ Acts 15:21
Decision for the whole Church (Acts 15:22-29) = Gal 2:6-10
Prophetic ratification (Acts 15:32) Judas and Silas

Peter had same faith as Paul 2Pet 1:1

2 Peter 1:1 - Gr. “God and Savior” = Jesus Christ

Apostles Believed in the Trinity
Approved of
Fellowshipped with Gentiles (Paul condemned for Timothy)
Rejection of Jesus because of Samaritans
Christians also kept the Sabbath until ca. ??? AD - Bacchiocchi
In obedience to Jesus went and made disciples of gentiles to rest of the world
-testimony of Foxed book of martyrs
Jews refused to believe in their preaching. Therefore turned to gentiles
God does not force acceptance
No Jewish Christians died. Christ’s Warning - Cestus withdrawal
Relocated to Pella
Acts 15 Only ordinances which are against the sinner crossed out
Can’t pick and Choose what to accept as true in NT -same should then be done for OT
-conflicting accounts also exists and founding miraculous stories in only 1 account by non by unknown witness
Acts 21:25 - Gentiles to keep some Laws -4
Work amongst 1,000,000 Gentile-Jew-wannabes - should have been done by Jews
If nothing is to change with Messiah then No new covenant in heart as Jer 31:31-34 says
God allowing signs to convert Gentiles = Promise of Him using light to do so (Isa 60:?)
?????
Ambiguous NT God’s way of keeping the Jews in their chosen darkness
Whereas CHR convert accept more by faith

Why didn’t other ‘messiah’s’ also claim a resurrection as successful Christianity

Rationale of God allowing CHR and Islam
CHR and Islam do dirty work for Jews

It is CHR have spread Judeo-CHR values throughout the world (-minus abuses) -thus fulfilling the promise of Abraham.
That is why God uses them to slaughter Jews??
I thought Messiah would do all this work on his own
Jesus and Paul warning against false Messiah

Original Followers of Jesus
Acts 5:33 leaniancy - God’s wisdom in Apostles first going to Jews before Going to gentiles
Jewish-Christian Sects were not part of Original Followers (12 Disciples)
-they picked and choosed what they would believe - they’re own Gospel instead of Matthew’s
-like Judaizing sects and Jewish persecutors of Paul - had problem with Law rejection.
Acts 21:20 - a group of faithful Christian who were still zealous for the Law
Pauline CHR got it extremely wrong
Remnant Church concept - Apostasy foretold in Dan 7 & 8 prophecy (little Horn) Dan 7:25.


Responses to: #4 - “How Missionaries Misquote and Misread Bible Prophecy”

In His dealing with Israel God has always operates on the Faith First and Proofs after
-Abraham’s Calling
-Moses and Exodus (initially)
-Red Sea Crossing
-Jordan Crossing
-Jericho Conquest
-
-Sacrificial Lamb - Atoning Messiah
This is a Salvation Necessity



Most non-Orthodox Jews Convert Out of A Feeling [09:59]
-Personal Relationship With God - A With David (Deut love God with Heart)
-Heart (Emotions) Religion was missing [Marriage Stages]
Jesus Church Bride Allegory

Isa 28:5-13 fulfillement for Jews (Spiritually Immature)
[(Does not) Ignore mention of Angel warning Magi - Why?? [20:21]]
Mormon Example - do believe an angel appear to Joseph Smith
It is only his contra-bible Gospel teaching which disprove him to me

Matthew’s “proofs”
More pragmatic understanding of “fulfill” in terms of complete
-allows for a secondary application
e.g., Jesus and the OT Law - spiritual aspects of it

Midrashic style
#4 01:42:30-01:47: - Skobac Answer
Christians believe now because of 70 AD Fulfilled Prophecies
1st Century+ Christians believe because of 1st hand testimony

Christians do the same today - non-expositional preaching (reverse midrash - what text means)
-‘this text applies to current circumstance/situation’
e.g., John not enough bread = not enough salvation for everyone

Writing to fellow Jews and using the Midrashic style:
“Midrash is a way of interpreting biblical stories that goes beyond simple distillation of religious, legal or moral teachings. It fills in many gaps left in the biblical narrative regarding events and personalities that are only hinted at.”
- 'to provide scriptural pretexts to justify oral tradition.'
2 Chr 13:22 "in the midrash of the prophet Iddo"
2 Chr 24:27 "in the midrash of the Book of the Kings."

I personally laugh at Jewish Midrash
examples


“Many midrashim start off with a seemingly unrelated sentence from the Biblical books of Psalms, Proverbs or the Prophets. This sentence later turns out to metaphorically reflect the content of the rabbinical interpretation offered.”

Jewish Encyclopedia : The midrashic method of biblical exegesis, is “…going more deeply than the mere literal sense, attempts to penetrate into the spirit of the Scriptures, to examine the text from all sides, and thereby to derive interpretations which are not immediately obvious”:[15]

Perfectly acceptable in his time
Case in point - The Jewish leader rebuttals to Jesus himself never were: ‘that is not what the Scriptures say...’

Matthew was trying to find OT Scriptures to explain what had factually occurred with Jesus


“Fulfilled” = Made more/most full not a prophetic prediction but a scriptural basis
=fulfill law and prophets = make more full

Talmud sees Messianic passages in non-messianic contexts

Sanhedrin 98b in the Babylonian Talmud speculates rather ironically about the undisclosed name of the unrevealed Jewish Messiah to come, so as to say it could be anyone: leper of the school (a hint on rabbinical disciples cast out of their seminary/school) based on Isaiah 53:4, Rabbi Nachman based on Jeremiah 30:21, Shiloh based on Genesis 49:10, Yinon based on Psalm 72:17, Rabbi Hanina reckons it is him, based on Jeremiah 16:13, Menachem ben Hizkija based on Lamentations 1:16

Jer 30:9, 21 - Messianic leader one of Israel
sinless - as a priest in order to “Give life as pledge to approach God”
Jer 23:5-6 | 33:14-17 - righteous Branch - overcomes Jeconiah curse just cited in Jer 22:30
Name of Righteous Branch - The Lord our righteousness (not the law, not ourselves, but the lord)
Jer 33:19-21 - Covenant of son for David cannot be broken, even if by righteous branch.
Jer 33:16 - she will be called (=Israel) Lord our righteousness (not Law)

Zech 3:8 - My servant Branch (Sprout) a new outgrowth
Zech 6:12-13 - Priest King counsel of peace between them

Isa 53 is applied to future: when immediate context was Babylonian Captivity
-It is argued that the "servant" represents the nation of Israel, and they beared excessive iniquities, pogroms, blood libels, anti-judaism, anti-semitism and continue to suffer without cause (Isaiah 52:4) on behalf of others (Isaiah 53:7,11-12)
-Israel went into Captivity for own sins

Matt 8:17 - Surely Jesus healed them but they still deemed him accursed.
-seen and understood later by Matthew



Matt 2:23 - Nazarene
MacArthur Notes
[-Reference to Hebrew word for branch in Isa 11:1]
-Unrecorded Prophecy of OT prophets
–Why would a prophet’s book not included as part of Canon??
-Maybe Iddo’s book who may be Deutero_Isaiah Isa 40-55 Hence “Midrash”
–father of Zecheriah, mentioned in post-exilic time 2 Chronicles
Genealogy goes down to ca. 300 B.C.
[-Jewish Tradition “Ezra”]
-Nazarene meaning “detestable” (John 1:45-46) = [Psa 22:6-8]; Isa 49:7; 53:3
–Messiah was to come from a non-glamorous region/background

Matthew quoting Hosea 11:1
-Like Servant Songs - speaks of God’s Faithful, most faithful = Christ
Israel is God’s Son (Exod 4:22-23)
Jesus is New Jacob/Israel for New Israel Nation
Not out of Theological Context
Rachel (Benjamin) weeping for children - restored in New Israel
-Jesus: ‘do not weep for me’

Zech 13:6 (False Prophets)
Good prophets removed to cause harm to little ones
unclean spirits also removes - people left to their own spirit
=What occurred with Jesus
=Jesus being thought to be a false prophet (Matt 10:23) and deemed deserving to die
Jeremiah was ashamed (fire in my bones, I will not speak)
Hairy robe - repentance (Mark 1:14) is still possible - no (ensaringly covert) judgement (Isa 6:8-13)
Does “prophet” alone ever mean “false prophet”

Psa 41:8
-Psa 41:4  - “I have sinned”
-John 13:18 - vss. 9 only (isolatively) quoted to show that: “if it could happen to the sinner (Psa 51:4) David, it could/would happen to the sinless “son of David”

Jesus speaking to disciples also uses Midrashic style (John 13:18)
-Jesus told them of Judas’s betrayal beforehand (John 13:19)
and came after Jesus had begun to take on the sins of the world
-hence “I have sine view spiritually applies (Isa 53:4, 5, 10 2 Cor 5:21)
Jesus in cry on Cross may eventually have come to believe that maybe He himself had sinned, hence need to have sacrifice verified to see if it was acceptable.


Paul’s Messianic Prophecies more exegetically explicit

Psa 22:16
Like a lion (=Psa 22:20) at my hands and my feet
“encompassed” = holding him down at hands and feet

Matt 1:18 “bethrothed” not “married” (Gr. gameo) (explained)
-Luke 2:5 Mary and Joseph were still not married ca. 9 months later

Isa 7:14 Virgin Birth
(Matt 7:14 - Matthew quoting LXX not Hebrew Bible)
(LXX translators understood it as virgin)
It is not at all a sign/miracle that a “young woman” (i.e., 12 years and older) gets pregnant and just because she has a child then that means “God is With Us”
-God speaking to “House of David” =Royal House
-A sign directly from God is a virgin birth (even greater than OT barren births)
-sign of New Movement
-page 16 non-supernatural signs
-sign from God are supernatural
-‘signs have to be visible’ virginity not visible


Spiritually: Before child outgrows age of innocence, adulthood Judah’s oppressors will be defeated. Jesus born to be Savior of Israel.

Psa 110:1 - Makes virgin divine birth of the Messiah necessary (Matthew found a proof in Isa 7:14)
Same type of Faith required for Jews to have faith in OT God.

It is KJV that did not translate the Greek article (also found in LXX)

Masculine “Young Man” claim (texts & p.10)

Pro 30:18-19 - no sign - why doesn’t that leave a trace

If a mistranslation then that means that
Matthew knew of virgin birth reality and thought that this LXX rendering indicated that

Gen 30:4 - rape of Dinah she was a virgin (rape was probably ignored spiritual virgin)


Responses to: #5 - “Why Jesus Didn’t Have to Die to Atone For Sin”

Egregious Sins required an immediate Sacrifice
All others = Annual Passover Sacrifice = remission - taken away

Sin Saving Purpose of Messiah [21:00ff]
Matt 1:21 -Save People from Sin
Luke 1:32 - Sit on David Throne
1 Cor 15:3 = Messiah Death According to Scriptures = Isa 53

Lev 17:11 - Shedding of Blood Needed for atonement
-=Gen 9:4 - Life for Life
Josiah Passover Reforms
Ezra 6 - Passover Celebrated

As done with Jesus, God can coin new theology through his prophets
-Paul was a prophet - could expound on what he was shown
EGW and angelic offbeat statements


Paul: Rom 11:26 - Isa 59:20 [28:37]
LXX eken = from within
those “(naturally) turning” (qal participle) = righteous people vs. those living unrighteously in Jacob = thus not all in Jacob will be righteous then contrary to Messianic expectations

-a midrashic take on OT passage based on how things had actually transpired
-saw Jesus in vision
-not the typical approach of Paul
-Jews just ignore Scriptures/Law for Sacrifices

Heb 10:5-6 = Psa 41
-Theological extrapolation

Moshiah (Moses) vs. Messiah
=Yeshua (God Saves) not Moses (Saved)
Examples of OT uses of Save
Psa 20:6 - God saves Messiah (interesting)
-Psa 41 not leave my soul in Hades (Acts 2:)
Psa 110:1 - right hand hiatus saving
-God resurrected Christ contra. Jesus’s expectation

Lev 17:11 - Consuming blood but special statement on why
blood offering alternatives (Lev 4)

Messiah comes after Temple is rebuilt

There is a life cost for sins (Adam and Eve) (wages of sin)
Therefore in normative times, a blood sacrifice is required to (symbolically) pay that price

Sin is the transgression of God’s Law [Law of Life]
-penalty is death
Soul sin die

God wants both change and sacrifices

Sacrifice is not “candy”
-God takes no pleasure in sacrifice and bloodshed
-it was just the most tangible lesson that sin had a life cost’
external symbol of internal change - no - the price to pay
like a ticket - remorse does not pay the costs of Law Enforcement all for optimal public safety

Sin = blood because life is in the blood

1 Kgs 8 - repentance and prayer towards Temple (=Jesus Christ John 2:18; Matt 12:6-7) was all that could be done. So that was the sign of remorse. Then God could forgive and restore.
Temple was to primarily be a house of Prayer not sacrifices (Sacrifices done in outer court) (Isa 56:7)
That is why we could prayer for forgiveness

If Jesus will Saves from sins, then He is the equivalent of Temple

-Skobac wants to make it seem like sacrifices are not required (No Temple mindset)

Does not replace but compliment the Law
Hosea 14:1-2 calves/bulls of our lips
Psa 141:2 - figurative use of
2 Chr 7:14 - hear from Heaven - We pray to God through High Priest Jesus
Pro 15:8 - sacrifice wicked vs. prayer of upright
2 Sam 12:13 - David had probably already given a sacrifice for unintentional sins.
-sincerely did not hypocritically think that his sin was intentional (Psa 51)
Psa 32:5 - Probably later gave sacrifice - Sacrifice to pay the penalty not obtain forgiveness (Day of Atonement) - Confession on Animal Head
-David had sinned Capitally which demanded an instant death. So death penalty was looming on his head.
Ezekiel 18:21-23; 33:14-15, 16
Isa 55:6-7
Jonah 3:6-10- Foreigners were supposed to keep God’s Covenant (Isa 56:6-7)
God required post-exilic Temple
Job 22:22 - Job also offered sacrifices for his sinful children (Job 1:5)

Also no “cheap grace” in New Covenant (sin knowledge sacrifice)
=sacrifice is maintained in NC = Christ’s own

Atonement vs. Forgiveness
Dan 4:27 - Atone = cover up sins and iniquities (=Day of Atonement)
Good works Covers a multitude of iniquities
Pro 16:16
That is why Jesus’s Gospel Good works atone for sins in NT
Lev 17:11 does not need to say “only”. Law works can only be substituted by life saving works
Blood = life

Only New Covenant by God can make that change
-No such New Covenant made outside of what Jesus did
All those passage corroborate that Jesus’ New Covenant theology was Biblical

Why will Messiah have a rebuilt Temple (Ezekiel 40:1ff)

God had only sacrifice
-Isa 1:11-13, 16
Psa 51:15-17
Micah 6:6-8- Jews in Christ’s day did not under stand this (Heb 10:1-6)
Hos 6:6 = Matt 9:13

In OT cannot indifferently ignore the Law of Moses
-Law was a tutor - once lesson learned then in NC, it could be removed (Gal )
Lev 17:11 - Sacrifices had to be brought in OT
-that is the principal way

Like “corban” make void word of God by self-serving tradition
-think to change laws

Limit on God
-only when not possible God, in OT, accepts alternative

Moses did not ask for forgiveness but for another sentence than immediate death
-they were not forgiven but just delayed sentenced (Psa 78:35-39)
Moses interceded and stood in for them
-God could later be gracious with him because he had pled for Israel

Micah 7:18-20

No Jewish Temple Today
-while Israel lives in their paneled homes

Dispensational Views on Future Literal Temple are false
NT Teaching is that the Church is God’s Temple
Eph, 2 Thess
Jesus is the body = Temple

Ezek 37:36:37
Covenant of Peace = Temporal Prosperity
Ezekiel 45:22 =
should have be done before advent of Messiah
-Jesus spiritually provided that sin offering
Vicarious Death
Only for people wanting to be forgiven (John 3:16-17)
seen in Passover Lamb who had to die so that sinner can go free

Exod 32:32-33 - the Sinners had not wanted to be forgiven (Exod 32:26)
-Moses was probably shocked to see that only one tribe had repented
-couldn’t kill everyone (3000 in one day)
-Instead of killing more the next day tried to seek forgiveness perhaps
-hopeful suggestion by Moses (Exod 32:30)
-God said that He would punish (Exod 32:34-35)
ungodly and justifies not same LXX words?

Rom 4:5; 5:6 vs. Proverbs 17:15
Justified only if they accept and turn from wickedness (Ezek 18:21-23; 27-28; Paul quoted David Rom 4:7-8) = John 3:16, 18
Proverbs “justify” = “white-wash” -say that they are good while righteous are evil (Isa 5:20)
Rom 5:6 - Christ graciously offered his sacrifice for unbeliever in case they accept it (John 3:16)


Deut 24:16 - put to death
however God does punish to the 3 and 4th generation, which means they are alive but still pay for parents sins. (Exod 34:7)
Ezek 18:20 involved a “punishment of death”
01:22:17 - Explanation of 3/4 generation not exegetically sound (Exod 20:5-6), though has a technical contribution
“taking note” to grandchildren, even great-grandchildren.
-said in context of punishment vs. graciousness
E.g. 70 Year Captivity Grandchildren also paid for sins of grandparents (Dan 9:6, 8)
Third or Fourth Generation could have intervened e.g., if new generation every 20 years (as normative then) 80-60-40-20, a 20 year old great-grand-adult can hold great grand parent to account. So they too must bear the misleadings of great-grandparent. (70-50-30-10)- even 10 year old children are typical most forthcoming in exhorting righteousness.
-Daniel ‘we’ have sinned.
-God only does so if warranted. So if an e.g., 10 year old child knows to exhort but chooses not to, God will then hold then justly responsible.

01:22:55 - Jesus went through Hell and suffered great mental anguish
=shock cause of death
Jesus then offered up His breath and died

Shedding of Blood
-blood of sacrificial lamb
-Jesus offered himself as a sacrifice = Lamb - was not the Levite Priest
-burning symbolized Hell
-God did not effect that extent on willing Jesus
Bones not broken
Godless Romans inflicted those wounds
-blemishes were inherent defects = no imperfection
= spiritually sins. Jesus was sinless
crucifixion suffering and wounds were part of Lamb slaying process
John 19:36 - Only bones were not to be broken, but lamb would be physically mangled
Like Abraham and Isaac, would have been Altar had Jews been faithful
-human sacrifice only antitypically aloud - Lamb was symbol for God
-Abraham’s act would have been a human sacrifice
-Jesus would not have died if accepted by Jews - died only because he was rejected (Isa 53)

blood was to be on an altar
-would have been (or probably halted) if Jewish Leaders had done that requirement
therefore blood was shed as Red Heifer - outside the camp both on Mount of Olives and on Golgotha (Heb 13:11-12)

Why/From What do Jews believe in a Hell
-outside of Jesus/NT teaching purely a Hellenistic concept.

