Jews not for Jesus Esynagogue #12a by Rabbi Jonathan Ginsburg: 2008

Monday, September 22, 2008

Debate with the Messianists

Dear Rabbi Ginsburg,

I apologize if I am trying your patience. I understand you point of view and your irritation.
I know that you put a substantial amount of effort into your video series and you blog, but, understandably, you didn't address every question.

Your belief that It's okay for Christians to believe in Jesus raises an interesting question for me. In Genesis 48:19 Jacob prophecies about Ephraim ben Joseph "that his seed shall become a multitude of nations." It's my understanding that only G-d knows which nations are of the seed of Ephraim. If some individuals in those nations put there faith in Jesus/Yahshua, would G-d spare them as H- would do with righteous Gentiles, or would they suffer the same fate as apostate Jews?

ME1.epharaim became a name for the 10 northern tribes which were lost. see hos. 5:3 and Isa. 7 1-17
2. your question is flawed because it assumes Jacob's conjecture has prophetic status. why do you assume that?
3. We can't link individuals to ehpraim any more even if jacob was prophecying.
4. point still stand that jews cannot claim to be jews and righteous and follow Jesus

Would you please be kind enough as to explain to this ignoramus what David is speaking about in verse 19 of Psalm 22? I can only think of one explanation and I don't want to annoy you by stating it. Please tell me how that verse should be understood. I will try not to be a pest about that verse hereafter.

ME Flaw #1 You assume author of the psalm was a prophet.
a. prove who wrote it
b. prove he/she was a prophet

ME:Jews have always understood it as a lament by David over the future exile, aND SOME THE THREAT AGAINST THE JEWS BY h
HAMAN IN ESTHER.
i don't think your an ignoramus. obviously you take bible seriously. Its just that your arguments were non-sequitors.

Also, with respect to your response about my suggestion (repeated below) that the Moshiach is actually named in Zechariah 3:8 and Zechariah 6:11 and 12). You replied, "never mentions JESUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" but isn't "Jesus just the corrupted/anglicized form of the name YaHshua, which is also the same Hebraic name as the priest who is crowned in Zechariah 6:11?

ME You should learn hebrew. you just destroyed your whole argument. It says joshua who was the high priest, who was a real person, so obviouslyh could not have been some guy who was no high priest five hundred years later.

Thank you in advance for your consideration.

Shalom of HaShem to you and those you love,

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

My youtube relevant videos

Combatting "Messianic Jews"
Messianic Jews?/Jews Not for Jesus 1 JewU 200
Messianic Jews?/Jews Not for Jesus 2 JewU 201
Messianic Jews?/Jews Not for Jesus 3 JewU 202
Do Jews need to be perfected ala Coulter JewU271
A Jewish view of the Messiah and Messianic era JewU 30
False Messiahs in Jewish History JewU 165
Kosher evangelism proseltyzing JewU 275
How do non-Jews achieve salvation? Noahide laws JewU 155
Kosher evangelism proseltyzing JewU 275
Is universal salvation a Jewish belief? Jewu 425
How do non-Jews achieve salvation? Noahide laws JewU 155
Anti-Semitism-a brief history JewU 40
Righteous Gentiles and anti-semitism JewU279
How we know Jews did not kill Jesus JewU300
Refuting the lies about Judasim and Talmud JewU341

Jesus Christ is a False Messiah from http://www.evilbible.com/jesus_false.htm

Jesus Christ is a False Messiah

According to Jesus’ admissions, as well as the Bible’s prophecies, Jesus of Nazareth could not have been the Messiah. This of course, would invalidate Christianity as we know it. The compilation presented here shall be split in three sections. The first shall be the biblical prophecies that were made in order to identify the messiah, which Jesus does not fulfill. The second shall be the prophecies that Christians use to say that Jesus was the Messiah, yet they clearly fail. The third set shall be the prophecies and statements Jesus made yet they are false and have never came true.

Prophecies to Identify the Messiah, Which Jesus Does Not Fulfill:

1) Matthew 1:23 says that Jesus (the messiah) would be called Immanuel, which means "God with us." Yet no one, not even his parents, call him Immanuel at any point in the bible.

2) The Messiah must be a physical descendant of David (Romans 1:3 & Acts 2:30). Yet, how could Jesus meet this requirement since his genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 show he descended from David through Joseph, who was not his natural father because of the Virgin Birth. Hence, this prophecy could not have been fulfilled.

3) Isaiah 7:16 seems to say that before Jesus had reached the age of maturity, both of the Jewish countries would be destroyed. Yet there is no mention of this prophecy being fulfilled in the New Testament with the coming of Jesus, hence this is another Messiah prophecy not fulfilled.

Prophecies Christians Use to Verify Jesus as the Messiah, Yet Clearly Fail:

4) The gospels (especially Matthew 21:4 and John 12:14-15) claim that Jesus fulfills the prophecy of Zechariah 9:9. But the next few verses (Zechariah 9:10-13) show that the person referred to in this verse is a military king that would rule "from sea to sea". Since Jesus had neither an army nor a kingdom, he could not have fulfilled this prophecy.

5) Matthew (Matthew 2:17-18) quotes Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:15), claiming that it was a prophecy of King Herod’s alleged slaughter of the children in and around Bethlehem after the birth of Jesus. But this passage refers to the Babylonian captivity, as is clear by reading the next two verses (Jeremiah 31:16-17), and, thus, has nothing to do with Herod’s massacre.

6) John 19:33 says that during Jesus’ crucifixion, the soldiers didn’t break his legs because he was already dead. Verse John 19:36 claims that this fulfilled a prophecy: "Not a bone of him shall be broken." But there is no such prophecy. It is sometimes said that the prophecy appears in Exodus 12:46, Numbers 9:12 & Psalm 34:20. This is not correct. Exodus 12:46 & Numbers 9:12 are not prophecies, they are commandments. The Israelites are told not to break the bones of the Passover lamb, and this is all it is about. And Psalm 34:20 seems to refer to righteous people in general (see verse Psalm 34:19, where a plural is used), not to make a prophecy about a specific person.

7) "When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." Hosea 11:1. Matthew (Matthew 2:15) claims that the flight of Jesus’ family to Egypt is a fulfillment of this verse. But Hosea 11:1 is not a prophecy at all. It is a reference to the Hebrew exodus from Egypt and has nothing to do with Jesus. Matthew tries to hide this fact by quoting only the last part of the verse ("Out of Egypt I have called my son").

8) "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Micah 5:2 The gospel of Matthew (Matthew 2:5-6) claims that Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem fulfils this prophecy. But this is unlikely for two reasons.

A) "Bethlehem Ephratah" in Micah 5:2 refers not to a town, but to a clan: the clan of Bethlehem, who was the son of Caleb’s second wife, Ephrathah (1 Chronicles 2:18, 2:50-52 & 4:4).

B) The prophecy (if that is what it is) does not refer to the Messiah, but rather to a military leader, as can be seen from Micah 5:6. This leader is supposed to defeat the Assyrians, which, of course, Jesus never did. It should also be noted that Matthew altered the text of Micah 5:2 by saying: "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Judah" rather than "Bethlehem Ephratah" as is said in Micah 5:2. He did this, intentionally no doubt, to make this verse appear to refer to the town of Bethlehem rather than the family clan.

Statements Jesus Made Which Are False:

9) Jesus in John 14:12 & Mark 16:17-18 said: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth in me, the works that I do shall he also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father." This implies that Jesus’ true followers should be able to routinely perform the following tricks: 1) cast out devils, 2) speak in tongues, 3) take up serpents, 4) drink poisons without harm, and 5) cure the sick by touching them and MANY other of Jesus’ "works". Curiously I have yet to see a Christian that can do any of the above on demand.

10) In John 14:13-14 Jesus stated: "And whatsoever ye ask in my name I do, that the Father may be glorified in the son. If ye ask any thing in my name, I will do it." In reality, millions of people have made millions of requests in Jesus’ name and failed to receive satisfaction. This promise or prophecy has failed completely.

11) Paul says Christianity lives or dies on the Resurrection (1 Corinthian 15:14-17). Yet Jesus said in Matthew 12:40 that he would be buried three days and three nights as Jonah was in the whale three days and three nights. Friday afternoon to early Sunday morning is only one and a half days, so he could not have been the messiah by his own and Paul’s admission.

12) Jesus’ prophecy in John 13:38 ("The cock shall not crow, till thou [Peter] hast denied me three times") is false. Mark 14:66-68 shows the cock crowed after the first denial, not the third.

13) In Mark 10:19 Jesus said: "Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother." Jesus needs to re-read the Ten Commandments. There is no Old Testament commandment against defrauding. The only relevant statement about defrauding is in Leviticus 19:13 , which says : "Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbor." This is an OT law, but is not listed with the Ten Commandments. Surely, if Jesus was god incarnate he would know the commandments.

14) "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven" (John 3:13). If Jesus is in heaven, how can he be down on earth speaking? Moreover, according to 2 Kings 2:11 ("and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven") Jesus was not the only person to ascend into heaven, nor was he the first. Elijah preceded him and apparently Enoch did also ("And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him"--Genesis 5:24).

15) In Luke 23:43 Jesus said to the thief on the cross, "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise." This obviously has to be false, for Jesus was supposed to lay dead in the tomb for three days following his crucifixion.

1 6) Jesus says : "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy" (Matthew 5:43). This statement does not exist in the OT either. In fact, Proverbs 24:17 says, "Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth…"

17) Jesus is reported to say: "The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it" (Luke 16:16). Certainly every man is not pressing to enter the kingdom of God. The very fact that I am an atheist (one third of the world’s population does not believe in a god) proves this verse to be false.

