The Land of Our Ancestors

Posted on January 15, 2015 by yourphariseefriend

yourphariseefriend's avatar1000 Verses - a project of Judaism Resources

The Land of Our Ancestors

 

 

“And it came to pass after these things, that Naboth the Jezreelite had a vineyard, which was in Jezreel, hard by the palace of Ahab king of Samaria. And Ahab spake unto Naboth, saying, Give me thy vineyard, that I may have it for a garden of herbs, because it is near unto my house: and I will give thee for it a better vineyard than it; or, if it seem good to thee, I will give thee the worth of it in money. And Naboth said to Ahab, The Lord forbid it me, that I should give the inheritance of my fathers unto thee.” (1Kings 21:1-3)

Naboth’s response to Ahab was not merely a mundane refusal to sell a piece of property; it was a lesson about life.

You see, Ahab had lead Israel into idolatry. He encouraged his people to give…

View original post 667 more words

Posted in General | Leave a comment

Identifying the Teachers of the Law – Excerpt from Council of My Nation

Posted on January 15, 2015 by yourphariseefriend

Identifying the Teachers of the Law

This brings us to the final function that Eternal Israel performs in relation to the Law, namely the identification of her leaders. The teachers of the Law serve as a crucial component in Israel’s relationship with the Law. These leaders are the arbitrators of the Law, and their judgment enables the nation to apply the Law to living situations. These leaders guide Eternal Israel in dispensing her duty in the realm of preservation of the Law. It is these leaders who set forth the Rabbinic enactments that serve to perpetuate the Law. And it is these leaders who direct the ongoing living discussion, preserving the authenticity of the discussion so that the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob (Deuteronomy 33:4) is passed on the way it was received.

 

 

The first body of arbitrators of the law was established by Moses (Exodus 18:25, Deuteronomy 1:15). Since then, the nation always had people to whom they can turn with their questions relating to the Law. The leaders of each generation recognize their responsibility to provide guidance for the next generation. The imperative to educate students who can shoulder the mantle of leadership is a major element in the lives of Israel’s leaders. The chain of leadership passes on from one generation to the next through the academies and study halls of Eternal Israel.

 

 

The system of choosing Israel’s leaders is not a formalized process, it is a living process. Scripture informs us that even when Israel was enslaved in Egypt she possessed identifiable leaders (Exodus 3:16, 12:21). It is doubtful that as slaves under Pharaoh that the people had any formal election system. The straightforward reading of these passages implies that these leaders attained their position through a natural process. These were men who had earned the respect of their brethren and whom the society turned to for leadership. When Moses established a more formal system of leadership, he did not override the nation’s natural system of leadership, instead Moses appointed men who were already acknowledged by the nation as her leaders (Numbers 11:16, Deuteronomy 1:13).

 

 

From the times of Moses until today the leadership of Israel is chosen by a spontaneous and natural process. Within the parameters of any given community which lives the Law, some people will necessarily stand as examples to their peers. As the nation participates in the ongoing living discussion, proficiency in the Law stands as a very valuable commodity. Eventually, some people will gain the confidence and respect of society as representatives of the spirit of the Law, and as experts in understanding the Law. This process occurs on many different tiers. Someone with little or no background in study of the Law, will be incapable of determining the precise caliber of his friend’s Torah acumen, but he is certainly qualified to voice an opinion concerning his friend’s character. People with more Torah knowledge will be able to offer a limited evaluation as to the quality of Torah knowledge of their peers. Those proficient in Torah knowledge will be capable of gauging the abilities of their contemporaries with greater exactitude. Each segment of the population looks to the appraisals of those more proficient then themselves with much respect. The opinion of those who have already proven their mastery of the Law will certainly carry the most weight, but the nation will want to see for themselves.

 

 

As long as the nation remained in geographical proximity, and the living discussion was united and cohesive, certain individuals or groups of individuals were able to gain the collective respect of the nation as a whole. These men constituted the bodies of central leadership, and in these men resided the nation’s collective authority. The natural process worked in synchrony with a formal ordination process through which the mantle of Torah leadership passed from one generation to the next. It is only with such universal authority that decisions could be made on behalf of Eternal Israel. The establishment of the national holidays of Channuka and Purim was only possible when the nation was collectively united under one body of spiritual leadership. Central leadership was a necessity for the institution of the Rabbinic decrees. And it is only a body of leadership empowered by the nation as a whole, who has the authority to accept a book into the corpus of Jewish scripture.

