Did Israel Assassinate a Palestinian Reporter?

The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network.

Is it true that the Israeli army assassinated a beloved Palestinian journalist? It's time for the Line of Fire with your host, biblical scholar and cultural commentator, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice for moral sanity and spiritual clarity. Call 866-34-TRUTH to get on the Line of Fire. And now here's your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Thanks for joining us on our Thoroughly Jewish Thursday broadcast.

Phone lines are wide open. Any Jewish-related question you have of any kind, give me a call now 866-348-7884. That's 866-34-TRUTH. If you're a new listener, welcome to the broadcast.

So glad you're here. Thursday is our specific Jewish emphasis day so we could talk about events in modern Israel. We could talk about biblical prophecy or messianic prophecy or Jewish background to the New Testament or something else like that. But if it's Jewish-related, we cover it on Thoroughly Jewish Thursdays. Again, remember to call with any Jewish-related question 866-34-TRUTH. It can be about a specific Old Testament verse that ties in with this, the Hebrew language. We're glad to be of help.

The earlier you call, the better chance we have of getting to your calls later in the broadcast. Okay, so as you know, as someone living in the world today, one of the most difficult situations politically, socially in the world is the ongoing conflict of the Israelis and the Palestinians. Prior to the Six-Day War, Palestinian identity was not as fixed. Peoples there identified as Arabs or Jordanians or Syrians, depending on where they lived.

But the deepening of the concept of a Palestinian identity is just a given now. And in point of fact, there are people who say, hey, we've lived here for centuries. Our families have lived here for centuries and centuries. We can trace our origins back many, many centuries.

This is our homeland. And these Jews came in and took our homeland. And that is genuinely how they feel and genuinely how they view history. And they generally look at the Israelis as occupiers. And that is the viewpoint of the larger Muslim world, the larger Arab world. The Israelis are evil occupiers, and they are in an ongoing way oppressing the Palestinians, suppressing the Palestinians, making life miserable for them, treating them as second-class citizens. Now, there's another narrative which is very different, where Jewish people say, hey, this was our ancient homeland. There never was a Palestinian homeland.

Yes, there have been Arabs that lived here for centuries, as well as other people groups and Christians, et cetera. And this was under different leadership, Christian leadership, Muslim leadership, Ottoman Empire, and then up to the British Mandate and things like that. And then after World War I, the Western nations or the European nations agreed on dividing things up.

And now you had states where there weren't states before. There were mainly tribal regions and things like that. In any case, in any case, the Jewish argument would be, we started coming back to the land. We always had a small presence there through the centuries. We started coming back to the land in larger numbers in the late 1800s. As we did, Arabs began to come in as well so they could work the land and make a living as the Jews were further developing it. There was room for everyone.

In the 1930s, the Peel Commission offered the parties there. The Arab peoples and the Jewish people said, hey, let's divide things up. The Jewish community gets this group.

It's fairly small. The Arabs get the rest. Arab leadership said, absolutely not. 1947, the UN partition plan, now a little bit more for the Jewish people.

You get this. The Arabs get that. Arab leadership said no. Muslim leaders said, well, drive the Jewish people into the sea.

Obviously, that didn't happen. But there was immediate war. Old State of Jerusalem now taken by Jordan and the division very, very deep in the land.

1967, the Six-Day War. Israel retakes old Jerusalem and now takes areas now in the midst of war from the Arabs that were there, from the Jordanians, hence what we know of as the West Bank. So it's Judea Samaria, right?

So it's on the other side of the Jordan, on the west side of the Jordan. So it's known as Judea Samaria in biblical times, in the ancient world, but known as the West Bank now, and known for those hostile to Israel being in the land, known as occupied territory. And then Gaza was given back to Egypt early on in Israel's independence, you know, taken in war, then given back to Egypt. And then the Gaza Strip, which is under Israeli control, was given over to Palestinian leadership. Then it's kind of a civil war between Palestinian Authority and Hamas. Hamas wins the day, is elected by the people. Israel recognizes Hamas as terrorists, as does America. So now you've got that massive conflict, the population of Gaza growing massively, people growing up in what the critics call the world's largest open-air prison.