18) "Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the Sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless?" (Matthew 12:5) Nowhere does the OT state that the priests in the temple profaned the Sabbath and were considered blameless.

19) "Yea; have ye never read, 'Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise'" (Matthew 21:16). Jesus is quoting Psalm 8:2, which says, "Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies…". "Perfect praise" has little to do with "ordaining strength because of thine enemies." Another misquotation!

20) "But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him" (Mark 9:13). There are no prophecies in the OT of things that were to happen to Elijah.

Jesus, in all his "God incarnate" wisdom, contradicts himself:

21) Jesus consistently contradicts himself concerning his Godly status. "I and my father are one." (John 14:28) Also see Philippians 2:5-6 Those verses lead us to believe that he is a part of the trinity and equal to his father being a manifestation of him. Yet, Jesus also made many statements that deny he is the perfect men, much less God incarnate. Take the following for example: "Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God" (Matthew 19:17). "My father if greater then I." (John 14:28) Also see Matthew 24:26 Clearly, Jesus is denouncing the possibility of him being the Messiah in those three verses.

22) Jesus said, "whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire" (Matthew 5:22). Yet, he himself did so repeatedly, as Matthew 23:17-19 and Luke 11:40 & 12:20 show. Clearly Jesus should be in danger of hell too?

23) Does Jesus support peace, or war? Matthew 5:39 "Resist not evil, but whoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." Also note Matthew 6:38-42 & 26:52 where Jesus teaches non-resistance, Non-violence. Now read (Luke 22:36-37) Where Jesus commands people to take arms for a coming conflict. (John 2:15) Jesus uses a whip to physically drive people out of the temple.

24) Matthew 15:24 Jesus said, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of lsrael,". This would of course mean that he is here only to save the Jews. The scriptures repeatedly back up this notion that Christ is savior to the Jews and not the gentiles (see Romans 16:17, Revelations 14:3-4 & John 10). The contradiction lies in what Jesus later tells his followers: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations" (Matthew 28:19).

25) Can we hate our kindred? Luke 14:26 Jesus says "If any man come unto me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brother, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he can not be my disciple." John 3:15 "Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer." Also see Ephesians 6:22, 5:25, & Matthew 15:4

26) Even many of the staunchest defenders of Jesus admit that his comment in Matthew 10:34 ("I came not to send peace but a sword") contradicts verses such as Matthew 26:52 ("Put up again thy sword into his place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword").

27) Deuteronomy 24:1 & 21:10-14 all say that divorce is allowed for the simple reason if a "man no longer delighteth in his wife". Yet Jesus comes along and breaks his father’s law by saying in Matthew 5:32 that adultery is the only way one can be divorced.

28) In Mark 8:35 Jesus said: "...but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel’s the same shall save it." How could Jesus have said this when there was no gospel when he lived? The gospel did not appear until after his death.

29) Matthew 6:13 Jesus recites a revised prayer and states, "Don’t bring us into temptation." God is the cause of everything, even Satan. God has been leading people into temptation since the Garden of Eden. Otherwise, the trees of life and knowledge would have never been there.

30) Matthew 12:1-8 Jesus thinks it’s okay to break his father’s laws, by breaking the Sabbath day. He states that he is basically exempt for such fiascoes and that he is Master of the Sabbath.

31) John 3:17 Jesus contradicts himself when he says, "God didn’t send his son into the world to condemn it, but to save it." Jesus seems to forget his own stories.

32) James 4:3 If your prayers are not answered, it’s your own damned fault. This is in direct contradiction to where Jesus says "seek and ye shall find, ask and it shall be known to you".

33) "If Jesus bears witness of himself his witness is true" John 8:14, "If I bear witness of myself it is not true." John 5:31

34) "I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" (Matthew 28:20), versus "For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always" (Matthew 26:11 , Mark 14:7, John 12:8) and "Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am thither ye cannot come" (John 7:34). Is this the kind of friend one can rely on?

35) "And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her" (Mark 10:11 & Luke 6:18), versus "And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery" (Matthew 19:9). In the book of Matthew, Jesus said a man could put away his wife if one factor-- fornication--is involved. In Mark and Luke he allowed no exceptions.

36) Jesus is quoted: "Judge not, and ye shall be not judged; condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven" (Luke 6:37 & Matthew 7:1), versus "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment" (John 7:24). Jesus stated men are not to judge but, then, allowed it under certain conditions. As in the case of divorce, he can’t seem to formulate a consistent policy.

37) "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Matthew 27:46, (also note the time before crucification where Jesus prays for the "cup to passeth over me") versus "Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour?’ No, for this purpose I have come to this hour" (John 12:27 RSV). Jesus can’t seem to decide whether or not he wants to die. One moment he is willing; the next he isn’t.

38) In Luke 23:30 ("Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, fall on us, and to the hills, cover us") Jesus quoted Hosea 10:8 ("...and they shall say to the mountains, cover us; and to the hills, fall on us"). And, like Paul, he often quoted inaccurately. In this instance, he confused mountains with hills.

39) "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they know him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist" (Matthew 17:11-13). John the Baptist was beheaded, but Jesus was not. And what did John the Baptist restore? Nothing!

40) We are told salvation is obtained by faith alone (John 3:18 & 36) yet Jesus told a man to follow the Commandments-Matthew 19:16-18 (saving by works)-if he wanted eternal life.

41) In Luke 12:4 Jesus told his followers to "Be not afraid of them that kill the body." But Matthew 12:14-16, John 7:1, 8:59, 10:39, 11:53-54, & Mark 1:45 show that Jesus consistently feared death. Jesus went out of his way to hide, run, and attempt escape from the Roman and Jewish authorities.

42) Matthew 5:28 says to sin in "your heart" is considered a sin in itself. The messiah is supposed to be God incarnate, not able to sin, yet in Matthew 4:5 & Luke 4:5-9, Jesus was tempted by Satan in the desert, which is sinning in his heart. Jesus also took upon all the sins of the world during his crucifixion, so how can it be said that "Jesus was the perfect man without sin"? This would lead one to believe he was not the Messiah.

43) Jesus told us to "Love your enemies; bless them that curse you," but ignored his own advice by repeatedly denouncing his opposition. Matthew 23:17 ("Ye fools and blind"), Matthew 12:34 ("0 generation of vipers"), and Matthew 23:27 (". . . hypocrites . . . ye are like unto whited sepulchres. . .") are excellent examples of hypocrisy.

44) Did the people of Jesus’ generation see any signs? (Matthew 12:38-40) Jesus announced that no signs would be given to that generation except the Resurrection itself. (Mark 8:12-13) Jesus announced that no signs would be given to that generation. (Mark 16:20) They went out preaching, and the Lord confirmed the word through accompanying signs. (John 20:30) Jesus provided many wonders and signs. (Acts 2:22) Jesus provided many wonders and signs. (Acts 5:12 & 8:13) many signs and wonders were done through the apostles.

45) Jesus commands the disciples to go into Galilee immediately after the resurrection. Matthew 28:10 Jesus commands the disciples to "tarry in Jerusalem" immediately after the resurrection.

46) Matthew 28:18 & John 3:35 both tell that Jesus said he could do anything. Yet Mark 6:5 says Jesus was not all powerful.

47) Jesus says in Luke 2:13-14 that he came to bring peace on earth. Matthew 10:34 Jesus back peddles and says he did not come to bring peace on earth.

48) Did Christ receive testimony from man? "Ye sent unto John and he bare witness unto the truth. But I receive not testimony from man." John 5:33-34 "And ye shall also bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning." John 15:27

49) Christ laid down his life for his friends. John 15:13 & 10:11 Christ laid down his life for his enemies. Romans 5:10

50) Deuteronomy 23:2 says that bastards can not attend church unto the tenth generation. If Jesus was spawned by Mary and Jehovah as the Bible claims then he is technically a bastard and should not be the leader of the church.

Their Bible has its own issues

Contradictions of the Gospels

We are told to accept that Jesus existed based upon the Gospels of the Bible, yet the Gospels are so poorly written that a logical person is at best left to ponder if Jesus even existed. The Gospels are consistently contradictive, filled with mathematic errors and don’t compliment each other on very important details. This page shall serve as an example for just how unreliable the Gospels are.

Gospel Contradictions:

1) How many generations were there between Abraham to David? Matthew 1:17 lists fourteen generations. Matthew 1:2 lists thirteen generations.

2) Is Paul lying? In Acts 20:35 Paul told people "to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.'" Since Jesus never made such a biblical statement, isn’t Paul guilty of deception?

3) When did the leper become not a leper? (Matthew 8:13 & 8:14) Jesus healed the leper before visiting the house. (Mark 1:29-30 & 1:40-42) Jesus healed the leper after visiting Simon Peter’s house.

4) Who approached Jesus? (Matthew 8:5-7) The Centurion approached Jesus, beseeching help for a sick servant. (Luke 7:3 & 7:6-7) The Centurion did not approach Jesus. He sent friends and elders of the Jews.

5) Was she dead or just dying? (Matthew 9:18) He asked for help, saying his daughter was already dead. (Luke 8:41-42) Jairus approached Jesus for help, because his daughter was dying.

6) Just what did Jesus instruct them to take? (Matthew 10:10) Jesus instructed them not to take a staff, not to wear sandals. (Mark 6:8-9) Jesus instructed his disciples to wear sandals and take a staff on their journey.

7) When did John find out Jesus was the Messiah? (Matthew 11:2-3) While imprisoned. John the Baptist sent followers to Jesus to inquire if Jesus was the messiah. (Luke 7:18-22) While imprisoned. John the Baptist sent followers to Jesus to inquire if Jesus was the Messiah. (John 1 :29-34,36) John already knew Jesus was the Messiah.

