@@tenaktalk YaH is The Father (Genesis 1) YaH, Who with His HAND formed “man” from the Dust of The Ground (Genesis 2:7) YaH The Father’s HAND they NAILED to the Almond TREE, to Symbolize Forgiveness of the “TREE of Life” sin and “The Fall of man” (Genesis 3) YaH Who Created “man (Adam)” was Who they Crucified for the sins OF “man” and YaH arrived to be Crucified via the Tent of Meeting - Hebrew Book of Isaiah YaH The FATHER
Jonathan is a perfect Christian, he learned the propaganda perfectly. His entire argument is 'his and the Churches opinions' not the Tanachs plain speech. All his arguments are these obscure unprovable opinions without one scriptural proof. Well Done William and the other guys here כל הכבוד
Well the discussion at the beginning started by the guy in the middle of the three, is whether or not the NT affirms or denies the deity of Jesus. The guy in the middle says it denies it. Jonathan of course says it affirms it. So you can't blame him(Jonathan) there for only using arguments from the NT, because the question that was put to him was purely regarding the NT. You are hearing all this NT stuff from Jonathan e.g. 5min in, and you're thinking oh it's all gibberish, But you're not following properly that he was specifically asked a question on the New Testament and on what the New Testament says. So maybe your issue is you don't like the question he was asked.
Here are my issues with some of the claims McLatchie made during the debate: At around 3:45 McLatchie talks about how we should use clear passages to interpret ambiguous ones when reading about Jesus’ divinity. I agree with him here, but I find that he has a double standard when it comes to the Hebrew Bible. He looks very closely at all these ‘angel of the Lord’ passages to determine some sort of plural unity in the text. But he is doing exactly what he says we shouldn’t be doing. At Sinai God revealed Himself to His people in order that they know whom to worship (Exodus 20:19, Deuteronomy 4:15). If God would have wanted us to worship Jesus, He would have shown Jesus to us at Sinai. This consideration is of paramount importance. The Sinai revelation came before scripture. All of scripture must be read in the context of the Sinai revelation. Since the Sinai revelation precludes the worship of Jesus (and of any other being aside from God) then all of scripture must be read in that light. Notably, Deuteronomy 4 is very explicit against the idea of an physical image of God (verse 12, 15), yet also states that the one shown to them is the only God with no other (verse 35, 39), excluding the possibility of Jesus or anyone else being involved in a revelation. 12:10 Around here he talks about believing in ‘progressive revelation’. The problem is that this methodology is unfalsifiable. We can basically make up any new belief and call it progressive revelation to try and excuse an error or contradiction between the established belief and the new belief. And using this method is how we get belief systems like Mormonism. 32:00 Here he tries to use Joshua 5:14-15 to prove that an angel is worshipped. Ignoring the methodological problems as listed above, his claim that the word ‘shachah’ means worship is false, and this can be proven. In Genesis 23:7 and 23:12, the word is used to describe Abraham bowing down to the Hittites. Genesis 27:29 uses it to describe people bowing down to Jacob. 1 Chronicles 29:20 uses the word to describe people prostrating themself to both God and David in the same sentence. I could go on with many more examples, but one should look through the concordance for those. Though prostration can be a form of worship depending on context, there is no reason to assume or falsely claim that the word means worship in Joshua 5. 41:20 Here he tries to argue that people proclaiming they would die after seeing an angel proves that the angel is God. Ignoring the fact that they didn’t die, one major issue in this claim is that seeing God is not the only ‘death sentence’ in the Bible. For example, when Uzziah died for touching the Ark (2 Samuel 6). In regards to Exodus 33:20 and Isaiah 6, we need to contrast seeing God physically against seeing God in a visionary manner, whether the vision occurs in the subconscious (Isaiah 6) or if they are conscious during the vision, but the vision is described as something that can’t be seen on camera (Ezekiel 1). Neither of these involve seeing something that is physical. Additionally, Deuteronomy 5:4 uses the term ‘face to face’ to talk about God speaking to all of Israel. Note this is only one chapter after the text talks about Israel not seeing any form of God. On another note, these angelic passages need be understood in the context of the fear present in the people who witness the angels. See Daniel 10:5-12, where the experience of witnessing and angel is described in a detailed and horrific manner. Notably, verse 12 has the angel telling Daniel to be not afraid. Meeting an angel unprompted would be a terrifying event for most people and could cause confusion. We should therefore not take a passage with an ambiguous reading as a ‘proof’ of a divine angel, since it is not the purpose of the surrounding text, and the author’s purpose for writing this was not to give a detailed elaboration on the identity of angels, so they did not bother to disambiguate texts that are ambiguous. 1:01:50 Here he talks about Isaiah 49. I won’t be repeating myself on this topic, since I have already discussed it elsewhere in the comment section. However for a very abridged version, there are several textual parallels between the servant Israel and the servant of Isaiah 49, so even if the servant in Isaiah 49 is an individual, they are designated as a member of Israel. If there existed an actual contrast between these servants, these textual parallels would make no sense whatsoever. 1:05:35 Here, he makes the claim that the words ‘my people’ only refer to Israel in the book of Isaiah. This claim is full of bad methodology. Firstly, it is not even true, as Isaiah 19:25 uses the term to refer to Egypt, not Israel. Additionally, if we look at the book of Exodus, the same Hebrew word he refers to is used 16 times, with 15 of them being a reference to Israel, and one to Egypt (When we consider the other constructs of this word, the ratio becomes 16:3). Using the same flawed logic he is using in the book of Isaiah , we could say that these outliers actually refer to Israel and not Egypt by ignoring the thing that ACTUALLY determines who ‘my people’ refers to: context. 1:10:30 Here I find that he makes a strawman regard the argument of the kings of nations being the speaker in Isaiah 53. He argues against this by citing parts of Isaiah 53 where the kings of nations aren’t speaking. I don’t think McBride was explicit enough, but the argument is that the part where the kings are speaking is verses 1 through 9. Though I should note that McLatchie only cites the very beginning and end of the servant song and finds 3 places where the term ‘my servant’ is used. If the nations aren’t the one speaking, it does seem a bit weird that the speaker never uses the term ‘my servant’ for an extended number of verses without any explanation. As a side note, the grammatical pattern of Isaiah 52:15 and 53:1 has strong parallels to Isaiah 14:16. Before the speech begins, it talks about the viewer seeing and being surprised about that which they are talking about. In both cases, the last word before the speech begins is ‘perception’ (Hebrew root word ‘yisbonanu’). Immediately afterward, the text continues with the words of those ‘perceiving’ without a direct introduction. The strong grammatical parallels heavily suggest that the speaker in the passage is in fact the kings of nations. 1:18:15 Here, he tries to use Isaiah 42 as a proof, trying to contrast the servant at the start of the chapter with the blind servant in verse 18 and 19. However, verse 24 says that this is because they did not follow his Torah. The servant in the latter half of this chapter is described in the present tense, but the servant at the beginning of this chapter is described in future tense. My reading is that God describes his ideal servant as something to occur in the future, then contrasts that with Israel as it was in Isaiah’s day. I contend that reading the later chapters shows that the servant of Isaiah 42 is only a small fraction of Israel, but that small fraction will call back the rest of Israel (Isaiah 49:5, 51:16), and the rest of Israel will repent, be rewarded, and become part of the righteous servant (Isaiah 53:10). In doing so, all of Israel will become a light to the nations (Isaiah 60:3).
@@tenaktalk William, please share it with Greg! Anyone dispatched by God with a mission can be referred to in the Bible as an Angel (Messenger), be it a man, a created angel, or God (the Son). Here's proof. *_"Behold, I will send my Angel, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the Angel of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts."_* (Malachi 3) The human being (John the Baptist?) who shows up before the coming of the Messiah is referred to here as "ANGEL" (messenger). And the Lord Messiah who will come to his temple (as described in the Gospels) is also referred to as the ANGEL of the covenant. This passage alludes to Isaiah 40:3 *_"The voice of one crying in the wilderness: “Prepare the way of the LORD (Yahweh); Make straight in the desert A highway for our God."_* This proves the Lord Messiah, the ANGEL of the covenant is YAHWEH! And Zechariah 2:8-11 hammers the point all the way home. *_"For thus saith the Lord of hosts; For the glory hath he (the Lord of hosts) sent me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye. For, behold, I will shake mine hand upon them, and they shall be a spoil to their servants: and ye shall know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me. Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion: for, lo, I come, and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the Lord._* *_And many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that day, and shall be my people: and I will dwell in the midst of thee, and thou shalt know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me unto thee."_* Yahweh (the Son) says that Yahweh (the Father) will send him for the glory to come and dwell with us (Immanuel = God With Us)! BINGO! Thus Yahweh (the Son) becomes the ANGEL of Yahweh (the Father) when he is sent to come in the flesh as God's servant and a man of war in order to become salvation (Yeshua Jesus) unto the ends of the earth. *_"The Lord is my strength and song, and he is become my salvation (Yeshua Jesus): he is my God, and I will prepare him an habitation; my father's God, and I will exalt him. The Lord is a MAN of war: YAHWHE is his name."_* With that being said, Jonathan McLatchie is right that the Angel of the Lord is Yahweh God in Tanakh and it's Jesus.
@@kingdomwithin-you4444 WHOOPS!😂😂😂😂 Was John your Elijah that was to arrive before the messiah? Let's find out. John didn’t fulfill Malachi’s prophecy that Elijah would restore the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers. Malachi 3:23 23👉Lo, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and awesome day of the Lord,👈 24that he may turn the heart of the fathers back through the children, and the heart of the children back through their fathers-lest I come and smite the earth with utter destruction. Matthew 11:13-14 13 👉For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. 14 And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.👈 WHOOPS🤣 Matthew 17 10 👉The disciples asked him, “Why then do the teachers of the law say that Elijah must come first?” 11 Jesus replied, “To be sure, Elijah comes and will restore all things. 12 But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.” 13 Then the disciples understood that he was talking to them about John the Baptist.👈 Wait for it! Don't cry too hard now. John 1:21 21 👉They asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?” He said, 👉“I am not.”👈🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 John didn’t fulfill Malachi’s prophecy that Elijah would restore the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers. Elijah wasn't John the Baptist and thus, Jezeus wasn't the messiah. Simple equation.
More people join the church than leave. God of the Bible is a triune God - God, God's Face/Image and God's Spirit and this is how God made man in their image as being three in one - mind, body, and soul.
@@cmain3931 The God of the Bible is TRINITY: *_”In all their affliction he (God the Father) was afflicted, and the ANGEL of his FACE (God the Son) SAVED them: in his love and in his pity he REDEEMED them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old. But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit (God the Holy Spirit) therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them.”_*
Gracias brother William. Have you heard of......"showing up to a gun fight with a knife...."? When one studies the Tanakh and knows it, there's no idol by the name of J.C.
Regarding the identity of the servant of Isaiah 49, here is a nice and thorough article defending the position that it is Israel: The Servant of Chapter 49 “Listen to me, O islands, and hearken O distant regimes: the Lord summoned me from the belly; He mentioned my name from my mother’s womb. He made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of His hand He hid me; He made me like a smooth arrow, in His quiver He concealed me. He said to me: “You are My servant, Israel, in whom I take glory.” But I said, “I have toiled in vain and used up my strength for nothingness and naught; however, judgment is with the Lord and (the reward for) my accomplishments is with my God.” And now the Lord, who formed me from the belly to be a servant to Him, to restore Jacob unto Him, and Israel will be gathered unto Him and I was honored in the eyes of the Lord and my God was my strength. He said: “It is insufficient that you be a servant for Me to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the ruins of Israel; I will make you a light for the nations, so that My salvation may extend to the ends of the earth.” Who is this servant? At first glance, we would say that this is Isaiah. The prophet is described as one who is called from the womb (Jeremiah 1:4). The mouth of the prophet is the implement that God uses to accomplish His purpose (Jeremiah 1:9,10). Isaiah was first called to restore Israel to God (when he spoke to the Jews of his own generation), but ultimately, it is Isaiah who is the primary prophet called to bring the message of the Messianic era to all of mankind. It is Isaiah’s words that are written on the side of the U.N. building expressing man’s hope for a future of peace. And it is Isaiah’s metaphor of the lion lying with lamb that is most often used to describe the glorious plan that God has for all of humanity. Furthermore; the servant in this passage speaks for himself in the first person without being introduced in any way, which also leads us to believe that it is Isaiah who is talking. However; the servant is identified as “Israel” (verse 3). Israel is also called from the time of their formation (43:21; 44:2, 21, 24; 46:3). The servant of this passage is described as a “sword” and an “arrow” just as Israel is called the “armor-bearers of the Lord” (52:11) and they are set by God to be a “threshing board of many blades” (41:15). Just as this servant is sheltered in the shade of God’s hand so is Israel likewise sheltered (51:16). Just as the servant fears that his toil has been in vain so does Israel fear that their toil has been in vain (40:27). Just as the servant will bring light to the nations so will Israel bring light to the nations (60:3). And this passage is placed in the midst of a series of prophecies which are spoken for the encouragement of Israel (48:20; 49:14). The lines between the prophet and the nation are intentionally blurred. The encouragement to Israel is that in a certain sense they are the prophet of God. Just as the prophet carries God’s word so does Israel carry God’s word and just as the prophet is granted the strength of God’s word so is Israel granted the strength, the power and the eternal nature of God’s word (40:8).
If you ask me, this debunks the Christian notion of the servant being distinguished from Israel. There are properly expressed parallels between the individual servant and the servant Israel, of which there are even more parallels, as not all are listed here. An individual servant could be part of Israel, such as Isaiah or the messiah. This is because they are a member of Israel, so there is no contradiction. However, the contrast between the servant of Isaiah 49 is nonexistent after seeing these parallels, so it does not cohere with the text for the servant to be ONLY the messiah and NOT Israel.
The question “who are the seed of Abraham?” can be answered several ways, and it is important to make some distinctions. There is the Seed of Abraham (Seed being singular); there is the seed of Abraham physically (descendants of Abraham according to the flesh); and there is the seed of Abraham spiritually (those who, like Abraham, have faith in God). The (singular) Seed of Abraham is Christ, as Galatians 3:16, quoting Genesis 12:7, says, “The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say ‘and to seeds,’ meaning many people, but ‘and to your seed,’ meaning one person, who is Christ.” The passage goes on to explain that an inheritance was promised to Abraham’s Seed (Christ) apart from the Law. Later, the Mosaic Law was introduced, but it did not annul the promises made to Abraham or to Abraham’s Seed (Christ). Just as Abraham believed God and his faith was counted as righteousness (Genesis 15:6), so are all today who believe in God’s Son justified apart from the Law. In this way, Abraham is the “father” of all who believe (Romans 4:11-17). “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Galatians 3:29). Of course, the seed of Abraham can also refer to the Hebrew people who descended from Abraham through Isaac. Still more broadly, the seed of Abraham could include Arabs, who trace their lineage through Ishmael. This is the physical seed of Abraham. The spiritual seed of Abraham (believers in Jesus Christ) is comprised of people of all nationalities and ethnicities. The Jewish religious leaders of the first century took pride in that they were Abraham’s seed. They saw their physical connection to Abraham as a guarantee of God’s favor. This attitude kept them from seeing their need for repentance of the heart-and brought condemnation from John the Baptist, who warned them to repent. Anticipating their fallback argument that they were the seed of Abraham, John said, “Do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham” (Matthew 3:9). Jesus dealt with the same issue later. In speaking to the unbelieving Jews, Jesus emphasized their need to receive His words as truth and obey His commands. They replied, “We be Abraham’s seed” (John 8:33, KJV). Jesus then rebukes them for plotting ways to murder Him; their stubborn response was again, “Abraham is our father” (verse 39a). At this, Jesus makes a distinction between the physical seed of Abraham and the true, spiritual seed of Abraham: “If you were Abraham’s children . . . then you would do what Abraham did” (verse 39b). The conversation heats up as the Jews for a third time reference their connection to Abraham: “Are you greater than our father Abraham?” they ask Jesus (verse 53). Jesus provokes them further: “Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad” (verse 56). The Jews’ are incredulous that Jesus would claim to be a contemporary of Abraham, and that’s when Jesus brings the exchange to a climax with a claim to full deity: “Very truly I tell you, . . . before Abraham was born, I am!” (verse 58). In a fury, the Jews attempted to stone Jesus (verse 59), again proving that being the physical seed of Abraham is not enough-they had to be born again (John 3:3). Paul sums up the difference between the seeds of Abraham in Romans 2:28-29: “A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.” Messiah - Yeshua is the Word of God in the flesh, everyone who believes in the Word of God is Israel - Seed of Abraham, part of the Body of Christ - the Spiritual Temple of God - the Church. The body of the Messiah is without sin, it is purified through Lamb of God sacrifice, therefore it is a holy nation without blemish. This is why jewish people often read Isaiah 53 also as a nation. Because Israel is the Body of Christ - a Holy Nation. Therefore, the Messiah is also Israel. That's why Scripture says I will bring my son out of Egypt. The son refers in one place to Israel as a specific nation, but at the same time to the Messiah. "Then you shall say to Pharaoh, 'Thus says the LORD, “Israel is My son, My firstborn. (Ex 4:22) “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. (Hosea 11:1) When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. “Get up,” he said, “take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.” So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.” (Mt 2:13-15) In Jewish and Christian texts from the Greco-Egyptian area during Second Temple Judaism and beyond the name "Israel" was understood to mean "a man seeing God" from the ʾyš (man) rʾh (to see) ʾel (God). "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (John 1:18) The Messiah is the King of Israel, the representative of Israel, therefore he is Israel. Spiritual Body of Christ/Messiah - Holy Nation is also Israel.