Sacrifice had to be brought by a priest
Priest were representative of God dealing with sin/sinners
thus Priest here was God Himself

Yom Kippur was a judgement to see if atonement could indeed be made
Passover was a deliverance
Next great event in 70 Weeks/2300 is Day of Atonement

Meaning of Passover [01:31:00]
Passover ewe-Lamb and Sins - Gr. Amnos = John 1:26
[Lev 4:32]; #3532 = Exod 12:3-4
Lev 5:6-7; female lamb
Num 6:14 -male ewe-lamb
Exod 12:3-4 lamb or goat - one of the flock (later specified as ewe-lamb)
=later sheep separated from goats (Matt 25:31-46) = wheat and tares = both good and bad in fishnet (Matt 13:47-50)

=Jewish faith in God’s plan of deliverance = So that, through applied blood on household Destruction angel can indeed “Pass-over” Exod 12:13, 23, 27; cf. Isa 31:5)
Egyptian Idolatry claim not valid = God would have instead just told them to put out any Egyptian idols. They needed to have the blood of sacrificed lamb applied

Missionary Response to such claims [01:33:43]
Gal 2:21 - Righteous cannot come by keeping the Law
Divine Forgiveness still needed
Original Sin does exist - Rom 5:21 - Sin through one man
-Christ death pays for ultimate salvation for all. Sinful flesh
-creation also subject to death (groans)
-original sin effects also in gene degradation
if not, all should be born “immaculately” perfect genes, live to at least 1000 years as in early generations

‘Virgin Birth circumvents Original sin’
no since Jesus was still born of Mary (woman’s seed)

Jews believe in Immortal Soul - Spirit returned to God
If people wanted to convert to Judaism, they would even if Jews don’t accept them

Law of God point to sin (Ten Commandments)
Law of Moses in OT was to deal with that sin
Still a perfect Sacrifice was needed
-OT pointed to that Perfect Sacrifice (Deut 30:11-14)
-in heart (enjoy) and mouth (confess) it is at hand - they know the OT Covenant requirements to be able to do them

Rom 10:5-8 = Deut 10:11-14
-Righteousness according to Law vs. According to Faith and Abraham
Israel needed special laws after 400 years of slavery - still apostatised
Mark Howard (CM09 02) - Law cannot cover all aspects of Righteousness (as Jesus showed in Sermon on the Mount = Matt 5:20)
Paul already knew that Jesus had replaced the Law (Lord our Righteousness)
-he is not trying to establish that distinction here (Matt 5:17-20)
-fully admits that righteousness based on law was possible in OT, yet something better was needed (Heb 8:7-13)
-was saying that just like righteousness based on Law of Moses was not impossible to do
-so isn’t, for the same mouth and heart reasons, the NT righteousness which is based on faith
Law was replaced by Christ
Analogically speak Christ did not have to be brought down nor raised up, but only faith in knowledge of Gospel was needed Rom 10:9-11

Eccl 7:20/Pro 24:18 = there can be righteous OT people = E.g., Abraham (and without the Law of Moses) though he offered sacrifices.

Psa 14:1-5 - God will only be with the righteous;
Paul’s point; everyone is equally in need of grace because no one of mankind is perfect.


Jesus Once and For All Sacrifice
Heb 10:18 -
Jews Got forgiven when Daniel Prayed in Dan 9:3-18

‘Temple will be rebuilt and sacrifices resumed’
That is circular reasoning
-temple was rebuilt and Ezekiel Temple should have been rebuilt
why would God destroy 2nd Temple for no reason
-Only God can destroy the Temple
1st Destruction was, as Jeremiah said, by His own doing
therefore so was the Second. Jewish revolt was neither ordained, nor opposed by God
so outcome was His will.
‘Destruction of temple to teach true meaning of sacrifices = Jesus own teaching (Matt 9:13; 12:7 [Hos 6:6])

Responses to: #6 - “Suffering Servant Is Israel, Not Jesus”

Isaiah 53 - Suffering Servant
Was to die but be resurrected
Servant Songs are all...
-Experience of all martyred Christians
-Slaves of God

Jesus was only “suffering Servant” when sin came upon him, in Gethsemane. Yet was repeatedly sorrowful.
-Visage marring in Gethsemane evident from drops of blood anguish.
Luke 4:15 - praised when preaching favorable things

Isa 40-41 - Intro - John The Baptist
#1 - Isa 42

Isa 49:3 - Servant = Israel (started with one man) = Isa 41:8
-thus could be a reference to an single individual
=plural vs. masculine singular interplay

Mal 3:6 = ‘sons of Jacob’ vs. Jacob

=Ezek 9 Judah and Leaders judged first

-4th Servant Song
-Starts at Isa 52:13
Problem #1 - [15:24]
-Jesus’ own disciples did not see that reading
-at first Jesus also did not (Matt 10:23)
-reaction of people had forced that
-didn’t tell anyone He was the Messiah
-just did good works
-people wanted to install him as king because of these good works
-if these miracles done then would have uninterruptedly fulfilled Messianic expectations
-however people were opposing him, hostile to him (cf. Rev 11:?)

Problem #2 [24:18]
How do we know it is talking about Jesus
sin atonement must be empirical
not even so in OT - just signs of God’s presence and his word that this was done
-sin involves a judgement
-when a criminal is pardoned - proof is in the Most Holy Temple where only High Priest could enter - It was cleansed
Tangible proof of forgiveness only occurs on Day of Atonement not Passover

Belief and faith also needed for OT
just like Proof of OT God is OT Israel
Proof of Jesus is his Church
(Proof of Mohammed similar)
Test of Law (New Covenant) and Testimony (70 Weeks)

Mal 3:1-4 = (John 1:1-3) - See Youtube opposition
messenger of covenant comes first to Judah and Jerusalem = Dan 9:27a covenant prevailer
-preliminary action to take place before prophesied reunification (hence last revelation in OT)
-to current status of Judah only and not all 12 tribes
= “lord” #113 (adon) not Yahweh comes to temple “says Yahweh” = Jesus’ Lord/master appellation
to his temple to refine and purifer the priesthood (Mal 2)
present and offering in righteousness (Matt 5:17-20)
=meaning of “righteousness” in OT
-Abraham: ‘as if he had done what is right’
Then Judgement (Mal 3:5)
-Model for NT righteousness by faith vs. works

Adonay is greater than Adon (Deut 30:7 = Lord of lords) Lord of masters
Psa 2:4 - Adonay scoffs from Heaven (=Psa 110:1)
Adonay Yahweh = God the Father
Adonay simply = God the Son

Psa 110:1 - ‘Yahweh said to my Adonay’ (=My ruler)

Nothing that leads from Isaiah to Jesus
There is no specific name for the OT Messiah in any of the B passages
-some “interpretation” has to be applied in identifying the Messiah or else one should believe that it will be David resurrected or reincarnated (Ezek 37:24, 25)

-Basis for Jewish belief in resurrection

Other passages of rejected and killed Messiah
Dan 9:26 - Messiah killed
Psa 110:1 - Messiah will have enemies
Psa 2:4 - Messiah will have enemies

Problem #4 []

Problem #5 No need to believe []
-Isa 53:1 - who has believed

Problem #6 Despised and Rejected [38:00]
-Dan 9:26 - Messiah cut off - easily from being despised and rejected
followed at first “because of loaves and fishes” but then despised and rejected
-John 6 = despised and rejected
-rejected again at Trial at priestly plottings

Luke 2:52 speaks up to beginning of ministry.
Luke 4:14-15 - almost killed by all in synagogue rejections started in hometown of Nazareth (Luke 4:28-29)
Luke 18/Matt 10:23 turning point by
John 11:41 -

“we” speaks of rejecters; which by the end of his ministry turned out to be the vast fickle majority.
-it started with Herod
-when He did not meet their personal need, then not merely ignored but despised

Isa 53:3 Pain - “suffering” =not a pampered person - not merely physical pain = “son of man has no place to lay his head (Matt 8:20; wilderness temptation)
Isa 53:3 - sickness =not unaware of it.

Vs. Zeph 1:9 - violence and deceit done by Jewish leaders - neglect of poor and traditions

Isa 53:9 - Done no violence
violence is malicious force not enforcement force
Luke 19:27 - parable - Jesus did not “do” that. Just a story of what God will later do (strange act)
Luke 8:32-33 - unnecessarily killed a heard of swine
How??? - sent demons into them - the mad swines or demons in swines themselves themselves then plunged into the ocean. Demons drove man into the desert (Luke 8:26)
Only other option for those demons was to inhabit someone
Better they inhabit an animal than another man
God sacrifices animals were not off limit in dealing with sin (Azazel)
imploring him not to go into abyss, yet they themselves did

God allowed Satan to destroy Job’s animals
God ordered the slaying of Amalekite livestock

Fig tree cursed for object lesson (Matt 24:32)
Same as God’s OT objects lesson

Cleansing the Temple was an act of Judgement
-judgement is not “violence” e.g., Nehemiah, Israel Capital punishment, even by finger of God himself
John 2:15 - may be indicating a still ongoing action or just focusing on the making of a whip and not the actual use of it.

Samuel Hacking up Agag
Elijah slewing prophets of Baal was not “violence” but judgement & law Enforcement

Jesus having deceit [42:20]
deceit is saying one thing while meaning something else and not witholding information
-any withholding was done out of self defense (1 Sam 16:1-5)
-same as with killing commandment
God cannot lie (Num 23:19/1 Sam 15:29; Tit 1:2) - Similar OT examples
John 18:20 - nothing in secret = what he spoke secretly he also spoke publicly, in some form
=was not plotting secretly contrary to public professions
-anything exclusively said in private had no public interest.
Mark 4:10-12 - If this is deceit than so is Isa 6-8-13
-parables spoke those teachings, just not explained to them = God’s OT prophecies
Matt 16:19-20 - tell not the Christ. He would or had actually done so himself already
-John 10:24-26 - already told them (John 8:56, 58)
Luke 8:53-56 - not a deception (Dan 12's sealings)
not telling is not a deceit.

Jesus did what He saw God His Father had done

See His seed
seed is spiritual (Gen 3:14-15 exposition)

Prolong His days
died but was resurrected, thus prolonged


Problem #7 []

Problem #8 Jesus not a substitute for sins of others [43:48]
men vs. lamed
from our transgession
as a result of our inquities
Isa 53:8 - Because of the transgression

God does not bear “transgression” which is rebellion and not confessed

lamo = to them

Isa 53:10 - if he made him
Jesus did have a choice - Chose God’s will not his own (Matt 27:36-46; Phil 2:8 - he humbled himself to death)
Luke 12:50 - constraining Himself so that it may be accomplished
I could call 12 legion -Matt 26:53; cf. John 18:11;
Set his face towards Jerusalem
That was his mission but he still had a free will choice

Isa 53:11b
bear iniquities - left over, unknown or confessed and abandoned sins
Psa 51:9 - iniquities need to be blotted out (Exod 20:5)
word occurs 3 times in Isa 53:5, 6, 11 [Messiah still had to bear the iniquities of Israel]

Problem #11 - through his knowledge knew of how to accomplish God’s mission
-thus was able to provide this salvation
bear their iniquities
Isa 45:25= IN the Lord will all offspring of Israel be “justified” (Rom 5:18-19)


Christianity is based on Paul
My Gospel according to Christ (2 Tim 2:8 = Rom 16:25; Gal 1:11; 1 Tim 1:11; 1 Cor 15:1-8)
Paul was a prophet.
By Paul’s knowledge, including OT was able to complete the Theological implications of the Cross.

Knowing and practicing the words of Jesus is what saves someone as it helps them to know what sin fully is. (John 12:46-50)

Why didn’t Paul quote Jesus more, they probably soon came to have all of those teachings in the Gospel writings (ca. 50 A.D. with Mark) so with papyrus so costly then, why repeat those same things again.
-We do not have the precise content of Paul’s in person evangelistic sermons (e.g, 2 Thess 2:2 = Dan 7), just his follow letters of redress, encouragement and further instruction.
Paul confounded Jews in proving that Jesus was the Messiah (Acts 9:22 = proofs in Hebrews book)
Even knew more than what had been written in Gospels (Acts 20:35 = John 21:25)

Problem #12 Servant was to Prosper Isa 52:13-15 [53:00]
[That was God’s plan but because of opposition it changed (Jer 18:9-10)]
Manage to raise up a successful movement - Christianity
Prosperity through God’s plan and according to God’s view, not man’s

Verse 14 - Despite hardships and unseemingliness
Kings shutting their mouth
Pilate
Paul before Roman
-not been told about Jesus and Christianity
-were told it was a dangerous and false movement

Jesus was exalted when taken to the right hand of God
shocked because of triumph over marring adversity and not because that servant was always successful and great

Isa 53:1 - who has believe that report of the resurrected and triumphant Servant because of the great suffering he went through

Seeing this as being “in the future” is an eisegetical and detached interpretation. It concurrently had occurred with Jesus (Acts 2:32-36). John 12:31's “exalted” (Psa 88:15 LXX exalted = die)

Stephen saw Jesus at the right hand of God (Acts 7:56)

Christians believe that Jesus is indeed exalted now and reigning and literally all of the world’s nations (stemming from the then Roman Empire) have acquiesced Christianity

=Straw-man premise of future/second coming realization.
-a belief in the Second Coming vs. a belief in the resurrection are the same type of beliefs, with resurrection being foundation to 2nd Coming. So it is not better to ignore that first belief and only try to discredit the secondary one. Christians believe in Second Coming only because they first believe in resurrection, ascension and reigning exaltation of Christ in 31 AD

Resurrection message did “totally shock the Jewish people”
Isa 52:15 cannot be sequiturly speaking of second Coming so it could just as well apply to the also supernatural/divine miracle of the resurrection

Not Shock the Jews
-they were not pointedly singled out here as the rejectors of the Messiah, but the rest of the world. They just came to also fulfill this part. (Luke 4:18-19 & 21:22 -self-turning of Isa 61:2b = Luke 4:23-30 = DA 237.3-240.4)

Jews also had a king = Herod and he too was shocked by this preaching of the resurrection, as were the Jewish Religious leaders. Acts 4:26 (Acts 4:13-22, 23-31)
Acts 12:1-3a

Jewish Interpretation of Isa 53
[58:35] -
What then happen in 70 A.D. Why no reforming prophet sent, or was there?!! i.e., in John the Baptist, Jesus, and Apostles. (Day of the Lord)

Three Isaiahs view
Where is “difficult history (i.e., apart from own faults thus curses of Moses) stated in the Bible. Circular and revisionist reasoning.

Singular “He”, then woman she in Isa 54 and the plural servants in Isa 54:17a (cf. Isa 43:10) all indicate that the fulfillement of this figure will be multi-faceted.
It will include a single male figure
a woman which represents God’s people
and servants who, like Jacob, Moses, David, are God’s most faithful ones.

God will not give his glory to another.
Israel’s self-righteous way could not be blessed, thus fulfillements withheld on a disobedient community.

Claiming Servant is all ethnic Jews is not make a distinction between righteous and unrighteous and thus “justifying the wicked” Pro 17:15 [not literally]  (I.e. those who do not obey God and/or do not even belief he exists.) Forgetting God = rejected or sustained judgement as His Israel. (Jer 2:32; 3:21; 13:25; Ezek 22:12; 23:35)

Messiah comes first to make new covenant, then “Temple”, then Holy City, then Nation; then Global Kingdom.

God speaks collectively and inclusively to all aspects of His Restoration characters who are to all be found within Israel. the People, the Remnant, the reforming prophet, the Messiah

4 Servant Songs
Isa 42:1-4 - Servant’s initial plans
-Isa 42:5-9 God speaks to servant “covenant to the peoples”
Former and new things spoken of.
-God declares hidden things (Isa 48:6-8) because God suspected that Israel would be obstinate. Therefore ‘their ear was not opened’ (=Isa 50:5-6). Implies that was actually said in OT teachings.
-Delayed wrath for only God’s name. (Isa 48:9)
Isa 49:1-6 - Servant Messiah Work amongst God people (vs. 5) and for the Nations.
Isa 49:1 - speaks of Me in Isa 48:16 = God’s Servant (Isa 49:3 - Because of Israel’s obstinacy)
= Matt 16:18 decision by Christ for New Church/Israel. (=kingdom of heaven implication Matt 16:19)
Jacob not named by God in womb as Jesus was. [Isaac was Gen 17:19 = Isa 51:2)
God called Isaac when only an only child (Isa 51:2b)
Isa 49:5 - Jacob cannot bring Jacob back. (Isa 48:20=redeemed Jacob = not yet Israel people)

Isa 50:4-9 -servant ear’s opened to know of sufferings to endure
-obstinacy persists and (Isa 50:2) = divorce.
-result in fire torment (Isa 50:11)

Isa 51:1-13 - someone other than God is talking and has great authority (Isa 51:4-5 law, justice, righteousness and (thus) salvation)

Isa 52:13-53:12- Servant’s rejection theologically explained = to save people if they accept him in faith. Didn’t have to die, but did in order to save sinners who otherwise cannot live righteously. He drank that cup of Chalice instead of Israel (Isa 48:9-11; Isa 51:22). Same things applies to Gentiles (Isa 51:17).

-Israel left in total darkness (Isa 51:18)

Specific servant would seem as unworthy as was devastated Jerusalem.

Due to foreseen rejection development, a need for Servant to die as expected.
Otherwise it would have been like Abraham’s testing. (=Luke 2:35a = Gen 22:12 + other testing heart test)

Why not a literal understanding of “in Babylon” = Kingdom of Heaven teaching


Rome was known as Babylon (1 Pet 1:1) - thus also applicable to God’s Israel in Roman Empire

Isa 52 - Triumphal Entry
-Jesus deliberately did this for Jerusalem’s sake (Luke 19:41)
otherwise that action was unexplainable (DA account = uninspired but passing as inspired Talmud)
belong to thy peace (Isa 54:10)
Halted fulfillment

Isa 52:1 - uncircumscied enter you = adversaries and enemies
-Christ was doing this to avert the destruction of Jerusalem by Roman (which he had already spoken of in Matt 22: parable)

Isa 52:2 - Captive Jerusalem
loose bonds of sin (John 8:31-37a)
They were then still (i.e., from that Post-Exilic writing of 2nd Isaiah) under the subjugation of other nations ruling right in her midst.

Isa 52:3 - Sold for nothing
=Their subjugation was not even out of valuable incentive. No compensation given. Hence free and repaying restoration. (Isa 45:13; Ezra 7:21-24; Neh 2:7-8)
So would have been their restoration by Jesus gracious attempt here.

Isa 52:4 - Assyrians extorted oppressed without cause
-take more than what is due.
Record of all of her Kings “doing evil in the sight of God’ with lawlessness, idolatry and immorality.
Egyptians also enslaved Israel without a valid reason (afraid of coalition with enemies Exod 2)
Slavery only permitted by God with Cause = owing money (7 year limit)
Assyrians over did their permitted destruction (Isa 10:5-12-19)
They had been permitted to rule over (Egypt) and plunder (Assyria) but not enslave and subjugate oppress.

Why no restoration earlier then, not possible - no faithful remnant

Babylon also over did its destruction of Judah, by ravaging the helpless and innocent (=War Crimes)

Isa 52:5 - People taken away
=removed from their land
Sabbatical ignorance had a tangible need of abandoning the land, hence Babylonian exile for 70 years (2 Chr 36:21)

Dan 9:11 - Curses came upon them (=Deut 28:15ff)
God had withheld rain for idolatry (Deut 28:23-24)
If he had wanted to completely kill or dispossessed them, he would have done so Himself (Deut 28:21-22, 25-26)
Only wanted the losing to, and plundered by, enemies curses to be applied then to Northern Kingdom (Deut 28:27-33, 38-44, 50-52 etc)

God’s name is despised and slandered
That is why Jesus sought a forced resolution here

Isa 52:7 -
“Salvation means rescue from political and physical danger”
Jesus also understood this (Luke 19:41-44)
-Jesus preached that they ultimately needed to be saved from their sins (learning of the things which would bring that lasting covenant of peace)
Jesus refused this salvation as sins still remained
Save his people from their sins (Matt 1:21) Needed to learn the right way
Forever paying the penalty for their sins was another aspect of God’s redemption.

