Southern Baptists 'Outreach To Jews'

The Larry King Show (2000.01.13)

Critique of Discussion

Pâ•qidꞋ  Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhꞋu

• LK — Larry King

• OJ (SB) — Orthodox R. Schmuley Boteach, Exec. Dir. of Oxford lᵊ-Khaim Society in New York, NY,

• JJC (DB) — David Brickner, of Jews for Jesus, Los Angeles, Ca.

• OJ (MH) — Orthodox R. Marvin Hier, founder and dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, Ca.,

• SBC (AM) — Rev. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., Pres., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary,

• PY — Pâ•qidꞋ Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhꞋu

My Qualifications To Critique These Discussants

I’m intimately familiar with, and intimidatingly experienced in, both sides of this issue. I’m a life-long devotee of the Creator, student of the Bible in its original languages and of His Laws (logic, physics, math, archeology and other sciences) as well as Biblical history. Perhaps I should mention that I’m also a fellow-alumnus of Billy Graham’s daughter (though I don’t know her personally, nor even if this is the same, or only, daughter) from an elite Christian boarding school: Hampden DuBose Academy. In addition to being a Mensan and computer scientist in artificial intelligence, I was formerly a Southern Baptist and Christian preacher. My research culminated in the realization that becoming more like historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa meant converting to Orthodox Judaism.

Accordingly, in 1984, my wife, Karen, and I converted under the auspices of Orthodox rabbis ordained by the President of the Beit Din of America.

I’m an Orthodox Jew in good standing in Ra'anana, Israel. My wife and I made a•liy•âhꞋ to Israel under the Law of Return for Jews and, for over a decade, our family prayed regularly in, and I served on the board of, an Orthodox Yemenite synagogue here (Beit ha-KᵊnësꞋët Mo•rëshꞋët Âv•otꞋ – Yad Nâ•âm•iꞋ).

Based on my knowledge of both Christianity and Judaism, it was clear to me that:

1. Neither Orthodox rabbi in the interview understands Christianity at the depth required to grasp the points made by Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler or Jews for Jesus David Brickner — despite Orthodox R. Boteach's boast of having "read the 'New Testament' cover-to-cover many times." R. Boteach should learn that one who has merely read the "Null Testament" (Christian NT), still hasn't read the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) and doesn't, even remotely, have the understanding of Christianity of one who has lived it and experienced it all their life; any more than a Christian who reads the Original Testament (OT), still hasn't read תנ''ך, much less grasped תּוֹרָה in the depth and scope that the rabbis do. I regularly demonstrate mastery of both. To be effective, he must also learn empathy, courtesy, emotional self-discipline and, above all, a disciplined working knowledge of logic.

2. Things are no better on the opposite side of the table. Neither Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler nor Jews for Jesus David Brickner have even the most superficial grasp of תּוֹרָה — even now, much less 2 millennia ago in the 1^st-century — essential to understanding the religious historical תּוֹרָה-teaching Jew, RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, whom Christianity abominably misrepresents to be (lᵊ‑ha•vᵊdilꞋ) their 4^th century, anti-תּוֹרָה redacted idol-image – Jesus. Consequently, Christians have no contact with reality relative to even recognizing the conflict itself: which is between Christianity (including its core, their Christian Jesus of the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT)), on the one hand, versus תּוֹרָה and תּוֹרָה Jews (including RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa), on the other.

   Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler and Jews for Jesus David Brickner must learn that until they can match the depth of understanding of תּוֹרָה (Judaism) that the rabbis have – at least historical 1^st-century Judaism as described in the Judaic literature (like (4Q) MMT) instead of the Hellenist Greek literature, they cannot possibly understand an unassimilated (un-Hellenized) Pharisee תּוֹרָה Jew and RibꞋi of 2 millennia ago. They relate only to their 4^th century C.E. Greek-Hellenist idol-image – Jesus.

Consequently, I have analyzed the interview with a critical, but constructive, eye toward the shortcomings of both sides of the conflict. To help the reader keep the players straight, the affiliations have been associated at least once in every paragraph for each interviewee. There is no significant difference in the positions and arguments expressed in this interview from the polemics conducted for the last 2,000 years. Neither side has yet learned that there is no potential for resolving the conflict by regurgitating the same polemics which have failed for 2,000 years. Replaying the same movie always ends the same way. Expecting differently is one definition of mental disorder.

Before there can be any progress, at least one side must overcome some obstacles. Thus, I provide in my comments to this interview new information — which has only been discovered in the past few decades — suggestions for remedying each shortcoming, the only possible suggestions with the potential to lead to resolution of the conflict.

The second thing to note is that people in a live interview show often fail to say what they would prefer to say if given a little more time to think about their answer. Thus, in all of their defense, it's much easier to be critical here than to answer well under the pressures of live TV.

I missed taping the first couple of minutes of the show and, following a commercial, failed to get the tape running again for a minute or so, apparently missing an important answer to a question posed before the commercial break. What follows, then, are all of the excerpts and comments from what I was able to record that I feel are germane to the matter under discussion:

The Southern Baptist 'Outreach to the Jews'

There are several points which, had the participants resolved at the beginning, would have contributed to a more constructive discussion and understanding (which was nearly totally lacking on both parts relative to their counterparts). Consider as you read through the interview how many conspicuous misunderstandings would have been avoided by adhering to the ground rules proposed below. (Several paragraphs of explanation, which will follow the first remark of the interview, are essential for the reader to grasp and orient to these objectives and this essential strategy.)

1. What are to be agreed on as "Authoritative Scripture" in the discussion? Ta•na"khꞋ? The Christian "NT" – Διαθηκη Καινη? Since Jews don't regard the Διαθηκη Καινη ("Null Testament") as Scripture, the only "Scripture" that both can accept as Authority is Ta•na"khꞋ.

2. Apostle St. Paul's Christian Jesus of his Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) cannot be assumed to be identical with (lᵊ‑ha•vᵊdilꞋ) 1^st-century historical תּוֹרָה-teaching Pharisee-RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa!!! These two descriptions have been demonstrated to be mutually contradictory (inter alia, by the late Oxford scholar and historian, James Parkes – The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, A Study in the Origins of Anti-Semitism) polar opposites (cf. Who Are the Netzarim? (WAN)), and must not be blurred together. They must be consistently and rigorously distinguished from each other. Any blurring of confusing of the two must be immediately be corrected before any genuine communication between Christianity and תּוֹרָה Jews is possible.

3. One of the earliest Church historians, Eusebius, recorded (Eccl. Hist., III.xxvii.4) that the earliest Jewish followers accepted only their own Hebrew Ma•titᵊyâhꞋu – see The Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Reconstruction of Hebrew Ma•ti•tᵊyâhꞋu (NHM) – "and made little account of the rest."

   The Διαθηκη Καινη (NT), by contrast, and as it has evolved into the "New Testament" today, is a product of the 4^th-century Roman Hellenism (idolatry); built on extensive (tens of thousands) redactions by post-135 CE, venomously miso-Judaic, gentile Hellenist idolaters who had recently waged war against the Jews and destroyed the Jews' "Temple" in 70 CE, then waged war against the Jews a second time in 135 CE when they expelled all Jews (including Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ) from Israel and Yᵊru•shâ•laꞋyim and renamed Yᵊhud•âhꞋ to "Palestine." To say that these Hellenist Roman idolaters developing Christianity were miso-Judaic is a monumental understatement. Add to this the need for the "new" Hellenism (Christianity) to prove to the Hellenist-idolater Roman populace that it had displaced the hated "Jews" and their "Judaism" and you have the formula explaining the early vilifications of Jews by the original (post135 CE) Christian Church.

   Therefore, the only legitimate authority that all parties can accept describing the life and teachings of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa – if any at all – is NHM. In particular, Eusebius records in the same place that the original Jewish followers of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa expelled "Apostle St. Paul" as an apostate which, if you know what to look for (see link), is even corroborated in the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT).

   References to the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) are fine as historical input of uncertain reliability to be screened for authenticity and its accuracy demonstrated by correlation with known Judaic (Hebrew and Aramaic, not Hellenist Greek or translated from Greek) literature of the period and prior – like Ιώσηπος (Josephus) and Ta•lᵊmudꞋ. But none of these are Scripture. For the same reason, Ta•lᵊmudꞋ cannot be held as authoritative in inter-religious discussion. These peripheral sources are only reliable for any given point as their reliability for that point is demonstrated.

4. תּוֹרָה prohibits uttering the names of false gods (Shᵊm•otꞋ 23:13). Therefore, while we have no objection to Christians using the name Jesus, תּוֹרָה-observant Jews should either refer to Jesus by spelling it or using the Hebrew acronym YeshꞋ"u.

The tape picks up the interview with:

JJ (DB) — …We are 100% Jewish and 100% Christian. We are like the first Jews for Jesus…

Hellenist Jesus of "Paul" the Apostate: Antithesis of 1^st century תּוֹרָה-Jew RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa

PY — So they would love for you to assume without fact-checking. Other than racist considerations, however, the facts are that Jews for Jesus are, by תּוֹרָה criteria, apostate idolaters; only some of whom have a bit of Jewish ethnicity. They are neither legitimately Jewish nor remotely like the 1^st century followers of the historical Pharisee Jew RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa.

