Sunday, March 13, 2016

// // 9 comments

Brainwashed!

​ by Reb Gutman Locks   
    

Brainwashed!

 

     Shmuli brought a young American tourist over to me and said, "He says that his mother is Jewish."

     "So help him. What's the problem?"

     Shmuli helped him with tefillin. While he was still reading the Shema, Shmuli walked over. He looked bothered by something, "He's Jewish, but both he and his parents are messianic Jews."

     This means that they are Jews by birth, but believe that yashka (j.c.) was the Messiah.

     When someone, especially a Jew believes in such foolishness it is almost impossible to communicate with them. They are told if their faith in yashka waivers even the least bit they are going to burn in hell. They really believe this.

     I walked over knowing this, but still, the guy was a Jew so I had to try to at least give him something to think about.

     I said, "In order to be the Messiah the Jewish man must come from the tribe of Judah (Yehudah). The Torah tells us that tribes go by the father, so your choice cannot be the Messiah."

     Their book says that yashka was fathered by a "holy spirit," so it was an "immaculate conception," i.e. no man involved! This nutty idea comes from a misunderstanding of Isaiah saying that an almah will give birth.[i] Almah means young woman, but it can also mean a young girl virgin. X-ians believe that Isaiah was predicting the virgin birth of yashka!

     When Avraham's servant went to fetch a wife (Rivka) for Yitzchak he explained to her family that he prayed right before seeing her that if he would see an almah come to the well who would do certain things, then he would know that Hashem had chosen that girl for Yitzchak. You cannot tell if a young woman is a physical virgin by looking at her from a distance. The x-ians believe with all their being that Isaiah meant that the girl would give birth while still a physical virgin! 

     He replied with great calmness and confidence, "His stepfather was Joseph, and Joseph was from the tribe of Judah."

     "Tribes go by the father not by the stepfather, so your choice cannot be the Messiah."

     "His mother Marry was from the tribe of Judah and so was his stepfather."

     "The tribes go by the father, not by the mother, and not by the stepfather."

     "We cannot be forgiven without going through him. He died for our sins. We have all sinned."

     "The Torah clearly says, "The father will not die for the son's sins, and the sons do not die for the father's sins. No one can die for someone else's sins. Everyone dies for his own sins."[ii]

     "There are no sacrifices anymore so we have to go through him to be forgiven."

     "The prophet[iii] told us that our prayers are now in place of the sacrifices. Anyone can turn away from sin any time he wants. You do not need someone between you and G-d."

     I told him that he had to marry only a Jewish girl.

     He answered, "I will marry only a girl who believes in j.c. It doesn't matter if she is Jewish."

     I told him that I have a video discussing these things with a pastor, and that the video has spread around on many channels with different foreign language subtitles, and he has received over 2 million views! He said that he will look at it. I gave him the video address.

     Will it change his mind? I doubt it. He is afraid that he will burn in hell. But it will give him a lot of things to think about, and then, when the time is right, hopefully he will begin to question his baseless, insane blind belief.

 Answers to a Pastor 

    

   

 



[i] Isiah 7:14

[ii] Ezekiel 18:20

[iii] Hosea 14:3

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

How can we help those people cutting from their pure cognitive dissonance ?

crazy smade said...

I'm not taking the bait .. or maybe I am.

Honestly, I've wasted too many decades on this nonsense. Neither side truly wants to place this material back into its proper historical, linguistic, and cultural context. Neither side is willing to subject these offending passages to the rigors of textual criticism.

As a result, the Xtians think that their exegesis of their so-called sacred text is wholly correct. In like manner, the Jews approach these writings as if the Xtian interpretation accurately reflects the belief system of the historical man and his disciples. Nothing could be further from the truth!

Is it any wonder that various Ha-Shem fearing ex-pagans fell under the spell of Jewish messianism and quickly compared their new found faith with the paganism they sought to eschew? Keep in mind that the first Jews who settled in Rome were expelled in 139 BCE, by the praetor peregrinus, Gnaeus Cornelius Hispalus, who compelled the Jews to return to their homeland, because they sought "to infect the Roman custom with the cult of Jupiter Sabazius." The Romans mistook the Jewish Deity, the "Lord of Hosts," as being the same as "Jove Sabazius," because they had no other frame of reference to draw upon for understanding Ha-Shem. So too when these pagans and ex-pagans heard the phrase "Son of G_d" being used by Jews.

How is this phrase understood by the author of the Tanya? Does anyone doubt that the Tanya contains notions that have their origin in the Oral Law? Does anyone doubt that it is the job of each Jew to bring about the tikkun of his/her portion of the structure of Mashiach that pertains to their neshamah?