@@JonathanMcLatchie I would like to do this in an orderly manner and I will probably have to add to what they had to share though they presented those points with excellence. You are welcoming a new baby as i heard (congrats 💐). Let me rewatch it and I will write back in a few hours 🙏 Due diligence I'm jewish and an Israeli, English is not my mother's tongue, Hebrew is. God's blessings 😇
@@JonathanMcLatchie Thank you professor, but frontal is somewhat difficult for me, though i wouldn't mind audio recordings and where files can be easily attached. My name is Paz Pinhas Rahamim, a pic of a kippah. As messages with media names are erased here - the old way people used to wire short messages with an arrow pointing right 😁
@JonathanMcLatchie I find highly inappropriate and intellectually dishonest that you would try to take a discussion that came from our show and handle it privately. Please be respectful and answer all questions here in this thread, thank you
In the early days I tuned into your show, not so much anymore as I'm no longer a swinging voter. (I have Jewish beliefs) This episode is the best iv watched so far!! Divine sparks comes to mind whilst trying to describe it. Thank you
Jacob was curious about the angels name but was. Not told, Jacob probably thought he was wrestling with Esau and Penile ( face of God) is what Jacob says to Esau next ' I saw your face like the face of God ' one can only imagine what Esau thought but Jacob was good enough to give so vastly to his brother it shows that he probably felt guilty pretending and hurting not only his brother who wept so bitterly but the severe shaking of poor Isaac wondering who had just left with the divine blessings!!! We love Jacob because he valued YAHWEH always but it is not commendable the way he obtained it ( though God allowed Rebekah to scheme and so free will is part of the life of disciples but the consequences were painful for Jacob having to flee family into the unknown leaving Rebekah with Esau and the Cannanite wives which grieved her and Isaac
@@billweir8824 jacob wrestled an angel, see Hoseah chapter 12 verse 5 (verse 6 with a christian bible) it says it CLEARLY that it was an ANGEL that Jacob wrestled with. the word EL means "ABLE" like when lavan says to Jacob "yesh le'El yadi" יש לאל ידי "i have it in my ability to do to you" genesis 31 verse 29. Jacob wrestled an angel, so you think a human ie: Jacob can wrestle and beat God in a wrestling match? Seek truth, not a sense of validation for polytheism.
How can an Angel be God if in Hebrews 1:5 it says that Jesus is greater then the angels? Also in Matthew 2:13-15 it says that the Angel of the Lord came to Joseph in a dream telling him to flee Egypt with Jesus, are you telling me that the angel of the lord who is Jesus is telling Joseph to flee with Jesus????
He keeps saying..."text and context" so his followers may assume (because they don't hear anything else anyway....) that you are speaking out of context! A tactic used by politicians in election campaigns!!!! The crook will say the other guy is a crook and that's all their followers hear and care to hear...and amazingly still vote for them.
What good has wandering for 2000 years been? Not one of any of us is happy if our loved ones suffer so right? My heart continues to sorrow over Israel but I am glad YHWY has been always kind and will redeem his people to himself very soon - the nations have robbed Gods people and he will repay!!! All the gold and silver are mine! Russia and China have gathered tons of it but it isn't theirs and God will claim it and all Israel natural and spiritual will rejoice greatly with none to ever make afraid because every man shall dwell under his own vine and fig tree 🌞
I dont understand why this christian will use Ps to proof a point...point is David who wrote the Ps DID NOT KNOW jc...WHAT dont he understand...new t is NOT part of Scripture!!!😊..funny how he says you must read "context" of new t BUT when it come to Tanach they dont worry about "context"😂
The problem is when it is so disgenuine , a huge hypocrisy to use grey areas to plaster it with whitewash. Tanakh and the NT is just not compatible. To make them cohering , they must make up grey areas to spread lies.
Today is Tisha B Av and this professor reminds us that Rome is still hard at work in a somewhat subtle way....and just to think that for 52 years as a fundamental Baptist pastor-missionary-evangelist I "believed" the very same!!!!
According to Daniel 2:35,44 prophecy, Rome will be CONSUMED by the kingdom of heaven and BROKEN into pieces. *It's talking about Christianity as the kingdom of heaven that God will GRADUALLY establish DURING the days of the kings of the Fourth Beast Rome (Caligula, Nero, Diocletian, Constantine, etc.), then it will consume Rome in the 3rd century AD, break it into pieces (those of the kingdom vs the rest) and eventually grow to fill the earth by becoming a great mounting (making up 1/3rd of the population of the world).* *It is a SPIRITUAL kingdom because it was already active during the days of the physical kings of Rome, going parallel to it, and it will not be left to other people meaning it's not limited to any particular nation such as the Jewish nation.* Hope it helps
@@kingdomwithin-you4444 Christianity is Rome (Esau etc) my friend...The True Mashiach will rule in the Messianic age (read the prophets without Christological lenses and you will see who the True Messiah is and will see that clearly it is NOT the Graeco-Roman creation "god-man" Jesus....Believe whatever you want to....I believe the Prophets of Israel.
@@silveiranews Again: According to Daniel 2:35,44 prophecy, Rome will be CONSUMED by the kingdom of heaven and BROKEN into pieces. *It's talking about Christianity as the kingdom of heaven that God will GRADUALLY establish DURING the days of the kings of the Fourth Beast Rome (Caligula, Nero, Diocletian, Constantine, etc.), then it will consume Rome in the 3rd century AD, break it into pieces (those of the kingdom vs the rest) and eventually grow to fill the earth by becoming a great mounting (making up 1/3rd of the population of the world).* It is a SPIRITUAL kingdom because it was already active during the days of the physical kings of Rome, going parallel to it, and it will not be left to other people meaning it's not limited to any particular nation such as the Jewish nation.
I think I'll stick with the Tonuch. It's not as confusing. It's pretty simple to follow. Christianity seems too confusing to follow. If you need a pastor, priest, or reverend to tell you what it means, it's not true. I think God warns about Christianity and other branches from Judaism.
Correction God warns against the Apostasy which was the development of people who left the first century ecclesia and gave help to Constantine ( the pagan Roman Caesar) to join and fight his military battle to gain political power over 2 other contending Generals - something Jesus Christ told his followers was to be gentle as doves and wise as serpents and that whoever takes up the sword must perish with the sword - rather this is the patience of the saints to die living and preaching the truth of necessary because we are living in the dispensation of Grace when men are being called out of every nation to follow and obey Jesus Christ now which means following Matthew chapters 5-7
The 2 guys did good cop bad cop on Jonathan. William, you were the "baaad" cop but the "good" cop (with his slow calm tutoring) smashed each point on Jonathan's head.
BTW, I've always appreciated your work William, but this is the first time I've seen Greg. He's amazing! How can I find out more about his history? Is there a video about Greg's story?
such christian babble, nonsense contortionist twisting of the Hebrew Scriptures is truly amazing. The inabilty to not interject to try to prove his point with his and the Churches opinions over the plain reading of the Word of G-d, (Hebrew Scriptures) is utterly breathtaking
YHWH Hebrew tetragramaton ' I am that I am ' also we find YHWY Elohim and is an expression of Gods divine purpose being worked out and ultimately established to fill all the earth with his Glory Numbers 14;21 when he sends Jesus Christ back from heaven Psalm 2, 72 110:1-3, 149 set crush the kingdoms of men as Jesus with Abraham Isaac and Jacob and all the worthies come from Mount Paran Deuteronomy 32 to 33 to set up Zion
@@billweir8824 there is no "i am that i am", youre referring to when God says אהיה אשר אהיה and it means "I will be what I will be", the divine name YHVH means "the One Who brought everything into existence and continues giving it existence"
@@billweir8824 do you even speak Hebrew? אהיה אשר אהיה means "I will be what I will be", it doesnt mean "i am what i am", thats a severe christian mistranslations
When 1 takes off the christian glasses and walks away from the koolaid.. and then just reads the Hebrew text from a rabbinical source.. smh..the truth is out there..
Johnathan was awesome..totally beautiful man though he was interrupted from beginning to the end..this is why u should always do one to one for the loosing and weak side need to stop the person by interruption for fear of what the professor was saying...just watch the video and COUNT THE INTERUPTIONS AT ABOUT 100 PLUS BY WILL BUT NONE BY JONATHON WHO SAT MEEKLY AND HUMBLY WAITING FOR FAIRNESS WHICH THEY WERE NOT. . .POOR WILL WAS SO AFRAID OF THE TRUTH HE KEPT SHUTTING JONATHAN DOWN....WATCH AND COUNT I DARE U ...PROFESSOR ID BE SO PLEASED TO HAVE U AS A FRIEND FOR U LOVE TO LISTEN MORE THAN TALK ...JESUS BLESS U MORE..
I almost feel bad for Jonathan because he got so completely trounced here. Did you see his face in the end?! His faith ultimately depends on doctrine (the trinity) that is nonsensical.
Missionaries and apologists have to make the argument that Jesus and God are separate "persons" because of a clear reading of the text. Greg and William pointed out several verses to this point. You argue that no Christian would argue that they are the same person and yet minutes later you argue that Jesus IS God even though there are NO verses in the Hebrew Bible to support this claim without changing the text. Your theology is self contradictory. Several times you used the apologist trick of spouting verses rapidly to try to confuse the listener and provide your own christological conclusions while ignoring the clear reading of the text. That method may work with amateurs but William and Greg didn't let you get away with it. When they slowed it down and read each verses clearly the truth was revealed I don't think you had and answer in the end but I appreciate you jumping into the Lions den and giving it a shot.
@@paulwintermute1495 Do you know what the doctrine of the Trinity actually states? We do not think the Son is the Father. Rather, we maintain that the Father & Son are both distinct persons who share the divine essence (along with the Holy Spirit). You might disagree with this, but at least get straight what the claim actually is.
@@kingdomwithin-you4444 I was fooled for 72 years...There is not a single evidence that this man, which I preached to thousands for decades could remotely be the "Messiah." You are free to continue to be fooled but I would advise otherwise if I could. Ez. 15:23.
@@silveiranews Ez. 15:23 doesn't exist. You wanted to say Ez. 37:23 I suppose. *_"And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them. And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their ruler for ever."_* Simple question: Who is the king of Israel - Messiah David or the Lord?
I never was a xtian. Tried attending various brands. Tried reading a Catholic Haitian Bible. Stayed with the Unitarian Hippy Dippy people the longest. Returned to G.d via A.A. 33 years ago. All. Even fables. LaFontaine, Disney, etc all twisted and borrowed life instructions from TaNaK. 2000 of misery the world over this xtian movement. The Roman exile is almost over, Heaven willing ! My prayers are for people believe in znd return to the instructions given by our Creator G.d, and drop the idolatry and blasphemy of following any of his creations.
Shalom from South Africa. If Jesus is mention anywhere in the Tanach, does this mean he was already born and living and then be born again in their new testament where he dies again? how many times does he have to return just to fail?
Jesus Christ was born of Mary by Gods Holy Spirit power and was not prexistent and Jesus lived a sinless life having learned from the womb his Father's will - remember Jesus had not been born of flesh and blood like we were from two fleshly parents and now he is seated at Gods right hand soon to be sent back to raise the dead John 5:28 and save Israel from Russia Ezekiel chapters 38 to 48 and manifest himself to his brothers Zechariah chapter 12 and then rebuild the third temple in Zion in Jerusalem after his feet splits the mount of Olives
@@billweir8824 If Jesus lived a sinless life then he is not the Messiah because the Tenakh tells that the Messiah will be with Sin. Jesus maybe your personal savior, but not God or Messiah based on Torah and Tenakh.
Wow, I can hardly describe what I am witnessing here. I'm enjoying every second of this video.This Christian guy was then schooled by William and his good friend. I wonder how he feels after re-watching this video 😊
@@JonathanMcLatchieAll of them! You're also behaving in a rather petulant manner throughout these forum. Unbecoming for a distinguished biblical professor, don't you think? Perhaps your emotional outbursts emanates from your ego. You should give serious consideration to learning the Hebrew Bible through non christological lenses. Jesus is literally never mentioned in the tanakh. All you have are inferences and hopscotch in lieu of actual evidence. Both William and Greg can at very least point to explicit scripture which supports their assertions. You can't!
Ezekiel 13. False prophets. 1Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying:2"Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel who prophesy, and say to those who prophesy out of their own hearts: Hearken to the word of the Lord.3So said the Lord God: Woe is to the mad prophets who follow their desire and what they have not seen.4Like foxes in ruins were your prophets, O Israel.5You have not gone up into the breaches nor have you built a fence for the house of Israel, to stand in war on the day of the Lord.6They prophisied futility and false divination, those who say, 'The word of the Lord,' while the Lord did not send them, and expect their words to be fulfilled!7Have you not prophesied vain prophecy, and spoken false divination; yet you say, 'The word of the Lord,' while I did not speak.8Therefore, so said the Lord God: Since you spoke falsehoods and prophesied lies, therefore, behold I am against you, says the Lord God.9And My hand shall be against the prophets who prophesy vanity and the diviners of lies; in the counsel of My people they shall not be, and in the roster of the house of Israel they shall not be inscribed, and to the land of Israel they shall not come, and you will know that I am the Lord God.10Because, indeed because they misled My people, saying, 'Peace,' when there is no peace, and it is building a flimsy wall, and behold they are plastering it with daub.11Say to the plasterers with daub, 'Behold, it will fall. If there will be driving rain, then you, gigantic hailstones, will fall, and a storm wind will crack [it].12And behold, the wall has fallen! Will it not be said to you, "Where is the plaster that you have plastered?"'13Therefore, so said the Lord God: I will cause a storm wind to crack [the wall] with My fury, and there shall be a driving rain with My wrath, and gigantic hailstones with fury to destroy [it].14And I shall demolish the wall that you plastered with daub, and I shall make it reach the ground, and its foundation will be bared, and it will fall, and you will perish in its midst, and you will know that I am the Lord.15And I shall spend My fury on the wall and on those who plaster it with daub, and I shall say to you, 'The wall is not here, neither are those who plaster it.'16-The prophets of Israel who prophesy about Jerusalem, and those who envision for it a vision of peace when there is no peace, says the Lord God.17Now you, son of man, direct your face toward the daughters of your people who prophesy from their own heart, and prophesy about them.18And you shall say; So said the Lord God: Woe to those who sew cushions on all armpits, and who make the veils for the head of people of every height, to ensnare souls. Will you ensnare the souls of My people and sustain your own souls?19You have profaned Me before My people for fistfuls of barley and for morsels of bread to slay souls that will not die and to sustain souls that will not live, by your lying to My people, who hearken to lies. There were many instances , you used the Spoken Words of YHWH to you craft and twist the context of what YHWH Said into whitewash plaster walls. As a person in authority that speaks to other souls , your accountability is held higher as a , teacher or pastor or prophet that correctly divides GOD YHWH Scripture. If you are not clear on the subject you speak and is trying to debate on points only at your own preferred reference, where there are as many references that YHWH is The Only Father and True GOD. Whitewashing lies to mislead others from YHWH is a grave sin. As a witness to the debate , and as a witness to what you said , Mizpah we will be accountable in GOD Eyes. Better do you due diligence thoroughly , you speak only on your grey areas end. That is not doing JUSTICE to GOD's Testament . Deuteronomy 16.
@@JonathanMcLatchie Absolutely everything. It was really shocking to see how you answered. I can hardly believe it. Go and see what you answered. Is there anything more embarrassing than this. There was a big gap between what the text says and what you said. With all due respect. This really didn't go well for you as everyone seems to agree on
Here's their argument for everything: "As xhristians, we believe..." (fill in the blank) That's not proof of anything! It's just your opinion. Hello?! 🤣 "As flat-earthers, we believe the earth is flat." "But we have satellite and NASA imagery showing it's not flat." "As flat-earthers, we believe the earth is flat." 🤣
I only said this when I was identifying strawmen in the arguments being made by William and Greg, where they were inaccurately representing the Christian position.
Your analogy is perfect ! Someday, the xtians will all figure it out. 2000 years of misery world wide in the name of a false religion designed to steer people away from the Most High and His Instructions to humanity. I believe it will be an en masse awakening. May it be in our generation.
@@avalerie4467 The Bible says they will figure it out when the actual messiah gets here and redeems the Jewish people out of exile in Israel. That's Isaiah 53: "Who would have believed it! The Jews were right all along!" I think it will probably take the actual messiah to get here to wake up the xhristians, they're so lost in their delusions of their false messiah idol.
