|
|
Post by hamashiachagape on Sept 9, 2010 11:08:37 GMT -8
Have you ever encountered an Anti-Missionary who attacks the Brit Chadasha, and Yeshua's Messiahship? I've found a guide by Dr. Michael Brown to help you respond to the deceptive tactics most commonly used by the Anti-Missionaries. I'm sure you'll find it most helpful. You can view it here: CLICK ME I have been involved in Apologetics long enough to understand how Jewish countermissionary arguments usually undercut themselves. For instance, the same Jews believe in the Mashiach's roles of ben Yosef and Ben David. But then they try to create these other explanations that attempt to undercut these two roles mentioned regarding the Messiah. Its a real mess half the time  . Usually Isaiah 53 is a good way to address, and what the rabbis thought about this chapter, when witnessing to a Jew. Its odd, my rabbi stated that the chief rabbi spoke with him and told him that Isaiah 53 was not a part of the Tanakh.......Badunk.  |
|
tonga
Full Member
Posts: 243
|
Post by tonga on Sept 13, 2010 20:30:00 GMT -8
Of course it is part of the Tanach-no Jew is going to say it is not. Which makes me wonder if your religious leader misunderstood.
|
|
|
|
Post by David Ben Yosef on Sept 16, 2010 8:07:18 GMT -8
Of course it is part of the Tanach-no Jew is going to say it is not. Which makes me wonder if your religious leader misunderstood. Or the OP misunderstood his Rabbi. Isaiah 52:13-53:12 is not read as part of the Haftorah during Shabbat services. More than likely, that's what he was referring to. Personally, I think it's a huge mistake not to read that portion. Why skip it, since it speaks of the promised Mashiakh? |
|
tonga
Full Member
Posts: 243
|
Post by tonga on Sept 16, 2010 10:11:34 GMT -8
The vast majority of Isaiah and ketuvim/neviim is not read as part of the haftorah. It has nothing to do with censorship;
it has to do with the fact that apparently that portion of Isaiah does not have a theme close enough to any of the parshas.
|
|
|
|
Post by David Ben Yosef on Sept 16, 2010 11:06:30 GMT -8
The vast majority of Isaiah and ketuvim/neviim is not read as part of the haftorah. It has nothing to do with censorship; it has to do with the fact that apparently that portion of Isaiah does not have a theme close enough to any of the parshas. My previous comment was to offer an alternative to what the OP's Rabbi might have been referring to regarding the Isaiah 53 passage. However, Isaiah chapter 51 through verse 12 is read in the Haftorah, and then picked back up again in chapter 54 through verse 10. I was not insinuating a deliberate omission as some others have suggested in this thread. Thought you knew me better than that, Tonga...LOL Like I said though, my personal opinion is that it should have been included. Perhaps you are correct in that it's omission is due to no corresponding parsha. Seems plausible since there really is no parsha text that relates to the suffering Mashiakh that I'm aware of. Good point. Shalom |
|
tonga
Full Member
Posts: 243
|
Post by tonga on Sept 16, 2010 11:50:03 GMT -8
The vast majority of Isaiah and ketuvim/neviim is not read as part of the haftorah. It has nothing to do with censorship; it has to do with the fact that apparently that portion of Isaiah does not have a theme close enough to any of the parshas. My previous comment was to offer an alternative to what the OP's Rabbi might have been referring to regarding the Isaiah 53 passage. However, Isaiah chapter 51 through verse 12 is read in the Haftorah, and then picked back up again in chapter 54 through verse 10. I was not insinuating a deliberate omission as some others have suggested in this thread. Thought you knew me better than that, Tonga...LOL Like I said though, my personal opinion is that it should have been included. Perhaps you are correct in that it's omission is due to no corresponding parsha. Seems plausible since there really is no parsha text that relates to the suffering Mashiakh that I'm aware of. Good point. Shalom Oh, I wasn't picking on you, LOL. It's just that I have heard countless times on how "the rabbis" have censored the reading of Isaiah in the haftorahs because they are trying to hide from Jews the fact that it is a reference to a suffering messiah. Thought I would just point out that is not the case. A haftorah will always have some common link to the parsha, which is why of course it was picked to be the haftorah in the first place.  |
|
|
|
Post by David Ben Yosef on Sept 16, 2010 13:24:27 GMT -8
Oh, I wasn't picking on you, LOL. It's just that I have heard countless times on how "the rabbis" have censored the reading of Isaiah in the haftorahs because they are trying to hide from Jews the fact that it is a reference to a suffering messiah. Thought I would just point out that is not the case. No, it's not the case at all. "The Rabbi's" have much to say on that particular passage. None of which attempts to hide the suffering Mashiakh. In fact, "The Rabbi's" openly declare in the earlier interpretations, that passage is speaking of Mashiakh ben Yosef [contrary to modern Jewish apologists]. I've heard the claim of a purposeful omission before, but it's too preposterous to even entertain. It's unfortunate that many believers in Yeshua are almost completely ignorant of Judaic history, and the writings of the Sages. A haftorah will always have some common link to the parsha, which is why of course it was picked to be the haftorah in the first place. LOL...I'm well aware of that. Shalom |
|
Sean
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by Sean on Dec 7, 2010 1:27:23 GMT -8
