1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources

Dear Gil

Let me clarify a basic contrast that seems to have escaped you.

On the one side you have the word of God – I refer here to the Jewish Scriptures which we both acknowledge as the words of the Living God. On the other hand you have the speculation of men. The fact that the speculation that these men engage in revolves around the words of God does not change the status of these theories – they remain speculation.

I will clarify.

We are discussing the worship of Jesus – a worship that you condone and one which I see as the greatest rebellion against God.

Wonder of wonders! We both point to the same Jewish Scriptures to support our respective positions!

The difference is that I am pointing to direct and explicit commandments from God while you are simply using Scripture as a springboard for your own speculations.

I pointed to the Sinai revelation. It was not me who decided that this passage is relevant to this discussion. The Author of Scripture made it abundantly clear that this event was His teaching on the subject of idolatry.

You pointed to the sacrifice of Isaac and the smiting of the firstborn. May I bring it to your attention that the Author of Scripture did NOT present these as a teaching on the subject of idolatry – it is YOU who decided that these narratives have a bearing on this discussion.

Furthermore – the Sinai revelation was a comprehensive teaching on the subject. The Author of Scripture Himself tied up all the loose ends. The doctrine He taught was simple, straightforward and complete – it was that we are to worship only the God who revealed Himself to our ancestors at Sinai as our ancestors preserved that revelation (Deuteronomy 4:9; Isaiah 43:10).

The theory that you are building out of the narratives in Genesis and Exodus are not spelled out in Scripture at all. These are your own speculations.

Do you not see the stark contrast between your own speculations and the explicit, direct and comprehensive word of God?

Furthermore – because my nation does not accept your fanciful speculations you then say that we “overlook” the sacrifice of Isaac?! Your condescending tone about Israel retelling the story as a “wonderful story of the dedication and devotion of Abraham” – as if this is the insignificant part of the story – the “sideshow” so to speak – speaks volumes. Perhaps you noticed that the Author of Scripture Himself calls our attention to this aspect of the story (Genesis 22:18).

Since you seem to be in the mood of some speculation about the role of the sacrifice of the firstborn let me share some of my own speculations on the subject.

Israel is God’s firstborn (Exodus 4:22; Jeremiah 31:8), His only one (2Samuel 7:23), that He loves (Deuteronomy 7:8) . Throughout our history we have been called upon to give up our lives in obedience to God’s voice that commands us to refrain from worshipping idols. Isaac’s sacrifice served as the model and the inspiration for tens of thousands of subsequent sacrifices of God’s firstborn. The inspiration generated by these sacrifices continues to illuminate the world in the very same way that Isaac’s sacrifice illuminated and brought blessing: By testifying that God alone is sovereign over every facet of existence.

When it comes to my remarks about the alleged resurrection of Jesus you chose to ignore my main point and instead you addressed the comments that I put in parenthesis.

To remind you – my main point was that the distinction that you made between the resurrection and other miracles (that it was unaided) – is a distinction that has no basis in Scripture. Scripture uses the broad brush “sign or wonder” to teach that no miracle can move us from the path God set us on when He took us out of Egypt. Yet you come with your own speculation and create a distinction and then you preach to me that I am “entirely on my own”. Gil, it is you who stand on your own against the plain word of God.

(I disagree with your arguments concerning my parenthetical statement but I fear that if I spell it out you will limit your response to this peripheral part of our argument and continue to avoid the main issue.)

I will go back now to your opening comments

You say that you are not given to the back and forth of “he is” “he is not”. If you noticed that has not been the style of our discussion. Yes, we both have misunderstood each other at times as is expected amongst people from such different world-views – but all in all our discussions have not been a matter of each of us attempting to state their opinion more emphatically but rather each of us attempting to bring more light, clarity and articulation to the basis of our beliefs.