@@JonathanMcLatchie How come you have not responded to @jacobbraunstein4599, 2 days ago? "Here are my issues with some of the claims McLatchie made during the debate: At around 3:45 McLatchie talks about how we should use clear passages to interpret ambiguous ones when reading about Jesus’ divinity. I agree with him here, but I find that he has a double standard when it comes to the Hebrew Bible. He looks very closely at all these ‘angel of the Lord’ passages to determine some sort of plural unity in the text. But he is doing exactly what he says we shouldn’t be doing. At Sinai God revealed Himself to His people in order that they know whom to worship (Exodus 20:19, Deuteronomy 4:15). If God would have wanted us to worship Jesus, He would have shown Jesus to us at Sinai. This consideration is of paramount importance. The Sinai revelation came before scripture. All of scripture must be read in the context of the Sinai revelation. Since the Sinai revelation precludes the worship of Jesus (and of any other being aside from God) then all of scripture must be read in that light. Notably, Deuteronomy 4 is very explicit against the idea of an physical image of God (verse 12, 15), yet also states that the one shown to them is the only God with no other (verse 35, 39), excluding the possibility of Jesus or anyone else being involved in a revelation. 12:10 Around here he talks about believing in ‘progressive revelation’. The problem is that this methodology is unfalsifiable. We can basically make up any new belief and call it progressive revelation to try and excuse an error or contradiction between the established belief and the new belief. And using this method is how we get belief systems like Mormonism. 32:00 Here he tries to use Joshua 5:14-15 to prove that an angel is worshipped. Ignoring the methodological problems as listed above, his claim that the word ‘shachah’ means worship is false, and this can be proven. In Genesis 23:7 and 23:12, the word is used to describe Abraham bowing down to the Hittites. Genesis 27:29 uses it to describe people bowing down to Jacob. 1 Chronicles 29:20 uses the word to describe people prostrating themself to both God and David in the same sentence. I could go on with many more examples, but one should look through the concordance for those. Though prostration can be a form of worship depending on context, there is no reason to assume or falsely claim that the word means worship in Joshua 5. 41:20 Here he tries to argue that people proclaiming they would die after seeing an angel proves that the angel is God. Ignoring the fact that they didn’t die, one major issue in this claim is that seeing God is not the only ‘death sentence’ in the Bible. For example, when Uzziah died for touching the Ark (2 Samuel 6). In regards to Exodus 33:20 and Isaiah 6, we need to contrast seeing God physically against seeing God in a visionary manner, whether the vision occurs in the subconscious (Isaiah 6) or if they are conscious during the vision, but the vision is described as something that can’t be seen on camera (Ezekiel 1). Neither of these involve seeing something that is physical. Additionally, Deuteronomy 5:4 uses the term ‘face to face’ to talk about God speaking to all of Israel. Note this is only one chapter after the text talks about Israel not seeing any form of God. On another note, these angelic passages need be understood in the context of the fear present in the people who witness the angels. See Daniel 10:5-12, where the experience of witnessing and angel is described in a detailed and horrific manner. Notably, verse 12 has the angel telling Daniel to be not afraid. Meeting an angel unprompted would be a terrifying event for most people and could cause confusion. We should therefore not take a passage with an ambiguous reading as a ‘proof’ of a divine angel, since it is not the purpose of the surrounding text, and the author’s purpose for writing this was not to give a detailed elaboration on the identity of angels, so they did not bother to disambiguate texts that are ambiguous. 1:01:50 Here he talks about Isaiah 49. I won’t be repeating myself on this topic, since I have already discussed it elsewhere in the comment section. However for a very abridged version, there are several textual parallels between the servant Israel and the servant of Isaiah 49, so even if the servant in Isaiah 49 is an individual, they are designated as a member of Israel. If there existed an actual contrast between these servants, these textual parallels would make no sense whatsoever. 1:05:35 Here, he makes the claim that the words ‘my people’ only refer to Israel in the book of Isaiah. This claim is full of bad methodology. Firstly, it is not even true, as Isaiah 19:25 uses the term to refer to Egypt, not Israel. Additionally, if we look at the book of Exodus, the same Hebrew word he refers to is used 16 times, with 15 of them being a reference to Israel, and one to Egypt (When we consider the other constructs of this word, the ratio becomes 16:3). Using the same flawed logic he is using in the book of Isaiah , we could say that these outliers actually refer to Israel and not Egypt by ignoring the thing that ACTUALLY determines who ‘my people’ refers to: context. 1:10:30 Here I find that he makes a strawman regard the argument of the kings of nations being the speaker in Isaiah 53. He argues against this by citing parts of Isaiah 53 where the kings of nations aren’t speaking. I don’t think McBride was explicit enough, but the argument is that the part where the kings are speaking is verses 1 through 9. Though I should note that McLatchie only cites the very beginning and end of the servant song and finds 3 places where the term ‘my servant’ is used. If the nations aren’t the one speaking, it does seem a bit weird that the speaker never uses the term ‘my servant’ for an extended number of verses without any explanation. As a side note, the grammatical pattern of Isaiah 52:15 and 53:1 has strong parallels to Isaiah 14:16. Before the speech begins, it talks about the viewer seeing and being surprised about that which they are talking about. In both cases, the last word before the speech begins is ‘perception’ (Hebrew root word ‘yisbonanu’). Immediately afterward, the text continues with the words of those ‘perceiving’ without a direct introduction. The strong grammatical parallels heavily suggest that the speaker in the passage is in fact the kings of nations. 1:18:15 Here, he tries to use Isaiah 42 as a proof, trying to contrast the servant at the start of the chapter with the blind servant in verse 18 and 19. However, verse 24 says that this is because they did not follow his Torah. The servant in the latter half of this chapter is described in the present tense, but the servant at the beginning of this chapter is described in future tense. My reading is that God describes his ideal servant as something to occur in the future, then contrasts that with Israel as it was in Isaiah’s day. I contend that reading the later chapters shows that the servant of Isaiah 42 is only a small fraction of Israel, but that small fraction will call back the rest of Israel (Isaiah 49:5, 51:16), and the rest of Israel will repent, be rewarded, and become part of the righteous servant (Isaiah 53:10). In doing so, all of Israel will become a light to the nations (Isaiah 60:3)."
Iam using objections to you that is actually scriptures and you are using objections to me that's based on opinions! WOW! Destroyed! Well done , Iam proud of you ❤
I am sorry William but I feel you are wasting your precious time with this man. He will continue to keep to his misguided beliefs, he won't change his mind...the Christian mind set works differently. Greetings to you and Greg!👍
As far as the "sacrifices" of the last chapters of Ezekiel....was or was not the entire book of Ezekiel going to be omitted from the Tanach (but was saved by one single Rabbi) because the Ezekian sacrifices apparently were not consistent with the Mosaic sacrifices? One Rabbi is credited for saving the book of Ezekiel from being removed from the lineup? Is it or is that not true....? I've never heard anyone give an explanation for it. So, when it is mentioned by the fellows that the Messiah will sacrifice....if Ezekiel is not in line with the Mosaic sacrifices....can it be counted as reliable? This is a serious question....
You are attacking a straw man, red herring, as if Ezekiel is wrong, to distract from the fact that you are contradicting Tanakh, by falsely claiming the mitzvos involving animal korbanos are not happening in the messianic age. That Eze 45 says korban chatas happen in the messianic age, was not one of the seeming issues between Moses and Ezekiel, lol. The prophecy of Moses and the prophecy of Ezekiel agree that the Torah mitzvos, including animal korbanos, are happening in the messianic age. Deut 30:8 you will return and listen to the voice of the Lord, and fulfill all His commandments, which I command you this day. Eze 45:22 the prince shall make on that day for himself and for all the people of Israel a bull for a sin-offering. The sages never thought Ezekiel contradicts Torah. There was only a question whether or not to put aside the book of Ezekiel until the proper time, so that the unlearned not misconstrue what Ezekiel said. No where do the sages ever say Ezekiel literally contradicts the Torah. When one attempts to altar something from the Torah, they wind up needing to alter just about everything, in order to protect their falsehood, as you claim that large sections of the book of Ezekiel are falsehood. The men of the great assembly fixed the canon of scripture, which includes the book of Ezekiel. To claim the scripture canon of Ezekiel contradicts the Torah, is to demonstrate one is not following the Torah, as Deut 17:11 according to the Torah they instruct you.
@@torahlove7693 Here's a quick question for you. I provided you a link that lists the differences between the Ezekian sacrifices and the Mosaic sacrifices, and the reasons why the last chapters of Ezekial had come under scrutiny (not by me...but by Jewish rabbis in the past). My question for the moment is, who is guilty of adding to (or subtracting from) Torah law. If Torah is eternal, who is guilty of changing the Torah commandments in Ezekiel from those listed by Moses? I'm interested in how you will wiggle out of that.
@thenazareneperspective2734 Above, already debunked this misrepresentation, as if Ezekiel contradicts Moses about korban chatas happening in the messianic age. Moses, Deut 30:8, and Ezekiel, Eze 45:22, agree that korban chatas happen in the messianic age. Try to read it again maybe
@@torahlove7693 That's a pretty weak reply. Let's do it more simply....Are the sacrifices in Ezekiel the same as those installed by Moses? No gobbledegook....no cryptic answer...plain and simple; Are the sacrifices in the Messianic age the same as they were in the days of Moses? It's a yes or no question...and this will show your honesty. Shall I list the differences for you? I will be glad to.
@@thenazareneperspective2734 The men of the great assembly would not have included Ezekiel in the canon if they thought Ezekiel literally contradicts Moses. lol! Again your ridiculous false claim is just a red herring tactic that you are attempting, to distract from the specific fact that it is your false image of Jesus, as if he permanently removes the animal korbanos from the Torah mitzvos, that contradicts Torah. The Torah and Ezekiel both say the animal korbanos happen in the messianic age. There is no disagreement between them on this
No definitely not - and God warns you this very day from Ezekiel chapters 38 to 48 the promised seed from Abraham through whom all nations are blessed. As for Israel his HOLY NAME was disgraced and had to cast Israel out of his sight by the Roman armies, only now brought back because he is going to setup an everlasting kingdom of God on earth Daniel chapter 2:44 and he will save Judah first when he presents Messiah Zechariah chapter 12 and then rebuilds the third temple
@@jtprobst1 any reading is straight forward God is very plain and he needs Israel to acknowledge the wrongs done to His Holy Name and the plan of operations are going to happen exactly as required by God - Israel doesn't make the rules only YWHY can and only he already knows the end from the beginning and that is what God says and does throughout Ezekiel and has nothing to do with what happens later
I understand that this is NOT a I win you lose debate, but can one of the Christian apologists please explain why the Christian bible has changed/altered what is written in the Hebrew bible?....
Why take the details of the Greek testament at face value? Why waste time and energy arguing over the contradictions in what 'Jesus' said when the authorship is unknown? The claims of christianity only have to be tested against the scriptures from which it claims legitimacy: the Hebrew Bible.
This is why I don't like multiple-person debates. Every time one person is making a good and interesting argument, the other person messes it up because he has something to say.
That's why we set this up from the beginning as being a back-and-forth conversation. Not set up like a debate. McClatchy kept going on and on with information that did not even pertain to our conversations at all. I was not going to continue wasting my time letting him try to answer things that we didn't ask. And we still went 45 minutes over
Jesus did not have the Tetragrammaton before he died according to Paul. Evidence of that is Paul saying, "Therefore, God also has highly exalted him and given him the name which is above every name...." (Philippians 2:9). This was given, as Paul put it, in the form of a reward. If it's a name he had from eternity, how could it be an exaltation or a reward? Paul would have said this because it is well known that the Messiah will be given the Holy Name of God, as prophesied by Jeremiah 23:6. Being rewarded with that Name doesn't make him God. That Name will also be given to Jerusalem (Jeremiah 33:16).
1 samuel 15 verse 29 He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a human being, that he should change his mind. numbers 23 verse 19 God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good? Isaiah 10-11 “You are my witnesses,” declares the Lord, “and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me. I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour. Isaiah 11 verse 1,2,3 (About the Messiah) A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will bear fruit. 2 The Spirit of the Lord will rest on him- the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of might, the Spirit of the knowledge and fear of the Lord- 3 and he will delight in the fear of the Lord. The Messiah is an ordinary human being who fears the Lord. God does not fear himself. God can be anything but he says he is not going to be a man because men can lie and no one would know if he is lying. That would include Jesus. There is only God and no SAVIOR as stated in Isaiah 10-11.
The approach of CLEAR, WORD FOR WORD, LINE UPON LINE AND PRECEPT UPON PRECEPT, that you 2 have consistantly shown is WHY I HAVE HAD TO CONCEDE MY BLINDNESS AND REPENT OF IT.. I do want ypu to understand though, you 2, in thos episode are fighting on 2 fronts. 1. )This mans EGO and snobish attitude has already and will continue to keep him blind unless he gets sick of the the programming hes gone through and puts on his big boy pants. 2.) When children on up are taught the new testament, we are continuously told to GUARD OUR HEARTS and Defend (our unknowingly false) Faith at all costs. Praise Hashem for using YOU AS A LIGHT TO THE NATIONS to extend his ETERNAL FLAME OF LOVE❤️
Question:1). If the TETRAGRAMMATON 'spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that It brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices.' (Jeremiah 7:22). - Which TETRAGRAMMATON met 'Moses as he kept the flock of Jethro his father in law, the priest of Midian: And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush' saying to 'Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you' to beseech that the king of Egypt allow the Israelites three days' journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to the LORD our God?
@@zaharabardavid Amos wrote, "Have ye offered unto me sacrifices and offerings in the wilderness forty years, O house of Israel? Ye have borne the tabernacle of your Moloch and Chiun your images, the star of your god, which ye made to yourselves."
@@zaharabardavid as far as learning Hebrew... First thing first, there are 419,687 words in the old testament. Of those 419,687 words 8,679 are considered 'unique' Hebrew dialect. Of the 8,679 distinct words 1,480 are hapax legomena, words that occur only once. According to another linguist, there are a total of 8,198 distinct words, of which some 2,000 are hapax legomena. Some argue there are 13,962 words attributed to classical Hebrew, 6,556 of those are homonyms of another word and 3,373 are new words... BUTT, according to the old testament book of Nehemiah the 'Jews' could not even speak their own language post Babylonian exile. "In those days also saw I Jews that had married wives of Ashdod (Assyrian Asdudu, šadâdu), of Ammon (Assyrian Bît Ammanu), and of Moab (Assyrian Ma’aba, Ma’bu, Mu’âba, etc.): And their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, *and could not speak in the Jews' language*, but according to the language of each people." Neh 13:23-24.. The uniformity of language, style, and ideas of the Ezra, Neh, and Chronicles mark the entire work as the product of a single author, known as the Chronicler. He belongs to a period after the Babylonian Exile, probably about 350-300 bc... Some argue the Torah was translated from Greek into 'Hebrew', not Hebrew into Greek in the third century B.C.E.; the rest of the biblical books were translated later. The earliest copies of the Hebrew Bible were written without vowels or accents, as written Hebrew did not represent vowels until the Middle Ages. To preserve traditional spoken readings, starting in the fifth century C.E., a group of Jewish scribes known as the Masoretes carefully selected, copied, and annotated biblical scrolls, adding vowels and accents to the ancient Hebrew consonants in the process. Though the Masoretic scribes added these vowels to the ancient text long after it had been written, they were likely preserving traditional vocalizations that dated to much earlier times. The Masoretes produced several different systems of vocalization (writing in vowels) between 500 and 700 C.E. As stated, the Torah was translated, in the third century B.C.E.; the rest of the biblical books were translated later. The whole Hebrew Bible was likely translated into ancient Greek by the middle of the second century B.C.E. At the time the Bible was translated into Greek, there was no MT or any official or authorized Bible in existence. There were merely multiple editions of many scrolls of various perceived levels of sacredness. In fact, it seems that there wasn’t an official project to translate “the Bible” into ancient Greek; instead, many different Greek-speaking Jews in various times and places simply translated their favorite books into ancient Greek. Some of these books were later chosen to be included in the Bible, and some were not. It was only many centuries later that people began to choose the best of these Greek translations and to copy them all together as if they were one book. So, it can be said that the Bible was translated in its entirety before there even was a Bible.
@@zaharabardavid furthermore, October 7, 3761 BCE., is the date on which the world was created; per the biblical narrative, and Hebrew calendar. Civilizations in and around Mesopotamia are credited with inventing the first true writing systems in the world at around 3500 BCE., 261 years after the alleged creation of the world. Several Sumerian, Akkadian, Eblaite, Elamite, Hittite, Hurrian, Luwian, Urartian, Palaic, Aramaic, Old Persian, etc. Cuneiform clay tablets up and throughout the invention of the Paleo-Hebrew writing that dates to the 10th century BCE., that have been recovered help better our understand the Hebrew language. Interpretations of the cuneiform tablets has aided comparative studies of Semitic languages-including the language of the Old Testament. Modern Hebrew is the only vernacular tongue based on an ancient written form, that was developed in the 19th and 20th centuries 'as a living language', that has been resurrected from the dead, or from beginning 12th to its ending 3rd century BCE., life.
@@dantesinferno4580 I appreciate your attempt at trying to goysplain language in the diaspora but it doesn't negate the fact that the Tanakh is written in Hebrew and Aramaic, and unless you're able to read and understand each word of it, you're not in the position to teach Hebrew speaking Jews that have been learning Tanakh since the beginning of their lives
Just a question I’d have for the christian nonsense defender… isn’t the whole Word of God (what he calls the old testament) context for everything he wants to add to the Word of God?? Since it clearly is, he should never say look at context when others mention verses from the Word of God (what he calls the old testament)
Genesis 48: 15And he [Israel] blessed Joseph and said, "God, before Whom my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, walked, God Who sustained me as long as I am alive, until this day, that's one statement, pointing out that G-d had sustained him and all his ancestors, and: 16may the angel who redeemed me from all harm bless the youths, and may they be called by my name and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, and may they multiply abundantly like fish, in the midst of the land." is a continuation statement finishing the blessing. There's no mention whatsoever that the angel is HaShem. It just asks the angel to bless the youths, nothing about the angel being G-d. The angel is a separate entity, created by HaShem, and Israel is asking for the angel's blessing, just like someone would ask for a rebbe's blessing, or ask for a blessing from anyone. An angel is perfectly capable of redeeming a person from harm, through the power of HaShem, just like a human being can redeem someone from harm with the help of HaShem - a firefighter, for example, or anyone helping any person out of harm. It doesn't mean the person or angel is HaShem, lol. Not sure what the xhristian has such a hard time understanding. And if the angel were in fact intended to mean HaShem, why isn't it capitalized? Just more xhristian confusion.
I’m not a Christian. I’ve watched this UA-cam channel for many years and this was a disappointment. William came in WAY too strong. Constantly interrupting and calling it a “conversation.” The Christian didn’t constantly interrupt him. Definitely do better next time. It reminded me of a Sam shamoun video and I can’t stand Sam shamoun.
It's really funny that our opinion is so different. I felt like they kept trying to remind him of the rules , to give exact scriptures, etc. and he kept ignoring it and just kept plowing through to make his point. I do think the 2 against one thing was a little rough. Although I think my perspective might be jaded from hearing "context" too many times. ;)
@@mandyvoss1966 It’s because you’re biased. You already have a side. But it’s like a good marriage, an honest husband or wife can tell the other one when they’re in the wrong. Dishonest chooses their side no matter what. You can simply watch the first 5 minutes and William is immediately interrupting before the Christian even got it out all the way. An honest respectful conversation wouldn’t be interrupted with “oh, really?, wow” as they other person is talking. William almost seemed irritated in the first few minutes. The Christian couldn’t even get what he was saying out and William is like “what about this verse?” And the Christian said well let’s finish this before moving on. William wanted to keep throwing more points but he didn’t want the Christian to do it.
@@Christo-pv7eb I was actually looking forward to the debate, I’ve struggled with the concept of the Trinity forever. So, I was hoping for new light to be shed on it. I don’t know about biased, but it was super annoying that he would say a scripture, that I could barely hear, then read it so quickly I couldn’t make out what he was reading. It wasn’t a debate that’s for sure. It seemed a bit unfair if that’s where they were going. I was wondering if I caught part 2, because they seemed like I had missed a prior conversation.
@@mandyvoss1966 You’ll always struggle with the trinity. It’s not biblical. God never says he’s 3 in 1. He says he created and did it by himself. Isaiah 44:24. Jesus was not there with him.
In my humble personal opinion, I think the two guys’ tactic versus Mr. McClatchie’s or any Paulinist, should not be attempted in the way they pursued it here. I think the tactic should be to first show how Paul is a false apostle, and once that is accomplished, then Paul’s house of cards falls. It should be recognized that any writings associated with Paul should be rejected as being a subversion to Judaism, and Nazarene Judaism in particular, as Paul was sent not to subvert Judaism, but rather he was sent to subvert the teachings of the Nazarenes. Once Paul can be proven to be false, then the trinitarian argument falls apart.