Hi, I have an Israeli friend who has now taken it upon himself to talk me out of my faith in Yeshua. I actually enjoy the debates we have, although he has now roped in his rabbi and I have to work a little harder. Don't worry, I am not ready to give up my faith in Yeshua One point that the rabbi did raise was that if Yeshua is born of a virgin then he is not from the tribe of Judah and thus cannot be Messiah. he also said that the lineage of Yosef (Joseph) is cursed (becuase of Jeconiah) and thus even if Yeshua was conceived in the normal fashion he would still not me eligible to be Messiah. Now I know that descendants of Jeconiah did reign, e.g. Zerubabel, so it seems that G-d must have reversed that decision, but I want to know what the response is to the issue of the virgin birth invalidating Yeshua's claim to messiahship would be. Any thoughts would be much appreciated, sorry if I'm asking the question in the wrong place, but I'm sure it's a favourite of the anti-missionaries. -Sean |
|
|
|
Post by David Ben Yosef on Dec 7, 2010 7:15:22 GMT -8
One point that the rabbi did raise was that if Yeshua is born of a virgin then he is not from the tribe of Judah and thus cannot be Messiah. He also said that the lineage of Yosef (Joseph) is cursed (becuase of Jeconiah) and thus even if Yeshua was conceived in the normal fashion he would still not me eligible to be Messiah. Those are two very good points. Your right, the curse on Jeconiah has been lifted. It was lifted by HaShem because he had repented of his sin. Teshuva can do wonderous things! As for the virgin birth of Yeshua, I'll PM you a link to a study article on that subject. So check your PM's. Shalom |
|
tonga
Full Member
Posts: 243
|
Post by tonga on Dec 7, 2010 7:17:41 GMT -8
Hi, I have an Israeli friend who has now taken it upon himself to talk me out of my faith in Yeshua. Are you a Jew? Otherwise I don't understand why he is attempting to get you to change your beliefs...that isn't something we do. This is true. Tribal status comes from the father. If there is no father, there is no tribal status and Jesus can not be from the tribe of Judah. This eliminates him from being moshiach. Which brings me to a different question. Why would G-d send a messiah to the Jews in a way that makes it totally impossible for them to accept him as messiah? Some of the problems I see are: Born of a virign-therefore no tribal status. Possibility of the mamzer issue since Mary was not pregnant from her husband. G-d coming in human form. G-d sacrificing Himself (or His son, however you wish to word it) in a place and manner not acceptable by  . I'm definitely not trying to dissuade you from your faith, you should stay with what you believe if you aren't a Jew. I'm just curious about this. |
|
|
|
Post by David Ben Yosef on Dec 7, 2010 9:25:34 GMT -8
Why would G-d send a messiah to the Jews in a way that makes it totally impossible for them to accept him as messiah? In short, He wouldn't, and He didn't. The Brit Chadasha tells us that thousands upon thousands of 1st century Jews accepted Yeshua as HaMashiakh. Here's but a few of many passages that tell us this.... (John 12:19 Complete Jewish Bible) The P'rushim said to each other, "Look, you're getting nowhere! Why, the whole world has gone after him!" (Acts 2:36-41 Complete Jewish Bible) Therefore, let the whole house of Isra'el know beyond doubt that God has made him both Lord and Messiah - this Yeshua, whom you executed on a stake!" On hearing this, they were stung in their hearts; and they said to Kefa and the other emissaries, "Brothers, what should we do?" Kefa answered them, "Turn from sin, return to God, and each of you be immersed on the authority of Yeshua the Messiah into forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Ruach HaKodesh! For the promise is for you, for your children, and for those far away - as many as ADONAI our God may call!" He pressed his case with many other arguments and kept pleading with them, "Save yourselves from this perverse generation!" So those who accepted what he said were immersed, and there were added to the group that day about three thousand people. (Acts 2:47 Complete Jewish Bible)And day after day [ie- daily] the Lord kept adding to them those who were being saved. (Acts 11:19-21 Complete Jewish Bible) Now those who had been scattered because of the persecution which had arisen over Stephen went as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch; they spoke God's word, but only to Jews. However, some of these, men from Cyprus and Cyrene, when they arrived at Antioch, began speaking to the Greeks too, proclaiming the Good News of the Lord Yeshua. The hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number of people trusted and turned to the Lord. (Acts 21:20 Complete Jewish Bible) On hearing it, they praised God; but they also said to him, "You see, brother, how many tens of thousands of believers there are among the Judeans, and they are all zealots for the . History also bears record of a great number of Jews accepting Yeshua HaMashiakh, in all generations. It would be even more if Christianity had not corrupted the true Gospel of the Kingdom. Shalom |
|
tonga
Full Member
Posts: 243
|
Post by tonga on Dec 7, 2010 9:49:51 GMT -8