Says to Zion Your God reigns
-was intended to be fulfilled with Jesus being enthroned as Davidic King (as the people wanted - John 6)

Isa 52:8 - See return of the Lord to Zion
See the restoring of Yahweh’s Zion.
‘God will be clearly ruling the world
Zionist prophecies were to be fulfilled then

“God says He will hide His face from Jewish people”
-Deut 31:17-18
Deut 32:20

Isa 52:9 - ruins of Jerusalem
Indeed there were ruins in Jerusalem when Deutero Isaiah wrote this
was to be fulfilled in advent of the Messiah

Isa 52:10 - Arm of the Lord
God’s strength
Isa 62:8 -
Isa 63:12 -
Exod 3:20 -
Exod 14:31 -
Exod 15:6 -
Exod 15:12 -
Deut 4:34 -
Deut 7:19 -
Psa 44:3 -
Psa 89:10 -
Psa 98:1-3 -

No concept of Jer 18:9-10

Isa 52:11 - Depart
Leave Babylon (Isa 48:20; Jer 50:8; Zech 2:7) = Rev 18:4

Isa 52:12 - not go out in haste nor flight
An orderly and protected return procession as seen in Ezra

Not “historical suffering” but Babylonian era, which was to be dealt with by the Messiah, God’s servant (Isa 52:13ff) He would make a return from being forsaken just like the Jews were. He was bearing the sins of the world.

Isaiah 52:13-53 - Passion [01:19:00ff]

Acts 8:32-33 - Philip under the guidance of the Holy Spirit applied Isa 53:7-8 to Jesus Christ. So Christians should be doing likewise today.

Post 1st Century Jews to 3rd and 4th generation, under different judgement light than, particularly current, far removed generation.
Disciples were not aware of this prophecy before the Cross. Not aware does not mean ‘did not believe this to apply’
Origen was wrong to remove this from Christ

Isa 52:13 - Servant will prosper
-obviously not strictly chronological or else how then barren by Isa 54
people, as Jews, do not believe that the Servant (Jesus) was successful. Believed that he was accursed by God (Gal 3:13/Deut 21:23) for having been crucified and did not actually resurrect and Christianity is a baseless and false movement. Fulfills Isa 53:1ff!!!

Isa 41:8-9 speaks to Jewish Exiles who feel rejected (Jer 29:10-11; Dan 9:24a)
-they were merely disciplined and indeed ‘for their good’ as land needed its sabbatical rest.
-God was indeed not in agreement with the abuse of force by Babylonians, but could not intervene for his undeserving people.
like a parent does not reject a child simply by spanking or given them a 30 minute timeout discipline (70 years out of 1445-31)
Like post Holocaust Jews, if they feel rejected it could lead to “atheistic” beliefs and behavior
Jer 29:11-13 Future and hope = a chance a future success if they then ‘seek him with all of their heart’.
Jer 29:14 - Then will fortunes be restored and full gathering take place.

Isa 44:21 - My Servant Israel.
Isa 48:20 -
Isa 49:3 - my servant Israel

[01:34:44] - Answer for we claim
“Who has believe our report” - biasedly mistranslated as “Who [would] have believed [what we are] hearing
complete re-toning of the entire passage as “we thought”
Isa 53:5 no mention of we thought that upon him...
Isa 53:6 why not “we thought that we have gone astray but only inserted for ‘the lord laying the iniquity’

Isa 53:7 - sheep cannot go astray unless they had previously been gathered

Jewish view from rest of the world
-again what happened in 70 A.D. = Jeremiah destruction
“Jewish Revolt”
-they did more than talk, they, unlike Jesus, took up arms and fought - thus not like a lamb
Jewish contemporary troubles (i.e., since the Second Temple restoration) started in 70 AD and 125 AD

Isa 53:7b - did not opened his mouth = peacefully allow this to be done
Psa 44:11-21 - Jews did not reject God.
Most Jews preferred to stay in Babylon,
Many abandoned their Jewish Faith
Many became Atheist and Agnostic following WWII (even in Israel today)s
- then so didn’t Jesus in that sense...

False Christian Messiah will fulfill Dispensational claims and elevate the Jewish people, help rebuild their Temple, etc

Christians don’t expect to see Jesus literally appear, but will be duped by a false Jewish Messiah and will accept him because he fulfills their eschatological scenario.
Jewish messiah switch as done my many Christians rejecting Isa 53 as they did for Dan 9

Isa 53:8b [Does not comment] Cut off from the land of the living - (did not happen to all Jews, and obviously not to all righteous jews (i.e., Religious/Orthodox Jews)

Isa 53:9 - not deceit
-applied to only righteous Jews
Zeph 3:13-20 - remnant of Israel
How Peter Understood this 1 Pet 2:22-23 no threat, reviling, = “no violence”

Isaiah 54 [01:12:50-01:19:00] - The Triumphing of Christ and His Church from the Cross
Isa 54:1 - barren one and husbandless woman -
Husband in Old Covenant vs. New Covenant (Jer 31:32; Isa 54:5; Hos 2:19) = Gal 4:27-29
Jesus therefore only unmarried at the Cross

Isa 54:2 - Enlarge site of Tents
=John 10:16
-preaching unto Gentiles

Isa 54:3 - Descendants will possess nations
=Many majoritarily Christian nations in the world
USA, Canada, Italy, South American Countries, Europe, etc.

Isa 54:4 - Shame of your youth
the shame of the cross (Heb 12:2; 13:13)
-the shame of how Christianity had started

Isa 54:5 - Widowhood
widowhood - abandoned by God
(Widowhood, not divorce) = death not of God the Father, but of God in Christ (2 Cor 5:19)
-Death of God was to occur with Israel

Isa 54:6 - remarriage = New Israel

Isa 54:7 - Jesus was forsaken for a brief moment
As potentially then was all of Israel
compassion gather you - accepted back to Heaven (Psa 110:1)

Isa 54:8 - Wrath
wrath poured out on Christ

Isa 54:9 - Not rebuke
Even if unfaithful
-the wrath on Christ Himself was not warranted = hence his questioning
not rebuke you when you are doing my will
-As with Noah vow, will not allow himself to get that upset
-therefore not threaten to forsake Zion (despite prior promise Isa 49:14-16)
-God was apparently going to scrap the entire New Israel work

Jesus Himself almost forsook this world, and would have been allowed to (Luke 12:49-50; Matt 27:36-46)
Isa 54:11-12 - Costly upbuilding
=New Jerusalem the “bride of Christ” description (Rev 21:9-21)
Secondarily applies to all those who like Jesus, strive to establish His Zion

Isa 54:13 - Children taught By God
Prosperity
Relative wealth of Christian nations

Isa 54:14 -
Righteousness
Oppression
Terror

Not current Christian nations

Isa 54:15 - Attempted Assaults

Isa 54:16 - form weapons

Isa 54:17 - confute

He/Him mentions [01:24:15] (Page 11)
Just like Jacob/Israel was originally first and individual

Exod 4:22 - Israel is my son, my first born
Isa 43:10 - witnesses, my servant
Hos 11:1 - I loved him
Hos 8:3 - enemy will pursue him
Hos 14:5-6

[Israel was to suffer as a whole in Isa 53]
He vs. We adversaring in Isa 53
-not “they” .... but “we” including believers (as did the disciples - all fled, anything good from Nazareth)
one from among Israel

Jewish Future Greatness
Isa 60-14-15 (Isa 53 points to an enemy from within)
Not the Jews in general, but the righteous ones in Israel

Isa 62:2-3 - Gentiles/nations and kings did see this glory of NT Church which (cf. Acts 9:15, Agrippa, Caesar), as God’s Enduring Israel, was indeed called by a new name. Jesus (~ala. Jacob) Christ - Christians (Mat 1:21)
no longer “prince with God
but “salvation of God” Joshua
-Yet an even more glorious fulfillement to come

Ethnic Israel Claims of Application
Isa 60:1-3 - nations/kings come to light of Christianity (Judeo-Christian principles)
-even if it is a Babylonian Christianity

01:30:20 - For 2000 years, Jesus not portrayed as sub-human
-Because now He has triumphed as stated in Isa 52:14

Isa 41:11 & Jer 16:19 - ‘Jews were always right’
Enduring Israel Through the Messiah Jesus Christ (Dan 9:23-27)
In Biblical Christianity, unfulfilled OT Israel prophecies will be accomplished in a Triumphant Remnant Christian Church


Responses to: #7 - THE DAVINCI CODE: A Jewish Perspective

Mentioned Women in Matthew Genealogy [27:30]
-known wives of the men and not because of questionable sexual life


Mark 7:24 - Pantera rumors started from that verse
A.D, 9 coming of Pantera to Sidon, thus not 8BC as was Jesus’ birth
John 6 - people seeking to kill him (John 7)
Not hints but attempts to silence that claim
-why would gospel writers relate hints

50:17 - Faulting Paul for not Going to first meet with Jerusalem Church
Acts 9:3 - was approaching Damascus and God orchestrated that he first meet Annanias in Damascus.
-[Gal 1:16-23] did not go right after to meet with Jewish Christians in Jerusalem; only 3 years later (Acts 9:26) (also see my comments to Elle). Cites this lapse as proof of genuine message from God and not a learned one (Gal 1:11-12, 20 = ‘Paul’s own wisdom’)

In his letter to the Galatian believers Paul briefly reviewed the leading incidents connected with his own conversion and early Christian experience. By this means he sought to show that it was through a special manifestation of divine power that he had been led to see and grasp the great truths of the gospel. It was through instruction received from God Himself that Paul was led to warn and admonish the Galatians in so solemn and positive a manner. He wrote, not in hesitancy and doubt, but with the assurance of settled conviction and absolute knowledge. He clearly outlined the difference between being taught by man and receiving instruction direct from Christ.  {AA 386.1} 

Apostles did not oppose his teachings (Acts 15)
Acts 9:27-29 - Jerusalem leaders needed that tangible testimony to accept and trust Paul
Paul was probably fully aware of Christianity Beliefs and Claim (as Skobac is to argue against them)
Gal 1:14-15 - Paul called from womb and was extremely zealous more than colleagues. God was raising up a very knowledgeable Jew ()
-kicking against the goads = acting against conscience and conviction

Tensions between Paul and Other Jewish Christians on Torah
Paul understood it better - Got his Gospel from Christ = many things which Jesus had to tell his disciples (John 16:12)
= Probably mentioned the passing of sacrifices and meal offerings” in Acts 1:3 [AA 26.2] but evidently (Acts 10) not yet Gentile inclusion, not hiatus (Acts 1:8).

Paul perfect “Instrument” for that work
Roman Citizen - Travel and Rights
Former Persecutor - persecution and credibility
Rabbi/Pharisee - Anti-law capital
Educated

Acts 22:15-21 = Paul did not start preaching to Gentiles until ca. 37 A.D. (Acts 9:20-25; Gal 1:17-18)

Paul preached

Paul’s Ministry was ratified by God in 6 cited visions (Acts 9:3-6; 16:9-10; 18:9-10; 22:17-21; 23:11; 27:23-24) cf, 2 Cor 12:1-7ff (taken to Heaven like Moses (to see and hear of now New Covenant and High Priestly ministry of Christ?? - Saw ful Gospel that Moses had priorly seen) = 14 years before, ca. 41-42 A.D. sometime after call to go to Gentiles (Acts 22:15; = Acts 13:46)
& revelations Gal 1:12; 2:2; Eph 3:3.

Acts 11:26 Christians first called there at Antioch.
Jewish believer had started to preach and convert Gentiles before Paul arrival there.

Acts 12 = Herod Agrippa I = 44 AD


55:58 - ‘Messiah was to come back from the dead’ - no had seen that He was resurrected and in Heaven and would livinlgy return
Pseudo-Clementine Gospel “Paul but his visions over Jewish Apostles teachings
Peter statement on this hard to understand in Paul’s writings
Epistle of James
only emphasized what was not properly known/taught. No need to repeat what is otherwise known
not “works of the Law of Moses” (Rom 3:20, 28; Gal 2:16; 3:2, 5, 10)
but works of Faith/Righteousness/Belief = demonstrating one’s faith “faith is completed” James 2:22

Paul’s actual State of the Dead belief.

James marginalized and deemed heretical (sabbath, torah)
James does not say ‘saved by works (of faith [not law] alone’ but “also”

Historical Christianity did indeed ‘twist Paul’s teachings to their own destruction’

Second Coming Message comes back to this world after 1000 years

Changing Baptism accounts
not changing, but complimenting
John especially relates many things not said in prior synoptic accounts
Ebionite testimony = Jesus was reluctant
Matt 11:1 is not Q (Quelle = “source” Common sayings) hypothetical
not necessary, helpful, nor convincing

[Immaculate Conception - Catholic Heresy]

Sick feeling of worshipping dead Palestinian Jew
-don’t believe in resurrection nor the Divine Incarnation of Jesus (Phil 2)

Gal 3:10 - Curse of the Law = curses in Deut 27:26. If just one is not kept.
Hence faith in Christ relieves this curse sin he perfectly/sinless kept the whole law (Gal 4:16)
Gal 3:11 - righteous (vs. proud) man lives by faith
Gal 3:12 - Law is not by faith but works (Lev 18:5 / Rom 10:5)
Gal 3:13 - Christ became that Curse (Deut 21;23)
Gal 3:14 - So that the Blessing of Abraham can now be extended to Gentiles (who never practiced the law before) through faith.
Gal 3:18 - Abraham inheritance was a promise and not law.
Abraham was faithful to God’s Law (Gen 26:25)
Gal 3:19 - Law was added to regulate transgression. To point out what was sin. Until promised seed came.
Gal 3:21 - If the Law could fulfill that promise then Righteousness would have come from the Law and not from Faith as with Abraham (Rom 3:13-16)
Gal 3:22 - Scripture showed that everyone has broken the law
Gal 3:23 - Before faith was restored, kept in custody under the law
Gal 3:24 - Law was a tutor until faith (in a perfect being) could be restored. Law was a substitute as Faith was more abstract. Law was a means for the OT covenant
Gal 3:25 Now that faith has been restored. No longer a need for the tutor. Law in the heart, as it was with Abraham.
Gal 3:26-29 - All sons of God through Christ fulfilling promise to Abraham. Israelite and started with Abraham (Gen 12), His Son/Seed (Gen 15) and even before circumcision (Gen 17) = Rom 3:9-12.

Circumcision came after unfaithfulness of Abraham (Gen 16) distinguish his race.
-for covenant of exceedingly great seed. []

Tangible covenants are need to make concrete a promise in order to avoid faithlesness.
=Gen 15:18 [Land possession covenant]
Faithfulness = no need for tangible covenant demonstrations
=no ritualism in New Covenant.
Law is an expression of what should righteously be done.

Promise of Abraham and Righteousness comes by faith and works of that faith (Gen 18:17-19) and not by Law
Abrahamic Righteousness and thus Promise predates the Law by 400+ years. Indeed how were patriarchs righteous prior to the Law.

Righteousness by given law another, lesser way to attain that righteousness (Deut 6:25)
Talmud: “My Children have eternalized me”

Land of Israel conditional on righteousness (cf. Deut 9:4-6)
OT study of Righteousness (#06666)

Rom 3:28 - Man is justified by faith, apart from the works of the Law.
Rom 3:31 - Law is however not nullified
Rom 4:2 -Abraham justified by works (of the Law) but rather by works of faith/belief
Rom 4:4 works = due not “credit”. Given something that he did not have. Obedience and works of faith (James 2:26) repaid that debt/credit.
Rom 4:5 - Therefore owed his righteousness to God alone. All Abe had to do was obey.

Rom 4:6-8 - David knew of credited righteousness. (Psa 32:1-2)

Rom 3:17 - Abraham could not be a father of many nations and not one nation (Gen 17:4-6) if promise would only apply to Jews who kept the Old Covenant.

Gen 17:7 - seed singular = Jewish people. Gentiles were going to become Abraham’s seed by spiritual adoption. Circumcision was only required of Jewish seed. (The headquarter nation)

Rom 4:25b - Jesus was raised because of our justification = Sacrifice was acceptable as Christ first sought to confirm.

Law was a tutor to righteousness, but does not lead to full righteousness. Belief in God, no matter whatever the circumstance may be, does.

Since endgoal of following is righteousness (right-doing (vs. wrong doing) by God)
Enoch - Gen 5:24 - taken to Heaven
Noah - Gen 6:9 - also preached it 2 Pet 2:5; Ezek 14:14, 20. Covenant Gen 6:18; Heb 11:7 heir of righteousness by Faith.
Job - Job 1:1, 8; 27:6 - no law could not have been later as (most righteous person)
-then the righteousness given to Abraham was one and the same as that achieved through Law observance. And so, God was merely implementing various ways to achieve that righteousness. The sinfulness of the Israelites, stained by having lived in Egypt, necessitated the explicit law and its tutoring works, in order to

MSB 123 - restatement of Law (correct Sabbath Heb)
Only explicit Law (will of God) prior to Exodus were the one derived from God’s actions
1. Only God - He created all things (Rev 14:7)
2. Idols - Disobedience of God & Obedience to Serpent (Rom 6:16; Jos 24:24)
3. Cursing God’s name/character (in heart/action/feelings) (Job 1:5)
4. Sabbath - Day 7 (Gen 2:2-3)

5. Honor Parents - Noah and Sons (Gen 9:20-27)
6. No Murder - Cain (Gen 4:9-13; 9:6)
7. Cleaving marriage and Sexual intimacy (=man and his wife) of one man and one woman - (Gen 2:24-25; 3:7)
8. Theft - Fruit of Knowledge of Evil (Tree and Fruits (=KOGE) were not theirs) - Gen 2:16-17; 3:2-3, 4-7, 22; cf. Phil 2:6)
9. False Witness - Serpent statement
10. Coveting Cain wanting Abel`s blessing but not doing right thing (Gen 4:3-8)

Other laws added/revealed with sinful manifestations. From context of Egyptian Enslavement, False Religions, Unclean Diet, Immorality, etc.




Responses to: JUDAISM vs CHRISTIANITY_ A Parting of the Ways - Response to Jews for Jesus & Michael Brown - Skobac
Date Published April 26, 2012

[00:15-01:19] - Admits it is only a theoretical belief
-a bit speculative, tentative, not every jot and tittle has been nailed down, popular trend in scholarship.
=Current Christianity is wrong on misunderstanding Paul/NT Church and the Law

Talmud speak negatively about Jesus
Gospels show Jesus rebelling against Judaism

Law vs. antinomialism view
Jesus upheld 10C and heightened other civic laws
but not tradition (hand washing)
SDA understanding

Historical proofs better?