8) Who made the request? (Matthew 20:20-21) Their mother requested that James and John, Zebedee’s children, should sit beside Jesus in his Kingdom. (Mark 10:35-37) James and John, Zebedee’s children, requested that they should sit beside Jesus in his Kingdom.

9) What animals were brought to Jesus? (Matthew 21:2-7) two of the disciples brought Jesus an ass and a colt from the village of Bethphage. (Mark 11:2-7) They brought him only a colt.

10) When did the fig tree hear of its doom? (Matthew 21:17-19) Jesus cursed the fig tree after purging the temple. (Mark 11:14-15 & 20) He cursed it before the purging.

11) When did the fig tree keel? (Matthew 21:9) The fig tree withered immediately. and the disciples registered surprise then and there. (Mark 11:12-14 & 20) The morning after Jesus cursed the fig tree, the disciples noticed it had withered and expressed astonishment.

12) Was John the Baptist Elias? "This is Elias which was to come." Matthew 11:14 "And they asked him, what then? Art thou Elias? And he said I am not." John l:21

13) Who was the father of Joseph? Matthew 1:16 The father of Joseph was Jacob. Luke 3 :23 The father of Joseph was Heli. Christians shall try to LIE and tell you that one is the heritage of Mary and the other Joseph. This is utter bullshit, the Hebrew and Greek cultures NEVER regarded the bloodline of the mother. They were patriarchal societies which only concerned themselves with paternal lineage.

14) How many generations were there from the Babylon captivity to Christ? Matthew 1:17 Fourteen generations, Matthew 1:12-16 Thirteen generations.

15) Matthew 2:15, 19 & 21-23 The infant Christ was taken into Egypt. Luke 2:22 & 39 The infant Christ was NOT taken to Egypt.

16) Matthew 5:1-2 Christ preached his first sermon on the mount. Luke 6:17 & 20 Christ preached his first sermon in the plain.

17) John was in prison when Jesus went into Galilee. Mark 1:14 John was not in prison when Jesus went into Galilee. John 1:43 & 3:22-24

18) What was the nationality of the woman who besought Jesus? Matthew 15:22 "And behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, Have mercy on me, 0 Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil." Mark 7:26 "The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by nation, and she besought him that he would cast forth the devil out of her daughter."

19) How many blind men besought Jesus? Matthew 20:30 Two blind men. Luke 18:35-38 Only one blind man.

20) Where did the devil take Jesus first? (Matthew 4:5-8) The Devil took Jesus first to the parapet of the temple, then to a high place to view all the Kingdoms of the world. (Luke 4:5-9) The Devil took Jesus first to a high place to view the kingdoms, then to the parapet of the temple.

21) Can one pray in public? (Matthew 6:5-6) Jesus condemned public prayer. (1 Timothy 2:8) Paul encouraged public prayer.

22) If we decide to do good works, should those works be seen? Matthew 5:16 "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works." 1 Peter 2:12 "Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that ... they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation." This contradicts: Matthew 6:1-4 "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them…that thine alms may be in secret." Matthew 23:3-5 "Do not ye after their [Pharisees'] works ... all their works they do for to be seen of men."

23) Who did Jesus tell the Lord’s Prayer to? (Matthew 5:1, 6:9-13 & 7:28) Jesus delivered the Lord’s Prayer during the Sermon on the Mount before the multitudes. (Luke 11:1-4) He delivered it before the disciples alone, and not as part of the Sermon on the Mount.

24) When was Christ crucified? Mark 15:25 "And it was the third hour and they crucified him." John 19:14-15 "And it was the preparation of the Passover, and about the sixth hour; and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your king…Shall I crucify your king?" John 19:14-15.

25) The two thieves reviled Christ. (Matthew 27:44 & Mark 15:32) Only one of the thieves reviled Christ. Luke 23:39-40.

26) In 1 Corinthians 1:17 ("For Christ sent me [Paul] not to baptize but to preach the gospel") Paul said Jesus was wrong when he said in Matthew 28:19 "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them…" Clearly one of these people is wrong, either way, it’s a contradiction.

27) When did Satan enter Judas? Satan entered into Judas while at the supper. John 13:27 Satan entered Judas before the supper. Luke 23:3-4 & 7

28) How many women came to the sepulcher? John 20:1 Only one woman went, Mary Magdalene. Matthew 28:1 Mary Magdalene and the "other Mary" (Jesus’ mother) went.

29) Mark 16:2 It was sunrise when the two women went to the sepulcher. John 20:1 It was still dark (before sunrise) when Mary Magdalene went alone to the sepulcher.

30) There were two angels seen by the women at the sepulcher and they were standing up. Luke 24:4 There was only one angel seen and he was sitting down. Mark 28:2-5

31) How many angels were within the sepulcher? John 20:11-12 two, Mark 16:5 one.

32) The Holy Ghost bestowed at Pentecost. Acts 1:5-8 & 2:1-4 The holy Ghost bestowed before Pentecost. John 20:22

33) Where did Jesus first appear to the eleven disciples? In a room in Jerusalem. Luke 24:32-37 On a mountain in Galilee. Matthew 28:15-17

34) Where did Christ ascend from? From Mount Olivet. Acts 1:9-12 From Bethany. Luke 24:50-51

35) Can all sins be forgiven? (Acts 13:39) All sins can be forgiven. Great, I’m happy to know God is so merciful, but wait (Mark 3:29) Cursing or blaspheming the Holy Spirit is unforgivable.

36) The Elijah mystery: (Malachi 4:5) Elijah must return before the final days of the world. (Matthew 11:12-14) Jesus said that John the Baptist was Elijah. (Matthew 17:12- 13) Jesus insists that Elijah has already come, and everyone understood him to mean John the Baptist. (Mark 9:13) Jesus insists that Elijah has already come. (John 1:21) John the Baptist maintained that he was not Elijah.

37) Who purchased the potter’s field? Acts 1:18 The field was purchased by Judas. John 20:1 The potter’s field was purchased by the chief priests.

38) Paul’s attendants heard the miraculous voice and stood speechless. Acts 9:7 Paul’s attendants did not hear the voice and were prostrate. Acts 22:9 & 26:14

39) Who bought the Sepulcher? Jacob, Josh 24:32 Abraham, Acts 7:16

40) Was it lawful for the Jews to put Christ to death? "The Jews answered him, we have a law, and by our law he ought to die." John 19:7 "The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death." John 18:31

41) Has anyone ascended up to heaven? Elijah went up to heaven: "And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." 2 Kings 2:11 "No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man." John 3:13

42) Is scripture inspired by God? "all scripture is given by inspiration of God." 2 Timothy 3:16 compared to: "But I speak this by permission and not by commandment." 1 Corinthians 7:6 "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord." 1 Corinthians 7:12 "That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord" 2 Corinthians.

verses they take out of context and misinterpret

Go to this page and they will link you to the jewish view of these passages
http://members.tripod.com/~GHaas/contents.htm

Prophecies Used by Missionaries and the Jewish Interpretation based on the original Hebrew texts:
Torah:

Prophets:

Writings:
Genesis 3:13-15 Isaiah 7:14 Psalm 2:2, 6-8
Genesis 18-19 Isaiah 9:6-7 Psalm 16:10
Exodus 17:15 Isaiah 11:1-2 Psalm 22
Numbers 9:12 Isaiah 42:1-4 and 42:6 Psalm 40:6-8
Deuteronomy 18:15,18,19 Isaiah 43:3 Psalm 41:9
Deuteronomy 21:23 Isaiah 48:16 Psalm 69:22
Isaiah 49:6 Psalm 88
Isaiah 50:6 Psalm 89:27, 28-30
Isaiah 52:3 Psalm 110:1
Isaiah 52:10 Ezra 3:8
Isaiah 52-53
Isaiah 61:1-2
Jeremiah 31:30-33
Hosea 11:1
Micah 5:2
Zechariah 3:8-10
Zechariah 6:9-13
Zechariah 9:9
Zechariah 12:10
Zecheriah 13:7

eternal brit covenant

The Eternality of the Covenant with the Jewish People
by Gretchen S.

The below is a rebuttle to those who say that the covenent the Jewish people have with G-d has been replaced or is no more

Leviticus 26:44-45 "Yet, even then, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or spurn them so as to destroy them, annulling My covenant with them: for I the L-RD am their G-d. I will remember in their favor the covenant with the ancients, whom I freed from the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations to be their G-d: I, the L-RD." He will not reject us, ever. He will never annull the covenant.

Deuteronomy 4:31 "For the L-RD your G-d is a merciful G-d; He will not forsake you, nor destroy you, nor forget the covenant of your fathers which He swore to them." G-d will never destroy us, we are His eternal people, His servant Israel.

Deuteronomy 29:28 "The secret things belong to the L-RD our G-d; but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this Torah."

Judges 2:1 "And an angel of the L-RD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said,[delivering G-d's messege] I made you go out of Egypt, and have brought you to the land which I swore to your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you."

Jer 31:36 "Thus says the L-RD; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth explored below, then I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, says the L-RD."

The heavens above have not been measured, nor will they ever fully be measured. The foundations of the earth have not been fully searched, either in Jesus' day or our own. Israel decendents are still THE people Israel. The Covenant and the people are eternal.

Not only will G-d not break the covenant, we too are forever bound by it.

Deuteronomy 11:1 "Love [be loyal to], therefore, the L-RD your G-d, and always keep His charge, His laws, His rules, and His commandments."

Malachi 3:22 admonishes us Jews to "Remember the Torah of Moses My servant, which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments."

Psalm 119:86 "All Your commandments are enduring..."