@@Pverb623 Thanks for the reply... You asked: "Explain what a Nazarene is?" My reply: The briefest answer is that it is one of the seven sects of Judaism that existed in the 1st Century AD. A more detailed answer to what their beliefs were I can provide...or you can research yourself as that is easily done. The best explanation of the Nazarene sect is given in comparison to the other sects of Judaism as found in both the "Panarion of Epiphanius"...and the "Clementine Literature" as well. You asked: "And where the Tanakh speaks about it?" My reply: That the Nazarene sect of Judaism existed historically is without question, but in truth, it is not mentioned in the Tanach as the sect was established after the Tanach was written (so were the Jewish sects of the Sadducees, Pharisees, Scribes, Essenes, Hermerobaptists, and Herodians. All formed after the Tanach was written). My question back to you is, where in the Tanakh does it speak of the Apollo 11 moon landing? The point is, just because it isn't mentioned in the Tanach, doesn't mean that it didn't happen. You said: "This is not asked blindly…" My reply: Of course, it isn't....I'm just wondering what you are leading to...lol.
I just don’t understand how and why doesn’t the Christian admit defeat and see Williams points that he has made. The man is just blind to the obvious scripture points. And William even used scripture and the Christian just kept making circle arguments
This was a laughable conversation in that this poor professor was tossing a word salad made of nothingness. I almost felt sorry for him because he was used as a mop to wipe the floor...
You insist that Jesus is in Zechariah 13:6, right? GREAT! That proves Jesus is the Messiah shepherd of the Lord and the second person of the Triune God - God's neighbor/associate/another/companion sitting at the right hand of Yahweh the Father right now and ruling in the midst of his enemies like u and ur rabbis (Psalm 110 and Daniel 7:13-14,27)! *_"And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends._* *_Awake, O sword, against MY SHEPHERD (Messiah), and against the MAN that is my FELLOW (NEIGHBOR/ASSOCIATE/ANOTHER), saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones."_* Hope it helps.
@@kingdomwithin-you4444 It's about false prophets you dunce, which your man god was which is why it says....... And it shall come to pass on that day that the prophets shall be ashamed, each one of his vision when he prophesies; and they will not wear a hairy mantle in order to lie. And he shall say, "I am not a prophet! I am a tiller of the soil, for a man entrusted me with his cattle from my youth." Zechariah 13:6 And one will say to him,👉 "What are these wounds between your hands?"👈 And he shall say, "That I was smitten in the house of my friends." smitten in the house of my friends, I thought your buddy called them the sons of the devil! John 8:44 Get your story straight idol worshipper! were they his friends, were they the devil, why is your man god committing false prophesies?
The deity of Jesus, in the context of the Nazarene (Jesus, the 12 Apostles) perspective: Jesus never claimed to be God (in a trinity type of situation). But, he was “g”od in representation according to the Jewish Law of Agency. In the debate between the Jewish Nazarene Apostle Peter (and by association Jesus), Simon Magus, Simon suggests to Peter that Jesus was put to death (for being a false prophet) on the basis of Deu 13. To put it in context; Clementine Homily Book 16: Chap: 14 Peter goes on to explain that there are “g”ods (elohim) [i.e. pharaoh, judges, kings, etc. angels, etc] which are “created” beings, and he .who are not “G”od, who is “un” created Clementine Homily Book 16: Chap 15. This is a very important chapter… • When Simon heard this, he said; “Since you say that we shouldn’t believe even the prophet that gives signs and wonders if he says that there is another god and that you know that he even incurs the penalty of death if he does so, therefore your, teacher, Jesus, also was for this very reason cutoff for having given signs and wonders.” And Peter answered; “Our Lord neither asserted that there were other gods except for the Creator of all, nor did He proclaim Himself to be God, but He with reason blessed him who called him the Son of that God who had arranged the universe.” And Simon answered; “Does it not seem to you, then, that he who comes from God; is God?” And Peter said; “Tell us how this is possible, for we cannot affirm this because we did not hear it from Him.” Clementine Homily Book 16: Chap 16. Peter avers that God is uncreated and that Jesus is created…and that Jesus cannot be compared to God (unbegotten (self-begotten)) cannot be compared with Jesus (begotten), or even the “Spirit of the Messiah” (also a begotten being). • Peter continued; “In addition to this, it is unique to the Father to have not been made, but the Son is a created being, so what is begotten cannot be compared with that which is unbegotten or self-begotten.” And Simon said; “Is it not the same on account of its origin?” And Peter said; “He who is not the same in all respects as someone, cannot have all the same appellations applied to him as that person.” And Simon said; “This is to assert, not to prove.” And Peter said; “Why, do you not see that if the one happens to be self-begotten or unbegotten, they cannot be called the same, nor can it be asserted of him who has been begotten that he is of the same substance as he is who has begotten him? Learn this also; The bodies of men have immortal souls, which have been clothed with the breath of God and having come forth from a well of souls. The souls are of the same substance, but they are not gods. But if they are gods, then in this way the souls of all men, both those who have died, and those who are alive, and those who shall come into being, are gods. But if in a spirit of controversy, you maintain that these also are gods, what great matter is it, then, for Christ to be called God? For He has only what we all have.”
This is in line with a church I went to at one time. They said that Yeshua was a great example of spiritual perfection and should be revered for that, but he isn't a special son of G-d. We are all daughters and sons of G-d.
@@wittymystic7361 The Nazarenes did consider him a "special" son of God...naturally conceived through the interactions of a married man (Joseph) and his wife (Mary) and naturally born. According to the Nazarnes/Ebionites, because it was historically time, and because of his righteousness and piety, Jesus became the "adopted" Son of God at his adult baptism, where it was confirmed publically by the "Bat Kol". At his baptism, he was given both the complete 7-facet "Holy Spirit of God" as well as the "Spirit of the Messiah". Commissioned to be the expected "Prophet like unto Moses" through the empowering of the Holy Spirit at his 1st Coming, Jesus will fulfill the role of the "Messiah ben David" at his return.
'he was “g”od in representation according to the Jewish Law of Agency' Anytime followers of Jesus try to claim how Jewish it is to follow Jesus, that is a clear red flag. They don't hardly know anything about Judaism, of which they are very distant from, which is especially evident when their sources are an unrelaible encyclopedia, and they don't really have a clue about the limits of a shaliach, and when it can apply or not. The usage of 'shaliach' employed by the Hebrew scriptures, is not the same as that used by pagan-influenced followers of Jesus in their attempts to define the relationship between the nature of the Father and the supposed Son
William & Greg, you made an awesome job guys 👍🏼. Thank you so much ! Verly clearly, I have to say that Jonathan was wrong all the time and is even not representing appropiately the christian opinion and conviction for some christians do not belive Jesus is God ! Keep teaching us relevant jewish context to help every one have a better understanding of the jewish bible 😇. Thank you guys for having so marvelously put in light the context of every jewish bible passages quoted 😉
@@JonathanMcLatchie Thank you very much for being interested in the diversity of opinions among the viewers. I did not review the debate in full and will not be able to bring all the points which caught my attention during the Debate but let's take the fisrts points of the Debate. In one hand you say "We do not even have to argue that Jesus is Yaweh" and in the other hand you said that " Jesus is not the father". This seemed very confusing to me and believe me, I do not agree with every thing the orthodox jews say. Secondly you used the verse in Mark in which it is said "the father is greater than me" to prove that Jesus is divine and God through the privileges he had back. Whereas God being greater than Jesus naturally indicates that Jesus is not divine... This point sounds also confusing to me. Thirdly, you brought in massive and multiple contexts at the same time to justify your arguments, whereas on the Mark's verse for example, they are not appropriate. By saying that the father is greater than I, every one who is familiar with the old testament perfectly understand that Jesus is in line with all the heros of the old testament (Abraham, David, Daniel, Joseph, the prophets...) without any ambiguity. But by bringing massive contexts you make the verse say the opposite of its natural understanding... all this were not great points in your favour for any one that has simple knowledges of the bible... But again it is only my opinion. William and Craig were more convincing on these very first points, at the beginning of the debate. Take care Jonathan
@@jean-pierremassardo8627 "Whereas God being greater than Jesus naturally indicates that Jesus is not divine"? How so? God the Father naturally is greater than God the Son in function and purpose but they are EQUAL in nature. What is greater in you - your body or your mind controlling your body?
@@jean-pierremassardo8627 The Tanakh is crystal clear that the God of Tanakh is TRINITY: the Lord, our God, the Lord in one complex unity. Jesus is the Lord (Yahweh) of hosts speaking in the first person in Zechariah 2:8-11 and saying that the Lord of hosts (the Father) will send him for the glory to come and dwell with his people. Jesus is the FACE of the Lord or the Angel of God's Face in Tanakh prophecies so the commandment "you shall have no other gods over my face" literally translates into "you shall worship me only through Jesus"!
as an atheist who values proper textual criticism......i was like i kid in a candy store watching mclatchie get bounced around theologically so bad that his only constant rebuttals to what you two were informing him on was essentially "ya but context". the smugness and overestimation of their understanding of science or the bible that comes from these crap apologists from AIG is so cringe
The Christians doesn't realize that if the angel is Jesus, the whole Christian dogma are collapsing... Exudes 23:20-21 Behold, I send an Angel before you to keep you in the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. Beware of Him and obey His voice; do not provoke Him, for HE WILL NOT PARDON YOUR TRANSGRESSIONS; for My name is in Him.
Exactly Nathan. Repentance won't work because your sins cannot just be PARDONED. Do you not understand this? Your sin must be PAID FOR with the shedding of blood. You must be WASHED by the blood. How will you avoid the wrath of God as at the Passover without the shedding of blood? You are up a creek without a paddle. Unless of course you say you have no sin then you don't need to be washed. God is well pleased with you. But myself, I've broken God's moral law. I've stolen I've lied I've committed adultery at some points in the past. I've not honored my parents nor God at times in the past. I will stand guilty.
@@garyg7549 the prophets says repent works and washed, they NEVER say MUST be washed by the blood, are they liyng? Btw the Torah also never says ONLY blood washed.
So I Googled J. Mclatchie and found that he is nicely accredited in the academic world... and yet, when I watch this debate I'm left shaking my head. If this is the brightest and best Christianity has... it will crumble even quicker than I've imagined.
@@JonathanMcLatchie Hi Jonathan. I hope you don't feel personally insulted; that wasn't my intent. You may be intellectually well-endowed, but false claims will always remain shaky. There are many points that were absurd bc Christianity is based on nothingness, not bc you are unintelligent. One point, of the top of my head, is questioning the claims of the reinstitution of the sacrificial system in Ezekiel, and questioning if the prince is the Messiah when Ezekiel 34:24 specifically says he is. I don't blame you for not knowing; Christians rarely know the Hebrew Bible in context. Be well!
@@SeekingToServe This I would argue is only relatively weak evidence against my view. The word נָּשִׂ֡יא literally means leader or chief. There is only a single arguable connection of Ezekiel 45:7 to the Messiah, namely Ezekiel 34:24. That's not nothing, but I wouldn't deem it sufficient by any measure to overwhelm the positive case from the Hebrew Bible (and, indeed, from the New Testament) for the Messianic identity of Jesus.
@@JonathanMcLatchie When one looks at the Hebrew scriptures there is absolutely nothing that points to Jesus. Every single "proof" is taken out of context or a mistranslation. One thing a Christian cannot say is that the Jewish people are ignorant. We reject the claims of Christianity because they are contrary to everything in the Hebrew scriptures. Be well! And if you truly seek to worship the Gd of Israel, it is suggested to take off the christological lens and learn the Torah in the correct context. Be well!
Here is a question....if men are raised from the dead to live in the Messianic Kingdom age...are they not perfected? If so, will they be raised to "sin" again during the Messianic Kingdom age? To sacrifice for sins during the Messianic Kingdom age....it doesn't make sense if the Messianic Kingdom is going to be filled with people endued with the Holy Spirit.
Though rebellious sin may be gone with the subjugation of the evil inclination, there is still the possibility to unintentionally miss the mark or to be deficient, this is why Eze 45:22 uses the word chatas, and not pesha. We see here the korbanos involving animals happening in the messianic age. The claim that since Jesus, there are no longer anymore animal korbanos is false
We see all the Torah mitzvos, including animal korbanos, are still being done in the messianic age in Deut 30 'And you will return and listen to the voice of the L-rd, and fulfill all His commandments, which I command you this day'.
The messianic age , comes as how to Correctly divide the Scripture and the Heart of GOD, The Righteous (anointed by GOD, pour oil by GOD, messiah) return to teach others how to be righteous and no longer stray from JUSTICE Laws and His Heart. The sins done prior to their righteousness still has to be atone for in a way , GOD has Listed out how the redemption process is , sacrifices will be reveal by the anointed By GOD. The Anointed david will correctly divide what GOD Wants in Atonement . Before being accepted .
The whole concept of sin in the Messianic age and in the past with the sin sacrifice, was and will be, only for inadvertent sins. It never was for international sins. They require repentance. In the Messianic era, everyone will know G-D without a doubt. None will sin intentionally. Free will ends in the current sense, but people will make mistakes and that is what the sin sacrifice will be
Jonathan keeps avoiding answering yo the point by running to other places. He runs from verse to verse, book to book, ignoring context and demanding it from everyone else but himself. He's the picture of self convincing with circular reasoning without any hold to the actual original text of the תנ"ך. Frustrating
This man McLatchie, has a firm grip on an empty sack!
Gomer Pyle left the chat..
learn so much on this video, thank you!
William, such a great job! I’m a huge Rabbi Singer fan, but for us former Christians, you are amazing! You speak for us
Thank you
And, Greg too!! Great job 🎉
@@tenaktalk
YaH is The Father (Genesis 1)
YaH, Who with His HAND formed “man” from the Dust of The Ground (Genesis 2:7)
YaH The Father’s HAND they NAILED to the Almond TREE, to Symbolize Forgiveness of the “TREE of Life” sin and “The Fall of man” (Genesis 3)
YaH Who Created “man (Adam)” was Who they Crucified for the sins OF “man” and YaH arrived to be Crucified via the Tent of Meeting
- Hebrew Book of Isaiah
YaH The FATHER
@@Praise___YaH Jesus is not g-d or messiah.
@@cmain3931
I didn’t say one word about some jesus. You need to READ what I shared
Jonathan is a perfect Christian, he learned the propaganda perfectly. His entire argument is 'his and the Churches opinions' not the Tanachs plain speech. All his arguments are these obscure unprovable opinions without one scriptural proof. Well Done William and the other guys here כל הכבוד
Well said
Well the discussion at the beginning started by the guy in the middle of the three, is whether or not the NT affirms or denies the deity of Jesus. The guy in the middle says it denies it. Jonathan of course says it affirms it. So you can't blame him(Jonathan) there for only using arguments from the NT, because the question that was put to him was purely regarding the NT. You are hearing all this NT stuff from Jonathan e.g. 5min in, and you're thinking oh it's all gibberish, But you're not following properly that he was specifically asked a question on the New Testament and on what the New Testament says. So maybe your issue is you don't like the question he was asked.
best programe I have ever watched, keep up with the good works. Brilliant..
William is on fire here! 🔥🙌🏼
I'm used to watching him moderate and run the show, but man he can really hold his own in a debate! Great job! 🙌🏼💙🙏🏼👍🏼
Thank you Zack
Here are my issues with some of the claims McLatchie made during the debate:
At around 3:45 McLatchie talks about how we should use clear passages to interpret ambiguous ones when reading about Jesus’ divinity. I agree with him here, but I find that he has a double standard when it comes to the Hebrew Bible. He looks very closely at all these ‘angel of the Lord’ passages to determine some sort of plural unity in the text. But he is doing exactly what he says we shouldn’t be doing.
At Sinai God revealed Himself to His people in order that they know whom to worship (Exodus 20:19, Deuteronomy 4:15). If God would have wanted us to worship Jesus, He would have shown Jesus to us at Sinai. This consideration is of paramount importance. The Sinai revelation came before scripture. All of scripture must be read in the context of the Sinai revelation. Since the Sinai revelation precludes the worship of Jesus (and of any other being aside from God) then all of scripture must be read in that light.
Notably, Deuteronomy 4 is very explicit against the idea of an physical image of God (verse 12, 15), yet also states that the one shown to them is the only God with no other (verse 35, 39), excluding the possibility of Jesus or anyone else being involved in a revelation.
12:10 Around here he talks about believing in ‘progressive revelation’. The problem is that this methodology is unfalsifiable. We can basically make up any new belief and call it progressive revelation to try and excuse an error or contradiction between the established belief and the new belief. And using this method is how we get belief systems like Mormonism.
32:00 Here he tries to use Joshua 5:14-15 to prove that an angel is worshipped. Ignoring the methodological problems as listed above, his claim that the word ‘shachah’ means worship is false, and this can be proven. In Genesis 23:7 and 23:12, the word is used to describe Abraham bowing down to the Hittites. Genesis 27:29 uses it to describe people bowing down to Jacob. 1 Chronicles 29:20 uses the word to describe people prostrating themself to both God and David in the same sentence. I could go on with many more examples, but one should look through the concordance for those. Though prostration can be a form of worship depending on context, there is no reason to assume or falsely claim that the word means worship in Joshua 5.
41:20 Here he tries to argue that people proclaiming they would die after seeing an angel proves that the angel is God. Ignoring the fact that they didn’t die, one major issue in this claim is that seeing God is not the only ‘death sentence’ in the Bible. For example, when Uzziah died for touching the Ark (2 Samuel 6).
In regards to Exodus 33:20 and Isaiah 6, we need to contrast seeing God physically against seeing God in a visionary manner, whether the vision occurs in the subconscious (Isaiah 6) or if they are conscious during the vision, but the vision is described as something that can’t be seen on camera (Ezekiel 1). Neither of these involve seeing something that is physical. Additionally, Deuteronomy 5:4 uses the term ‘face to face’ to talk about God speaking to all of Israel. Note this is only one chapter after the text talks about Israel not seeing any form of God.