Why would G-d send a messiah to the Jews in a way that makes it totally impossible for them to accept him as messiah? In short, He wouldn't, and He didn't. The Brit Chadasha tells us that thousands upon thousands of 1st century Jews accepted Yeshua as HaMashiakh. Here's but a few of many passages that tell us this.... (John 12:19 Complete Jewish Bible) The P'rushim said to each other, "Look, you're getting nowhere! Why, the whole world has gone after him!" (Acts 2:36-41 Complete Jewish Bible) Therefore, let the whole house of Isra'el know beyond doubt that God has made him both Lord and Messiah - this Yeshua, whom you executed on a stake!" On hearing this, they were stung in their hearts; and they said to Kefa and the other emissaries, "Brothers, what should we do?" Kefa answered them, "Turn from sin, return to God, and each of you be immersed on the authority of Yeshua the Messiah into forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Ruach HaKodesh! For the promise is for you, for your children, and for those far away - as many as ADONAI our God may call!" He pressed his case with many other arguments and kept pleading with them, "Save yourselves from this perverse generation!" So those who accepted what he said were immersed, and there were added to the group that day about three thousand people. (Acts 2:47 Complete Jewish Bible)And day after day [ie- daily] the Lord kept adding to them those who were being saved. (Acts 11:19-21 Complete Jewish Bible) Now those who had been scattered because of the persecution which had arisen over Stephen went as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch; they spoke God's word, but only to Jews. However, some of these, men from Cyprus and Cyrene, when they arrived at Antioch, began speaking to the Greeks too, proclaiming the Good News of the Lord Yeshua. The hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number of people trusted and turned to the Lord. (Acts 21:20 Complete Jewish Bible) On hearing it, they praised God; but they also said to him, "You see, brother, how many tens of thousands of believers there are among the Judeans, and they are all zealots for the . History also bears record of a great number of Jews accepting Yeshua HaMashiakh, in all generations. It would be even more if Christianity had not corrupted the true Gospel of the Kingdom. Shalom Of course you will have to forgive me for not accepting what the NT says Sure some Jews have converted, but it is a small minority. And it still doesn't answer my question-why would G-d send a messiah in a manner that is contradictory to Judaism, Jewish law, and that the vast majority cannot accept? |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 7, 2010 15:01:19 GMT -8
Tonga,
Can I deal with your questions one at a time? First:
[quote G-d coming in human form.
[/quote]
Gen. 18:1 And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;
2 And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground,
Who is the third person that didn’t visit Lot?
Dan 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.
Who is the fourth person in the fire?
It seems to me that God has appeared in human form of old. If so, then why not as Messiah?
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 8, 2010 9:59:23 GMT -8
Born of a virign-therefore no tribal status. Judg. 30:3 And his mother's brethren spake of him in the ears of all the men of Shechem all these words: and their hearts inclined to follow Abimelech; for they said, He is our brother. Shouldn’t Abimelech have been counted as part of the tribe of Manasseh, instead of Shechem his mothers people. Jephthah was also rejected of his brethren because his mother was an harlot. (See Judges 11) Apparently tribal status does not always come from the father. And if I remember history correctly, there have been Rabbinic decrease that allowed the children of Jewish women raped by invading armies to be full members of the Jewish people. I don’t think your statement that “Tribal status comes form the father.” is always true. We also need to consider the leverite marriage. David’s linage was incapable of producing the Godly Seed to set on the throne for ever. So God stood in for him in a way in order that the Godly seed could be brought forth. Matt 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. Tonga, forgive me for referring to the new testament. But I don’t think that this passage says anything that you don’t believe. Just because someone is the seed of Abraham doesn’t mean that they will act like. And some one not of the seed of Abraham can act as if he were through God’s intervention. So then God can raise up seed of David by this woman Mary. And just a personal observation on the virgin birth. There are quit a few scientifically documented instances of Parthenogenesis or virgin births among animals. And man has manipulated quite a few plants into producing vegetables through parthenogenesis. If you have eaten a hot house cucumber, it most likely was produced by parthenogenesis. If it happens in nature and man can cause it, why couldn’t God have done it. |
|
|
|
Post by David Ben Yosef on Dec 12, 2010 22:19:07 GMT -8
David’s linage was incapable of producing the Godly Seed to set on the throne for ever. That simply isn't true. Can you please explain to me why you have come to that conclusion? If you are perhaps referring to the curse on Jeconiah, that was lifted by HaShem because he repented of his sin. Teshuva is a powerful thing, and The Almighty most certainly honors it. In fact, the Tanakh teaches us that HaShem prefers teshuva over ANY offering we might bring before Him. You cannot keep the first commandment without regular teshuva. It's mandatory for a covenant relationship to last. Otherwise, one is cut off from the people of G-d, and has forfeited his/her inheritance in the coming Kingdom age. Shalom |
|
. Usually Isaiah 53 is a good way to address, and what the rabbis thought about this chapter, when witnessing to a Jew. Its odd, my rabbi stated that the chief rabbi spoke with him and told him that Isaiah 53 was not a part of the Tanakh.......Badunk. 
.