Psalm 119:160 "Truth is the essence of Your word;
your just rules are eternal."

Proverb 21:21 "He who strives to do good and kind deeds attains life, success, and honor"

The quotes from the Tanakh come from either Tanakh, The Holy Scriptures. Philadelphia, Jerusalem: Jewish Publication Society, 1985. or The Davka Tanakh on CD-ROM

A Summary of Why Jews Should not be Christians

A Summary of Why Jews Should not be Christians
By Keith Kothe

Jesus said the most important commandment is "Hear O'Israel, The L-rd is G-d, The L-rd is One. Christianity says G-d is three.

The Torah says the messiah will gather the dispersed of Israel, Jesus failed to cause the dispersed to be regathered, in fact shortly later Israel was destroyed.

Torah says the messiah will Rebuild the Temple, Jesus proving that he was not the messiah said the Temple would be ground to dust saying not one stone would be left upon another, it was destroyed, however Jesus also failed as a prophet, the western wall still stands to this day. [G. Haas note: not only is the western wall still standing, so are many other sections of the wall around the Temple Mount, so are the steps leading up to the main entrance, so are many other structures such as arches that once supported walkways]

Torah says the messiah will bring Peace to all mankind. Jesus said that I come to bring a sword, each man shall hate his mother and father. Jesus statments are contrary to Torah and Judiasm.

Jesus said the "pharasies and the scribes, (persons who interpet and teach the Oral Torah) sit in the seat of Moses, follow them and do all they say." Paul says forget that, forget circumcision, forget kosher, forget everything that Jesus did and said to do, now the law is done away with.

The Sabbath is the seventh day of the week, christians say it is the First day of the week, following the pagan customs of the Romans.

Torah says do not follow strange gods that your fathers did not know. The new testament says that Jesus is a god.

Torah says you shall have no other gods beside me. The NT says that Jesus (a god) sits at the right hand of the father. Then there is this holy ghost thing that is also a god.

Human sacrifice is totally against Torah. Further G-d said I am tired of the blood of bulls and goats, I want the sacrifice of the fruit of your lips.

The representation of eating blood and flesh of a human as in the communion act is the very essence of a pagan ritual. Totally repulsive to Torah.

According to Torah the blood sacrifice for sin can only be a goat or a FEMALE lamb. That sacrifice can only pay for unintentional sin, commited by accident. The only means of forgivness for all other sin if for the person who commited the sin to do Teshuva, to repent and do what is right.

G-d said I make an eternal covenant with Israel, the NT says that covenant is past we now have a new covenant.

Christianity departed from all of G-ds festivals, the ones that even Jesus kept, and instead incorporated a host of pagan festivals with pagan rituals such as A supernatural Elf that brings gifts, Yule logs, Christmas trees, Bunny Rabbits, and Eggs etc etc.

I could go on, but you get the general Idea. As Rabbi Tovia Singer said, Every thing good in the NT is from the Torah, Every thing new in the NT is not from Torah.

They quote?

Some things you should ask yourself when dealing with quotes from missionaories are:

* Are the quotes in context?
* Are the translations accurate?
* Is it really a prophecy being that is quoted?
* If it is a prophecy, is it about the messianic era and the messiah?
* Does it point exclusively to one person, or could it point to many people?

Virgin birth? from www.beingjewish.com

The Supposed Virgin Birth

The Virgin Birth is a fundamental tenet of most forms of Christianity. Yet it is very odd that none of the earlier Christian books mention it. The book of Mark, probably the first written, makes no mention of it at all. One would think that it would be worth at least one sentence, if not the amount spent on it by the book of Matthew. It is evident that Mark had never heard of the Virgin Birth. The book of John does not mention it either.

The reason that the virgin birth concept was added to Christianity was because the first Christians were very unsuccessful at converting Jews. Most Jews knew they had something better, so they would not leave Judaism for Christianity. Remember: at the beginning it was nothing more than a very small messianic movement within Judaism, and after their "messiah" died, it was rather hard to convert Jews to their movement.

So they began to reach out to the pagans, the non-Jews. But those pagans attracted to Judaism had already joined Judaism, and the new ones would not be very likely to join a tiny fringe group that had lost all real meaning since their false messiah-leader had died. Anyone interested in Judaism would more likely be interested in mainstream Judaism.

So the Christians had to do something different. They had to develop appeal. So, they began to assume beliefs that pagan people found attractive. That was how they came up with the concepts of the trinity, transubstantiation, the need to "save" everyone through the resurrection of a messiah, virgin birth, and all the other wacky ideas of Christianity. All these were lifted straight from other religions, some of which preceded Christianity by 700 years! Pagans just lapped up things like demigods, gods having intercourse with humans, virgins giving birth. Such claims meant something to pagans, and they were already familiar with such beliefs from their own cultures. So leaving a pagan religion to join Christianity was not much of a stretch, especially after Paul declared that the pagans did not need to keep the Commandments of the Torah.

Virgin birth was a popular pagan myth, prevalent in numerous religions of the time. The particular strain that we find in Christianity was probably taken directly from the Greek myth of the divine birth of Perseus from the virgin Danae. It never had any association with Judaism. Furthermore, Attis, a popular Roman and Syrian god around the time Christianity began, was also said to have been born of a virgin. Long before that, Krishna, the Hindu god, dating back to nine centuries before Christianity, was said to be god incarnate born of a virgin, as was Gautama Buddha. So there was rather widespread precedent for Christian beliefs, but none of it came from Judaism.

Your average Jew with any kind of Jewish upbringing is disgusted by these ideas. This was true back then, just as much as it is true today. The virgin birth seems to us rather strange.

A Jew will also ask: "And how do I know she was a virgin?" We don't, of course, so there's really no evidence at all. In fact, no one could ever have known whether or not she was a virgin!

What do I mean by that? In Matthew, Chapter 1, verse 24-25, it says: "Then Joseph awoke and did as the angel of the Lord had instructed him, and married her. He did not have relations with her until after she had given birth to her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus."

The verse says that Joseph did not have relations with Mary until after jesus was born. In other words, after jesus was born, they did have relations. Not only that, Matthew later says quite explicitly that jesus had three brothers and a few sisters (Matthew 12:46; 13:55-56). Mark (6:3) lists four brothers and says "all his sisters," which might imply more than two sisters, but in any case implies at least two.

There are those who wish to argue that "brothers and sisters" refers to those that jesus considered is true brothers and sisters -- his followers.

But this answer doesn't work. Let's look at the actual verses involved. First, Matthew 12:46-50.

While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you." He replied to him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" Pointing to his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother."

In other words, his biological mother and brothers were waiting outside for him, and he argued that his real mother and brothers were his followers.

So he apparently had real brothers, biological brothers.

Now, it is quite evident that even if a woman could conceive a child and still remain a virgin, the act of giving birth would rupture the hymen anyway. So once jesus was born, Mary would no longer have had a hymen.

Now, if Joseph did not have relations with her until after her hymen was ruptured from jesus' birth, even Joseph could never know whether she had been a virgin when jesus was conceived. By the time Joseph got to her, one way or another she had no hymen, so how could Joseph know whether the hymen was there before jesus was born?

So who in the world could verify that she was a virgin when she conceived jesus? No one, that's who!

Think about it. What sort of proof would it be anyway? I stand up in front of a few people, and I declare: "You see that virgin?" And everyone turns to look at her, and they say, "Well, I see a woman, but how do I know she's a virgin?"

"Never mind about that now," I say. "I'm a prophet, and I tell you she is a virgin. She will give birth, miraculously!"

"What's so miraculous about that?" everyone wants to know. She'll have relations with someone, and she'll get pregnant, and she'll give birth. It happens every day."

"Take my word for it."

No one checks to see if she is a virgin, because that would be in poor taste anyway.

So how is this a proof of anything?

But what is even more amazing is their supposed proof that virgin birth is significant. It all comes from a distorted verse in Isaiah.

Let's examine what Isaiah says there, in plain English.

King Ahaz of Judah was afraid, because the king of Aram and the king of Israel were conspiring to wage war against Judah.

Isaiah prophesied to King Ahaz that within a few years Israel would be taken into exile, and Judah would be left alone. Aram would not bother Judah, and Israel would not be able to.

Isaiah offered King Ahaz a sign that would prove that Isaiah's words were prophecy from G-d. King Ahaz refused, because that would have caused a greater sanctification of G-d's Name. Isaiah got angry, and offered his own sign. He predicted the gender of an unborn child. Isaiah indicated a young woman who was nearby -- some say it was the king's wife, and some say it was Isaiah's wife -- and Isaiah said, "The young woman is pregnant. she will give birth to a son, and his mother will call him Emmanuel. Before he is even old enough to know good from evil, before he is even old enough to enjoy delightful food, the two kings will stop invading your land. And this child will grow up to enjoy good and delightful food, because your land will be in peace."

And it indeed happened that way.

That is what Chapter 7 of Isaiah is about. Now where is there mentioned the Messiah? How does a virgin fit into this?

Even if you can prove that almah means a virgin -- and you can't-- it is STILL not talking about the Messiah. Jesus was born some 700 years later. How would that have answered King Ahaz's problem? None of the words of that chapter fit into any such interpretation.

Let me restate this, to make sure everyone understands.

Chapter 7 of Isaiah tells of a conversation between King Ahaz and Isaiah, sometime around the year 600 B.C.E.

King Ahaz of Judea was worried. The Kings of Aram and Israel were planning a siege and attack against Judea. G-d told the Prophet Isaiah to reassure Ahaz and tell him not to worry, it will not happen. Aram and Israel will not succeed against Judea.