It's a very, very difficult situation. At the same time, the 200,000 or so Arabs that stayed in the land, maybe 600,000 fled in the midst of the war, and about 800,000 Jews from surrounding countries like Iraq, Syria, etc., had to flee for their lives. And they were absorbed mainly by Israel, then by other countries, some even came to America, etc. But the 200,000 Arabs that stayed there in Israel as citizens have grown to over a million and a half. And they have the most liberties of any Arabs anywhere in the Middle East in terms of freedom of speech, and in terms of differing with the government, and things like that. But this is part of the ongoing tension. So, a couple days back, there is a reporter, a beloved reporter, U.S. citizen at this point, she has U.S. citizenship, but known as a Palestinian, Arabic-speaking reporter, a well-known face in her 50s on Al Jazeera TV, which broadcasts to, I've read, about 150 million people, not potential audience, but people who actually watch it.

So she's a well-known figure. So Israel is fighting with terrorists at the Jenin refugee camp. So this is northern Judea-Samaria, so northern West Bank.

Jenin is a key city there, and then the refugee camp. And you still have these refugee camps within Palestinian territories, which is a whole other story. In any case, that's always been a hotbed of terrorism and people growing up there all the more resentful towards Israel.

So it's just, it's a battleground. So Israel is fighting, fighting, shooting at some terrorists there. There's firing back at the Israeli soldiers. And this woman who's clearly marked, she's wearing the vest that identifies her as press, she's shot in the head and killed.

Immediately, the outcry is going to be great in the Muslim Arab world. Immediately, Israel killed this beloved terrorist in cold blood, or even worse, Israel assassinated her. Now, Israel's immediate response was, we may have, we don't believe it was one of our bullets. It may have happened.

It's a terrible accident and tragedy if it did. We don't think it was us, but we will investigate and take full responsibility if it was. Now, I have read that there's audio of the the Palestinian terrorists saying, we shot an Israeli soldier. Now, in point of fact, no Israeli soldiers were shot.

So they're wondering, was this the crossfire where they hit the journalists and they thought the person we hit was a soldier? So Israel said, let's do a joint investigation with Palestinians. And we want the bullet returned to us. We can see if it's our bullet or not.

And we need to see through the autopsy, the trajectory, where the bullet entered, and then that will help us sort this out. The Palestinians didn't want to do that. Now, article in the Jerusalem Post says this, journalists' death will become excuse for terror attacks on Israel. This is an editorial, a Jerusalem Post from yesterday, with no questions asked. Israel is the curious of intentionally killing a high profile Palestinian journalist. It's just going to happen.

It's inevitable. Even if there was an inquest and it was found that Israel did not shoot the bullet, but Palestinians did, either way it was inadvertent. Either way, I do not believe for a split second that Israelis would intentionally assassinate a journalist. There is no reason for it. There is absolutely no reason for it. And the soldiers must be disciplined.

They are required to be in so many ways because of potential abuses and problems. Would the Palestinians do it intentionally to make Israel look bad? It's possible. But if this is someone on your side that's beloved and reporting for you, I would, let's just say, I certainly hope that that was not the case. In other words, if she was killed either side doing it, it was accidental.

Look at some of the quotes already, though. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas declared immediately that Israel bears full responsibility for her death. Palestinian politician Hanan Ashrawi tweeted that Abu Akhla, so her name, I'm sorry, I didn't mention it earlier, I should have, Shireen Abu Akhla, was shot and murdered by the Israeli occupation army. Fatah spokesman Osama Al Qasami said, Israel deliberately targeted Abu Akhla because it wants to send a message to journalists around the world that whoever wants to cover the truth will be shot and killed.

Lola al-Khattar, deputy foreign minister of Qatar, which sponsors Al Jazeera, tweeted that Israeli state-sponsored terrorism must stop. And Al Jazeera determined with certainty that the IDF shot its journalists deliberately and in cold blood. All of that was stated before any investigation and without any physical evidence, those who think the worst of Israel will be willing to accept and believe anything about it, including that it would intentionally target and kill a prominent Arab journalist. Prime Minister, so Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett says that according to information in our hands right now, there is a good chance that Akhla was killed by Palestinians firing indiscriminately at the Israeli troops. The PMO circulated a video showing a Palestinian gunman saying, we hit a soldier, he is lying on the ground.