 

 

As the nation dispersed, and the national living discussion fragmented into local circles of discussion, the power of the central leadership went into decline. The people still looked to a central body of leadership for the monthly and yearly decisions pertaining to the calendar, but that remained the only function of the central leadership. In fact, the last act of Eternal Israel’s contiguous assembly of central leadership was the arrangement of a permanent calendar. Before the Byzantine persecutions stamped out the last vestige of the nation’s high court, Hillel the Prince (not to be confused with Hillel the Elder, his ancestor), established the calendar we follow today.

 

 

The decline of the power of the central leadership was a slow process and did not move entirely downhill. Throughout the period of decline, the central leadership underwent two major peaks of resurgence. The brief respite from persecution that the nation experienced in the times of Rabbi Judah the Prince, and again in the times of Rav Ashi enabled the nation to reassert a measure of unified authority. During these two time periods (approximately 175 CE and 400 CE respectively) the leading scholars of each community were able to convene under the leadership of these two Torah giants. These conventions of scholars were recognized by the nation as incorporating the collective authority of Eternal Israel. With possession of this measure of power these two assemblies were able to ratify the Mishna and the Talmud as anchors and foundations for Eternal Israel’s ongoing living discussion.

 

 

Since then, each community identified their own leaders. With the passage of time, the various communities interacted with each other and learned to appreciate the leaders of localities other than their own. In this way the nation was able to come to a consensus in the evaluation of national leaders. In the lifetime of Rashi the Jews in Iraq might not have heard of him, and they certainly didn’t know enough about him to properly appreciate his contribution to the living discussion. As Rashi’s books spread, the collective Torah wisdom of the nation was able to come to a consensus in their evaluation of Rashi. The same living process repeats itself, and continues to repeat itself as the dispersed nation continuously calibrates her evaluation of various scholars and their written works. In this way, Eternal Israel continues to discharge her duty towards the Law by identifying the leaders who embody her spirit and who know her letter.

 

 

Just as God entrusted Israel with the task of identifying the arbitrators of the Law, so did He charge Israel with the duty of recognizing His prophets. The process of authenticating the verity of a prophet is legislated by the Law (Deuteronomy 13:2-6, 18:18-22). The nation, under the guidance of her arbitrators of the Law would be required to determine the legitimacy of any claim to prophecy. This process was far from smooth. More often than not, God appointed the prophet to deliver stinging words of rebuke. The harshest criticisms were frequently directed at the most powerful people in the society. There was a tremendous motivation to silence the prophet or to dispute his validity. In most cases the rulers of Israel absorbed the censure of the prophets without moving to silence them (1Samuel 3:18, 13:13,14, 15:24,28, 2Samuel 12:7-10, 1Kings 20:42, 21:27, 2Kings 20:17, Jeremiah 26:18,19, Haggai 1:12, 2Chronicles 12:5,6 19:2, 20:37). In some cases the rulers persecuted the prophets (1Kings 12:4, 18:4, Jeremiah 20:2, 26:21,22, 29:25, 36:26, 2Chronicles 16:10, 24:21). The general society of the nation was also upbraided by the prophets on a regular basis. In many cases the populace recognized the prophet’s authority to administer the reproach (Judges. 2:1-5, 10:11-16, 1Samuel 12:19, Jeremiah 26:17, 38:11, 2 Chronicles 28:9-5) while in other situations they actively opposed the prophet (Jeremiah 11:19, 18:18, 26:11, 38:4). The hostility towards the prophets was generally instigated by corrupt arbitrators of the Law, and by men who had falsely laid claim to prophecy (Jeremiah 6:14, 8:8-11,14:13, 23:13,14, 26:8, 27:14, 28:1-4, 29:8,9,21, Ezekiel 13:1-16, Amos 7:10-13). In the confusion generated by the heat of the immediate situation many elements in society fought the prophets tooth and nail. But as the dust settled and time went on, the voice of those loyal to God was eventually heard and embraced. The people were able to sort out the genuine prophets from the frauds and to distinguish between the corrupt leaders and those who truly represented God’s Law. That is how we have scripture today.