Jacob/James = James the Just

Jesus vs. Barabbas
many sudden reversal to Jesus
John 6
Samaritan

People only wanted what was best for them = “loaves and fishes”

Jesus was apolitical so disciples avoid discussing Roman occupation
-did mention them when those paths crossed
-Decree
centurions
-crucifixion
others

Luke 22:30 - get a sword
-arrested in Gethsemane

Jesus = God = “scandalous”
=bingo - that was why Jesus was arrested and handed over to be crucified (Matt 26:63-66)

35:00 - Jesus saying generation will not pass away
-“25 year” generation
-thus said in ca. 55 A.D.
If 15 years later as claimed, or even 40-year = 70 AD then why “add” this to the Gospel accounts at all as it is clearly not true and long passed

Humans become more like God - Jesus’s advent and victory simplified that task
Sin - repent - still, as sanctuary taught remission is needed

Joan Osborne’s Song “One of Us”  has nothing to with Christian Theology.
-Her point was that God could today be anyone of us - which is contrary to CHR Understanding as false gods.

Law = Mirror ~said by James (1:23-25) echoing Paul (Rom 7:7; 13:9)

Apostles were monotheistic - not!!

Ebionites and Nazarenes died out vs. Christianity

[59:08] - Ebionites were true followers
Gospel Ebionites: “I am come to abolish the sacrifices, if ye cease not from sacrificing, the wrath will not cease from you." (16.4–5)”
Hardly exlusively torah keepers

John’s Gospel in response to false claims in
Gospel of Hebrews, Nazarenes and Ebionites
Galatians = Judaizers


EGW is as valid a prophet as Balaam, Nebuchadnezzar who God gave prophetic revelations to even if non-ethnic Jews (PP & PK) - better than Talmud comments

(Gospel of the Nazarenes 17) At Matthew 21:12, Jerome records, "For a certain fiery and starry light shone from His eyes, and the majesty of the Godhead gleamed in His face."[34] Also, there is quoted in a marginal note of a thirteenth century manuscript of the Aurora by Peter of Riga the following: "Rays issued forth from His eyes which terrified them and put them to flight."
=DA 590.4

Again the piercing look of Jesus swept over the desecrated court of the temple. All eyes were turned toward Him. Priest and ruler, Pharisee and Gentile, looked with astonishment and awe upon Him who stood before them with the majesty of heaven's King. Divinity flashed through humanity, investing Christ with a dignity and glory He had never manifested before. Those standing nearest Him drew as far away as the crowd would permit. Except for a few of His disciples, the Saviour stood alone. Every sound was hushed. The deep silence seemed unbearable. Christ spoke with a power that swayed the people like a mighty tempest: "It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves." His voice sounded like a trumpet through the temple. The displeasure of His countenance seemed like consuming fire. With authority He commanded, "Take these things hence." John 2:16.  {DA 590.4} 

“Paul was a Heretic”
-Just continuing what Jesus had set in motion for the New Covenant




Responses to: #8 Inside the Missionary Mind

Living According to the Law


07:30 - Schoolmaster of Law Teaching
Torah was weak and useless Heb 7:18

Jer 31:32-34
writing of Law into hearts and mind done by Holy Spirit
-knowing God personally - through the Holy Spirit (John 14:25-26); 16:7-11) “Spirit” of the Law

Holy Spirit could only be widely diffused after Christ regained this world from prince power of air (Job 1:2)

No need, as in first covenant, for a law for everything leaving many “spiritual” loopholes which Jesus sought to close (Matt 5-7). Righteousness (right-doing) will be the Holy Spirit guided law.

Lev 18:5 - statutes and judgements - and not ordinances
Only ordinances against the sinner abolished - civil laws still applicable but out of doing what is right
Col 2:14 the law that was “in between” us (distinguishing, sanctifying rituals and ceremonies)
record of debts in laws against us circumscion was one of those distinguishing laws against them
Eph 2:14 - the Law in the commandments in ordinances - emnity
Gen 3:14-15 emnity between seed of God and seed of Satan
Gentiles did not have to keep the sanctifying Laws to be accepted as Israelites for Jesus had fulfilled that law in his perfect life/flesh and thus we have that righteousness through faith in him and not through the works of those laws.
Eph 2:16-19 Jesus was even the new Temple (John 2:18) cornerstone.
e.g., no abortion vs. Exod 21:24 accidental harm to infant

7th day Sabbath given at Creation and was very good.
All who accept the Covenant will be “taught of the Lord” Isa 54:13 (post resurrection development).
-Spirit still striving with men (as in Noah’s days)

hearts changed = having a heart that loves God and others

Most of the Law is regulatory vs. prescriptive as are 10 commandments
no need for 603 laws on top of 10 commandments (Rom 7:21) because right doing according to God’s law will be in the heart.

Rom 10:8 = Deut 30:12-14

Jewish perspective - unless we see we will not believe

exiled from land if Law is not kept
-that was the reason in Jeremiah’s time
-that was therefore also the reason in first century A.D.
Letter of the Law kept, but its spirit was violated
Law cannot be kept without also Having and keeping the Spirit - as revealed through the Holy Spirit
-or else will lead to a religion of loopholes as during 1st Century AD (Matt 15:) which God obviously did not approve of).

2 Cor 3:6 - Letter kills (decreed punishment); Spirit Gives life (mercy second chance)
A spiritualized punishment (probation)

Law given by God to specify what was not acceptable as people would live unrighteously
-a first in the world then
-inherently involved an automatic condemnation
-God would have preferred not explicit law, as before, thus default opportunity for mercy

Skobac has similar view by claiming that Second Temple was destroyed at God’s ordination in order to show Jews that sacrifices was not important but heart/prayer spiritual religion
-So God abolished the ceremonial parts of his law?? And then why reinstitute it later again?? When Messiah comes.
Wasn’t it the Messiah, new Covenant maker who was to teach the spiritual aspects of God’s law and covenant (Jer 31:31-34)?? = Jesus’ teachings and ministry

20:30 - Law indeed Is eternal, but not ceremonial aspects of it. Hence destruction of Temple and earthly priesthood and High Priesthood of Jesus

Second Reason: Not works
not saved by works
As God constantly reminded Israel (Ezek 16:; Psa -even with Abraham) they too were saved by an unpayable gift from the slavery of Egypt (world =sin)
-their law-keeping did not save them. Their act through faith in the Passover Lamb sacrifice is what permitted them (their first born) to live and then leave Egypt.
Or else they would have suffered the same penalty as the heathen Egyptians that night
So Covenant and Law was only given to keep that saved community from doing what displeased God and not to “save” them from Egypt and keep them a righteous community before God that He could then bless and protect and let them live.

Paul’s crux was in regards to the law as a means of salvation and not the law as an indicator of righteous living (Rom 7:21 - not known sin)


Who is Man?
Pleasure [29:30]
-This world is the only realm that man will eternally live in
Millennium concept
Only spend 1000 years in Heaven then return to this Earth (Rev 20-21)

We don’t have to “work for it” - the disobedience of Adam and Eve caused this chaos
-robe of light
-we instead have to be obedient to God
-God intends for man to have physical pleasures in the righteous contexts and not be ethereal spirits as angels are.

This GC age is to fully learn what the consequences of sin is and thus not repeat these misguided wanderings again.

Work in this world is physical and not merely spiritual work. God did not intend for sin.
Christians, at least Bible Christians, believe in sanctification, and that is done through righteous living (Rom 6:19-22; 1 Thess 4:3-5ff)

As stated before in OT and NT “Salvation/Justification” from slavery as from sin is both by grace and cannot be earned, but just believed in faith. Then Sanctification.

Mafia wants people to believe it does not actually exist
-even when its rackets are being done
-wants victim to think its acts are best for them
=Jewish view of Satan

Jews believe Satan is greatest blessing. Not so in the NT (John 8:44)
-1 Chr 21:1
-Job 1 &2
-Zech 3:1-2
It is the Serpent/Satan who claims that man needs to know and experience sin and evil in order to be complete (Gen 2) = anyone who teaches this is indeed a child of Satan John 8:44

bi-polar view of God = God says to stay away from sin but then tempts men with it ‘-for their own good’!???


God intended that Man, as later on with Israel, develop Godly character through merely obedience and not disobedience, curses, and suffering. Choose Life and Live.
God permitted temptation with the TKOGE in Eden but the consequences of disobedience was man’s fault.

War in Heaven Motif- God did not create the Devil

The virtue in being Good is inherent in being good and not dependent on being bad. Don’t need to first be a murderer and imprisoned to enjoy being free and guiltless.

Self-achievers could become arrogant and boastful
-but works does not produce salvation, just sanctification
and by these works ultimately being self-sacrificial, leave no room for boasting for when properly done, it will only result in joy of seeing the fruit of this sacrificing.

[39:00] Assurance of Salvation
Goal is getting back to Edenic perfection = God’s Ideal

[45:35]
Torah is incomplete
-to be completed by New Covenant’s Spirit
-role to play by Christians is there.
-no need for 1 million laws as in civil societies today

Deut 17:8-13 by Priests and  (then King vss. 14-20) = Deut 30:12-14?
God does let us figure things out on our own (energy) except in genuine emergencies
-OT Law (Num stoning of Sabbath Breaker)
Urium and thummin was to provide injunctive answers directly from God by stumped leaders (Num 27:21; 1 Sam 22:10)
-evidence that Law was not exhaustive.
=NT prayer to God for answers, which he only answers in genuine circumstances
=consulting with leading sages (Deut )
-same as with SDA discovery of truths

50:12-54:25 - Talmud Elijah story Bava Metzia 59b= “My children have Eternalized me”
=preserved energy - sin = death as a self defence for sinless God. Requires supernatural energy to overcome

-asking for miracle is tantamount to asking God for an indicating sign

Oneness of God
Not a bridging - just the price to pay for sin
-not God becoming like man, but showing us how to be holy like God

Mainstream Christianity against Remnant Church teaching

Paul quoting erroneous LXX - perhaps believed it was inspired or (Gospel for Gentiles)
Rom 11:26 [Isa 59:20]- ‘save people from their sins’ sins of unrighteousness
-the Jews then did not understand this as being sinful
-needed to know of the spirit of the law which gives live

Isa 59:20 -
-‘come towards Zion’ - the best of the best
-‘turn from rebellion’ = Dan 9:24
redeemer (#01350) = one who buys back (Lev 25:25)
=Rom 11:11-27 = they have to turn from their rebellion to be grafted in again.
Rom 11:29 - Gifts given to Israel and their Calling persists, but only to draw them to the full truth and not in further disobedience.
Deut 30 - if they return to God
able to sanctify themselves, but not obtain/merit God’s gift of grace

Gal 2:21 - righteousness in Law vs. Christ.

Talmud Sanhedrin 98a - Ben Levi meets Elijah
-When will Messiah come?
-Go ask Him yourself (Has already come on Earth)
-At the Gate of Rome
sitting amongst the poor and needy (Just as demonstrated in Christ’s ministry)
wanted not be delay
-sign - treating the poor (= Jesus ministry) come Today if they accept him (=Psa 95:7-8ff = Heb 3:7, 15; 4:7)

-Messiah was going to come while in vulnerable state (Psa 110:1)

Rom 11:29 - God still speaking to Jewish people according to former light (e.g., through Elijah) as with SDAs.

=Second Coming and not Dan 9 first Coming


Responses to: #9 Eternal Torah vs. New Testament

Torah = “instruction”
Bible = Written Instructions
-only Lecture Notes
-not all that has been orally said

Oral Traditions is not the same as prophetic revelation
Jesus had both teachings and revelations

Dumb attitude

Deut 12:21 - as I have commanded you = “Oral, unwritten Law”
Num 8:4 = Exod 25:9, 31-40; 26:30; 37:17-24 - specs for Candlestick

Sabbath Work = lighting a fire, so definitely gathering sticks was part of work

Sabbath begins and end at evening ()

Exod 16:29 - Not leave your place ...to go out and gather manna.

Only heard a voice at Sinai.
Idolatry = worshipping Jesus

Rom 3:2 - Written Bible is as reliable as Oral Torah and Jews must be trusted for both.

611 + 2 only after 10 C is the switch from God to Moses made
Second commandment in first person (Exod 20:5-6)

Oral = 187
Written = 424
Torah = 611+2

If written is 2x more than oral then oral would be ca. 2.5 books the size of Genesis-Deuteronomy

[34:30] - Oral kept secret so as to not have the key to unlock it all
Gospel of Christ is indeed the key
Jer 17:22 - Carrying burdens (oral tradition)
-Jer 17:21 - God had just given law on loads
-Jer 17:22 - keep sabbath day holy as commanded to fathers not new loads law, but working on Sabbath.
Ezra 10:3 - non-Jewish children married in the land. Covenant had already been remade (Ezra 9:1-2) Neh 8 Law had been read.
Non-Israelite wives already had children
matrinial descent in Oral Torah
arguing from blindness

[37:40] - Jesus accepts Oral Torah
Matt 23:1-3 Pharisees taught oral Torah
-Korban
-hand washing
-carrying bed on Sabbath
-[eating grain]
-

Way too much confusion in Oral Law for it to be from God.
-god not author of confusion (Babylon)

[41:00-43:19] Mar 2:23-28 - plucking Corn
Jesus gives oral law answer - virtually any commandment can be violated to preserve life
=Jesus “do good on the Sabbath”

45:00 - Righteousness by Faith
Gen 15:1-3 - How will I know?? Vs.8
Oral Law = God punished Abraham with 400 years of slavery
God makes covenant with Abraham not slavery curse (Oral tradition are interpretative attempts to explain what they consider not possible). Sins of Amorite not complete
Make void the word of God by traditions

Gen 15:6 - Abraham’s initial believe = justification righteousness = rest of his life was sanctifying walk
other 3 things mentions (actions) is sanctifying acts contrast is that faith is also considered as foundational to righteousness
Deut 24:13 - returning a pledge
Deut 6:25 - do all the commandments
Psa 106:30-31 - Judging evildoers
righteousness is also done in obeying God(‘s laws)
Gen 18:19 - righteousness = justice (doing something according to what God has said) which includes believing in God. Long before works of the law. (Gen 22:18 - obedience; Gen 26:4-5; Exod 19:5-6) SDA Understanding (Acts 5:32)
Deut 28:19 & Jer 7:23 - Obey God = blessing
James 2:21-24 - Faith and Works (Faith Which works)
not justified by works of the law but works demonstrating faith.
Christians have a wrong anti-law and obedience view.
Both James and Paul do not say that one is justified by the works of the law
-as Paul says Law came only ca. 400 years later (Gal 3:17)

Paul knew that righteousness was only sustained if confession was made sure in faithfulness

Heb 3:6, 14; 4:14; 10:23. Cf. Rev 2:25; 3:11


New Covenant permission = Because, as in Deut 12:20-21 permission, God’s Israel was now going to be worldwide and diverse.

54:54 - Forever (cites many verses)
Until they are ended (Exod 21:6; Jon 2:6)- as done by Christ in New Covenant (Jer 31:31-34)
Why then do Jews not observe ceremonial Laws even without a formal temple.
Deut 10:13 = Rom 7:12
In Ezekiel God had altered the Law (OT Intro 357 Talmud ref) Ezek 45:18-25
-only 3 of 6 feasts kept (Pentecost - Evangelism, Trumpets - Warning, Atonement -Judgement are no longer observed)
finding fault with then (Jer 31:33) God changed covenant

Paul’s hard sayings, by his inspiration 2 Pet 3:15-16 (not foolproof) dysnuoetos

Keeping Law more fully in Messianic Age
-Ezek 37:24

Messianic Temple - Ezek 44:9 - circumscied in flesh if they had accepted Ezekiel (Ezek 40:4; 43:8-10 )
Ezek 40:1 573 B.C. Temple was to be built according to that Template
Just like God showing Moses the patterns for the Sanctuary while in Heaven. Now for a Temple and land layout
If they were ashamed then Ezekiel was to relate specifics. If not then withhold this info. At their own detriment. (Ezek 43:10-12 - Law of the House)
Ezekiel not accepted in canon until ca. 1st Century AD by work of Hananiah b. Hezekiah b. Garon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hananiah_b._Hezekiah_b._Garon )

In Revelation 21-23, as in the closing visions of Ezekiel, the prophet is transported to a high mountain, where a heavenly messenger measures the symmetrical new Jerusalem, complete with high walls and twelve gates, the dwelling-place of God, producing a state of perfect well-being for his people.
Jews never see their own religious wrongs
white-washing
same as in Jeremiah’s day
revisionism: Talmud “Temple destroyed because they trusted too much in sacrifices’
=precise condemnation of Jesus. prove their own guilt and Jesus’ rightness.
-candidly pronounce their own judgement (=Matt 21:41)
What happened, God died??


That Temple is Jesus Christ
Could have had Ezekiel Temple built at Herod restoration

01:09:04 - ‘All world come to Jerusalem to keep feast of Tabernacles’
In NT spiritually understood Christologically (Messianically) and related to Dan 11:45 fulfilment. (NJK Project)

01:15:15 - “Paul Never says a positive word about the Law’
Au Contraire - Just the Jew gentile partition in the Law.

Laws distinguishing Jews from Gentiles could not be internalized in New Covenant
-circumscion

“End of the law” = goal of the law Rom 10:4

Gal 3:23-25

Holy Spirit is not in contradiction therefore Paul’s hard statement have to be harmonized with Bible - Major problem in Christian Church.

Gal 4:9 - Weak
Ministry of death 2 Cor 3:6-7

1 Pet 1:18 - “futile ways”

01:20:49 - Christian Argument
Jer 31 New Covenant
Law in the heart defaultly abolishes all outward symbolisms but these heart effectuations are shown outwardly. One is a follower of God in his heart and not by outward symbols

Problem #1 - All will know the lord
not “everyone” but only those who properly ascribe to that New Covenant = House of Israel and House of Judah.(vs. 31) God’s spirit does the convicting (Ezek 11:19-20; 36:26-27)

Problem #2 - Law was unbearable (Gal 6:13)
put law in heart directly through the Holy Spirit’s work - walk by the spirit and not the Law. Therefore not limit righteousness to only what is written in Law (Matt 5:20)

Psa 40:8 - delight to do God’s will and keep His commandments
1 Kgs 8:61
Deut 5:29

Acts 15:10 = yoke to physically keep them in line (Matt 11:28-30) God also did not require them to go to all nations which would have made this law keeping harder.
=”strong enough in order to bear/carry out”
the monarchial history is factually filled with centuries of lawlessness.

Cited Examples of OT people who were said to keep the law
Acts 15:5 Pharisaical Sect - Peter allusion to Pharisaical Laws Matt 23:4 & Luke 11:46 = Spurious Oral Law.
Our fathers include many many more than Just a couple of OT faithful like David who was actually pointed to by God as exemplary. Fact is most of OT people did not bear the law of God (Jer 31:32)
Saved by Grace (Acts 15:11) - salvation issue, and not sanctification issue.