Historians such as the late Oxford scholar on miso-Judaism, James Parkes noted in his book The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, A Study in the Origins of Anti-Semitism, the glaring, diametric, differences between:

1. the pro-תּוֹרָה Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ (Jews) of the 1^st-century (the original 'Nazarene' Jews who followed RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa; typically, but inaccurately, sullied as '1^st-century Christians'), and (lᵊ‑ha•vᵊdilꞋ)

2. the anti-תּוֹרָה gentile, Roman Hellenist (= idolatrous) Christians of the 4^th-century (more accurately post-135 CE).

It has been indisputably demonstrated from Dead Sea Scroll (4Q) MMT, and before that from the Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha and other Judaic literature of the period, that the historically-correct first Jewish followers whom Mr. Brickner arrogates (the original followers of the historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa as Mâ•shiꞋakh) were the pro-תּוֹרָה Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ (Jews) of the 1^st-century.

By contrast, the "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate's anti-תּוֹרָה Christians, Christianity and the Hellenist (= idolatrous) Roman gentile idol-image: Jesus — which is the religion Mr. Brickner has just acknowledged Jews for Jesus advocates "100%" — were a diametric antithesis of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and his original pro-תּוֹרָה Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ followers in the 1^st century.

Mr. Brickner couldn't be more wrong when he claims that his Jesus, which is the product of "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate's anti-תּוֹרָה Displacement Theology idolatrous-Hellenist Roman-gentile Christianity, is anything like the 1^st century historical תּוֹרָה-Jewish RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and his original תּוֹרָה-Jewish Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ followers in the Jewish community.

Jews for Jesus is, like the rest of Christianity, the diametric antithesis of the 1^st century historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and his original תּוֹרָה-Jewish Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ followers in the Jewish community. Mr. Brickner's claim is spurious and the rabbis were incompetent for not immediately correcting his claim.

Some Pertinent History

Look at just a little of the evidence. All major encyclopedias corroborate, and our books document, that even the earliest Christian Church historians recorded that Easter, Christmas, Sun-[god-] day worship and the like were adopted into Christianity several centuries after the death of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, only by gentiles who were native Roman idolaters; and only after 135 CE, after the Hellenist-Roman gentile idolaters had forcibly wrested control from the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ. The same gentile Hellenist-Roman idolaters did this at the same time – 135 CE – they idolatrized Yᵊru•shâ•laꞋyim into "Aelia Capitolina" — dedicated to Ζεύς and Mithra – Sun- (god-) day – worship (and, by the way, included renaming the land they wrested from the Jews and occupied – calling it for the first time "Palestine"). Our web site (click on the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ 'Olive Trees & Mᵊnor•âhꞋ' logo at the very top or very bottom of this page) covers much more and the books in our Kha•vᵊr•utꞋâ (Distance Learning) document in detail the many intractable contradictions inherent in Christianity.

Long before Christ, Christmas was the idolatrous celebration of the birthday of Mithra – Sun- (god-) day – worship! According to Grolier's Multimedia Encyclopedia 95 "Christmas" entry:

"Despite the beliefs about Christ that the birth stories expressed, the church did not observe a festival for the celebration of the event until the 4th century. The date was chosen to counter [syncretize is the accurate word as documented by the Encarta Encyclopedia below] the idolatrous festivities connected with the winter solstice; since 274, under the emperor Aurelian, Rome had celebrated the feast of the "Invincible Sun" on December 25."

It is also well demonstrated, in our books as well as others, that historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa was absolutely not born in winter. Our books demonstrate this, and further that his birth occurred in late spring. The astronomical events even provide the exact date.

Moreover, the Encarta Multimedia Encyclopedia 95 documents that the adoption of the birthday of the sun god into Christianity "since the 4^th century" was, in fact, a syncretism of their native idolatry merely given a new 'spin':

"Christmas festivals, generally observed by Christians since the 4^th century, incorporate idolatrous customs, such as the use of holly, mistletoe, Yule logs, and wassail bowls. The Christmas tree, an evergreen trimmed with lights and other decorations, is derived from the so-called paradise tree, symbolizing Eden, of German mystery plays. The use of a Christmas tree began early in the 17th century, in Strasbourg, France…"

The first Christmas was in the 4^th century, not the 1^st century, and celebrated the birthday of the sun-god-syncretized "Jesus" (whose face, John Romer has documented in a video cited in our web site, was the face of the Great Idol of Ζεύς!). Christmas, with its inherently idolatrous origins, has never had any connection to the historical Jew RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa who was born in late spring. "Jesus," by the way, is not merely a translation of the Hebrew RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa. This is documented in our book, Who Are the Netzarim? (WAN).

The change from Sha•bâtꞋ to Sun- (god-) day didn't occur until long after 135 CE (cf. Samuele Bacchiocchi, "How It Came About: From Satur(n)-day to Sun-day," Biblical Archaeology Review, IV, 3, 78.09-10, p. 32ff). This, of course, was long after the death of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, and after Hellenist-Roman gentile idolater-Christians — seething in post-war miso-Judaism — had forcibly usurped the original followers of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa in 135 CE as part of their idolatrization of the city of Aelia Capitolina – which they dedicated to their idolatrous gods Jupiter (Roman-Latin version of Ζεύς) and sun-(day) god Mithra – built overtop the ruins of Yᵊru•shâ•laꞋyim.

Long before Christ, Easter was the spring festival for Esotera / Ishtar / Astarte / Ashtoreth. Easter didn't become part of Christianity until Hellenist-Roman gentile idolater-Christians, centuries after the death of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, syncretized the idolatrous festival into their own native Hellenist-Roman (gentile idolater) "new Hellenism" Christianity. This, too, occurred only after the Greek-speaking, Hellenist-Roman gentile idolater-Christians had, in 135 CE:

• forcibly expelled the Jews – which included the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ – from Yᵊru•shâ•laꞋyim

• dedicated their "Jew free" – gentile – idolatrous Roman-Hellenist city to their gods Ζεύς and Mithra – Sun- (god-) day – worship

• renamed their idolatrized Hellenist Roman gentile city to Aelia Capitolina, built overtop the ruins of Yᵊru•shâ•laꞋyim they had earlier destroyed (in 70 CE), and renamed the land of יְהוּדָה to "Palestine";

• usurped the original תּוֹרָה-Jew followers of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa then headed by the 15^th Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ פָּקִיד, namely יְהוּדָה ha-Tza•diqꞋ, who was forcibly ousted by the first Greek-speaking gentile, Hellenist-Roman follower of "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate: ἐπίσκοπος (Μαρκος

The idolatrization of Yᵊru•shâ•laꞋyim into Aelia Capitolina by idolatrous Greek-speaking Hellenist-Roman gentiles coincides with the supposed "coincidental gentilization" of the original Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Jews by Greek-speaking Hellenist-Roman gentiles of "the early Christian Church" who commenced to syncretize and assimilate idolatrous Hellenist-Roman gentile worship as the earliest, original, Christianity adapted from "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate!!!

That these first Christians are the diametric antithesis of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and his authentic, Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Jews, followers is solidly documented from the historical record and cannot be credibly or reasonably disputed.

All of the Judaic documentation up through 135 CE demonstrates that historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ were observant of תּוֹרָה (which includes Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ). The Dead Sea Scrolls (specifically (4Q) MMT) demonstrate that all sects of legitimate 1^st-century Judaism (i.e., under the aegis of the Beit Din hâ-Jâ•dolꞋ, the 'Great Sanhedrin'), while defending their individual interpretations, included their respective definitions of Oral Law within the overall framework of תּוֹרָה / Judaism.

As religious Jews functioning within the legitimate Jewish community, this included RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ. Our books demonstrate that RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa obtained sᵊmikh•âhꞋ (ordainment) from Ga•mᵊl•iy•eilꞋ himself — the grandson (and patriarch of the House) of RibꞋi Hi•leilꞋ (pop. "Hillel"), who was also the Nâ•siꞋ (president) of the Beit Din hâ-Jâ•dolꞋ. Being a RibꞋi necessarily means that RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa was a Pᵊrush•iꞋ (Pharisee)! It shouldn't be surprising, then, that, although the redactors buried it pretty well, we still find that RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa endorsed the Pᵊrush•imꞋ in NHM (23:1-3).

The title RibꞋi was exclusive to those who obtained sᵊmikh•âhꞋ jointly by the patriarch of one of the recognized Houses (in this case, the House of RibꞋi Hi•leilꞋ) and the Nâ•siꞋ of the Beit Din hâ-Jâ•dolꞋ in pre-"Palestine" (lᵊ‑ha•vᵊdilꞋ) Yᵊhud•âhꞋ (Judea / Judean / Jew). RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa obtained sᵊmikh•âhꞋ directly from head of the Beit Din hâ-Jâ•dolꞋ who was the grandson-patriarch of RibꞋi Hi•leilꞋ! He clearly didn't get there by advocating the idolatry of gentile Greco-Roman Hellenism, Displacement Theology, supersessionism, self-divinity or seething miso-Judaism of the post-135 CE Greek-speaking, idolatrous Hellenist-Roman gentiles, who developed Christianity and the Church from the Hellenism of "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate and who inherently have characterized Jesus, Christianity and the Church ever since – including today.

Post-135 CE redactions and Christian literature present an idol, Jesus, diametrically opposite to the pro-תּוֹרָה historical Jew, RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, who lived in the religious Jewish community described in Dead Sea Scroll (4Q) MMT et al.