 

 

Although we no longer have prophets to lead us we still have leaders who guide the nation in matters of the spirit. In many situations these men are the same leaders who arbitrate the Law, but in some situations the spiritual leaders did not make a particular mark as arbitrators of the Law. These leaders rebuked, encouraged, and provided guidance in our general relationship with God. As with the prophets before them, some of these teachers encountered opposition amongst various elements of the population. And as with the prophets before them, with the passage of time, the nation came to appreciate the greatness of these holy men.

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

 

 

Posted in General | 45 Comments

3 Challenges – excerpt from Supplement to Contra Brown

Posted on January 12, 2015 by yourphariseefriend

# 7 – The seventh line of reasoning relates to the prohibition against idolatry.

 

As a general rule, the argument about the authenticity of the traditions of Judaism is not very relevant to the debate between Judaism and Christianity. It is not necessary to believe in the traditions in order to reject the doctrines of the Church. The Bible itself provides more than enough evidence to refute the claims of Christianity. Historically, Jews who rejected the traditions of their fathers, (known as Karaites), were amongst the most vociferous opponents to Christianity. Conversely, there are Christians who accept the authenticity of many of the traditions and still believe in Jesus. It is clear that the traditions are not a central factor in the debate between Judaism and Christianity.

 

There is however one exception to this rule, and that is the tradition that defines the prohibition against idolatry. This tradition has been the central focus in the debate between Judaism and Christianity for the past 2000 years. When Jews chose death over Christianity, and tens of thousands made this choice, it was because they accepted the Jewish definition of the prohibition against idolatry. Amazingly, Brown never addresses this particular tradition in this book! The one detail of the traditions that plays such a critical role in the debate between Judaism and Christianity is not mentioned in this volume that purports to defend the Church against Jewish objections to Christianity that are based on the traditions!

 

This is all the more surprising in light of a communication that took place between Dr. Brown and myself ten years ago.

 

I presented the following challenge to Brown in August of 2001. (At that point in time, his projection for this series was that it would only contain three volumes, and it was the third volume that would include his arguments against the traditions, hence the reference to the third volume as opposed to the fifth.)

 

I will present you with a challenge. You are presently preparing the third volume of your book for publication. I did not see it, but I can tell you what it does not contain. I will list three objections to the Christian belief system which you were not planning to mention. Two of these objections lie at the heart of the Jewish resistance to any belief system aside from their own. Here they are.

1) The medium through which we learned that scripture is authentic is the testimony of our parents. These same people testified to us that there is a body of unwritten Mosaic law which is crucial in understanding how God wants us to live. If they lied about these unwritten traditions then why should we believe their testimony about scripture. (The Ibn Ezra articulates this argument in several places)

2) The one item which the Torah itself is most explicit and clear that we are to follow the testimony of our fathers, is the issue of “who are we to worship”. Scripture tells the witnesses of Sinai, “you should make it known to your children and children’s children”. It is obvious that God considered this a valid medium of transmitting information, that is the chain of parent to child. Once God explicitly designated a medium of transmitting information, we can be sure that He will ensure its preservation. Until today jews testify that God revealed Himself at Sinai as an absolute unity. All those who deviated from this tradition never claimed that with their worship they follow a tradition which goes back to Sinai. (This is the main point of the Jewish insistence on clinging to their belief system)

3) An honest reading of the NT will reveal that Jesus and his followers believed in, and observed the unwritten traditions which the Jews accepted as God‑given. (I hope to substantiate this at length later in this letter)   

 

At the time, Brown responded by accepting the challenge and assuring me that he will address these arguments in his upcoming volume. But he did not. He devotes one paragraph, in an end-note (#131) to the first objection (- see our response below in point #16). He touches upon one  limited aspect of the third of the three Jewish objections in the main body of the book (6.15 – see our response in point #69), but he completely ignored the second objection.

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

 

Posted in Correspondence, Critique | 45 Comments

Excerpt from The Elephant and the Suit

Posted on January 5, 2015 by yourphariseefriend

Dr. Brown’s Teaching on Biblical Interpretation

In Volume 2, on page 94, Dr. Brown presents a teaching on the correct method of Biblical interpretation: “…it would be highly unlikely ‑ to put it mildly‑ that the Lord would hang a major life‑critical Torah revising revelation, on just one verse, especially when that verse in the original Hebrew is somewhat obscure grammatically…”.