Christ is the end of the Law so that there is righteousness for everyone who believes Rom 10:1-8
That you may do it does not mean that they can or cannot do it. (Deut 30:11-14)
Paul making a Christological application
Rom 2:13 - doers of the (ten Commandment) Law which are justified (=Matt 7:21-23), but by the free gift of Jesus Christ (Rom 3:21-26)
Also had same general Law Jewish understanding

Sabbaths as a sign to sanctify Israel

01:32:37 - Canonicity
5 Books of Moses - By belief
Book of Genesis (thus including the call of Abraham) through Exod 20:1 not spoken out loud. Then only Exod 20:1-22 spoken in the hearing of the people who may have only perceived it as thunder (Exod 20:18 = John 12:27-30)

Shepherds heard the announcement of Christ Birth
God publicly spoke to Christ at Baptism (Matt 3:17; Mar 1:11; Luke 3:22)

Book of Iddo the seer may have been rejected

Paul God his Gospel from visions and wisdom = many more things
Peter also preached end of the Law (Acts 15 & 1 Pet 5:18; later was acting hypocritically Gal 3:))
Acts 7:14-16 completely wrong
Gen 46:27; Exod 1:5  - LXX says 75 so LXX translators were wrong
(Deut 10:22) - LXX says 70
Gen 23:16-19 - Said Abraham instead of Jacob (Jos 24:32) Abraham had probably also bought that land when he built an altar there (Gen 12:6-7)
Gen 49:29-32; 50:12-13 - Stephen speaking of Joseph death not Jacob
So Only mistake is saying Abraham instead of Jacob in Acts 7:16. Under given circumstances not, a discrediting error as it was not under verbal inspiration, but in memory recollection (OT Bible has similar factual errors - e.g., Gen 15:13 Exod 12:40-41)

“Author of Acts” actually Stephen, not Luke. and Author of Exodus which is not Moses, also contradicted Gen 15:13

Major differences between Christians and Jews
Trinity - God is one in unity but not in number
Messiah is God - Psa 110:1
Messiah dies for sins of the world - Dan 9:26 & Isa 53
Atonement only through blood sacrifice
-remission/removal of sin - atonement is after judgement
Judaism prayer and repentance - Lev 5 sin offerings
Paschal Lamb provided the deliverance from sin
CHR - Everyone is tainted and stained
JUD - Everyone starts off with a clean slate

Then why didn’t only Adam and Eve have to bear the punishment of sin and not everyone else born from them??

Full Righteousness in not in works of the Law alone, but also in Faith in New, more extensive Covenant. Jews and Adultery (no law against lusting after a woman in one heart). - Righteous David’s failure

Satan - Angel of God
God’s own ministers do not break His Law (2 Kgs 22:18 - lying spirit)

CHR - all righteous people will be saved (Matt 25:34-40; Rom 2:14-16

Dispensational CHR view land of Israel as central to all OT prophecies

New Israel = The Church
DIS CHR = view Israel as distinct, lasting and pivotal

Olivet Discourse and Revelation Prophecies are signs of God’s doing (Deut 18:19-21)
-Through Historical and Day for Year understanding
-Is Jesus a false god?

Josh McDowell Proofs
-Jews did a more meticulous job of preserving textual accuracy.
But there is much more MSS
6000 - 12
23,000 vs. 12,000
Jewish and Christian preservation cover same time and Christians were persecuted from start and first, including by Jews and for ca. 300 years (AD 31-313) also nationally/globally by the State and armies Rome vs. Jewish local and persecution.
Jews had years of initial peace to assure their accuracy.
-LXX is demonstration of divergent views in Judaism producing a different texts
-actual vocalization cannot be verified with ancient text and may result in as many and similar types of NT MSS differences. E.g., is Dan 9:1 a hiphil or hophal (“made king”)
Oldest MT text is only from 9th and 10th century A.D.
Waldenses MSS destroyed

New but not wonderful things
=Talmud passages = all need to be tested (Isa 8:20 & 1 Thess 5:19-22)

Responses to: #10

Responses to: #11 UNDERSTANDING CHRISTIAN ANTI-JUDAISM (Anti-Semitism)

The crux of Christianity is the resurrection of Christ (1 Cor 15:13-19)
Started a New Religion centered on Christ - Acts God was adding to the Church (=called out of (judaism) ones)

Jewish Christians understood that the sanctify Laws did not apply to Gentiles.
Tension only supposed by Skobac. Statements of James was rather explanatory (i.e., justified not by faith alone but also by works demonstrating ones faith (in Christ) who is the one who actually justified. Thus 1+X=2 James pointed out that X=1 was missing.

Jews first tried to kill Christianity starting with Jesus. And failed.
Main Christian view is that they believe Jews killed God.

Anti-Semitic Passages

Demonic
1 Thess 2:14-16 - Acts documents persecutions and preaching oppositions before authorities

Matt 23:15, 23-26, 31-33
-Why defend Jesus? What difference does it make. (John 8)
Luke 11:42, 47-51
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Ezekiel
Zechariah
Elijah
Moses
[John the Baptist]

-fathers killed the prophets

62 verse in John
John 8:42 - spiritual children of the serpent

Synagogue of Satan in Rev is to be understood symbolically
=Rom 2:28-29 - people who heart are not circumcised


Superceded
Matt 21:40 - Jews did not accede to God’s New Covenant but remained in old passing one


Deicide
tried to stone Jesus
plotted to kill him
Also after Lazarus ressurection
Jews arrested and charged Jesus for being a false prophet
-they called for his crucifixion
-Jewish leaders insisted on death sentence

01:20:00 - Jesus was killed by Jews because he said he was God (”idolatry”)
-could forgive sins
-would destroy and replace the Temple

‘CHR return to Law’ except for 7th day Sabbath
-Deut 4

01:30:00 - Converts to Jews is as minimal and much less percentage wise than Jewish Converts to Christianism. And unlike Judaism, Christianity has more converts from people of the world.

CHR and Islam are seeding the world - doing their work. Won’t be irrelevant. I thought the Jewish Messiah would do any relevancy work?

01:32:00 - Jesus had mid ministry switch at rejection of the Jews
-inspired Paul with Full Gospel message
CHR don’t have this belief that parts of the Gospel were falsified or that Paul was a heretic
That is all from a Judaism biased perspective


Responses to: #12 How to Reason with Jews For Jesus

Converted Jews

Responses to: The Power of Persuasion (How Cults Recruit)

reciprocation (including concessions) - need of proof
consistency -
social proof - global CHR Testimony
scarcity -
liking (similar, flatter) - Sababtarian/Nomian
authority - scholarly
neuro-linguistic programming

Responses to: EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS & ISRAEL_ Knight in Shining Armor or Trojan Horse

30% Dispensationalists

Responses to: A RABBI CROSS-EXAMINES CHRISTIANITY (Jews for Jesus, Messianic Jews, Michael Brown) - Rabbi Skobac

[35:53] - Acts 21:21 - [Paul was never accused of rejecting the whole Law (i.e., 10C) but mainly circumcision and other “customs”.] Acts 21:27-28
Acts 21:27-28 - Paul became a Jew to Jews’ (1 Cor 9:20ff)
deeds of faith not law
Law was given to deal with sin and death. Vs. Christ - spirit giving life.

Kingdom of God is at hand (only said once
Jesus also spoke against the Temple

“Only one is Good”

Only God in Heaven knows the end

fundamental bias of “revisionist fabrication” against any opposing point.
50:09 - “My God and your God” = resurrected Jesus about to ascend
=submission of son to father (father son relationship)

John’s Gospel written in response to Jewish Sects John 20:31
-John himself was a Jewish Christian

Historical Anti-Semitism (Justin Martyr, Martin Luther)
-did known sayings in Talmud contribute to this

01:05:23 - Jewish Kabbalistic teachings
1840 - revolution of world knowledge
What does the Bible actually say: “understanding of the law”
CHR Seeds for own destruction - far off course (not in Bible study)
-only false Christianity

HaShem vs. Yahweh is a false God.

“More sure word of Prophecy” about Jesus - as Peter also saw
Daniel OT and Revelation NT

Temple Mount is probably Mount Gerizim

Talmud also does Midrashic “as it is written” statements for the Messiah
Sanhedrin 98a


Responses to: IS RELIGION KILLING JUDAISM

Skobac’s Testinony - [22:54-31:43ff]

Responses to: 1_2 HOW TO ANSWER A CHRISTIAN MISSIONARY

Proper Understanding of the Messiah Involves all of the following things
God Incarnate
Trinity
Partition ended
New Covenant
Christ’s Teaching
New/Continuing Israel

Real implication on becoming Christian
-partitioning law


What is the Messiah
A Human King vs. God Incarnate

Trinity
Mount Sinai Audible Revelation
-No Form
Angel of the Lord
Worshipped and Leading Israel

“US” passages
Gen 1:??; 3:20
Gen 18:??
Deut 6:4
Isa 6:8
[1 Kgs 22:??]

-Fact that Talmud sees a need to explain these passages reveals that their indeed in a problem.
A Single God would not refer to himself as plural, nor ‘include (inexistent) humans’ as if they were God.

(Satan and Trinity mp3)
Benny Hinn - nine parts

God is a united Godhead
Deut 4:35, 39 - The is none apart from Him
Isa 43:9-11 - no savior
Isa 44:6 - first and last
Isa 45: - no god beside me

There are plenty of hints, Israel just could not handle it (indeed they were prone to idolatry Hos 11:2)

Psa 146:3 - no salvation in sons of men. Vs. 4 thoughts perish when spirit departs
Ezek 28:2 - Satanic inspiration (Isa 14)

Messiah Human or Divine
Could not God incarnate Himself??
Absolutely = John 10:34-36 - Psa 82:6 = all men then why not the Son of Man (Heb 1:10)
Why become a man?
God can and did take on human form - to judge and to show the way to full deliverance
“God is not a man” in permanent form or nature . Does not preclude an, even lasting (future) incarnation.
Hos 11:9
1 Sam 15:
Num 23

 God came in that way to test. Like with Jews today who only want to see a glorious deliverance
are they willing to heed the spiritual (socio-economic) stipulations of God.
Jews should be most benevolent people vs. merely the “rich/wealthy” stereotype.

Deut 4:12 - only heard a voice no form

Isa 11:1-2 - As a man; going by faith that He was God, Jesus had to fear God (Matt 27:36-46)

Jer 30:9 Lord their God and David their King (also that is) no mention because Israel could not handle it.
Following Captivity they were less prone to idolatry (re-mentions of Satan in 1Chr 21:1 and =Zech 3) however first mentioned in Job story. Long hiatus between remention

Ezek 34:23-24 - Jesus: he and the father are one
Ezek 37:23-27 - God and Davidic King two people.
Hos 3:5 - their Lord and David
Psa 2:1 - The Lord and His Messiah
-Messiah is begotten by God (vs. 7)
-do homage/kiss the Son (vs. 12) = Gen 41:40

“All Christians agree” false (so skips the OT testimony)

“Good Teacher” testing him
Good does not mean God

Good and faithful slave (Matt 25:21)
good man (Mat 12:34)

“Good Teacher” was an odd appellation instead of merely “Master” as disciples
-so he was insinuating that Jesus was God and Jesus sought that confession from him
Others, even disciples  merely called him” Teacher”
John 1:38; 3:2; 8:4; 11:28; 13:13; 20:16
-so he was indeed implying something more

*Col 2:10 - circumcision and Baptism in Christ
James called Jesus - glorious Lord (James 2:1)

Jesus elsewhere said he was one with God (John 14:7, 10-11ff; Col 1:16; 2:9 MSB 2015), even publicly. (John 10:30, 33-36 Jesus specified he meant God and not spiritual oneness “unity”)
-Matt 16:16-18
So not a dissociation nor a one and only opportunity to make that point clear, but clearly just a test. As with Pilate (John 18:33-38)

Son of God does not know time of Second Coming
Only God in Heaven then, and maybe only God the Father will decide.
If not (John 5:22) Jesus knows when that time will have come.

1 Tim = one mediator
Paul also says Jesus was God. (Phil 2) So what’s your point.

John 20:18 - Resurrection claim
Head of Christ is God - sonship under God
Godhead heiarchy

Acts 5:38-39 - claim -Persecutions of CHR resumed later by Jews.

Make Christianity more appealing to pagan world

Torah Laws
ceremonial and ritual laws are not binding

Bible
OT & NT

Oral Law
As long as it does not contradict written Law
Israel referred to all Laws as Law because they had to kept all
however there were ceremonial, moral, civil, health, priestly laws

Replacement Theology
Inclusion of Gentiles

613 Commandments
Ministry of Death - cannot keep up with every single possibility


Why don’t Jews have indentured slaves?
Are Jews actually allowed to voluntarily live away from the land of Israel? = a curse

Isa 56:6 - Sabbath applicable to foreigners
Sacrifices and Offerings
-Hold Fast to (New Covenant)

Myth of the Oral Law

Matt 23:2-4 = Only when teaching accords with Bible
Matt 15:1-14ff false teachings to be uprooted

Written/Engraved on Stones (2 Cor 3:7) = 1st Covenant in general and not law of God
or: vs. law engraved on heart in 2nd covenant
not Ten Commandments but Law of Moses (Josh 8:32)
All that was written was all that Moses had spoken Josh 8:34-35
Circumscion (of what) not specified - according to what Abraham had done

No mention by Joshua of Oral Law

Given Sadducee dissent, not so clear cut

27:20 - Prophets only spoke of the persecution of righteous amongst the Jews, and that by their own apostate people (=Isa 53 and other servant songs) Not to Jews in general/ethnically but spiritually.

Reconstitution would have occurred by first century (AD under Jesus), but Ezekiel was rejected (Ezek 40:11ff)

All Jews today are from Judah Jews = Judah
Northern Israelite Jewish have been diluted amongsts the nations. Could only be regathered by gathering Gentiles. Samaritans rejected in Return.

48:19 - NO Historical record of Jesus but of John the Baptist
-Josephus testimonium (original) Mason, 168.
Mal 4:6 “et” direct object?? IBHS 177 10.3 - homonym and quite problematic

Jesus: IF john had been accepted he would have been that Elijah

In regards to you yourselves “Elijah the prophet”
IF David (Ezek 34, 36, 37, Hos etc), Jacob is symbolic, why not Elijah (=spirit and power of David
Jeconiah curse - straw man
-genealogy passed through adoption

Youtube Response video #2 - Plausible View, but not proof of virgin birth (Louis Ruggiero)
Solomon’s line was accursed (as was Saul) but not David, hence Nathan.
So still a son of David

Responses to: 2_2 HOW TO ANSWER A CHRISTIAN MISSIONARY

03:30 - Pilate’s “sudden” Mellowness
-awaken at 3 AM
suspected a conspiracy (Matt 27:18)
knew of Jesus - knew he was a crowd favorite
-feared the crowd more then than Jewish leaders
centurion report
-wanted to uphold rule of law

Matthew and resurrected saints
-God’s faith element
-not visually known people (no photographs)
-probably told not to reveal identity - even Matthew did not know who exactly
-just announced that Jesus had risen and they also have
-appeared only to believers (500)
-martyr OT people Zechariah, Abel, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Josiah, except for John Baptist
-


Matthew and John were eyewitnesses of crucifixion & resurrection.

Luke 1:2 - interviewed eyewitnesses and/or preachers of gospel

Mark = Peter also an eyewitness

25:29 - Ghost OT Messianic Passages
Matt 27:9-10 Jeremiah - meant Zechariah (Zech 11:12-13 paraphrase) Jeremiah collective name for Hebrew prophets section (MSB 1415)

Heb 10:5-6 = Psa 40:6 Paul’s extra-biblical revelation about Christ’s incarnation (2 Cor & Phil 2 Heb 1) LXX - part signifies the whole. (Quote MSB 1882) Midrash extrapolations = “wisdom of Paul”
Isa 50:5-6 - Servant song - opening of ear = to give over entire body
-back (Matt 27:26; Mar 15:15; Luke 23:16; John 19:1)
-cheek/beard ()
-spitting and humiliation (Matt 26:67; 27:30)

I don’t have to hide facts to validate my points

Psa 40:8 - Law within heart and not on stone (Messianic New Covenant fulfilment)
Greatest thing that Messiah could do was put law on hearts - but 1st Century Israel refused and thus that was postponed. God’s Holy Spirit does this work, not by force. Though hard to phatom today, perhaps no conscience voice before NT times. Annanias = Sin against the Holy Spirit (Acts 5). Much like sinners today have not convictions of Biblical wrong doing.
Even lying spirits have to be allowed.
OT People were to create for themselves a new heart and a new spirit by repenting of iniquities (Ezek 18:31 = Psa 51:10-11)

OT Holy Spirit only given by oil anointing. (Isa 11:2; 42:1; 61:1ff)

Trinity - Hint - God did not want to give that “hint” to Israel then and the Godhead is indeed one.
3 Visitors to Abraham
Zech 13:1-5 - lying spirits also limited by God.
Satan moved upon David

Isa 48:16 Involves Trinity and show that God’s Servant would not be a mere human (Isa 48:12 = Rev 1:17; 22:13) Isa 48:17-22 - speaks forth for God, thus also a prophet.
Servant speaks to Jacob/Israel (Isa 48:1) so not one and the same, but specifically is righteous in Jacob/Israel
-“I am He” could be understood as Divine (=Isa 41:4; 44:6; /Exod 3:14) but could merely mean, ‘I am God’s appointed one’.
“First and Last” = I am the one who has the founding and the ultimate instructions to heed. Incontrovertible.

Israel’s Abrahamic prophesies conditional on their obedience (Isa 48:18-19)

Servant is creator (Isa 48:13) = Isa 42:5
Isa 41:4 = Same as Yawheh - With the last vs. I am the last
Isa 43:10 = No God before = I am first
Isa 44:6 - No elohim beside (not “Me”)
Revelation = “Fifth Gospel” = John’s Gospel

Don’t know which part of Pro 26:14-15 to speak of.

35:45 - Messiah’s Work What the world will look like as a result of the Messiah’s work. It is taking 2000 years to naturally do so instead of by force as could have been done starting with the triumphal entry of Jesus. (=Psa 110:1ff)

‘Out of Egypt I called my son’ -Midrashically stated with effectuated New Israel in Christ.
Jesus the Messiah is God’s First Born

2 Sam 7:14 - (Heb 1:5 - actually 1 Chr 17:13) Speaks of Solomon committing sin. Jesus did not commit any sin, only took on the sins of men in Gethsemane and suffered their penalty. 1Chr 17:13 rendering is purely Messianic. It was a vision, thus a Messianic vision. Only spoke of descendants up to the Messiah. By 1st Chr, that passage was understood to be Messianic.

Pa 2:7 = Psa 110:1- Messiah was to be a begotten son of God. (Psa 30:4 - speaking of “surely known” creator God).

Deut 18:18 - “many prophets”
Deut 34:10 - Prophet like Moses is one who God will speak to Face to Face. (Deut 34:10-12=Acts 3:22-23; 7:37; John 6:14)
Therefore that prophet would have to ascend to heaven and have spoken to God in person or be from Heaven (Num 12:8) no other prophet like this until Jesus.
Presence of Father was continually in Him (John 5:19-46; 10:38; 14:10-11, 24)
Jesus related ‘what he had heard from father’
Clear Voice heard at baptism and John 12:38

Num 12:7-8 - To not fully righteous ones, God speaks in veiled/“dark saying” and also reveals himself in form to him.
=dark sayings = “riddles” Judge 14:12-19; 1 Kgs 10:1; riddles of the wise (Pro 1:6) denuciary Hab 2:6
= “parables” Psa 78:2, aka taunt-songs, proverbs (Isa 14:4; Micah 2:4)
=Isa 6:8-13 = Matt 13:10-17

Teaching should be:
clear - obvious (3rd Temple and restoration by 1 Century AD - people rejected Ezekiel)
Jes cannot be making non literal applications. Jews in America not spoken of.
-interpretive application is required.
consistent - all see it the same way - not when interpretive application is necessary.