The product of the Roman gentiles — Jesus and Christianity — is also the diametric opposite of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and his original followers (the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ = 'Nazarene' Jews of Israel) on the question of the validity versus replacement (displacement / supersession of the Ta•na"khꞋ – "the Law of sin and death" – by the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT)).

It's logically inescapable that 1^st-century Christianity was a miso-Judaic fabrication of post-135 CE gentile Roman idolaters, retrojected, long after the fact, back into the 1^st century; and diametrically contradictory to 1^st century pro-תּוֹרָה Jews and historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa.

Since "Jesus" is a miso-Judaic idol fabricated by post-135 CE gentile Roman idolaters and diametrically antithetical to the 1^st century pro-תּוֹרָה Jew, RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and his original Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Jew followers, belief that RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa is the Mâ•shiꞋakh, then, implies his antithesis must be the "Antichrist"; the 'Beast' of Dân•iy•eilꞋ.

Blurring RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa with his antithesis, beside being ignorant axe-grinding coupled with obsessive self deception, is slander. Blurring the followers of Jesus with the followers of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, and/or the words/teachings of Jesus with the words/teachings of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, is no different.

To call the pro-תּוֹרָה Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ '1^st-Century Christianity' or call RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa "Jesus" as if these diametric opposites were the same, is to horrendously ascribe to תּוֹרָה-observant Jews Christian doctrines which historians and encyclopedias indisputably document didn't exist until syncretized from idolatry by gentiles centuries later.

Neither RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa nor his original Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ followers had to pretend to be in Israel (equating themselves to 'spiritual Israel'), to pretend to be in the legitimate Jewish community (equating the body of the Church, which didn't come into existence until a century later, to 'spiritual Jews'), or pretend to practice a "Christianized" Judaism. They were legitimate. Whereas Jesus and Christianity, by contrast, were never in the legitimate Jewish community or legitimate Judaism.

Like the original Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ, the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ of today are reconstructed according to the extant historical documentation within the legitimate Orthodox Jewish community here in Israel — the real Orthodox Jewish community in the real Israel. The Honorable Pâ•qidꞋ of the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ, Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhꞋu Bën-Dâ•widꞋ, Pâ•qidꞋ] 16, in Ra•a•nanꞋâ(h), Israel — is an Orthodox Jew recognized by Orthodox rabbis, the Israeli rabbinate and Chief Rabbis, and is a member in good standing on the board of the Orthodox synagogue of Yemenite Jews (Beit ha-KᵊnësꞋët Mo•rëshꞋët Âv•otꞋ – Yad Nâ•âm•iꞋ, in Ra•a•nanꞋâ(h), recognized by the Israeli rabbinate and Chief Rabbis) where he and his family pray regularly, he serves on the board and participate in synagogue functions and social life. Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ live and function within the Orthodox community and Israel in the real, rational, world. We aren't self-proclaimed poseurs in a pretend "spiritual Israel" opposite to the real Israel and opposite to historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and 1^st-century Judaism like the wannabe "Netzarim" poseurs and false teachers still in the Roman deception of Christianity.

JJ (DB) — Peter, James and John were the first Jews for Jesus, and Jesus himself is Jewish…

PY — It's already been shown that Christianity refashioned the stories they heard in Greek into their idolatrous Hellenist perspective. "St. Peter" was no different; a Roman image diametrically contradictory to the 1^st century pro-תּוֹרָה Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Jew, Shimon 'Keipha. The same is true of the Christian "St. James" versus the first Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Pâ•qidꞋ Ya•a•qovꞋ "ha-Tza•diqꞋ" Bën-Yo•seiphꞋ and the Christian "St. John" versus Yokhâ•nânꞋ. It's also clearly demonstrated that nothing is more intractably antithetical to historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa — and being Jewish — than the Christian "Jesus."

JJ (DB) continues — and this is not about subterfuge, and this is not about appropriating symbols. After all, Jesus used Jewish symbols.

PY — Jews for Jesus Mr. Brickner is correct here. This isn't about appropriating symbols. It's about historical truth. Mr. Brickner believes Jesus used Jewish symbols.

"Jesus," as we've demonstrated that image to be — in fact recorded by Eusebius — loathed Jewish symbols, displaced Judaism entirely, claimed supersession by the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT), labeled the original Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Jews as "servants of Sâ•tânꞋ and enemies of the Church, and killed the last vestiges of the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Jews in 333 CE precisely because they refused to go to the idolatrous gentile Roman-Hellenist church instead of the synagogue, on Easter instead of PësꞋakh, and eat pork on the way out, as documented by Bellarmino Bagatti, The Church from the Circumcision, pp. 13-14)!

Jews for Jesus Mr. Brickner believes Jesus used Jewish symbols because, like every other Christian, he hasn't disciplined himself to take a hard look at the historical facts. Like Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler and every other Christian, he has blindly accepted the Christian line in "abysmal ignorance without thoroughly investigating the historical facts."

LK [Jesus] was Jewish… He was Jewish, and so the message of faith in him is a very Jewish message.

PY – Historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, who was diametrically opposite to Jesus, was Jewish. Jesus, by contrast, is a post-135 CE miso-Judaic idol produced by gentile Hellenist-Roman idolaters through syncretization of their Hellenist-Roman idolatry by tens of thousands of documented redactions, many of them miso-Judaic, of Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) source texts. No, Mr. King! Jesus was not Jewish! "It" (not "he") was a gentile Hellenist-Roman idol. "And so the message of faith in Him" is idolatry which is intractably contradictory to תּוֹרָה.

OJ (SB) — I am absolutely against any religion that says that one faith is superior to another. I don't see how that is any different from spiritual racism. It's a way of saying we are closer to god than you, and that's what leads to hatred… totalitarian… culminated in the Holocaust.

PY – Either Rabbi Boteach doesn't comprehend the תּוֹרָה and Judaism of Mosh•ëhꞋ on Har Sin•aiꞋ or he's being deliberately disingenuous. Since he's a former Oxford chaplain and Orthodox rabbi, I must assume the latter. If he, or his colleagues, cannot see the transparency or foolishness of this conspicuously absurd assertion then he shouldn't be representing Judaism or תּוֹרָה in such a forum. Christians aren't ignorant of what their Original Testament (OT) says about the unique truth and One-ness of י‑‑ה, as Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler demonstrates below.

SBC (AM) — …and, you know, when it comes to the issue of claims that the belief that the Christian Gospel is the only Gospel, and that Jesus is the only Savior, that that's totalitarian, I find that very strange coming from the people whose own book in the 'Old Testament' speaks about the One True god over against the false god-s.

PY – Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler should immediately have been remonstrated for referring to our Ta•na"khꞋ as the 'Old (implying superseded) Testament'! Besides being logically petitio principii (in assuming the supersession of the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT)), it's denigrating and offensive.

OJ (MH) — Don't come and use subterfuge — Rosh ha-Shân•âhꞋ, Yom ha-Ki•pur•imꞋ, and a sho•phârꞋ… Those aren't Christian symbols.

OJ (SB) — Doesn't that sound a bit to you like if you don't have blond hair and blue eyes you're going to go up in a furnace? Doesn't that sound exactly the same?

PY – Orthodox R. Boteach's ignoratio elenchi not only reflects poorly on Judaism and Jews, but detracted from Orthodox R. Hier's effort to try and represent Judaism responsibly.

LK (ignoring Orthodox R. Boteach's ignoratio elenchi) — Orthodox R. Hier, that's important. If he just believes that if you die and you don't accept this you're going to hell, and he would like to send you to heaven, he's trying to help you. What's wrong with that?

OJ (MH) (also ignoring Orthodox R. Boteach's ignoratio elenchi) — There's nothing wrong with that, as I said before, if he feels that strongly. What's wrong is their methodology. They're very deceptive about it. They're using our symbols… But once Jesus left the Jewish people, and his disciples created a new religion, they are two separate religions.

LK He didn't create a new religion did he?

OJ (MH) — No, his disciples did. They created Christianity and, therefore, you can be either Jewish or Christian. You cannot be both… You're one or the other.

PY – Orthodox R. Hier was logically precise and correct in using the term "Jewish" rather than "Jew." While Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ defines those born of a Jewish mother to be a Jew (and even that definition is Biblically imprecise and inaccurate), Christians are no more Jewish (= Judaic = תּוֹרָה-observant) than Jews practicing Buddhism, Hinduism, Voodoo, neo-idolatry, atheism or Satanism. (Note: One must be careful not to categorize Islam, which may not be idolatrous, with these other contra-Judaic religions.) Christian Jews fraudulently calling themselves 'Messianic Jews' (e.g., 'Jews for Jesus') are notorious for finding it to their advantage to confuse this issue claiming "We're 100% Jews and we're 100% Christians" (which you will find corroborated in this interview, by the way) trying to imply that their teaching is Judaism because they are racially Jews who advocate it. They are apostate Jews advocating a contra-Judaic religion comparable to Buddhism, etc. Jews, well, according to modern Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ — but apostate. Jewish/Judaism/Judaic no!

In fact, however, תּוֹרָה takes a harsher view on this matter than the rabbis, defining such apostates as excised from Israel, the Jewish people, on a number of counts of which all Christian Jews are guilty simply by adhering to Christian doctrines that are intractably contradictory to תּוֹרָה. According to תּוֹרָה, which is the Authority above any rabbi(s), no Christian is, or has ever been, a Jew or part of Yi•sᵊr•â•eilꞋ! (Jesus was a post-Paul Christian idol but, lᵊ‑ha•vᵊdilꞋ, RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa was not a Christian, nor were any of the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ!)