Since, however, no idea of soldier was injured in this firefight, this suggests that it is possible the gunman mistook the journalist for an IDF soldier and is responsible for her death. This need not be a classic, he said, she said, case of conflicting claims that can never be proven. So let's do a joint investigation.

Let's find out. Right before the show, I saw this report, the initial findings of an autopsy on the body of 51-year-old Al Jazeera journalist Shereen Abu Akhla were inconclusive it was announced Wednesday night. So I have to look into more who conducted this autopsy, to what extent Israel was allowed to be involved. I would say this, just based on propaganda that's out there, if Palestinian forensic doctors conducted the investigation and said it's inconclusive as to who killed her, then Israel didn't.

That's just my opinion. In other words, if there's any chance that Israel killed her unintentionally at that, it would have been announced that Israel did it. To say inconclusive is either saying, hey, there really is not evidence either way and we've got to show integrity or it's pretty clear Israel didn't do it, but we don't want to pin down us. And either way, the tragedy is her life is lost. That's a real tragedy. And regardless of what happens, Israel is going to get blamed for further inflaming tensions. That's the reality. That's why we pray for God's gracious intervention. We'll be right back.

Yes, yes, yes. That Thoroughly Jewish Thursday music, sometimes I jump in ready to talk, forgetting it is Thursday. Latest I'm reading here, Palestinian authorities, Jerusalem Post, stood firm in its refusal to hold a joint investigation with Israel and to the shooting death of Al Jazeera journalist Shereen Abu Ekla, whose funeral procession made its way Thursday from Ramallah to Jerusalem. Quote from Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abad, we have rejected a joint investigation with the Israeli authorities because they are the ones who committed the crime. And now Abu Ekla, of course, is being referred to as a martyr of Palestine. May the truth come to light. May the truth come to light.

I'm going to go to the phones in one moment. Friends, we keep receiving notes from people who had lost their faith, lost their way, because they watch videos online from counter missionary rabbis, raised questions for them about Jesus in the New Testament. They had lost their faith and they came across our videos, they came across our materials, they came across the line of fire, and God has restored their faith and it's stronger than before.

And others have said this is the thing that kept them strong in the faith. And, by God's grace, we hear from Jewish people who come to the faith through our materials. So, I want to invite you to join our team a dollar a day helping us bring the gospel, the good news of the Messiah, to the Jewish people.

We get to do things that others don't get to because we have so much interaction, we have so much material that's out there, and we are a resource. Some of the the key cutting-edge ministries doing Jewish outreach around the world today use our resources and that's all with your help. So, join our support team and help us bring the gospel to the Jew first. And the neat thing is, every testimony that comes in, you will be part of that. You will share in the reward. So, go to askdrbrown.org, click on donate monthly support.

And, of course, because our desire is to pour into you every week, every day, we will be pouring into you in a fresh way and you can receive and grow minister to others. All right, I'm going to go to the phones pretty early today. 866-34-TRUTH.

We'll start with Gary in Huntersville, North Carolina. Welcome to the Line of Fire. Good afternoon, Dr. Brown. I appreciate you taking my call.

I've got a very complicated question concerning the use of the Hebrew letter Hey in the medical expertise concerning the created order. That's complicated. That was good, you said it well.

You said it concisely. Okay, very good. And I'm going to kind of take us back to a time when just normally we read our Bible, normal English Bibles, let's say King James or New King James, New Living Translation, NIV, ESV. When we read the Genesis created account, we read those days as the use of the definite article, the first day, the second day, the third day, so on down the line. And yet some other translations like the RSV, New Living Translation, some Catholic versions, Amplified versions, ASB versions, they do not use that definite article except for the sixth and seventh day. Now that being said, kind of reverting to the Hebrew Scriptures, as I read it, the Hebrew Scriptures only use that definite article in the sixth day and the seventh day.

