Response to Line of Fire 12

Response to Line of Fire 12

On the February 21 2013 Line of Fire radio show Dr. Brown shares his pain with the listening audience. He explains to his audience how the counter-missionary organization: Jews for Judaism, maintains a “no debate policy” – yet at the same time they challenge Dr. Brown to respond to the writings of “so and so”. Dr. Brown sees this as “hypocritical”. For years, he says, he has desired to “put the issues on the table” and it is Jews for Judaism who has refused. So on what basis do the rabbis from this same counter-missionary organization expect Dr. Brown to enter into a written debate?

Since I am that “so and so” that the rabbis from Jews for Judaism are challenging Dr. Brown to respond to I will take the liberty of saying a few words on the subject.

The “challenge” to debate originates with Dr. Brown. Dr. Brown often makes the point that rabbis are not willing to debate him, or to use his words; “to put the issues on the table”. Whether this is Dr. Brown’s intention or not, the impression many people walk away with is that the counter-missionary community is fearful of the truth. They refuse to debate because they do not want to put the issues on the table in a fair and open venue.

The “challenge” of Jews for Judaism to Dr. Brown is put forth to correct this erroneous conclusion that people may come to on the basis of Dr. Brown’s “challenge”.

The rabbis of Jews for Judaism would like nothing more than that the issues be put on the table. It is for this reason that I took the time and trouble to write a systematic response to every major point that Dr. Brown raises in his 5 volume series: “Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus”.

If Dr. Brown refuses to respond to my work that is his prerogative. But for him to go and say that the counter-missionaries refuse to put the issues on the table is misleading. We have put the issues on the table. Perhaps we do not want to respond in the format that Dr. Brown prefers – but the issues are already on the table for everyone to consider with seriousness and conscientiousness.

When Dr. Brown tells his audience that the counter-missionaries refuse to debate him in the forum of a public verbal debate it would only be fair if he would acknowledge that the counter-missionaries have taken the time and the effort to present a systematic response to every major argument that he has ever raised against Judaism.

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 Response to Dr. Brown Line of Fire. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Response to Line of Fire 12

  1. Yehuda says:

    Like everything else about the missionary enterprise (including the title of his book series. Dr. Brown is not “Answering Jewish Objections”. He is initiating Christian arguments.) Dr. Brown would like to assume the position of the noble christian soldier gallantly standing up to countermissionary aggression, only to be met with their cowardice. While the fairly obvious reality is that without missionaries there would be no COUNTER-missionaries.

    I’d like to ask any Christian readers when they last had an occasion in their personal lives to be approached by a Jewish person who INITIATED a polemical discussion with them.

    Speaking as Jewish person, I can think of at least two occasions when Christian co-workers did so with me.

  2. Yehuda says:

    …and I don’t just mean friendly conversation about religion…I am referring to pointed questions from people with whom I had only casual acquaintance intended (rather feebly) to challenge my religious beliefs, and prompted by probably nothing more than the fact that I wear a yarmulke.

    I can assure you I have never done the anything like that with any christian.

  3. Dr. Brown will not debate me in public!

  4. Ryan T Jones says:

    Thank you for this blog. I am an aspiring Christian theologian, and I find your blog challenging, stimulating, and thought provoking. I originally found this site from a comment on the Amazon page of one of Dr. Brown’s books. I am curious (and curiosity really is all it is; I don’t mean this as a veiled attack) why not debate him in person? I, for one, would find such a debate fascinating and well-worth it as a way to engage the issues. You have some really strong arguments so it’s hard for me to understand why you wouldn’t want to debate in person. Can you show me the reasoning behind your decision? Thanks!

    • peterusa123 says:

      Menashe Dovid (מנשה דוד) says
      “Dr. Brown will not debate me in public”
      Can you tell me how you reached brown to ask him for a debate.

      Ryan T Jones says:
      “why not debate him in person?”
      I think the Rabbis are to mild and it makes them appear as losers of the debate.

      However I am perplexed as to why the Rabbi wont debate in public. I can understand if he never read or heard brown than he does not know how to prepare. However all of browns arguments are out in the open if he can refute them on paper why not refute them verbally.

      I debate christians almost every day I used to be flusterd in the begining however after I read the answers on Jews for Judaism web site and others now I have them running.

      Like the Rabbi spends a considerable amount of time defending the oral Torah. My approach is if brown does not believe in the oral Torah he cannot believe in his false books. If any one contemplates on this his books are also from oral mouth none of the writers claim to have known who they were writing about.

      I. 36. Objection 2.4 Brown informs us that the crime of rejecting Jesus is the sin which deserves the holocaust. Sad. What is the moral crime of failing to see the scriptural “truth” of institutions that could produce a holocaust?

      Here the Rabbi could have answered did browns god die because of these verses below. Even the first followers of their god christians claim were killed. A note to this couldn’t browns god save them it would have been more impressive. The true creator saved all of his first followers. Also we can mention the black plague was that because they followed their false god it would seem so since Jews hardly died in that plague and many christians died in the holocaust.

      Deuteronomy Chapter 18:20 But the prophet, that shall speak a word presumptuously in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ 21 And if thou say in thy heart: ‘How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken?’ 22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken; the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously, thou shalt not be afraid of him.

      Another thing is brown claims all the atrocities that were committed by christians they were not real christians. This I would suppose is that they had no fear of their god. Well in their book is says actually to fear their god.

      ( 1 Peter 2:17 Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honor the emperor.)