Isaiah offered a sign. He would foretell an event, and when it came true that would prove that he spoke prophetically. Then Ahaz could cease worrying. What sign did he offer? "This young woman here is pregnant. She will give birth to a son. She will call him Emmanuel. Once he is old enough to have intelligence, he will eat rich foods, because there will be peace in the land. This is because even before he attains intelligence, Aram and Israel will be conquered, and their people will be taken away."

This last point is important.

Isaiah showed King Ahaz a sign, to reassure him that during the childhood of the boy Emmanuel the two kings will be rendered harmless. As it says there, in verse 16 of that chapter in Isaiah: "For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken." The prophecy was fulfilled not long after, when Isaiah's wife gave birth to a son. Isaiah 8:4 therefore says: "Even before the child shall know how to cry 'Father and Mother!' the riches of Damascus and Samaria will be taken away by the king of Assyria."

Isaiah makes it absolutely clear that his prophecy will take place very soon. Not 600 or 700 years later.

So the child being referred to was the son of Isaiah, or the son of the king. It has nothing to do with the Messiah. The entire event: the birth of the child Emmanuel and the exile of the two kings, took place over 600 years before Jesus was born. So the verse is not talking about a virgin, and in any case is not talking about the Messiah, but about a child that was born very shortly thereafter.

But this is considered irrelevant to many Christians. They argue that Isaiah was referring overtly to the problem of the time, but was also alluding to the Messiah.

How do they do this? How can you possibly find in these verses a proof that the Messiah will be born of a virgin?

It's quite simple. Change the "young woman" to "virgin." Change "she is pregnant" to "she will become pregnant." Ignore the reference to "Emanuel." If you don't mention it, perhaps no one else will notice it either.

Don't be concerned that Isaiah makes no mention of the Messiah here. Perhaps the Christian apostles honestly believed that the Messiah is mentioned in this verse, despite the glaring absence of any such reference.

Now, ignore the fact that Isaiah was reassuring Ahaz that in his own time he will have peace. Pretend instead that he was referring to an event 600 years in the future. How that would reassure King Ahaz that he would have peace from Aram and Israel I cannot imagine. Maybe the problem is that I don't have enough "faith" to believe in a lie.

Typically, Christians ignore the context of the verses in Isaiah, and focus -- when forced to -- only on the question of what the word almah means.

Any translation that renders almah as "virgin," is absolutely wrong. That is not the definition of the word. You can argue from today until the middle of next year, but the meaning of the word won't change.

Some people argue that the Septuagint uses the word "parthenos" in Isaiah 7:14. (The Septuagint was a Greek translation created by a large group of Rabbis sometime around 300 B.C.E.) That would mean, if this is true, that even the Jews translated almah as "virgin."

Actually, one cannot bring proof from the Septuagint. The only existing copies of the Septuagint are nothing like the original version. Though the Septuagint was created by Rabbis, they did it against their will, because King Ptolemy Philadelphus of Egypt forced them to do it. Ptolemy wanted a Greek version for his library. The Septuagint was never used by religious Jews as a source of study. In pre-Christian times, it was not popular at all, and if it was used at all, it was used almost exclusively by non-Jews, and sometimes by assimilated, non-religious, Hellenized Jews.

Non-Jews did not consider it holy, and so they were not careful about preserving it precisely. The Septuagint was therefore not kept in its original form. It was changed many times. Later, the Christians deliberately introduced many changes in the text, in order to bring it in line with their own doctrines.

Some argue that the christians cannot be blamed for misreading it, because the meaning of the Greek word "parthenos" changed. Originally, it meant "young woman," and later the meaning of the word shifted (as happens in all languages over time) and people began to use it to mean "virgin." Even if that's true, that gives a sorry picture of the "wisdom and divine inspiration" of the people (i.e., the christians) who thought that Isaiah was talking about a virgin. It means that they had no idea what the original Hebrew verse was saying. Why, then, should I learn theology from an ignoramus?

The original translators that created the Septuagint were Rabbis. They translated it according to Jewish Tradition. They certainly knew Hebrew, and they knew that almah means "young woman." They knew it does not mean "virgin." It makes no sense to believe that the Rabbis of the Septuagint translated it as "virgin," when no other Rabbi in all of history has ever translated it that way.

But even if we accept that the Septuagint was originally written with the word "parthenos," and that the Rabbis meant to translate it as "virgin" (which makes no sense), how does that explain what the Christians did to the rest of the passage? Even if it does mean virgin, how did the Messiah get into this prophecy? And how did a prophecy that clearly refers to a contemporary event get applied to an event 600 or 700 years later? There is no logic to this so-called "proof."

You might ask: Christians aren't stupid. Anyone can read Isaiah and figure out these things for themselves. Why haven't they rejected this doctrine on their own?

There are a few reasons.

First of all, you would be amazed at how many missionaries studied my exposition on this matter, and have responded by saying things like: "I am satisfied that Isaiah Chapter 7 is talking about the Messiah." Many missionaries say they have "blind faith" (and for some reason they expect to somehow use that to convince me). In reality, they are blinded by their faith. Their faith does not allow them to accept interpretations that do not match what they have been taught, so they simply edit the contradictions out of their minds. They see what they want to see.

But not all Christians are blinded by faith. Many blind themselves willingly. Take Catholics, for example. Catholics are not taught to study the Bible, and so many of them know only what they have heard the priests teach them in church.

It is certainly significant that for over seventeen hundred years, the Catholic Church forbade Catholics to read the bible! When two people translated the bible into a language so that everyone could understand it, the Catholic Church burned them at the stake! Can you believe this? They did not want people to read their own holy book!!

They knew that if the Catholics read the bible properly, they might start asking questions that the Catholic priests wouldn't be able to answer. People might start to see the contradictions and problems that the Christian bible is full of.

Protestants have another problem. Protestants often rely on the King James' version of the bible, which not only is so terribly distorted and mistranslated, it is also next to impossible for the modern reader to understand.

Years ago, I used to attend weekly meetings at a book store, where people would get together and have some rather fascinating conversations.

One time I got into a discussion with a customer that walked in at the time. She was Protestant (Methodist, I think), and the subject of the supposed virgin birth was brought up. I challenged her to read chapter 7 of Isaiah and find any references to the Messiah.

She asked the owner of the book store for a bible, and she began to read it. After about two or three verses, she gave up. She complained that she could not understand what the Bible was talking about. That was the end of the conversation, as far as she was concerned. There was no way to even discuss the matter, because she was incapable of investigating on her own.

She would not ask for any other bible, because she insisted that the King James Bible is the only divinely inspired translation, and that it is infallibly correct.

Such people fulfill, I suppose, what the Christian bible says, "If your eyes offends you, pluck it out." If you don't like what you see, don't change the wrong thing. Blind yourself! And then you won't see it.

Missionaries with whom I have had any discussion, especially about this, often simply ignore everything I have written. They can't focus on it. (And in addition, missionaries are trained to trick you and snare you with confusing twists in conversation. Missionaries tend not to even answer the questions you ask them.)

One stance taken by some Christian missionaries is that we Jews are all wrong, and that almah actually does mean virgin. We Jews just don't know any Hebrew! After all, where's the proof from the Tanach that almah does not mean "virgin?" This is ridiculous, of course. We Jews have been using Hebrew for the past three thousand, there hundred years, which is more than one thousand years longer than Christianity has even existed. But I will prove they are wrong anyway.

A Christian woman who tried to convert me over the Internet (I'll call her Beulah) once quoted to me six places in Tanach where the term almah is used, and claimed that all of them "could mean virgin." There is no explicit indication anywhere, she said, as to whether it refers to a virgin or not.

There are two problems with that.

In the first place, the fact that they could mean virgin does not prove that they do mean virgin.

Secondly, she omitted the seventh occurrence of the word, the one that is the actual proof.

The proof is in Proverbs 31:18-20.

There are three things that leave no trace after they have passed, and a fourth that one can never know afterwards. The way an eagle has flown in the sky, the way a serpent has crawled on a rock, the way a ship has sailed in deep water, and the way a man has been with a young woman (almah). That's how an adulterous woman acts: she "eats," wipes her mouth, and says "I have committed no sin."

What this means is that when an adulterous woman sins, she relies on the fact that no one can tell. We cannot tell that an eagle has just flown across the sky, or that a serpent has just crawled across this rock, or that a ship sailed by here ten minutes ago, because they leave no permanent sign. So too, when a man sins with a young woman, no one can tell, because there is no mark left behind.

Now, if almah means a virgin, this passage makes no sense. After a virgin has such an experience, there is definitely a difference, there is definitely a sign: she has lost her virginity. That is in no way comparable to the other three examples. Yet the verse says that the fourth leaves no sign afterwards, and you can never tell it happened!

It follows therefore, that almah here cannot mean a virgin. It means a young woman. The word almah means, simply, a young woman. It does not mean "virgin."

In other places in Tanach a "young woman" might be a virgin, and might not. Here in Proverbs, she is definitely not a virgin.

Beulah, the Christian missionary from the Internet whom I mentioned above, objected that the verse simply says "the way of a man with a young woman." She argued that the way of a man is to talk with young women.

I told her that if she thought all a man does with young women is talk, she's been spending too much time inside her church. She should get out of the convent, and go meet some men, and see if all they want to do is talk.

Secondly, if it simply means talk, why need it say a man and woman? It could refer to any two people. Why particularly a man and a young woman? In what way is talking "the way of a man with a young woman?"

She had no answer, so she ignored my question and changed the subject. I wasn't very surprised at that.

Quite a number of missionaries have attempted to prove to me by other means that almah really means virgin. They show me the other places in Tanach that the word almah is used, and say things like "Surely he wanted a virgin, not merely a young woman." As if that proves the definition of the word, somehow.