Rav Hier corrects one of his misstatements, but, though he is correct in the main, a misstatement still remains. It was not the ta•lᵊmid•imꞋ ("disciples") of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa who created Christianity. Rather, it was the successors of "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate, particularly the Hellenist-Roman gentile idolaters of 135 CE (who wrested control from the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ as part of the Roman idolatrization of Yᵊru•shâ•laꞋyim) and their successors into the 4^th century.

These first — original and earliest — Christians expelled the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ along with the rest of the Jews from the newly Hellenized (idolatrized) city of Aelia Capitolina, which was dedicated to Jupiter, Ζεύς and Mithra – Sun- (god-) day – worship, built overtop the ruins of our Holy City of Yᵊru•shâ•laꞋyim. These first Christians, the early Church, were Hellenist-Roman idolaters selectively syncretizing a few Judaic ideas they found appealing. The product they created was a "New Hellenism" – Christianity.

In fact, selectivity, selective-observance, along with the Hellenist doctrine of absorbing and syncretizing foreign idolatry, comprise the sine qua non that has always distinguished Christianity from legitimate Judaism.

This selectivity of Jewish symbols, rather than embracing תּוֹרָה-observance non-selectively, is the problem which Orthodox R. Hier has, rightly, raised. Non-selective תּוֹרָה-observance is why the Orthodox rabbis accepted me to become an Orthodox Jew — being fully informed that I recognize RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa as the Mâ•shiꞋakh — while Jews for Jesus Mr. Brickner, even though he was born a Jew, is apostate so long as he embraces Christianity. Belief regarding who the Mâ•shiꞋakh is, or isn't, has proven an extremely deceptive red herring. The real sine qua non is, has always been, and will always remain, the issue of non-selective תּוֹרָה-observance (which precludes syncretizing other religions).

While Orthodox R. Hier is right that Christians cannot be Jewish, don't blame Christianity on either historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa or his authentic, Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ, followers.

LK … I've interviewed Billy Graham many times and when I asked him about this, about death and salvation and heaven and hell, he said that he's not going to judge it because maybe everybody at death does find Christ, so he's never going to try to convert Jews. Would you agree that a fair opinion to have? That maybe when a Jew dies, at the moment of death, he, or she, finds Christ? Is that a fair statement?

OJ (SB) — I do not believe that I have a copyright on truth as a Jew. I believe that my Judaism is true for Jews, in the same way that feminism may be true for women.

PY – As Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler will soon point out, Rabbi Boteach's position is a sophomoric and self-contradicting knock-off of 'New Age' egalitarianism. Something is true or it isn't. To claim that one thing is true for Jews and there's another, different, truth for everyone else is racist, and it contradicts תּוֹרָה. While Orthodox R. Boteach emotionally, and rudely, flames the Christians for being racist we find that his own views are racist. Physician heal thyself.

In answer to Mr. King's question, it's an equally fair statement to say that when a Christian dies, at the moment of death, he, or she, finds, too late, that the תּוֹרָה they have rejected and never practiced is true. To suggest that Jews "find Christ" at death is petitio principii, presuming that Christianity, rather than Judaism, is true. It is not a fair statement, it is a ludicrous statement.

LK According to the Jew who goes to heaven and who goes to hell?

OJ (MH) — Every good person. We have a statement in Ta•lᵊmudꞋ which says that you are judged on deeds… We're not god. We don't have the keys to heaven, but god is not going to deny Mahatma Ghandi, and he's not going to deny great humanitarians. For example, today you have the Dalai Lama, so we're going to say because he didn't verbalize a belief? If a man is a good person he merits heaven.

PY – Ta•lᵊmudꞋ does indeed say that we are judged on deeds. However, Ta•lᵊmudꞋ doesn't even suggest that every "good" person goes to ha-O•lamꞋ ha•baꞋ (heaven). Who is "good"? By what criteria?

Quite the contrary. תּוֹרָה is the Creator's criteria for "good." But I will immediately add that one need not be a Jew to satisfy תּוֹרָה by doing their utmost to live according to תּוֹרָה – principles that are logically derivable by anyone, anywhere. The converse also means that "Jew is as Jew does"! A Jew who does not live according to the criteria of תּוֹרָה is excised (kâ•reitꞋ). Neither the Creator, י‑‑ה, nor His "Life's Instruction Manual", תּוֹרָה, is racist!

Ta•lᵊmudꞋ — not to mention the A•mid•âhꞋ and •leiꞋnu recited in Orthodox synagogue services — teaches that one must be at least a תּוֹרָה-observant non-Jew — the 1^st-century definition of geir (cf. Lewis H. Feldman, Prof. of Classics at Yeshiva Univ. in NYC — Orthodox, "The Omnipresence of the god-Fearers," Biblical Archaeology Review, XXII.5, 1986.09-10, 59-69).

Neither is the rabbis' recently innovated ecumenical position tenable from תּוֹרָה to convince anyone outside of a yᵊshiv•âhꞋ. And the Christians know this better than anyone else. Jews cannot engage Christians while continuing to hide their head in the sand on this issue. To engage Christians, Jews need to ask — and answer — some critical questions about the holiness of י‑‑ה, the means of ki•purꞋ from transgression of תּוֹרָה (which we will get into later), and to whom ki•purꞋ is accessible and under what conditions. Ta•na"khꞋ is crystal clear on this issue, and virtually every knowledgeable Christian knows the two major quotations so the issue won't ever go away or be glossed over by rabbinic casuistry:

1. ‫53.6 Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu – כֻּלָּנוּ כַּצּׂאן תָּעִינוּ, אִישׁ לְדַרְכּוׂ פָּנִינוּ;

2. ‫ 64.5 Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu — וַנְּהִי כַטָּמֵא כֻּלָּנוּ, וּכְבֶגֶד עִדִּים כָּל-צִדְקׂתֵינוּ

The failure of Orthodox Judaism to come to grips with this issue – despite the unparalleled persecutions of the 70CE Destruction, the 135CE Expulsion, the Dark Ages Inquisition and 20^th century Sho•âhꞋ – is not only one of the main causes that Christians have the impression that Orthodox Judaism is a religion of "blind" ignorance, it's perhaps the biggest reason that educated young Jews are estranged from the rabbis and their "Judaism".

This is the pivotal, and most crucial, issue of the interview. Most every Christian knows from the "Original Testament" (OT) that man can't be "good" enough to merit mingling or communing with י‑‑ה, the Creator — as Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler demonstrates by immediately pouncing upon it. Jews continue not to grasp this (acknowledging isn't comprehending) and deal with it (effectively); repeatedly demonstrating (in the Christian mind), that Jews continue to be blind, lost, etc. I will deal with this further in response to a later valid and pivotal statement by Jews for Jesus David Brickner.

SBC (AM) — … before god we are all sinners in need of a savior. "There is not one who is good; no, not one" says the Scriptures.

PY – Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler has the gist right. What the Scriptures say is:

‫14.3 Tᵊhil•imꞋ – הַכֹּל סָר, יַחְדָּו, נֶאֱלָחוּ אֵין עֹשֵׁה-טוֹב; אֵין גַּם-אֶחָד:

The question is why Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler doesn't accept RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa's explanation of this passage in NHM 19.17:

"RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa said to him, "Why do you ask me about 'good?' אֶחָד is Good. If you wish to come into life, be sho•meirꞋ over the mi•tzᵊw•otꞋ."

Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler and Jews for Jesus Mr. Brickner must not be allowed to avoid this issue. Refusing to non-selectively practice sho•meirꞋ-תּוֹרָה defies not only Ta•na"khꞋ, but the words of the very person they misrepresent themselves to be following as the Mâ•shiꞋakh. They are defying, not following, RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa. This is deliberate and arrogant sanctimony eclipsing by far the hypocrisy of the 'Pharisees' that RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa rebuked. As Rabbi Boteach pointed out, RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa declared in NHM 5:

"Don't think that I came to uproot the תּוֹרָה or the Nᵊviy•imꞋ, but rather I came to reconcile them with the Oral Law of ë•mëtꞋ. Should the heavens and hâ-ÂrꞋëtz exchange places, still, not even one י nor one  ֨ of the Oral Law of Mosh•ëhꞋ shall so much as exchange places; until it shall become that it is all being fully ratified and performed non-selectively. For whoever deletes one Oral Law from the תּוֹרָה, or shall teach others such, by those in the Realm of the heavens he shall be called "deleted." Both he who preserves [them] and he who teaches them shall be called RibꞋi in the Realm of the heavens. For I tell you that unless your tzᵊdâq•âhꞋ is over and above that of the So•phᵊr•imꞋ and of the Rabbinic-Pᵊrush•imꞋ, there is no way you will enter into the Realm of the heavens!."

I recall also RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa condemning the hypocrisy which is characteristic of the 'spiritual Israel' Christian poseurs — eating, worshiping and living like idolaters instead of Israel, according to gentile Hellenist-Roman idolatrous doctrines instead of Ta•na"khꞋ. As RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa warned in NHM 7.15ff:

"Take heed against false Nᵊviy•imꞋ who come to you in wool like sheep, but inside they are wolves who extort. You shall recognize them by their ma•as•ëhꞋ. Do men pick grapes from a stinging-nettle? Or figs from a thistle? So, every green tree is unable to produce evil fruit, and a dried-up tree is unable to produce good fruit."