John the Baptist - Was indeed accepted by Jews (John 5:35)

Peter Believed Jesus was Servant Acts 3:25-26 (Isa 53; Isa 59:20)

Psa 2 Sermon = Acts 4:24-28

Acts 13:31 - Apostles were witnesses of resurrection

Romans did not execute Capital punishment without ground = loss of revenue
-that is why they took that prerogative (Acts 13:28)
[Isa 7:14 - Immanuel - Allegorically Messianic. Just like we apply Bible stories to our experiences today for trusting in God. Matthew saw that circumstances were quite similar (Judah threatened by Rome).

54:36 - Duplicitous beliefs - How does he know Joseph had not had sexual relations with Mary. If Mary could have committed adultery or being rape (which would not have been a crime, and by law she would have to report it (cf. Deut 22:24, 27)), then Joseph could likewise easily have sinned or even raped Mary!

Isa 53 - Not clear - follower of Jesus did not understand this. Jesus told them - they would not hear it.
John 12:38 - John later understood this by 90 A.D. Paul by 55 A.D. Rom 10:16
The Messiah’s sin-salvation work advent was a testing advent, thus concealed. (Though Dan 9:24-27)

Acts 13:29 - Death was written about Jesus

David Had Law in heart (Acts 13:22) 1 Sam 13:14; Psa 119:34, 70
-because he loved it
-God’s Spirit help one to love His Law
-and thus do His will
Psa 37:28-31 -Righteous = Law in heart and thus inheritors of land. Wicked are cut off.

[Rom 15:21 = Isa 52:15 - post-events understanding]= sprinkling many nations with the Gospel

Matt 8:16-17 = Isa 53:4 - Messiah would be a healer. (See Messiah Checklist below)

Acts 8:32-33 = Isa 53:7-8 - Disciple Philip now understood that it was Messianic

1 Pet 2:22-23 = Isa 53:9 -

Luke 22:37 = Isa 53:12 - Jesus was saying that violence against him was coming. Disciples just did not understand. OF course 2 swords would not be “enough” if HE was here rounding up a militia to defend Himself.

[01:11:11] - “You could very well repent on your own of your sins” = straw man
though true in the sense of bearing the sins of another.
-paschal/sin offerings for unintentional sins (Lev 5)?? =
-Messiah does not come to “repent” for people. They have to do this on their own (Mark 1:14-15; Matt 4:17)
-thus not a reference to Pro 17:15.
-Like Lamb symbolism, Messiah was only to remove the sins away from the camp. Sanctuary Service. It is strange for a Jew not to understand their own Sanctuary service.
-If God was going to do away with First Covenant, then he needed a fitting substitute or else prior works was not even necessary. He crafted that substitute in His Messiah.
-Repentance is not forgiveness. Repentance allows for forgiveness of sin.
NT/NC repent and then be baptized (=Christ’s Passion 1 Cor ?:?) = E.g., Acts 2:38, et al.
Repent-Baptism-Holy Spirit (“seal of ??”)
-Jews understood that it was God who forgave sins.

Deut 24:16 offset by Ezek 18:20

Jewish leaders did not teach people of consequences of violating the law of God, therefore death sentence was upon all Judah then.

01:12:50 - Jesus did die because of the sins and rebellions of other. Therefore, one way or the other, He did die for them (=Ezek 18:1-4). They are therefore to pay for that unjust murderous death. (Isa 53:11) bear their iniquities. = Knowledge from opened ears (Isa 50:5-6; Psa 40:7 = Heb 10:5-6).
God wanted to offer him as a guilt offering in order to spare the sinful people.

Christian “belief” is a generationally passed on belief form the Apostle’s who witnessed these things in person (2 Pet 1:16-19) to their initial followers to today. Belief reaffirmed by subsequent prophesying and fulfilments (Revelation).
From the same scenario, Jews believe that was was said in Gen-Deut and so forth, is the truth.

Believed by Muslim (1.7) and CHR (2.2) = not despised and rejected. Yes rejected as Messiah by Muslims. = both prosper and exalted but also rejected by most (4.8B) Further effectively rejected by nominal Christians.

Grief and pain - not necessarily “constant” but only that he will not be free from it (acquainted)
-wilderness temptation by God’s directs (=Tempted in all points)
grief lost father, Lazarus’s death

A Man of Grief - destine to grief (Matt 26:38; Luke 2:35a)
each rejection and unbelief continually grieved him (Mar 3:5)

Isa 53:7 - (very talkative” =  call people to produce a valid accusation/judgement against him. = Isa 50:8

John 18:36 - kingdom not of this world. Not speaking to oppressors = the accusing Jewish leaders
Matt 26:39 - Not speaking to oppressors, but God.
Matt 27:46 - Speaking to God

Holocaust said to be because of CHR anti-semitic Statements - Deicide
They see it as fulfilling Isa 53 - thus are bearing their own sins.
Warped thinking. They could have resolved all their problems if they had properly done their restoration from Babylon.

Isa 53:8 - a stroke/Plague to them = consequences for the servant being cut off
and to his generation: who complained that he was cut off from the land of the living?? The stroke plague is due to them (=Matt 27:25) = 70 A.D. destruction; all according to Christ Prophecy (Matt 23:37-24:2; Luke 19:41-44; Dan 9:26-27) COL 294.1

Mark 11:13 - not season but it had leaves (= Israel (Luke 13:6-9) An acted parable = Jer 8:12-13 God Judgement)
Matt 24:32 - leaves said summer was near = should not have leaves in early Spring

If he cursed the fig tree and it did “violently” occur, then that was a miracle.!??! By God’s ratifying Mar 11:20

If Jesus had said to Pilate that he was not a king, which would be a lie, then Pilate would not have allowed him to be crucified. (King of the Jews).

Servant = Israel
Isa 41:8-9
44:1-2 -
45:4
48:20
49:3

Indeed only a faithful remnant few returned from Babylon = servants = Neh 1:2-3 “remnant of the captivity which is now back in Judah”.

01:21:06 - Second Coming would indeed shock most of the world (Rev 6:15-17) Peace and safety = destruction

Isa 52:14 =
astonished = appalled due to desolation
not “saying” in that verse = NASB So/thus his visaged

Servant was to have same (vicarious) experience as Israel, but because of their iniquities and rebellion that he will bear.

Isa 52:15 not at al “startle” but sprinkle (as in sanctuary service with blood) all other 20 occurrences involve blood (17 in sanctuary service), Isa 63:3 in judgement. Atoning sanctify by sprinkling of blood. Water in Red Heifer ceremony (Num 19)
=not Ezek 36:25 abundant water cleansing.
Mixture of singular with plurals in Servant songs not normal i.e., not one and the same entity but a single servant speaking to the larger community. Israel = only (potential) righteous. Thus not all.

Jewish people are said to be despised and rejected
Isa 60:14-15 - again Jerusalem, not people as a whole. Zion is hated, even by Israelites.
Ezek 16:5 - Not technically true of Israel/Jerusalem past was hated by other nations. Only in pre Davidic overtake days. So not Jewish people.

Jacob, Israel, Jerusalem, Zion = all distinctive aspects of God’s people. Indeed today Israel and Zion(ism) are distinct Political vs. Religio-political movement.

Circular view of despising applying to Jews to today.
Jesus popular = exalted and prosperous Servant

Isa 53 - not “shocked/startled” nation. Preconcieved premise of “other nations”.

Since 70 A.D. Jews suffered because they revolted against Rome twice
Lost Temple and then Lost City/State.

125-1948 suffering were mostly from CHR majority
-Jews had persecuted CHR through most of the 40 years till 70 AD
-as with Jesus, incited the state to do so
-proof that this was surely done with Jesus
WWII suffering was more socio-economic scapegoating than religious.

Reinstated by Force in 1948 and are now suffering because of harm being done to Muslims/Palestinians.

Christianity is left out of that loop.

01:25:30 - repentance is not the effectuating of forgiveness
there is a tangible death penalty to pay for sin (From Eden)
-Christ provided an once and for all time sacrifice. Therefore no need for the continual shedding of the blood of goats and bulls (Heb )

Pro 15:8 - still need a sacrifice when the prerequisite of genuine and contrite repentance is made.
The only reason why one should brings a sacrifice is because they feel sorry for their sins.
Since unfaithful Israel did suffer penalties despite sacrificing animals, then repentance was indeed always needed. Straw man to say that this is what CHR believe.
1 Kgs 8:46-53 = repent, then look toward Temple for prayer for forgiveness = sacrifice.
If they did not look, then no forgiveness. If no sacrifice then no forgiveness
OT Covenant need sacrifice and/or Temple for forgiveness. Jesus replaced both.
Hos 14:2 - offering of our lips
Hos 3:4 -be many days without sacrifice, prince, king (Hosea written before Northern Kingdom fell - 755-710) thus before 70 years of Babylonian Captivity.
Fanciful non-historically contextual Revisionism
Hos 3:5 - seek David their king (ancestor or Messianic descendant)

Micah 6:6-8 - Also be just, merciful and humble (i.e., ‘we have done nothing wrong or God owes us.’)

Psa 145:18 - could not offer sacrifices alone, but had to go through priest and temple.
They destroyed their own Temple, thus this is their fault.

Isa 1:11-16
Amos 5:22-24
Psa 51:15-17 (vs. “righteous sacrifices” vs. unrighteous ones)
Jer 7:1-7
Mic 6:6-8
Pro 21:3
Hos 6:6

Ninevites were not in covenant with God, did not have to bring sacrifices. OT Covenant was a object lesson of the reality.

“Do not know what they are doing” Unintentional sin. If intentional then they would have all died. When realize, no need to bring sacrifice since Jesus was that sin offering. Guilt offering = intentional sin (Lev 5:17-19)

Oral Law = “Case law” based on Written Law stipulations and precedences. So only passed on Case Law.

Sacrifices only for unintentional (unaware) sins. Therefore the need to always sacrifice.

Only way to be forgiven in NT is in believing in Messiah and all that He taught and did.

Why don’t Jews write God (=G-d) but say “God”???

For Dan 9 - Why is Isa 13&14 speaking of Babylon

Responses to: INTERMARRIAGE_ Is There Light at the End of the Tunnel_ - Rabbi Michael Skobac

Problem is religious, being unequally yoked.

Responses to: Jewish Meditation

Like Catholiscm - Spiritual Formation
Vain Repetition
Get a Personal Life


Responses to: Da’at Calm

20:00 - Let Us Make man - God speaking to all man (image and likeness) not dependent on others but on each individual.

Creation good not “good”

Satan tempt David thousands died - how is this God’s plan.

28:00 Need of Satan, Evil, Harm, “Matrix”
Probably born out of “suffering of the Jews”

Responses to: HD Judaism

10:00 - Talmud “Lost temple and Jerusalem because they only kept letter of the law.” Entire premise of New Covenant and Christianity (Not revolt but spiritual reason).

38:24 - want a better world free of distractions, why isn’t that beneficial for man

Responses to: WHY A CHRISTIAN MINISTER CHOSE JUDAISM_ Born-Again Christian Born Again as a Jew - Yehuda Tebbitt

Abandoning Jesus because of the Law is wrong

Responses to: SCRIPTURE TWISTING_ How Missionaries, Jews for Jesus+Messianic Jews Distort the Jewish Bible_ Skobac

They also have a problem of finding a personal Messiah

Utopian World
That gets done by Osmosis - brotherly recognition...not survival of the richest.


Bible is consistently clear, there is a Global Conflict and then Judgement by God, starting first amongst his people, and then His Kingdom.

Isaiah 40-55 - God’s Servant first comes to do the reform work amongst God’s people (48:6)

Isa 61 - and Christ’s delayed “days of Vengeance” = upon Israel itself (Joel 2)

Joel 1:1-3:17 || 3:18-21 [Judah]
Micah 1:1-3:12 || 4:1-5:15 || 6:1-7:20 [Judah]
Amos 7:1-9:10 || 9:11-15 [Judah]
Ezekiel 1-24 || 25-39 || 40-48 [Judah & World] [36-37 visions of future glory]
Isaiah 1-39 || 40-54 || 55-66 [Restoration]
-Isa 66:10-14 || 15-17 || 18-21 (people restoration)
Isa 11:4 - destroy the wicked
Isa 11:1- || 4, 14-16 || 11-13
Obadiah 1:15-16 || 1:17-21 [vs. Edom]
Zephaniah 1:1-3:8 || 3:9-20
Haggai 2:20-23 [Temple Rebuilding]
Zechariah 1-8 Apocalyptic Visions || 9:1-10 & 11-13 || 9:11-10:12 & 14
Malachi 1:1-4:4 || 4:5-6 before day of the Lord [Judah and Priesthood Refining (=Good but not Good enough) Reforms]
Hosea 1-10 || 11-14 [Israel Apostasy || God’s Restores] = Messiah’s start
Jeremiah 33 (Promise of Future Restoration) 44, 46-51 [Judgement against Nations]
Daniel 2:34, 44 World Kingdoms Ended and God’s Kingdom Established
Daniel 7:26 Judgment
Daniel 8:25 Broken without Human agency
Daniel 11-12 11:40 Israel Civil War

7 Trumpets approach

Nahum = Nineveh
Habakkuk = [Oracles for God to act]

Haggai 2:9 - The Temple was to be upgraded to have a latter glory = Ezekiel Specs

Preconcieved Agenda - Testimony of Jesus was well established
Then let Isaiah 40-54 speak for itself

God would lead His anointed to have many similar experiences as what occurred in the Bible
-same unchanging principles involved

Hos 6:2 - Heal US = group of people = US in Gen = Group of God

Israel = not Jewish People
Jew = Judah (ju, Ben, .5 Man) = Rehoboam on
spiritually means most faithful of God’s Israel
Israel then = Ephraim

01:20:00 - Matthew Midrash
backtracking
-Matthew Knew these facts and sought Biblical illustrating
-what the Bible might be alluding to

I can make claims of absurdity in Talmudic claims and Scripture interpretations

Lost sight of Midrashic readings
Jewish people are spiritually hardened “blind”
hardening (porosis) vs. blindness - Mar 3:5 & Eph 4:18
-refused to see the evidence before them in First Century AD
not an enduring blindness today as DISP-FUT believe, but merely a resulting effect

Rabbi Skobac How Christianity has so many followers.mp4

Matt 10:5-6 - Only sent to Jews prior to Pentecost (Acts 1:8)
-reformation started to overturn that veering to Remnant SDA Church
Constantine - adherents are free today. Nominal falling away

Catholic world astounded by James Ossuary
Historical Info on James??

Responses to: The Domino Effect Part 2 - Judaism and Christianity and the parting of ways

Jesus claiming to be Messiah = No problem
Jesus killed by Romans = Problem
-Jesus could have averted that death if he wanted to, just as he had miraculously done before with Jews (Luke 4)


Miscellaneous Comments
Num ??|Luke 8|Matt 23 - Jesus did indeed have “Law tassels”, but not long as Pharisees.

Responses to: The Domino Effect Part 1 - Judaism and Christianity and the parting of ways

Jesus didn’t start Christianity
Paul never met Jesus
Talmud stories not about Jesus of Nazareth

Why Abraham was chosen over Noah
-recognize Noah’s righteousness
-God had wanted to start over then, but his children went off course
-God then saw need of a religious people = Abraham

[Abraham knew that only lot and his family were righteous. His questioning of God was whether or not GO d would first do a exahustive judging of the characters of the people.]

Other Presenters

Daniel 9 REALITY CHECK
-Dan 9:24 not fulfilled. To be fulfilled by the people starting before the Messiah comes

Original Jesus Movement Part 1
Jesus himself halted his triumph and went to the cross instead.

-Peter Confessed Jesus as Son of God before Crucifixion
-Knew that Jesus would be raised on third day (Matt 16:21) picking and choosing what was true
Dan 12:2 resurrection = Messiah coming back from the dead.
Resurrection of both just and unjust and eternal reward and punishment.
-Wicked are eliminated not forced to believe and obey God.

Jonah Repentance
-were those people “saved” or just spared a precipitated, judgement death
-if “saved” then shows that salvation was available outside of the keeping of the law

Ezek 18 &33 - repentance, then sacrifice implied, as per the Law. God is not going to restate all the law every time he exhorts someone to repent.
Repentance and work of the law together confirm genuine repentance.

Jews cannot bring sacrifices outside of Temple (Lev 17:8-9 -tent)
-did so for 500 years before Temple.
-national relationship is not right.. so fix it or righteous/religious are also not right?? While even living in their own land.

Contra-trinity
Essence of God
One God - Bible does not
-Jesus Spoke of Trinity
-Jesus explained the Father
(not an excuse for idolatry)

Original Sin
Perfect = sin
None that do righteousness
Filthy Rags =

Abraham offering his son = work of faith
Man bringing a sacrifice = work of law
Work of faith is the ideal
Work of law = results in sure death (“ministry of death”)
sinner can be more readily forgiven for a sin when there is no express law than when there is
-as in judicial cases
-God’s ideal, no explicit law (and thus a pre-determined penalty), but righteousness

Law will change in Future
Yes in Messianic Age Ezekiel (MSB )
-Pentecost, Trumpets, Atonement Feasts = Because of Messianic Triumph.

Zech 6:11-13
Jesus was to first be King and Build 3rd Temple, then Priest
-King of the Jews (they rejected his rule (Luke 1:32)
-Establishes New Covenant and Church/Temple (Eph)
-Ministers as High Priest in Heaven (Heb )

According to Old Covenant Implication in Jer 31:34
-why don’t Jews “tell their brothers to know the Lord” (i.e., unfaithful Jews)

Targums

Isa 52:15
Jesus was “exalted” at ascension, to the right hand of God.
Jesus was always rejected when his works were not what the people wanted
-swines - farmers kick him out
-set face to Jerusalem - Samaritans reject him
-had to flee beyond Galilee
only one account of large crowd listening to him
-who would gather for a potential healing .. Only wanted “loaves and fishes” and not his teachings John 6:.

Isa 53
Servant does die
Isa 48:12-16:
Creator
Divine Messenger - Judge just like God
Prophet
Oral Law
Quite flimsy/obtuse quasi- straw man arguments
[includes Case Law claim is valid (Case Law = Man’s Judgements)]
Oral Law - a precursor to Scientific “Law” which would naturally discovered much later by man
Idolatry - All stated in 2nd Commandment
Deu 4 =Exodus and Sinai = Idolatry = All recorded in the Torah
Could be a cultural basis (e.g., vs. Christianized pagan festivals; Olympic Torch Lighting at Olympia)
Sabbatical law = mix of science reality and faith for supernatural intervention by God


Psa 78:4-6
[-Oral Law was written down in order to do this work of passing on. For similar reason as why Talmud was written down.]
-Testimony = 10 Commandments (Exod 31:18; 32:15; 34:29)
God was only able to speak the 10C to Israel directly

Deut 4 not proof of Oral Law (from God)
just actions of God in accordance to written Law (2nd Commandment)
-nowhere does it say: “and more things God revealed to them
-deliberately concealed law is a fanciful claim
-God wanted other nations to know and appreciate all of his laws (Deut 4:5-8)
[In fact it is quite manifest that it was the Written Law was the Oral Law before it was written down after the fact, by someone other than Moses, in Exodus-Deuteronomy]
Moses wrote Law = Exod 24:4; Deut 31:9; Josh 8:32

Psa 81:3-5 - New Moon Law
“ark of testimony” to enclose the tablets of the testimony

Covenant is an agreement between two parties so that a item can be realized (Righteousness)
knowledge of Sabbath before 10 Commandments (Exod 16:27-30)

Deut 4:10-13 - God’s Covenant is basically the 10 Commandments (Exod 34:28)
Deut 4:14-15 - The Statutes and judgements added
God’s New Covenant with Gentile is the Abrahamic Covenant based on Faith.

