Saturday 6 July 2024

Response to Yehuda Yisrael on his video to the Jewish Catholic

In terms of videos, Yehuda Yisrael had responded to a video done by Jewish Catholic. There was more of an exchange if you can check the description but the video, I want to look at is Yehuda’s response to “The "JEWISH CATHOLIC" FAILS to Defend his Faith Against Yehuda Yisrael!” and take a crack at addressing the arguments raised by him.

I have also listened to Yehuda’s debate with that of Radar Apologetics as well which gave me a better understanding of his position was that though blood atonement was A way to get atonement, it is not the ONLY way. The debate can be found here: Finally! My Debate with Radar Apologetics: Is Jesus Necessary For The Forgiveness Of Sins Today?

It has been a while since I have interacted with Yehuda but nevertheless, I had a listen through to his video to the Jewish Catholic. Let’s see what has been said. I have written down several points and I have had to relisten carefully so that there should be no misrepresentation of the arguments. Time stamps have been included where Yehuda deals with certain points and it is only fair to look at the original video in context to get an understanding of the issues at hand.


The argument presented from Leviticus 26 is the usage of the humbling of the heart and confession of sin as a legitimate means of dealing with sin according to the Torah in times of exile and how it refutes dealing with Hebrews 9:22. Yehuda mentions that this objection had not been addressed, though I think this can be dealt with a point he later makes. We will see why shortly.


A reference to the Talmud, Berkhot 26b was raised by Jewish Catholic and the thrust of the point made by Yehuda Yisrael was a refusal on the part of the Christian to deal with the Torah directly that “contradict your Christian claims”. The point made was the Rabbinic ideas are supporting exactly what it says in the Torah and that the Christians pretend the Rabbis made this up and is not in the Torah.


The reference is still included on screen in the video. Jewish Catholic mentions the subject of the Rabbis replacing sacrifices with prayer. The point that Yehuda mentions is the refusal to link what Daniel did in his prayers in Daniel 6 back to the Torah in Leviticus 26, and that Daniel is praying three times a day just as the rabbis had prescribed for the different services in the temple, making those sorts of analogies.

The point raised is so that the Jews can go back to rebuild the temple and the Jews say at the end of their prayer services that they want the rebuilding of the temple and the reestablishment of the Levitical Priesthood, along with the Prophets description of the third temple. (That too I can look at later as I have a bit to say on the subject.)

Basically, Yehuda’s point is what the rabbis prescribe is consistent with the TANAKH and not their own fabrication.


Another reference in the Talmud that gets raised by Jewish Catholic is that of Rosh Hashanah 16b. Yehuda Yisrael comments that Jewish Catholic brings up superfluous details distracting us from the rabbis giving us a paper trail from Leviticus 26 to Daniel 6 of what the Jews do and have done from the Torah and the Prophets implementing that. There is simply a validation for what the Jews have always done in times of exile.

Lastly, I shall quote Leviticus 26:38-41 and judging by Yehuda’s footage in question which looks to be, for the sake of this video, All TANAKH related references shall be quoted from there unless another translation is used, or I quote from my articles. All New Testament references however will be quoted from Bible Gateway.

Let’s look at Leviticus 26.

38You will become lost among the nations, and the land of your enemies will consume you.                   לחוַֽאֲבַדְתֶּ֖ם בַּגּוֹיִ֑ם וְאָֽכְלָ֣ה אֶתְכֶ֔ם אֶ֖רֶץ אֹֽיְבֵיכֶֽם:

39And because of their iniquity, those of you who survive will rot away in the lands of your enemies; moreover, they will rot away because the iniquities of their fathers are still within them.                      לטוְהַנִּשְׁאָרִ֣ים בָּכֶ֗ם יִמַּ֨קּוּ֙ בַּֽעֲו‍ֹנָ֔ם בְּאַרְצֹ֖ת אֹֽיְבֵיכֶ֑ם וְאַ֛ף בַּֽעֲו‍ֹנֹ֥ת אֲבֹתָ֖ם אִתָּ֥ם יִמָּֽקּוּ:

40They will then confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers their betrayal that they dealt Me, and that they also treated Me as happenstance.                  מוְהִתְוַדּ֤וּ אֶת־עֲו‍ֹנָם֙ וְאֶת־עֲוֹ֣ן אֲבֹתָ֔ם בְּמַֽעֲלָ֖ם אֲשֶׁ֣ר מָֽעֲלוּ־בִ֑י וְאַ֕ף אֲשֶׁר־הָֽלְכ֥וּ עִמִּ֖י בְּקֶֽרִי:

41Then I too, will treat them as happenstance and bring them [back while] in the land of their enemies. If then, their clogged heart becomes humbled, then, [their sufferings] will gain appeasement for their iniquity,                      מאאַף־אֲנִ֞י אֵלֵ֤ךְ עִמָּם֙ בְּקֶ֔רִי וְהֵֽבֵאתִ֣י אֹתָ֔ם בְּאֶ֖רֶץ אֹֽיְבֵיהֶ֑ם אוֹ־אָ֣ז יִכָּנַ֗ע לְבָבָם֙ הֶֽעָרֵ֔ל וְאָ֖ז יִרְצ֥וּ אֶת־עֲו‍ֹנָֽם:

42and I will remember My covenant [with] Jacob, and also My covenant [with] Isaac, and also My covenant [with] Abraham I will remember. And I will remember the Land,                מבוְזָֽכַרְתִּ֖י אֶת־בְּרִיתִ֣י יַֽעֲק֑וֹב וְאַף֩ אֶת־בְּרִיתִ֨י יִצְחָ֜ק וְאַ֨ף אֶת־בְּרִיתִ֧י אַבְרָהָ֛ם אֶזְכֹּ֖ר וְהָאָ֥רֶץ אֶזְכֹּֽר:

43[For] the Land will be bereft of them, appeasing its sabbaticals when it had been desolate of them, and they will gain appeasement for their iniquity. This was all in retribution for their having despised My ordinances and in retribution for their having rejected My statutes.             מגוְהָאָ֩רֶץ֩ תֵּֽעָזֵ֨ב מֵהֶ֜ם וְתִ֣רֶץ אֶת־שַׁבְּתֹתֶ֗יהָ בָּהְשַׁמָּה֙ מֵהֶ֔ם וְהֵ֖ם יִרְצ֣וּ אֶת־עֲו‍ֹנָ֑ם יַ֣עַן וּבְיַ֔עַן בְּמִשְׁפָּטַ֣י מָאָ֔סוּ וְאֶת־חֻקֹּתַ֖י גָּֽעֲלָ֥ה נַפְשָֽׁם:

44But despite all this, while they are in the land of their enemies, I will not despise them nor will I reject them to annihilate them, thereby breaking My covenant that is with them, for I am the Lord their God.               מדוְאַף גַּם־זֹאת בִּֽהְיוֹתָ֞ם בְּאֶ֣רֶץ אֹֽיְבֵיהֶ֗ם לֹֽא־מְאַסְתִּ֤ים וְלֹֽא־גְעַלְתִּים֙ לְכַלֹּתָ֔ם לְהָפֵ֥ר בְּרִיתִ֖י אִתָּ֑ם כִּ֛י אֲנִ֥י יְהֹוָ֖ה אֱלֹֽהֵיהֶֽם:

45I will remember for them the covenant [made with] the ancestors, whom I took out from the land of Egypt before the eyes of the nations, to be a God to them. I am the Lord.             מהוְזָֽכַרְתִּ֥י לָהֶ֖ם בְּרִ֣ית רִֽאשֹׁנִ֑ים אֲשֶׁ֣ר הוֹצֵֽאתִי־אֹתָם֩ מֵאֶ֨רֶץ מִצְרַ֜יִם לְעֵינֵ֣י הַגּוֹיִ֗ם לִֽהְי֥וֹת לָהֶ֛ם לֵֽאלֹהִ֖ים אֲנִ֥י יְהֹוָֽה:


The argument seems very plausible, and it is so far a good one. However, to suggest you do not need Jesus on that basis is not tenable.