You seem to be disappointed that you cannot bring the Christian Scriptures to support your position. This sentiment perhaps goes to the root of our differences. According to your own standard (that a claim for prophecy be measured in light of previous revelation) what you should have done is that you should have studied the Jewish Scriptures and the Jewish Scriptures alone, absorbed its spirit and allowed yourself to become saturated with its teachings – you should have developed a complete world-view on that basis and then and only then evaluate the claims of Christianity in that light. Do you not agree that this would be the proper approach?

If this would have been your approach – then you should be able to demonstrate from the Jewish Scriptures why it is that you accept the claims of Christianity.

Peace and light

Yisroel

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

Dear Gil

Thanks again for your willingness to engage in this discussion.

I would however appreciate it if you would directly address the issues that stand between us.

In the context of what we are discussing it is almost frivolous to discuss matters that do not bear on the central issue. I hope to address your errors about prophecy and sin only so that you don’t take my silence as agreement – but first I’d rather clear up the main issue.

We are discussing idolatry. You seem to be under the impression that I am opposed to the concept of the incarnation because it might LEAD TO idolatry.

No! That is not what disturbs me about the incarnation claim at all.

The incarnation claim IS idolatry. Claiming that a man is somehow divine and thus worthy of worship is idolatry itself.

You state that you have no desire to “compel” people to worship Jesus – “Suffice” it that they worship the Father “This pleases the son” – you say. You do however condone worship of the son. You consider worship of the Father “sufficient” – and you swallow it because it pleases the object of your adoration – namely “the son”.

This is idolatry.

In response to this charge you presented several statements

1) That if man could become like God than God reciprocated with the “counter reality of becoming like man”

2)  Then you argue that if God could create man in His image why would He despise the qualities of man.

3) You state “While we know the concept is not an impossibility.”

There are two different tracks that I could utilize to demonstrate your error. I could demonstrate to you why saying that God “became man” is as impossible as saying that a square is a circle, that sin is righteousness, that up is down and that cruelty is kindness. In the context of worship; God and man are more contradictory than any of these. (In other words the concept IS an impossibility.)

But I will not choose that track now (I have written extensively on this subject on my blog). Instead I will approach the issue from the angle of Scripture.

The purpose of the Sinai revelation was to teach us who to worship and who not to worship (Deuteronomy 4:15). This is explicitly declared in Scripture.

So how can you condone a worship other than the one our ancestors were taught at Sinai? Is this not the most direct violation of the covenant that was sealed with the Jewish people at Sinai?

And on what basis do you want to condone this worship? On the basis of your own imaginative piecing together of some Scriptural concepts (none of which are introduced by the Author of Scripture as teachings on worship). How could you pit your own speculations against the explicit word of God?

Note: God did not say that He will become like man – it is you who decided to read that idea into Scripture. Note: When Scripture says that man has become like God it is not giving legitimacy to worship of man (– I hope you agree), so this whole comparison of God to man or vice versa is completely unrelated to worship – for you to decide that these concepts have a bearing on the matter of worship is again – your speculation.

I read your comments to Annelise on your blog explaining your position.  Your argument about Jesus not being a prophet because he never claimed to be one – then using this as a loophole to thus bypass the duty of Israel to apply the Scriptural criterion for a prophet to his claims – is fallacious for several reasons. I will state one here.

The point of Deuteronomy 13:2 is not that when someone wants the specific title “prophet” then we are instructed to apply certain criteria to him or her. If that were the case then your argument that Jesus said (or implied over a long period of time): Aha! I am not claiming to be a prophet so Deuteronomy 13 doesn’t apply to me! – would perhaps be something to talk about. But you seem to have missed the point about Deuteronomy 13. It is not about the title “prophet”. It is about loving God. The point of the passage is that no miracle no matter how spectacular can move that love. God set us on a path at Sinai – and no miracle should budge us from that path. This is the point of Deuteronomy 13 and it is a directive to reject anyone who would condone worship of one that we did not encounter at Sinai.

Your argument that since the resurrection of Jesus was performed by Jesus himself so this sets it apart from any other miracle – is without Scriptural foundation. Deuteronomy 13 does not qualify the miracle that we are to disregard. It is your own reasoning that produced this distinction. The human mind is agile enough to produce such distinctions for any miracle – rendering the commandment meaningless.