Isa 59:21 - New Covenant (Jer 31:31-34) with faithful Remnant and Returning ones (Isa 59:20 = Rom 11:26-27) Spirit and Words - That is what Jesus did starting with 12.
=Most of People unrighteous (Isa 59:11b-16)
-God’s sifting Judgement (Isa 59:17-19)
Then raising up of Zion within that new Covenant (Isa 60)
Then work of Zion (Isa 61)
Then Zion established (Isa 62)
Then God’s Judgement on the unrighteous in other Nations (Isa 63:1-7)

Historical Songs of God’s Zion and its Ordeals (Isa 63:8-65:16) = Judgement Period
God Restores all things (Isa 65:17-24)

Closing Salvo (Isa 66)

Jesus was the New/Correcting Oral Law
-you have heard it said....but I say
-Jesus said much more things (John 20:31)

1 Thess 4: “fallen asleep” = losing faith - no clearly means have died.

Nazarite Vow
Acts 21:25 - James firmly believed that Law did not apply to Gentiles, but only to willing Jews (vs. 21)
Paul became a Jew to Jews to save some (1 Cor 9:20)

God’s Law is eternal but in NC in the Heart through God’s Spirit; and also not by external demonstrations.

Face Off
Deu 6:4
Yahweh is our Elohim, yet Yahweh is a unity
Gen 18:24 - Yahweh rained fire from Yahweh in heave
Jesus/Angel of the Lord could be also called Yahweh
-Messenger of Yahweh - Michael, Angel of the Lord
-Spirit of Yahweh (Holy Spirit)

echad (chd) probably related to yachid (ychd)
-prefix ya attached to indicate naturally flowing “imperfect/prefix) circumstance
=e.g. 2 Sam 22 “one sheep” last one left
-or “one of its kind from his entire flock”

Messianic Prophecies
Dan 9:24-27
Isa 9:1-7
Micah 5
Dan 7
Isa 48:6
Isa 53
Isa 11:1-11
Mal 3

Dan 7 - Like a Son of Man = one who was born of man, a human, Moses, Enoch or Elijah = or Jesus
-given a kingdom on Earth (=Psa 2 & Psa 110)
-Post ascension of Jesus
-after a judgement

Lev 17:11 - no other method for atonement which involves blood
NASB - it is blood with life makes atonement
loophole view, mentality “religion”
Lev 4:20, 26, 31, 35; ch. 5 -sin offering atonement

1 Sam 3:14 - sins of Eli’s sons were forever and could not be atoned for
-Sacrifice had to be acceptable to God and not a mere formality (=Isa 22:14)
2 Chr 30:18 - Prayer for pardon
Psa 78:38 - unmerited or asked for forgiveness
Psa 79:9 - Not automatic; God pleasing (=Jer 18:23; Matt 16:19; 18:18; John 20:23)
Pro 16:6 = Lovingkindness and truth (mercy) = iniquity is atoned for
=covers a multitude of sins
Isa 6:7 - Isaiah forgiven by God
Isa 27:8-9a - judgement = atonement for sin, thus possible free restoration of Northern Kingdom (Isa 28:12-13; Ezek 36)
-they had already paid the price
Yet further reforms still needed for “full price” (vs. 9b)
-Babylonian exile was for sabbatical violations (70 years paid for restoration)
Restoration is not forced. as in Return from Babylon, “trumpet is blown” indicating God’s will for a return, but only those who freely want to are the ones who will return. If not enough, or non at all, then no return possible and plan is scrapped.
=Dan 9:24 - 70 Weeks to make atonement for iniquity and anoint a most holy (Ezekiel Temple)

Isa 28:18 - covenant with “natural” death “paid for” by a premature overflowing scourging causing premature deaths.

Ezek 16:63 - Israel and Judah’s humiliation is price for forgiveness. (Collection agency)
Not done for their sake (=not because of love for them) but for God’s name (Ezek 36:32

SOP - In Deut 34:1-3 Moses was shown Canaan in Eden restored form (=Ezek 36:22-35 & Isa 65:17ff = PP 472.3) - As this never happened with OT Israel, then it was not an actual view, but a representative possibility
Deut 9:5 - no other option by God as other existing nations were more wicked.

Ezek 18:21-22 does not mention atonement, per se, [just forgiveness of sin]
-righteous acts atone for sins (Ezek 33:14-15, 19)
-That is how Nineveh was spared
justice and righteousness must be tangibly practice to tangibly atone for past waywardness
-restitution had to be done for full atonement (Lev 6)

Faith only possible in Christ because he paid the full penalty for all/any sin.
-Righteous however must not continue in sin (Heb 10:26-27)

NC - Deut 30:6-14 same old law. Then why not according to OC with fathers.
-same laws, more spiritual than literal/external.
Through an understanding of the spiritual meaning of the laws
-scientific revelations = why law should be obeyed
=in order to be healthy, good, just, a true witness, etc

CHR saved by blood of Lamb, therefore do not have to do any works to be forgiven, as in OT (Ezek 18:22)
==life must come from blood
-no works of righteousness, lovingkindness, truth, etc, but merely faith, certainly not penances
-only when there is no faith are works a remote substitute, but faith is much more simpler and easier. Just lives by his faith.
Abraham was later justified by works because his subsequent sin of going to Hagar had to be atoned for.
Therefore God tested him to see if he really was “a fearer of God” (believed the power of God) Rev 14:7
All this time his fear of God was assumed by God (wanted the promise)
Believed God could still bring about the promise by asking him to offer that unique son as a sacrifice. (Heb 11:17-19)
As a result of those works his faith was perfected (James 2:22)
Faith without doing the works of God = no actual faith.
Prior righteous works not a Carte Blanche (Ezek 33:12-13


Did not Israel know this already by 1st century AD
-missing Pro 16:6 aspect of forgiveness
=i.e., not mere religiosity while being unkind and teaching falsehoods

Psa 110:1 (=Acts 3:21)

Book 1 (41): Psa 1-41 - blessed
Book 2 (31): Psa 42-72
Book 3 (17): Psa 73-89
Book 4 (17): Psa 90-106
Book 5 (44): Psa 107-150
My Lord = God the Son since Holy Spirit sent to this Earth

IBHS 11.2.1f
-indefinite authorship
a Psalm of David (one of many) vs. the Psalm of David

According to Order of Melchizedek
-How is Messiah/Branch a priest (Zech 6:2) as properly translated
if he is not a Levite
was to be a priest king like Melchizedek

not same a Psa 72
David is speaking in the spirit for he is quoting God.
“Yahweh Says” is prophetic
-2 Sam 24:12
1 Kgs 22:14
Isa 21:6
Isa 41:21
Jer 30:3

136 “Lord” Adonay only used with God “Lord God” (Check)
113 “lord” adoni is used of men
Gen 18:27 - Abraham speaking to the Lord
Gen 19:2, 18 - my lords = two angels
thus that Psa 110:1 “Lord” was at least an angel = Angel of the Lord

Acts 7:30, 38=Exod 3:2 = Moses was speaking with the Angel of the Lord
-Exod 19:17 - met Elohim

Was titling of Psa part of original text
Why no answer as such from Jewish leaders

Dan 7 Son of Man is then in Heaven and then comes to Father to receive a kingdom
-judgement is set to make up that kingdom

Isa 53 could have been entire nation of Israel if faithful, but realistically only a faithful portion/remnant, even one person (no man when I came; Moses one man)
Gradual degradation in Isa 40-54 servant songs - National, to Remnant, to Individual, to restored large group in Zion (Isa 54)

SIT at right hand = more physically involved and specific = ascension to God’s throne
(Rev 5:1, 7; 12:5)
Psa 16 = resurrection Psalm - right hand

Messiah Cannot Rule twice
(Jer 18 - injunctive acts of God (God and Future))
-Disciples did not know their Bible, nor were prophets, as Jesus was
-many examples of them not understanding what Jesus taught
-were greatly conditioned by years of having learned the teaching of Jewish Leaders
-knowledge was not to be limited to them (Matt 5:20; 15:1-6)
were disappointed because they heard nothing before (=picking and choosing NT statement)

Pre-Death Claims of Jesus
Had Biblical Knowledge
Had Direct Knowledge and Revelations from God
Jesus pointed to his Great works which were recognized (John 3:1)
Sign of Jonah for an adulterous generation = Death

Christ in Passover
3 unleavened bread
-a Rabbinic teaching
-Rabbis may have been impressed to teach this
“Deu” “can DO it - exegesis - not far and unknown = not impossibility of it.

Bible on Commandments
If righteousness came by Old Covenant, then no need for a New One (Heb 8:7-13; Jer 31)
-said in context of faltering and most atrociously failed 1st Covenant - destruction of Jerusalem and Temple and Exile (=Curses of Deuteronomy)

Dealing With Sin
-mastery over sin
-God said he needed a better covenant with Israel
-righteousness comes from failing 7 times

Jesus and Holocaust
=Consequence is destruction of Temple and Jerusalem
-leading to loss of Homeland
-leading to dispersion
-leading to being at mercy of countries they were in
-respectively leading to ongoing conflicts in attempt to retake possession of Land, Jerusalem and Temple Mount

Objection to Jesus as God
(‘Abraham saw my day’)
immediately recognized him as God and thus worshipped him
Moses saw the back of non-incarnate God while on Earth (Exod 33:17-23)
-and that Glory was so Moses could best know how to lead the people (Exod )
So God could incarnate Himself as a human being
-was Yahweh - [‘no man hath seen God’ in his Divine form]
Gen 19:24 - Yahweh cast fire from Yahweh in Heaven

-one of the other two angels was also Yahweh.
God the Father had priorly returned to Heaven (Gen 18:33)
-Jesus “cast fire on Earth (Luke 12:49-50)
Gen 19:29 - Elohim destroyed the cities.

Holy Spirit was also incarnated into a Spirit.

Abraham worshipped a man
Joshua/Gideon worshipped an angel

=Angel of the Lord/Presence appearances (=a covering Cherub)
52 mentioned in OT
-receives worship = Michael
Was Physically present with Yahweh at burning bush [Mount Horeb/Sinai] Yahweh speak (Exod 3:1-6 = Acts 7:30-33). Angel of the Lord = Yahweh. Elohim called to Moses.

Philo identifies him as Logos (=John 1:1-3's source??)

Documented Similarities

The Hellenistic Jewish philosopher Philo identified the angel of the Lord (in the singular) with the Logos.[4] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_of_the_Lord
Michael is also said to have had a dispute with Samael over the soul of Moses.[18]



Gen 22:15-17 = Angel swears by Himself. The one who made promise to Abraham (John 8:56, 58. Vs. 59 - understood the identification he had made with God)

-messenger of the covenant (Angel of the covenant/testimony = covering Cherub who “looks into the 10C)
Jesus was manifestly aware of all of those “Angel of the Lord” passages.

Balaam Stopping (Num 22:22-35)

Judges 6;11-12, 21-22 - appeared to Gideon and ordered Divine worship.
Judge 6:13 - Gideon does not know it is the Lord - call him adon (lord)
6:14 - I Have sent you to fight against Midian
6:16 - (shortened to) the LORD said to Gideon
6:20 -angel of God. 6:21 - Angel of the Lord
6:22 -Gideon then realizes that it was the Angel of the Lord when vanished. (Knew it was at least an angel.)
6:23 - The Lord speaks to Gideon.

Judges 13:3-21 Announced birth of Samson.
Jud 13:6, 8, 9-10 - Incarnate appearance like a “man of God”
Jud 13:18 - name is “wonderful” (#6383 = Isa 9:6 =#6382) = [Michael] vs. Gabriel (does not reveal that telling name).
Jud 13:20-21 - is worshipped when he disappears in flame. Then knew it was the angel of the Lord. (Always appears like a man)

2 Sam 24:16-17 - Present at destruction for David’s census sin, was the destroying angel himself (1 Chr 21:12-30)

1 Kgs 19:7 - Appears to despondent Elijah

2 Kgs 1:3 - Sends Elijah to confront Amaziah’s envoy, then Amaziah (2Kgs 1:15)

2 Chr 21:16-19 - angel command Gad, and Gad then speaks in the name of the Lord.

Isa 37:36|2 Kgs 19:35 - Struck down 185,000 Assyrians

Hos 12:4 - The one who wrestled with Jacob and authoritatively blessed him and changed his name = An angel = “wrestled with God” (Gen 32:24-29 (= a man) )
Gen 32:29 - refused to say his name
Gen 32:30 - Jacob knew it was God who He had seen. Peniel (“face of God”
Gen 35:10 - God appeared again to Jacob, restating name change (=man/angel/God of Gen 32:24ff)

Dan 10:21 - Only Michael has such strength (fighting not done by osmosis)
-mind sovereignty overruling.
Dan 12:1 - Michael stands guard of the People of God

Dan 3:28 - Nebuchadnezzar angel = son of the gods

Zech 1:7-12 -Man Rider on Horses is AOTL, intercedes for Jerusalem (=Rev 6 4 horsemen = Jesus)
a distinct vision angel present (vs. 9)
horses answer the Man who is the AOTL

vs 12 - AOTL speaks to Yahweh in intercession

vs. 13-14 - relating angel speaks in the name of the Lord of Hosts.

Zech 3:1, 5, 6 - Is Joshua’s Advocate

Zech 12:8 - like God, like the AOTL, before them.

Hint: Dan 9 and Zech 1 Four Horsemen - Fulfilled by Jesus, thus not angel relating those vision, Later Gabriel had that role (Daniel). Cf. King of the North vision in Dan 10-12.

Job 33:23-24 = an angel can be a ransoming mediator

2 Sam 24:22 - lord (#0113) used for king.

=”Angel of God”
Gen 31:11-13 = Appeared to Jacob to establish covenant (above ref.)

Other Possible
Gen 24:7, 40 - to find a wife for Isaac

Regular Angel (lesser tasks) (not “My Angel” but “an angel”)
1 Kgs 13:18
Dan 6:28 - in Lion Den
In Zechariah’s visions = Zech 2:3; 4:1, 4, 5, 5, 10, 6:4-5

Regular Angel relating the words of God instead of synonymously saying : “I ...”
Miracle Working can be part of Covenant Establishment (Exod 34:10)

‘Jewish Problem with Human Being God’
OT people seeing Theophany had no problem saying a man or angel was God. It is right to call a rose by its name. Question is: was Jesus actually human or God incarnated, through birth in a woman ... long term (i.e., 38 years)

Jews4Judaism use quasi-midrashic vs. exegetically present words/thoughts to circumvent difficult passages. Or outrightly ignore them while harping on what seems easy to refute.
God did not make himself “not God” in any Theophanic, physical, Incarnation. Same with Jesus, and God the Father remained on His throne. Phil 2 - Jesus was fully God and Fully man.
Philosophical arguments to limit God.
OT People repeated pointed to men/angels and called them God.

Righteousness through confession
Does pardon them mean then no need to obey the Law
-does not that prove why Christian see that forgiveness of sin is possible through a faith/word interaction with God and no longer through sacrifices. Except CHR have a thus saith the Lord for no longer subsequently offering sacrifices, Jews do not, but a mere rationalization of men. Unlike Paul, they did not get their Theology from God.

God permitted destruction of Temple and Jewish move away from sacrifice to spare animals (Jonah 4:5, over the last 2000 years, as any sacrifice would be completely useless.
-Gen 9:4 - life of man justly shorten by killing animals for food; Religious sacrifices served to preserve life of man.

“Jews Believe everyone, Jew or none Jew has full access to God.” =NT Theology Heb 9:?? Come boldly...” Then why resuming sacrifices in Third Temple and Messianic age??? there were no sacrifices before sin in Eden, why the in Messianic age? Will it still be a sinful age. (Contra. Isa 65:17)


Lev 17:11
Whole Chapter is about sacrifices not on eating blood ()
Blood makes atonement because of life in blood
So it is life that makes atonement (Lev 17:14)
it pays the death penalty (Gen 9:4)
Atoning Altar was Gethsemane (Penalty of 2nd Death)
Cross was curse or Pagan Altar


70 Weeks Audio Presentation
423-70 AD
-untenable historical dates a.k.a - “missing years” - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_years_(Jewish_calendar)
An admission that Temple destruction was prophesied in Dan 9:25-27
no covenant making between 63-66.5-70 A.D.

Dan 9:27 = temple destruction was because of most extreme abomination.
What was that most extreme abomination
Ezek 8 = abominations - post exilic community did not explicitly do such things (spiritually yes)
more extreme than that
Maccabean and Other Fulfillments
Onias View (382 years??)
70 Weeks
time to be computed beforehand

Circularly seeing Jesus
-just replace Jesus with the Messiah
-chronology and its events don’t change and at such a specific time, this was all only done in Jesus’ life/ministry and then his 12 disciples

Why did God destroy the Second Temple which He had filled (Ezra 6:14)??
Gospels and Matt 23 indictments of Jesus

CHR target Jews also because of quasi-cognate religion vs. even Muslims
CHR fulfills Judaism

Why No Temple Rebuilding
Jews do not even keep their own law
-make void by their traditions
-God destroyed Second Temple
-want such a divine justification so as to not rebuild

Why No Sacrifices
‘God feels that they would not understand’
-OT teaches that they should do both, and not ignore either aspect of repentance
-revisionist convenience
-Jews, especially over time, never see anything wrong with them, -it all God’s “fault”
sacrifices are “outward expression” that is also exactly why the NC does not need them anymore

Who is a Jew?
An heir according to the promise (and not merely or only flesh (=Ishmael)) of Abraham
-Abraham was to be, through faith, father of more than one nation
So converts to that faith are also children of Abraham
-Thus a Jew is one who is inwardly righteous. More matter of heart than flesh.
-rebellious people are not God’s people any longer (Message of Hosea Hos 1:9 - the were illegitimate children)
Hos 1:10 = Gentile Infilling (Rom 9:26; Acts 2:; John 1:12: 1 Pet 2 :10)
Isa 65:1-9 (Post restoration of Gentiles) = God establishes a Remnant Gentiles for his servants (Isa 65:13-16)

General Notes
Isa 56:8 - Others to Gather = John 10:16
Luke-Matthew Harmonized Genealogy. (Chart Gif)
Messiah to also fulfill Scripture OT - Word of God

Jewish Gospel Objections

Jewish Messianic Expectations
God Only Speaks Clearly to Most Faithful People (Isa 6:8-13 & 28:5-13)
Jews are acting as if God owes them something...but have they been faithful.
If yes then why those “curses” = “Most extreme of Abominations” Rejection of the Messiah (Dan 9:26-27).


Jews is actually only people from Southern Kingdom of Judah - Where are people of Northern Tribes??

Ezek 36:26-27 - Put Spirit in New Israel Covenant people. Cause to walk in statutes

Plurality and Trinity
Jewish countering

God Became a Man
God can kill Himself
-does not have any reason not to
-unlike what happened at the cross
-Jesus forsook worship immediately after resurrection when He had notice that God in him had died on the cross
-ceremony in Heaven to be worshipped again.