On another note, these angelic passages need be understood in the context of the fear present in the people who witness the angels. See Daniel 10:5-12, where the experience of witnessing and angel is described in a detailed and horrific manner. Notably, verse 12 has the angel telling Daniel to be not afraid. Meeting an angel unprompted would be a terrifying event for most people and could cause confusion. We should therefore not take a passage with an ambiguous reading as a ‘proof’ of a divine angel, since it is not the purpose of the surrounding text, and the author’s purpose for writing this was not to give a detailed elaboration on the identity of angels, so they did not bother to disambiguate texts that are ambiguous.
1:01:50 Here he talks about Isaiah 49. I won’t be repeating myself on this topic, since I have already discussed it elsewhere in the comment section. However for a very abridged version, there are several textual parallels between the servant Israel and the servant of Isaiah 49, so even if the servant in Isaiah 49 is an individual, they are designated as a member of Israel. If there existed an actual contrast between these servants, these textual parallels would make no sense whatsoever.
1:05:35 Here, he makes the claim that the words ‘my people’ only refer to Israel in the book of Isaiah. This claim is full of bad methodology. Firstly, it is not even true, as Isaiah 19:25 uses the term to refer to Egypt, not Israel. Additionally, if we look at the book of Exodus, the same Hebrew word he refers to is used 16 times, with 15 of them being a reference to Israel, and one to Egypt (When we consider the other constructs of this word, the ratio becomes 16:3). Using the same flawed logic he is using in the book of Isaiah , we could say that these outliers actually refer to Israel and not Egypt by ignoring the thing that ACTUALLY determines who ‘my people’ refers to: context.
1:10:30 Here I find that he makes a strawman regard the argument of the kings of nations being the speaker in Isaiah 53. He argues against this by citing parts of Isaiah 53 where the kings of nations aren’t speaking. I don’t think McBride was explicit enough, but the argument is that the part where the kings are speaking is verses 1 through 9. Though I should note that McLatchie only cites the very beginning and end of the servant song and finds 3 places where the term ‘my servant’ is used. If the nations aren’t the one speaking, it does seem a bit weird that the speaker never uses the term ‘my servant’ for an extended number of verses without any explanation.
As a side note, the grammatical pattern of Isaiah 52:15 and 53:1 has strong parallels to Isaiah 14:16. Before the speech begins, it talks about the viewer seeing and being surprised about that which they are talking about. In both cases, the last word before the speech begins is ‘perception’ (Hebrew root word ‘yisbonanu’). Immediately afterward, the text continues with the words of those ‘perceiving’ without a direct introduction. The strong grammatical parallels heavily suggest that the speaker in the passage is in fact the kings of nations.
1:18:15 Here, he tries to use Isaiah 42 as a proof, trying to contrast the servant at the start of the chapter with the blind servant in verse 18 and 19. However, verse 24 says that this is because they did not follow his Torah. The servant in the latter half of this chapter is described in the present tense, but the servant at the beginning of this chapter is described in future tense. My reading is that God describes his ideal servant as something to occur in the future, then contrasts that with Israel as it was in Isaiah’s day.
I contend that reading the later chapters shows that the servant of Isaiah 42 is only a small fraction of Israel, but that small fraction will call back the rest of Israel (Isaiah 49:5, 51:16), and the rest of Israel will repent, be rewarded, and become part of the righteous servant (Isaiah 53:10). In doing so, all of Israel will become a light to the nations (Isaiah 60:3).
There are some good points made here. Thanks!
Now here is someone who studies the Tanakh. Great Reasoning.Good commentary.
Great job William proud to be subscriber
Much appreciated
I love all these videos!
They make me want to dive into a deep study of the Tanach until I memorize it all 🤪
Yay!
@@tenaktalk William, please share it with Greg!
Anyone dispatched by God with a mission can be referred to in the Bible as an Angel (Messenger), be it a man, a created angel, or God (the Son).
Here's proof.
*_"Behold, I will send my Angel, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the Angel of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts."_* (Malachi 3)
The human being (John the Baptist?) who shows up before the coming of the Messiah is referred to here as "ANGEL" (messenger).
And the Lord Messiah who will come to his temple (as described in the Gospels) is also referred to as the ANGEL of the covenant.
This passage alludes to Isaiah 40:3
*_"The voice of one crying in the wilderness: “Prepare the way of the LORD (Yahweh); Make straight in the desert A highway for our God."_*
This proves the Lord Messiah, the ANGEL of the covenant is YAHWEH!
And Zechariah 2:8-11 hammers the point all the way home.
*_"For thus saith the Lord of hosts; For the glory hath he (the Lord of hosts) sent me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye. For, behold, I will shake mine hand upon them, and they shall be a spoil to their servants: and ye shall know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me. Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion: for, lo, I come, and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the Lord._*
*_And many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that day, and shall be my people: and I will dwell in the midst of thee, and thou shalt know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me unto thee."_*
Yahweh (the Son) says that Yahweh (the Father) will send him for the glory to come and dwell with us (Immanuel = God With Us)! BINGO!
Thus Yahweh (the Son) becomes the ANGEL of Yahweh (the Father) when he is sent to come in the flesh as God's servant and a man of war in order to become salvation (Yeshua Jesus) unto the ends of the earth.
*_"The Lord is my strength and song, and he is become my salvation (Yeshua Jesus): he is my God, and I will prepare him an habitation; my father's God, and I will exalt him. The Lord is a MAN of war: YAHWHE is his name."_*
With that being said, Jonathan McLatchie is right that the Angel of the Lord is Yahweh God in Tanakh and it's Jesus.
@@kingdomwithin-you4444
WHOOPS!😂😂😂😂
Was John your Elijah that was to arrive before the messiah?
Let's find out.
John didn’t fulfill Malachi’s prophecy that Elijah would restore the hearts of the fathers to
their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers.
Malachi 3:23
23👉Lo, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and awesome day of the Lord,👈
24that he may turn the heart of the fathers back through the children, and the heart of the children back through their fathers-lest I come and smite the earth with utter destruction.
Matthew 11:13-14
13 👉For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. 14 And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.👈
WHOOPS🤣
Matthew 17
10 👉The disciples asked him, “Why then do the teachers of the law say that Elijah must come first?”
11 Jesus replied, “To be sure, Elijah comes and will restore all things. 12 But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.” 13 Then the disciples understood that he was talking to them about John the Baptist.👈
Wait for it! Don't cry too hard now.
John 1:21
21 👉They asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?”
He said, 👉“I am not.”👈🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
John didn’t fulfill Malachi’s prophecy that Elijah would restore the hearts of the fathers to
their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers.
Elijah wasn't John the Baptist and thus, Jezeus wasn't the messiah. Simple equation.
@@kingdomwithin-you4444 no. The angel of g-d is just that, an angel. Messiah is fully human and has not arrived yet.
@@cmain3931 So you agree that God's servant who is blind and deaf in Isaiah 42:19 is an Angel of God, correct?
The more you have Christian’s explain the Trinity the more people will leave the church!
Baruch Hashem!!!
The trinity is confusing
More people join the church than leave.
God of the Bible is a triune God - God, God's Face/Image and God's Spirit and this is how God made man in their image as being three in one - mind, body, and soul.
@@kingdomwithin-you4444 g-d is one means only one not two or three.
@@cmain3931 The God of the Bible is way more complex than your ghost-like, one-as-a-rock, formless g-d.
@@cmain3931 The God of the Bible is TRINITY:
*_”In all their affliction he (God the Father) was afflicted, and the ANGEL of his FACE (God the Son) SAVED them: in his love and in his pity he REDEEMED them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old. But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit (God the Holy Spirit) therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them.”_*
The xhristian cannot show Scripture or verse in the Tanak. My brothers well done. ❤❤❤❤
Thank you
Great job of you two guys! very clear! Strait from the Text! Thank you! Keep on! May Hashem bless you and keep you!🤗
Thank you so much!
Even if they don't believe in the trinity Christianity is still antisemitic and not inspired by Hashem !
Question, Is the Tetragrammaton used in the new testament at all?
Gracias brother William. Have you heard of......"showing up to a gun fight with a knife...."? When one studies the Tanakh and knows it, there's no idol by the name of J.C.
Regarding the identity of the servant of Isaiah 49, here is a nice and thorough article defending the position that it is Israel:
The Servant of Chapter 49
“Listen to me, O islands, and hearken O distant regimes: the Lord summoned me from the belly; He mentioned my name from my mother’s womb. He made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of His hand He hid me; He made me like a smooth arrow, in His quiver He concealed me. He said to me: “You are My servant, Israel, in whom I take glory.” But I said, “I have toiled in vain and used up my strength for nothingness and naught; however, judgment is with the Lord and (the reward for) my accomplishments is with my God.” And now the Lord, who formed me from the belly to be a servant to Him, to restore Jacob unto Him, and Israel will be gathered unto Him and I was honored in the eyes of the Lord and my God was my strength. He said: “It is insufficient that you be a servant for Me to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the ruins of Israel; I will make you a light for the nations, so that My salvation may extend to the ends of the earth.”
Who is this servant?
At first glance, we would say that this is Isaiah. The prophet is described as one who is called from the womb (Jeremiah 1:4). The mouth of the prophet is the implement that God uses to accomplish His purpose (Jeremiah 1:9,10). Isaiah was first called to restore Israel to God (when he spoke to the Jews of his own generation), but ultimately, it is Isaiah who is the primary prophet called to bring the message of the Messianic era to all of mankind. It is Isaiah’s words that are written on the side of the U.N. building expressing man’s hope for a future of peace. And it is Isaiah’s metaphor of the lion lying with lamb that is most often used to describe the glorious plan that God has for all of humanity. Furthermore; the servant in this passage speaks for himself in the first person without being introduced in any way, which also leads us to believe that it is Isaiah who is talking.
However; the servant is identified as “Israel” (verse 3). Israel is also called from the time of their formation (43:21; 44:2, 21, 24; 46:3). The servant of this passage is described as a “sword” and an “arrow” just as Israel is called the “armor-bearers of the Lord” (52:11) and they are set by God to be a “threshing board of many blades” (41:15). Just as this servant is sheltered in the shade of God’s hand so is Israel likewise sheltered (51:16). Just as the servant fears that his toil has been in vain so does Israel fear that their toil has been in vain (40:27). Just as the servant will bring light to the nations so will Israel bring light to the nations (60:3). And this passage is placed in the midst of a series of prophecies which are spoken for the encouragement of Israel (48:20; 49:14).
The lines between the prophet and the nation are intentionally blurred. The encouragement to Israel is that in a certain sense they are the prophet of God. Just as the prophet carries God’s word so does Israel carry God’s word and just as the prophet is granted the strength of God’s word so is Israel granted the strength, the power and the eternal nature of God’s word (40:8).
Source is a website called ‘A project of Judaism resources’, many great articles on other relevant topics.
If you ask me, this debunks the Christian notion of the servant being distinguished from Israel. There are properly expressed parallels between the individual servant and the servant Israel, of which there are even more parallels, as not all are listed here. An individual servant could be part of Israel, such as Isaiah or the messiah. This is because they are a member of Israel, so there is no contradiction. However, the contrast between the servant of Isaiah 49 is nonexistent after seeing these parallels, so it does not cohere with the text for the servant to be ONLY the messiah and NOT Israel.
I’ll probably have more thoughts to write on this video later on, probably tomorrow night. I think McLatchie misrepresents a lot of stuff.
The question “who are the seed of Abraham?” can be answered several ways, and it is important to make some distinctions. There is the Seed of Abraham (Seed being singular); there is the seed of Abraham physically (descendants of Abraham according to the flesh); and there is the seed of Abraham spiritually (those who, like Abraham, have faith in God). The (singular) Seed of Abraham is Christ, as Galatians 3:16, quoting Genesis 12:7, says, “The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say ‘and to seeds,’ meaning many people, but ‘and to your seed,’ meaning one person, who is Christ.” The passage goes on to explain that an inheritance was promised to Abraham’s Seed (Christ) apart from the Law. Later, the Mosaic Law was introduced, but it did not annul the promises made to Abraham or to Abraham’s Seed (Christ). Just as Abraham believed God and his faith was counted as righteousness (Genesis 15:6), so are all today who believe in God’s Son justified apart from the Law. In this way, Abraham is the “father” of all who believe (Romans 4:11-17). “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Galatians 3:29). Of course, the seed of Abraham can also refer to the Hebrew people who descended from Abraham through Isaac. Still more broadly, the seed of Abraham could include Arabs, who trace their lineage through Ishmael. This is the physical seed of Abraham.
The spiritual seed of Abraham (believers in Jesus Christ) is comprised of people of all nationalities and ethnicities. The
Jewish religious leaders of the first century took pride in that they were Abraham’s seed. They saw their physical connection to Abraham as a guarantee of God’s favor. This attitude kept them from seeing their need for repentance of the heart-and brought condemnation from John the Baptist, who warned them to repent. Anticipating their fallback argument that they were the seed of Abraham, John said, “Do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham” (Matthew 3:9). Jesus dealt with the same issue later. In speaking to the unbelieving Jews, Jesus emphasized their need to receive His words as truth and obey His commands. They replied, “We be Abraham’s seed” (John 8:33, KJV). Jesus then rebukes them for plotting ways to murder Him; their stubborn response was again, “Abraham is our father” (verse 39a). At this, Jesus makes a distinction between the physical seed of Abraham and the true, spiritual seed of Abraham: “If you were Abraham’s children . . . then you would do what Abraham did” (verse 39b). The conversation heats up as the Jews for a third time reference their connection to Abraham: “Are you greater than our father Abraham?” they ask Jesus (verse 53). Jesus provokes them further: “Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad” (verse 56). The Jews’ are incredulous that Jesus would claim to be a contemporary of Abraham, and that’s when Jesus brings the exchange to a climax with a claim to full deity: “Very truly I tell you, . . . before Abraham was born, I am!” (verse 58). In a fury, the Jews attempted to stone Jesus (verse 59), again proving that being the physical seed of Abraham is not enough-they had to be born again (John 3:3).
Paul sums up the difference between the seeds of Abraham in Romans 2:28-29: “A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.”
Messiah - Yeshua is the Word of God in the flesh, everyone who believes in the Word of God is Israel - Seed of Abraham, part of the Body of Christ - the Spiritual Temple of God - the Church. The body of the Messiah is without sin, it is purified through Lamb of God sacrifice, therefore it is a holy nation without blemish. This is why jewish people often read Isaiah 53 also as a nation. Because Israel is the Body of Christ - a Holy Nation. Therefore, the Messiah is also Israel. That's why Scripture says I will bring my son out of Egypt. The son refers in one place to Israel as a specific nation, but at the same time to the Messiah. "Then you shall say to Pharaoh, 'Thus says the LORD, “Israel is My son, My firstborn. (Ex 4:22) “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. (Hosea 11:1) When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. “Get up,” he said, “take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.” So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.” (Mt 2:13-15) In Jewish and Christian texts from the Greco-Egyptian area during Second Temple Judaism and beyond the name "Israel" was understood to mean "a man seeing God" from the ʾyš (man) rʾh (to see) ʾel (God). "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (John 1:18) The Messiah is the King of Israel, the representative of Israel, therefore he is Israel. Spiritual Body of Christ/Messiah - Holy Nation is also Israel.
There are some good points here. Thanks!
You guys, That was a slam dunk! Well done ✨💯👏👏👏👏👏👏
Which of my arguments do you think William and Greg refuted?
@@JonathanMcLatchie I would like to do this in an orderly manner and I will probably have to add to what they had to share though they presented those points with excellence.
You are welcoming a new baby as i heard (congrats 💐).
Let me rewatch it and I will write back in a few hours 🙏
Due diligence I'm jewish and an Israeli, English is not my mother's tongue, Hebrew is.
God's blessings 😇
@@PazPinhasRahamim9220 If you prefer to have a conversation over Zoom, rather than typing it all out, I would be glad to do that too.
@@JonathanMcLatchie
Thank you professor, but frontal is somewhat difficult for me, though i wouldn't mind audio recordings and where files can be easily attached. My name is Paz Pinhas Rahamim, a pic of a kippah. As messages with media names are erased here - the old way people used to wire short messages with an arrow pointing right 😁
@JonathanMcLatchie I find highly inappropriate and intellectually dishonest that you would try to take a discussion that came from our show and handle it privately. Please be respectful and answer all questions here in this thread, thank you
Dang dood you rocked bro!!!!
In the early days I tuned into your show, not so much anymore as I'm no longer a swinging voter. (I have Jewish beliefs) This episode is the best iv watched so far!! Divine sparks comes to mind whilst trying to describe it. Thank you
Thank you very much!
The name "Isaiah" literally in hebrew means "the salvation of God" Yesha-Yahu,
This was simply brilliant of you two guys!!!
Thank you
Hoseah chapter 12 verse 5 (verse 6 with a christian bible) says CLEARLY that it was an ANGEL that Jacob wrestled with, an angel, not God.
Jacob was curious about the angels name but was. Not told, Jacob probably thought he was wrestling with Esau and Penile ( face of God) is what Jacob says to Esau next ' I saw your face like the face of God ' one can only imagine what Esau thought but Jacob was good enough to give so vastly to his brother it shows that he probably felt guilty pretending and hurting not only his brother who wept so bitterly but the severe shaking of poor Isaac wondering who had just left with the divine blessings!!! We love Jacob because he valued YAHWEH always but it is not commendable the way he obtained it ( though God allowed Rebekah to scheme and so free will is part of the life of disciples but the consequences were painful for Jacob having to flee family into the unknown leaving Rebekah with Esau and the Cannanite wives which grieved her and Isaac
@@billweir8824 jacob wrestled an angel, see Hoseah chapter 12 verse 5 (verse 6 with a christian bible) it says it CLEARLY that it was an ANGEL that Jacob wrestled with. the word EL means "ABLE" like when lavan says to Jacob "yesh le'El yadi" יש לאל ידי "i have it in my ability to do to you" genesis 31 verse 29. Jacob wrestled an angel, so you think a human ie: Jacob can wrestle and beat God in a wrestling match? Seek truth, not a sense of validation for polytheism.
@@Yehonatan613 the wrestling was engaged at first by who and why?
@@Yehonatan613 by the way Israel were warned to not go against Gods angel do you know why?
@@billweir8824 "because he doesnt have the ability to forgive"
if jonanthan the trinitarian believes that jesus' heavenly name is vav hei yod hei, what does jonathan believe the name of the Father?
That christian is speaking non sense, i really cant even understand what he is saying
How can an Angel be God if in Hebrews 1:5 it says that Jesus is greater then the angels?
