Is Jesus the Jewish Messiah? Michael Brown vs Rabbi Immanuel Schochet
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 лип 2013
- Dr Michael Brown vs. Rabbi Immanuel Schochet. Arizona State University March 30, 1995
Dr. Brown's website: askdrbrown.org/
Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus: realmessiah.com/answers_to_obj...
Where us Brown's rebuttal?
Hey shamounian! I’m struggling watching some of these debates! Are there any sources you could point me to to refute Jews on their claim Jesus isn’t the messiah? Thank you and may the Lord bless you.
Thank you for posting this event!
I find it interesting Michael Brown doesn't post this debate when he posts his past debates on his UA-cam channel he never posts this debate and now I know why.
🤣😂🫡🙏🏻❤️
It is obvious from this debate that Brown followed in the footstep of his master, the nailed man. He disregarded the pharisees who were the authorities and Brown disregarded the sages. Obviously, Brown's followers will later disregard him for new ideas and the cycle will continue because they love new things. The church goer has been declining even though new converts are coming in. Why? After the emotional phase is gone the passion will gradually diminish.
@Tojoo9 I wouldn't go that far as much as Christianity has caused bloodshed or the false interpretation of it...but passion is something we got a lot of we want to change the world just as you do my jewish friend you may question are motives but please at least give us that we are sincere and devoted.
@@adammooney4861 to be fair though, the jihadists are much more passionate than you.
By the same token, that would also shame Rabbi Tovia Singer seeing that he refuses to even allow the (first) debate he had with Dr Brown to be released 😅😅😅
a very informative and civilized debate , about a very complex topic , well done and thanks to all who helped make this excellent video,
Civilised ? One of them called others mentally ill! Civilised NO WAY
@@CyprusHot he's saying that those who claim to hear Hashem speak to them are mentay I'll or bs liars
@@quentinortiz4837 listen to the way he spoke - he was disrespectful. As for the Old Testament - the rabbi loses his argument as many people heard voices …..
Either be consistent or just shut up
@@CyprusHot there have been multiple cases of people killing others because they "heard G-d tell them to do so"
@@CyprusHot Jews have millions of reasons to be disrespectful to the church.
They don't go out of their way to do so. He warned you at the start of the video that you might be offended - you could turn off them.
The cheek of christianity is insufferable. He did well to contain his indignation as he did
This is, and I’m being as objective as I can be, Michael Browns worst debate and one of the most lopsided debates I’ve ever ever heard. I say I’m objective because I think Brown has done far better in other debates, but in this one Rav Schochet stayed razor sharp on topic and dismantled everything Brown said
Rabbi Schochet stated very well a proper response to Christian missionaries. As a former Christian missionary, I appreciate all the points he made and acknowledge that many of these arguments were instrumental in my realizing the fallacy of Christianity and the reality of Judaism. Great post!
Dean Edward Lol, obviously Mr Brown won
@kb be he destroyed the rabbi
Rabbi got owned
@@lionofthecherubim4486 Dr Michael Brown lost. Also, Michael is gay.
@@chadrocks4329 No, rabbi got owned
I respect Rabbi Shochet, hes brutally honest and doesnt try to twist words to make a show and no point, rabbi shochet is clear and concise while dr. brown is vague. hard to trust dr. brown.
well said.
Watch Brown’s debate with Bart Ehrmab. You’ll see how mean spirited and viscous he actually is, making fun of people who are “too stupidl to accept his kind loving God because they see children dying of brain cancer.
Dr Brown epitomises most Christian preachers.
@@deanedward2379 not really Dr. Brown is well respected and sites very truth about Judaism. No not well said
@@TheIncognitusMe that is a vicious twisting of his demeanor
The Rabbi destroys Dr. Brown by quoting Romans and Galatians in his face: how absurd it is for a Christian to claim that he can be a scriptural Jew at the same time as being Christian. The new testament dissuades from such absurdity, yet Brown, disregarding his own holy book, dares to come to a debate to "prove" the absurd thesis. This happened already in the position statement of Rabbi Shochet. Brown, instead of answering, comes with the claim that Rabbi Shochet's stance on the Jewish (scriptural) messiah does not address "the problem of sin", which remains unresolved (not true, Scripture clearly gives the way and method to address this, and the Messiah is not a part of it). Therefore, says Brown following his imagination outside of the Scriptures, messiah must also necessarily be a "high priest", and provide a solution for the inclination of man to sin. In this way Brown "proves" that only Jesus could be the messiah.
Brown never answers Rabbi Shochet, he states that the Rabbi quoted verses of the NT out of context", and only addressed the matter from the point of view of a gentile adding circumcision to their faith. he never addresses Schochet concerning whether a xian Jew can keep the law and xianity together. Anyone can see that in this sense Rabbi Shochet understood the NT VERY WELL. No christian can defend another Christian circumcising himself and wanting to follow the Laws of the OT. Brown, instead of debating (answering the Rabbi), only makes imaginary unscriptural assumptions and concludes them. This is not a debate, but a monologue based on circular logics.
This debate is a complete debacle for Brown, from the logical point of view he is put to shame. One would wonder if, with all his diplomas, degrees and studies, he does this unintentionally or being fully aware of what he is doing.
🤣😂🫡🙏🏻❤️
@@brandonrumann3931 no
Your bias will keep you from reading the new testament and fact check for yourself if the rabbi is being honest with the N.T scriptures
Jesus is an idol! No man can die for the sins of others, pure paganism! New Testament is based on lies and twisting the old and only true bible !
holy crap that into from the rabbi was intense. u can just tell that he is after the truth after a powerful opening statement like that
He seemed angry and threatened by the biblicl Judaism of God (Christianity)
@lionofthecherubim4486 you should have listened to his words instead of trying to gauge his emotional state.
You would also be annoyed if your people had been persecuted for 2000 years in the name of easily refuted lies. Soneone who cares about the truth might also be angry that people have changed the word of God to fit their own agenda
He completely took Christianity and so much scripture out of context. Fueled by emotion not by Truth sadly. I pray he accepts the true Messiah Jesus Christ. God Bless ✝️🙏.
Clifford, that is so naively ignorant and amusing. You are apparently so indoctrinated in the nt, that you don't recognize the truth.
That was the point! Don’t interpret our Torah and we won’t interpret your New Testament.
WONDERFUL DEBATE
!
Rabbi Schochet (z"l) is an expert.logician. literaly everything Dr Michael Brown said was itrelevant to the points made by Rabbi Schochet and did not prove anything other than his own intellectual dishonesty.
I don't get the comment section. I thought Dr Brown won the debate. What did I miss?
They can't see it "yet".
Well you probably didn’t watch the video.
The Sunnyman - don't believe you actually listened if you think he did.
THE BOAT!!!!
I don't think Brown has recovered from this debate yet.
Context would be nice rabbi
Who won?
Yeh truth is a bitch aint it?
@@returntozion9287 rabbi lost
@@deus_vult8111 brown got his but spanked......hahaha!
