It is rare to find anything on the internet which confronts Orthodox Judaism. It is like a glass house no one really wants to throw stones at. Internet surfers can find plenty of stuff against belief in the New Testament, Islam and numerous other established religions and denominations. But it is rare indeed to find someone who worships YaH alone, follows the Turah (Scripture) alone and confronts Orthodox Judaism. Let's keep this simple. Below is a short opening to confronting Orthodox Judaism, with references to some articles which have already revealed numerous contradictions of Turah (Law) and adding and taking away from Scripture in Orthodox Judaism. Under this short opening you will find further articles confronting Judaism along with some debate with rabbinic authority and things of that nature.
This is about truth. It is not about "Jews." It is whether or not Orthodox Judaism represents and lives the ancient paths and beliefs revealed in the Turah (Scripture). It was prophesied in D'bayrim (Deut.) 30:1-2 that in their exile, when they have been punished and cursed, the people of the Almighty would RETURN to YaH and obey His commands and ways. Obviously that shows that Orthodox Judaism isn't it. Otherwise, YaH would not have to direct us to the ancient paths. Does Orthodox Judaism portray and exemplify the words and commands of the Turah (Scripture) in its original context and meaning? Have they added and taken away from Scripture which YaH specifically commanded His followers not to do (D'bayrim (Deut.) 4:2)?
Over the years, I have done my best to stand up for the truth of (YaHUAH) and Scripture, presenting the Government and Sovereignty of YaH and His Way of life. In the past, I took on the New Testament head-on and have recorded in article format our debates with several pastors. Much like the What's Wrong with the New Testament section, I will confront Orthodox Judaism in a number of ways.
Modern-day Orthodox Judaism is a major organized religion, the development of a people who, over the centuries, became engaged in mysticism (kabballah), mystery religion, sooth-sayings and traditions not found in Scripture. As a result of such mystery religion, they came to believe that the Almighty has no physical form. In doing so, they reject that we are made in the "image and likeness" of YaH and the messengers (angels). They changed the Scriptures and commands of it by claiming to take into custody power and authority over Scripture above the Most High. It is admitted that Orthodox Jewish "Oral Torah" are "those ordinances of the Oral Law for which no proof can be adduced from the Bible but which are regarded as of equal authority with biblical laws" (Encylopedia of the Jewish Religion, 389). Essentially, they have sought the usurpation of the throne of the Most High YaH.
There is already much light on the falsehood of Orthodox Judaism through this site, showing it
is not a pure transmission of the Turah (Scripture).
In the article on Cutting the Foreskin, it is shown that modern "circumcision" is not the same as Scriptural cutting of the foreskin, along with the nonsensical and non-Scriptural Orthodox Jewish tradition of "ha tafat dam" (pricking a penis with a pin because the foreskin was already "circumcised" outside of Judaism as a child). I have also addressed the issue of the sucking of the boy's penis at "circumcision" in other discussions.
Engraving the Commandments is an essential part of following the Turah (Law) of YaH. Rabbinical Judaism uses a "mezuzah" box on their door, with the letter "shin" for Sh'dai (the Nuturer/Almighty). Engraving the Commandments explodes on this false tradition.
Orthodox Judaism has created a system of vowel-pointing (niqud) by the Tiberian codification which has taken away from the simplicity of ancient Aibreet (Hebrew). Thus, none can read the Turah (Scripture) without using THEIR pronunciation. And this would only be done if one understood modern Masoretic niqud (vowel-pointing) and reads the Turah (Scripture) in the modern text without ever questioning it.
The Calendar of YaH is what our lives ought to be governed by, under the Government of YaH. The Creator's calendar involves the Sh'bayt (Sabbath), which was originally by the moon, as proven in three separate moon cycles (months) in the events of Sh'moot (Ex.). But Orthodox Judaism observes the Roman 7th day "Saturday," which is not found in nature or by any sign of nature.
Orthodox Jews also begin their "day" in the "night," with the advance of "evening" which they equate with "sunset." For this and other calendar discrepancies which Orthodox Judaism needs to face, see articles in the Calendar Stuff section.
