Jewish Objections 1.07 Chrstianity's Proofs are Meaningless

[Sophiee]

By Drashi

Michael L. Brown


From http://www.realmessiah.com/OBJgeneralPF.htm

Objection: 1.7. “The fundamental problem with Christianity is that it is not Judaism. Therefore all your so-called ‘proofs’ from the Hebrew Scriptures are meaningless. They are simply your interpretation, not ours.”

Answer: “Is it possible that it is you who are not getting the point? Who says that Judaism is the faith that is in harmony with the Hebrew Scriptures? Who says that ‘Christianity’ (or, ‘Messianic Judaism’) is not for Jews? Who says that ‘your’ interpretation is right? If Jesus is indeed the successor of Moses and the prophets, the Messiah spoken of in our Hebrew Scriptures, then the faith that acknowledges him is the proper faith for those who claim to adhere to those Scriptures. It’s that simple. Of course, much that has been called ‘Christianity’ through the years has hardly been either Christian or biblical -- let alone Jewish. But there is an authentic ‘Christianity’ that is thoroughly biblical and -- I kid you not -- amazingly ‘Jewish.’ It is the right faith -- meaning ‘right’ in the sight of God -- for you and for every Jew without exception.”

He also claims that the sages of the Jewish people "made a tragic mistake in rejecting Jesus as the Messiah."

It is an interesting declaration to make, to say that the Jewish leadership rejected someone who got stabbed to death by an Italian and never had any leadership or position of authority over the Jewish people.

Perhaps they knew something.

Of course, that is coming from a point of view that he even existed.

Brown goes on to ask, "Which faith is the true biblical faith?"

And then he never answers it.

But he does say that believing in Jesus and not believing (whatever that means) is no different than Traditional Judaism and Messianic Judaism - Judaism with just some variants like many other forms of Judaism.

How are they the same?

1) Both believe that the Hebrew Sctipures are true
2) Both believe in the coming of the Moshiach
3) Both believe in an afterlife with reward and punishment

He claims that Christianity was taken from the Jews, from it's Jewish roots, and made into something foreign, and strayed from it's purity and spiritually powerful form of Judaism.

He brings forth the old argument about what is "true Christianity" or what does it mean to be a "true Christian", thus distancing himself from the Christian past and heritage and grasping the Jewish one and taking a few bits of Christianity that he thinks should be Jewish.

He asks about "who is right" several times, and while never giving a definite answer, he does make one telling statement about the Rabbinical Jews who have rejected Jesus:

"What makes them right? Who says their interpretations are the correct ones?"

He then does down a dark path. He speaks of the Christian period where Scripture was not translated for the masses to reasd and understand, and where they were forbidden to learn on their own. And continues with:

How is it that you as a Jew don't feel free to read the Bible on your own? Why are you dependant upon someone elses interpretation? Isn't God able to lead you into the truth as you seek him with an open mind and an honest heart?"

I don't know if Brown uses a lower-case him on purpose or not.

But here is the core of it.

"Rabbinical Judaism" is the conspiratorial Judaism where, just as Christianity was stolen by the evil people, so was Judaism. Real Judaism is Brown's Christianity.

You see, according to him, Matthew was right, and that there was a Rabbinical conspiracy to hide the truth from the Jews, who are incapable of thinking for themselves. (This is a theme that you will find in more than one Missionary book, such as "The Case for Jesus" and others).

So while Brown doesn't actually go and answer his question, "Which faith is the true biblical faith?", his other statements provide the answer: Rabbinical Judaism is as false as goyishe Christianity, and a Judaism that worships Jesus is the true Judaism from the ancient of days.



Comments........................................

[Sophiee]

Xianity could be a fine religion for the Noachides (not Jews) even if they thought J-sus was the messiah. . .as long as they didn't worship him.

The problem with Dr. Brown's premise is that given all the changes to Xianity over the last 2000 years there is no way for a Noachide to know what J-sus would want of a non-Jew. There is no oral tradition going back that tells them.

We do know that rabbinical Judaism is true to Torah because we do not "add to or subtract from" it.

I've heard the old Xian argument that Rabbinical fences are changes. And that even the creation of the Siddur or the Haggadah for Passover are changes, but that is a bit absurd.

We are commanded to observe and celebrate Passover. We are commanded to tell the story to our children. So what if the story was "institutionalized" in the form of the Passover Haggadah? Do we fulfill the mitzvot? Yes.

Same with Rabbinical fences -- gezeirah. The rabbis didn't change one mitzvot, they simply are rules to prevent us from breaking halacha. Explanations (if you will) applying the halacha to given situations.

Then of course there is tekkinah. Now Tekkinah did institute things not found in Torah -- but do they add to or subtract from the mitzvot? Of course not. Things like Purim and Chanukkah are not found in Torah, but they are tekkinah -- things instituted by the rabbis. But how do they "change" Judaism? They simply remember and celebrate events in our history -- and praise G-d for it.

Where gezeirah can be thought of as "preventative" (stopping us from accidentally sinning and breaking mitzvot) then Tekkinah is "positive."

[Sophiee]

Drashi replies

His declaration that his Christianity (he admits that it is not the Christianity of the non-Jews) it the truth hides or sweeps away the fact that most of the people in his Christianity are non-Jews, and that they fund his religion to keep it going and provide schools for him to learn from and publish his books and so forth.

In other words, his foundation is not Judaism, but Christianity, or a devotee of a Christ.

Furthermore, he has made the claim several times that Jews have always, throughout every generation, worshipped Jesus as Jews. Although there is no evidence to support this. When asked where are the ancien messianic shuls, he says that the Jews were too afraid to tell people what they were doing because the Jews would attack them and so would the Christians.

But how come he is privvy to this historical information if it was hidden and there is a lack of historical evidence to support this?

Well, it sounds good.

He says that scholars declare that the early Christians were Jews. Anton Lavey, the founder of modern Satanism (just as Martin Rosen is the founder of modern Messianics) founded a religion that is composed mostly of ex-Christians. Are we to say that because Christians composed the founding of the Church of Satan that it validates Satanism as being joined at the hip with Christianity, or do we say that some deviants got together and what they did had nothing to do with the faith they left?

There is a connection.

And so, to follow the logic of Brown, Stanism is the truth, and it is based on the origins of Christianity, for most of it's founding members were once Christians, while modern Christianity obviously has hidden the truth from it's followers who are afraid to think for themselves.

[tongue in cheek]

[Anonymous]

Furthermore, he has made the claim several times that Jews have always, throughout every generation, worshipped Jesus as Jews. Although there is no evidence to support this. When asked where are the ancien messianic shuls, he says that the Jews were too afraid to tell people what they were doing because the Jews would attack them and so would the Christians.

That's pretty much what the Baptist claim about their denomination ie their denomination was there from the beginning, but it was underground movement because they feared persecution from the EVIL CATHOLIC CHURCH.

I guess not only does Dr Brown funding from the Baptist, but also their conspirancy theories