Am I correct so far in that conversation? Yeah, I'm just confirming, hang on, on the sixth day, just want to make sure, because it's something that I did not specifically note, right, Yom Hashishri, right, and then the seventh, right. Okay, so there are sometimes minor stylistic differences in a text where we might make a big deal of it from the outside, in other words, as a non-original ancient Hebrew speaker, but it's just a stylistic difference. However, it's always fair to ask, is there something intentional, because it's God's word and every letter counts, etc. So yeah, the New Jewish Publication Society version, for example, the new JPS, it says a first day, a second day, etc., and then the sixth day, because there is that variant in Hebrew, and then the seventh day. So the Hebrew is different in those last two, that's correct.

Okay, very good. That being said now, both of us as young boys going to a Bible study, going to Sunday school, whatever the case may be, we are taught from the very early age that the created order was done in a six, 24-hour period, literal day chronology, sequential event, and we go with that, and we're good with that. Now as we get older and learn a little bit more, investigate a little bit more, and we look into the scriptures and kind of evaluate things, at least for me anyway, I see three messages in the created order being established, one of creation, one of the six-day of creation accounts, and I also see an eschatological story being developed in there, and I just wonder if Jewish people see that, Orthodox Jewish people, you coming from, you know, that background prior, would see that, or is that taught, or how is that played out in a thematical exegesis type of theology?

Can you give me some insight to that? Yeah, sure, and I appreciate the questions. First, I didn't come from an Orthodox Jewish background, so my knowledge of the Bible, before I would say, was very superficial. Since then, I've interacted with Orthodox rabbis for almost 50 years, and I'm in the sources, the rabbinic sources, all the time.

That's the first thing, just turns my own background. As far as what we're taught, it depends on what Sunday school you went to. For me, when I was meditating on the Hebrew text during my grad school days, so late 70s, early 80s, I remember asking myself the question, why were ancient cosmologies written? Why did the Egyptians talk about creation, and the Babylonians talked about the creation, Sumerians talked about creation, and other ancient peoples talked about creation? Well, on the one hand, it was to explain the origins of the world, or the universe that they observed, but a lot of it was to talk about the deities, how this deity became supreme, or that one. In other words, it was more about the God, or the gods, who created than about science.

And if you ask, okay, is this literally how the earth came about? They may think it was literally that, but it wasn't to teach science, it was to teach us about God. So I began to read Genesis 1 completely differently thereafter, to say whether it's meant to be scientific and chronological is a fair question, but it wasn't put there for that reason. It was put there to teach us about the nature of God who brings light out of darkness, who brings order out of chaos, who causes things to reproduce after themselves, and lessons like that. Now, in terms of traditional Jewish interpretation, no, there is not a major theme of eschatology that is found from this.

However, there are other eschatological end-time themes that say that the earth will be here 6,000 years, and then the 7,000, so six millennia, and then the seventh millennium will be a Sabbath rest, or the messianic kingdom. So there are speculations like that, and the question is how much of it goes back to Genesis 1 and the seven-day scheme there. So you have reflections, but it's not a major reading of the text. You have to realize there's so much rabbinic literature.

You can find almost anything about anything somewhere. So there are end-time reflections from the creation account, but it's not a major way that it's read. Okay, so back to you, because we've got about a minute. What do you take as the significance of saying the sixth day and the seventh day?

Well, we get people that say, no, God created in six literal days. We run with that. We kind of go, that's good, and I'm good. I was good with that.

I'm still good with that. But as I get older and learn more stuff, I look at that created order going, wait one minute. The word yom in Hebrew can mean a 24-hour period. It can mean an unspecified period, or it could mean a thousand-year period.

That's for Psalms 90 or what Peter says in the New Testament. Yeah, and just to clarify, so yom itself doesn't mean a thousand years, but the day of the Lord could be a lengthy period. One day in his sight could be like a thousand years. But in any case, it frustrates young earth creationists and it frustrates old earth creationists when I say the Hebrew could go either way in terms of 24-hour literal period or unspecified time period. But you're saying in your mind the fact that it says the sixth day, the seventh day is somehow separating them in length or significance from the other days? Yeah, well as we learn the scriptures, we can see that six-day chronological 24-hour period order. But as we get older and as we learn, for instance, science. I'm not trying to introduce science as science is the only way.