(This aside from the fact that the argument itself is meaningless – if a false prophet can pull off the resurrection of someone other than himself so who said that Jesus wasn’t working with someone else who resurrected him? Furthermore; Matthew throws in a whole bunch of unaided resurrections at the time of Jesus’ death – were they all gods?)

The criteria that you are willing to apply to Jesus and Paul is that their message be aligned with the message of previous prophets. The mere fact that their message condones worship of a man tells us that their message does not align with the heart and core of the Jewish Scriptures – so they would have to be discounted even according to your own standard.

Even putting the issue of worship aside – their message conflicts with so much of Scripture – so even if you don’t understand how Jesus’ message contravenes the first two of the Ten Commandments – but don’t you see how it contravenes the general message of Scripture on the issues of atonement, observance of the Law and on the issue of the Messianic era?

In closing – I will again respectfully request that you stick to the central issue – idolatry. Again, to reiterate. God Himself taught our nation who it is that we are to worship and who it is that we are not to worship. This was done clearly and openly. This is by definition the core of our covenantal relationship with God. How then can you expect us to consider a teaching which condones a worship that God Himself instructed us to avoid?

Peace

Yisroel

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

Dear Gil

Thanks again for moving this discussion forward keeping  the focus on the issues.

1) Resurrection and Covenant

Your comments about the resurrections done through  Elijah and Ezekiel entirely missed the mark. Do you think that I don’t believe  in God’s ability to resurrect the dead? What did I say that would give you that  impression?

What I did pointo, and which you completely ignored (in keeping  with 2000 years of Church history), is the COMMANDMENT of God as articulated in  Deuteronomy 13:2-6 (1-5). It is that Scriptural text that commands us to  disregard resurrections, miracle healings, stopping the sun in the sky, and all  other miracles if they are being used to justify a redirection of our worship as  Christianity demands for Jesus.

It was in that context that I stated that a resurrection  is utterly meaningless – and I ask you – do you not agree? Do you believe that a resurrection (or any miracle) could justify a redirection of our worship? Do you have a  different interpretation of the passage in Deuteronomy?

Did I read you right? Were you stating (or implying)  that Israel’s covenantal relationship with God is defined by belief in a  resurrection or lack thereof? Wouldn’t you say that the prohibition against  idolatry is much more central to the relationship than is belief in the  resurrection?

In a certain sense I get the feeling that you view  idolatry as some technical legality which happens to be prohibited and you don’t  see it for the act of spiritual adultery that it is. Do you not agree that  worshiping anyone other than the God who we stand with in covenantal  relationship is the deepest violation of that relationship?

2) Bush, Serpent and lessons to be learned

The fact that you keep on bringing up the bronze serpent  tells me that you believe that it is somehow relevant to this  discussion.

It is not.

It could be compared to a woman who sees her husband  driving is another man’s car and attempts to use this as a justification to  commit adultery with that person.

I realize that perhaps you don’t consider worshiping  Jesus an act of idolatry – but then this is what you should be trying to  articulate – why it is that you believe that worship of Jesus is not idolatry  instead of harping on the Bronze Serpent again and again.

As for your question – what is the lesson to be learned  from the Serpent. I will respond – but before I do so let me point something out – Scripture does not clearly and explicitly tell us in a direct way what the  lesson is – all we could do is try to figure it out in the spirit of Scripture  as we have absorbed it.

The lesson is this (according to my understanding): The  people were being bitten by serpents. The human tendency is to focus on the  immediate problem and not see the hand of God behind the problem (as per Isaiah  10:5). God had the solution to their problem come about through the same medium  through which He delivered their problem – namely a serpent. They were healed by  looking at (note: not worshipping) a serpent. The message is that it is not the  serpent that brings death nor is it the serpent that brings life – these are but  agents in God’s hand to be used as He pleases for either life or death. When we  turn from God and from His holy law we find death and when we turn to God and to  His commandments God gives us life – that is the lesson.