Also in Matthew 2:13-15 it says that the Angel of the Lord came to Joseph in a dream telling him to flee Egypt with Jesus, are you telling me that the angel of the lord who is Jesus is telling Joseph to flee with Jesus????
Brilliant! Please keep sharing your knowledge with us! 🙏🏼
He keeps saying..."text and context" so his followers may assume (because they don't hear anything else anyway....) that you are speaking out of context! A tactic used by politicians in election campaigns!!!! The crook will say the other guy is a crook and that's all their followers hear and care to hear...and amazingly still vote for them.
Yes, that was incredibly annoying
Take him to school William and Greg
Wake Christians up
What good has wandering for 2000 years been? Not one of any of us is happy if our loved ones suffer so right? My heart continues to sorrow over Israel but I am glad YHWY has been always kind and will redeem his people to himself very soon - the nations have robbed Gods people and he will repay!!! All the gold and silver are mine! Russia and China have gathered tons of it but it isn't theirs and God will claim it and all Israel natural and spiritual will rejoice greatly with none to ever make afraid because every man shall dwell under his own vine and fig tree 🌞
You two were amazing. I admire you both being able to keep your cool. I was very frustrated with him every time he mentioned "context".
Love Rabbi Tovia Singer. Turned me on to learning Hebrew
It's the easiest language on earth to learn. Start by memorizing the alef bet.
He's the best!!!
Great job William!! 👏👏
I dont understand why this christian will use Ps to proof a point...point is David who wrote the Ps DID NOT KNOW jc...WHAT dont he understand...new t is NOT part of Scripture!!!😊..funny how he says you must read "context" of new t BUT when it come to Tanach they dont worry about "context"😂
The problem is when it is so disgenuine , a huge hypocrisy to use grey areas to plaster it with whitewash.
Tanakh and the NT is just not compatible. To make them cohering , they must make up grey areas to spread lies.
Today is Tisha B Av and this professor reminds us that Rome is still hard at work in a somewhat subtle way....and just to think that for 52 years as a fundamental Baptist pastor-missionary-evangelist I "believed" the very same!!!!
According to Daniel 2:35,44 prophecy, Rome will be CONSUMED by the kingdom of heaven and BROKEN into pieces.
*It's talking about Christianity as the kingdom of heaven that God will GRADUALLY establish DURING the days of the kings of the Fourth Beast Rome (Caligula, Nero, Diocletian, Constantine, etc.), then it will consume Rome in the 3rd century AD, break it into pieces (those of the kingdom vs the rest) and eventually grow to fill the earth by becoming a great mounting (making up 1/3rd of the population of the world).*
*It is a SPIRITUAL kingdom because it was already active during the days of the physical kings of Rome, going parallel to it, and it will not be left to other people meaning it's not limited to any particular nation such as the Jewish nation.*
Hope it helps
The people of Judaism and the state of Israel are referred to as the little horn in Daniel 7 & 8.
@@kingdomwithin-you4444 Christianity is Rome (Esau etc) my friend...The True Mashiach will rule in the Messianic age (read the prophets without Christological lenses and you will see who the True Messiah is and will see that clearly it is NOT the Graeco-Roman creation "god-man" Jesus....Believe whatever you want to....I believe the Prophets of Israel.
@@silveiranews In what parallel universe Rome was small, Noahide?
😜
Can you even think straight at this stage of deception?
@@silveiranews Again:
According to Daniel 2:35,44 prophecy, Rome will be CONSUMED by the kingdom of heaven and BROKEN into pieces.
*It's talking about Christianity as the kingdom of heaven that God will GRADUALLY establish DURING the days of the kings of the Fourth Beast Rome (Caligula, Nero, Diocletian, Constantine, etc.), then it will consume Rome in the 3rd century AD, break it into pieces (those of the kingdom vs the rest) and eventually grow to fill the earth by becoming a great mounting (making up 1/3rd of the population of the world).*
It is a SPIRITUAL kingdom because it was already active during the days of the physical kings of Rome, going parallel to it, and it will not be left to other people meaning it's not limited to any particular nation such as the Jewish nation.
I think I'll stick with the Tonuch. It's not as confusing. It's pretty simple to follow. Christianity seems too confusing to follow. If you need a pastor, priest, or reverend to tell you what it means, it's not true. I think God warns about Christianity and other branches from Judaism.
Correction God warns against the Apostasy which was the development of people who left the first century ecclesia and gave help to Constantine ( the pagan Roman Caesar) to join and fight his military battle to gain political power over 2 other contending Generals - something Jesus Christ told his followers was to be gentle as doves and wise as serpents and that whoever takes up the sword must perish with the sword - rather this is the patience of the saints to die living and preaching the truth of necessary because we are living in the dispensation of Grace when men are being called out of every nation to follow and obey Jesus Christ now which means following Matthew chapters 5-7
The 2 guys did good cop bad cop on Jonathan. William, you were the "baaad" cop but the "good" cop (with his slow calm tutoring) smashed each point on Jonathan's head.
Seek truth, not a sense of security/validation for polytheism.
Omg I’m learning so much! ❤️
BTW, I've always appreciated your work William, but this is the first time I've seen Greg. He's amazing! How can I find out more about his history? Is there a video about Greg's story?
That's a good point! I need to do his testimonial soon!!!
Amazing job guys, this man is unfortunately very lost I hope he finds the truth some day!
such christian babble, nonsense contortionist twisting of the Hebrew Scriptures is truly amazing. The inabilty to not interject to try to prove his point with his and the Churches opinions over the plain reading of the Word of G-d, (Hebrew Scriptures) is utterly breathtaking
The hebrew word for angel "מלאך" literally means "messenger", they are messengers, they are created beings by the Creator, theyre not the Creator.
amein
Did Christian copies of psalms also misquote 47? Or was it only in Hebrew?
The Divine Name "YHVH" literally means "The Creator", the One Who brought everything into existence, המהווה, Ie: the Creator ie: the Father.
YHWH Hebrew tetragramaton ' I am that I am ' also we find YHWY Elohim and is an expression of Gods divine purpose being worked out and ultimately established to fill all the earth with his Glory Numbers 14;21 when he sends Jesus Christ back from heaven Psalm 2, 72 110:1-3, 149 set crush the kingdoms of men as Jesus with Abraham Isaac and Jacob and all the worthies come from Mount Paran Deuteronomy 32 to 33 to set up Zion
@@billweir8824 there is no "i am that i am", youre referring to when God says אהיה אשר אהיה and it means "I will be what I will be", the divine name YHVH means "the One Who brought everything into existence and continues giving it existence"
@@Yehonatan613 eyer Asher eyer? So future? ' I will be who I will be ' let me know your ' English description please
@@billweir8824 do you even speak Hebrew? אהיה אשר אהיה means "I will be what I will be", it doesnt mean "i am what i am", thats a severe christian mistranslations
@@Yehonatan613 why?
When 1 takes off the christian glasses and walks away from the koolaid.. and then just reads the Hebrew text from a rabbinical source.. smh..the truth is out there..
Hebrew 1 he says he is not an angel
He is nothing
Johnathan was awesome..totally beautiful man though he was interrupted from beginning to the end..this is why u should always do one to one for the loosing and weak side need to stop the person by interruption for fear of what the professor was saying...just watch the video and COUNT THE INTERUPTIONS AT ABOUT 100 PLUS BY WILL BUT NONE BY JONATHON WHO SAT MEEKLY AND HUMBLY WAITING FOR FAIRNESS WHICH THEY WERE NOT. . .POOR WILL WAS SO AFRAID OF THE TRUTH HE KEPT SHUTTING JONATHAN DOWN....WATCH AND COUNT I DARE U ...PROFESSOR ID BE SO PLEASED TO HAVE U AS A FRIEND FOR U LOVE TO LISTEN MORE THAN TALK ...JESUS BLESS U MORE..
I almost feel bad for Jonathan because he got so completely trounced here. Did you see his face in the end?! His faith ultimately depends on doctrine (the trinity) that is nonsensical.
I'd be interested to hear which of my arguments you think Greg & William refuted?
Missionaries and apologists have to make the argument that Jesus and God are separate "persons" because of a clear reading of the text. Greg and William pointed out several verses to this point. You argue that no Christian would argue that they are the same person and yet minutes later you argue that Jesus IS God even though there are NO verses in the Hebrew Bible to support this claim without changing the text. Your theology is self contradictory. Several times you used the apologist trick of spouting verses rapidly to try to confuse the listener and provide your own christological conclusions while ignoring the clear reading of the text. That method may work with amateurs but William and Greg didn't let you get away with it. When they slowed it down and read each verses clearly the truth was revealed I don't think you had and answer in the end but I appreciate you jumping into the Lions den and giving it a shot.
@@paulwintermute1495 Do you know what the doctrine of the Trinity actually states? We do not think the Son is the Father. Rather, we maintain that the Father & Son are both distinct persons who share the divine essence (along with the Holy Spirit). You might disagree with this, but at least get straight what the claim actually is.
@@JonathanMcLatchie Mazal tov to you and your wife for the baby. What did you have?
@@zaharabardavid We haven't had our baby yet but it will be a boy.
So, if "Jesus" as presented in the no-testament never existed where is the relevance of any of these arguments and debate???
Tanakh is the best evidence out there that Jesus existed and is the Messiah God of Israel.
@@kingdomwithin-you4444 I was fooled for 72 years...There is not a single evidence that this man, which I preached to thousands for decades could remotely be the "Messiah." You are free to continue to be fooled but I would advise otherwise if I could. Ez. 15:23.
@@silveiranews Keep dreaming. You are fooled now more than ever.
Mind-boggling ignorance and blindness.
@@silveiranews Funny how you, followers of the rabbis, love to cite scriptures absolutely mindlessly without noticing they utterly debunk your faith.
@@silveiranews Ez. 15:23 doesn't exist. You wanted to say Ez. 37:23 I suppose.
*_"And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them. And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their ruler for ever."_*
Simple question:
Who is the king of Israel - Messiah David or the Lord?
I love how it is always new testament to prove new testament.😂
That's simply not true. I have written and spoken extensively on the support from the Hebrew Bible for the New Testament claims.
@@JonathanMcLatchie Correction☝️your opinions, but not based on the Hebrew scripture
I never was a xtian. Tried attending various brands. Tried reading a Catholic Haitian Bible. Stayed with the Unitarian Hippy Dippy people the longest. Returned to G.d via A.A. 33 years ago.
All. Even fables. LaFontaine, Disney, etc all twisted and borrowed life instructions from TaNaK.
2000 of misery the world over this xtian movement. The Roman exile is almost over, Heaven willing !
My prayers are for people believe in znd return to the instructions given by our Creator G.d, and drop the idolatry and blasphemy of following any of his creations.
The best strategy is to use the Old Testament to prove the New Testament.
@@avalerie4467 The people of Judaism are referred to in Tanakh prophecies as ESAU or the little horn (Daniel 7 & 8).
Shalom from South Africa. If Jesus is mention anywhere in the Tanach, does this mean he was already born and living and then be born again in their new testament where he dies again? how many times does he have to return just to fail?
Jesus is not mentioned in Tenakh or the Torah. Not even the word Yeshua is mentioned in Tenakh.
Jesus Christ was born of Mary by Gods Holy Spirit power and was not prexistent and Jesus lived a sinless life having learned from the womb his Father's will - remember Jesus had not been born of flesh and blood like we were from two fleshly parents and now he is seated at Gods right hand soon to be sent back to raise the dead John 5:28 and save Israel from Russia Ezekiel chapters 38 to 48 and manifest himself to his brothers Zechariah chapter 12 and then rebuild the third temple in Zion in Jerusalem after his feet splits the mount of Olives
Deuteronomy 31:7-8 ' Moses commanded Joshua '
@@billweir8824 If Jesus lived a sinless life then he is not the Messiah because the Tenakh tells that the Messiah will be with Sin. Jesus maybe your personal savior, but not God or Messiah based on Torah and Tenakh.
@@wyattfoley100 as by one man sin and death entered the world so now by one man has righteousness and life entered by Jesus Christ Romans chapter 5:18
Wow, I can hardly describe what I am witnessing here. I'm enjoying every second of this video.This Christian guy was then schooled by William and his good friend. I wonder how he feels after re-watching this video 😊
I’m curious which of my points you think was successfully refuted here?
@@JonathanMcLatchieAll of them!
You're also behaving in a rather petulant manner throughout these forum. Unbecoming for a distinguished biblical professor, don't you think?
Perhaps your emotional outbursts emanates from your ego.
You should give serious consideration to learning the Hebrew Bible through non christological lenses. Jesus is literally never mentioned in the tanakh.
All you have are inferences and hopscotch in lieu of actual evidence.
Both William and Greg can at very least point to explicit scripture which supports their assertions. You can't!
Ezekiel 13. False prophets.
1Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying:2"Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel who prophesy, and say to those who prophesy out of their own hearts: Hearken to the word of the Lord.3So said the Lord God: Woe is to the mad prophets who follow their desire and what they have not seen.4Like foxes in ruins were your prophets, O Israel.5You have not gone up into the breaches nor have you built a fence for the house of Israel, to stand in war on the day of the Lord.6They prophisied futility and false divination, those who say, 'The word of the Lord,' while the Lord did not send them, and expect their words to be fulfilled!7Have you not prophesied vain prophecy, and spoken false divination; yet you say, 'The word of the Lord,' while I did not speak.8Therefore, so said the Lord God: Since you spoke falsehoods and prophesied lies, therefore, behold I am against you, says the Lord God.9And My hand shall be against the prophets who prophesy vanity and the diviners of lies; in the counsel of My people they shall not be, and in the roster of the house of Israel they shall not be inscribed, and to the land of Israel they shall not come, and you will know that I am the Lord God.10Because, indeed because they misled My people, saying, 'Peace,' when there is no peace, and it is building a flimsy wall, and behold they are plastering it with daub.11Say to the plasterers with daub, 'Behold, it will fall. If there will be driving rain, then you, gigantic hailstones, will fall, and a storm wind will crack [it].12And behold, the wall has fallen! Will it not be said to you, "Where is the plaster that you have plastered?"'13Therefore, so said the Lord God: I will cause a storm wind to crack [the wall] with My fury, and there shall be a driving rain with My wrath, and gigantic hailstones with fury to destroy [it].14And I shall demolish the wall that you plastered with daub, and I shall make it reach the ground, and its foundation will be bared, and it will fall, and you will perish in its midst, and you will know that I am the Lord.15And I shall spend My fury on the wall and on those who plaster it with daub, and I shall say to you, 'The wall is not here, neither are those who plaster it.'16-The prophets of Israel who prophesy about Jerusalem, and those who envision for it a vision of peace when there is no peace, says the Lord God.17Now you, son of man, direct your face toward the daughters of your people who prophesy from their own heart, and prophesy about them.18And you shall say; So said the Lord God: Woe to those who sew cushions on all armpits, and who make the veils for the head of people of every height, to ensnare souls. Will you ensnare the souls of My people and sustain your own souls?19You have profaned Me before My people for fistfuls of barley and for morsels of bread to slay souls that will not die and to sustain souls that will not live, by your lying to My people, who hearken to lies.
There were many instances , you used the Spoken Words of YHWH to you craft and twist the context of what YHWH Said into whitewash plaster walls.
As a person in authority that speaks to other souls , your accountability is held higher as a , teacher or pastor or prophet that correctly divides GOD YHWH Scripture. If you are not clear on the subject you speak and is trying to debate on points only at your own preferred reference, where there are as many references that YHWH is The Only Father and True GOD.
Whitewashing lies to mislead others from YHWH is a grave sin.
As a witness to the debate , and as a witness to what you said , Mizpah we will be accountable in GOD Eyes.
Better do you due diligence thoroughly , you speak only on your grey areas end. That is not doing JUSTICE to GOD's Testament . Deuteronomy 16.
@@JonathanMcLatchie Absolutely everything. It was really shocking to see how you answered. I can hardly believe it. Go and see what you answered. Is there anything more embarrassing than this. There was a big gap between what the text says and what you said. With all due respect. This really didn't go well for you as everyone seems to agree on
@@Leon-jp7ch Can you give me the best example in your opinion of that - "a big gap between what the text says and what he said"?
This was great!
Hope it was helpful
Here's their argument for everything: "As xhristians, we believe..." (fill in the blank)
That's not proof of anything! It's just your opinion. Hello?! 🤣
"As flat-earthers, we believe the earth is flat." "But we have satellite and NASA imagery showing it's not flat." "As flat-earthers, we believe the earth is flat." 🤣
I only said this when I was identifying strawmen in the arguments being made by William and Greg, where they were inaccurately representing the Christian position.
Your analogy is perfect !
Someday, the xtians will all figure it out.
2000 years of misery world wide in the name of a false religion designed to steer people away from the Most High and His Instructions to humanity.
I believe it will be an en masse awakening. May it be in our generation.
@@avalerie4467 The Bible says they will figure it out when the actual messiah gets here and redeems the Jewish people out of exile in Israel. That's Isaiah 53: "Who would have believed it! The Jews were right all along!" I think it will probably take the actual messiah to get here to wake up the xhristians, they're so lost in their delusions of their false messiah idol.
@@JonathanMcLatchie How come you have not responded to @jacobbraunstein4599, 2 days ago?
"Here are my issues with some of the claims McLatchie made during the debate:
At around 3:45 McLatchie talks about how we should use clear passages to interpret ambiguous ones when reading about Jesus’ divinity. I agree with him here, but I find that he has a double standard when it comes to the Hebrew Bible. He looks very closely at all these ‘angel of the Lord’ passages to determine some sort of plural unity in the text. But he is doing exactly what he says we shouldn’t be doing.
At Sinai God revealed Himself to His people in order that they know whom to worship (Exodus 20:19, Deuteronomy 4:15). If God would have wanted us to worship Jesus, He would have shown Jesus to us at Sinai. This consideration is of paramount importance. The Sinai revelation came before scripture. All of scripture must be read in the context of the Sinai revelation. Since the Sinai revelation precludes the worship of Jesus (and of any other being aside from God) then all of scripture must be read in that light.
Notably, Deuteronomy 4 is very explicit against the idea of an physical image of God (verse 12, 15), yet also states that the one shown to them is the only God with no other (verse 35, 39), excluding the possibility of Jesus or anyone else being involved in a revelation.