Did you know that every week, when Jews celebrate their weekly Roman 7th day "Sabbath," they light two candles in the evening? Their claim is that these two candles are in honour of the 4th commandment, to remember (zakoor) and honour or make it distinct from the other days (qodash) (Sh'moot (Ex.) 20:8) (http://www.sightedmoon.com/?page_id=322). The truth is, there is no commandment regarding the lighting of two candles and this is a tradition of modern Orthodox Judaism, influenced by Romanism. Frank Viola exposed the fact that it was a long held practice to light two candles when ceremonial courts took place by Roman emperors of the 4th century. This is taken from http://www.paidionbooks.org/misc/pcsummary.html. From chapter one of his book, Pagan Christianity. This can easily be found in any Catholic church, as the Romans placed two candles near the altar and claimed they must always be lit. This was their way also of replacing the menurah (lampstand) of the Tent of YaH (Dictionary of Church Terms, by Father Tadros Yacoub Malaty. Pg. 10. http://www.copticchurch.net/topics/thecopticchurch/dictionr.pdf).
While engraving the commandments on one's doorpost is a literal commandment, the "thethpayt" or wrappings, commonly called "tefillin," is not literal in D'bayrim (Deut.) 6:8. Orthodox Jews will not believe you though, even when you show them that this exact same phrase was symbolic in Sh'moot (Ex.) 13:15-16. This is because they have found some pretty old leather wrappings and they conclude that Scripturally, followers of YaH had always done that. Really though, they don't date back to the time of the Turah (Law) given to Y'shr'Al (Israel), and it is likely that this is one of the ways in which Y'shr'Al (Israel) added to the Turah (Law) what wasn't there.
Most of the population of Orthodox Judaism don't care about how an animal was raised for consumption... only that it is bled properly and excessively salted. Scripture only speaks to the bleeding of the meat. This, Orthodox Judaism is right to do. And although they seem to hate blood in their meat, yet they suck blood from babies' penises when they cut the foreskin.
Numerous people in this major religion have separate kitchens, cutlery and dishware in order to separate meat from dairy. They believe that such a separation is based on D'bayrim (Deut.) 14:21. This injunction was clearly only a command that one should not cook a young goat in its mother's milk. If YaH wanted to separate meat and dairy, He would have said so in much more plain terms. Moreover, we see Abrahaym (Abraham) serving YaH and His messenegers meat with dairy in B'rasheet (Gen.) 18:8.
Ever read the story of Rabbi Akiva and the authority of the rabbis? This is what Orthodox Judaism is based on. If a person doesn't know about "the oven of Aknai," then they don't really know what Orthodox Judaism is about. This story is essentially a story about the authority of the rabbis over the voice or word of YaH Himself. In the end of the story, the rabbis claim that the Turah (Law) "is not in heaven" anymore, but given to them. They base this off of their false application of D'bayrim (Deut.) 30:12, which only originally meant that the Turah (Law) is near to us, not that we have to go up to the loftiness (sh'meyim) to get it. And this text never meant that the Turah (Law) was no longer in the authority of YaH and somehow given to the rabbis to tear apart and monk with.
To make matters worse, the "oven of Aknai" is not the only lesson that rabbis use to hold an iron fist over the sheeple. They would have us believe that M'shih (Moses) was shown of YaH that future rabbis would take the Turah (Law) to a greater level, and M'shih (Moses) was glad about it. There are other stories to enforce the idea that YaH and His representatives yield to the all-knowing authority of the rabbis.
Rabbi Tzvi Freeman, senior editor of chabad.org, a strong Orthodox Jewish website, relates the story of M'shih (Moses) and Akiva. Apparently when M'shih (Moses) went to receive the Turah (Law) in the mountain of YaH, he saw YaH placing crowns on all the letters of Scripture. I guess M'shih (Moses) forgot to mention that.
There are no crowns on the letters of modern-day Aibreet (Hebrew) Turah (Scripture) usually. But in their official scrolls and things of that nature you will find the style of writing known as "STAM" meaning "Sapayrim (Scrolls), Turah (Law), and Mezazoot" (Commandments/Doorposts). They place marks known as "tagin" or lines with dots on top of letters once in a while to look as if crowned. Basically, Jewish scribes decided to start crowning stuff in the scrolls of Scripture and then they had to come up with a story to promote their decision. This is all modern scribal nonsense that M'shih (Moses) would certainly shake his head at if he were alive today.
M'shih (Moses) sees YaH placing all these crowns on the letters and asks if this is really necessary. The Most High brings M'shih (Moses) into the classroom of rabbi Akiba and asks M'shih (Moses) to step back. He steps back and steps back until he is in the last row of the classroom. Finally he ends up standing in the hallway. Right. Apparently M'shih (Moses) couldn't understand the teachings of Akiba and finds himself in the hall like some student on time out. Like he's scratching his head as to whether all this garbage he is hearing is the result of the Turah (Law) of YaH and all the hard labour he struggled in. Well as he listens to Akiba teaching in the classroom, he overhears that Akiba gives credit to receiving the teaching from M'shih (Moses). This makes M'shih (Moses) glad (You may read of this abominable story of M'shih (Moses) and Akiva at: http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/624196/jewish/Is-It-Really-the-Torah-Or-Is-It-Just-the-Rabbis.htm).