Firstly, I will be generous and grant the rabbis the interpretation as valid and sanctioned by the Torah, that what is being done by Jews even today (And in the time of the Babylonian Exile) is essentially a contingency plan when the temple is not in operation. But granting this would not refute Jesus and the need of his sacrifice nor refute Hebrews 9:22.

The solution as found in the Torah would be a temporary solution even if the rabbinic interpretation is considered. Moreover, this situation as a means of atonement in exile is a less-than-ideal scenario, not the normal situation. I am fully aware that the point is what to do without a temple and not a rejection of blood sacrifice in and of itself but whether Jesus is needed considering what the rabbis have derived from Leviticus 26. (Again, being generous in granting the interpretation here.)

That being said, if I have understood the point correctly, if in the threefold prayers during the services like Daniel the Jews are looking forward to the reestablishment of the temple and the Leviticus priesthood, that simply means there is still a need and a burden among your people for the priesthood and the sacrificial system is a vital thing, it wouldn’t take away from the Christian atonement.

Jesus’ death alleviates that problem entirely, though the subject of the third temple I will save for later.

I do think the argument in question from the rabbinic interpretation, even with some contention still lends credibility to the Christian atonement because of what I have said. It would not contradict the Christian claim that the only way today to be cleansed of sin is by Jesus’ blood as the blood sacrifices were instituted by God through Moses (Though some exceptions were granted in some circumstances but do not take away from the general point regarding Hebrews 9:22.)

I recognise once again that the position based on the debate between Yehuda and Radar is that blood is not the only way but one way to atone and what to do in exile without a temple. Even taking that on board, because the temple has yet to be rebuilt unlike the first exile where it was swift by the standards of the time scales, clearly the conditions have changed and there is a clear difference between the Second Temple Exile and the Babylonian Exile.


I need not dwell on this point too much on Leviticus 26 and Daniel 6 but with regards to Hosea 14, let us look at it.


1Samaria shall be accounted guilty, for she has rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword, their infants shall be dashed, and their pregnant women shall be ripped up.                   אתֶּאְשַׁם֙ שֹֽׁמְר֔וֹן כִּ֥י מָֽרְתָ֖ה בֵּֽאלֹהֶ֑יהָ בַּחֶ֣רֶב יִפֹּ֔לוּ עֹֽלְלֵיהֶ֣ם יְרֻטָּ֔שׁוּ וְהָֽרִיּוֹתָ֖יו יְבֻקָּֽעוּ:

2Return, O Israel, to the Lord your God, for you have stumbled in your iniquity.             בשׁוּבָה יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל עַ֖ד יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֶ֑יךָ כִּ֥י כָשַׁ֖לְתָּ בַּֽעֲו‍ֹנֶֽךָ:

3Take words with yourselves and return to the Lord. Say, "You shall forgive all iniquity and teach us [the] good [way], and let us render [for] bulls [the offering of] our lips.                 גקְח֚וּ עִמָּכֶם֙ דְּבָרִ֔ים וְשׁ֖וּבוּ אֶל־יְהֹוָ֑ה אִמְר֣וּ אֵלָ֗יו כָּל־תִּשָּׂ֚א עָו‍ֹן֙ וְקַח־ט֔וֹב וּנְשַׁלְּמָ֥ה פָרִ֖ים שְׂפָתֵֽינוּ:

4Assyria shall not save us; we will not ride on horses, nor will we say any longer, our gods, to the work of our hands, for in You, by Whom the orphan is granted mercy."            דאַשּׁ֣וּר | לֹ֣א יֽוֹשִׁיעֵ֗נוּ עַל־סוּס֙ לֹ֣א נִרְכָּ֔ב וְלֹֽא־נֹ֥אמַר ע֛וֹד אֱלֹהֵ֖ינוּ לְמַֽעֲשֵׂ֣ה יָדֵ֑ינוּ אֲשֶׁר־בְּךָ֖ יְרֻחַ֥ם יָתֽוֹם:

5I will remedy their backsliding; I will love them freely, for My wrath has turned away from them.                     האֶרְפָּא֙ מְשׁ֣וּבָתָ֔ם אֹֽהֲבֵ֖ם נְדָבָ֑ה כִּ֛י שָׁ֥ב אַפִּ֖י מִמֶּֽנּוּ:

6I will be like dew to Israel, they shall blossom like a rose, and it shall strike its roots like the Lebanon.              ואֶֽהְיֶ֚ה כַטַּל֙ לְיִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל יִפְרַ֖ח כַּשּֽׁוֹשַׁנָּ֑ה וְיַ֥ךְ שָׁרָשָׁ֖יו כַּלְּבָנֽוֹן:

7Its branches shall go forth, and its beauty shall be like the olive tree, and its fragrance like the Lebanon.            זיֵֽלְכוּ֙ יֽוֹנְקוֹתָ֔יו וִיהִ֥י כַזַּ֖יִת הוֹד֑וֹ וְרֵ֥יחַֽ ל֖וֹ כַּלְּבָנֽוֹן:

8Those who dwelt in its shade shall return; they shall revive [like] corn and blossom like the vine; its fragrance shall be like the wine of Lebanon.             חיָשֻׁ֙בוּ֙ יֹֽשְׁבֵ֣י בְצִלּ֔וֹ יְחַיּ֥וּ דָגָ֖ן וְיִפְרְח֣וּ כַגָּ֑פֶן זִכְר֖וֹ כְּיֵ֥ין לְבָנֽוֹן:

9Ephraim; What more do I need the images? I will answer him and I will look upon him: I am like a leafy cypress tree; from Me your fruit is found.                      טאֶפְרַ֕יִם מַה־לִּ֥י ע֖וֹד לָֽעֲצַבִּ֑ים אֲנִ֧י עָנִ֣יתִי וַֽאֲשׁוּרֶ֗נּוּ אֲנִי֙ כִּבְר֣וֹשׁ רַֽעֲנָ֔ן מִמֶּ֖נִּי פֶּרְיְךָ֥ נִמְצָֽא:

10Who is wise and will understand these, discerning and will know them; for the ways of the Lord are straight, and the righteous shall walk in them, and the rebellious shall stumble on them.                      ימִ֚י חָכָם֙ וְיָ֣בֵֽן אֵ֔לֶּה נָב֖וֹן וְיֵֽדָעֵ֑ם כִּֽי־יְשָׁרִ֞ים דַּרְכֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֗ה וְצַדִּקִים֙ יֵ֣לְכוּ בָ֔ם וּפֹֽשְׁעִ֖ים יִכָּ֥שְׁלוּ בָֽם:

The main thrust of the point of Hosea 14 is not whether you need a blood sacrifice or not, it is an exhortation to repent and turn back to God and him restoring them upon their return. Therefore, it does not even put a dent in the Christian position.

Some time stamps I have skipped over as there is not much for me to comment on aside from what I have already written.


As I have mentioned before and will grant the contingency plan from the rabbis as valid from Leviticus 26 though this is an additional point I am going to make. 

Once again, it is very strange with respect to the fact the second temple in all this time but even more to the fact that a third one has not been rebuilt from the time after the death and resurrection of Jesus.

Regarding the argument that the generation will not pass away. While I have before argued that generation could refer to the race of the Jews not passing away, I recognise that it may not be addressing the second coming at all. 

In fact, not only did Sam Shamoun address this in a video, but he also addressed Shabir Ali on this issue several years ago, in a portion I will quote here. (Italics have been added by me.)