***** Thank you for your honesty
Is the channel owner Messianic or regular Jewish? Please to the owner reply to me.....
Messianic isn't ny type of jewish. Messianic is. Chrustin denomination . No less christian than any other christian denomination.
Well done debate.
As a Christian I struggled with atheism but eventually overcame it. Then I found Judaism and my Christian faith hasn't recovered since.
ua-cam.com/users/kabanethechristian see the series on Jesus’ messiahship. It uses arguments that are rarely seen.
Yep, tends to happen!
Are you still there? I happened to be afflicted to find Jews seemed to refute Christianity, but up until now the pattern has been that if I was patient and persistent enough, an answer surely has come every time Judaism had something against Christianity
Love this!!!🤣🙏🏻❤️👍🏻
Rabbi Schochet was brilliant and powerful!!! BARUCH HASHEM!
Amen
Schochet is as blind as it can get
A real debate!
"What ever happened to the Gospels according to Thomas, Jade, James, Peter,"
They were all forgeries from the second century, which placed them about 100+ years after the original Gospels were written. Simple.
"The vote of the one is the belief of all the others"
Nah, you're just woefully ignorant of the subject.
All the gospels are fraudulent!
@@returntozion9287 Ok.
@@regelemihai ok, what?????
@@returntozion9287 Chicken butt.
@@regelemihai Meaning????
" there are several that vary immensely"
The fact that there are (minor) variations in how individuals CENTURIES LATER decided to include some books and exclude others doesn't mean there was no canon. It was established from the get-go, and the consistent testimony of the Church Fathers shows it.
"Bible has changed numerous times"
You've failed to show this once, even though you've had the opportunity. Don't kid yourself.
"either included or discarded"
included not as part of the canon.
fun fact he had to stop debating because he got serous death threats
The problem with Christianity is how many different variations existed. Docetists believed Jesus was a spirit or image, Marcionites(oldest biblical Canon ever) who believed Jesus was a brand new God from the Old Testament and the OT God was evil had a great following that stayed around even after Marion's death. Ebionites who believed Jesus was a mere man who didn't come from a virgin birth. Arians who believed Jesus wasn't God but created by God.
Rabbi confused Luke for Matthew but his point remained clear
As someone in both faiths since I was young, the debate is closer than people think. The Rabbi did misinterpret some Christian scriptures completely incorrectly, ie. circumcision.
So you are telling people what they should think? Obviously you don't believe Rabbi Schochet, you CAN'T. He said Jesus can't be the Messiah and you say he is. Same with the trinity.
Wow!!!!!
The Rabbi came out swinging hard.
I like it!
Good going Rabbi👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌
Michael Brown Destroyed this disciple of Satan
@@TorahisTRUTHPsalm keep lying to youself
@@ShayAviv1000 You cannot use the NT to prove that jesus is the messiah. If you attempt such a thing you will conclude that jesus is the messiah. You are fooling yourself.
@@ebraismoecristianesimo1126 no he used both the nt and ot to prove it
@@ziondanielkashani3843 you keep lying to yourself Jewish supremacist
Dr Brown should read Ezekiel 18
I’m sure he has.
@@michaeldukes4108 And then choked on it!
He won't read it because it's not "messianic", it doesn't agree with jesus.
“If there be a messenger with him, an interpreter, one among a thousand, to shew unto man his uprightness:
Then he is gracious unto him, and saith, Deliver him from going down to the pit: I have found a ransom.
His flesh shall be fresher than a child's: he shall return to the days of his youth:
He shall pray unto God, and he will be favourable unto him: and he shall see his face with joy: for he will render unto man his righteousness.
He looketh upon men, and if any say, I have sinned, and perverted that which was right, and it profited me not;
He will deliver his soul from going into the pit, and his life shall see the light.”
Job 33:23-28
Dr Brown finally met his match. Wow
Am I missing something? Where did Dr. Brown's rebuttal time go? Did he not get one??
It's at 1:20:21 It's the title that is wrong. It says "Question", and the moderator says, "Dr Brown your question, Sir", but the footage is of his rebuttal.
How the good Rabbi Shochet performed to his name and ritually slaughtered that clown.
hahaha....so true!
Schochet is the one who got slaughtered just like Tovia Singer in another debate with Dr Brown.
@@seriouslyiknowhowtoread 17:13
God bless all the comments here but to the Jews rejecting Christ as their Messiah, where is your Messiah?
Rabbi Schochet said that if he believed every Messianic prophecy, so what, what does that have to do with Jesus?
It has everything to do with Jesus. Because the period for the advent of the Messiah is over. It's closed. If Jesus is not the Messiah, then Daniel 9 has no meaning. It's meaningless. In fact, would Daniel then be considered a false prophet because what he said did not come to pass? If the Tanakh is claimed to be the inspired writings of the LORD but contains the work of a false prophet, what does that say about the Jewish faith? A clear time frame is given and has since passed.
Where is your Messiah? He is Jesus, the Son of God.
キリストは主である Well, for every reason they reject Jesus as the Messiah, so they must also reject Cyrus. Furthermore, Cyrus was not of the tribe of Judah or the lineage of David nor did he come as King of the Jews or fulfill any prophecy spoken of the Messiah.
Dave Biddle I agree with your statement, but I am not sure I understand or agree with the statement that Jesus was of the tribe of Judah or even that Jesus was Jewish.
I am not a bible scholar, but I do read the bible on a regular basis and am a very intelligent person I have found no where that Jesus claims Jewish heritage, in fact it appear to me that he denies it when questioned if he is the King of The Jews by stating in effect, that is what you say.
The argument that he is of the lineage of David fails in that Jesus is the Son of God, the Son of Man, not the biological child of Joseph. I am told by a Jewish friend that Jewish lineage is maternal, I have not questioned that statement, but assuming that is accurate, I have never seen the lineage of Mary.
You seem educated in the topic at hand so I am interested in your remarks.
Jack Crabb Please read carefully!!This is the very first messianic scripture promising redemption directly after the sin of the man and woman. It is interesting that the prophecy is for a redeemer to come from the seed of a woman when most times in scripture legal genealogies come through a man. This is a hint to the virgin birth, Is 7:14. Genesis 3:14,15 And YAHWEH Elohim said to the serpent , Because you have done this, you are cursed above all beasts, and above every animal of the field. You shall go on your belly, and you shall eat dust all the days of your life. 15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He will bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel.
Jack Crabb Jack, the lineage of Jesus Christ is traced back to Abraham in Matthew's gospel (Matthew 1:1+) and Jesus' lineage is traced back to Adam in Luke 3.
Whichever way modern Orthodox Jews decide to impart "Jewishness" by birth, this much is clear:
(a) All biblical lineages are given by the FATHER. Although we know who Jesus' ACTUAL Father was, any Jew would have considered Jesus to be of Judah since they supposed that Joseph was Jesus' father and Joseph is clearly in the line of David of the tribe of Judah.
