 Before I get to the issues that we are going to discuss, the scriptural matters that stand between us, I would like to take the time to address three points that Dr. Brown raises that are not directly related to the issues. Number one, Dr. Brown opens and closes his presentation with a request, a suggestion that I consider a live debate. The first time I met Dr. Brown, I said this and I'll repeat it again. I take this presentation seriously. I take our interaction seriously. I appreciate that he's interacting with me and I have a responsibility to present in a way that's accurate, that's clear, that serves educational purpose to the best of my ability. I'm a human being. I could make mistakes, but I feel it's my responsibility to give myself the best opportunity that I have to be able to present. I can't do that under the pressure of responding within so many, so many hours, within a certain time frame. So no, I'm not going to be doing the live debate. Furthermore, I will point out that we are actually debating now. I'm making a presentation and Dr. Brown, you are presenting, you are making a presentation. I actually have no problem. I have no problem if while I'm presenting, you are sitting here and watching me and you cross-examine me after I make a presentation, a presentation that I sat and I prepared for. I'm willing to take questions on that. I anticipate questions, I'm willing to do that, but I have no interest in sitting there when you are making a presentation and I don't need to cross-examine you on the spot. I could do that in my presentation. If you want, we could splice all these videos together and call it a debate and maybe we'll get more viewers because of that word debate. Or if you want, we could actually start a new thread. We can coordinate if we want to choose a specific subject and maybe coordinate how often we'll be doing it or how long they should be and maybe, like I said, if you want, you can be here to cross-examine me or I can come to your place and you can cross-examine me when I make a presentation. I have no problem with that. If you feel that would be more beneficial, more educational, it's fine with me. A second issue that I would like to address. Dr. Brown, you suggested that I pull those videos that are entitled unanswered because you feel that now you have answered the questions that I raised, maybe not to my satisfaction, but you feel that you have answered them. Now we're going to discuss that shortly if you did or didn't answer them. But for argument's sake, let's say that you didn't answer them. But why should I pull those videos? I think it ought to go down for the record that for years and years you left those questions unanswered. If these questions deserve answers, and again, I'm not saying that they do, but if the audience considers that they deserve answers, I'm leaving that up to the audience, then it should go down for the record that for all those years you left the truth-seeker without answers to those questions. And the third non-issue that I would like to discuss or distraction that I would like to discuss, you take issue with the fact that I call my response, my written response to your five volumes comprehensive. You tell us that comprehensive, it would have to be thousands and thousands of pages. Well, I don't define comprehensive by the length of a book. I define comprehensive by if it totally accomplishes what it's supposed to accomplish. Throughout the years, I've received many questions on the basis of your books, and invariably almost every time I can point back to my writings and people are satisfied. People have read your books, people have read my writings, and they feel that I've answered every question that you raised. It is not necessary. You can bust a gigantic balloon with one pinprick. You don't have to write a lot, a lot of words. If you're trying to obfuscate, then perhaps you need a lot of words. But if you're focusing on clarity, the less words, the better. Let's get to the issues that stand between us. In my most recent video entitled, Did Dr. Brown Answer You Decide, I basically didn't say much. I just asked a few questions. What was I trying to do? Well, let's put this in context. In the first video entitled, Unanswered, that's the one that Dr. Brown wants me to pull. I put down three questions. The first question relates to the reader's guide to the Bible. I want to focus. I want to zoom into that question. Both of us, the Jewish people, the Jewish teachers throughout history, and on the other side, the churchmen, the Christian missionaries, the theologians on the other side are both pointing to the same Jewish Bible, that book which the Christians call the Old Testament. And each one of us uses that same book and sees in it a different message, completely diametrically opposed to each other. One of us is reading the message of the Bible correctly. And the other one of us is imposing our own theology, whichever one it is, on the Bible. Let's use sharper words. One of us is trying to help you see the real message inherent in the Bible, and the other one is actually trying to prevent you from seeing that message. And it's my belief, and I'm going to try to substantiate this. And with Dr. Brown's help, that it is the Christian missionary that is trying to prevent you from seeing the message of the author of the Bible. How does he do this? Well, one of the primary tactics that the missionary has is to take a concept mentioned in the Bible, or rather, I should say, a fragment of a concept mentioned in the Bible and invest it with emphasis, with weight and with meaning way beyond what the author of the Bible intended and draw your focus and attention to that and use that to overshadow the explicit, clear and comprehensive message of the Bible. The first question I asked in my previous video, the Dr. Brown answer, was about Zachariah chapter six, versus nine through 15. And I asked a simple question if this passage is messianic and if the author is emphasizing this passage, he's pointing arrows at this passage. He's highlighting this passage. What is the message of the passage? Is the message that the Messiah is supposed to be a temple builder or is he to die as a vicarious atonement for your sins? That was the question that I asked. Dr. Brown said that I asked the wrong question. He feels the question should be why is the high priest wearing a crown sitting on the throne? That is the question. This is exact. This is example, a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Dr. Brown wants you to read that passage, Zachariah chapter six, versus nine to 15, and he wants you to see Jesus there. How is that going to happen? Well, Christians claim that Jesus is a vicarious atonement. Now, priests are associated with atonement. Now, well, what does a priest have to do with Jesus? Well, Jesus claimed to be the Messiah and here we have a priest who is wearing a crown sitting on a throne, which is sort of messianic. So in this sense, the priest who is in atonement and sometimes even a vicarious atonement is somehow associated with the king who is the Messiah. But again, this is a fragment of a concept. The author did not say anything about vicarious