All of these things are because of rabbinic tradition and falsehood. Theirs is the authority of the rabbis over all logic, reason and Scripture. This quelling of dissention by the rabbis is a prevailing character of theirs which is based on the first rule of rabbinic Judaism... their authority over the voice of YaH Himself.
Anyhow, let us end with some thoughts showing the falsehood of rabbinical teaching.
The Stone Edition Tanach is a perfect witness of falsehood. From the time we open it and read its footnotes in B'rasheet (Gen.) 1:14, there is disagreement with the original text of Scripture. "The luminaries, which had been created on the first day, were set in place on the fourth (Chagigah 12a)" (The Stone Edition Tanach, 3). We must at this crossroad confront the rabbinical falsehood. That isn't what Scripture said. "And then said (wa-y'ahmer) the Mighty One (Alahym), let there come to be (y'he) lights (m'arat) in the expanse (b'raqiai) of the loftiness (ha sh'meyim)" (B'rasheet (Gen.) 1:14). Now THAT is a literal translation. The word "y'he" for "let there come to be" is the same word used throughout this chapter when YaH speaks something into existence. Make no mistake, the lights of the sun, moon and stars did not exist until the fourth day of the creation week. The rabbis can't get it right when it comes to understanding something as simple as this, and following the weekly and monthly cycles of the moon for Sh'bayt (Sabbath) and New Moon apart from the false Roman calendar. That is page three of The Stone Edition Tanach, the first chapter of Scripture, the fourteenth verse. We are barely getting started and we could write a book of probably another 500 pages if we were to go through all the false commentary and application of Turah (Scripture) in the Stone Edition. Throughout this version are varying tractates, sayings (targums) and falsehoods of the rabbis being referred to in the footnotes. We also find the English translation in this version to be very lacking in quality, beside the fact of all this falsehood. The only reason we would suggest anyone get a copy of the Stone Edition in their library would be to see the contradictions on every page and expose rabbinical falsehood for what it is. Another example of rabbinic falsehood can be found in their commentary on B'rasheet (Gen.) 1:26. The Most High speaks to the messengers (melakim - angels) and says "Let us create Adawm (man) in our physical image (tsalmenu) and after our likeness (damutanu)." In the footnote comments on this text they got one thing right, that this is indeed the Most High speaking to His messengers. But then they quote from Midrash that "When Moses wrote the Torah and came to this verse (let us make), which is in the plural and implies that there is more than one Creator, he said: 'Sovereign of the Universe! Why do You thus furnish a pretext for heretics to maintain that there is a plurality of divinities?' 'Write!' God replied. 'Whoever wishes to err will err .... Instead, let them learn from their Creator Who created all, yet when He came to create Man He took counsel with the ministering angels' (Midrash)" (The Stone Edition Tanach, 4 - They could be continuing their quote from Targum Yonasan... it is hard to tell which they are quoting from because it is not typed out very well in order). Now you might say "Okay, so they are using midrash to say the same thing you said Sha'ul, which is that YaH spoke to His messengers." True. But these rabbis are making up a dialogue that took place between M'shih (Moses) and YaH which never did. Rabbis constantly do this. They make up stories and dialogue that never took place in the Scriptures in order to support their standing on different texts and traditions they have made outside of the Government and Scriptures of YaH.
One last one for
fun. We'll do something really simple. You know, really false that even a child
could see it is wrong. B'rasheet (Gen.) 18:8. A young male went and prepared cream,
milk and a young calf for a meal. He placed them in front of Abrahaym and the
messengers who came to visit him... YaH being among them (vs. 1 in line with verses
3,10,13,17,22-23). I'm not saying YaH was one of the males, because vs. 22
says that "the males" that came to Abrahaym, turned and went away
while Abrahaym continued to talk with YaH. But the rabbis think that messengers (melakim-angels) cannot eat food as we do. So they
write "Angels do not eat in the human
sense; they only appeared to do so. This teaches that one should not deviate
from the local custom (Rashi)" (ibid, 36 - emphasis mine). Yes, falsehood signed with love from
Rashi once again. Where did they pull that from? The text clearly says "wa-y'ahkalu" (vs. 8) meaning "and
Rabbi Rashi makes all kinds of outlandish claims. He claims that Aishu (Esau) did not know the Name
of (YaHUAH) or use it, which is what tipped off Y'tsakheq (Isaac) that the one who
brought him the tasty meal might not be Aishu (Esau) (ibid, 63). He claims Aishu (Esau) stole the garments of
"the great hunter Nimrod" (ibid). Aishu (Esau) most certainly would have maintained the worship of his father, the worship of YaH. Aishu (Esau) had no relation to Noom'rad (Nimrod) and such stories are fictitious.