(z) If a Jewish woman marries a gentile man and has a child, that child would be Jewish by your orthodox friend's belief. How would the bible record that child? 'Name_of_child', son of 'Name_of_his_father"
(b) Both Matthew's and Luke's lineage CLEARLY show Jesus to be of Judah.
(c) Ruth was a Moabite woman who married Boaz of Judah. Boaz begat Obed and Obed begat Jesse who begat David. No one questions King David's lineage of Judah but his great-grandmother was born of Moab which is not even of Israel. This is a clear example of the Jewish Scriptures showing that lineage is of the Father. Joseph was of Judah so we see a clear Old Testament precedent of paternal lineage - hence, there is no issue with Jesus being considered of the tribe of Judah.
(d) Jesus would have all legal rights and status as Joseph's son anyway. So by biological or legal inheritance, Jesus was of Joseph and has every legal right as Joseph's son.
(e) The Luke lineage is often considered to be the biological lineage of Jesus through Mary. Since we see that lineage is never given in scripture by the mother, it is believed the biological lineage (through Mary) is given by the name of the fathers. This is also supported by Luke's use of (as was supposed) in his lineage which I believe he used to show that the ACTUAL biological lineage was from Mary although, yes, this could also mean that Luke is saying that God is ACTUALLY Jesus' father, not Joseph.
(f) I also want to note that in Luke 2:1-5, when Caesar Augustus calls the census, Joseph must return to Bethlehem, the city of David, to be registered because he was of the "house and lineage of David." Please notice that Mary, pregnant with child, accompanies JOSEPH to be registered with him. Clearly, Jesus and Mary were both registered of the house of DAVID through Joseph.
(g) I believe that any issue with any of these lineages would have been blatant to 1st century Jews who were risking EVERYTHING to believe in Jesus as the Messiah.
To sum this up, whether Luke's lineage is of biological (through Mary) or tribal/paternal, we see a clear precedent of tribal lineage through the Father, not the mother, in Ruth 4 which shows part of King David's lineage which is not disputed. Jesus would have all legal rights as a son of Joseph of Judah. Though contested, it is a majority opinion that Luke's lineage is biological (through Mary) which would show that she also was of the bloodline of David. I think that this can be spoken of in much more detail but I think this is a fair address of your question - let me know. I probably could have listed my bullet points in a bit more of a cohesive order but I didn't (sorry!).
Regarding the Jewishness of Jesus:
Jesus was presented in the temple and circumcised on the 8th day. He was prophesied over in the temple. Mary observed her days of purification according to the Law of Moses and the Mosaic offering was given for Jesus when he was presented at the temple. Clearly Jesus was raised by observant Jews. Luke's gospel in chapter 2 records the only childhood event of Jesus where he is talking with the scholars in the Temple and amazing them with His understanding. Throughout Jesus' ministry, He expounds on the Jewish scriptures and calls out the Pharisee's, Sadducees, chief priests, and scribes as hypocrites in that they do not DO the burdens that they laid on the shoulders of others; that they made the word of God to no use through their own human tradition; that people blasphemed God because of them. Jesus quoted the Scripture extensively and demonstrated His authority and knowledge of Scripture - certainly these are the actions of a man who is a Jew (besides them being full of grace and truth as of the only begotten Son of God). Jesus was a Jew by birth, by heritage, by zeal; inwardly (Romans 2:27-29) and outwardly.
I hope I addressed your question satisfactorily - it was a pleasure reflecting on this topic again. I try not to just rehash old arguments but I try to actually re-examine my own understanding as I answer therefore exhorting you (hopefully!) and myself at the same time.
Dave Biddle How well do you know Hebrew? Also whether you know Hebrew or not what do you think the disciples called Jesus name in Hebrew? I have been battling this out for a long time and have heard a lot of opinion's it wouldn't hurt to hear one more lol you know what I mean...?
What happened to Brown’s debate against Rabbi Gold?
Accusing your opponent of taking words out of context, really means I lost this debate
Starts at 10:42:00
Dr. Brown cited the prophets and their prophecies on numerous occasions. That suggests to me that he, then, believes in those prophets and their projections. If I am correct in my observations, then certainly the good doctor is familiar with the following well known prophets and their prophecies, Jeremiah 16:19 and Zecheriah 8:21-23. In these prophecies, Doctor Brown is, in effect, told that he and those of his ilk are wrong. And, he is told that the day will come when he will come to see that he is wrong, place the blame on his ancesters and then seek to correct himself. If Dr. Brown is only going to cherry pick those prophecies, which seemingly support his views, then, in my view, he is being intellectually dishonest.
True!
But that is that strategy of brown....he must 1st rationalise his betrayal of his own people! His quotes of Rabbinic tradition is complete crap, and taken out of context....but wait a minute that's what xtians do!
@@returntozion9287 Brown said to Rabbi Shochet that, in his position statement, the Rabbi quoted Romans and Galatians "out of context". On the contrary it is plain clear to any xian how Rabbi Shochet understood xianity very well, that it is a curse for a xian to circumcise himself and be willing to be under the law of Moses. This, the NT states, means going under "the curse of the law".
Brown accuses Shochet falsely of quoting "out of context", while Shochet had in fact walked the whole yard to prove brown wrong from his own "holy book". brown never answers. What a shame for him. How is it possible that after so many years he is still showing his face and even debating.
In this sense, Rabbi Schochet was correct in his opening statement to affirm that these debates are useless. His words are proven True. Blessed be the memory of this man of Truth.
@@ebraismoecristianesimo1126
All you need to do was to have listen to the conditions...
How was he to answer about Galatians and Romans when they were meant to debate the Tanakh.
Aren't you any smart??
Will.the rabbi have believed him in the first place?? 🙄🙄
@@returntozion9287
Show how it is crap??
Or you're just been emotional.
You shouldn't have watched a logical, academic debate if you're here to through tantrum
He shows his points clearly from the Tanakh.
Jews are seeing that and more and more are coming to Christ, and will continue to. Amen.
It's better to just ask the question(s) then hear the rebuttal than waste the time with a long winded lecture like we're in college & not on UA-cam. 😇
J. Miller, what are your top 3 arguments the Rabbi used?
it's all in the Rabbi's introduction and position statement. Brown does not answer the Rabbi's request to justify his belief in the NT from Jewish sources (i.e. outside the NT) as was agreed before the debate. Arguing the positions of the NT by quoting the NT is a total fallacy: you can always prove any document by using the thesis of the document itself!
