Unauthorized Negotiator

Unauthorized Negotiator

Tom and Joe were partners in a business. As they walked up the path to the office one day they encountered a man exiting the door that they were about to enter. The man asked them what they were doing here and where did they think they were going. They responded by explaining that this was their office and that they were going to work. The man then informed them that he had just bought the business from the lady behind the desk and that they no longer had the right to enter the building. They informed him that the “lady behind the desk” was simply their secretary and that she had no right to sell the business and that he had just been the victim of a scam.

In this parable, we are in the position of the “lady behind the desk”. The business does not belong to us; we only work here and our first obligation to the business is that we recognize this truth. When the missionary approaches us and asks us to sell our soul to Jesus, we must recognize that we are not authorized to enter into negotiations on this matter. Our souls belong to the One who breathed them into us in the first place and to no-one else. The Jewish people as a national unit have never entered into negotiations with the Church for the purchase of their souls and they never will.

Furthermore – while the Church authorizes man to decide between Judaism and Christianity on the basis of his or her study of Scripture, Judaism does no such thing. Judaism does not believe that God gave us the Scriptures so that we can decide which belief system is correct. God first gave us a belief system and only in the context of that belief system did He give us the Scriptures. The Scriptures themself testify to this truth.

The Scriptures declare that before God gave Israel any book He had already taught them who it was that they were to worship and who and what they were not to worship (Deuteronomy 4:35). Scriptures testifies that before God gave Israel any book He already established the validity of Moses’ prophecy (Exodus 19:9). These two axioms (Israel’s perception of God and the authenticity of Moses’ prophecy) are the mainstays of the Jewish belief system. It is only in this context and on this background that God gave us Scripture. The only way to read the Scriptures is in the context of these truths that God Himself directly imparted to the Jewish people.

The Scriptures are here to guide and instruct, but they are not here to help us decide who to worship.

If you found this article helpful please consider making a donation to Judaism Resources by clicking on the link below.

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=FEAQ55Y7MR3E6

Judaism Resources is a recognized 501(c) 3 public charity and your donation is tax exempt.

Thank You

Yisroel C. Blumenthal

This entry was posted in Faith Structure. Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to Unauthorized Negotiator

  1. David says:

    In this scenario the secretary (Judaism) thinks that she is the owner rather than a caretaker/administrator. This folly then then leads her to believe she can do, say, and hold to beliefs not in keeping with the wishes of the true owner.

    The men in question who bought the place in reality didn’t really buy it from the unfaithful secretary; because they didn’t buy it at all. They are also caretakers. But they were called by the owner to come and talk to the secretary and others. The men didn’t come to kick the secretary out but to inform her of the owner’s current and future wishes which the owner had tried to reveal to her as she had been his faithful caretaker and administrator for a long time. However, no matter how hard the owner tried, no matter who he sent she had refused to listen to the owner’s newest and latest instructions. It seems the secretary was stuck in her ways and didn’t want to change, she just wanted to retire there. They informed her that because as of late she had not handled the owner’s property faithfully, the owner was building a new structure across town where all are invited and none are excluded so long as they accept the owner as he leads them.

    It would be as if Noah and his sons refused to eat from God’s new and improved menu after the flood and insisted on eating only from the old animal food menu. The secretary is saying to God in effect: “I will not change my diet God, I like the old way, and you can’t make me change. Send whomever you want, profits; explain it however you choose, through prophesy; you can even send your Son to fulfill these prophesies, it makes no difference to me; I will continue to eat from the old menu as long as I live because that’s what I’m used to, that’s what I know. Nothing that God or anyone else says or does will change that fact.”

    Well, you can continue to eat from the old menu and you are not technically wrong in doing so if that’s what you want to eat for yourselves. But all those who choose to eat from the new and improved menu have chosen a better way and you should not stand in their way.

  2. David
    You can make your own parables if you want – but why post them on my blog?
    Judaism is here to testify to one and all that none of us have the right to choose who to worship -our hearts belong to the One who created them and to no one else
    If you consider the history of Christianity the “better way” – go ahead and eat the “new menu” – I’ll stick to the menu that God Himself presented to our nation – and I will avoid the “menu” that He explicitly prohibited
    Did you notice that your argument about the “new menu” is similar to the serpent in the garden who also argued for a “new menu”?