Anyhow, to these matters we have only one thing to hear from the Turah (Scripture). "Even I (Anuki), whatsoever (atakam) I command (mets'wah) you (atu), you guard (tash'meru) to do it (l'ayshoot). Do not (la) add (tasap) upon it (aylayu) and (wa) do not (la) take away (tagarai) from it (m'menu)" (D'bayrim (Deut.) 13:1 (12:32 in Bibles)).
The Shield of Da'ood (David)
The "M'gan Da'ood" or "Shield of
Da'ood" (David) is said to
be symbolized by "two superimposed equilateral triangles, forming a
hexagram," as noted by The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion, pg.
246. If the shield of Da'ood (David) was a
Scriptural symbol like the 7-branched menurah (lampstand) or any of the symbols
in the Tent of YaH, we should think there would be some description of
this in Scripture. More importantly, it is not found in the Turah (Law) of M'shih (Moses). If there was such a thing as a shield belonging to Da'ood (David), we would
expect it to look like an actual shield or tribal banner and not a 6-pointed
star. The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion further admits that the
M'gan Da'ood (Shield
"has neither biblical nor Talmudic authority
and its origin as a Jewish symbol is extremely obscure" (Werblowsky, 246 - emphasis
The shield of Da'ood (David) apparently
"developed into a distinctive and representative Jewish symbol only after the 17th Cent. It was adopted by the Zionist Organization at the First
Zionist Congress (1897) and subsequently incorporated in the flag of the State
of Israel" (ibid, emphasis mine). Wow. Let us get this straight. Here we have a
Jewish encyclopedia produced by Jewish authorities on the Jewish religion, who
have admitted that the 6-pointed star on the Israeli flag is neither of
Scriptural or Talmudic origin or authority, and that it only became adopted in
the 17th century onward by Zionist movement! So this is the national symbol of the "state of Israel" and used on peoples' prayer shawls and all the rest of it. But they will not turn to the Turah (Law) of M'shih (Moses).
In Scripture, we find that "shield"
is associated with the Almighty to a large degree. "Fear not (al-teera) Ab'rawm. I am (Anuki)
your (laka) Shield (m'gan) and your reward
Should (YaHUAH) our Shield
and Reward be substituted with a 6-pointed star? No. He is our only Shield. We ought to refrain from these un-Scriptural symbols of
crosses, evil eyes, kaballah hands and so-called "Davidic" stars.
Dekhiyot - Jewish Postponements
A lot of people ignore the fact that the modern Jewish calendar and its dates are not Scriptural. Here is one blatant example I am including in our freshest version of our book, The Path of the Most High. Mishnah, Pesachim 7:10, "The bones and sinews and what remains over must be burnt on the 16th. If the 16th falls on a Sabbath they must be burnt on the 17th, since they override neither the Sabbath nor a festival day" (The Mishnah, Danby, p.146). This is absolute garbage from the traditions of rabbinical falsehood in the Mishnah. Scripture is very clear that you are not to leave of the remains of the Passover offering until the morning, which would be the morning of the 15th (Sh'moot (Ex.) 12:10). Now because Judaism believes a day begins in the evening, they postpone it to the 16th, after the evening of THEIR Roman 7th-day Sabbath takes place. They do the same thing with the Day of Atonement which is coming up. If Day of Atonement landed on THEIR Sabbath, then they perform the atonement offering after their Sabbath evening ends. Scripture is clear that the Day of Atonement offering is to be done during the day, before the sun is gone down. Feel free to share this with your Jewish friends and see if they have an answer for this non-Scriptural nonsense.