By their own confession, Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler and Jews for Jesus David Brickner produce what RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa defined as the evil fruits of deliberately transgressing the תּוֹרָה of י‑‑ה, which everyone in this interview agrees is Ta•na"khꞋ. And what does RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa say of their fate??? (ibid.):

"Every tree that is not producing good fruit is being cut out and thrown into the fire. Wherefore, by their fruits, that is their works, you shall recognize them. Not everyone saying 'Sir' to me will enter the Realm of the heavens. Rather, he who does the wish of my Father who is in the heavens shall enter into the Realm of the heavens. In that day many will say to me, 'Sir, sir, didn't we prophesy in your name? Didn't we throw out demonic-forces in your name? Didn't we do many signs for your name?' Then I will attest to them, 'I never knew you. (Tᵊhil•imꞋ 6.9): 'Get away from me all doers of crookedness!' "

Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler, as it turns out, it is you and Jews for Jesus Mr. Brickner, and all other Christians — not תּוֹרָה-keeping Jews, who RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa the Mâ•shiꞋakh condemns to hell because you are not doing what תּוֹרָה — and RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa the Mâ•shiꞋakh — commanded you. I call upon you to repent, to renounce the post-135 CE idolatrous antichrist Jesus, and to follow instead the historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, doing your utmost to practice תּוֹרָה to obtain ki•purꞋ and salvation from hell.

Caller from La Mesa, NM I believe that there is One god overall, so what is the conflict?

LK [Jews for Jesus] David Brickner… you believe there's One god overall, right? The conflict is who's the road to Him?

PY – Stop right there! Step away from the premise! Don't swallow (assume) Larry King's premise that contradicts תּוֹרָה. Without realizing it, he has asserted an incorrect and misleading definition of the conflict, causing misdirection away from any logical solution. Though the Jews for Jesus rep leaps at the false opportunity (below), the premise is wrong and the reasoning, therefore, is logically false by ex falso quodlibet. "The Road", is properly Hebrew: "DërꞋëkh י‑‑ה" (the Way of י‑‑ה) ‭ ‬ – תּוֹרָה, not a "who" at all!!!

Being עַל דֶּרֶךְ (on the Way) is doing one's utmost to practice תּוֹרָה, thereby obtaining the promise (in His תּוֹרָה) of י‑‑ה, in His Own KhësꞋëd, to provide ki•purꞋ.

JJ (DB) — Yes, absolutely; and the issue is whether or not Jesus really is the Messiah. He claimed to be. He claimed to be the One sent from god to bring us back to the Father and that's what we believe, and so the issue really is not a conflict between Judaism and the Southern Baptists but a question: Is Jesus the Messiah?

PY – The issue isn't at all whether "Jesus" really is the Messiah. In fact, by תּוֹרָה criteria, the Mâ•shiꞋakh, no matter who he is or is not, is not the fulcrum of "salvation" at all!!!

According to תּוֹרָה criteria, the Mâ•shiꞋakh is not prophesied to "save" in a personal spiritual sense, but, rather, to restore pristineness to Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ so that ki•purꞋ (not Hellenist "salvation" based on a mutated-Ζεύς idol) is restored as it was from the time of Av•râ•hâmꞋ.

Regardless of who or what the Mâ•shiꞋakh is, by תּוֹרָה criteria, the issue of identifying the Mâ•shiꞋakh is primarily about restoring pristineness of justice and truth to Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ and is related only peripherally to ki•purꞋ. "Salvation" is not the core purpose of the Mâ•shiꞋakh who, in any case, תּוֹרָה precludes from being divine. Ki•purꞋ is the exclusive provenance of י‑‑ה Himself in His KhësꞋëd, exclusively for those who make tᵊshuv•âhꞋ.

It's less than certain from NHM that historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa ever made a claim that he was "specially sent" above other children of Israel by י‑‑ה. Either way however, whatever post-135 CE claim may be retrojected upon a miso-Judaic Jesus of idolatrous Roman gentiles is irrelevant. Jews for Jesus Mr. Brickner attempts to divert attention from the real issue: can a gentile idol, Jesus, intractably antithetical to the very Ta•na"khꞋ which prophesies the Mâ•shiꞋakh be the Messiah?

Ta•na"khꞋ provides the clear and unambiguous answer (Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 13.1-6):

"The entire word that I command you, that shall you keep to do; you shall not add to it and you shall not subtract from it. If there should stand up in your midst a prophet… and he will produce for you a sign or wonder, and [even if] the sign or wonder comes to pass, which he foretold to you saying, 'Let us follow ël•oh•imꞋ of others that you didn't know and we shall worship them' Don't hearken to the words of that 'prophet'… for י‑‑ה, your ël•oh•imꞋ, is testing you to know whether you love י‑‑ה, your ël•oh•imꞋ, with all of your heart and with all of your soul. י‑‑ה, your ël•oh•imꞋ, shall you follow, and Him shall you revere; His mi•tzᵊw•otꞋ shall you keep and to His voice shall you hearken…"

Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler and Jews for Jesus Mr. Brickner, no matter how much you might like to avoid or evade it, the historical fact is that post-135 CE Jesus has always been the champion of supersession, Displacement Theology and miso-Judaism. It is totally impossible that Jesus, or any other person or thing which stands for superseding Ta•na"khꞋ as an "Old Testament," in order to supersede the specifications to match a candidate-Messiah (especially a gentile, Hellenist idol), prophesied in that same Ta•na"khꞋ. Any child can understand that when Jesus invalidates Ta•na"khꞋ it invalidates its very basis for claiming to be the Messiah. If Ta•na"khꞋ is valid then it clearly stipulates that Jesus cannot possibly be the Messiah. If, on the other hand, you hold Ta•na"khꞋ to be invalid then you have no basis for any Messiah at all. If, on the third hand (??), you hold that Ta•na"khꞋ was valid but is no longer valid, having been superseded by the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT), then you serve a capricious god that changes its mind, certainly not י‑‑ה of the Ta•na"khꞋ who does not change (Ma•lâkh•iꞋ 3.6; Tᵊhil•imꞋ 89.35) — which, yet again, disqualifies Jesus.

Thus, it is inescapable that the issue very definitely is "a conflict between Judaism and the Southern Baptists " – as Oxford scholar James Parkes demonstrated (The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, A Study in the Origins of Anti-Semitism); particularly, at this juncture, exemplified in the Southern Baptists' missionary "Outreach to the Jews." Further, it is clear in this that there is no logical possibility that Jesus is the Messiah. The issue isn't even whether historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa is the Mâ•shiꞋakh. The identity of the Mâ•shiꞋakh will become clear only after the conflict between Judaism and Christianity is resolved. Jews do know, however, that the Mâ•shiꞋakh will be a champion of Ta•na"khꞋ, not idolatry.

LK As a loving Messiah, if he were here right now… hold it rabbi (to Orthodox R. Boteach again interrupting), if Jesus were here right now, as a loving messiah and Rabbi Hier or R. Boteach would say to him "I love you but I don't think you're the Messiah," Jesus would condemn them to hell? … Would Jesus Christ say "You're going to hell"?

JJ (DB) — Absolutely, because Jesus said that before. We know. We have his words… All of us are sinners…

PY – Two things are true here, which again points up the intractably antithetical natures of these two opposites:

1. This certainly is true of the record of Jesus saying, among other similar things, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life; no man cometh to the Father but by Me" (Jn. 14.6).
   
   
2. This certainly isn't true of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, it isn't found in NHM, and is intractably contradictory to the words of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa quoted earlier.
   
   

LK So you could be in hell?

JJ (DB) — Yeah, absolutely, except for the fact that I've embraced god's forgiveness in the person of Jesus.

OJ (SB) — … this is a subject which has led to my people being turned into, you know, lampshades, and (???) and crusades. People don't…

LK Rabbi (interrupting Orthodox R. Boteach's ignoratio elenchi) that's an emotional appeal, and well done, however, if someone has a sincere belief that Christ is the answer and wants to share that with you, why are you hanging the Holocaust around his neck?

OJ (SB) — Racist beliefs lead to racist action; and Christian anti-Judaism leads to anti-Semitism. Every historian knows that to be true, and that's why these beliefs are dangerous.

PY – Rabbi Boteach is correct in his declaration (!!!), but failed to keep up with the question currently under focus: recognition of the Jewish Messiah and forgiveness. Recognition of the Jewish Messiah and forgiveness is dangerous to Jews??? That's a laugher. R. Boteach should have made a good point by refocusing on the inherent miso-Judaism in Christianity. Instead, his constant discourtesy, "lampshade" style ignoratio elenchi, ad hominems and amateurism nullified this extremely critical point.

LK [Southern Baptist] Albert Mohler, do you use that term, 'incomplete Jews'?

SBC (AM) — … I affirm what it intends to mean, and that is a Jew that has not received Jesus the Messiah. Definitely, we believe that Jesus is the Messiah of the Jews, and of all the nations, and that to be complete in faith one must receive him and accept him. You know, Larry, one of the best things I heard asked on this program is, 'If Jesus were before us, what would he say?' I believe the best thing to do is to quote him. Two statements. "Come unto me all ye who are heavy laden and I will give you rest." That's wonderful. The second statement is just as true: "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no man cometh unto the Father but by Me." That isn't something we made up. That is from the statement of Jesus Himself.