 

This teaching is quite straightforward. God did not give us the Hebrew Scriptures to confuse us. There are many clear and explicit teachings in the Hebrew Scriptures. Many of these teachings are repeated again and again. God has no problem making a point clear and emphasizing the point again and again. Dr. Brown is teaching us that a Biblical interpretation that assumes that God revealed a critical revelation in just one grammatically obscure verse that runs counter to a teaching that is expressed clearly and explicitly in many verses, would be illogical and faulty.

 

With this teaching, Dr. Brown has delivered a death blow to the Church’s 2000 year effort to establish a Scriptural basis for Jesus’ claims.

 

The entire theology of Christianity stands on the tenuous claim that God hung major Torah revising revelation on solitary verses where the Hebrew is grammatically obscure.

 

The Scriptures explicitly state that the forgiveness of sin is achieved through sincere repentance. This teaching is repeated many times throughout the Hebrew Scriptures in a clear and unambiguous manner (Deuteronomy 30:1‑10, Ezekiel 18:21‑23,27,28,31,32, 33:11,14‑16,19, Isaiah 1:16‑18, 55:7, Hosea 14:2‑10, Jonah 3:10, Micah 6:7,8, Psalm 51:19)[9]. These passages directly address the issue of forgiveness from sin, yet they make no mention of a blood offering. Some of these passages[10] actually preclude the requirement of a blood offering as a necessary component in the process of forgiveness from sin. Yet on the basis of the misinterpretation of one solitary verse (Leviticus 17:11)[11] from a passage that does not directly address the issue of forgiveness from sin at all, Christianity teaches that repentance cannot achieve atonement without a blood offering!

 

Throughout the Scriptures, we find that both tribal and royal lineage proceed through the paternal line. The phrase “to the house of their fathers” is repeated over 20 times in the first four chapters of the Book of Numbers alone. Yet Christianity teaches that the Davidic Messiah of the tribe of Judah will NOT be a descendant of David and Judah from his father’s side. This, on the basis of one solitary mistranslated verse that is wrenched out of its Scriptural and historical context (Isaiah 7:14)!

 

Many passages in Scripture are devoted to describing the Messianic era. These passages provide us with a clear and unambiguous portrait of those glorious times (Numbers 24:14‑19, Deuteronomy 4:30, 30:1‑10, 32:43, Jeremiah 3:14‑18, 16:14,15,19, 23:3‑8, 30:3,7‑11,16‑25, 31:1‑39, 32:37‑44, 33:6‑26, 46:27,28, 50:4,5,19,20, Ezekiel 11:17‑20, 20:40‑44, 28:25‑26, 34:9‑16,22‑31, 36:6‑15,22‑38, 37:1‑28, 38:1‑48:35, Isaiah 1:26,27, 2:1‑4, 4:2‑6, 10:33‑12:6, 24:21‑25:9, 30:26, 34:1‑35:10, 40:1‑11, 41:8‑20, 43:1‑10, 44:1‑5 49:8‑26, 51:11,22‑52:12, 54:1‑55:5, 56:7, 60:1‑63:9, 65:17‑25, 66:10‑24, Hosea 2:1‑3,16‑25, Joel 3:1‑4:21, Amos 9:11‑15, Obadiah 1:17‑21, Micah 4:1‑7, 5:1‑13, 7:8‑20, Zephaniah 3:9‑20, Zechariah 2:9, 8:1‑8, 14:3‑21, Malachi 3:4,16‑24, Psalm 51:20,21, 69:36,37, 98:1‑3, 102:14‑23, 126:1‑6, Daniel 2:44, 7:18,22,27, 12:2,3). Throughout these lengthy Scriptural depictions, we find not a word about a second coming of the Messiah. Christianity builds the theological edifice of a second coming on the basis of the misinterpretation of one solitary verse (Daniel 7:13[12])!

 

This is not to mention the many Christian doctrines which do not have even one solitary, non-contextual, mistranslated verse to lean on at all. These include, but are not limited to, the idea that the sacrificial system is to be replaced, the teaching that our devotion ought to be directed to Jesus, the concept that all men are damned to hell for ever and ever because of Adam’s sin, the concept that a new election is established on the basis of devotion to an individual and the concept that devotion to an individual is a prerequisite for atonement, amongst many others.

 

According to Dr. Brown’s own teaching, Christianity has no valid Scriptural basis.