This entire debate comes down to the second question Schochet asks Brown @ 1:27:33. Although not germaine to the supposed subjects of the debate as described by the moderator @ the outset, it reveals everything about Brown and his tenuous grasp of the basic tenets of his faith. He is asked how he differentiates between his belief in Jesus and the belief of a Muslim in Mohammed and the Koran, a Buddhist in Buddha, or a Hindu in the Vedas. Brown then proceeds to miss the point entirely. He talks about Jesus as a Torah observant Jew, the emphasis on atonement in the Gospel writings, Jews who have come to Christ and Burmese who have done the same. None of that is relevant when considering the fundamental doctrine of Christianity - the Incarnation. Diety "stamped" in flesh. There's your difference. Had Brown focused on this point, Schochet, would, of course, state that such a claim is idolatry and blasphemy. Brown might then turn to the resurrection (and the proof of it) to validate any claim that Jesus or the apostles made about his divinity. Now you have the substance of a real debate, instead of the prolonged and fruitless argumentation that preceded the question (despite Schochet's far superior rhetorical skills).
Right on the spot
This is my interpretation of the debate:
The Rabbi destroys Dr. Brown by quoting Romans and Galatians in his face: how absurd it is for a Christian to claim that he can be a scriptural Jew at the same time as being Christian. The new testament dissuades from such absurdity, yet Brown, disregarding his own holy book, dares to come to a debate to "prove" the absurd thesis. This happened already in the position statement of Rabbi Shochet. Brown, instead of answering, comes with the claim that Rabbi Shochet's stance on the Jewish (scriptural) messiah does not address "the problem of sin", which remains unresolved (not true, Scripture clearly gives the way and method to address this, and the Messiah is not a part of it). Therefore, says Brown following his imagination outside of the Scriptures, messiah must also necessarily be a "high priest", and provide a solution for the inclination of man to sin. In this way Brown "proves" that only Jesus could be the messiah.
Brown never answers Rabbi Shochet, he states that the Rabbi quoted verses of the NT out of context", but anyone can see that Rabbi Shochet understood the NT VERY WELL. No christian can defend another Christian circumcising himself and wanting to follow the Laws of the OT. Brown, instead of debating (answering the Rabbi), only makes imaginary unscriptural assumptions and concludes them. This is not a debate, but a monologue based on circular logics.
This debate is a complete debacle for Brown, from the logical point of view he is put to shame. One would wonder if, with all his diplomas, degrees and studies, he does this unintentionally or being fully aware of what he is doing.
@@ebraismoecristianesimo1126Paul is taken out of context. He never taught against circumcision or the law. James and Peter attested to this in acts and Paul himself defends Torah. Paul even had Timothy circumcised. The earliest “Christians” were Torah observant Jews who viewed Yeshua as the Messiah and worshipped in Synagogues.
@@Anon62796 What?? Are you kindding? Galatians chapter 2, he shows his freedom not to circuncise Titus.
Galatians chapter 5:2 "Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, christ will be of no value to you at all. "
Colossians 2:16 "Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ".
It is clearly written that Timothy was circuncised as a need not to "make stumble" some Jews, not as the direct choice of Paul or Timothy.
Galatians 3: 10" For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.”[e] 11 Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.” Do you read the words "UNDER A CURSE"???? Is Paul defending Torah (ther law)?
And so on and so forth.....These are only three verses but there are many more.
If earliest Christians were Torah observant and worshipped in Synagogues, why or when did they stop? And why?
@@ebraismoecristianesimo1126 read Peters warning in 2 Peter 3. Acts 21, 24, 25 where James and Paul say he never taught against Torah.
"Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny, Suetonius,"
You missed the point yet again. I was contrasting the historical textual attestation of these authors with the NT. I did so in response to your negation that the NT is one of the best attested documents we have from ancient history, something you have denied, and something I have proved. Or would you like me to list those facts again?
" Paul admonished certain Xtian groups to fall in line with his brand of Xtianity"
No, to fall in line with the cont..
What do you mean?
Why only a link to Christian websites in the description?
Not only are there various Xtian Bibles, there are even more Xtian books that have been rejected from the Xtian Bible, some to be accepted again later. To this add the crass contradiction among the accepted "gospels" today.
In the video at time 1:37:04, Dr. Brown casts doubt on the Talmud aka "Rabbinic" Judaism, that Jews follow till today. All the Talmud is, is an explanation of the Mosaic. In Exodus; Jethro, Moses advised (ie. morals and ethics) and Judged (ie. Jewish law) the Jewish Nation after the Torah was given. His father-in law, Jethro saw that he was exhausted (think of the long lines) and advised him to train people so there would be a hierarchy of helpers to help him. If Moses didn't know the answer from the Torah or what he learned after ascending to heaven, he asked g-d. These people became the first "Judges" of Israel and numbered between 70,000 to over 100,000. They went into Israel with the jewish nation. All the laws were also written on the second set of the ten commandments that Moses received from g-d. All law was oral and was transmitted through the generations source: Hebrew prophets. Deuteronomy 5:28, - G-d tells Moses: “But as for you, stand here (at Sinai) with Me, and I shall speak to you the entire commandment and the decrees, and the ordinances that you shall teach them and they shall perform in the Land that you shall possess.” Deuteronomy 1:18- Moses reminds the people: “I commanded you at that time (at Horeb) all the things that you are to do”. The Five Books reiterate again and again the importance of passing on the teachings of Moses to the future generations (Exodus 10:2; 12:14,17,24; 13:8,14; 31:13,16; Leviticus 23:43; Numbers 15:24,38; Deuteronomy 4:9,40; 6:2,7,20,21; 11:19; 12:25,28; 30:2; 32:46.) Not once throughout the Five Books are we commanded to utilize a book in the personal process of passing on the teachings of Moses to our children. The process is described as one in which parents speak to their children - an oral transmission. The Law of Moses, as it is described in the Five Books, remains for all practical purposes an Oral Law. When Moses makes continuous reference to “the Law”, “the commandments”, or “that which I command you” (e.g. Deuteronomy 26:16; 27:26; 28:1,14; 29:28; 30:2,11; 32:46), he refers to a body of information that his listeners carried around in their minds and in their hearts. When the Five Books declare: “Moses commanded us a Law, and inheritance for the congregation of Jacob” (Deuteronomy 33:4) - it is referring to an Oral Law that is the exclusive inheritance of the intergenerational community of Eternal Israel. The Prophets are replete with references to the "Oral" law. When the Rabbis saw that the Oral laws was being slowly forgotten, they codified and wrote it down into the Talmud.
Lies
@@sigmanocopyrightmusic8737 A scholarly rebuttal. You obviously have nothing to say so just keep quiet.
The Rabbi bent Brown over his knee this was a one sided fight. I do want to thank Brown for proving that we should never accept Jesus.
The Roman Catholic, Greek Catholic, and Protestant canons, no two of which are alike, were fixed by modern councils. The Council of Trent (1645-1563) determined the Roman Catholic canon. While a majority were in favor of the canon of Augustine they were not agreed in regard to the character and classification of the books
Weird to see james white moderating and not debating and wow hes young
would that be the same Michael Brown that famously and falsely prophecied back in the '90's concerning temple mount ???