It should be said that there is a particular sect of Judaism that is called "Karaite Judaism." These people reject the so-called "Oral Torah" of the rabbis also as falsehood against the Turah (Scripture). Alish'bai and I are not out of the norm. People have stood against the tide of the rabbis throughout the centuries, to follow YaH and the Turah (Scripture) alone. But even the Karaites follow a lot of Jewish tradition that isn't found in the Scriptures and we have sent considerations to them on a number of occasions. It should also be said that they are simply those who claim to follow what is "called out" (qora) in Scripture. That is respectable. And as one encounters various people who go by this label, it is obvious that there are wide differences in this category from person to person. It is due to these differences that some people in this movement have turned away from following YaH and Turah (Law) alone to following rabbis and modern Judaism. In truth, they couldn't walk alone with YaH as numerous Scriptural males did. They bowed out for "the sake of unity" in false teachings and traditions. Don't let anyone tell you we can't simply follow what is "called out" (qora) in Scripture. People may tell you that we are divided or that we need to submit to the authority of Orthodoxy. But the truth is that we are to love (YaHUAH) with all our mind, heart, strength and being. Slaughtering truth on the altar of false unity is a false offering indeed. Karaites use the moon to determine their feast days, but they don't use it for their weekly cycle.
Beyond Orthodox Judaism and Karaite Judaism we have the cult of Samaritan Judaism. "On Passover, for example, their high priest sacrifices a sheep in a community-wide ritual, where its blood is dabbed on foreheads and later eaten together with matzo and bitter herbs."1 Seriously, blood on the forehead? Where is that in Scripture? So I contacted a friend of mine on Facebook, Ben Sedaka, whose book I ordered, entitled The Israelite Samaritan Version of the Torah. I asked him this same question, as well as to why he shaves his face, if the Samaritan version doesn't have the same Wa'y'qora (Lev.) 19:27 text or not. This is how the discussion went. Keep in mind that this is someone who is an authority as a Samaritan.
The Sh'merunim (Samaritans) also have a different set of 10 Commandments from the traditional Turah (Law) versions people are familiar with. And it isn't so much that the commandments are different in their version, it is that there is an additional statement made by YaH after the 10 commandments, regarding the building of an altar on Garazim (Gerezim) as opposed to most versions which have the alter on Aybal (Ebal). Not such a big deal in reality, considering the Tent of YaH was in the valley area of Sh'kam (Shechem) and that offerings are no longer necessary without the presence of the Tent of YaH there with the active priesthood of Lui (Lewi/Levi) working there. Now in order to keep the 10 commandments as 10 commandments, what the Sh'merunim (Samaritans) did was to combine the traditional first two commandments into one commandment. That way the command to build the altar on Garazim would not be an 11th commandment, but rather the 10th commandment. All of this is very suspect to adding and taking away from the Turah (Law) by a specific sect of people much further after the giving of the Turah (Law). It is even more suspect now that the altar which Yahushai (Joshua) established on Aybal (Ebal) has been found. Anyhow, here are the photos to prove that Sh'merunim (Samaritans) have a hard time counting the actual 10 Commandments YaH gave.
One thing to clarify my standpoint. I am not saying the command to build an altar at Garazim is not original to the words of YaH. It is certainly possible. But YaH gave 10 commandments, not 11. And the altar found on Aybal (Ebal) is certainly problematic to consider. And what Sedaka has done is to place marginal comments restructuring the 10 from the original text, and making the command to build Garazim one of the 10. This is illogical. Each command starts with "thou shalt." So to include the "thou shalt" of not making images in with the first commandment so that the Garazim works out as the 10th is falsehood.
Most of the commands start with "la," meaning "not to do." These are separations in the text. To include command 2 with command 1 to make Garazim fit into the 10 is incorrect. Thus, if the text found in Qumran, as referenced by Charlesworth is original, it would be an extra command, not part of the 10.
The confrontation continues...
That is all for this opening page on Confronting Judaism.
Below are some articles in which I have already done much to expose modern-day
Judaism as being against Scripture, along with debate with rabbinic authority.
I encourage others to contact me about this page, share their thoughts,
suggestions and so forth.
Khenuk (Enoch) the Idolator? In this issue of the Way of the Most High, Samaritan "sages" assassinate the righteous character of Khenuk (Enoch) who "walked with Alahym (Mighty One)," as well as looking at whether Khenuk (Enoch) died or ascended.
Confronting Rabbinical Authority with Rabbi Asher Meza. Here is debated the issue of the 70 elders and the general argument that people must submit to the leadership of Orthodox Judaism. Most importantly we share how Orthodox Judaism contradicts the Turah (Scripture) in some very serious ways.
Engraving the Commandments vs. Orthodox Jewish Door Box.
The Calendar of YaH vs. Orthodox Jewish Calendar compromise with Rome.
The Scriptural Day vs. Orthodox Jewish Starting of a DAY at NIGHT.