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

Posted in Critique | 1 Comment

Angels – by Annelise

Posted on December 30, 2014 by yourphariseefriend

Genesis describes very vivid conversations with God, experienced by His earliest followers. The encounters are portrayed as close and tangible at this stage of humanity’s growing relationship with Him.

Some Christians turn to these ‘appearances’ of God as evidence that their belief in an incarnation of God is not foreign to Torah. They try to prove that it is normal to see a human as uncreated, as personally deserving the worship of God, by saying the patriarchs did the same.

The most popular proof-text of this kind is in Genesis 18. It can easily be read to imply that Abraham talked with a man who appeared to him and that this was a conversation with God Himself. Another is found in Genesis 32, where Jacob wrestled at night with an unnamed man and then declared that he had come face to face with God and lived. He later identified God with the angel who protected him throughout his life. And in various other parts of the Torah, there seems to be an interchange between the phrases “the angel of the LORD” and simply “the LORD”.

 

There are two different opinions about what we are supposed to learn from this.

 

One possibility is that Torah occasionally reminds us that when people are described as speaking with God, we should keep in mind that they are speaking with His angel. After all, some of these stories sound similar to the neighbouring pagan myths where gods come in human form and speak with people. Torah carefully contrasts Israel’s worship from that of its neighbours, so perhaps the phrase “the angel of the LORD” is inserted at times throughout the narrative to remind its readers that they were dealing with a created manifestation of God. The appearance really was God speaking with them, but it was through a ‘messenger’ (which is the literal meaning of ‘angel’) rather than with a pagan-like ‘incarnation’.

 

Most missionaries prefer the second possible reading, which is basically opposite. They suggest that this interchange of phrases is telling us something not about God’s appearances, but about His angel: that the angel is inseparable from God and is, though appearing in human form, personally treated as God. They liken this to their worship of Jesus.

 

For a number of reasons, we need to accept the first option and reject the second one.

 

To begin with, the word ‘angel’ or ‘messenger’ is a very significant descriptive choice. Common sense understands that a messenger is one who is sent on behalf of someone else, and the simplest reading of scripture is that this is happening. So often the scriptures describe all things in the world as being made by God, so it does make sense that the concept of ‘messengers’ shows Creation’s sustainer appearing to people without actually being one of the created things around us.

 

This is the clearest and simplest reading of “the angel of the LORD”. Further than that, the fact that the proof-texts could be read in this way at all shows that nothing has been clearly proven in the other direction. The burden of proof is still on incarnation believers to show that a finite form can itself ‘be’ (rather than merely reflecting or representing) the infinite God.

 

The children of Israel received a practical commandment that relates to this very topic. In Deuteronomy 4, they were reminded of their foundational covenant encounter with God, and the fact that they saw no form is considered a significant, definitional element of the way they should worship. Although this lesson relates to the prohibition of creating an idol, it also taught them how to respond to the experience described in Exodus 23 when God promised to send His angel ahead of them. Although He said of the angel “my name is in him,” and His presence was described as personally going with them, they couldn’t have worshipped the manifestation itself without forgetting the lesson of Sinai.

 

Moses learnt the same lesson again when God spoke to him intimately, as if “face to face”, but also said that really he could only see “His back” (Exodus 33).

 

In any case, if Israel did choose to worship the angel as an incarnation, what would they be doing? They couldn’t pray to its body, light, sound, or qualities, because all these visible, physical things are finite and created. And if they were to pray to the person represented by the angel, then this should be no different from ordinary prayer. If it is different, or if the person is in some way distinct, then what does that say?

 

If we come across an angel or manifestation of God, then it is good to honour and perhaps even bow to it as His messenger. It is good to speak with it, listen to it, and be thankful for the expression of God’s presence with us. We can marvel at the gift He has given humans of meeting with Him, talking with Him so closely, finding Him present in small and immediate places. But when we pray to the sustainer of all things, no messenger of His deserves our hearts’ whole surrendered devotion.

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

Posted in Annelise | 9 Comments

Definitions – An Open Letter to “Concerned” Reader

Posted on December 29, 2014 by yourphariseefriend

Definitions – An Open Letter to “Concerned” Reader

Dear Concerned Reader

I am writing this letter not only in response to a recent comment of yours (https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2014/12/21/channuka-excerpt-from-contra-brown/#comment-16337 ) but my letter addresses your entire approach in your comments on this blog.