Rabbi Locks, I respectfully submit that, by arguing against the fallacious notion of the "Virgin Birth" doctrine in this manner, you only work to perpetuate the erroneous interpretation of the Xtians! In short, you offer no real correction for this delusional belief.

A critical examination of the material in question will show that this ridiculous dogma is based on a gross cultural misunderstanding of the two-stage marriage process as it was practiced by the working class Jews (juxtapose the wealthy elites) during the Second Temple period.

Further, one only need look to Niddah 31a to realize that Ha-Shem's Spirit is an Agent in the conception of each and every child! We are ALL the literal Offspring of Our Heavenly Father. Sadly, only a few actually behave like it. I for one have failed miserably at being a conduit for Ha-Shem's Divine Chesed.

The whole "Virgin Birth" doctrine stands or falls on four Greek words "seeing I know not a man" (ἐπεὶ ἄνδρα οὐ γινώσκω), which is an obvious interpolation of the text. Without these four words, the passage simply has the angel telling Mariam that her son will be given the Throne of David, which leads her to ask, "How shall this be?" to which the angel responds, "With Ha-Shem all things are possible." There is absolutely no surviving text of Luke 1:34 that contains the wording "seeing I know not a man" that predates the 4th century CE.

Shiloh said...

That's right, neither side will open the Pandora's box. You know the real reason we cannot tell the truth about "Jesus" and the brother who continued the movement "James" is because it is documented the Teacher of Righteousness, James, was an opposition Sadducee. Since "James" took over from "Jesus" it's apparent that "Jesus" was an opposition Sadducee, and NOT a Pharisee. That's why he cannot be the messiah ben Yosef, because if he is, that means both Roman Gentile Xtianity and Rabbinical Judaism are infact NOT Derech haShem. Both sides have too much to loose so play this charade.

Anonymous said...

The last two commenters make no sense at all. This shnook who came with his distorted views and had tefilin put on him is either a shoteh or has no Yiddishe neshama. An emmeser Yid can't be that foolish, even with no Jewish background. Secondly, the whole story of their belief might have no historical basis at all, as many sages say; Just another sippur of fantasia. Cannot believe that there are so many so-called Jews who have fallen for avodah zorah.

Akiva said...

Anonymous -

Halacha is clear, one with a Jewish mother is Jewish. If he's a tinok she'b'nishba and has no idea of his background, he's still Jewish. Halacha doesn't discuss a "yiddishe neshama", which is just your way of saying a person who some some background, education, or feeling for his Judaism.

Sadly many Jews are in such a position (of having no or so little background that they are subject to manipulation or belief in other things).

Anonymous said...

To Anon at 12 am, it has nothing to do with how he was raised. It is just that typically a Jew (who was not raised in the jungle with apes and doesn't know the difference between the two) does not accept or believe (particularly with such intensity as that young man who is afraid of going to hell) in yeshu. This is what makes even a non-Jew who yearns to become a Jew unique in that his neshama is Jewish, as our sages tell us.

But, maybe because of the assimilation and brainwashing in this era, it might have a deep impact on a person's psyche. These are not your normal times; it is a time of chaos. We pray for the return of all Jews back to our roots.

Shai said...

I understand that most "messianic Jews" are not halachically Jewish. Some are, but most are Xians who for some reason gravitate toward messianic "Judaism," or non-Jews with some Jewish ancestry. Interestingly, many of them later see the error of their ways and convert to true Judaism. But some are there to convert Jews to Xianity. In any case, good work as always, Reb Locks!

crazy smade said...

Those messianics who believe that the historical man is Ha-Shem Himself or that he's part of some 3-in-1 deity are advancing avodah zarah. Same goes for those who advance the messianic belief in parthenogenesis. I don't think Jews are immune to paganism. Further, I don't think one can reason a person away from a belief that they've reasoned themselves into. I've never had any success at deprograming Jews or non-Jews from their messianic avodah zarah, even with the "Infinite Deity" argument that Rabbi Locks has employed. If the man in question ever existed, then he was obviously the product of three partners (per Niddah 31a) just like the rest of humanity.

crazy smade said...

Shiloh writes, "it is documented the Teacher of Righteousness, James, was an opposition Sadducee. Since 'James' took over from 'Jesus' it's apparent that 'Jesus' was an opposition Sadducee, and NOT a Pharisee."

Shiloh, what author(s)/book(s) are you getting this information from?

Related Posts with Thumbnails