As far as Matthew 16:28 is concerned, Jesus may have been referring to a visible manifestation of his glory and power. Jesus would therefore be promising his disciples that some of them would get a foretaste of what Christ coming in his kingdom would be like. For instance the scriptures teach that two witnesses would herald Christ's coming before he returned in glorious splendor. (Cf. Malachi 4:5; Rev. 11:1-12, 19:11-16)

Mark indicates that this is precisely what Christ meant:

"And he said to them, ‘I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God come with power.'" Mark 9:1

The fulfillment of this promise took place shortly afterwards:

"After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James, and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white light. Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah talking with Jesus." Matthew 17:1-3

The Apostle Peter indicates that this event was the fulfillment of Christ's promise to his followers:

"We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the POWER and COMING of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were EYEWITNESSES of his MAJESTY. For he received HONOR and GLORY from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, ‘This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.' We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain." 2 Peter 1:16-18

Secondly, Jesus' statement could also be referring to Christ manifesting his kingly rule and glory at Pentecost. There, the Holy Spirit was poured out miraculously upon believers. This marked the birth of the Church where Christ reigns as King in the heart of believers. (Cf. Acts 2; 22:16-18)

In relation to Matthew 24:34, there are three possible responses. First, the term "generation" is the Greek geneous, a synonym of genes which can mean race. Hence, the race of Jews whom Jesus was addressing would not pass away until the culmination of the age.

Furthermore, Jesus may not have even been referring to his generation per se, but to the generation that would witness the signs that Christ predicted would occur before his Second Coming. (Cf. Mat. 24:15-33)

Finally, Christ may not have even been referring to his Second Coming. Rather, Christ could have been referring to his coming in judgment against Jerusalem. Christ had predicted that the temple and the people living in Jerusalem would be destroyed. This bears out in light of what is said elsewhere in Scripture:

"They produced false witnesses, who testified, ‘This fellow never stops speaking against this holy place and against the law. For we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and change the customs Moses handed down to us.' All who were sitting in the Sanhedrin looked intently at Stephen, and they saw that his face was like the face of an angel." Acts 6:13-15

Although these men were trying to falsely accuse Stephen there was some truth to what they were saying since Jesus had in fact predicted the destruction of the Temple:

"Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 'Do you see all these things?' he asked. 'I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.'" Matthew 24:1-2

"As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it and said, 'If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace-but now it is hidden from your eyes. The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God's coming to you.'" Luke 19:41-44

Hence, there are no false predictions but only Shabir's misinterpretation of the Holy Bible. (Source:

Therefore, there is no hypocrisy from the camp regarding this issue of the second temple not being rebuilt. (No hypocrisy from the Jewish camp either.)


For this I have no response, admittedly I am not sure why the Jubliee Year is brought up.


The point made by Yehuda on the subject of Hosea 3 is that there is no indication that the Messiah had to come before the destruction of the second temple but rather that David their king will come after the final exile which will happen for many days, that it doesn’t say there shall come an intermediate period where the Messiah is going to come, we’re going to miss him and that everyone is going to go into exile and they already had their king and their sacrifice. No (continuing Yehuda’s point here.) it says they will have no king and no sacrifice, that’s referring to the Davidic King, we will have no Davidic king and no sacrifice, that has described the past 2000 years to a tee and that this will be the case up until the Messiah comes and ultimately Jesus didn’t fulfil it.

Let’s look at Hosea 3:

1And the Lord said to me: Go again, love a woman beloved by her companion, yet an adulteress, like the love of the Lord of the children of Israel, who turn to other gods, and love goblets of grapes.             אוַיֹּ֨אמֶר יְהֹוָ֜ה אֵלַ֗י עוֹד לֵ֣ךְ אֱהַב־אִשָּׁ֔ה אֲהֻ֥בַת רֵ֖עַ וּמְנָאָ֑פֶת כְּאַֽהֲבַ֚ת יְהֹוָה֙ אֶת־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וְהֵ֗ם פֹּנִים֙ אֶל־אֱלֹהִ֣ים אֲחֵרִ֔ים וְאֹֽהֲבֵ֖י אֲשִׁישֵׁ֥י עֲנָבִֽים:

2And I bought her for me for fifteen pieces of silver, and a 'chomer' of barley and a 'lethech' of barley.                בוָֽאֶכְּרֶ֣הָ לִּ֔י בַּֽחֲמִשָּׁ֥ה עָשָׂ֖ר כָּ֑סֶף וְחֹ֥מֶר שְׂעֹרִ֖ים וְלֶ֥תֶךְ שְׂעֹרִֽים:

3And I said to her: 'You shall remain as mine for many days; you shall not play the harlot, and you shall not belong to another man; so will I be towards you.                       גוָֽאֹמַ֣ר אֵלֶ֗יהָ יָמִ֚ים רַבִּים֙ תֵּ֣שְׁבִי לִ֔י לֹ֣א תִזְנִ֔י וְלֹ֥א תִֽהְיִ֖י לְאִ֑ישׁ וְגַם־אֲנִ֖י אֵלָֽיִךְ:

4For the children of Israel shall remain for many days, having neither king, nor prince, nor sacrifice, nor pillar, nor ephod nor teraphim.               דכִּ֣י | יָמִ֣ים רַבִּ֗ים יֵֽשְׁבוּ֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֵ֥ין מֶ֙לֶךְ֙ וְאֵ֣ין שָׂ֔ר וְאֵ֥ין זֶ֖בַח וְאֵ֣ין מַצֵּבָ֑ה וְאֵ֥ין אֵפ֖וֹד וּתְרָפִֽים:

5Afterwards shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God and David their king, and they shall come trembling to the Lord and to His goodness at the end of days.                    האַחַ֗ר יָשֻׁ֙בוּ֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וּבִקְשׁוּ֙ אֶת־יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹֽהֵיהֶ֔ם וְאֵ֖ת דָּוִ֣יד מַלְכָּ֑ם וּפָֽחֲד֧וּ אֶל־יְהֹוָ֛ה וְאֶל־טוּב֖וֹ בְּאַֽחֲרִ֥ית הַיָּמִֽים:


The timing of the Messiah’s first coming (For a lack of better term as Messiah only has one in Rabbinic Judaism but putting that aside.) I do not think occurs at the end of days.

It is true Hosea doesn’t mention the Messiah coming before the second temple was destroyed as a prerequisite (That rests on Daniel 9:24-27 I deem rather than Hosea 3, but I digress.) However, In the years after Jesus had died and rose again, the Jewish people were later rendered without sacrifice (or rather a sacrificial system that didn’t work and what reason that is will be shown later) and before Jesus arrived, the people were already without king or prince. None sat on David’s throne since the Babylonian exile though his descendants had survived, through Jeconiah and Zerubabbel, the later as a governor rather than a prince or king.

Over the years since the temple’s destruction (There is a bit to say on that soon), many Jews have come to faith in Jesus and hence over time have come to “seek the Lord and David their king.”

As for end of days, it is likely that the passage is not necessarily referring to the end of time or the final day but rather a latter age, a final age before the end. Admittedly, the passage does not provide a time frame for these things to be accomplished.

Several translations have differing renderings of the passage which can be read here:


A response to the usage of Yoma 39b was mentioned in passing and is read later in the video. It will require a response later in this document.


The point that Yehuda made is that Jewish Catholic claimed the second temple was destroyed because the Jews rejected Jesus.

It’s not as simple as that. I agree with Jewish Catholic on that point but there is more to say than simply that. The wider reason is that when Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied and thus there was no need to continue the Levitical sacrifices anymore. The Talmud of course does not say that this is the case in the passage, but it does note unusual phenomenon occurring with the temple as to why for four decades the sacrifices were rejected. The rabbis would also have rejected Messianic Jewish testimony at the time.

Something clearly happened in the days of Jesus that the rabbis in the Talmud either did not account for or refused to acknowledge. It’s one of those two scenarios.

Yehuda does bring up a rebuttal he has written regarding the Talmudic tradition but that will be looked at later.