3) Prophecy, Moses and Numbers 12

You argue that I set a standard for prophecy (that the prophet  be kind and honest) – you argue that it is non-Scriptural and you refer me to  Numbers 12. Numbers 12 makes a point about Moses’ humility – do you think that  it is coincidental that the most humble person was also the greatest  prophet?

The reason I make no reference to Numbers 12 in the  context of identifying a false prophet is because it is not stated as a  commandment – Deuteronomy 13 and 18 are. (It seems to me that you don’t  appreciate the significance of God’s explicit command – perhaps you would care  to explain your position on this).

Abraham would not have failed according to my standards  and he was not dishonest – in any case, my standard of kindness and honesty was  not to demand of the prophet that he or she never sin. But if someone who is  clearly wicked (such as in unkind or dishonest – even according to human  standards) – we could be sure that such a person is not a prophet. I don’t need  Scripture to support such an obvious point – but if you insist I will point you  to Isaiah 59:2 where it is stated that our sins stand between us and God – someone who is saturated with sin will not be someone who enjoys the connection  to God inherent in prophecy (I understand that there may be some exceptions to the  rule; such as with Balaam).

Your statement that Jesus was a prophet like Moses is  contrary to Scripture. Moses was the greatest prophet because of the credibility  that God granted to his mission (Exodus 19:9; Deuteronomy 34:10-12). Numbers 12  teaches about what was going on behind the scenes. Unless God explicitly teaches  us what is happening between Him and any given prophet – we can never know what  is going on in that private realm. This is not the measuring stick that God  granted us through which we can evaluate the level of a given  prophet.

4) Covenantal Responsibility

Do you not see how the claims of the Church concerning  the alleged deity of Jesus as viewed from the position of the Jew represent the  deepest violation of our covenantal relationship that we share with God? Can you  please address this critical issue?

Peace

Yisroel

(P.S. It may please you to know that I’ve read most of  the articles on your blog.)

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

Fifth Response to Gil Torres

Dear Gil

I want to begin by thanking you for taking the time and the effort to move this discussion forward with gentleness, sincerity and humility. When I asked for your “intention” I was not questioning your motivations – I was asking for clarification as to what you meant.

I will attempt to respond to the three points you made in response to my most recent letter. In the course of responding to your second point, I will also attempt to respond to a point that you made to Annelise. I then hope to articulate some general observations about this conversation (I refer here not to our personal conversation but the 2000 year conversation that has been going on between our respective communities).

1) You say that Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection and the subsequent fulfillment of this prophecy drew you to Jesus.

Allow me to articulate how this appears to me from the perspective of a Jew – because after all; the claims of Jesus were originally presented in the social context of the Jewish people.

We stand in a covenantal relationship with the Creator of heaven and earth; this through no merit of our own but on account of God’s love for our ancestors Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

This relationship carries a heavy responsibility with it. The ramifications of this responsibility are multi-faceted but the center of this responsibility is our relationship with God.

Every created being owes everything to the One who created them. When any person considers the shower of love from the Creator that is inherent in their very existence then their heart will certainly turn to God.

But for the Jewish people God went further. The miracles of the exodus, the Sinai revelation and the miracles in the wilderness brought the understanding of God’s mastery of creation into Israel’s heart in an unparalleled way (Deuteronomy 4:35). These events also demonstrated God’s closeness and His love for this nation in an unparalleled way.

For a Jew to worship an idol it is a repudiation not only of the love that is inherent in the creation of every being but it is also a spurning of God’s love that was poured out upon our nation in such an open and unique way.

With this in mind you can perhaps appreciate why Deuteronomy 13:2-6 (1-5) is such a critical passage. In this passage our Divine Lover warns us not to be impressed by miracles when they are being used to justify a shift in the focus of our worship.

From the standpoint of a Jew who stands in a covenantal relationship with God – a resurrection is utterly meaningless.