This blog was established in order to counter the efforts of missionaries to convert Jews. An essential part of resisting the missionary effort is the process of exposing the false foundations of Christianity.

It seems that this does not sit well with you (and please correct me if I have misunderstood your intentions). You would rather that all of us live in brotherhood and harmony (a goal to which I also aspire) and this means to you, that we not bad-mouth each other. You would rather that Jews go on being Jews but that they say nothing to discredit Christianity. After all, if Judaism is self-sufficient, why do Jews need to knock the foundations of Christianity?

Your mistake lies in this that you refuse to acknowledge that Christianity is nothing more than a statement about Judaism. The entire Christian religion is an attempt to define Judaism. Christianity claims that one Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah proclaimed by the Jewish prophets and Christianity insists that the loyalty that Christians bear in their heart toward Jesus is the very same loyalty encouraged by the Jewish Bible.

Your liberal concept of political correctness would deny us our right for self-definition. You would want us to accept the claims of the Church as another viable form of Judaism although the Church itself would never allow for our version of Judaism. You are disturbed that we define Judaism in a way that negates the claims of the missionaries and you would much rather that we present the world with a silly-putty Judaism that does not insult progressive Christians such as yourself. This has been the upshot of all of your comments on this blog.

In your effort to deny Judaism its definitions you have elevated your own shallow questions above the words that are written in the Bible you claim to revere.

You see “confusion” in the pages of the Bible. On the one hand you see God appearing in various forms and being worshiped in those manifestations and on the other hand you see Moses encouraging Israel to avoid worship of a form. You can only see a way out of this confusion by reducing the credibility of Moses’ words (after all – they are only a second hand report) and by arguing that Moses is only prohibiting the manufacture of a form for the sake of worship.

I will encourage you to read and to absorb the words that Moses is actually saying. I would also encourage you to ask yourself what was the covenant that Israel shared with God before Jesus appeared on the scene, and what methods did God set in place to preserve the integrity of that covenant. I would also encourage you to ask yourself why it is that those who saw themselves as a part of the covenant nation never saw the “confusion” that you see in the pages of scripture.

After you have taken my questions seriously I will encourage you to keep on commenting on this blog. The reason that I encourage comments is because I believe that open discussion will only lead people closer to the truth and my belief has been confirmed many times over since the establishment of this blog. But please do not speak in the name of political correctness as if that were an ideal that we should respect. If you believe that you have a piece of truth to share, share it. Because peace and harmony on earth will never come about when we deny each other the right to define ourselves for the sake of political correctness. According to the prophets of Israel, peace on earth will be achieved when the truth is revealed in its full glory.

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

Posted in Correspondence | 4 Comments

Birthday of the Sun

Posted on December 28, 2014 by yourphariseefriend

yourphariseefriend's avatar1000 Verses - a project of Judaism Resources

Birthday of the Sun

The fact that the most prominent holiday in the Christian yearly cycle is pagan in origin is relatively well known. Some Christian leaders argue for an abandonment of this pagan celebration while most observe this holiday and use the time as an opportunity to call attention to the message of Christianity.

Many churchmen justify the adoption of a pagan holiday with the argument that this was simply a historical circumstance. The expanding Church found that so many people were already celebrating this time, so instead of attempting to repress this celebration, the Church converted it from paganism to Christianity. The “conversion” of the holiday was achieved by artificially associating the Christian message with the observance of the holiday. This merger turned the commemoration of the birthday of the sun into a celebration that commemorates the birthday of the “son”.

Are these two celebrations really so different?…

View original post 366 more words

Posted in General | Leave a comment

Videos December 2014

Posted on December 28, 2014 by yourphariseefriend

The Literary Context of Scripture

The Theological Context of Scripture

The Spiritual Context of Scripture

Can the Messiah Come Twice?

http://www.judaismresources.com/video-and-audio-lectures.html

Posted in General, Videos | 4 Comments

Channuka – Excerpt from Contra Brown

Posted on December 21, 2014 by yourphariseefriend
  1. 1.    Haggai 2:6 – 9.
  2. “For thus says the Lord of hosts: There will be one more; it is a small one. I will shake the heavens and the earth and the sea and the dry land. I will shake the nations and the precious things of all the nations will come, and I will fill this house with glory, says the Lord of hosts. Mine is the silver and mine is the gold – the word of the Lord of hosts. Great shall be the glory of this house – the latter more so than the former, said the Lord of hosts, and I will grant peace in this place – the word of the Lord of hosts.”