This point is quite lengthy so please bear with me on this. First, lets look at Zechariah 8:

16These are the things that you shall do: Speak the truth each one with his neighbor; truth, and judgment of peace you shall judge in your cities.                טזאֵ֥לֶּה הַדְּבָרִ֖ים אֲשֶׁ֣ר תַּֽעֲשׂ֑וּ דַּבְּר֚וּ אֱמֶת֙ אִ֣ישׁ אֶת־רֵעֵ֔הוּ אֱמֶת֙ וּמִשְׁפַּ֣ט שָׁל֔וֹם שִׁפְט֖וּ בְּשַֽׁעֲרֵיכֶֽם:

17And let no one think evil of his neighbors in your heart, nor shall you love a false oath-for all these are what I hate, says the Lord.                    יזוְאִ֣ישׁ | אֶת־רָעַ֣ת רֵעֵ֗הוּ אַל־תַּחְשְׁבוּ֙ בִּלְבַבְכֶ֔ם וּשְׁבֻ֥עַת שֶׁ֖קֶר אַל־תֶּֽאֱהָ֑בוּ כִּ֧י אֶת־כָּל־אֵ֛לֶּה אֲשֶׁ֥ר שָׂנֵ֖אתִי נְאֻם־יְהֹוָֽה:

18And the word of the Lord of Hosts came to me, saying:                     יחוַיְהִ֛י דְּבַר־יְהֹוָ֥ה צְבָא֖וֹת אֵלַ֥י לֵאמֹֽר:

19So said the Lord of Hosts: The fast of the fourth [month], the fast of the fifth [month], the fast of the seventh [month], and the fast of the tenth [month] shall be for the house of Judah for joy and happiness and for happy holidays-but love truth and peace.             יטכֹּֽה־אָמַ֞ר יְהֹוָ֣ה צְבָא֗וֹת צ֣וֹם הָֽרְבִיעִ֡י וְצ֣וֹם הַֽחֲמִישִׁי֩ וְצ֨וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֜י וְצ֣וֹם הָֽעֲשִׂירִ֗י יִֽהְיֶ֚ה לְבֵית־יְהוּדָה֙ לְשָׂשׂ֣וֹן וּלְשִׂמְחָ֔ה וּֽלְמֹֽעֲדִ֖ים טוֹבִ֑ים וְהָֽאֱמֶ֥ת וְהַשָּׁל֖וֹם אֱהָֽבוּ:

20So said the Lord of Hosts: [There will] yet [be a time] that peoples and the inhabitants of many cities shall come.                     ככֹּ֥ה אָמַ֖ר יְהֹוָ֣ה צְבָא֑וֹת עֹד אֲשֶׁר יָבֹ֣אוּ עַמִּ֔ים וְיֹֽשְׁבֵ֖י עָרִ֥ים רַבּֽוֹת:

21And the inhabitants of one shall go to another, saying, "Let us go to pray before the Lord and to entreat the Lord of Hosts. I, too, will go."                      כאוְֽהָלְכ֡וּ יוֹשְׁבֵי֩ אַחַ֨ת אֶל־אַחַ֜ת לֵאמֹ֗ר נֵלְכָ֚ה הָלוֹךְ֙ לְחַלּוֹת֙ אֶת־פְּנֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֔ה וּלְבַקֵּ֖שׁ אֶת־יְהֹוָ֣ה צְבָא֑וֹת אֵֽלְכָ֖ה גַּם־אָֽנִי:

22And many peoples and powerful nations shall come to entreat the Lord of Hosts in Jerusalem, and to pray before the Lord.                   כבוּבָ֨אוּ עַמִּ֚ים רַבִּים֙ וְגוֹיִ֣ם עֲצוּמִ֔ים לְבַקֵּ֛שׁ אֶת־יְהֹוָ֥ה צְבָא֖וֹת בִּירֽוּשָׁלִָ֑ם וּלְחַלּ֖וֹת אֶת־פְּנֵ֥י יְהֹוָֽה:

23So said the Lord of Hosts: In those days, when ten men of all the languages of the nations shall take hold of the skirt of a Jewish man, saying, "Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you."               כגכֹּֽה־אָמַר֘ יְהֹוָ֣ה צְבָאוֹת֒ בַּיָּמִ֣ים הָהֵ֔מָּה אֲשֶׁ֚ר יַֽחֲזִ֙יקוּ֙ עֲשָׂרָ֣ה אֲנָשִׁ֔ים מִכֹּ֖ל לְשֹׁנ֣וֹת הַגּוֹיִ֑ם וְֽהֶחֱזִ֡יקוּ בִּכְנַף֩ אִ֨ישׁ יְהוּדִ֜י לֵאמֹ֗ר נֵֽלְכָה֙ עִמָּכֶ֔ם כִּ֥י שָׁמַ֖עְנוּ אֱלֹהִ֥ים עִמָּכֶֽם:


The passage interestingly is brought forward as a case to why the second temple was destroyed and it has to do with the “baseless hatred towards their fellow man” according to Rabbinic understanding and Yehuda cites Rashi who commented on the passage in question. It this passage that Yehuda believes it validates Rabbinic Judaism and that he knows not of any group that fits this aside from them.

Essentially, Yehuda says it is talking about a “future messianic time of redemption where God will return to Zion.” Along with the restoration of the temple, the temple might be built, and the remnant of the people will come back to Jerusalem with good done to them by God, the future messianic redemption.

Yehuda then explains the means of bringing about this Messianic redemption by citing verses 16-17 and says it is a messianic prophecy that hasn’t been fulfilled yet, not by Jesus or anyone else by citing 18-19.

The question Yehuda asks is this and he has brought this to other groups, including the Catholics, specifically to Jewish Catholic. 

“What significance does this verse have in your observance of Catholic understanding?”

“Do you observe any of these fasts?” The Rabbinic Jews have kept the fasts, commemorating the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem and the Rabbinic Jews are the only ones who observe this.

He goes onto 20-23 saying that it has nothing to do with the Catholic Church and has nothing to do with what Jesus did and is reminiscent of what Rabbinic Jews have been doing for the past 2000 years.

Finally, a citation of Rashi’s commentary on verse 17 has been provided here:


“And let no one think evil of his neighbors: He warned them concerning hatred without cause, which brought about the destruction of the Second Temple.


ואיש את רעת רעהו: הזהירם על שנאת חנם והיא שהחריבה בית המקדש שני:”

Yehuda then says this is the mitzvah that the Jews are to work on during this exile that will bring on the redemption so that his people will be celebrating these days, which currently represent the destruction of the temple but in the future they will celebrate these days because the temple will be rebuilt just as described in Zechariah 8:22.

Isaiah 56:7-8 is also brought to the discussion with respect to a third temple and as a future messianic passage that is not fulfilled by Jesus.

7I will bring them to My holy mount, and I will cause them to rejoice in My house of prayer, their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be acceptable upon My altar, for My house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.             זוַֽהֲבִֽיאוֹתִ֞ים אֶל־הַ֣ר קָדְשִׁ֗י וְשִׂמַּחְתִּים֙ בְּבֵ֣ית תְּפִלָּתִ֔י עֽוֹלֹתֵיהֶ֧ם וְזִבְחֵיהֶ֛ם לְרָצ֖וֹן עַל־מִזְבְּחִ֑י כִּ֣י בֵיתִ֔י בֵּית־תְּפִלָּ֥ה יִקָּרֵ֖א לְכָל־הָֽעַמִּֽים:

8So says the Lord God, Who gathers in the dispersed of Israel, I will yet gather others to him, together with his gathered ones.                 חנְאֻם֙ אֲדֹנָ֣י יֱהֹוִ֔ה מְקַבֵּ֖ץ נִדְחֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל ע֛וֹד אֲקַבֵּ֥ץ עָלָ֖יו לְנִקְבָּצָֽיו:



The third temple is a debated topic among Christians and is usually discussed within the realm of eschatology. I have written about the third temple and contend that this is done during the Millennial Reign of Christ (Which I think is literal not spiritual). But first I need to comment on Zechariah 8 before I cross that bridge.