PY – Oh, but post-135 CE Christians did indeed make up that second statement, Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler. Only the first of those two statements is found in NHM (11.28).

The second statement that you claim 'Jesus' said is found only in the post-135 CE redacted Greek Gospels from the 4^th century CE, which are documented to have tens of thousands of Hellenist redactions (cf. Who Are the Netzarim? (WAN)). Moreover, Eusebius documented, the original Jewish followers of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa rejected the Greek Hellenist knock-off Displacement Theology Διαθηκη Καινη (NT).

Hellenist Roman gentile-refashioned Christian Jesus said it. | lᵊ‑ha•vᵊdilꞋ | תּוֹרָה RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa didn't!

The dichotomy is yet again conspicuous. It is also intractably contradictory and antithetical to everything that Ta•na"khꞋ, and historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, and his original Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ-Jew followers practiced, stood for, and taught.

The words of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa have been quoted in this analysis. Deal with it!

OJ (SB) — [Southern Baptist] Rev. Mohler, may I quote to you [Hellenist Greek] Mt. 5 verse 18 where Jesus says that he came to the world in order to fulfill the law and that anyone who doesn't keep every aspect of the law — he uses the words in the Hebrew of the qotz of the yod, a tiny little piece of the letter of the law — is not fulfilled. Rev. Mohler, do you keep kâ•sheirꞋ? Do you drive on the Sha•bâtꞋ? Do you wear tzitz•itꞋ with the little fringes that we wear? Do you wear a yarmulke? If you don't, why don't you live by everything that Jesus said? Why do you abrogate the law? … (Unintelligible, as Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler tries to answer while Rabbi Boteach tries to continue talking)

PY – Again, this carries the potential to be a blockbuster, but Rabbi Boteach's amateurism bungled the attempt. First, "Jesus" says nothing whatsoever in NHM. Historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa speaks in NHM, never "Jesus". The Hellenist Greek Gospel of St. Matthew in which Jesus is described is irrelevant because it is among "the rest" of the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) which, early Church historian Eusebius recorded, and I remind the reader yet again, was never accepted by the original Jewish followers of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa – and there's no argument that it was never accepted among the main body of Jews. So there's no point in discussing it, which amounts to implicit acceptance. This constant blurring of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa with his antithesis, the Hellenist Roman gentile Jesus idol, brings no end of confusion and can never lead to resolving the misunderstandings and conflict.

Worse, Rabbi Boteach fails to quote the passage correctly, from NHM — and loses the 'punch line' entirely. Assuming the punch line — which leaves Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler and Jews for Jesus Mr. Brickner the escape they eventually take — Rabbi Boteach adds blunder upon bungle.

The "jot and tittle" which Rabbi Boteach tries to use as leverage to demonstrate dependence upon Judaism, does not refer to the qotz of the yod. That interpretation isn't supported either in the Greek nor in the Hebrew. Rather, this phrase is "yod and qërꞋën." The latter is better known today among Yemenite Jews as the cantillation symbol âꞋzël. A detailed explanation of this is found in NHM, note 5.18.1.

Asking Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler if he keeps kâ•sheirꞋ could have been, and should have been, effective if it were handled more adeptly, and if neither Rev. Mohler nor Jews for Jesus Mr. Brickner were permitted to ever wriggle out of the question. The entire remainder of the discussion should have been tirelessly and tenaciously anchored in this point. This is the key to the entire mess. If Rev. Mohler, Mr. Brickner and other Christians would follow the teachings of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa there would be no conflict! Driving on Sha•bâtꞋ isn't nearly as clear-cut outside of the yᵊshiv•âhꞋ as keeping kâ•sheirꞋ. Throwing in more debatable items only serves to deflate the impact.

Why didn't Rabbi Boteach ask "Do you keep Sha•bâtꞋ or Sun-god-day?" Even if the Christians equivocated, if ruthlessly pressed on the question their ultimate answer would have been that he keeps Sun-god-day — which opens up another whole bucket of worms for Rev. Mohler and Mr. Brickner! Like lawyers, you should know the answer or not ask the question. "Do you wear tzitz•itꞋ?" was another excellent example. But then asking about a yarmulke was self-defeating. History documents that other than ko•han•imꞋ, Jews didn't wear head-covering until forced to by the Church, probably in the Middle Ages; and only subsequently justified the practice by inventing a symbolic meaning for it. So Rabbi Boteach shot himself in the foot again. Moreover, 'yarmulke' is a Yiddish word, the product of German assimilation that has virtually no relevance to Hebrew or historical – Biblical – Judaism. Why didn't Rabbi Boteach ask questions with more 'locked in' answers found in the Ta•na"khꞋ? Why don't they wear tᵊphil•inꞋ? Why doesn't Rev. Mohler wear a beard? (, many Jews are going to have a problem with that , and Mr. Brickner would be very happy on that point… well, that's the cost of sticking to truth. Get right with the truth and then you don't need to fear truth.)

Rabbi Boteach's play-calling in this instance was faultless. The failure was in the lack of execution. The passage of the words of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa which Rabbi Boteach should have quoted from, NHM, was quoted earlier (excluding the extensive notes, which are found in NHM).

As may be apparent to the reader, this quotation should be recited whenever needed — which is often.

SBC (AM) — (in answer to Orthodox Rabbi Boteach's question "Why do you abrogate the law?") Because Jesus did not instruct us to live that way. In fact, Jesus made the point that there is not one of us who is righteous according to the law, that He is the only One Who is righteous by the law, He Himself, and He alone, fulfilled the law.

PY – As the earlier quotation made unequivocal:

"Take heed against false Nᵊviy•imꞋ who come to you in wool like sheep, but inside they are wolves who extort. You shall recognize them by their ma•as•ëhꞋ. Do men pick grapes from a stinging-nettle? Or figs from a thistle? So, every green tree is unable to produce evil fruit, and a dried-up tree is unable to produce good fruit."

Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler demonstrates vividly for us the selectivity in accepting what supports Christian doctrines while rejecting what is inconvenient and contradictory to Christian doctrines — selective observance.

It is unfathomable how Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler can be so ignorant of what RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa clearly and unequivocally instructed, but it's unconscionable how he can deny it when confronted with the very words of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, to rebel and reject the very words he claims to follow. There has never been hypocrisy in the same league with Christian hypocrisy!

Beyond that, Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler misunderstands and distorts other words of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa here too. Historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa never intimated in any way that "He is the only One Who is righteous by the law, He Himself, and He alone, fulfilled the law."

1. First, that is intractably contradictory to the words of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa just quoted.
2. Second, Rev. Mohler misquotes NHM 19.16:
   

   "RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa said to him, "Why do you ask me about 'good?' אֶחָד is Good. If you wish to come into life, be sho•meirꞋ over the mi•tzᵊw•otꞋ."

   

Here, RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa declares exactly the same formula as תּוֹרָה: do your best to keep תּוֹרָה if you wish to have life in ha-O•lamꞋ ha•baꞋ! He didn't say "Believe in Me as the Messiah"! He didn't say "Accept Me as your personal Savior"! How does Rev. Mohler pervert "If you wish to come into life, be sho•meirꞋ over the mi•tzᵊw•otꞋ", and RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa's words in NHM 5.15-20, into "Jesus did not instruct us to live that way"???

Christians are lost in a 4^th-century, idolatrous, Hellenist-Roman, gentile deception and idol: 'Jesus' — their only 'savior' and 'salvation.' As it has been from the time of "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate, Christianity isn't validated as having superseded תּוֹרָה until it has invalidated – euphemistically, successfully accomplished an "outreach to" – תּוֹרָה, Judaism – and Jews. As a consequence, they cannot be satisfied until they "outreach to" every Jew.

SBC (AM) — (continuing) What Jesus also did was to tell us that we should live by His [Christian's interpret this to be Jesus'] Word and the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) gives us very clear indications it is not a Judaizing that we experience as gentiles coming to Christ. Paul and Peter fought that out in the book of Acts and the lord made His decision very clear. The Church is made up of Jews and gentiles in Christ.

PY – Such a thing is not found in NHM. Moreover, saying such a thing in contradicting תּוֹרָה absolutely disqualifies "Jesus" as a prospective Mâ•shiꞋakh described in תּוֹרָה and according to the stipulations quoted earlier from Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 13.1-6.

What RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa said, which has already been quoted, intractably contradicts these Christians' claims:

he who does the wish of my Father who is in the heavens shall enter into the Realm of the heavens

What does it take to get through to Christians?!? No one in the 1^st century Jewish community, not even Hellenists, denied that this referred to Ta•na"khꞋ and תּוֹרָה.

On top of this, these Christians are not only superseding, and contradicting, the Ta•na"khꞋ they depend upon for messianic legitimacy, they contradict the words of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa with post-135 CE, 2^nd-4^th century, redactions of gentile Hellenist-Roman idolaters and "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate who, early Church historian Eusebius recorded, was excised as an apostate from the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ . (Though it was pretty well buried by the redactors, the record of "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate's standard Judaic excision – the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Beit Din absolved themselves of further responsibility for Shâ•ulꞋ (which he had exclusively been called before his excision), "commending him into the Fearsome Hand of י‑‑ה" for future Judgment, after which he was referred to exclusively as "Paul" – the Apostate. This typical Judaic excision formula is still evident and discernible in the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) if one knows what to look for – see links.)