  3. Linda says:

    I would like to share this article ( though a long one ) but well worth the time to read. About the faithful servant of Abraham, ( who was a gentile ) The parable of The Rich Man and Lazarus ( Eliezer in Hebrew ) I especially love this part >>
    ‘I am sure that there is much more that can and will be learned and understood regarding this unique parable of Lazarus and the Rich man. However, whatever we teach regarding it must at least stand on solid Scriptures and not contradict. The real truth of this parable is not nearly as morbid as it may appear at first glance. God has a plan that eventually brings all the Jews and all the Gentiles to salvation. The very heart of the Gospel is the salvation of the Jews and Gentiles, the salvation of the WHOLE WORLD! ‘

    yourphariseefriend, can you response to this and we can have a discussion here, please…thank you respectfully, Linda
    also anyone else who would like to as well..:)

  4. Linda says:

    oh, so sorry I forgot to give the link for the article
    http://bible-truths.com/lazarus.html

  5. Linda says:

    It might be missed understood where I posted he was a gentile. I think I should of typed the faithful servant ( who was a gentile ) of Abraham.

  6. naaria says:

    Linda, I see some similarities between NT Luke’s Lazarus & NT John’s Lazarus (first fruit). Luke comes close to see wealth (w/o compassion) as a black & white issue, with Luke’s “age” & “age to come” coming close to John in his gospel, v. 12:25 “Those who love their life lose it, and those who hate their life in this world will keep it for eternal life.”. Thank God there are better plans out there.

    Luke’s “resurrection” parable is an allusion to Jesus, but the “logic” in it is problematic. In Luke 14:1-9, where the “master commends the dishonest manager” & says “make friends for yourselves by means of dishonest wealth”, parables can be interpreted differently from what MAY have been intended. My New Interpreter’s study bible states that “This parable illustrates well the problem of trying to read the parables in Luke in an allegorical way—that is, by trying to identify God or Jesus or someone else as characters within the parable. Like so many parables in Luke, the point is simply that Jesus’ audience should learn lessons from “the real world” about how the new age works.”

    The Lazarus parable is problematic also, not in being “morbid”, but when God (or at least “father Abraham”) is shown to be “devilish”, uncompassionate, cruel, & sadistic. It makes God look both very unmerciful and horrendously unjust. It seems to equate the “rich man on earth” with God, “the rich man in heaven”.

    The parable unintentionally ends poorly as well. Luke 16:3 “…If they do not respond to Moses and the prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead”, makes it appear that “rising from the dead” is of less importance and less spectacular or less convincing than hearing about Moses or the words of the “prophets”. I would think otherwise, for those people who actually “see” or have “seen first-hand a resurrection” should be more convinced than a person who only reads or is told an unbelievable story about a resurrection. But also, in other words, if a person rejects Moses, than a “resurrection” is worthless and unnecessary. Likewise, “the resurrection” is worthless to those who already believed in Moses and the prophets. Those who already knew God could not be convinced by the “tall tales” of false prophets. They were tested and many, those righteous ones, stuck with the Words of God and the God that they knew.

    • naaria says:

      The “rich man” parable also suggests that only those who don’t truly believe in Moses & the writings and the Jewish prophets in the Tanakh, will need miracles (or fantastic stories told them) in order to believe in God and to maintain their faith in God. The prophets in the Tanakh tell us a different story about “this age” and about “the world to come” than most parts of the NT tell us. Why didn’t the NT writers agree with the Word of God that already existed before them?

    • naaria says:

      Sorry about my copy & paste errors. The gospel parable of the “dishonest manager” is at Luke 16:1-9 and the end of the rich man-Lazarus parable is at 16:31, not v.3.

  7. Rabbi, looks like this post has been HIJACKED by Xtians trying to Shoehorn their beliefs in a “man-god” into the Torah of HaShem, given to Klal Yisra’EL 🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️

    • Sharon S says:

      Hi Shirley,

      I assume from your comment that you are Jewish.