There is more to discuss here such as: Is the worship that Jesus encouraged a “shift in the focus of our worship”? How do we define “another god”? If any question arises concerning the application of this scripture, who, if anyone, is authorized to arbitrate and decide on this matter? Who gets to determine if the prophet is encouraging us to “stray from the path that the Lord our God commanded us to walk upon”? And finally (actually this question is the least relevant): is there any reason to believe if the resurrection actually happened? I hope to address at least some of these after I respond to the other two points you raised.

2) You say that the authority of Scripture is to be accepted on the basis of the nature of its “matter-of-fact, unapologetic” claims.

I don’t fully understand what you are saying but I will still respond. If I understand you correctly you are saying that because Scripture stands apart from other religious works (such as the Koran or the Book of Mormon) by virtue of possession of a given quality (“matter-of-fact, unapologetic”) so we must accept it.

I never read the Koran or the Book of Mormon but I would venture to guess that Moslems and Mormons would say that these books share those same qualities. This would then render my perception concerning Scripture as something that is relative and subjective. Furthermore, who said that these qualities are the ultimate determinant as to what should be the book that guides our lives? And most importantly; is this the way God, the Author of Scripture, expected us to arrive at this conclusion? Did God expect us to read every piece of religious literature and then sit back and pass judgment as to which books are authoritative and which are not? Is there any indication from the Scriptures themselves that this is the method that God utilized in order to communicate with us about the validity of Scripture?

In your comment to Annelise you justify your decision to accept Jeremiah as an authentic prophecy on the basis of his predictions coming to pass.

Here your answer is actually in line with Scripture (Deuteronomy 18:22). This still does not negate the need to rely on the testimony of the Jewish nation. If Jeremiah would have put down one prediction that did not come to fruition – we would then have to discount him as a false prophet despite the fact that some of his predictions came to pass. If Jeremiah would have encouraged the worship of another god we would also have to reject him even if all of his predictions were to be fulfilled. It is only the testimony of the Jewish people that tells us that Jeremiah fully fulfilled the Mosaic criteria that is required of a true prophet. Furthermore; without the collective testimony of the nation there is no way of knowing that Jeremiah lived, or even if he did, that this is his book, and even if he did live and that this is indeed his book, you still need someone to tell you that he proclaimed these predictions before the events actually happened – in other words you need someone to tell you that the book is an accurate record of what actually happened. Finally; you may perhaps be aware that the followers of false prophets have all kinds of answers ready when the predictions of their prophets fail to happen. How do you know that this did not happen with Jeremiah? (Just for starters; many historians would argue that the return from Babylon did not take place precisely 70 years after the exile. The criterion of “fulfilled prophecy” is not so “cut and dried” as it would appear at first glance.)

3) If I understood your point about the Scriptural narrative about Adam and Eve it could be restated as: “you cannot easily bring proof from the fact that Scripture does not mention something”.

Good and fine. It is clear that certain things are to be understood naturally, as part of the sense of justice that God breathed into all of us. Throughout Scripture we find God punishing those who violated the basic precepts of justice and morality although there were no explicit commands given to them. The worship of the Creator of heaven and earth is dictated by the sense of justice that is common to all humanity. Directing worship towards a man is the most blatant violation of that sense of justice and morality. Just because one was left unsaid doesn’t justify or compare in any way to the leaving of the other unsaid.

To add insult to injury, Christianity demands what appears to the Jews as the deepest violation of their calling as a witness nation and as a covenant nation before God – and this could be left “unsaid”?!

The burning bush, the bronze serpent and the Ark of the Covenant did not encourage any redirection of our worship. If Jesus claimed deity then he was doing just that.

I will now move to some general observations and I hope that these words add clarity to my responses and to the discussion as a whole.

Before Jesus came on to the scene, the covenantal relationship that the Jew shared with God required that the Jew not direct his or her devotion to any entity aside from the One Creator of heaven and earth.