12:10 Around here he talks about believing in ‘progressive revelation’. The problem is that this methodology is unfalsifiable. We can basically make up any new belief and call it progressive revelation to try and excuse an error or contradiction between the established belief and the new belief. And using this method is how we get belief systems like Mormonism.
32:00 Here he tries to use Joshua 5:14-15 to prove that an angel is worshipped. Ignoring the methodological problems as listed above, his claim that the word ‘shachah’ means worship is false, and this can be proven. In Genesis 23:7 and 23:12, the word is used to describe Abraham bowing down to the Hittites. Genesis 27:29 uses it to describe people bowing down to Jacob. 1 Chronicles 29:20 uses the word to describe people prostrating themself to both God and David in the same sentence. I could go on with many more examples, but one should look through the concordance for those. Though prostration can be a form of worship depending on context, there is no reason to assume or falsely claim that the word means worship in Joshua 5.
41:20 Here he tries to argue that people proclaiming they would die after seeing an angel proves that the angel is God. Ignoring the fact that they didn’t die, one major issue in this claim is that seeing God is not the only ‘death sentence’ in the Bible. For example, when Uzziah died for touching the Ark (2 Samuel 6).
In regards to Exodus 33:20 and Isaiah 6, we need to contrast seeing God physically against seeing God in a visionary manner, whether the vision occurs in the subconscious (Isaiah 6) or if they are conscious during the vision, but the vision is described as something that can’t be seen on camera (Ezekiel 1). Neither of these involve seeing something that is physical. Additionally, Deuteronomy 5:4 uses the term ‘face to face’ to talk about God speaking to all of Israel. Note this is only one chapter after the text talks about Israel not seeing any form of God.
On another note, these angelic passages need be understood in the context of the fear present in the people who witness the angels. See Daniel 10:5-12, where the experience of witnessing and angel is described in a detailed and horrific manner. Notably, verse 12 has the angel telling Daniel to be not afraid. Meeting an angel unprompted would be a terrifying event for most people and could cause confusion. We should therefore not take a passage with an ambiguous reading as a ‘proof’ of a divine angel, since it is not the purpose of the surrounding text, and the author’s purpose for writing this was not to give a detailed elaboration on the identity of angels, so they did not bother to disambiguate texts that are ambiguous.
1:01:50 Here he talks about Isaiah 49. I won’t be repeating myself on this topic, since I have already discussed it elsewhere in the comment section. However for a very abridged version, there are several textual parallels between the servant Israel and the servant of Isaiah 49, so even if the servant in Isaiah 49 is an individual, they are designated as a member of Israel. If there existed an actual contrast between these servants, these textual parallels would make no sense whatsoever.
1:05:35 Here, he makes the claim that the words ‘my people’ only refer to Israel in the book of Isaiah. This claim is full of bad methodology. Firstly, it is not even true, as Isaiah 19:25 uses the term to refer to Egypt, not Israel. Additionally, if we look at the book of Exodus, the same Hebrew word he refers to is used 16 times, with 15 of them being a reference to Israel, and one to Egypt (When we consider the other constructs of this word, the ratio becomes 16:3). Using the same flawed logic he is using in the book of Isaiah , we could say that these outliers actually refer to Israel and not Egypt by ignoring the thing that ACTUALLY determines who ‘my people’ refers to: context.
1:10:30 Here I find that he makes a strawman regard the argument of the kings of nations being the speaker in Isaiah 53. He argues against this by citing parts of Isaiah 53 where the kings of nations aren’t speaking. I don’t think McBride was explicit enough, but the argument is that the part where the kings are speaking is verses 1 through 9. Though I should note that McLatchie only cites the very beginning and end of the servant song and finds 3 places where the term ‘my servant’ is used. If the nations aren’t the one speaking, it does seem a bit weird that the speaker never uses the term ‘my servant’ for an extended number of verses without any explanation.
As a side note, the grammatical pattern of Isaiah 52:15 and 53:1 has strong parallels to Isaiah 14:16. Before the speech begins, it talks about the viewer seeing and being surprised about that which they are talking about. In both cases, the last word before the speech begins is ‘perception’ (Hebrew root word ‘yisbonanu’). Immediately afterward, the text continues with the words of those ‘perceiving’ without a direct introduction. The strong grammatical parallels heavily suggest that the speaker in the passage is in fact the kings of nations.
1:18:15 Here, he tries to use Isaiah 42 as a proof, trying to contrast the servant at the start of the chapter with the blind servant in verse 18 and 19. However, verse 24 says that this is because they did not follow his Torah. The servant in the latter half of this chapter is described in the present tense, but the servant at the beginning of this chapter is described in future tense. My reading is that God describes his ideal servant as something to occur in the future, then contrasts that with Israel as it was in Isaiah’s day.
I contend that reading the later chapters shows that the servant of Isaiah 42 is only a small fraction of Israel, but that small fraction will call back the rest of Israel (Isaiah 49:5, 51:16), and the rest of Israel will repent, be rewarded, and become part of the righteous servant (Isaiah 53:10). In doing so, all of Israel will become a light to the nations (Isaiah 60:3)."
@@torahlove7693 How small is your "small fraction of Israel" that will restore the tiny remnant of Israel per Isaiah 49:1-7?
Small as one person?
I don't know about you but we learn In asking and debating that is what makes the truth hit the table .
I really applaud you for having this discussion
Thank you
Iam using objections to you that is actually scriptures and you are using objections to me that's based on opinions! WOW! Destroyed! Well done , Iam proud of you ❤
Thank you
Get him Boys!
Fast talker....raises red flags...smells snake oil salesman...So sad...
Greg you were on fire too
Oh I love this!!!
I am sorry William but I feel you are wasting your precious time with this man. He will continue to keep to his misguided beliefs, he won't change his mind...the Christian mind set works differently. Greetings to you and Greg!👍
You are likely correct. Thank you for your message.
As far as the "sacrifices" of the last chapters of Ezekiel....was or was not the entire book of Ezekiel going to be omitted from the Tanach (but was saved by one single Rabbi) because the Ezekian sacrifices apparently were not consistent with the Mosaic sacrifices? One Rabbi is credited for saving the book of Ezekiel from being removed from the lineup? Is it or is that not true....?
I've never heard anyone give an explanation for it. So, when it is mentioned by the fellows that the Messiah will sacrifice....if Ezekiel is not in line with the Mosaic sacrifices....can it be counted as reliable? This is a serious question....
You are attacking a straw man, red herring, as if Ezekiel is wrong, to distract from the fact that you are contradicting Tanakh, by falsely claiming the mitzvos involving animal korbanos are not happening in the messianic age. That Eze 45 says korban chatas happen in the messianic age, was not one of the seeming issues between Moses and Ezekiel, lol. The prophecy of Moses and the prophecy of Ezekiel agree that the Torah mitzvos, including animal korbanos, are happening in the messianic age.
Deut 30:8 you will return and listen to the voice of the Lord, and fulfill all His commandments, which I command you this day.
Eze 45:22 the prince shall make on that day for himself and for all the people of Israel a bull for a sin-offering.
The sages never thought Ezekiel contradicts Torah. There was only a question whether or not to put aside the book of Ezekiel until the proper time, so that the unlearned not misconstrue what Ezekiel said. No where do the sages ever say Ezekiel literally contradicts the Torah.
When one attempts to altar something from the Torah, they wind up needing to alter just about everything, in order to protect their falsehood, as you claim that large sections of the book of Ezekiel are falsehood.
The men of the great assembly fixed the canon of scripture, which includes the book of Ezekiel. To claim the scripture canon of Ezekiel contradicts the Torah, is to demonstrate one is not following the Torah, as Deut 17:11 according to the Torah they instruct you.
@@torahlove7693 Here's a quick question for you. I provided you a link that lists the differences between the Ezekian sacrifices and the Mosaic sacrifices, and the reasons why the last chapters of Ezekial had come under scrutiny (not by me...but by Jewish rabbis in the past). My question for the moment is, who is guilty of adding to (or subtracting from) Torah law. If Torah is eternal, who is guilty of changing the Torah commandments in Ezekiel from those listed by Moses? I'm interested in how you will wiggle out of that.
@thenazareneperspective2734 Above, already debunked this misrepresentation, as if Ezekiel contradicts Moses about korban chatas happening in the messianic age. Moses, Deut 30:8, and Ezekiel, Eze 45:22, agree that korban chatas happen in the messianic age. Try to read it again maybe
@@torahlove7693 That's a pretty weak reply. Let's do it more simply....Are the sacrifices in Ezekiel the same as those installed by Moses? No gobbledegook....no cryptic answer...plain and simple; Are the sacrifices in the Messianic age the same as they were in the days of Moses? It's a yes or no question...and this will show your honesty. Shall I list the differences for you? I will be glad to.
@@thenazareneperspective2734 The men of the great assembly would not have included Ezekiel in the canon if they thought Ezekiel literally contradicts Moses. lol! Again your ridiculous false claim is just a red herring tactic that you are attempting, to distract from the specific fact that it is your false image of Jesus, as if he permanently removes the animal korbanos from the Torah mitzvos, that contradicts Torah. The Torah and Ezekiel both say the animal korbanos happen in the messianic age. There is no disagreement between them on this
And the son being Israel, is the one who will glorify the Father
No definitely not - and God warns you this very day from Ezekiel chapters 38 to 48 the promised seed from Abraham through whom all nations are blessed. As for Israel his HOLY NAME was disgraced and had to cast Israel out of his sight by the Roman armies, only now brought back because he is going to setup an everlasting kingdom of God on earth Daniel chapter 2:44 and he will save Judah first when he presents Messiah Zechariah chapter 12 and then rebuilds the third temple
@@billweir8824 you apparently read Ezekiel through a xtian lense, see chapter 44, gentiles dont enter in
@@jtprobst1 any reading is straight forward God is very plain and he needs Israel to acknowledge the wrongs done to His Holy Name and the plan of operations are going to happen exactly as required by God - Israel doesn't make the rules only YWHY can and only he already knows the end from the beginning and that is what God says and does throughout Ezekiel and has nothing to do with what happens later
@@jtprobst1 And you apparently read Ezekiel and the rest of Tanakh through a noahide lense.
@@kingdomwithin-you4444 I’m Jewish, I don’t read it with a lense only xtians and ex-xtians do
He, the guest speaker talks to fast & is hard to understand.
O this is good!! 🤣
I understand that this is NOT a I win you lose debate, but can one of the Christian apologists please explain why the Christian bible has changed/altered what is written in the Hebrew bible?....
Why take the details of the Greek testament at face value? Why waste time and energy arguing over the contradictions in what 'Jesus' said when the authorship is unknown?
The claims of christianity only have to be tested against the scriptures from which it claims legitimacy: the Hebrew Bible.
True. Problem is Christian apologists refuse to acknowledge when Christianity fails the tests. Former Christians acknowledged it.
1:30:53 I could see the sparks flying and Jonathan is in the ashes.
26 pages? That's long even for me! And thats friggen long.
TLDR lol
This is why I don't like multiple-person debates. Every time one person is making a good and interesting argument, the other person messes it up because he has something to say.
That's why we set this up from the beginning as being a back-and-forth conversation. Not set up like a debate. McClatchy kept going on and on with information that did not even pertain to our conversations at all. I was not going to continue wasting my time letting him try to answer things that we didn't ask. And we still went 45 minutes over
Jesus did not have the Tetragrammaton before he died according to Paul. Evidence of that is Paul saying, "Therefore, God also has highly exalted him and given him the name which is above every name...." (Philippians 2:9). This was given, as Paul put it, in the form of a reward. If it's a name he had from eternity, how could it be an exaltation or a reward? Paul would have said this because it is well known that the Messiah will be given the Holy Name of God, as prophesied by Jeremiah 23:6. Being rewarded with that Name doesn't make him God. That Name will also be given to Jerusalem (Jeremiah 33:16).
Xtians fashioned an idol of flesh and say my creation commanded this.
1 samuel 15 verse 29
He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a human being, that he should change his mind.
numbers 23 verse 19
God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?
Isaiah 10-11
“You are my witnesses,” declares the Lord,
“and my servant whom I have chosen,
so that you may know and believe me
and understand that I am he.
Before me no god was formed,
nor will there be one after me.
I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour.
Isaiah 11 verse 1,2,3 (About the Messiah)
A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse;
from his roots a Branch will bear fruit.
2 The Spirit of the Lord will rest on him-
the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding,
the Spirit of counsel and of might,
the Spirit of the knowledge and fear of the Lord-
3 and he will delight in the fear of the Lord.
The Messiah is an ordinary human being who fears the Lord. God does not fear himself. God can be anything but he says he is not going to be a man because men can lie and no one would know if he is lying. That would include Jesus. There is only God and no SAVIOR as stated in Isaiah 10-11.
Truth
The approach of CLEAR, WORD FOR WORD, LINE UPON LINE AND PRECEPT UPON PRECEPT, that you 2 have consistantly shown is WHY I HAVE HAD TO CONCEDE MY BLINDNESS AND REPENT OF IT.. I do want ypu to understand though, you 2, in thos episode are fighting on 2 fronts. 1. )This mans EGO and snobish attitude has already and will continue to keep him blind unless he gets sick of the the programming hes gone through and puts on his big boy pants. 2.) When children on up are taught the new testament, we are continuously told to GUARD OUR HEARTS and Defend (our unknowingly false) Faith at all costs. Praise Hashem for using YOU AS A LIGHT TO THE NATIONS to extend his ETERNAL FLAME OF LOVE❤️
Question:1). If the TETRAGRAMMATON 'spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded
them in the day that It brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings
or sacrifices.' (Jeremiah 7:22). -
Which TETRAGRAMMATON met 'Moses as he
kept the flock of Jethro his father in law, the priest of Midian: And the angel of the LORD
appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush' saying to 'Moses, I AM
THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say
unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you' to beseech that the king of Egypt allow the Israelites three days' journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to the LORD our God?
It doesn't say that. You might want to learn, read and understand Hebrew.
@@zaharabardavid Amos wrote, "Have ye offered unto me
sacrifices and offerings in the wilderness
forty years, O house of Israel? Ye have borne
the tabernacle of your Moloch and Chiun your
images, the star of your god, which ye made
to yourselves."
@@zaharabardavid as far as learning Hebrew... First thing first, there are 419,687 words in the old testament. Of those 419,687 words 8,679 are considered 'unique' Hebrew dialect. Of the 8,679 distinct words 1,480 are hapax legomena, words that occur only once. According to another linguist, there are a total of 8,198 distinct words, of which some 2,000 are hapax legomena. Some argue there are 13,962 words attributed to classical Hebrew, 6,556 of those are homonyms of another word and 3,373 are new words... BUTT, according to the old testament book of Nehemiah the 'Jews' could not even speak their own language post Babylonian exile.
"In those days also saw I Jews that had married wives of Ashdod (Assyrian Asdudu, šadâdu), of Ammon (Assyrian Bît Ammanu),
and of Moab (Assyrian Ma’aba, Ma’bu, Mu’âba, etc.): And their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, *and could not speak
in the Jews' language*, but according to the language of each people." Neh 13:23-24.. The uniformity of language, style, and ideas of the Ezra, Neh, and Chronicles mark the entire work as the product of a single author, known as the Chronicler. He belongs to a period after the Babylonian Exile, probably about 350-300 bc... Some argue the Torah was translated from Greek into 'Hebrew', not Hebrew into Greek in the third century B.C.E.; the rest of the biblical books were translated later.
The earliest copies of the Hebrew Bible were written without vowels or accents, as written Hebrew did not represent vowels until the Middle Ages. To preserve traditional spoken readings, starting in the fifth century C.E., a group of Jewish scribes known as the Masoretes carefully selected, copied, and annotated biblical scrolls, adding vowels and accents to the ancient Hebrew consonants in the process. Though the Masoretic scribes added these vowels to the ancient text long after it had been written, they were likely preserving traditional vocalizations that dated to much earlier times. The Masoretes produced several different systems of vocalization (writing in vowels) between 500 and 700 C.E. As stated, the Torah was translated, in the third century B.C.E.; the rest of the biblical books were translated later. The whole Hebrew Bible was likely translated into ancient Greek by the middle of the second century B.C.E. At the time the Bible was translated into Greek, there was no MT or any official or authorized Bible in existence. There were merely multiple editions of many scrolls of various perceived levels of sacredness. In fact, it seems that there wasn’t an official project to translate “the Bible” into ancient Greek; instead, many different Greek-speaking Jews in various times and places simply translated their favorite books into ancient Greek. Some of these books were later chosen to be included in the Bible, and some were not. It was only many centuries later that people began to choose the best of these Greek translations and to copy them all together as if they were one book. So, it can be said that the Bible was translated in its entirety before there even was a Bible.
@@zaharabardavid furthermore, October 7, 3761 BCE., is the date on which the world was created; per the biblical narrative, and Hebrew calendar. Civilizations in and around Mesopotamia are credited with inventing the first true writing systems in the world at around 3500 BCE., 261 years after the alleged creation of the world. Several Sumerian, Akkadian, Eblaite, Elamite, Hittite, Hurrian, Luwian, Urartian, Palaic, Aramaic, Old Persian, etc. Cuneiform clay tablets up and throughout
the invention of the Paleo-Hebrew writing that dates to the 10th century BCE., that have been recovered help better our understand the Hebrew language. Interpretations of the cuneiform tablets has aided comparative studies of Semitic languages-including the language of the Old Testament. Modern Hebrew is the only vernacular tongue based on an ancient written form, that was developed in the 19th and 20th centuries 'as a living language', that has been resurrected from the dead, or from beginning 12th to its ending 3rd century BCE., life.
@@dantesinferno4580 I appreciate your attempt at trying to goysplain language in the diaspora but it doesn't negate the fact that the Tanakh is written in Hebrew and Aramaic, and unless you're able to read and understand each word of it, you're not in the position to teach Hebrew speaking Jews that have been learning Tanakh since the beginning of their lives
Just a question I’d have for the christian nonsense defender… isn’t the whole Word of God (what he calls the old testament) context for everything he wants to add to the Word of God?? Since it clearly is, he should never say look at context when others mention verses from the Word of God (what he calls the old testament)
Some times Jesus is the father, and sometimes he's the Son. Doesn't that happen in real life when you steal your dad's ID to buy beer?