It is strange to me that somehow here that the messianic redemption is somehow to be merited or brought about by the actions of the Jews. It is an unusual interpretation.

The Messianic Era cannot be brought about by implementing what occurs in Zechariah 8:16-23. All these are in the context simply commands given by God rather than a condition used to bring about the Messianic Redemption. I would say it certainly fit into a repentance to God before the coming of the Messiah himself.

Moreover, though the Rabbinic Jews have kept these fasts over the centuries, some Messianic congregations do keep the feasts of the Torah, though this topic is one that this response doesn’t permit me to go into as the subject of whether Christians are to keep the Mosaic law or not is another matter. In short, it isn’t just the Rabbinic Jews alone that observe the feasts. Some Messianic Jews observe the feasts and still did even in the early church although the Gentiles didn’t do so (nor were they required) as found in Romans 14 and Colossians 2, as it was a matter of personal conviction.

This, Rabbinic Jews are not the only ones who have kept the fasts.

While Isaiah 56:7-8 could be interpreted to be Messianic, the third temple usage would not contradict Christian theology. Ezekiel 40-48 speaks of the temple.

This I address in my article “Anti-Christ building the Temple?”


It is with this section that we finally come to rebuttal regarding Yoma 39b. There are parts in between Yehuda’s reading the rebuttal. Let us look at what he wrote.

Watch also the video regarding the in-between points that Yehuda makes.

The Talmud and Rashi’s claim regarding the second temple being destroyed by the Jewish people’s baseless hatred of their fellow men while on the surface has weight, it does have a few problems.

If the New Testament documents were false books, then indeed Rashi and the Talmud’s assertions would be correct.

However, if the New Testament is proved to be true, then its comments were justified, but I say this with some qualifications so as not to give the wrong impression about Jesus or his disciples and their attitudes to the Jewish people. Nor do I write this to be insensitive to the persecution of the Jews which has been horrible and unjust.

First, the “inconsistencies” between the TANAKH and the New Testament can be reconciled with careful thought and consideration, whether it be contradictions, theology etc. Even when Answering Judaism was started ten years ago, there I tried to respond to some of the objections that have been raised, though whether my arguments hold up to scrutiny, the reader can look at see whether that is so.

Furthermore, Deuteronomy 13 I have addressed in the past:

In fact, Yehuda Yisrael was the first one to use Deuteronomy 13 against me and these articles I have written in response to him:

A brief summary I will give here however is that Deuteronomy 13 while it makes clear miracles don’t prove a false prophet genuine, the resurrection of Jesus would be an exception.

First, a prophet who was raised from the dead is an example of God confirming the prophet to be true and vindicating his claims.

Muhammad failed this, Joseph Smith failed this and certainly Balaam would have failed this. If Jesus rose from the dead, he ends up being vindicated and having the Father’s stamp of approval. If anyone wants to say it proves nothing, there is no evidence in the TANAKH, even in Deuteronomy 13 that the same false prophet would be raised later to test the people, it simply wouldn’t happen.

At the end of the day, if anyone is contentious about the resurrection of Jesus and say it proves nothing, I think of the parable involving the rich man and Lazarus, as found the Gospel of Luke aptly applies here. The verses in question I have underlined:

Luke 16:19 “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. 20 And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man's table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side.[a] The rich man also died and was buried, 23 and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. 24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’ 25 But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’ 27 And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father's house— 28 for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.’ 29 But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ 30 And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31 He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’”

If any Jew wants to say that the resurrection of Jesus doesn’t prove him to be true, there is not much I can say. Regardless, it doesn’t impact Jesus.

Two, Jesus did not promote a false God, which is essentially the condemnation as found in Deuteronomy 13. The Trinity also certainly would not be debunked by this passage.

In one of my responses to Yisroel Blumenthal, I have stated the following. Forgive the slight informality in my comments:

First of all, Old Testament people did not say at Sinai "Hello Jesus" when God revealed himself on Sinai, Jesus wasn't given the name Jesus UNTIL the incarnation. It is Jesus' claim and the apostles that he was God in the flesh. If Jesus was not who he claimed to be, Then the Jews were right in concluding that bowing to him in worship would be idolatry. If however, Jesus is God but he is not the Father in heaven and proved that to be the case, then worshipping him is acceptable. We don't bow to the flesh; we bow to the one who took on flesh. He "tabernacled among us" as John 1 puts it.

If Jesus is God as I am convinced he is, then the revelation at Sinai wouldn't present a problem, and I have written on the subject of Deuteronomy 13 if Blumenthal wishes to bring that up:

The point is in the context of Sinai, the three persons are not required to be seen at once. James White made an excellent point on the Dividing Line on the subject of singular pronouns. He says:

"Every single time, that the context does not demand that we see a particular individual operating differently than the others, would be a reference to the Triune God. So any time where God's general activities, God's general attributes or in reference, can be referred to the entire Godhead acting in unity."

This would cover the Sinai Revelation, considering it was the ONE God acting in that context without having all three persons seen at once. The Godhead was acting in unity in the context of Sinai. Also, James White has stressed that the revelation of the Trinity was revealed in the Incarnation of Jesus and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. It was revealed between the Old and the New Testament. He made this point in his debate with Jalal Abularab.”

As a result, the “angel hunt” as Yehuda refers to the Angel of the Lord proof texts and the famous passage in John 8 where Jesus refers to himself as the Great I AM hold weight in the matter. It is not circular reasoning.

Jesus would only be guilty of baseless hatred if he turned out to be a fraud and only in that would the Jews have ample reason to put him to death according to the Torah.

As for other specific passages highlighted by Yehuda, we look at the context of John 8:44 as the first.

39 They answered him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham's children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, 40 but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did. 41 You are doing the works your father did.” They said to him, “We were not born of sexual immorality. We have one Father—even God.” 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. 43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. 46 Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? 47 Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.”

In the passage, The Jews who were speaking to Jesus are Jews who believed in him, supposedly. However, as Jesus speaks, he reveals their heart's attitude towards him, once again, this is referring to specific Jews in a given context, he is not saying ALL Jews are of the devil, he is condemning a particular group of Jews. They were shocked by his claims and couldn't stand what he had said about them. They were superficially believing in Jesus, not really submitting to him. This is the one statement in all the Gospels that is commonly quoted by the Counter-Missionaries to attack the NT and accuse it of Jew Hatred.

As made clear in the video to Jewish Catholic, Yehuda does not point to these passages as evidence of antisemitism but rather he points to this passage and others as evidence of Jesus and Paul having baseless hatred for their fellow Jews, which to me is very unlikely in light Jesus’ various attitudes to his people in addition to Paul’s overall comments.

Jesus’ words in John 8 sound harsh, but certainly do not constitute baseless hatred, especially in his exchange with the Samaritan woman in the same Gospel in chapter 4:

John 4:16 Jesus said to her, “Go, call your husband, and come here.” 17 The woman answered him, “I have no husband.” Jesus said to her, “You are right in saying, ‘I have no husband’; 18 for you have had five husbands, and the one you now have is not your husband. What you have said is true.” 19 The woman said to him, “Sir, I perceive that you are a prophet. 20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you say that in Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship.” 21 Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. 22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. 24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” 25 The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah is coming (he who is called Christ). When he comes, he will tell us all things.” 26 Jesus said to her, “I who speak to you am he.”

Jesus speaks of a day when it will not matter where you come from, that true worshippers of the Father will come from many ethnic backgrounds, highlighting especially the point that salvation is of the Jewish people, without them, no salvation for the Gentiles.

In Matthew 23, though Jesus pronounced woes specifically on the Pharisees, who should have known better, he says following regarding Jerusalem:

37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! 38 See, your house is left to you desolate. 39 For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’”

As for Paul, his comments in 1 Thessalonians 2:15-16 only applied to the Jews who called for Jesus to be put to death.