Invariably, and I mean this absolutely, they never mention the verse in Proverbs. That one they studiously ignore.

For example, they point to Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, who said that he will choose as a bride for Isaac the first almah who offers water to both him and his animals. "Surely he wanted a virgin," they tell me.

What was Eliezer saying? Was he intending to check each woman and see if she was a virgin? "I will accept only a virgin. So if I see a woman who is not a virgin, I will reject her." That's ridiculous. How would he know which young woman was a virgin and which was not? Would he even have asked her such a question? He was not in a position to make any such judgment.

This is not proof that almah means virgin.

Another argument often thrown my way is the interesting, "All young women then were virgins."

Except that it is completely untrue. Most young women were married, and consequently were no longer virgins.

And here is yet another thing to consider: Isaiah was bringing a sign, that is, a proof that he was a prophet. He prophesied that the woman would give birth to a boy, which was something only prophet could have known for sure. If he meant to use the word "virgin" as his proof, why did he use a word whose meaning is ambiguous? He could simply have said "besulah," which means "virgin."

He didn't use the word "besulah," because that was not the sign he was giving. He said 'young woman," because he meant the young woman (who was, by the way, already pregnant).

In short, the word almah means a young woman. That's all. The woman might be a virgin, she might not be. She might be married, she might be single, she might be divorced, she might even have been debauched. It simply means "young woman," whatever her status. But the word almah does not imply virginity or lack thereof. Virginity is irrelevant to the meaning of this word.

As such, it does not constitute PROOF that someone born of a virgin is the Messiah.

which is kinder? from www.beingjewish.com

Was Jesus Merciful?

Many Christian missionaries make the claim that the Jews see G-d as cruel, and that in contrast, Jesus is merciful.

The first statement is a lie. Certainly, anyone who has read the articles on my site knows that Judaism is very emphatic that Hashem is merciful. (Before emailing me about this, read the articles on my home page.)

The second claim, that Jesus was merciful, is certainly not supported by the words of the Christian bible, as we shall see below.

Let us discuss the two claims in order. According to Judaism, no one can be more merciful than G-d. It is impossible. G-d is the most merciful of anything in the universe that exists, all of which G-d created. According to Judaism, it is heresy to claim that anyone or anything is more merciful than G-d.

What do Christian missionaries mean when they say that Jesus is more merciful? They usually don't answer this one directly, because missionaries seldom answer any direct questions. The answer appears to be that supposedly "Jesus accepts repentance, and the Jewish G-d does not."

However, that is also untrue. Hashem most certainly does accept repentance, and sacrifice is not necessary for forgiveness and atonement. (More about that in another article.)

Hashem forgives sins, and it is only Hashem who forgives sins, as it says, "I, I alone, erase your sins, for My sake, and I will not remember your iniquities." (Isaiah 43:25) And also, it says, "I, I alone am G-d, and no one other than I is a savior." (Isaiah 43:11) And it says, "I, I alone, comfort you; how can you, who are worthy, fear a person, who will die, a son of man, who is as short-lived as grass?"

Statements of Hashem's mercy are found all over the Torah.

"For Hashem is a merciful Power...." (Deuteronomy 4:31)

"For he is merciful, He will atone sin, He will not destroy..." (Psalms 78:38)

"And he prayed to Hashem, and he said, Please, Hashem .... for I know that You are a merciful and compassionate Power, difficult to anger, and has much kindness, and forgives evil." (Jonah 4:2)

"The wicked should forsake his ways, and the evil person should forsake his plans, and return to Hashem, Who will have mercy on him, for He forgives abundantly." (Isaiah 55:7)

"Hashem is merciful and compassionate, difficult to anger, and has much kindness." (Psalms 103:8)

"Tear your hearts, and not your clothes, and return to Hashem your G-d, for He is compassionate and merciful, difficult to anger, and has much kindness, and forgives evil." (Joel 2:13)

"Hashem has made memorials of the miracles He performed for us; Hashem is full of compassion and mercy. Hashem is good to all, and His mercy is on all His creations." (Psalms 111:4-5)

And so on, all over the Torah.

And in our prayers, we say three times a day "Blessed are You Hashem, who is compassionate, and forgives abundantly." (Amidah prayer, sixth blessing)

As to sinners, the Torah says, "He who hides his sin will not be successful, but he who confesses to Hashem and forsakes his sin, will receive mercy." (Proverbs 28:13)

Now let's examine some of the things that the Christian bible records Jesus as saying. We will find that Jesus was cruel, very unforgiving, and full of a great deal of unrelenting anger.

Since there are so many examples in the Christian bible of cruel things in the name of Jesus, I will restrict the following quotes to the book of Matthew, the book that is placed at the beginning of the Christian bible, and therefore the first encounter anyone would have of Jesus in the Christian bible. So all quotes not otherwise accredited are from Matthew.

Jesus is quoted as having said: "But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (8:13) Why doesn't he just forgive them, and allow them into Heaven? Where is the forgiveness? Where is the mercy?

Jesus is also quoted as saying, "But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven." (10:33) So those who do not believe in Jesus will not go to Heaven. How is that more merciful?

"And you, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell." (11:23) It is not explained why Capernaum was exalted to Heaven, (meaning that many miracles supposedly took place there), will be brought down to hell. In any case, since they Jesus considered it worse than Sodom, they would be destroyed and sent to hell. Again, where is the mercy in this?

"...but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men." (12:30) Notice that not only is this considered a sin, it won't even be forgiven! This is reiterated again (in verse 32), "whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come."

And here's a beauty; "but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath." (13:12) Of course, that one doesn't even make sense. How can you take away something from someone who has nothing? But what does that matter in the face of strong blind faith? Christians are taught to have blind faith, The actual words written in the Christian bible are not as important as having faith.

It made sense, by the way, in the original Talmudic version that Jesus distorted it from, which was, "Whoever tries to take what does not belong to him, what he seeks he will not get, and what he has shall be taken away from him" (Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 9a).

What Jesus did there is to take part of the words and apply them to something else. What he applies them to shows yet more of his cruelty. The disciples ask him why he speaks in parables. He answers that it is to prevent the masses from understanding him. For the masses have nothing, that is, they do not know the 'mysteries of Heaven." Since they do not know those secrets, they have nothing, and therefore they shall be given nothing, and all their merits -- although they have none -- will be taken away from them.

Well, they have no merits, he says. And you know what, Jesus says that he will not even give them the chance to get any merits at all!

Jesus said that he spoke in parables so that the masses would not understand and perhaps gain heaven, because they had closed their own eyes and it was their fault anyway. "Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them." (13:13-15)

In other words, if they would understand the parables, they might repent, and be converted, and he would heal them from their sins. And he does not wish that to happen for them. He cruelly denies them the possibility of repentance and conversion! (Not that he could really have granted it to them anyway, but the Christian belief is that he could have. In that case, he is cruel for refusing to do so!)

He and John the Baptist did a similar thing with the Pharisees. According to Matthew (3:7), the Pharisees came to John the Baptist when he was baptizing people, but he rejected them and refused to baptize them. " But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?"

Later, Jesus said that the Pharisees were to blame for not going to John the Baptist! "For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not; but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him." (21:32) John never even gave them a chance, and Jesus still blames them! This is merciful?

What will happen in the future, asks Matthew? "The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." (13:41-42)

He repeats this again: "So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." (13:49-50)

No forgiveness, no mercy, for those he considers evil. But wait! It gets worse!

Who does he consider evil? Get a load of this! "Whosoever shall say, You fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." (5:22) In other words, just for calling someone else a fool, you will go to hell forever. This is being merciful?

"But if you forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses." (6:14) While this seems somewhat logical and fair, it is not particularly merciful. In what way is Jesus merciful?

"That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven." (5:21) In other words, if you are not very righteous, says Jesus, you will not go to Heaven. No mercy, no exceptions.

But it gets worse! Look what Jesus says about the average person:

And Jesus spoke to them again with parables, and said, The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who made a wedding for his son, And sent out his servants to call the guests to the wedding: but they would not come. Again, he sent our other servants, saying, Tell the guests, Look, I have prepared a large dinner: I have killed my best animals for the meal, and everything is ready: so please come to the wedding. But they didn't take it seriously, and continued whatever they had been doing before: one went back to his farm, another went back to selling his merchandise: And the rest of them took the king's servants, and treated them spitefully, or killed them. When the king heard about this, he was very angry, and he sent out his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. Then he said to his servants, The wedding is ready, but the people who were originally invited were not worthy. Therefore, Go to the highways, and invite to the wedding everyone you find there.

So those servants went to the highways, and gathered together everyone they found, both bad and good people: and the wedding had a lot of guests. And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man who was not wearing a wedding garment: And he said to him, Friend, how can you come her without wearing a wedding garment? And the man was speechless. So the king said to the servants, Tie him up very tightly, and take him away, and throw him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. For many are called, but few are chosen.

This is from Matthew, Chapter 2, verses 1-14

In other words, a simple man from the street, who did not expect to be called to the wedding, was suddenly brought to the wedding. Yet because he was not already wearing wedding clothes, he was punished! Many are called, Jesus says, but this man was NOT called. It is hardly his fault that he was not ready!

This parable reveals the horror of Jesus' teachings. The people in the street had not been invited to the wedding, and they never expected to be there. They had no command, indeed, they had no reason, to be wearing wedding clothes or to get ready for the wedding in any way. Yet they were pulled in suddenly, unexpectedly. And for not being prepared for something they had no reason to attend, this man is punished!

And the meaning of this parable is that when the time comes, and someone is not ready for G-d, he will be punished even though he did not expect to be called! This is cruel in the extreme.