      I understand from the article that the Klal Yisrael are the “workers” managing a business -which I take it to mean their souls which belong to the One who made them . As such the Jewish people as a national unit are not authorized  to negotiate with other parties to purchase their souls as the One who created the soul has  given a belief system for your nation to follow .

      I agree with you that this article has been hijacked by Christians . However the bigger concern from the article that I see is this- The One who created all our souls ( Klal Yisroel and the goyim) has also given us a free will. It seems the article is suggesting that the Jewish people has no free will.

      I have heard teachings in Jewish tradition that God somehow suspended Mount Sinai over the Jewish people in order to compel them to accept the Torah. Did God choose the Jewish people or did the Jewish people choose God?

      Perhaps we can look at this article beyond the constraints of Jewish Christian polemics and see it from a much broader picture.

      I am just a goy. Apologies if my comment offends.

      Shabbat shalom

      • Dina says:

        Sharon, I’m going to take a stab at this. To use the language of this article, it’s true that we aren’t authorized to sell our souls. That doesn’t mean we don’t have the free will to do so. We have the free will to comply with or to disobey God’s commands. And whatever we choose will bear consequences, whether good or ill. Deuteronomy 30:15 and 19 makes this very clear:

        “Behold, I have set before you today life and good, and death and evil…I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. You shall choose life, so that you and your offspring will live.”

        I hope that clarifies.

        • Sharon S says:

          Hi Dina,

          I hope you and your family are well.

          Thank you for responding to my comment . I understand clearly now.

          If you don’t mind , I will ask another question. Are non Jews authorized to negotiate with other parties to purchase their souls since the One who made the soul has not given a belief system for all of humanity to follow (as per the Torah)?

          Forgive me if this question is off topic.

          Thank you.

          • Dina says:

            Hi Sharon, I hope you and yours are well too! Please forgive me, I won’t go further than my previous answer. You may remember that we have already explored this topic at great length. I am sorry you found my explanations unsatisfactory, but please believe that I will not be more effective now than I was back then.

            Also, please understand that I do not wish, by any means, to discourage you. I can’t help you, but maybe someone else can. I wish you much success on your continued search for answers.

          • Sharon S says:

            Hi Dina,

            Yes, I remembered that we discussed a similar topic before. No worries.

            Thank you.

    • LarryB says:

      Shirley
      I went to your website and aren’t you christian? Or do you simply think Jesus is just the messiah, not god?

      • Sharon S says:

        Hi LarryB,

        I don’t have any website. We have had conversations in this blog in the past where I have shared a bit about my background and beliefs.

        I am puzzled. My comment did not touch on Jesus at all .Why do you ask me about him?

      • I am not a xtian, where are you getting your MISINFORMATION from ⁉️

      • Sharon S says:

        Hi Laura,

        The  comment policy of this website states “Please DO NOT attack other people commenting on the blog in a personal way”

        Is it ethical then for Larry to publish articles from Shirley’s website or even her Youtube channel in this discussion thread?  Worse , is it right for him to keep on enquiring if her statement “Baruch Hashem” , which I understand as an expression to  bless Hashem stand for Messianic Judaism?

        This blog is followed by people from various backgrounds and beliefs. The blog administrator  to my understanding has never  restrict anyone to comment here, unless if the commenters here violate the  comment policy. I have frequently commented here without anyone questioning my religious credentials , why then the need for Larry, who is not the blog administrator ,to do a background check on  Shirley’s beliefs?

        Has it ever occured to Larry and you that one’s beliefs can change over time? I was a nominal Catholic a few years ago . I used to put up verses from the Gospel and shared my beliefs in my Facebook posts. My beliefs may change but these posts remain online. Likewise Shirley’s beliefs may have undergone a change between the time she wrote it ( a few years ago) and when Larry saw these posts. Is it right to continue pointing out that Shirley is a Messianic just from these posts?

        No offense to Larry and you,but I am concerned with what Larry is doing here . If these ” background checks” is tolerated this time, this will discourage those who follow the blog from sharing their views out of fear that someone will do a ” spiritual background check” on them.

        Thank you

        • Laura S says:

          Hi Sharon. It sounds like Shirley is quite capable of supporting herself on her statements. Clearly your statement of “I assume from your comment that you are Jewish” allows one to inquire in ones background. I didn’t see an attack on Larry’s behalf. In fact, I see Shirley as the one attacking calling out the post “as being hijacked by xtians”.