1 Thessalonians 2:13 And we also thank God constantly[d] for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men[e] but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers. 14 For you, brothers, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea. For you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Jews,[f] 15 who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and displease God and oppose all mankind 16 by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they might be saved—so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But wrath has come upon them at last![g]

The Jews that “oppose all mankind” that Paul refers to here are a specific group of Jews that hindered his efforts in bringing the Gospel to the Gentile nations, though the misuse of this passage by so called Christians as blood libel was certainly an abominable action and not something Paul would have blessed. The misuse of the passage was an unjust and cruel treatment of the Jews that Jesus himself would abominate, considering what I have already quoted above from Matthew 23.

As to whether Paul should thank the Jews (the ones responsible not all.) for putting Jesus to death. Absolutely not. That is like asking should we thank Joseph’s brothers for selling their brother to the Ismaelites who in turn sold him into Egypt and to cover up their deed, the brothers lied to Jacob because eventually it led to the salvation of the Jews in Egypt from famine. Should we thank the brothers of Joseph for that? Of course not. No, as Joseph said to his brothers:

Genesis 50:19 But Joseph said to them, “Do not fear, for am I in the place of God? 20 As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people[b] should be kept alive, as they are today. 21 So do not fear; I will provide for you and your little ones.” Thus he comforted them and spoke kindly to them.

In fact, when on the cross, what did Jesus say regarding his executioners? 

Luke 23:26 And as they led him away, they seized one Simon of Cyrene, who was coming in from the country, and laid on him the cross, to carry it behind Jesus. 27 And there followed him a great multitude of the people and of women who were mourning and lamenting for him. 28 But turning to them Jesus said, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. 29 For behold, the days are coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren and the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ 30 Then they will begin to say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us,’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us.’ 31 For if they do these things when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?”

32 Two others, who were criminals, were led away to be put to death with him. 33 And when they came to the place that is called The Skull, there they crucified him, and the criminals, one on his right and one on his left. 34 And Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”[b] And they cast lots to divide his garments. 35 And the people stood by, watching, but the rulers scoffed at him, saying, “He saved others; let him save himself, if he is the Christ of God, his Chosen One!” 36 The soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him sour wine 37 and saying, “If you are the King of the Jews, save yourself!” 38 There was also an inscription over him,[c] “This is the King of the Jews.”

Despite the circumstances, Jesus’ death was planned but nevertheless, even if what was done to him by the people was murder.

Sam Shamoun also wrote the following regarding Jesus saying “Father, forgive them.”

To put it simply, Jesus' use of the imperative shows that he was actually demanding that the Father forgive the individuals responsible for dividing up his clothing. He wasn't simply making an entreaty. We need to point out that by saying that Christ commanded his Father to perform a specific function, we are not implying that there is competition within the Godhead. Rather, we are simply highlighting the point that the Lord Jesus has the authority to make demands since he is equal to the Father in essence and is the object of the Father's infinite and eternal love. Yet, these demands are not done out of a dictatorial spirit, but out of a spirit of mutual love and the assurance that whatever Christ asks for he shall definitely receive:

"When Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went out to meet him, but Mary stayed at home. ‘Lord,’ Martha said to Jesus, ‘if you had been here, my brother would not have died. But I know that even now God will give you whatever you ask.’" John 11:20-22

"So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, ‘Father, I thank you that you have heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me.’" John 11:41-42

"I will not speak with you much longer, for the prince of this world is coming. He has no hold on me, but the world must learn that I love the Father and that I do exactly what my Father has commanded me. Come now; let us leave." John 14:30-31

"As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father's commands and remain in his love." John 15:9-10

"Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world." John 17:24

Now in order to establish the case that the Lord Jesus wasn't simply asking or encouraging the Father to forgive them, but making a demand based on his relationship to the Father as the divine Son, we need to read all that Luke has to say about the person and work of Christ. Once this is done, it becomes quite evident that Jesus is indeed the Sovereign Lord of all creation, the Father's eternally beloved Son, and because of this he is able to make certain demands of the Father.

This is just a small fraction from Shamoun’s article but the comment here is striking. It certainly showcases the point that Jesus did not have a “baseless hatred” of even those who opposed them.

Peter also says to the Jewish people the following in Acts 3:

11 While he clung to Peter and John, all the people, utterly astounded, ran together to them in the portico called Solomon's. 12 And when Peter saw it he addressed the people: “Men of Israel, why do you wonder at this, or why do you stare at us, as though by our own power or piety we have made him walk? 13 The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified his servant[b] Jesus, whom you delivered over and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release him. 14 But you denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you, 15 and you killed the Author of life, whom God raised from the dead. To this we are witnesses. 16 And his name—by faith in his name—has made this man strong whom you see and know, and the faith that is through Jesus[c] has given the man this perfect health in the presence of you all.

17 “And now, brothers, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did also your rulers. 18 But what God foretold by the mouth of all the prophets, that his Christ would suffer, he thus fulfilled. 19 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, 20 that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, 21 whom heaven must receive until the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago. 22 Moses said, ‘The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers. You shall listen to him in whatever he tells you. 23 And it shall be that every soul who does not listen to that prophet shall be destroyed from the people.’ 24 And all the prophets who have spoken, from Samuel and those who came after him, also proclaimed these days. 25 You are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant that God made with your fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed.’ 26 God, having raised up his servant, sent him to you first, to bless you by turning every one of you from your wickedness.”

Although the Jewish people involved with killing Jesus along with the Romans, in terms of what they did, Peter tells them that this was done in ignorance, they didn’t realise that their Messiah was the one they had killed but nevertheless, forgiveness has been extended to them if they would simply turn to Jesus in repentance and faith. Peter certainly doesn’t speak to his people with malice, instead he understands why they did what they did, while not excusing it.

Moreover, Paul himself also said the following regarding his people in Romans 9:

9 I am speaking the truth in Christ—I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit— 2 that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers,[a] my kinsmen according to the flesh. 4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. 5 To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.

6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, 7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. 9 For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.” 10 And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— 12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

Like Jesus, Paul wept over his own people and despite the rejection of Jesus, the Jews have not been cast away forever. This is quite different from someone having baseless hatred of his own people. On the contrary, it shows great love that he would speak this way of his people.

The supposed confusion over Jews among the Gentiles have arisen over the years especially from replacement theology damaging the church and it’s gradual moving away from the Jewish roots to its own destruction. Peter even notes that there were people in his day distorting Paul’s letters and even the TANAKH itself (2 Peter 3:16.)

It is not a case of pretending that Jesus and the apostles were not guilty of baseless hatred, the question is where they guilty of it to begin with? The answer is no and even if Jesus turned out to be false, it would not justify the dehumanisation of the Jewish people, whether it be by the church or those outside the church.

Let us turn quickly to Revelation 2:

8 “And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write: ‘The words of the first and the last, who died and came to life.

9 “‘I know your tribulation and your poverty (but you are rich) and the slander[a] of those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. 10 Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have tribulation. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life. 11 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. The one who conquers will not be hurt by the second death.’

I will not sugarcoat the passage. The Jews mentioned here are specifically ones that have persecuted the church in Smyrna with Jesus commending the church and strengthening it.

Certainly Revelation 2:9 has been misused and abused by the church over the years but considering the fact some churches were made of Jew and Gentile congregations (Romans 10 and Galatians 3), I think misusing the passage towards someone for simply existing as a Jew is not fair and is baseless and insensitive.

Both Jews and Gentiles according to the New Testament must turn to Jesus to be saved.

As Yehuda has argued, he is not arguing whether a passage has anti-semitism or not, but he is arguing about whether the apostles and Jesus had a baseless hatred towards their people and as I have said that is not the case. If Jesus is who he says he is, then I can say he and his apostles are innocent of the charge of baseless hatred towards their fellow Jews.

As for the comment of the prophets from Paul. He does not mean all Jews are contrary to mankind as mentioned earlier, only a group of them and the point about the prophets being killed was referring to the stiff-necked nature of the Jewish people and the refusal to hear the voice of God when calling them to repentance (except the remnant who harkened to him.) 

