In the NHM exercises, it says "consult us in presenting and defending them in personal contacts to gentile and Christian Jews." Did you want the presentation in writing? if so how much or less in writing do you want the presentations.

How much or less of the reports,incorporating the notes in Vol. II in writing are you expecting (# of sentences, pages, etc)?

A few days ago my parent had finally asked me about my current belief in J-e-s-u-s and the רוח קדש and at the time I didn't quite know where to effectively start. I was not comfortable telling my parent that Xtny and their savior was pagan but I do know that it's one of the things that need to be proclaimed more an more from my mouth when asked. Anyways I got so excited that at times I completely forgot what to say. It wasn't until the conversation was over that my thoughts were more organized to give a better answer but by then it was too late. I have found that the Xtns I know just want the direct answers(get to the point) which can be hard to give them without some background information and it almost feels overwhelming because there is so much to share with them without giving them more than they need to hear at the moment. At the beginnning they don't want to hear about who or what was discovered regarding the truth of the real Mashiakh because I don't have the proof in my hand, nor do they want to hear that they should go to a website and read about the truth I claim because they believe they have the truth already. I'm sure as I become more prepared and better at presenting the facts then eventually they would want to know more and inquire about the website. Need your advice also on minimizing cold feet.

תוניע

---

The length of the presentation will depend on the length you plan to post when responding to articles and blogs; the primary means of communications these days. If you make them very long, people won't read them. Too short and people won't grasp them. With that in mind, you cannot be effective merely relying on your personal opinion to impress people as an authority. You'll have to keep things relatively brief, extremely concise and include essential citations to document your statements – all without getting your message too long.

When asked about belief in Jesus, we have an overriding primary concern: after 135 C.E., idolatrous Roman occupiers perverted (thousands of documented "redactions" to) the historical record to syncretize their  (gentile) Hellenist counterfeit image, an idol. Consequently, the first thing any Christian needs to do, if they're serious about following the real, historical RibꞋ i Y^әho•shuꞋ a rather than be deceived by a Roman apostasy (and what Christian would claim to be non-serious?), is to clear away the Hellenism of the Romans in order to reveal the documented historical, Tor•âhꞋ -teaching, Pharisee Jew. At this point, you introduce Oxford historian-scholar James Parkes' book (The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, a Study in the Origins of Antisemitism).

Then everything stops until they read it. No further discussion. At all! You may not "argue" with anyone who deliberately chooses to remain ignorant of the pertinent history. You must refuse further discussion until they educate themselves to the pertinent history. Never permit side-tracking to other points, etc. No further discussion. Any religious discussion circumventing their need to educate themselves to the documented history would be counter-productive. Tough love. Parkes is the proof in hand.