      Lets see in every christian school they have their dead god hanging on a stick on the wall. Now you tell me the teaches are teaching their book and they teach you should fear your god the children will laugh yes we fear a guy hanging on a stick on the wall. So if the christians had no fear of their god it is their dead god that caused this.

      There is much much more if the Rabbi still refuses would he mind if I took the challenge to debate.

      • peterusa123 says:

        Brown claims his christianity is growing every one loves it.
        I would agree however this is only in as we see here Africa. You can Google it most of Europe is leaving his christianity. The reason in Africa they are converting is the choich goes there with millions of dollars to convert. So it is not his wonderful message to worship a man that they convert.

        “It has been almost 100 years since Hilaire Belloc pronounced of Catholicism: “Europe is the faith and the faith is Europe.” It seems a great deal longer. In Belloc’s day, Europe was the center of the Christian world from which in the previous 300 years missionaries had ventured forth to convert the heathen. Today the Christian world increasingly is the Third World, where new Christians tilt dramatically toward evangelical and traditional forms of belief.”
        http://www.evangelicalfellowship.ca/Page.aspx?pid=7322

        “Pope Benedict XVI has lamented the weakening of the churches in Europe, Australia and the U.S. Addressing Italian priests, the Pope said: “There is no longer evidence for a need of God, even less of Christ. The so-called traditional churches look like they are dying.”

        http://www.christianpost.com/news/survey-1-in-8-americans-switched-out-of-christianity-46346/#A83lSCPcGAOb3agi.99

        About one out of every eight adults is an “ex-Christian,” a new survey reveals.

        These include those who left the Protestant or Catholic tradition that they were a part of as a child and who now report being atheist, agnostic or some other faith, according to the Barna Group

    • Shalom Ryan
      You ask why it is that I do not want to debate in public – There are several factors that influence my decision – First of all – even within the arguments themselves – if someone presents something new to me – I want time to process the question and to formulate a coherent answer – when I play hockey – I am happy to go in to the game and rely on whatever split-second decisions I will make – its only a game – but here I would not want the reponsibility of someone making the wrong life-changing decision because I didn’t think of the right answer in a flash
      Furthermore – I believe that arguments are often not the deciding factor in a debate – the presentation and various techniques of winning the crowd are often more influential in deciding who “won” the debate
      Another fatcor – I believe that honesty is actually a factor that works against you in a debate – an honest person when faced with a question that he senses that he doen’t have a perfect answer for at this point will not be able to hide his doubts and his lack of confidence in his answer – while a dishonest person can easily say something that he knows does not answer the question properly with an air of confidence – and the crowd trusts the confidence of the performer
      Finally – I find that many of my arguments are only understood by Christians – who are coming from such a different world-view – after I spend alot of time explaining them – I don’t think that the debate forum is conducive to this type of discussion

      • peterusa123 says:

        yourphariseefriend says
        “First of all – even within the arguments themselves – if someone presents something new to me – I want time to process the question and to formulate a coherent answer”
        My reply
        I totally agree with this, christians are constantly throwing new arguments at me. That is why I have an ongoing debate I say I will look it up and get back to you. However I know in a formal debate this cant be done so how about an E mail debate and each one post it on their web sites. There is an ex muslim his web site is here http://www.faithfreedom.org/ who challenges muslims to debate him through e mail of course he does it so he doesn’t get killed. He has had many debates with muslims who have written to him.

        http://realmessiah.askdrbrown.org/video/is-jesus-the-jewish-messiah

        In fact we can start it off with this brown in his debate with Rabbi Schochet claimed that וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ and pelech are all used exclusively for the worship of the true creator. I have had a christian copy him and he claimed this to me. His claim was Abraham here bowed to the angel Genesis Chapter 18:2 and it used the word וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ so it must be he bowed to the creator. My response knocked him out all these verses use the same form of וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ
        and they cannot mean the true creator.

        Genesis Chapter 19 1 And the two angels came to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom; and Lot saw them, and rose up to meet them; and he fell down on his face to the earth;
        Genesis Chapter 23:7 And Abraham rose up, and bowed down to the people of the land, even to the children of Heth
        Genesis Chapter 33:3 And he himself passed over before them, and bowed himself to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother. More boweing in the verses.
        Genesis Chapter 42:6 And Joseph was the governor over the land; he it was that sold to all the people of the land. And Joseph’s brethren came, and bowed down to him with their faces to the earth.
        Exodus Chapter 18:7 And Moses went out to meet his father-in-law, and bowed down and kissed him; and they asked each other of their welfare; and they came into the tent.

        He than qouted Daniel Chapter 7:14 where it says יִפְלְחוּן
        This he claimed can only mean worshiping G-D however this shows he only reads to find his false god because in the same chapter Daniel Chapter 7:27 it says יִפְלְחוּן and it cannot there mean worshiping G-D

      • Ryan TJones says:

        Thank you Rabbi Blumenthal. These seem like good reasons. I have seen debates, generally between Christians and atheists, where one side has been out-debated by the other. I always feel that these sorts of debates say more about the skills of the debtors than the truth of the issues themselves. On the other hand, I have seen a few debates that have been really helpful in clarifying the issues. I wonder what would happen if you sent him your concerns just as you wrote them here. Could you perhaps find a way to engage with him, and he with you, in a format you are both comfortable with? Personally, I think Christians need to hear what you have to say. I think that you and Dr. Brown could both affirm a mutual desire: that truth be made known, and not simply to demonstrate either of your verbal sparring abilities.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s