I’d have to wholeheartedly agree with the Rabbi. Debating which faith is correct does more harm than good. Even though he gives a disclaimer that what he professes as his beliefs may offend people, it still will just as the doctors beliefs, and cause animosity. It’s best to focus on what we hold as similarities than our differences in going forward to create a better world.
Can't. Oir religions are not similar. The NT is an abomination to the tanach. The teachings are the opposite. The NT is full of jew hate. And your whole false religion is built to try destroy our religion and nation.
Nothing similar and nothing to respect
No liar
Debate 11:00
" to help addicts find rehabilitation."
I'm addicted to chocolate. I also like fudge brownies with vanilla ice cream. I do need to cut down on that.
omg He came out like mike tyson.
jesus is a non entity in the TNK
Jesus is but a failure who was then promoted by the Greek authorities to gain a submitting nation, (if he existed that is) ...
All references that xtians attribute to jesus from the TNK are simply acrobatic gymnastics in changing the lines to fit their evil purpose.
The beautiful thing is that every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus christ is Lord 🙏
i am wondering if anyone red the whole video
Thank You Rabbi
Isaiah 30 18And therefore will the LORD wait, that he may be gracious unto you, and therefore will he be exalted, that he may have mercy upon you: for the LORD is a God of judgment: blessed are all they that wait for him.❤️
Currently at 29:10
Consider this, Rabbi Shochet isn't laying out evidences, he's making claims,
claims like "Jesus mocked communal prayers in mathew chapter 6"
He doesn't give any evidense for this he makes the claim then moves on, read mathew chapter 6 and that's not at all what's going on.
Jesus is talking about making a show of prayer and religion for the sake of pride and that we need to focus on pleasing God rather than being praised by people. Jesus says this is so important that we need to be intentional about how we live to avoid even the temptation of doing religion for human praise rather than praise from God.
Maybe this is addressed later, but with how many claims the rabbi is bringing up without going to the evidence I doubt we will have time in the debate to consider even a fifth of these claims.
I think the rabbis premise is that Jesus is judging those people are praying for other reasons than praying for the purpose of God alone. Matthew 6 opens with “hypocrites in the synagogue” therefore judging their actions and intentions negatively. Instead of just making the point without using others actions negatively for comparative reasoning. The same message could have been given without using direct and personal examples, which comes across as mockery especially to Jewish readers.
Not in this debate but from Jews for Judaism page- Was Jesus violent?
If the New Testament account is true, Jesus did commit certain acts of violence. Whip in hand he attacked the merchants in the Temple area, causing a fracas (Matthew 21:12, Mark 11:15-16, Luke 19:45, John 2:15). He caused the death, by drowning, of a herd of swine by allowing demons to purposely enter their bodies (Matthew 8:32, Mark 5:13, Luke 8:33) and destroyed a fig tree for not having fruit out of season (Matthew 21:18-21, Mark 11:13-14).
AH ! The "Scholarly" thing . The problem is that the various Christian scholars (including the "Church Fathers) included AND excluded many books from the Christian Bible.
No
Hold your horses, pal. The books that are in the Bible we're widely accepted and used by the Church fathers and christians even before the council of Alexandria. The 4 gospels are the most trust worthy and oldest of the bunch, that is the reason why they we're used. There we're other gospels, but those we're used mostly by small fringe gnostic sects. Further,
You'll have to help me out a bit, it says Tell Balata, which I've never heard of?
"are found in some of the older manuscripts of the New Testament, are Shepherd of Hermas"
Yes, found. That doesn't mean they were considered inspired, anymore than a map of the Bible, or an appendix that are found in modern day Bibles mean that they're too are inspired.
Those letters were not considered to be a part of the canon because they were written much much later after the apostolic period. They're all second century-third century works, hence not part of the original canon.
The rabbi wiped the floor.
Not only is The Shepherd of Hermas in the Codex Sinaiticus (the first complete Xtian Bible. But It is attested by the Muratorian Fragment which you relished citing as "evidence of an early and authentic Xtian Text".
cont...canonical. I've explained this to you! It was tacked on to the ending of the book, just like an appendix, or maps would be today onto modern Bibles. It meant that some Christians considered it to be useful, not inspired. It's Never ever ever placed on the same level as the books of the NT.
"Papyrus 66 is a partial fragment"
Contains large portions of John, and again...Not an argument to say that it's not a full copy. Debunked this already.
Actually being evangelical is the first catapult to leave Christianity specially the most fundamentalists in the Christian Bible,. Not just to believe in Jesus but follow all God's commandments and that's the old pentecostal, then the second catapult us messianism evangelicals with emphasis in yeshuah, TORAH, AND THE HEBREW LANGUAGE OF TGE HEBREW BIBLE then searching more history and writing Jewish stuff then becoming a Jewish, or from no kosher Christian Jewish to kosher as me .
Also you can check my UA-cam channel.תודה
I find Rabbi Schochet, very intelligent and truthful!
No, Rabbi Schochet is an arrogant idiot.
@@bluesnagg You believe in heretic M Brown?
If the Rabbi has the truth then why is he opposed to debate?????
He said: such debates are useless. in fact, although brown lost miserably, it did not serve him to correct himself.
The Rabbi destroys Dr. Brown by quoting Romans and Galatians in his face: how absurd it is for a Christian to claim that he can be a scriptural Jew and at the same a Christian. The new testament dissuades from such absurdity, yet Brown, disregarding his own holy book, dares to come to a debate to "prove" the absurd thesis. This happened already in the position statement of Rabbi Schochet. Brown, instead of answering, comes with the claim that Rabbi Schochet's stance on the Jewish (scriptural) messiah does not address "the problem of sin", which remains unresolved (not true, Scripture clearly gives the way and method to address this, and the Messiah is not a part of it). Therefore, says Brown following his imagination outside of the Scriptures, messiah must also necessarily be a "high priest", and provide a solution for the inclination of man to sin. In this way Brown "proves" that only Jesus could be the messiah.
Brown never answers Rabbi Shochet, he states that the Rabbi quoted verses of the NT out of context", but anyone can see that Rabbi Schochet understood the NT VERY WELL. No Christian can defend another Christian circumcising himself and wanting to follow the Laws of the OT. Brown, instead of debating (answering the Rabbi), only makes imaginary unscriptural assumptions and concludes them. This is not a debate, but a monologue based on circular logics.
This debate is a complete debacle for Brown, from the logical point of view he is put to shame. One would wonder if, with all his diplomas, degrees and studies, he does this unintentionally or being fully aware of what he is doing.
@@ebraismoecristianesimo1126 Christianity is the fulfillment of Judaism. Judaism prophecies a messiah and Jesus fulfills that prophecy and so there is no contradiction in being Jewish and a follower of the Messiah.