In this day, The Christian church is guilty of being stiff necked, especially how impotent it has become in the West and Paul warns if God does not spare the natural branches, he will not spare the ones grafted in (Romans 11:27) and Peter says that judgement begins in the house of God (1 Peter 4:17)

This does not justify the cruelty of the church towards the Jewish people in the past. Such an irrational and immoral treatment of the Jewish people is not supported by the writings of the New Testament. 


Hosea 3 I think I have covered and in fairness, responding to the actual objection rather than running to the rabbis is a fair request. But as for Malachi 3, let us move on and see what is being said.

The passage according to Yehuda has not been fulfilled yet and has not been fulfilled by Jesus. When the third temple is established, then the Levites will be purified, refined as gold and silver with the offerings once again shall be pleasant to the Lord in former years. This is mentioned at the end of the prayer services and the Rabbinic Jews have a longing for the restoration of the temple in the Messianic era.

Here is a section from Contra Blumenthal I wrote a decade ago:

"Malachi 3:1-4

"3 “I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, will come,” says the Lord Almighty.

2 But who can endure the day of his coming? Who can stand when he appears? For he will be like a refiner’s fire or a launderer’s soap. 3 He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver; he will purify the Levites and refine them like gold and silver. Then the Lord will have men who will bring offerings in righteousness, 4 and the offerings of Judah and Jerusalem will be acceptable to the Lord, as in days gone by, as in former years."

The NT interprets the first verse as a reference to John the Baptist paving the way for Yeshua or Jesus. As for the subject of the Levites being refined, John the Baptist cleanses the Levites by baptising them in the river Jordan, thus getting them ready for the Kingdom of Heaven. The sacrifices of the Levites afterwards are also pleasing to God as a result of this. In the Millennial Reign of Christ when the Temple stands once more in Jerusalem, the offerings given within the context of Malachi will pleasing to the LORD as in the former times of Judah. While the NT makes it clear that the Law is fulfilled in Christ, there isn't anything to suggest that the temple, even temporarily, will not be re-established in the end of days for a holy purpose."”


31Not like the covenant that I formed with their forefathers on the day I took them by the hand to take them out of the land of Egypt, that they broke My covenant, although I was a lord over them, says the Lord.                      לאלֹ֣א כַבְּרִ֗ית אֲשֶׁ֚ר כָּרַ֙תִּי֙ אֶת־אֲבוֹתָ֔ם בְּיוֹם֙ הֶֽחֱזִיקִ֣י בְיָדָ֔ם לְהֽוֹצִיאָ֖ם מֵאֶ֖רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם אֲשֶׁר־הֵ֜מָּה הֵפֵ֣רוּ אֶת־בְּרִיתִ֗י וְאָֽנֹכִ֛י בָּעַ֥לְתִּי בָ֖ם נְאֻם־יְהֹוָֽה:

32For this is the covenant that I will form with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will place My law in their midst and I will inscribe it upon their hearts, and I will be their God and they shall be My people.            לבכִּ֣י זֹ֣את הַבְּרִ֡ית אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶכְרֹת֩ אֶת־בֵּ֨ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל אַֽחֲרֵ֨י הַיָּמִ֚ים הָהֵם֙ נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֔ה נָתַ֚תִּי אֶת־תּֽוֹרָתִי֙ בְּקִרְבָּ֔ם וְעַל־לִבָּ֖ם אֶכְתֳּבֶ֑נָּה וְהָיִ֚יתִי לָהֶם֙ לֵֽאלֹהִ֔ים וְהֵ֖מָּה יִֽהְיוּ־לִ֥י לְעָֽם:

33And no longer shall one teach his neighbor or [shall] one [teach] his brother, saying, "Know the Lord," for they shall all know Me from their smallest to their greatest, says the Lord, for I will forgive their iniquity and their sin I will no longer remember.                לגוְלֹ֧א יְלַמְּד֣וּ ע֗וֹד אִ֣ישׁ אֶת־רֵעֵ֜הוּ וְאִ֚ישׁ אֶת־אָחִיו֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר דְּע֖וּ אֶת־יְהֹוָ֑ה כִּֽי־כוּלָּם֩ יֵֽדְע֨וּ אוֹתִ֜י לְמִקְּטַנָּ֚ם וְעַד־גְּדוֹלָם֙ נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֔ה כִּ֚י אֶסְלַח֙ לַֽעֲו‍ֹנָ֔ם וּלְחַטָּאתָ֖ם לֹ֥א אֶזְכָּר־עֽוֹד:

34So said the Lord, Who gives the sun to illuminate by day, the laws of the moon and the stars to illuminate at night, Who stirs up the sea and its waves roar, the Lord of Hosts is His name.                   לדכֹּ֣ה | אָמַ֣ר יְהֹוָ֗ה נֹתֵ֥ן שֶׁ֙מֶשׁ֙ לְא֣וֹר יוֹמָ֔ם חֻקֹּ֛ת יָרֵ֥חַ וְכֽוֹכָבִ֖ים לְא֣וֹר לָ֑יְלָה רֹגַ֚ע הַיָּם֙ וַיֶּֽהֱמ֣וּ גַלָּ֔יו יְהֹוָ֥ה צְבָא֖וֹת שְׁמֽוֹ:

Jeremiah 31:33-34 is brought up to demonstrate that the New Covenant has not been made. Because of these passages, there is no need to teach each other the law as God will inscribe it on the hearts of the Jews, which is articulated in Deuteronomy 30 when it says after the final exile when God regathers Israel in the future messianic age, then God will put this covenant on their hearts and the hearts of their offspring.

It is described as contrary to the Mosaic covenant because that covenant needs to be taught to the Jewish children but the new covenant, the Jews will not have to teach their children or their neighbour.

Yehuda points to the fact the video by Jewish Catholic exists where he is teaching about “his supposed new covenant.” Proves the new covenant was not made, otherwise he as a Jew would not have to teach other Jews, as he is trying to teach Yehuda that the new covenant as a thing. It would not have to be taught as the Jews would all know Ha Shem from the least of them to the greatest. Yehuda says there is no way around that and it’s just a testament to the fact that Jesus did not fulfil the New Covenant, because Jewish Catholic has a YouTube channel to teach Jews and others to know God and that the New Covenant says this will not be happening in the future messianic era when the New Covenant is enacted.


In what way will this happen? Is this gradual or instantaneous? I contend it is not the latter. The people due to the merits of the Messiah, come to know the God of Israel whether they be Jew or Gentile alike, but the covenant would be made with the Jews (The Gentiles being grafted in after the resurrection.) 

Also, in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is a gradual process of the least to the greatest person knowing God is gradual, it is not something that will happen immediately and is happening over all the earth with the gospel coming to all nations and bringing people into the knowledge of the God of Israel and submitting to him and turning from idols thanks to Jesus. Hence as the Lord says, they will all know me from the least of them to the greatest. People will come to know the God of Israel but there still must be instruction on how to live for him. 

Regardless of one’s personal feelings towards the New Testament and whether you take it as divinely inspired or not, the writers didn’t conceive of the objection raised by Yehuda when looking at Jeremiah 31:31-34 as the passage would not be a refutation of their use. 

The New Testament also assumes that the person reading it should be knowledgeable or at least familiar with a passage in the TANAKH and its context so their readers at the time they were written so that they could go back to the TANAKH to see if the points hold up to scrutiny.

Matthew Henry says the following in his commentary:

31:27-34 The people of God shall become numerous and prosperous. In Heb 8:8,9, this place is quoted as the sum of the covenant of grace made with believers in Jesus Christ. Not, I will give them a new law; for Christ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it; but the law shall be written in their hearts by the finger of the Spirit, as formerly written in the tables of stone. The Lord will, by his grace, make his people willing people in the day of his power. All shall know the Lord; all shall be welcome to the knowledge of God, and shall have the means of that knowledge. There shall be an outpouring of the Holy Spirit, at the time the gospel is published. No man shall finally perish, but for his own sins; none, who is willing to accept of Christ's salvation.