Then Jesus came along and claimed (according to the Christian narrative) that worship ought to be directed to him, a man. By parsing various nouns and verbs Church theologians have presented abstract and convoluted arguments that this Jesus is actually “one and the same” as the God described in the Jewish Scriptures. Every one of these arguments can be used to justify the worship of a stone statue. Can the stone statue not be the “incarnation” of the divine? Is anything impossible with God? Can you limit God’s ability to do as He pleases? Not that the stone became God but that God became a stone – in order to humble Himself…

But God made a covenant with the Jewish people. A covenant that He expected them to keep and to remain loyal to. At the core of the covenant we have the Sinai revelation which taught Israel who it is that they are to worship and who it is that they are not to worship (Deuteronomy 4). According to that revelation the worship demanded by the Church is precisely the worship that God prohibited in the strongest terms.

For 2000 years (and counting) the Church has attempted to persuade the Jew to accept the claims of Jesus’ deity. What stands out to me in this conversation is the appalling lack of respect that the Church displays towards the Jew’s covenantal responsibilities before God.

The Church has exerted herself for 2000 years now to convince the Jew, millions if not billions of man-hours were spent in the attempt to argue for the deity of Jesus. Yet I know of no coherent Christian response to the teaching that God presented us at Sinai. For 2000 years the Jew has been saying, and sometimes it cost him his life to say, that the worship that the Church demands is the deepest violation of the covenant that I share with God. God Himself taught us who it is that we are to worship and according to that teaching we should not be looking at Jesus as an object of devotion. Yet the Church did not respond. Instead the Church has declared that our resistance to the message of Jesus is evidence to our lack of loyalty to God’s covenant.

Gil – this was declared BEFORE the alleged resurrection. We were already being called children of the devil and enemies of light for resisting Jesus’ claims for deity – and no one had even dreamed of a resurrection.

There is no way that the Church can reasonably expect us to take their message seriously if they can’t take our message seriously. You see, the Church acknowledges that our message was handed to us by the Maker of heaven and earth – and they can’t take the time to listen to our testimony. How then can they expect us to listen to their testimony?

I raised some questions in this letter. I addressed these issues in various articles over the years.

https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2011/05/17/non-prophet/

https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2010/09/07/the-responsibility-of-israel/

https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2011/07/07/the-exodus-versus-the-resurrection/

https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2011/08/04/trust-grattitudeand-the-joy-of-obedience/

https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2010/09/06/faith-structure/

https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2012/05/10/how-were-the-jewish-scriptures-canonized/

It is my prayer that these words bring us all closer to the God of truth

Peace

Yisroel

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

Dear Gil

In your previous comment you wrote twice that I was  mistaken concerning your intention – in this most recent comment you insist that  I didn’t misunderstand you but rather that you believe that I understood – can  you please explain your intentions more clearly? Was I mistaken or did I  understand?

You didn’t answer my question as to how you came to the  conclusion that Jesus was divine – can you please explain how you came to this  conclusion?

You did seem to supply an answer as to how you know that  Scripture is authoritative – but I didn’t understand it – can you please  clarify?

What is your point with the question about Adam and  Eve’s worship? (Incidentally I don’t find the question “troublesome” at all.)  Can you please spell it out more clearly?

Blessings and peace

Yisroel

Third Response to Gil Torres

Dear Gil

So it seems I have been misunderstanding your points.  This being the case can you please clarify your beliefs for me?

I understand that you believe that Jesus claimed to be  divine and that he was telling the truth when he made that claim (did I  misunderstand you here as well?).

How did you arrive at this belief? On what basis are  people in general expected to arrive at the same conclusion that you  did?

You state that you believe that Scripture is “the  authoritative revelation of the will of God”.

How did you come to this conclusion? How did you  conclude that the books that you find in the Scriptural canon truly belong  there?

I understand that you might think that these questions  are not relevant to the discussion at hand. In case I understood you correctly – I strongly disagree. The method  that God set in place to teach us that that Scripture is authoritative and that  these books rightly belong in the canon of Scripture were also used by God to  teach us other truths – and these truths provide the true context for  Scripture.

Looking forward to your response

Yisroel

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