@@brendanbutler1238 Brown can affirm that Jesus is "that" messiah only by postulating that he must come again (to bring about the signs that are clearly prophesied by the prophets of old and which have not happened at the time of Jesus). There is no such prophecy as a second coming in the Hebrew scriptures, it's another postulate from outside scriptures. Rabbi Schochet keeps begging for a proof, but brown does not bring any scriptural proof, only subjective experience and non-proofs that can be applied in the same manners to muslims, buddhists etc... nothing scriptural. In fact, it is all greek literature, which is foregn to Jews. Why would a Jew accept a Greek testament and not an arabic Quran? both of them are documents based on the Hebrew Scriptures and foreign to the Hebrew Scripture.
Furthermore, a Jew that becomes xian must worship, pray, serve and praise a human being, and ascribe to him the Power of God. This is a total violation of Scriptures (!), it is contrary to everything Jews have ever believed (including Jesus and his disciples). Finally, the idea that the messiah has to be God himself is not Jewish! This is another postulate from outside Scriptures.
Moreover, the messiah must be from the seed of David, and Jesus' father is not of the seed of David.
Furthermore, brown says that psalm mentions that the children of king David are "kohanim", which should prove that king David was a kohen (a priest), and that Jesus is a messiah-priest, but Rabbi Schochet clearly tells him that the word "kohen" means "person with an office, any office", another problem for brown who does not reply to this objection. There are so many problems and unproven things in what you and brown say that Rabbi Schochet concludes: be my guest, if you want to believe this, do it, but to go an missionize Jews and dissuade them from following the clear Word of God based on these beliefs (1. Messiah second coming, 2. Messiah is also a priest,3. Messiah dying to solve man's inclination to sinning 4.Messiah- a man- being at the same time God Almighty etc....) is a total abomination. Brown does not answer. he continues blindly with his Greek material. This is the conclusion of the debate.
@@ebraismoecristianesimo1126 The scriptures prophecy a suffering messiah and also an all conquering messiah, therefore the messiah must first suffer, and then come as the conqueror. Stories like that of Jacob show a younger brother who is rejected and thrown into a pit by his brothers but who then becomes powerful and saves his family (but they didn't recognize him until he revealed himself to them). Abraham being asked to sacrifice his son, and his son willingly laying himself down as a sacrifice. Stories such as these can be said to prefigure the life of Jesus. The Jewish scriptures don't have to say that the messiah will be God. God doesn't have to reveal everything at once. Even during Jesus's life he only revealed his identity gradually. Also the scriptures don't say that the messiah can't be God. It makes sense rationally that the messiah would be both human and divine as the scriptures say the messiah will be a human but they also ascribe to him Godlike powers and achievements. The New testament genealogies of Jesus both place him as a descendent of David.
The greek new testament isn't foreign to the Hebrew scriptures just because it's written in Greek any more than the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, the septuagint, is foreign to the Hebrew scriptures just because it's written in Greek Greek was the most international language of that time and so it made sense to write it in Greek, there is also evidence that it may have been translated from earlier Hebrew works. The Hebrew scriptures say that the messiah would bring all peoples to worship the Hebrew God, therefore it only makes sense that the Messiah's scriptures would be written in a language that the most people could understand. Even most Jews didn't speak Hebrew at that time. The New Testament was however written by Jews and was about the coming of the Jewish messiah in Israel, so it isn't a foreign document to the Jews unlike the Quran. It is Jewish history written by Jews. History that has been shown to be reliable.
History since the time of Jesus also shows that Jesus is fulfilling messianic prophecy. 37 years after Jesus, the Temple is destroyed and Temple Judaism is ended, and replaced by Rabbinic Judaism. Jesus's followers go on to develop the world's largest and most successful Religion and civilization, thereby fulfilling the prophecy that all nations would come to know God through Abraham and his descendents.
For the same reason scientists don't debate flat earthers, 9/11 truthers, and anti-vaxxers
cont.. "ignoring like a simpleton," the various canons included 1 Clement, the Shepard, and other works in the end of the condex. You like to scattershot the names of books? How about these: The Heresy of Orthodoxy, The Canon Revisited, The Wisdom of Solomon and the Muratorian Fragment--all scholars of which say that it was common practice in the church to include "disputed" books at the end of the work, testifying to their usefulness, but not canonical status.
Not only is the Epistle of Barnabas in the Codex Sinaiticus (the first complete Xtian Bible) But so is The Shepherd of Hermas in the Codex Sinaiticus (the first complete Xtian Bible). The Xtian Bible is an ever changing thing that has produced many different theologies.
None of the books Contradict biblical theology, Moreover 1 Barnabas can be called as Scripture as canon doesn't necessarily mean the only inspired book, Ask Rabbi Akiva on how he viewed the changes in Judaism where he was defending song of Solomon as a divine scripture or not.
This Mr Brown is very cunning in saying the wrong things
😂😂..shut the hell up
Wrong things like?
WOW! How can anyone follow jesus after watching this?? Rabbi Schochet demolished Brown and I'm not saying this out of any bias. How sad that he's not with us any more.
What are you talking about? You obviously say it out of bias, that's why you felt the need to deny it. Maybe you were impressed by Shochet's empty noise and sarcasm, like some people are. Brown clearly and calmly showed that Shochet's claims are without substance and that he is shamelessly using passages out of context, like the one with Paul and the circumcision, and then he lamely explain himself: i just read the passage as it is.. Not a man of truth and honesty, obviously. While he was nervous and impulsive all the time, sign of fear and insecurity. That's why he childisly stated from the beginning that the rabbi won all the debates in the past. And he wasn't able to give a proper and clear explanation to what it means "to be the light of the nations", regarding the people of Israel. He even forgot to answer to this essential question and he needed to be reminded. No so much light, obviously.
@@viravirakti My comments are focused on the content of what was said. Shochet reminded Brown of something most Christians forget. The burden of proof is solely on the Christian. The Jew has no obligation to prove or demonstrate anything about his belief to a Christian. All Christians believe the same thing as Jews...up until jesus. So the only argument is did anything change. Obviously then the only thing that has to be shown is that it changed. There is no indication anywhere that anything changed. Everything points to the fact that nothing changed. This is what was demonstrated and this is why I said Brown was demolished. The only thing Brown has to accomplish up there is to show why we should believe it changed and instead of focusing on proving this, he simply tries to ask on Judaism and he tries to discredit them. He does this because there is no reason to believe anything changed. It's purely blind faith and believing the supposed testimony of one guy named Paul. What if he was lying about the whole thing? The ot is antithetical to everything that the church teaches so there's got to be some really heavy duty reason why someone should believe it changed and some heavy duty reason to believe Paul any more than to believe Mohamed, Joseph Smith or Hare Krishna. Can you tell me what that is?
@@viravirakti Btw he gave a very clear answer to how we will be a light unto the nations. We are to be an example by the way we act and conduct our lives. Would it be ideal to be able to go out into the world and preach how Christianity is idolatry? Sure. However, this is impractical. There are only roughly 13 million jews in this world and the first obligation for the jew is to their own brethren who have gone astray. This is the priority and considering the small numbers, there is no way to missionize and proselytize like that.