atonement. And Dr. Brown admits it. He says he never claimed that this is an explicit teaching on the vicarious atonement role of the Messiah. So he acknowledges that. So what is the explicit message of this scripture, of this passage in scripture? Well, if it's a messianic passage, it's telling you that the Messiah is supposed to be a temple builder. It is very clear. All I'm trying to do is, you know, put Dr. Brown's rhetoric aside, ask yourself, what is the direct message of the author of scripture? And don't get confused by the smoke screens. Don't get confused by rhetoric. See what's that. What did the author say? And what did he leave unsaid? What do you leave for speculation, for deduction? I can give you several other interpretations about why the Messiah is wearing a throne, wearing a crown, sitting on a throne. Just this particular priest actually was a temple builder himself. So perhaps he was wearing a crown and sitting on a throne because he plays a messianic role as a temple builder. Perhaps he is representative of the Messiah. But one of the other roles of a priest is to be a teacher. And perhaps that is what is trying to teach us all that. The author left for speculation. He didn't make that clear. What the author did make clear is that the messianic figure is a temple builder. So in Dr. Brown's dictionary, when he used the words, the most overt, he points to a fragment that the author did not make clear. And when he uses words like fringe at best, and again, these are Dr. Brown's own words or hardly significant. Another another direct quote from Dr. Brown, he's talking about the direct message of the author of scripture. Dr. Brown claims that I took those words of his out of context. When I pointed out that he pointed the same passage in scripture, calls it most overt or on the one side and fringe at best, hardly significant on the other side. I didn't take them out of context. Just use your imagination. Can you imagine any Christian missionary talking about the role of the Messiah as a vicarious atonement and in any context using the words fringe at best or hardly significant? On the other hand, could you imagine any Christian missionary using the words most overt to describe the Messiah's role as a temple builder? So again, I'm just going to go back to my question that I asked in the previous video. Open your Bible, turn to Zachariah chapter six verses nine to 15 and ask yourself, what message is the author of scripture trying to tell me? Not the Christian missionary, not Dr. Brown, the author. Is he telling me a message about temple building or is he telling me a message about vicarious atonement? If this passage is most overt, then what is the message of the author of scripture? Let's move on to the subject of idolatry. Here, too, Dr. Brown uses obfuscation, obfuscation of a different sort. Dr. Brown quotes Genesis 18, Exodus chapter 24 verse 10, numbers chapter 12 verse 8 in order to point to the Christian claim of the alleged divinity of Jesus. So my question was, why is it that the author of scripture doesn't introduce these verses as a teaching about directing your worship? Dr. Brown's response that he never claimed that these verses are teaching about directing your worship because he worships God. When I spoke about my second question, and I made a statement in my previous video, I just made a statement. This wasn't a question. I just made a statement and I said that when the Christian missionary is knocking on your door, he's trying to introduce a new love, a love. He's knocking on the door of a person who already worships God. He's trying to introduce a new love, a love that our hearts never knew. Now, Dr. Brown uses obfuscation. He presents my position as if I am claiming that the Christian missionary, like himself, wants us to abandon our love for God, reject it, ditch God, and accept Jesus. That's not true. I know and I recognize that Christians worship the God of Israel. I have no problem with that. In fact, I admire that. I know many Christians that have a deep and abiding love for the God who created heaven and earth. And I don't accuse them of ditching God, of throwing God overboard. That's not the discussion over here. That's not what we're talking about. All I'm saying is that aside from loving God, they're introducing a new love, another love, aside from the love of God. And that is a love for Jesus. Christians, Christian missionaries don't just want you to believe something abstract about Jesus, some theological, philosophical ideas. They want you to move your heart and bend your heart towards Jesus. That is a different love. The attraction towards God and the attraction towards Jesus are two different attractions. You can have one without the other. They're not the same attraction. People could love God and not love Jesus. And it's been done. People could love Jesus and not love God. You could love both. You could love neither. It's two different attractions. And throughout the scriptures, the prophets use the metaphor of adultery to describe idolatry. Now imagine if a person is married to their partner, be it a husband to a wife or wife to a husband, and they're introduced to another person, not their partner. And they enter into a relationship with that person. In addition to the relationship they already have to their partner in marriage, that is adultery. Whether they abandon their original marriage partner or not, it's still adultery. And if they were convinced that this new partner, this adulterous relationship, is in some mysterious way a deeper relationship with their original spouse, it's very sad, but it's still adultery. So many well-meaning people are being confused and misled when they're told that in some deep mysterious way Jesus is one and the same as God. In the world of the abstract, in the world of theological mysteries, you could say what you want. But in your heart, it's two different loves. There's the love of God, which is what the Bible is full of. And then there's another love, which is the love for Jesus, which the Christian is trying to introduce to you. That love is idolatry, even if you don't abandon your love for God. So coming back to Genesis 18, Exodus 24-10, numbers 12-8, yes, Dr. Brown is using these verses as a teaching on redirecting your worship. He wants to use these verses to justify introducing a new love to your heart, a love that your heart did not know. And the author of Scripture does not introduce these verses that way. In fact, the Scriptures teach us that when God taught us who it is that we are to worship, God didn't use the medium of a prophet. He didn't use the medium of a book. He certainly didn't expect us to dig up some deductions from between the lines of the Bible. God taught the Jewish people himself who it is that they are to worship. Deuteronomy 4-35 clearly states unto you the Jewish people it was shown in order that you know that the Lord is God and the heavens above and the earth below, there is none other. God himself taught us that we're not going to abandon the explicit clear teaching of God that God took the care of teaching to us himself and accept the teaching that emerges from between the lines of various Scriptures.