          • Sharon S says:

            Hi Laura S,

            It seems my statement seem to encourage further enquiry to one’s background. This is not what I intended and I apologize for this.

            I am concerned with excessive enquiries of one’s background by going through and sharing links to one’s articles and posts in this discussion thread . It’s intrusive and should not be tolerated at all.

            There are other ways to respond if you strongly disagree to the comment calling out that the post is hijacked by xtians. Perhaps both you and Larry could have engaged directly with Shirley on her comment or perhaps explain why this post is not hijacked by xtians .

        • Laura s says:

          You are entitled to your opinion. If the administrator deemed these comments as unfair or attacking they would have been removed. Larry did address her. Again, she is quite capable of defending herself views if they are untrue. She may not be a messianic Christian. Nothing here that was said is untrue. It was good observation. My comment followed. Nothing unfair. FYI, Baruch Hashem is spoken by orthodox Jews and by messianic Christians. It’s a non sequitur here.

        • LarryB says:

          Sharon
          shirleyannelindberg is in control of her wordpress website.
          Shirley is in control of her you tube channel site.
          What ever is on Shirleys website, Shirley wants on her web site.
          Shirley willingly provides a link to her website so we can go there and see what she has to say.

          Speaking of attack, why are you attacking me for asking a question of Shirley based on the link She provided?
          If you were the site moderator Would you ban me “Facebook or Google” style for asking a question of Shirley not approved by you even if Shirley invites others to her website by willingly providing a link?

          • Sharon S says:

            LarryB,

            To my understanding ,there are people who share their websites when they log in to comment or there are people who comment via their wordpress app , so one is able to view their profiles and website through the links provided.

            You responded to Shirley’s comment “Rabbi, looks like this post has been HIJACKED by Xtians trying to Shoehorn their beliefs in a “man-god” into the Torah of HaShem, given to Klal Yisra’EL” initially by stating that you have been to her website and enquiring if she is a Christian or believer of Jesus. You share her article from her website when she did not answer your question. I have no issues with your comment at this point.

            However you proceeded to copy and paste a post from her Youtube channel (I don’t see the link to her Youtube channel in the website) when Shirley did not reply .You questioned if her beliefs are at all different from what a Christian believe. I have issues with this as I find it intrusive .

            Instead of questioning one’s beliefs, the better way is to ask Shirley where she got the idea that this post was hijacked by xtians. You can also explain why in your opinion this post is not hijacked by xtians. However you and I have been following this blog for quite a while. This is a counter missionary blog so it is very obvious that most of the posts in this blog are hijacked by “xtians”. Shirley is just stating the obvious.

            As one who regular comments here ,I have put up questions in this blog that was not answered for a period of time. Normally I will follow up by asking the same question or sharing information that I get from this blog to supplement my follow up question. However I have never shared links/copy and paste articles/post by the person with whom I am having a conversation in this blog that is not publicly listed in his/her website, or which requires me to Google his/her name in order to have access to his/her Facebook or other social media accounts.

            As such , if I were the site moderator , I will monitor your comments closely. However I would have deleted your comment where you shared Shirley’s Youtube channel post as it is not listed in her website.

            Correct me if I’m wrong. Thank you.

          • LarryB says:

            Sharon
            I’m sot surprised you would monitor me and anyone based on your personality. You remind me a lot of the young people I see on TV these days. You don’t see a link to youtube in her website? Keep looking. AS far as the rest of your comments, I don’t agree with anything you said. I do not believe your way is better and would never take advise from you on anything. If you don’t mind, the next time I am trying to have a conversation with Shirley please hesitate to reply.

          • Sharon S says:

            LarryB,

            I do not wish to continue this conversation either, so I will end here.

            Thank you.

  8. Laura says:

    Good eyes Larry. Messianic Hebrew christian roots has now become “rabbinical Judaism”.

  9. shirley anne says:

    I do not wish to continue this conversation any further.
    STOP sending me updates to this futility ‼️
    Vanity of vanities, chasing after the wind 💨

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

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