Christians are correct that it is not Judaizing they experience when they come to Christ, it is a coming to "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate, to an apostate, and to gentile Hellenist-Roman idolatry which they experience. תּוֹרָה knowledgeable Jews, wisely, reject that.

Jews are properly defined by their practice of תּוֹרָה (not genetics or racism as today's rabbis insist). Christians are defined by their insistence on following the religion of "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate – the 2^nd-4^th century gentile, Hellenist-Roman idol.

Caller from Phoenix, AR – Rabbi, since we're talking about Christ as the Messiah, what are the qualifications that they are looking for in the Messiah, and why hasn't Jesus filled those qualifications?

OJ (MH) — The reason that Jesus is not accepted as the Messiah by the Jewish people is that Jesus is viewed as divine. The Jews do not believe in any other divine Being except god Himself.

PY – An excellent question which receives an excellent answer! It must be added, however, that other intractable and compelling reasons are that

1. The divinity issue is actually a secondary, not the primary, issue. The main disqualification of Jesus is that the Jewish Mâ•shiꞋakh must, above all else, live by and teach non-selective תּוֹרָה-observance. Jesus stood for the opposite of non-selective תּוֹרָה-observance; and it can be seen, then, that the divinity issue derives from this primary issue.

2. it is unalterably fixed historically that Jesus stands for Displacement Theology (the Church as supremacist "spiritual Israel" displacing "sinful" (rejecting the Christian "Savior"; ergo, "remaining in sin" = evil, enemy of god and the Church – i.e., Sâ•tânꞋ) Israel "of the flesh"), supersession (of the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) displacing the Ta•na"khꞋ), and inherent miso-Judaism tracing from its Hellenist Roman idolatrous gentile founders in 135 CE and tracing back to "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate.

LK Don't you believe the Messiah is coming?

OJ (MH) — Yes, but the Messiah that we believe is coming could be somebody that flunks mathematics in university. He is not infallible, not divine, and would be a student or a disciple of Moses, who, by far, would be considered greater than the Messiah…

PY – Rabbi Hier is correct regarding the fallibility of the Mâ•shiꞋakh prophesied in Ta•na"khꞋ. However, Ta•na"khꞋ contradicts Rabbi Hier's statement that the Mâ•shiꞋakh would be a disciple of Mosh•ëhꞋ who would be considered greater than the Mâ•shiꞋakh. There is a prophesy of the Mâ•shiꞋakh in תּוֹרָה that there would be a Nâ•viꞋ greater than Mosh•ëhꞋ — the Mâ•shiꞋakh: Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 18.15-18, whom this passage unequivocally commanded we are to obey. The frequent suggestion that this refers to Yᵊho•shuꞋa Bin-Nun is frivolous and irresponsible since the last 3 verses of תּוֹרָה — after Yᵊho•shuꞋa Bin-Nun had come to power — confirmed that no one like Mosh•ëhꞋ had come during Yᵊho•shuꞋa's lifetime. While the difference may seem pedantic, the Mâ•shiꞋakh must be a student of תּוֹרָה, oriented toward serving י‑‑ה, not Mosh•ëhꞋ per se (or any other mortal, including rabbis).

LK How do you now he hasn't come?

OJ (MH) — Well, because the world is still in turmoil. We're told that when the Messiah comes we will all live in peace and tolerance, and since we know that hasn't happened we know for sure that the Messiah has not come.

PY – Probably judging that it would be too complex to get into on the show (and probably correctly), Rabbi Hier doesn't mention the Mâ•shiꞋakh Bën-Yo•seiphꞋ (confirmed in Ta•lᵊmudꞋ by the way, for those not aware of it), who is the "Suffering Servant" of Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53. However, the complexities of dealing with the dual Messiahs (the other being the Mâ•shiꞋakh Bën-Dâ•widꞋ) in Judaism cannot be avoided if Judaism and Christianity are to get to the truth and resolve their conflict.

OJ (SB) — I am an Orthodox rabbi who has read the New Testament cover-to-cover many times…

PY – Reading is one thing, sir. Understanding the issues is another. You don't understand Christianity in the depth and experience that Christians understand it; and every Christian immediately sees that just as surely as they quickly discover that I do understand it in greater depth than any of them – even their seminarians and top scholars; and they are, rightly, frightened by someone who, because I do understand and am very knowledgeable about Christianity, renounced Jesus to become an Orthodox Jew. Read NHM — including the extensive notes — and you may develop a handle on it.

SBC (AM) — I understand what the rabbi says about the infinite distinction between god and man, and that is precisely what we understand as well… we are told in the scriptures that god became man in Jesus Christ… and everything in the 'Old Testament' prophesies…

PY – Now that's just a laugher. First of all, Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) is not Scripture; תנ''ך is Scripture (and prophesies no such thing)! Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) contradicts and claims to displace and supersede Scripture!

If Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler understood what the rabbi said he would see his conspicuous – and hilarious – oxymoron. Moreover, the only Scriptures recognized by all of the parties in the interview is the Ta•na"khꞋ. Scriptures say nothing of the kind. Furthermore, neither does NHM. Only the post-135 CE Roman gentile-idolater redacted and miso-Judaic Hellenist-Greek Christian book, Διαθηκη Καινη (NT), says that. It's true of Jesus, but false regarding historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa — another example of the diametrically antithetical natures of these two opposites; one a historical Jew, the other a mutated – perverted – Hellenist-Roman gentile idol.

There is no excuse why neither rabbi on the panel rebuked Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler for his petitio principii that the Ta•na"khꞋ is an 'Old Testament' (implying supersession and Displacement Theology). Nor is Ta•na"khꞋ a "testament" at all. Ta•na"khꞋ is a bᵊrit. Besides being illogical and contra-historical, this Christian presumption is offensive and shouldn't be tolerated in civilized discussion.

SBC (AM) — … to the Jews, as well as to the gentiles, just as we find in the New Testament. As Paul said, I'm not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ for it is the power of god unto salvation, to the Jew first and also to the gentile.

PY – Again, the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) and "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate are no more relevant to Jews than the Koran, Book of Mormon or Watchtower. That these Christians insist that the Jew must be first in accepting their idolatry, a direct legacy of the 135 CE and 333 CE Hellenist-Roman, gentile-idolater founders, is unacceptable; attempting to superimpose Christian authorities and presumptions – not a level field for intelligent discussion. The reality of the Creator and His universe is the exact reverse of "Outreach to Jews": Jews must learn and get the word of historical – תּוֹרָה-teaching – RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa to Christians like Jews for Jesus, the Southern Baptists, and the rest of Christianity!

LK Do you want to end Judaism Albert?

PY – The reader is alerted to consider Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler's words carefully, because he lies through his teeth in this answer. What you should notice is the difference between Judaism — the question Mr. King asked — and 'ethnic Jews' to which Rev. Mohler redirects attention AFTER he has already lied in answering "No" to the question. Rev. Mohler indeed wants to end Judaism, converting all Jews to Christianity. His response that they would still be ethnically Jewish has nothing to do with the question asked by Mr. King. That Rev. Mohler would characterize ending Judaism as "without any theological significance whatsoever" is unconscionable. Why the rabbis said nothing is unfathomable.

SBC (AM) — No, I want to see the Gospel proclaimed to all persons, and the ethnic identity of the person who comes to Christ is absolutely without any theological significance whatsoever. I believe the Jewish people will continue as an ethnic people… I firmly believe that in the time to come as the lord accomplishes His work, we're going to see a massive turning to Christ on the part of the Jews.

OJ (SB) — Why aren't [secular Christians] being targeted? What do they want from the Jews? … I was rabbi at Oxford University for 11 years and whenever a Christian student came to talk to me about faith I sent them to a priest… all we hear is these superior claims of these two Christian representatives that we Jews…

LK (interrupting the increasingly excitable Rabbi Boteach who tries to continue talking) Are you saying, [Southern Baptist] Albert Mohler, that the Jews are inferior? If he does not believe in Christ?

PY – To answer Rabbi Boteach's question, what they want from Jews, if you would listen occasionally, was just spelled out: "the Gospel… to the Jew first." I understand why Oxford University wanted Rabbi Boteach to stay there so long. But Rabbi Boteach's practice only communicates to inquirers that Judaism has no answers, that the priests are the ones with answers, reflecting poorly on Judaism. Rabbi Boteach's ignoratio elenchi have become so profuse, despite Larry King's several admonishments, that Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler can no longer ignore it. Rev. Mohler correctly senses that he has everyone in TV land on his side here. Jews should pay attention here to the well-stated Christian perception of genuine humility.

SBC (AM) — Absolutely not. No, there's a lot of flak being thrown up in the air here by the rabbi, in particular Rabbi Boteach. The fact is that we don't believe that anyone is superior or inferior. My humility comes from the fact that I know I'm in need of a Savior, and I did not come up with this Gospel. I did not come up with this understanding of the need for a Savior. This is revealed in Scripture. I have no other option than to humbly believe and to teach what Scripture teaches, and that's what I'm doing here tonight. I know it's offensive to some persons.