@@nothingbutthetruth613 and that's precisely what Brown showed and explained, and Shochet, that Jesus and the NT is consistent and harmoniohs with the OT, but Shochet, like almost all the rabbis, is refusing to accept and find all kind of inconsistent reasons to reject it, by using even the NT, misinterpreting it and citing it out of context, as Brown clearly show it. And, as Brown said, not only that many things have changed, but the change is gradual, as, for God, time is irrelevant, 1ooo years are like a moment and viceversa, and the idea of instant change is a silly one.
@@nothingbutthetruth613 yes, basically he said to be a light to the nations by doing nothing and let everybody to think and believe whatever truth they want, and by seeing and taking care of your own nation.. And there you go, thing like the holocaust happen, because everybody can think their own truth and see only and prioritise their own nation.
Rabbi with all fue respecto.. the anger expressed through your words speaks louder than your message. Pls calm down so that yr. msg. can be better understood. Bless the Lord Almighty!!
"Epistle of Barnabas" , included in Codex Sinaiticus AND Hierosolaymitanus , quoted by Clement of Alexandria ........drum roll.....Discarded. Xtianity's convenient and multiple variations are legion.
I love what the rabbi said about the gentiles. If they believe in the supremacy of the almighty even though they believe he works through intercessors, a Jew has no mandate to convert them.
Lies
Jewish supremacist
Scripture says that a ruler from the days of eternity will be born in Bethlehem. You cannot get around that. God will be born in Bethlehem and He will be King. Everyone understood that Messiah God would be born as a man since God told Adam and Eve that the seed of the woman would crush the serpent's head.
This is referring to King David, who is the biological descent of the Messiah and was indeed born in Bethlehem (1 Samuel 17:12). Another problem Christians have is the infancy narrative contradictions. Some gospels say it’s Bethlehem and others say it’s Nazareth. Which is it? Cannot Be both. As for crushing the serpents head, I cannot think of the greater proof that Jesus was NOT the messiah. Satan is everywhere, nothing was “crushed.”
@@allisonsmith9050 Messiah conquered death and He has sent everyone His Holy Spirit so that no one can make excuses before Him. David is a type and a foreshadow of messiah, not the actual Messiah. An ordinary man of sin cannot ever be Messiah. Only God Himself can be our Salvation. Only your Creator can perfectly cover for you Himself and remake you again from the inside out by the power of His true word as no one else can. Everything you do is on and against your Maker whether you want it to be or not. David is not a ruler from long ago (from before Micah). The God of Abraham and Moses is “I Am”. The God who wrestled our father Jacob is *I Am.*
(I am an I1 M253 descendant of Dan : )
@@allisonsmith9050 (The satan is crushed when you believe in Messiah Yeshua.)
Where is Michael brown rebutal
Your self correction is accepted. Now that you finally know this, let's note the fact that the higher standard of criticism is purported by Xtianity itself and not the scholars. Any scholar can see , note, record, and acknowledge that a certain event transpired. However when you take a normal event in history variances are somehow understood.But Xtianity alleges that,their scattered fragments, put together for the first time in 350 CE, and later changed,are somehow "The word of the perfect God"
Just one question .when did Elijah show up ??!!!!!
Speaking of John the Baptist, "For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John;
and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come. He who has ears to hear, let him hear." (Matthew 11:13-15 RSV)
Idk but I pray he shows up with some great vegan recipes cause my chicken loving ass has yet to find it
@@friendlyletters Yet John denied being Elijah....hahhahahhaahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahaah!
@@returntozion9287 he was a type
1st centry
Kudos Dr. Brown. God is using you mightly. May His grace and favour be with you as you propagate the gospel.
You must have faulty hearing. The guy is a charlatan. That is obvious
Propagating lies, confusion, and arrogance. Kudos to him!
Athanasius rejected Esther, and Epiphanius accepted the Epistle of Jeremiah. Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, and Gregory, Bishop of Constantinople, both rejected Revelation. Chrysostom, one of the greatest of church divines, and who gave to the sacred book of Christians its name, omitted ten books from his canon-- First and Second Chronicles, Esther, Job, and Lamentations, five books in the Old Testament; and Second Peter, Second and Third John, Jude, and Revelation, five books in the New Testament
cont...as every source we have attests to the fact that the Gospels, Acts, and Paul's' epistles were part of the canon.
Also, the fact that modern Bibles chose to include other apocryphal books isn't an argument anymore than if a committee would today choose to include into the existing corpus of Cicero's writing some new pieces of work.
" The first complete Xtian Bible is the Codex Sinaiticus"
It IS incontrovertible. Problem is, you don't understand the implications behind cont...
As a gentile I really appreciate Rabbi Immanuel Schochet's version of Judaism. I can believe whatever nonsense I want as long as it isn't 'idol' worship. And I can look forward to living in a a segregated heaven.
Serquss negative
Brown lost... big time.
Very easy to lose, because jc is not in Torah.
Michael Brown Destroyed this disciple of Satan
Jesus in the Old Testament www.gordonconwell.edu/resources/Jesus-in-the-Old-Testament.cfm
I'm an angel a messenger of God's AMEN time is short judgement is at hand Jesus is the son of God and the CHRIST period.
Fact: There is no Xtian Bible before the codex Siniaticus (350 CE).
Fact:Codex Siniaiticus contains the oldest complete New Testament which included The Epistle of Barnabas.
Fact: Papyrus 66 is a partial fragment of the Book of John (200 CE)
Fact:There are fragment of Xtian Books prior 4th Century but NONE were in any compilation we have today and some of these Xtian books were rejected and some we accepted later .
"are Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, Revelation"
Right, none of which are the Gospels, the book of Acts, or the letters of Paul, which constitute the majority of the text. Thanks for conceding my point.
1 Peter was never contested, its absence from the Muratorian canon doesn't mean it wasn't inspired, as a consensus of church fathers never treated it otherwise. And the fact that the other minor epistles took time before they were included doesn't mean a thing.
cont..
The rabbi was arrogant while Dr Brown was humble
He is trying to convert one of the oldest reilgions in the world, all of them, because he thinks he has the ultimate truth. That's humble?
I really enjoyed this debate. I am a Gentile but I have a heart for Israel. It saddens me to see and feel the anger that the Rabbi has towards us Christians who believe is His Jewish Messiah, and support his land Israel. I am humbled to know that I have been grafted into the vine. God is able to open this mans eyes as He did with the apostle Paul who I imagine had the same characteristics.
Michael Brown there is a humbleness about you that is God given. God Bless you in your work. An excellent rebuttal and one without prejudice but informed and revealed.
We do not need your sadness about us being angry at Christians tyvm. we are angry on Christians simple because they have torchered
aped\massacred us Jews for so many generations simple out of hate or not accepting the Christians fate. and after failing with that, they try to murder our soul now with some nonsense believes. That is why the Rabbi is angry and Christaians. btw i enjoyed this debated as well simple because i finely see a Rabbi crush Dr. Brown .
what is sad is that you see rav schochet angry with christianity simply because he refutes your beliefes
It is ironic for sinful man to be saying that God did not bring in an end of sin.