Jesus was not merciful. Jesus condemns everyone who does not believe in him.

"Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not. Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh." (25:11-13) Where is the mercy here? The statement here is that they did not deserve to go to Heaven. If only those who fully deserve it go to Heaven, how is that being merciful?

And then there is Jesus' beliefs about marriage and divorce. How cruel it is to force a man and woman who are incompatible with each other to stay married to each other and not remarry (5:31-32). Moreover, he said that it is better not to marry (19:10-12). But if a man marries, and discovers that it was better not to marry, he must still suffer all his life in the marriage!!! This is kind? No, this is cruel!

Think about it. Jesus said that it is better not to marry. Yet nevertheless, he forbade divorce to everyone, even though not everyone can take it! It is hard to know which is crueler, to force men to stay single, or to force an incompatible couple to stay married. And if the woman leaves the husband, she may not even remarry, because Jesus says that this is adultery (5:32)! Jesus commits numerous cruelties with this ruling.

The very fact that such words were attributed to him by the very people who adopted him as god-messiah and brought him to the rest of the world as god-messiah, means to me that I don't want or need to know anything more about him. His own believers and followers reported him as being cruel, and no amount of whitewashing by later Christians can change that.

By their account, Jesus was cruel, which in itself shows that he was not on Hashem's side. According to his words, it is very difficult to attain Heaven. For he demanded that his followers love him more than their parents and children (Matthew 10:37); that they give up their entire lives and travel with him (ibid, 38-39); that they give away all their possessions and all they call their own (19:21); and that they never get divorced (5:32). His demands were utterly impossible, often abusive, and indeed, few Christians have ever fulfilled them.

As if those are not sufficiently difficult, he also insisted that you allow people to rob you, and even help them hurt you (5:38-41). Of course Christians don't keep that! All of society would collapse if those rules were kept! In point of fact, Christians have been the biggest source of hurt throughout history.

The Christian bible insists that Christians sell everything they own, and give it all to the poor. Is this more merciful than Judaism? Judaism (i.e., the Law of Moses, the Hebrew Bible, Jewish Law, the Torah) in most cases prohibits giving away all your assets, because that would make you destitute and dependant upon charity yourself, forcing others to support you when you are capable of supporting yourself. Therefore, the Law of Moses commands you to give only a tithe, one tenth of your assets. At most you may give one fifth, except in case of certain emergencies. Jesus demands that you give everything away. Giving away everything you own is much harder than giving away only a tenth. Yet Paul claims that the Law of Moses is more difficult to keep than the Laws of Jesus. Not true, obviously. Jesus' laws are cruel, unreasonable and wrong. Of course, very few (if any) Christians keep them, because they know those laws are impossible to keep.

Incidentally, many of today's churches ask for tithes, i.e., a tenth of each member's income, relying on the Law of Moses that they claim is no longer in effect! There is no real consistency in Christianity.

I think, all in all, the Jewish G-d is much more kind and merciful than the Christian "god."

Is Christianity a higher religion? from www.beingjewish.com

Is Christianity the Higher Religion?

Christians believe that the Law of Moses has been abolished in favor of a better, higher religion. They believe that the Torah is bad and gives death, but their faith gives only life.

Even a casual study will easily disprove this.

Let's begin by discussing the Torah.

The Torah comes from Hashem, so how can it be cruel or bad?

Furthermore, the Torah itself says that the Torah is our life.

"I call as witnesses today, heaven and earth, that I have offered to you life and death, blessing and curses. You must choose life, so that you and your descendants will live. You must love Hashem your G-d, which means obeying His instructions, and clinging to Him, for that is your life and your survival...." (Deuteronomy 30:19-20).

And it says, "For a Commandment is a lamp, and the Torah is the light..." (Proverbs 6:23).

And it says, "Your days are increased through Me, and that's how years are added to your life" (Proverbs 9:11). So you see, we get life from Hashem directly, and we do not need jesus or Christianity.

There is nothing higher than the Torah.

King David says in Psalm 19:

The Torah of Hashem is perfect, it restores the soul.
The testimony of Hashem is trustworthy, it turns simple people wise.
The instructions of Hashem are proper, they make one's heart happy;
The commandment of Hashem is clear, it enlightens the eyes.
The fear of Hashem is pure, and endures forever.
The judgments of Hashem are true, consistently righteous.
They are more desirable than gold, even more than the purest gold!
Sweeter than honey that drips from the honeycombs.

"The Torah of Hashem is perfect, it restores the soul." Think about what those words say about the Torah. Yet Paul, the reshaper of Christianity, hated the Torah, and said many nasty things about it, when he wasn't busy saying nasty things about women.

The Torah has everything in it that a person needs to restore his soul. It is the most perfect of teachings, and it is complete. It lacks nothing.

What are some of those rules that Christianity claims make their religion loftier than Judaism? Here are a few examples:

"If you want to be perfect, sell all that you have and give it all away to the poor." Does any Christian sell everything he or she has and give it to the poor? Only Catholic priests do, because this is not a practical instruction.

Judaism, by contrast, prohibits, in most cases, giving away all your assets, because that would make you destitute and dependant upon charity yourself, forcing others to support you when you are capable of supporting yourself. It would make you a burden to society. Judaism insists that you give charity, and that you must do your share to support yourself and your family as well. Which, then is the better and more reasonable Law?

A Christian once said to me that this rule only applies to those who want to be perfect. But jesus taught that you should be perfect! "Be therefore perfect, just like your Father in heaven is perfect" (Matthew 5:48). Because if you are not perfect, he says, "what reward will you get for what you do?"

And according to Judaism, you can be perfect even without giving away everything you own. Again I ask: which, then is the better and more reasonable Law?

It is no wonder that Matthew quotes jesus as saying that the way to eternal life is narrow and difficult! (Matthew 7:13-14) The Christian way is indeed difficult. The Jewish way is easier.

"Judge not, lest you be judged." And "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." This is why Christians NEVER become judges, right? But they do. Almost every Christian Church has tribunals. The various Christian Churches have tried many people over the past two thousand years, and sentenced many of them to death. Christians have always tended to JUDGE Jews as being devils and evil people often without even meeting any Jews or knowing any personally. (Shakespeare wrote the Merchant of Venice, and had seldom even seen any Jews, since Jews had not been allowed in England for over a century.)

Christianity has never been better than Judaism. When Christianity was first invented it was an alternative to the pagan cultures. It was, perhaps, something of an improvement over most of the pagan faiths. It was never better than Judaism, though they would like you to think it was.

The teachings of most Christian denominations today contain some rather horrifying things.

For example, The Anglican Articles of Religion state, in Article 13, that when someone who does not believe in jesus does a good deed he is really performing a sin, and not a good deed at all! According to them, all the non-Christian people who have ever given charity, helped a sick person, fed a hungry person, clothed a needy person, prayed to G-d, or defended the weak, every single one of them will go to everlasting hell, and cannot be "saved."

But the Torah teaches us, "Hashem does not bury the reward of any creature" (Babylonian Talmud: Pesachim 118a; Nazir 23b; Bava Kama 28b; Horyos 10b). Anyone, even an animal, that does a good deed, is rewarded for it.

The Christian bible practically claims to have invented love. It is interesting to note that the Christians like to say that Jews did not and won't accept jesus because we are full of hate and sin. Jesus was a man who said that he would have all his enemies destroyed. Where is the love in that? Indeed, the Catholic Church has been directly responsible for most of the horror and death that has taken place in the past two thousand (2,000) years. And they say we are the ones full of hate?

The Christians lay claim to the phrase, "Love your enemies." Yet, as I said above, Christians have been more responsible than anyone else for killing their enemies, and even their friends who slightly disagree with them. If you don't believe this, ask the next Abigensian you meet. I'm willing to bet that unless you are a history buff you have never even heard of the Albigensians. That's because the Christians killed them all out in the twelfth century. You know why they killed them? Because the Albigensians believed that all physical things are inherently evil, so the preached against wealth and physical acts of ritual. Unfortunately for them, the Catholic Church was rich and fat on the wealth of Jews and everyone else they didn't like, and they didn't take too well to people telling them it was wrong to have material goods. Furthermore, the Catholic Church was offended because the Albigensians were against the wafer and wine sacraments, which is a ritual that the Catholic Church believes in very strongly. So, the Catholic Church did the simplest thing. They killed all the Albigensians, showing their love and tolerance.

You might think that the Catholic Church is better about these things today. You'd be mostly wrong. They are not apologetic at all about it. In the Catholic Encyclopedia, I found these words:

The death penalty was, indeed, inflicted too freely on the Albigenses, but it must be remembered that the penal code of the time was considerably more rigorous than ours, and the excesses were sometimes provoked....Pope Innocent III was justified in saying that the Albigenses were "worse than the Saracens"; and still he counselled moderation and disapproved of the selfish policy adopted by Simon of Montfort. What the Church combated was principles that led directly not only to the ruin of Christianity, but to the very extinction of the human race.

(The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume I
Copyright © 1907 by Robert Appleton Company
Online Edition Copyright © 1999 by Kevin Knight)

No apology, no contrition, no acknowledgment that the Albigensians had done nothing wrong. No, the Albigensians deserved it, because they supposedly attempted the "very extinction of the human race," and besides, the penal code of that time was very rigorous anyway.

This is just one example. The Catholic Church has been responsible for more acts of hatred than any group ever to exist. Admittedly, they have been around very long, but there are groups who have been around even longer and have not been responsible for such death and destruction. Buddhism existed at least 400 years before Christianity, and they are not known for such wholesale destruction.

The Protestants have been no better.

