Brother Nathanael Refutes Rabbi Mannis Friedman
Rabbi Mannis Friedman bills himself as a devotee of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Menachem Schneerson.
Watch On BitChute – Donate With PayPal
Watch On BitChute – Donate With PayPal
Watch On BitChute – Donate With PayPal
Brother Nathanael Refutes Rabbi Mannis Friedman
Rabbi Mannis Friedman bills himself as a devotee of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Menachem Schneerson.
This lands him squarely in Talmudic Law—“The Tradition Of The Elders”—which nullifies the Word of God.
It’s all up for grabs. [Clip]
[“There is no love without vulnerability. Christianity says God loves you more than anything in the world. ‘You’re not interested? Heh! I tried to save you, but there goes another one.’ So, Christianity basically says God loves you very much and if you’re not interested, go to hell. Heh! Forever. Heh, heh! Thank you very much. So he says, ‘I can’t, I can’t, I can’t believe Christian love because they don’t believe in God’s vulnerability. If God is not vulnerable then he does not love you.”]
God, “vulnerable?”
Not all-powerful, as the Bible says, but susceptible to the whims of men.
I studied with the Lubavitcher rabbis.
The underlying rule was that all God’s decrees were for the rabbis to ‘referree.’
“The law given to Moses,” they say, is “no longer in heaven,” but, now, “on earth.”
“A ‘divine voice is no longer joined to the Law of Moses, but subject to the council of the rabbis,” so they say.
Tell me.
When the Jews snubbed God’s Commandments in the desert…
…why then did God call them an “evil congregation” and vowed…
…that “their carcasses should fall?”
No “rabbinic bent” can deliver Rabbi Friedman from the Biblical sense:
God is “not vulnerable” to human whims. [Clip]
[“So the first thing that we taught the world was that there’s one God, they didn’t get it. They said, ‘Oh! No more statues? Okay, no more statues.’ They didn’t get it.”]
And the Jews, “got it?”
Beginning with the Golden Calf, then throughout the Old Testament, are tons of statues—unrepentant idolatry.
All scolded by the prophets until they should “get it.”
They didn’t. [Clip]
[““One God means he cares about everything. He doesn’t need an assistant god to take care of his plan, or his needs, or his–He needs. He does. He is God. There is only one.”]
Because God had to jam it into their heads—chronically prone to idolatry—that He is complete in His Deity.
Nowhere does the Orthodox Church speak of an “assistant god.”
But affirms, “The Word of God.”
The “Word…”
…Who manifested HImself in human appearance, “theophany,” to Jacob, Joshua, Gideon, Ezekiel, and Daniel.
The Word…Who “in the fullness of time” took on our human attributes and physical form, when born of the virgin Mary.
But in Judaism—which is a new religion created 2000 years ago—foists on God, “assistant gods.”
I mean, the “council of the rabbis—‘assistant gods’”—which has the right to “triumph” over God’s commands. [Clip/same]
[“Our message to the world is that there is one God who does all the caring. If you don’t add that, you’re not being helpful.”]
And you’re “helpful?”
Where’s your message to the world?
Judaism stopped proselytizing Gentiles in 400 AD.
“If Judaism is true,” I asked the rabbis, “why aren’t we trying to convert the Gentiles?”
“Because,” I was told, “the Jewish soul is divine. But the Gentile soul is created, not divine.”
Well…
…this too, is rabbinical notion, not found in Holy Writ. [Clip]
[“You can’t get over the fact that God needed us and took us out of Egypt. Why would we ever get over that? If he stops needing us it’s not good news.”]
If He “needs us,” that’s bad news.
It invents an impoverished God. [Clip/same]
[“So, we are celebrating our first encounter with God’s need in Egypt. That was when we saw that God needed us. Until then we believed that he was the Creator and you gotta listen to his laws. Now we found that it’s not His laws, it’s His needs. Well, that’s a whole different story.”]
A “different story?”
It’s a story that contradicts Scripture.
Laws upon laws did Moses give, never before given.
Laws of sacrifices, priesthood, Temple, veils, drapes, leprosy, dead bodies, clean, unclean.
Nowhere do we read of an “Oral Tradition”—“rabbinic law”—in Moses.
Nor from Ezra who reintroduced Biblical Law. [Clip]
[“So, we are celebrating our first encounter with God’s need in Egypt. That was when we saw that God needed us.”]
Rabbinic hokum.
God told Moses, and he wrote it down:
“I have seen My people’s affliction in Egypt and am come down to deliver them.”
It was the people’s “need,” NOT God’s.
The Orthodox Church teaches that God is absolute, omniscient, omnipotent, and complete.
He “needs” nothing.
Out of boundless love, He elects to create.
But choice, dear Rebbe, is the opposite of necessity.
The rebbe speaks a language from his own stand.
You cannot sing the songs of Zion in a strange land.
God is omnipresent.
Do these people even read the Old Testament?
One can easily refute the claim that “a divine voice is no longer joined to the Law of Moses” simply by pointing to the Book of Ezekiel; the prophet saw visions of God in the heavens, he even saw God Himself upon His throne, above the firmament, and he heard God’s voice, instructing him to go to the children of Israel and show them the error of their ways. Obviously, a council of rabbis was not the ultimate authority in ancient Israel, neither was it infallible, hence the multitude of prophets upon whom the divine word came for the correction of the Israelites whenever they did evil in the sight of God.
As for the claim that the Christian God lacks compassion because He condemns unrepentant sinners to hell, someone has obviously not read the twelfth chapter of the Book of Daniel: “and many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt”. Clearly, eternal punishment for sinners isn’t something Christians have made up, it’s right there in the Old Testament.
Lastly, the notion that God needs something or someone is pagan. The true God is perfect, therefore He needs nothing and He is certainly not vulnerable to the mistakes and sins of His creation. His jealousy and His anger are dispassionate, they do not consume Him and they don’t stem from any vulnerability or personal need but from holy righteousness. If only these “scholars” studied the Bible and not the traditions of men.