Prophet Like Moses - an incarnate flesh&blood person
become like God
God came to show the way

In freeing Israel, Moses was to be like God. (Exod 4:16)

Haggai 2 - Jesus Temple Visit
-Ezekiel Temple - not followed
-therefore superceded by Jesus being Temple
Hag 2:9 - glory of House = Material glory not Shekinah Glory.
-would have to first build according to present funding (Ant 15:11.1 #386)
-but later when they will have greater funds, Ezekiel’s temple
-did not do so with Herod’s rebuilding in ca. 19-18 BC
Charity and Good deeds moved to the forefront
-not left the other undone
-why would God do this by destroying his temple
-and without any warning (Amos 3:7) unless of course Jesus was that warning. (Did not desire sacrifice (Matt 9:10-13 = Hos 6:6))

Jesus Messiah broke relationship
-magnified the law and righteousness

Blessing all nations
-God’s Program
-Separate Nation
Isa 60 - world in darkness.

Torah Observance and World
Jesus was a Torah observing Jew
-then religious rulers were wrong about their claims of Sabbath breaking
-chief reason to put him to (Capital) death

Matt 5:18 = “....as far all might be accomplished” i.e., until the Cross. (=John 19:30 = “It is finished”; cf. Gal 4:4)

Where did Christians Go Wrong since prooftexts are wrong
OT only spoken to Jews
-New Covenant incorporates Gentiles (Exod & Isa 56)

Jesus and Peace in Middle East
-only Jesus has best revelation and teachings for socio-economic and religious peace

Did Jesus Protest
-Willfully arrested
John 18:30 - trying to get himself off the hook
-told truth to inquisitive Pilate
-admitted to Pilate that he was a King
-kingdom not of this world makes not sense if only a human

Millions of Jews went to their death
Not Revolting Jews - Died from and in lost war
Holocaust Jews did not know they were going to death
-complied in order not to be killed
-even when going to “Gas Chambers”
-knowing Jewish guard said nothing in order not to be killed

Prolong His Days
-God, stained by sin, died on the Cross
-man- was resurrected (selective claim)
Isa 54 spiritual children
zerach - literal seed
Gen 3:14 - how does serpent have seed if this is only literal
=spiritual children (sons of God vs. Sons of men) Gen 6:1
=Isa 1:4 - offspring of evildoers
=passed on evil traits which are only externally rendered, though genetical affected

Regathering was to take place during 490 years

Isa 54:3 - The claim that Isa 54, which in speaks of the post-sufferings glorious triumph of God’s Servant(s) (Isa 52:13 & 54:17), ‘cannot apply to Jesus because the word for seed/offspring/descendant (Heb. zera -Strongs #02233) can only have a literal meaning and Jesus had no literal/natural children of His own’ is exegetically untenable unless, from its use in Gen 3:15, there has, and still exists a half-human & half-serpent race on the Earth, even to this day!!? Clearly/Logically when God spoke of the ‘seed of the Serpent’, (who, as the NT understands, was actually Satan (Rev 12:9; 20:2; cf. John 8:44)),

(which in Christian understanding is seen as what wil

Gal 4:25-27 - Jerusalem from above (Isa 54:7)
Isa 54:11-12 = Rev 21:2, 9-21
John 6:44-45


Messiah Checklist
Signs & Miracles (Raise the Dead (like, only Elijah/Elisha) Matt 8:16-17 - Healing Ministry (Exod 15:26; Deut 7:15; Egyptian Curse Deut 28:58-60 - generally allow them to naturally take root within Israel.)
Sin Pardoning and disease healing are linked (Psa 103:3 = Genesis fall)
Prophecies - Past and Future ones
Mission/Ministry
Teachings
New Covenant

Messianic Jews - Biblical vs. Rabbinic
Jewish symbols are of Rabbinic origin

“Jewish Bible”
No such thing as “Jewish Bible” Our Bible
That’s a passe Christian dichotomy
Since the story starts millennias before Abraham
It belongs to anyone who believes in God
It so happened to be, by God’s design, the ethnic Israelites for most of the OT

Ezekiel Messianic Temple
Mount Of Olives Relocation?
Red Heifer Purification Hiatus

The Coming of Elijah
Possible: Messiah-Elijah-Day of the Lord
=Historical Moses/Prophet-Elijah-????


The Jewish Experience - God’s People?
Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome Subjugation (490 years of Probation before full reinstatement (Dan 9:24)
70 A.D. - Why Temple not rebuilt
Bar Kockba Revolt (Messiah delivers from Romans)
European Persecutions
Holocaust
Conflicts with Palestinians


Sin and Salvation Part 1&2
CHR - Savior
JUD - Political and Physical Salvation [Yeshua used that way (03444)]
CHR - Salvation from sin - Jesus replaced Old Covenant

Title: “Salvation for Orthodox Judaism”

Gen 49:18 - For your Yeshua I wait

Psa 106:4-8 - Sinned like fathers when in Egypt yet were save (03467 - yasha) by God.
Isa 56:1-2 - persisted sins prevent salvation
NC law in the heart provides a deliverance from sins (Ezek 36:26-27)

Isa 56:6-7 = Foreigners who join themselves to Israel can become God’s servants

Heb 9:20-21 - blood of the Old Covenant (Exod 24:8) (cf. Matt 26:28 -blood of the New Covenant) - must be a death of giver (hence substituting animal sacrifices)
Shedding of Blood = Death (Heb 9:7, 14, 18)
Heb 9:22 - almost all things...blood or its equivalent: life sustaining good works

Exod 24:4, 7 - Moses wrote down all the words of the Lord...then read that book of the covenant
Exod 24:4-8 = Old covenant - Jer 31:31-34 New Covenant ..better promises (Jesus will perfectly do the Law)

Exod 24:8 sprinkled people with blood; Isa 52:15 sprinkle people; Isa 49:8 - give servant as a covenant.

Isa 49:6-13 = Rev 7:13-17

The Resurrection of Christ

Many books of OT cannot be full vouched for
-Author of Daniel
-

DA = prophetic retelling fix
-on same level as Talmud claims

‘Only devotees testifying’
only devotees cared to see him at grave “to finish embalming him”

Doubt reports is proof of candidness and veracity
Matt 28:17 - Jesus was not physically recognizable (Emmaus, Mary)

-believe in faith, not sight.
Thomas doubted but believed when he saw Jesus
-and he did not even believe by merely seeing Jesus but by seeing and feeling the crucifixion scars, -thus not recognizable

They were not devoted to Jesus before the resurrection because they all abandoned Him when he was arrested and put on trial and then crucified. Only John stuck by and it is not surprising that he was the first to believe upon merely seeing the cloth linen (John 20:8) Peter came close but then abandoned him. Which may be why he was rewarded a longer life over Peter (John 21:20-23). After the resurrection, they had no such fear, at all, even to the death.
James his brother did not believe until after witnessing resurrected Christ (1 Cor 15:7)

Resurrection story is mentioned in the accounts of Acts, by the Gentile Luke.
Paul mentions it in 1 Corinthians 15:6 55 A.D. (MSB 1723)
Cephas/Peter (Luke 24:34)
then twelve (Matt 28:17)
500
James/Jacob (= conversion of James) = Gospel of the Hebrews
all apostles again ()
Paul (Acts 9)

= Matt 28:17 where some did not believe.

All resurrection appearances were noted
-even when precise location is stated, still no monument there.
-unlike Mount of the Ascension on Olives

Only John was convinced by an empty grave. Why not all the others

Burial site was known as it belonged to Council member Joseph of Arithmethea, was sealed and guarded
Peter and John went to it,
The women had seen where it was (Luke 23:55)

Mary’s assumption
-disingenuous duplicity = Oral Law claim (it is all or nothing)
disciples could not have moved body as it was guarded because of resurrection claims

They is not the disciples but (conspiring) enemies of Jesus (Circular claim of “some of the disciples..hence they did not believe). Guards would not be complicit to anything which fosters a resurrection claim. That would be the only reason to move the body.

Duplicity - they at first believed so, but then all expressing this believed in resurrection. So “we have no right to differ”

They were all convinced of Jesus as reigning Messiah and not dying one (Matt 16:18; Luke 24:21)

Luke 24:22-23 - Emmaus disciples did not even believe after the women’s account, but only when they recognized Jesus. Breaking Bread may have revealed crucifixion scars.

Why did the Roman and Jewish opponents of Jesus not dig up the body of Jesus in order to disprove the resurrection story touted by Jesus’ followers?

Just a body in the known tomb (which was unchanged) would have disproved the resurrection claims at any time after this.

Tomb site can be reasonably found today (Wyatt) so certainly within the first century. Rich tombs were not disturbed.
Opponents marked the tombsite with a guard.

Digging up of body would have been barred by guard who only left when it was emptied with visiting angel. Matthew says that scripture circulated to this day.
Just like Talmud records the Hanging of Yeshua. The disproving of his resurrection, particularly in the face of Claims to the contrary would similarly have been done.

If indeed the body was brought to the attention of the public then why would his disciples still believe the resurrection story?
“Who knows? And frankly, who cares. “ Yisroel Blumenthal
-Quite tellingly

Why “who cares” the proof is really in the claims and teachings of Jesus. Are they scriptural in themselves.

“Time is fulfilled”

Christ’s reign

Micah 5:2
Going forth from East/Eternal; that is and from Eternity
East/Eternal/Ancient - Deut 33:27; Hab 1:12; 2 Kgs 19:25; Neh 12:46; Psa 44:1; Micah 7:20
(sons of the east - east = point of origin (of sun))
Since from Bethlehem, then not from East; therefore means ancient/eternity

Isa 23:7 - not qedem (06924a) but qadam (formerly 4X - 06927)

Jews should believe in reincarnation of David
Origins are from old, from former days.
Not to be born in Bethlehem but come from Bethlehem

Matt 2:5-6 = Belief of priests
Micah 5:3- who has labored (Isa 54)
Messianic allusion to lost tribes (Asyria)

Jesus was born in Bethlehem, left because of Herod threat (Matt 2:13)

Census
See Case for Christ 101 Egypt sample for returning requirement
Luke Census - taxing cities - in order to avoid paying taxes, people can go to a city, claim to live there and then move back to their home city, their likely place of habitation and not pay taxes. Easier to spot foreigners in a foreign city.

See documentation on my post - no a “ruse by Luke”

Luke 12:40 - Luke omits visit of Magi

Zech 12:10 (John 19:37)
At Second Coming - mourning comes later (Rev 1:7) - mourn for having put him to death back in 31 AD

Isa 9:6-7
-context if of a future occurrence
-not already born since no accomplishment

altars called = representative of God
Jer 33:16

Ezek 32:21 - plural meaning strong ones

Name won’t contain el, but be el (Hezekiah)

Had Jews been working to help people in need with riches would they have been so hated
-Deut 15 - helping neighbors

increase of government - continuing till today

“Is Hezekiah”
-means Yahweh has strengthened

Isa 39:8 - Peace and truth in my days - a selfish thought/saying
actual prince of peace = Ezek 37:25b-26

Satan in Judaism
Satan is foundational a major one (14X)
Job, Late Zec 3, 1 Chr 21:1
NT 33X Devil 35X

They could not handle it.

Serpent is devil

Balaam’s angel is not a proper name but adversarial action
Satan is a proper name
no GC awareness (Rev 12:7-10)
Satan was one of God’s angel’s (Ezek 28 & Isa 14)
lying sprits are the angels who rebelled with him
1 Chr 21:1 = “Satan” & 2 Sam 24:15 = “it”
Satan is a great blessing (NT = a curse)
allowed GC is the greatest blessing

Genesis “very good” = evil inclination = Satan
-completely absurd
-need evil to function = ego
=ego is good = selfish views of Satan (Isa 14)
=sons of the devil

Sexual impulse is negative
Satan is an experience a roadblock - temptation

Why a good thing?
-no potential for virtue = knowing evil

Adultery is tempting - sexual attraction is evil
The friction is already present in all that God created
-man must constantly choose to do what is right/good

NT uses
2 Cor 4:3-4 = god this world = GC context
John 12, 14, 16 - prince of this world
1 John 3:8-10 - “in order that he might (begin to) loosen the  works of the devil’ (Gen 3:14) subjunctive (ingressive) aorist. A work in progress (Psa 110:1ff)

Eph 6:11-12 - ‘not subject to God’ = Christ sent him away at last Temptation (Matt 4:8)

John 8:44 - Satan speaks of his own
God does not lie

Acts 26:16-18 - turn them from the power of Satan
-God does not ‘control’ anyone


Challenge to CHR
‘use whatever criteria you want’
really: whatever we think alludes to Jesus
-exegesis, including contextual, prophetic, spiritual is the only answer




Notes



1. [1] And based on all that it can be argued that Psa 119 was perhaps not written by David.
2. [2] As recorded in the Gospels, this similarly was done with/through Jesus during his ministry (Matt 13:10-17; John 12:39-41), and evidently for similar reasons of, as involved in John 12:42-43, knowing what the truth about Jesus was, but obstinately choosing not to acknowledge it for various base reasons.

3. [3] Given the encountered sincere objecting, I’ll be both watching more of the lengthier/more detailed Jews for Judaism presentations and addressing any other, if any, cited distinct objections/arguments beyond what was stated in this ‘6-minute crash course’ (if they had not already been pointedly or relatedly covered in this post thus far). 
4. [4] Indeed while this, and all the other videos of the Jews for Judaism ministry were made to pointedly respond to the Christian “Jews for Jesus” Missionary Evangelism efforts, who, given the predominant Futuristic-Dispensational mindset of most Christians, are probably also of that, actually spurious, persuasion, and thus may not be making the best, i.e., well, Biblically fully, substantiated and contextualized apologetic arguments in defense of the Messiahship of Christ, or more generally the Theology of Messiah, the responses here to that “6-minute crash course”, as with all of the other responses in the later sections, are certainly not handicappedly limited to the scope of that Theological and Prophetic mindset. And as with all Biblical truth, the proof of the claims is in what can be properly demonstrated/proven from the Bible.
5. [5] Case in point, the latest of the 6 cited as a substantiation here, Ezek 36:24, was given in ca. (Jan) 585 B.C., thus ca. 23 into the 70 year captivity and thus ca. 47 years before its end!
6. [6] That Messianic understanding and development forms the basis for the (supposed to be) Christian Teaching of the Heavenly Priestly ministry of Jesus in God’s original Sanctuary (Exod 25:8-9; Heb 8:1-6) which is in Heaven. (See e.g., Heb 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:1, 10-11, 15, 17).
7. [7] Relatedly, it is also dissonantly “interesting” to hear today the revisionist claims of Jewish believers, who, as in this presentation, say that it is normal that the Jewish people suffer as they have since ca. 70 A.D. (through World War II) to today because they are God’s Chosen people and other people will jealousy be opposed to this and thus assail them for that reason. That is most preposterously unbiblical. The Biblical record is clear that God never said of the Jewish People that He would permit other nations to overrun them if they were faithful to Him. Instead, as repeatedly seen in the OT, He would, even most supernaturally, come to their immediate defense. Only when they are unfaithful to him would they be punished with such curses.
            So if the Jewish people have been continually suffering at the hands of various world powers and factions since ca. 66 A.D. it is most sequiturly because they are not in God’s will. And I only am seeing the rejection of the proven Messiah Jesus Christ as the reason, resulting in the prophesied consequence of, duration-wise, unqualified rejection (Dan 9:26b, 27b; Luke 21:20-24 -discussed in here))
8. [8] It was relatedly also interesting to hear that the Judaism has 4 “denominations” which was news to me, though indeed not impossible. I find it interesting that there similarly were for major factions in Judaism in the time of Jesus Christ: namely the Pharisees (=present-day Orthodox/Traditional Judaism) Sadducees (= Liberal/Progressive/Reform), Essene (= Conservative/Historical), and Zealots (= Zionists). So the present day divisions may indeed simply be a neo-form of those prior historical factions.
9. [9] Some Christian Preachers/Commentators that this “It is Finished” statement is equivalent to (an imposed Niphal rendering for) “He has done/performed it” in Psa 22:31b, thus claiming that all along, since having just earlier repeated the words of Psa 22:1, Jesus had been prayingly repeating that Psalm on the Cross, but I personally do not exegetically see this Psa 22:31 linkage.
10. [10] Perhaps Satan did the (ensuring) hardening in Exod 7:22; 8:19; 9:7, 35, which would in turn mean that in the other Plagues where it is said that it was God Himself who did it (i.e., plague #6, #8-#10), that was actually necessary since Pharaoh did not even allow Satan to harden him as before.
11. [11] Related here, it is significant to note that God uses the term “servant” only for King David. And this is only applied to King which will fulfill God’s Davidic plans (e.g., Zerubbabel in Haggai 2:20-23). So succinctly said here/for now, the prophetic “Servant” theme as chiefly found in Isa 40-54, is to also have prophetic Davidic implications.

12. [12] Jesus Genealogy Table: 



13. [13] Since the levirate marriage law also stated that the son from such a union had to be given the name of the deceased, childless husband, it is evident that Zerubbabel was given a symbolic name instead, marking the great historical, locational circumstances of his birth instead. Yet Shealtiel’s name still distinctly appears in genealogical records.
14. [14] As stated in the SDA Bible Dictionary, p. 1210, the converse could technically also be true, that it was Pedaiah who had died childless and Shealtiel married his brother’s widow and had a son with her, Zerubbabel. So 1 Chr 3:19 would then stating the legal father of Zerubbabel, while the natural father was Shealtiel.
15. [15] 1 Esdras 5:5 says that Zerubbabel (also) had a son by the name Joakim.
16. [16] I personally find the Medo-Persian surnaming theory quite plausible and likely as I recall I had an Iranian friend in the Sixth Grade whose name was Rhesa. However, as some commentators (e.g., Word Biblical Commentary 35A, p. 171) suggest that Rhesa is a transliteration of the Aramaic word for “ruler”. So perhaps one of Zerubbabel’s sons was so designated to be the successor of Zerubbabel but that never materialized, yet Luke would therefore have been correct in following his line in the genealogy instead of his brother Abiud as Matthew did. However that would not explain why Luke do so for similar reasons when having the option of following Joseph’s humanly natural line vs. his patriarchal/royal line at the level of Neri (his daughter) vs. Jeconiah (her likely husband). So Rhesa may not have been the Aramaic name meaning “ruler”, and Luke (and/or the source person who had compiled the genealogy he was relying on) had made this choice of Rhesa for other reason.

1 comment:

  1. Hello “Anonymous” poster from St. Joseph, Missouri who submitted a comment here on April 8 at 6:54:59 AM (CST). That comment was not posted because it is substantively “all over the place” and is tangentially not responsive to any of the actual “Judaism vs. Christianity” subject/issues of this blog post. If you want to continue that discussion, then email me directly. See my email in my profile.

    ReplyDelete

This blog aims to be factual and, at the very least, implicitly documented. Therefore if applicable, any comment which contains unsubstantiated/unsupportable ideas will not be allowed to be published on this blog. Therefore make the effort to be Biblical, truthful and factual.

-It typically takes 1-2 days for an accepted submitted comment to be posted and/or responded to.

[If you leave an "anonymous" comment and, if applicable, would like to know why it may not have been published, resend the comment via email (see profile) to receive the response.]