The prophet is encouraging those who returned from the Babylonian exile. They were disappointed with the modest nature of the SecondTemple (2:3, 4, Zechariah 4:10), and this was God’s message of reassurance. God encouraged the people by telling them that this Temple will be filled with glory (vs. 7), a glory that will surpass that of the FirstTemple (vs. 9). This prophecy did not come to pass in its most literal sense. Brown admits as much[xxiii]. Still, Brown contends that in a certain sense the glory of the SecondTemple actually did exceed that of the First and that is because Jesus – who Brown believes is God Himself, visited the SecondTemple but did not visit the FirstTemple.

One problem with this interpretation is the simple fact that God did visit the FirstTemple in an open and obvious way (1Kings 8:11, 2Chronicles 7:1 – 3). All who witnessed that visitation – and the entire nation was present – recognized that the God of Israel had come to dwell in His house. When the people saw Jesus walking in the Temple courtyard (he couldn’t enter the sanctuary itself for he was not a priest), they just saw a man. So which visitation was greater? Or does Brown believe that Jesus is God while God is not God?

The second problem with Brown’s interpretation is that Jesus never came to glorify the Temple. According to Christian theology he actually came to replace the Temple. According to Brown Jesus came to replace both the atonement that was provided through the Temple offerings and the connection to God that the Temple represented[xxiv]. How could the career of Jesus, a man who claimed the glory of the Temple for himself, be considered a glorification of the same Temple?

So what did Haggai mean with this prophecy? The fact that the prophecy was not fulfilled in the most literal sense, lends weight to the explanation[xxv] that this prophecy was conditional on the nation’s full repentance – as was the prophecy of Zechariah (6:15 – see below). When the nation ultimately turns back to God[xxvi], then the glory of the Temple will indeed surpass the glory of the First Temple[xxvii].

If we will insist on a fulfillment of this prophecy during the time of the SecondTemple, we ought to allow the scriptures to tell us how the glory of God was manifest in the Second Temple[xxviii].

The scriptures teach that the purpose of the sanctuary was so that God could dwell in the midst of Israel (Exodus 25:8, 29:45, Ezekiel 37:27), and so that He could meet with Israel there (Exodus 23:17, 29:43, Deuteronomy 16:16). The primary purpose of the Temple was the connection it created between God and His beloved nation.

The Godly spirit which guided the nation during the SecondTemple era was not as dramatic or as openly manifest as was the prophetic spirit that was manifest in the FirstTemple period. But the connection that it created between God and His people ran deeper and was more fully absorbed by the nation. In the context of this same prophecy, Haggai assured the people that God’s own spirit had come to dwell in their midst (Haggai 2:5)[xxix]. Under the influence of this spirit the leaders of the Jewish people were able to seal the canon of scripture. It was through this spirit that God influenced our leaders to establish a network of rabbinical institutions which preserved the nation’s loyalty to God throughout the darkness of the exile. The divine inspiration bestowed through this spirit enabled our leaders to formulate the Mishnah and Talmud, the books that would unite all of Israel throughout the realms of time and space in their ongoing discussion of God’s Law.

In the historical context of the SecondTemple, the spirit that dwelt amongst our people encouraged the brave resistance to the Greek persecution. The people were inspired to take on the might of the Syrian-Greek Empire in order to maintain their loyalty to God and His holy Law. The victory that was achieved against overwhelming odds and the miracle of the Menorah associated with that victory, still testifies to the world that God was with the Jewish people (Zechariah 9:13 – 16).

The glory that was manifest in the SecondTemple was not more spectacular than the glory that was manifest in the FirstTemple. But it went further in achieving its purpose, and in that sense it was greater than the glory manifested in the FirstTemple. That still and silent spirit that came to dwell in the Second temple is still manifest amongst us, and will remain with us forever – just as God has promised (Isaiah 59:21, Haggai 2:5, Zechariah 4:6).

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

Posted in Holidays | 155 Comments

Audio – Lamps and Lights

Posted on December 14, 2014 by yourphariseefriend

http://www.judaismresources.com/video-and-audio-lectures.html

Posted in General | 2 Comments