😅🤣😂
😂😂😂😂😂
Genesis 48:
15And he [Israel] blessed Joseph and said, "God, before Whom my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, walked, God Who sustained me as long as I am alive, until this day,
that's one statement, pointing out that G-d had sustained him and all his ancestors, and:
16may the angel who redeemed me from all harm bless the youths, and may they be called by my name and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, and may they multiply abundantly like fish, in the midst of the land."
is a continuation statement finishing the blessing. There's no mention whatsoever that the angel is HaShem. It just asks the angel to bless the youths, nothing about the angel being G-d. The angel is a separate entity, created by HaShem, and Israel is asking for the angel's blessing, just like someone would ask for a rebbe's blessing, or ask for a blessing from anyone. An angel is perfectly capable of redeeming a person from harm, through the power of HaShem, just like a human being can redeem someone from harm with the help of HaShem - a firefighter, for example, or anyone helping any person out of harm. It doesn't mean the person or angel is HaShem, lol.
Not sure what the xhristian has such a hard time understanding. And if the angel were in fact intended to mean HaShem, why isn't it capitalized? Just more xhristian confusion.
I’m not a Christian. I’ve watched this UA-cam channel for many years and this was a disappointment. William came in WAY too strong. Constantly interrupting and calling it a “conversation.” The Christian didn’t constantly interrupt him.
Definitely do better next time.
It reminded me of a Sam shamoun video and I can’t stand Sam shamoun.
It's really funny that our opinion is so different. I felt like they kept trying to remind him of the rules , to give exact scriptures, etc. and he kept ignoring it and just kept plowing through to make his point. I do think the 2 against one thing was a little rough. Although I think my perspective might be jaded from hearing "context" too many times. ;)
@@mandyvoss1966 It’s because you’re biased. You already have a side. But it’s like a good marriage, an honest husband or wife can tell the other one when they’re in the wrong. Dishonest chooses their side no matter what. You can simply watch the first 5 minutes and William is immediately interrupting before the Christian even got it out all the way. An honest respectful conversation wouldn’t be interrupted with “oh, really?, wow” as they other person is talking. William almost seemed irritated in the first few minutes.
The Christian couldn’t even get what he was saying out and William is like “what about this verse?” And the Christian said well let’s finish this before moving on. William wanted to keep throwing more points but he didn’t want the Christian to do it.
@@Christo-pv7eb I was actually looking forward to the debate, I’ve struggled with the concept of the Trinity forever. So, I was hoping for new light to be shed on it. I don’t know about biased, but it was super annoying that he would say a scripture, that I could barely hear, then read it so quickly I couldn’t make out what he was reading. It wasn’t a debate that’s for sure. It seemed a bit unfair if that’s where they were going. I was wondering if I caught part 2, because they seemed like I had missed a prior conversation.
@@mandyvoss1966 You’ll always struggle with the trinity. It’s not biblical. God never says he’s 3 in 1. He says he created and did it by himself.
Isaiah 44:24.
Jesus was not there with him.
In my humble personal opinion, I think the two guys’ tactic versus Mr. McClatchie’s or any Paulinist, should not be attempted in the way they pursued it here. I think the tactic should be to first show how Paul is a false apostle, and once that is accomplished, then Paul’s house of cards falls. It should be recognized that any writings associated with Paul should be rejected as being a subversion to Judaism, and Nazarene Judaism in particular, as Paul was sent not to subvert Judaism, but rather he was sent to subvert the teachings of the Nazarenes. Once Paul can be proven to be false, then the trinitarian argument falls apart.
Explain what a Nazarene is?
And where the Tanakh speaks about it?
This is not asked blindly…
@@Pverb623 Thanks for the reply...
You asked: "Explain what a Nazarene is?"
My reply: The briefest answer is that it is one of the seven sects of Judaism that existed in the 1st Century AD. A more detailed answer to what their beliefs were I can provide...or you can research yourself as that is easily done. The best explanation of the Nazarene sect is given in comparison to the other sects of Judaism as found in both the "Panarion of Epiphanius"...and the "Clementine Literature" as well.
You asked: "And where the Tanakh speaks about it?"
My reply: That the Nazarene sect of Judaism existed historically is without question, but in truth, it is not mentioned in the Tanach as the sect was established after the Tanach was written (so were the Jewish sects of the Sadducees, Pharisees, Scribes, Essenes, Hermerobaptists, and Herodians. All formed after the Tanach was written). My question back to you is, where in the Tanakh does it speak of the Apollo 11 moon landing? The point is, just because it isn't mentioned in the Tanach, doesn't mean that it didn't happen.
You said: "This is not asked blindly…"
My reply: Of course, it isn't....I'm just wondering what you are leading to...lol.
I just don’t understand how and why doesn’t the Christian admit defeat and see Williams points that he has made. The man is just blind to the obvious scripture points. And William even used scripture and the Christian just kept making circle arguments
And I believe the Easter Bunny gives birth to chocolate eggs, so I am making as much sense as this bloke saying God and Jesus are one.
the title should be " PREPARING jesus lovers ON JUDGMENTS DAY " 😭
There are over 25 million christians who are non trinitarian
Believers
Lost interest as soon as started with the 3 person God.
For no English spokesman it is very hard to listen him he is very fast
28:57 wow that's a claim!
This was a laughable conversation in that this poor professor was tossing a word salad made of nothingness. I almost felt sorry for him because he was used as a mop to wipe the floor...
Also…. Jesus saying he can not speak unless the Father says- is representing Balaam not Moses…
Then there is Jesus in Zechariah 13:6
You insist that Jesus is in Zechariah 13:6, right?
GREAT!
That proves Jesus is the Messiah shepherd of the Lord and the second person of the Triune God - God's neighbor/associate/another/companion sitting at the right hand of Yahweh the Father right now and ruling in the midst of his enemies like u and ur rabbis (Psalm 110 and Daniel 7:13-14,27)!
*_"And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends._*
*_Awake, O sword, against MY SHEPHERD (Messiah), and against the MAN that is my FELLOW (NEIGHBOR/ASSOCIATE/ANOTHER), saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones."_*
Hope it helps.
@@kingdomwithin-you4444
It's about false prophets you dunce, which your man god was which is why it says.......
And it shall come to pass on that day that the prophets shall be ashamed, each one of his vision when he prophesies; and they will not wear a hairy mantle in order to lie.
And he shall say, "I am not a prophet! I am a tiller of the soil, for a man entrusted me with his cattle from my youth."
Zechariah 13:6
And one will say to him,👉 "What are these wounds between your hands?"👈 And he shall say, "That I was smitten in the house of my friends."
smitten in the house of my friends, I thought your buddy called them the sons of the devil! John 8:44
Get your story straight idol worshipper! were they his friends, were they the devil, why is your man god committing false prophesies?
The deity of Jesus, in the context of the Nazarene (Jesus, the 12 Apostles) perspective: Jesus never claimed to be God (in a trinity type of situation). But, he was “g”od in representation according to the Jewish Law of Agency.
In the debate between the Jewish Nazarene Apostle Peter (and by association Jesus), Simon Magus, Simon suggests to Peter that Jesus was put to death (for being a false prophet) on the basis of Deu 13.
To put it in context;
Clementine Homily Book 16: Chap: 14 Peter goes on to explain that there are “g”ods (elohim) [i.e. pharaoh, judges, kings, etc. angels, etc] which are “created” beings, and he .who are not “G”od, who is “un” created
Clementine Homily Book 16: Chap 15. This is a very important chapter…
• When Simon heard this, he said; “Since you say that we shouldn’t believe even the prophet that gives signs and wonders if he says that there is another god and that you know that he even incurs the penalty of death if he does so, therefore your, teacher, Jesus, also was for this very reason cutoff for having given signs and wonders.”
And Peter answered; “Our Lord neither asserted that there were other gods except for the Creator of all, nor did He proclaim Himself to be God, but He with reason blessed him who called him the Son of that God who had arranged the universe.”
And Simon answered; “Does it not seem to you, then, that he who comes from God; is God?”
And Peter said; “Tell us how this is possible, for we cannot affirm this because we did not hear it from Him.”
Clementine Homily Book 16: Chap 16. Peter avers that God is uncreated and that Jesus is created…and that Jesus cannot be compared to God (unbegotten (self-begotten)) cannot be compared with Jesus (begotten), or even the “Spirit of the Messiah” (also a begotten being).
• Peter continued; “In addition to this, it is unique to the Father to have not been made, but the Son is a created being, so what is begotten cannot be compared with that which is unbegotten or self-begotten.”
And Simon said; “Is it not the same on account of its origin?”
And Peter said; “He who is not the same in all respects as someone, cannot have all the same appellations applied to him as that person.”
And Simon said; “This is to assert, not to prove.”
And Peter said; “Why, do you not see that if the one happens to be self-begotten or unbegotten, they cannot be called the same, nor can it be asserted of him who has been begotten that he is of the same substance as he is who has begotten him? Learn this also; The bodies of men have immortal souls, which have been clothed with the breath of God and having come forth from a well of souls. The souls are of the same substance, but they are not gods. But if they are gods, then in this way the souls of all men, both those who have died, and those who are alive, and those who shall come into being, are gods. But if in a spirit of controversy, you maintain that these also are gods, what great matter is it, then, for Christ to be called God? For He has only what we all have.”
This is in line with a church I went to at one time. They said that Yeshua was a great example of spiritual perfection and should be revered for that, but he isn't a special son of G-d. We are all daughters and sons of G-d.
@@wittymystic7361 The Nazarenes did consider him a "special" son of God...naturally conceived through the interactions of a married man (Joseph) and his wife (Mary) and naturally born. According to the Nazarnes/Ebionites, because it was historically time, and because of his righteousness and piety, Jesus became the "adopted" Son of God at his adult baptism, where it was confirmed publically by the "Bat Kol". At his baptism, he was given both the complete 7-facet "Holy Spirit of God" as well as the "Spirit of the Messiah". Commissioned to be the expected "Prophet like unto Moses" through the empowering of the Holy Spirit at his 1st Coming, Jesus will fulfill the role of the "Messiah ben David" at his return.
@@thenazareneperspective2734 I hope he comes soon.
'he was “g”od in representation according to the Jewish Law of Agency' Anytime followers of Jesus try to claim how Jewish it is to follow Jesus, that is a clear red flag. They don't hardly know anything about Judaism, of which they are very distant from, which is especially evident when their sources are an unrelaible encyclopedia, and they don't really have a clue about the limits of a shaliach, and when it can apply or not. The usage of 'shaliach' employed by the Hebrew scriptures, is not the same as that used by pagan-influenced followers of Jesus in their attempts to define the relationship between the nature of the Father and the supposed Son
William & Greg, you made an awesome job guys 👍🏼. Thank you so much ! Verly clearly, I have to say that Jonathan was wrong all the time and is even not representing appropiately the christian opinion and conviction for some christians do not belive Jesus is God ! Keep teaching us relevant jewish context to help every one have a better understanding of the jewish bible 😇. Thank you guys for having so marvelously put in light the context of every jewish bible passages quoted 😉
I'd be interested to hear on what points you think William & Greg refuted my arguments in this video.
Thank you!
@@JonathanMcLatchie
Thank you very much for being interested in the diversity of opinions among the viewers. I did not review the debate in full and will not be able to bring all the points which caught my attention during the Debate but let's take the fisrts points of the Debate. In one hand you say "We do not even have to argue that Jesus is Yaweh" and in the other hand you said that " Jesus is not the father". This seemed very confusing to me and believe me, I do not agree with every thing the orthodox jews say.
Secondly you used the verse in Mark in which it is said "the father is greater than me" to prove that Jesus is divine and God through the privileges he had back. Whereas God being greater than Jesus naturally indicates that Jesus is not divine... This point sounds also confusing to me.
Thirdly, you brought in massive and multiple contexts at the same time to justify your arguments, whereas on the Mark's verse for example, they are not appropriate.
By saying that the father is greater than I, every one who is familiar with the old testament perfectly understand that Jesus is in line with all the heros of the old testament (Abraham, David, Daniel, Joseph, the prophets...) without any ambiguity. But by bringing massive contexts you make the verse say the opposite of its natural understanding... all this were not great points in your favour for any one that has simple knowledges of the bible... But again it is only my opinion. William and Craig were more convincing on these very first points, at the beginning of the debate. Take care Jonathan
@@jean-pierremassardo8627 "Whereas God being greater than Jesus naturally indicates that Jesus is not divine"?
How so?
God the Father naturally is greater than God the Son in function and purpose but they are EQUAL in nature.
What is greater in you - your body or your mind controlling your body?
@@jean-pierremassardo8627 The Tanakh is crystal clear that the God of Tanakh is TRINITY: the Lord, our God, the Lord in one complex unity.
Jesus is the Lord (Yahweh) of hosts speaking in the first person in Zechariah 2:8-11 and saying that the Lord of hosts (the Father) will send him for the glory to come and dwell with his people.
Jesus is the FACE of the Lord or the Angel of God's Face in Tanakh prophecies so the commandment "you shall have no other gods over my face" literally translates into "you shall worship me only through Jesus"!
as an atheist who values proper textual criticism......i was like i kid in a candy store watching mclatchie get bounced around theologically so bad that his only constant rebuttals to what you two were informing him on was essentially "ya but context". the smugness and overestimation of their understanding of science or the bible that comes from these crap apologists from AIG is so cringe
The Christians doesn't realize that if the angel is Jesus, the whole Christian dogma are collapsing... Exudes 23:20-21 Behold, I send an Angel before you to keep you in the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. Beware of Him and obey His voice; do not provoke Him, for HE WILL NOT PARDON YOUR TRANSGRESSIONS; for My name is in Him.
Exactly Nathan. Repentance won't work because your sins cannot just be PARDONED.
Do you not understand this?
Your sin must be PAID FOR with the shedding of blood. You must be WASHED by the blood.
How will you avoid the wrath of God as at the Passover without the shedding of blood? You are up a creek without a paddle.
Unless of course you say you have no sin then you don't need to be washed. God is well pleased with you.
But myself, I've broken God's moral law. I've stolen I've lied I've committed adultery at some points in the past. I've not honored my parents nor God at times in the past. I will stand guilty.
@@garyg7549 the prophets says repent works and washed, they NEVER say MUST be washed by the blood, are they liyng?
Btw the Torah also never says ONLY blood washed.
@@nathankupczyk3125 Nathan, how will you be washed of your sin ?
@@nathankupczyk3125 how can you so quickly forget the annual Passover that occurred when these prophets spoke these things?
So I Googled J. Mclatchie and found that he is nicely accredited in the academic world... and yet, when I watch this debate I'm left shaking my head. If this is the brightest and best Christianity has... it will crumble even quicker than I've imagined.
I'd be interested to hear on what points you think William & Greg refuted my arguments in this video.
@@JonathanMcLatchie Hi Jonathan. I hope you don't feel personally insulted; that wasn't my intent. You may be intellectually well-endowed, but false claims will always remain shaky. There are many points that were absurd bc Christianity is based on nothingness, not bc you are unintelligent. One point, of the top of my head, is questioning the claims of the reinstitution of the sacrificial system in Ezekiel, and questioning if the prince is the Messiah when Ezekiel 34:24 specifically says he is. I don't blame you for not knowing; Christians rarely know the Hebrew Bible in context. Be well!
@@SeekingToServe This I would argue is only relatively weak evidence against my view. The word נָּשִׂ֡יא literally means leader or chief. There is only a single arguable connection of Ezekiel 45:7 to the Messiah, namely Ezekiel 34:24. That's not nothing, but I wouldn't deem it sufficient by any measure to overwhelm the positive case from the Hebrew Bible (and, indeed, from the New Testament) for the Messianic identity of Jesus.
@@JonathanMcLatchie When one looks at the Hebrew scriptures there is absolutely nothing that points to Jesus. Every single "proof" is taken out of context or a mistranslation. One thing a Christian cannot say is that the Jewish people are ignorant. We reject the claims of Christianity because they are contrary to everything in the Hebrew scriptures. Be well! And if you truly seek to worship the Gd of Israel, it is suggested to take off the christological lens and learn the Torah in the correct context. Be well!
@@SeekingToServewell said
Professor Jonathan it's speckless at final... Well done church for wash brain... Maybe he just 'wake up'
Here is a question....if men are raised from the dead to live in the Messianic Kingdom age...are they not perfected? If so, will they be raised to "sin" again during the Messianic Kingdom age? To sacrifice for sins during the Messianic Kingdom age....it doesn't make sense if the Messianic Kingdom is going to be filled with people endued with the Holy Spirit.
Only the righteous will be resurrected.
Though rebellious sin may be gone with the subjugation of the evil inclination, there is still the possibility to unintentionally miss the mark or to be deficient, this is why Eze 45:22 uses the word chatas, and not pesha. We see here the korbanos involving animals happening in the messianic age. The claim that since Jesus, there are no longer anymore animal korbanos is false
We see all the Torah mitzvos, including animal korbanos, are still being done in the messianic age in Deut 30 'And you will return and listen to the voice of the L-rd, and fulfill all His commandments, which I command you this day'.
The messianic age , comes as how to Correctly divide the Scripture and the Heart of GOD, The Righteous (anointed by GOD, pour oil by GOD, messiah) return to teach others how to be righteous and no longer stray from JUSTICE Laws and His Heart. The sins done prior to their righteousness still has to be atone for in a way , GOD has Listed out how the redemption process is , sacrifices will be reveal by the anointed By GOD. The Anointed david will correctly divide what GOD Wants in Atonement . Before being accepted .
The whole concept of sin in the Messianic age and in the past with the sin sacrifice, was and will be, only for inadvertent sins. It never was for international sins. They require repentance.
In the Messianic era, everyone will know G-D without a doubt. None will sin intentionally. Free will ends in the current sense, but people will make mistakes and that is what the sin sacrifice will be
1 Corinthians 14:33 I'm confused.... god help me😢
Both things can't be true and AREN'T true! That guy is a double talker.
Jonathan keeps avoiding answering yo the point by running to other places. He runs from verse to verse, book to book, ignoring context and demanding it from everyone else but himself. He's the picture of self convincing with circular reasoning without any hold to the actual original text of the תנ"ך. Frustrating
I used stopwatch from the moment Johnathan started till William questioned him was 1:28.2 min.... Johnathan lost it after that .
I am very glad we set this up as a conversation rather than a debate. There would have been so many things left unanswered. B"H