PY – Here's another example where ground rules spelling out what will be accepted as Scripture would preclude a lot of confusion. Obviously the only Scripture which all of the interviewees accept says nothing of the kind. Neither does NHM. Only their post-135 CE Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) — extensively redacted by idolatrous and rabidly miso-Judaic Hellenist Romans — says that.

LK (to MH) — Have you ever thought that maybe Christ is the Messiah?

OJ (MH) — No, because of the fact that Christ is portrayed as divine and the son of god. Now I believe in a god that doesn't, frankly, need any assistance. He has no sons and no daughters.

PY – Rabbi Hier's response made me laugh out loud (but in agreement this time) at the preposterous position of Christianity. But, then he added the last sentence and got into trouble. Ta•na"khꞋ explicitly says, in several different passages, that י‑‑ה DOES have sons — Israel. But, of course, none of these sons are divine. It's not merely pedantic. These are the passages which the post-135 CE Christians misconstrued, and still misconstrue, to support the post-135 CE Hellenist-Roman gentile-idolater's concept of a divine son, syncretizing the traditions of Horus and subsequent idolatrous myths of that genre. Again, these things cannot be resolved by avoiding the issues. They must be dealt with squarely. That means becoming better educated in these areas and learning to be more logically careful.

LK (to JJ (DB)) — Have you ever thought that maybe he wasn't the Messiah?

JJ (DB) — Of course. But, you know, most people who make decisions about Jesus do so in abysmal ignorance, never read the New Testament, don't know what Jesus taught,… Well, I'd like to challenge everybody to read the New Testament before making up their mind about Jesus. Give yourself a chance to hear. Give yourself a chance to hear.

PY – It should be painfully apparent by now that neither Rev. Mohler nor Mr. Brickner even remotely begin to match my knowledge of their Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) or Christianity. I am a Mensan who was born and raised a Christian, learned at Hampden DuBose Academy, experienced "the Holy Spirit" and was a Church organist and finally a Baptist preacher who, in my quest to resolve many contradictions I found in Christianity that no Christian seminarian anywhere could answer, translated the entire Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) from all of the earliest extant mss. up through the 4^th century before accumulating enough knowledge to realize I needed to renounce the idol Jesus to convert to Judaism under Orthodox rabbis ordained by the President of the Beit Din of America.

Turns out, it is Christians who are abysmally ignorant concerning historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, and that they are following a post-135 CE Hellenist-Roman idolatrous-gentile fabricated counterfeit, an idol, which is the diametric opposite of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa. That makes Jesus the 'Antichrist,' which, considering it's a product of idolatrous Helllenist-Roman gentiles, shouldn't be surprising. Dân•iy•eilꞋ, not Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu, prophesied Jesus!!!

Following Jesus while being blissfully unaware of all this is unparalleled abysmal ignorance. Excepting a few scholars aware of these things from various research sources, anyone who hasn't read NHM is abysmally ignorant. Do, indeed, educate yourself before following Jesus, or before you follow "it" any further.

LK (to JJ (DB)) — Do you know Judaism well? Have you read the 'Old Testament'?

PY – Mr. King is no exception. "Old Testament" is petitio principii, not to mention offensive. It is an unacceptable term in intelligent discourse.

JJ (DB) — Not well enough…

PY – It should be reasonably obvious by this point that anyone who doesn't understand Judaism reasonably well has no grasp whatsoever of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa!

LK [Jews for Jesus] David Brickner, Do you believe that Orthodox R. Boteach is going to hell?

JJ (DB) (evading the question, and the obvious implications of Jn. 14.6, et al.) — I believe that all of us are going to hell but god is in the business of saving us an that's why in…

LK (interrupting to insist JJ (DB)answer his question — 'Attaboy,' Mr. King) — So you're saved and he's not?

JJ (DB) (evading the question, and the obvious implications of Jn. 14.6, et al.) — That's why He sent Jesus the Messiah…

LK (yet again

interrupting to insist JJ (DB)answer his question — 'Attaboy,' Mr. King) — So you're saved and he's not?

JJ (DB) (finally successful in evading the question, and the obvious implications of Jn. 14.6, et al.) — I've got my sins forgiven. I don't know how Rabbi Boteach is having his sins forgiven. That's between him and god, and I'm not the one who judges R. Boteach.

PY – First, the forgiveness of Jews for Jesus David Brickner's, and all other Christians', sins hangs precariously – above the "lake of hellfire" (according to Christian teachings) – from a post-135 CE Hellenist-Roman idolatrous-gentile fabricated idol.

Second, Rabbi Boteach's forgiveness is called in Hebrew ki•purꞋ and is guaranteed by the Promise of י‑‑ה in Ta•na"khꞋ; dependent solely upon his doing his best to keep the same mi•tzᵊw•otꞋ that historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa commanded you to keep – but you rebel and refuse, following his antithesis, a Hellenist Roman idol of the gentiles – the Antichrist, instead.

Ta•na"khꞋ itself prohibits adding any condition (Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 4.1-2; 13.1-6; et al. Mi•shᵊl•eiꞋ ShᵊlomꞋoh 30.5-6). Thus, Ta•na"khꞋ itself, upon which any prospective Messiah is dependent for validation and legitimacy, precludes adding a condition that one must accept the Messiah for "salvation".

Precisely how י‑‑ה provides ki•purꞋ isn't part of the requirement. Understanding the mechanism of ki•purꞋ (beyond the acknowledgment that it is granted directly by י‑‑ה in His Own KhësꞋëd as the Product of tᵊshuv•âhꞋ) isn't any part of the requirement for receiving that ki•purꞋ. The only requirement is exactly as historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa stated — which you reject.

What a shocking turnout: Christians aren't "saved" but תּוֹרָה-observant Jews are!!! It is Christians, not Jews who will be "Left Behind"!!!That's the message of historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa!!! It's also the reason this former Southern Baptist, church organist, and independent Baptist preacher renounced Christianity and Jesus and converted to Orthodox Judaism! That's humility, sirs; admitting you've been wrong most of your life and sacrificing everything – treasure, friends and even family – to make the decision to correct the error.

LK But you're making a judgment here. You're telling us if he doesn't accept Christ he's in trouble.

SBC (AM) — I would say that the lord Jesus Christ Himself said that we are to go unto all the world and make disciples of all nations. Larry, I believe that we, who are Christians, will face god and give an answer for whether we did everything within our power to tell as many people as possible about god's offer of salvation through Jesus Christ our lord, and we want, by god's grace, to be able to give a good answer. We pray to see men and women, young persons, old persons, persons of all ethnic backgrounds, come to faith in the lord Jesus Christ for He is the Messiah and the Savior of the world.

PY – The passage Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler quotes here is one of the most redacted passages there is (documented in notes to this passage in NHM).

NHM reads:

"Go and watchguard over the authority, prestige and Realm, to ratify all of these things, which I tzi•wâhꞋ to the qeitz of the age."

This passage, in fact, commands as a mi•tzᵊwâhꞋ that Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Jews, not gentiles, go forth and watchguard (Hebrew sho•meirꞋ), and ratify, the authority of תּוֹרָה and Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ — which is entirely consistent with what he commanded as documented earlier — to the qeitz of the age (which, for them, was 333 CE; see The Church from the Circumcision, p. 14)!

But, then, that merely scratches the surface of the many misconceptions which Christians have about historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, because of their ignorance of Judaism. They can remedy their ignorance by studying NHM.

The interview is wrapped up with a question to Southern Baptist Rev. Mohler about past segregationist policies.

It's appropriate here to comment directly to Southern Baptists on a great controversy which erupted from the Southern Baptists Convention a few years ago which was never properly resolved: Does י‑‑ה answer the prayers of Jews? The answer is in Mi•shᵊl•eiꞋ ShᵊlomꞋoh 28.9. Jews watchguard תּוֹרָה. Christians and Christianity claim to displace and supersede תּוֹרָה. Q.E.D.

Now Southern Baptists have decided to mount a special mission to convert Jews. In light of the above, this is a classic illustration of the teaching of the historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, that Southern Baptists would have "the blind lead the blind."

It defies reason to follow the Hellenist-Roman Christian idol prophesied in Dân•iy•eilꞋ as the "Beast" who would change the times and seasons, which is obviously, and widely recognized as, Rome; and one need merely look at the idolatrous origins of all of the Christian times and seasons.

While this is true for gentiles, it is even more true for Jews who have the background to reject idolatry and mingling the unholy with the holy.

The question you must answer is why would you continue to follow a Hellenist-Roman idol, 'Jesus', which (not 'who') is diametrically and intractably antithetical to the historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa??? Whether you are a Christian Jew or Christian gentile, learn how you can become like RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa — renounce the idol 'Jesus' in order to learn and practice תּוֹרָה and become a legitimate part of legitimate Israel and the legitimate Jewish community.

A later Larry King Show (2000.07.07) again included Rev. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., Pres., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and Shmuley Boteach among the interviewees to debate "Who is Jesus?" – Larry King Show II.

Learn the authentic teachings of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa in our Kha•vᵊr•utꞋâ. (Click on the appropriate ministry – Non-Jews or Tᵊshuv•âhꞋ Center – in the panel at left and read down to the Kha•vᵊr•utꞋâ link to find our Syllabus page.)

© 1996-present by Paqid Yirmeyahu Ben-David,
Google+ registered author & publisher