The end of sin is repentance as is brought numerous times in Tanakh
"Carmine Fr" sees this forum as the perfect place to go on his usual rants - saying anything and everything he sees fit - and having no basis in reality.
Brown got roasted
He sure did, he's still licking his wounds!
By the way, why do Rabbis stand against sharing God's love and will for His people with others, but look forward to a Messiah who will reach out to the whole world?
catherine waema that’s a great question. I’m a Jew who has recently come to Jesus and my opinion is that Jews want to feel special and above the gentiles, that’s why they reject Jesus.
@@mrb532 I'm sorry but if you really were a Jew you wouldn't have said the ridiculous thing you just said right now. To answer the question, it's putting a stumbling block before the blind. Most people are Christians or other religions, in Judaism you are judged based on what you know, if you were to hear and have been presented evidence of the God of Israel you would be held accountable. Christians, who worship three gods no matter how they wanna spin it, if they hear about God's oneness and reject it and try to pass off this "3 persons 1 God" nonsense they will be guilty of one of the worst sins in the bible. Worshipping another god upon God's face. In other words, God is the bridegroom and you are his wife, you worshipping Jesus and God at the same time is spiritual adultery. Spiritual fornication. You will be judged for what you know and you will be held accountable. I don't like scaring people with hell, that's Christianity's job, but there is no place in the world to come for people who worship Jesus and God together as one.
They don't want to condemn anyone with this knowledge. If you want God he's always there, reach out your hand to him, not Jesus
@@hitoshura2800 not every Christian believes in the trinity. Jesus is the messiah, not God. Of you believe that you're going to be judged based on your knowledge, then you might want to educate yourself on all of the Old Testament prophecies Jesus fulfilled. According to the tanach, the messiah needed to come before the destruction of the 2nd temple which occured in 70 AD. So, if the messiah didn't already come, then he isn't coming at all and that would make the all of the prophets of the tanach false prophets. Read Daniel 9:24-27
@@mrb532
You know the world is supposed to know God's law and no one is supposed to evangelize or proselytize anymore according to Jeremiah 31:31- onward right? Also no more wars, the world is supposed to be at peace. He fulfilled ZERO prophecies, the important ones. The WORLD changing ones. Jesus changed the world the same way Hitler did. For the worse , now for the better since Christianity cleaned up its act. You realize the book of Daniel talks about two anointed ones right? Neither is Jesus. You as a Jew should know messiah is ANYONE annointed by oil, including priests. Don't cherry pick verses that sound christological.
@@mrb532
Lemme guess though. He's gonna fulfill the prophecies when he comes back? Yeah ok, so are the THOUSANDS of other false messiahs. There's ZERO REASON to believe something without evidence. God made it CLEAR, this is how you know messiah has come, not once did he mention you better believe in a messiah and accept him as your lord and savior BEFORE the world changing prophecies take place or you'll burn forever. Not once.
*Throw-out
Dr brown till this day uses the same techniques in debates "that was the most out of context I've ever seen" then quotes "Mathew" scriptures to prove his point about the false messiah. 🤭
Rabbi u nailed it..you stick to the point..
Thank you very much for this video debate, I found it very interesting . I pray for God to pour out His Spirit on the house of David, and also all the inhabitants of Jerusalem. May He bring us all to "His Truth". ~ Baruch HaShem & Shalom~
cont...fact that it was finally closed then does not mean we do not know what it looked like prior, which was your central argument. We can recreate the entire NT from what the Church Fathers quoted alone! Add to this the fact that we have countless of canonical lists, and we know exactly what it looked like. It doesn't help your argument to bring up the fact that SOME of the minor epistles were contested for some time. All the Gospels were part of the canon, as was Acts, and the Pauline...cont
" TO YOU that the canon has not varied? "
Yep. Disagreements about minor books that were resolved doesn't mean the canon was changed. Again, you keep ignoring this, but the COR of the NT was not disputed. The majority of the text, that is the Gospels, Acts, and the epistles of Paul wre all included. If the best you can do is bring up some of the minor epistles' canonicity debate, then I suggest you try harder.
Okay so let me get this straight. They said that Yeshua taught against the Torah, but in the Jewish Talmud other Jewish teachers (not all) taught it's okay to have a lamb slain at a slaughter house by a "kosher" machine" and eaten in your house AGAINST the torah that said if you kill an animal and don't bring it to the temple you're guilty of murder Lev 17:3-4. How can you accuse Yeshua of doing what you embrace your "rabbis" for doing, when Moses' own nephews, the high priest Aaron's sons who were priests before GOD's Shekinah glory were killed by GOD for doing a sacrifice improperly!
Are any of the details you explained in the Torah or any other part of the Tanakh? Can the Talmud EVER trump the Torah on authority?
So if the Talmud says you can slay an animal without a temple, but the Torah says if you do you're guilty of bloodshed, then the Rabbis who wrote the Talmud broke the rules the prophets gave in the Torah, something the Jews who reject Yeshua claim their reasoning for rejecting HIM is.
By the way, I appreciate your maturity and courage in having this dialogue before others without breaking down to childish profanity as some do, that's commendable of you
So how do you get rid of your sins, the Torah makes it clear, there is no atonement for sin without blood.
Since the establishment of the covenant through Moses, sin was only forgiven by blood. Even with the day of atonement every year, you see the wrath GOD had against the children if Israel in the historical books. Therefore, if they were in that much trouble with a clean slate every year after the day of atonement, how much more with not a single atoning sacrifice year after year generation after generation?
Rabbi Schochet came across as very bright, knowledgeable and convincing.
Love is the only faith required
Gentiles need the 7 Noahide laws.
Whole books voted in. Whole books voted out only to be voted in again. That is exactly the point. But the fact that I have cited right here a plethora of changes across the Xtian history along with the fact that even today Xtianity has different Bibles can not dissuade a fanatic.In fact you yourself quote 2 different canons while denying that there are several different ones (go figure). Add to that the Agustine canon. The fact is that the Xtian Bible changes all the time.
Thank you Dr Michael Brown you has help me to understand much
Greetings to U all in Christ Jesus! I am 72 yrs and I cant think of a time when I was more deeply saddened in my life as listening to this debate! I know the Jewish leaders hated and loathed our Lord and savior Jesus Christ! Rabbi Immanuel vividly took us all back 2000 yrs ago when the Jewish leaders before Pilate demanded the execution of their own! and our God and Savior the Sovereign Lord Christ Jesus! By what he had to say and "in the way he said it"! May God in Christ Jesus bless you all!
Matthew 5:17
I think the rabbi had better points but someone else is going to comment saying that he doesn't just like this whole debate that we just watched. Its pointless to argue about because it's not going to change anyone's mind.
I think you'll find that these debates change a lot of people's minds. Look at videos by Tovia Singer and read the comments.