Matthew Poole also makes a point worth keeping in mind:

This must not be so interpreted as if under the gospel there should be no more need of ministerial teaching, for Christ himself sent out his apostles to preach; nor yet as if there should be no more need of brotherly teachings, by instruction or conception; the contrary is commanded, Colossians 3:16. It is only an expression signifying the increase of knowledge, and of the fear of the Lord, that should be after the pouring out of the Spirit: we have such expressions 1Jo 2:27. The learned author of our English Annotations thinks this phrase signifies, that under the gospel there should be a greater measure of means of knowledge, and of knowledge got by that means, and of clearness of understanding in persons, or ability to conceive things revealed, and a greater number of persons that should be enlightened with the saving knowledge of God. Others say, that by knowing the Lord is to be understood the first knowledge of God; Christians should not need be taught the first rudiments: but the apostle speaks otherwise, Hebrews 5:12. Others by knowledge understand the fear of the Lord. God saith, they should all know him; but it must not be understood of the same degree and measure, but in a degree of sufficiency for the duties which God expected from them upon their notion and apprehension of God. God makes the root of all this grace to be the free pardon and remission of their sins.

Other commentaries I shall link to for reading at your leisure:

The New Covenant doesn’t remove teaching the ways of God to the people and they didn’t assume that teaching their people to serve God would be rendered obsolete by the New Covenant. If there is a scenario where teaching others to know the LORD has finished, this will not happen until the end of days.

I have also commented on Deuteronomy 30 here:

I’ll restate a chunk of the points I made here:

"30 When all these blessings and curses I have set before you come on you and you take them to heart wherever the Lord your God disperses you among the nations, 2 and when you and your children return to the Lord your God and obey him with all your heart and with all your soul according to everything I command you today, 3 then the Lord your God will restore your fortunes[a] and have compassion on you and gather you again from all the nations where he scattered you. 4 Even if you have been banished to the most distant land under the heavens, from there the Lord your God will gather you and bring you back. 5 He will bring you to the land that belonged to your ancestors, and you will take possession of it. He will make you more prosperous and numerous than your ancestors. 6 The Lord your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants, so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live. 7 The Lord your God will put all these curses on your enemies who hate and persecute you. 8 You will again obey the Lord and follow all his commands I am giving you today. 9 Then the Lord your God will make you most prosperous in all the work of your hands and in the fruit of your womb, the young of your livestock and the crops of your land. The Lord will again delight in you and make you prosperous, just as he delighted in your ancestors, 10 if you obey the Lord your God and keep his commands and decrees that are written in this Book of the Law and turn to the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

11 Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, “Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, “Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it."

This is seen as a Messianic passage by the some of the counter-missionaries.

To the best of my knowledge, I was informed that Deuteronomy 30 in question speaks of the circumcision of the heart, much like Jeremiah and takes place after the exile.

Yisroel Blumenthal in the Elephant and the Suit articulates what Deuteronomy 30:1-10 refers to with respect to the New Covenant. Here is part of what he said:

"This passage in Deuteronomy clearly teaches that Israel’s repentance is the precursor of the Messianic age, this passage teaches that repentance is efficacious while Israel is still in exile, and this passage clearly teaches that the Law of Moses, as Moses taught it, is going to be observed in the Messianic era. Each of these issues is central to the debate between Judaism and Christianity." (Yisroel Blumenthal: My apologies if I misunderstood your points Rabbi Blumenthal.

Yehuda Yisrael also believes Ezekiel 36 refers to the New Covenant in the following video he made in response to Michael Brown (Dr Michael Brown is jesus the Jewish Messiah? Rebuttal!). This is relevant because it ties in with the timing of the New Covenant inauguration and connects back to the inauguration in Deuteronomy 30.

I also later enquired as to what Yehuda's position was about Deuteronomy 30 and Ezekiel 36 on the video in the comments. This is what was said a decade ago:


So I get clarification Yehuda, Are you saying that Deuteronomy 30 and Ezekiel 36 refer to the Messianic era? I remember you and I spoke on this with each other on Paltalk about that briefly and you mentioned when the circumcision would take place.

Yehuda Yisrael

Yes they refer to the Messianic Era. Neither passage says anything about "the circumcision of the heart" aka the New Covenant, occurring before the ingathering of the exiles. This flies in the face of Dr. Brown's false assertion that the New Covenant/the Messiah had to be made before the destruction of the of the Holy Temple. Clearly, it's the other way around!


+Yehuda Yisrael I see, thanks for the clarification.

There is also Christian exegesis that Deuteronomy 30 does refer to the New Covenant, with obvious differences to the points made by Rabbinic Jews. Such an example can be found in Adam Clarke's own commentary on this text:

"Verse 6

God will circumcise thine heart - This promise remains yet to be fulfilled. Their heart, as a people, has never yet been circumcised; nor have the various promises in this chapter been ever yet fulfilled. There remaineth, therefore, a rest for this people of God. Now, as the law, properly speaking, made no provision for the circumcision of the heart, which implies the remission of sins, and purification of the soul from all unrighteousness; and as circumcision itself was only a sign of spiritual good, consequently the promise here refers to the days of the Messiah, and to this all the prophets and all the apostles give witness: “for circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter,” Romans 2:29; and the genuine followers of God are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands - by the circumcision of Christ,” Colossians 2:11, Colossians 2:12. Hence we see these promises cannot be fulfilled to the Jews but in their embracing the Gospel of Christ. To look, therefore, for their restoration is idle and nugatory, while their obstinacy and unbelief remain." (

There are other points he makes on the passage, but I leave you guys to look at his words and judge them, as you are to judge mine.

My point regarding Deuteronomy 30, what is it? There are two exiles which ended with the ingathering of the people themselves, which exile does this New Covenant take place before or after? The return before the first exile after Solomon's apostasy, or the second exile from Jerusalem in AD70? The circumcision of the heart and the New Covenant was not instigated immediately after the first exile had taken place when the Jews returned to the land of Israel but certainly, they were gathered in the Land before the destruction of the second temple and the second exile had taken place some 40 years after the time of Jesus.

Ezekiel 36 mentions the following:

"24 “‘For I will take you out of the nations; I will gather you from all the countries and bring you back into your own land. 25 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. 28 Then you will live in the land I gave your ancestors; you will be my people, and I will be your God. 29 I will save you from all your uncleanness. I will call for the grain and make it plentiful and will not bring famine upon you. 30 I will increase the fruit of the trees and the crops of the field, so that you will no longer suffer disgrace among the nations because of famine. 31 Then you will remember your evil ways and wicked deeds, and you will loathe yourselves for your sins and detestable practices. 32 I want you to know that I am not doing this for your sake, declares the Sovereign Lord. Be ashamed and disgraced for your conduct, people of Israel!"

The Jews were in Babylon at this point after being banished from the Land of Israel and their restoration is promised to them, not because of anything they have done, but to have YHWH show his glory to the nations. Sure enough the Jews themselves were brought back to the Land and were allowed to dwell there and build the temple under Zerubabbel's direction, when he was anointed by God to build it.

Now the question is, when did the circumcision of the heart take place? Well in the mid-30s of the first century, The Lord's Supper is the first step, then along comes Jesus' atonement and then there is the taking out the heart of stone and being given a heart of flesh as found in Jeremiah 31:31-34. 

I have also written about what will transpire in the Messianic era with respect to the New Testament and what will happen in the end times. This can be found in Contra Blumenthal here:

Read the section "Role of the Temple in the Messianic era" where I articulate my position.

I would encourage you to listen and read carefully and see if any of the arguments presented stand up to scrutiny.

Answering Judaism. 

11th of July 2024 Addendum: I misspelt Yehuda’s last name. My apologies.

No comments:

Post a Comment