Take, for example, the Protestant persecution of the Society of Friends, otherwise known as Quakers. They had to escape and come to America, where they continued to be persecuted again, also by Protestants! The first American Protestants had themselves escaped persecution from other Protestants, and then turned around and persecuted everyone else who came to America, especially Catholics. This is the love of the Christian Churches. This is their "turning the cheek."

And it does not end there.

The Lutherans denounced and excluded the reformed Calvinists from salvation. The Calvinists roused up the people against the Lutherans. Zwingli, who started his own Christian sect in Switzerland, complained of Luther's intolerance when Zwingli and his group were the victims, but he and his followers tied the Anabaptists in sacks and threw them into the Lake of Zurich! Zwingli, by the way, followed the typical Christian method of spreading his religion by destroying churches and burning monasteries of rival religious sects. It can be argued that he was only responding in kind to the way he and his group were treated, but what about the Christian dictum to love your enemies and forgive them? What about the Torah's Commandment not to take revenge?

C. Johannes Janssen, author of a 16-volume history of Germany during "Reformation" times, quotes the Protestant theologian Meyfart that: "At Augsburg, in the first half of the year 1528, about 170 Anabaptists of both sexes were either imprisoned or expelled by order of the new-religionist Town Council. Some were . . . burnt through the cheeks with hot irons; many were beheaded; some had their tongues cut out." The Catholics had no monopoly on torturing dissidents.

Protestants do not generally spread around the fact that Martin Luther himself wrote that Jews should be murdered or forcibly converted, and that all the synagogues should be burned down.

And Luther wrote about fellow Christians who did not go to church: "It is our custom to affright those who . . . fail to attend the preaching; and to threaten them with banishment and the law . . . In the event of their still proving contumacious, to excommunicate them . . . as if they were heathen."

Here are some more choice statements by Martin Luther:

"The Pope and the Cardinals . . . since they are blasphemers, their tongues ought to be torn out through the back of their necks, and nailed to the gallows!"

"It were better that every bishop were murdered . . . than that one soul should be destroyed . . . If they will not hear God's Word . . . what do they better deserve than a strong uprising which will sweep them from the earth? And we would smile did it happen. All who contribute body, goods . . . that the rule of the bishops may be destroyed are God's dear children and true Christians."

And as I mentioned above, the Anglican Church teaches that anyone who does not believe in jesus and does something good has really done something evil.

How is that a religion of love and tolerance? By contrast, Judaism believes that all righteous, of every religion, goes to Heaven. Not only that, but a Gentile can go to Heaven without keeping the Torah! Gentiles have to keep only Seven Laws (which mostly they do anyway, today), but Jews have to keep the Commandments of the Torah and their Laws. So actually, according to Judaism it is easier for a Gentile to go to Heaven!

In what way is any branch of Christianity better and more loving than Judaism?

"Turning the other cheek?" "Resist not evil?" Most denominations of Christianity have not kept those teachings in any way, shape or form. Most of those who have claimed to espouse such platforms have turned out to be the worst offenders. Such "high moral" claims are not practical, and no one keeps them. Certainly, if someone robbed you, you would take them to court to try and get your money back.

This has always been the problem with christianity. They talk a lofty talk. It sounds so holy, and spiritual, and beautiful. Forgive everyone! Love everyone! How sweet. So why has this not worked in practice? Because it can't. When you are adamant in teaching an unreachable trait, it backfires. History has shown that unattainable and unrealistic ideals are very dangerous.

This was perhaps the source of one of their greatest errors. They thought they could improve on the Torah; they thought they could improve on what G-d Himself taught.

It can't be done. Hashem knows what humans are capable of, and what we are not capable of. And Hashem commanded us according to our ways.

Christian practice is simply NOT higher or better than Hashem's word. It is a lot less practical than Jewish practice. By contrast, Jewish practice is Hashem's word, and it is entirely practical.

How do jews obtain salvation? from www.beingjewish.com

How Does a Jew Attain Salvation?

Christianity maintains that all men are doomed to sin, and everyone will go to everlasting hell unless they accept jesus as their savior.

Judaism has always held that we do not need that sort of salvation, for we are not doomed or damned at birth. We are not doomed or fated to sin. Quite the contrary. The Torah says: "If you do good, won't there be special privilege? And if you do not do good, sin waits at the door. It lusts after you, but you can dominate it." (Genesis 4:7) In other words, you can do good, and if you do, things will be better for you. If you do not do good, sin wants to be partners with you. But you can control sin, you can control your evil desires, and you can be good.

So we have free will, and that is what Judaism has always believed, because that is what the Torah teaches. The Torah does not teach -- or even mention -- that we are "born in sin," or that we are fated to sin. Just the opposite. We have the ability to choose.

Which means that we can be good, or we can be evil. It's up to us. And if can be good, that means we can be righteous. I cannot understand how or why Christians like to say that no one can be righteous in the eyes of G-d. The Torah says otherwise.

I often say to missionaries that if they choose to believe that all Gentiles are sinful, I would have to disagree, but I won't bother to argue the point. It's their own people, let them say what they want.

But if they choose to say that all people, including Jews, are sinful and cannot be righteous, I have to strongly disagree, because the Torah says quite the opposite: "All your nation is righteous, they will inherit the earth eternally; the shoot that I have planted, the work of My hands, something to be proud of" (Isaiah 60:21). So we are righteous, and Hashem is proud of us.

And it says, "Open the gates, so that the righteous nation that keeps the faith may enter" (Isaiah 26:2).

We Children of Israel are righteous. For the Torah says so. Of course, we must uphold the Torah, or otherwise we might cease to be righteous. But as long as we keep the Torah, we are righteous.

The Prophets of the Torah warned us about this many times. They often called us wicked. When? When we did not obey the Commandments of the Torah. Yet never once in all of the Jewish Bible did the Prophets chastise us for not believing in jesus! Not once!

I also have to wonder: if no one can be righteous in the eyes of G-d, how can the Torah call Noah righteous (Genesis 6:9, 7:1), as just one example? "Noah walked with G-d," the Torah says. Obviously you can be righteous and you can walk with G-d without the help of jesus.

Hashem called Moses was a trusted servant, and closer to Him than any other prophet. Moses spoke directly to Hashem, and Hashem spoke directly to Moses (Numbers 12:6-8). No mention was made of jesus.

The problem is that Christians do not understand the meaning of the concept "righteousness." They think it means that one has never sinned. Never sinning is almost impossible. The Torah says that "There is no person on earth so righteous that he does only good and never sins" (Eccl. 7:20)

Rather, the definition of a righteous person is as taught in Proverbs 24:16: "The righteous fall even seven times and still get up, but the wicked stumble in evil."

Being righteous does not mean that one never sins. It means that after you sin you get back up again, repent, and try again. You keep on trying. That is being righteous.

Not only that, but even if you keep on trying, and you don't succeed very well, and you have many sins, you can still be forgiven and go to Heaven. In the Book of Job (33:23) it says that if someone has even only one merit and 1000 sins, he is rescued from hell. So we are not doomed to hell.

That's what Judaism teaches, as we see from the Torah. The Christian bible, on the other hand, teaches that there is no repentance after sinning. Here is what it says in the christian bible:

For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.

-- 2 Peter 2:20-21

In other words, if anyone accepted jesus as savior, and then sins, they are in worse trouble than they were before they accepted jesus.

So what then is the advantage of accepting jesus? It seems better to stay with Hashem! Hashem accepts repentance, and loves all those who turn away from sin, no matter how many times they have sinned and repented. "For the righteous stumble even seven times, but they get up again!"

And they are still called righteous!

And the wicked who repent are no longer called wicked.

Even when I have told the wicked that he will die, but then he repents, and he does justice and righteousness; he returns the collateral when he is supposed to, he repays what he stole, he begins to live by the Laws of Life, and does not do evil, he will live, and he will not die. All the sins that he committed will not be held against him, for he has begun to do judgment and righteousness; he shall surely live.

-- Ezekiel 33:14-16

We see, therefore another fallacy of the Christians, who argue that "sin has separated us from a perfectly holy G-d." We are not separated from Hashem at all. All we need to do is repent.

But no, say the Christians. Repentance won't work, for some reason that we cannot understand. They claim that "no one can be close to G-d without jesus."

This is completely wrong. The righteous live by their own faith. (Habbakuk 2:4) We do not gain life or atonement by the faith or righteousness of jesus. We are masters of our own fate, because the choice to do good or bad is our own.

Was King David separated from G-d? Yet the Torah says about him that he did one thing wrong (1 Kings 15:5) and yet he was considered righteous and Hashem was with him. (See, for example, 1 Kings 11:34; 1 Kings 18:14).) Whenever a royal descendant of King David did the right thing, the Torah says about him that he followed in the ways of his ancestor David. (See, for example, 1 Kings 14:8; 2 Kings 18:3; 2 Kings 22:2; et al.)

Did Moses sin? Was he close to G-d or not? Did Abraham sin? Was he close to G-d or not?

And if you examine the Christian belief in this matter, you will find that many denominations believe that G-d only chooses those that G-d has previously decided to choose. In other words, G-d will accept into Heaven only on those whom He has decided to accept into Heaven, and we have no free will or choice! That means that we cannot even be good people if we try! It's all up to G-d! "Many are called, but few are chosen."

How is this merciful?

What about all those people who are not chosen? How do they attain "salvation?" Why can they not attain salvation, when it isn't even their fault? That is possibly the cruelest doctrine I have ever heard! No matter what a person does, he will get Heaven only if G-d had previously chosen him to get Heaven! Everyone else goes to eternal hell!

In Judaism, it is entirely up to you. If you do good, you will get good.

Jews not for Jesus Esynagogue #12a by Rabbi Jonathan Ginsburg