That's not my conversation. But what I'm introducing is astrophysicists, per se, look at the creation order in the universe out there and they've kind of calculated that the universe is somewhere around 13.7, 13.8 billion years old. Well, when I look at that to track six days from creation, I get about 13.7, 13.8 billion years old. But when I look at the use of the definite article, hey, and I look at those creation order days, like let's say the first day, I can kind of see now where when God created, He created.

And then I can see a time period going by when He spoke again and created again to fulfill that, if you will, 13.7, 13.8. God, hey, sorry to catch you off there, but appreciate you sharing your thoughts on that and you want a different way in, feel free friends on either side to call and maybe we'll continue the discussion. Hey, Gary, thank you for the call. I appreciate it. It's the Line of Fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get on the Line of Fire by calling 866-34-TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

Welcome. Welcome to Thoroughly Jewish Thursday. You know, I heard that song as a boy. It's kind of a fun folk song that was sung in Hebrew and got faster and, you know, kind of a bouncy tune. I never knew what the words meant, though, what the Hebrew meant.

Hava Nagila, venis mecha. But it's come, let's rejoice. Come, let's exult and let us rejoice. So, it's biblically based. It's from the Psalms. All right, if you've got a Jewish-related question of any kind, now's the time to call. And especially if you differ with me on theology, you differ with me on replacement theology, you differ with me on Israel's place in biblical prophecy, you differ with me on Jesus Yeshua being the Jewish Messiah. Love to hear from you.

Let me say this. I tried to look at more YouTube comments in recent weeks than I have before. And just try to see some of you interacting more.

And I see that some of you interacting on YouTube, from what I can tell, are Orthodox Jews or maybe ultra-Orthodox, or you have that background. So, I wish I could interact with all your posts. I wish I had time to sit and go back and forth when you raise objections or raise issues. But I just want you to know I'm thrilled that you're taking the time to watch the videos and listen to the broadcast.

I'm really thrilled with that. And of course, you are warmly welcome there. Just don't use profanity, which would not be your thing if you're a religious Jew, and don't engage in personal attacks on people because we don't allow that.

But otherwise, differ all you want, have at it, and we're so glad that you are there. Okay, before I go to the phones, I was asked a question about why, with the sixth day and the seventh day of creation, there is the definite article, hey. So, this is put before a word in Hebrew, like we have the in English. There is no a in Hebrew. So, if it's a, you just don't have anything. If it's the, you put this in front of the word. Sometimes in poetry, you don't use it the same way.

But in normal writing, you put this. So, this is telling you the versus a. So, when you get through Genesis 1 and you come to the end, for the first time after saying first day, second day, third day, et cetera, you get to the sixth day, right? The sixth day, and then the seventh day. So, just to give you an insight into how the rabbinic commentators think, and how they would read the text. So, the foremost commentator in Judaism on Bible and Talmud, Talmud being the, well, the massively expanded traditions and legal commentary and so on.

So, Rashi, foremost commentator, lived in the 11th century. Look at what he says on Genesis 1 31, commenting on the sixth day, and I'll read the English translation on this for a real website. The letter hey, the numerical value of which is five, is added to the word shishi, sixth, when the work of creation was complete, to imply that he, God, made a stipulation with them that it endures only upon condition that Israel should accept the five books of the Torah, and he's citing there the Talmud Shabbat 88a. Another interpretation of Yom Hashishi, the sixth day, the whole creation, the universe, stood in the state of suspense, moral imperfection, until the sixth day.

That is, the sixth day of Sivan, which is destined to be the day when the Torah would be given to Israel, that's another Talmudic source of a Dazara 3a. So, it's telling you a couple things. One, it is taking every letter seriously and saying there must be a reason why it varies. And then secondly, it's coming up with a homiletical explanation, completely unrelated to the fact that it is simply the definite article and not the number five appearing for some reason.

But this is typical of rabbinic interpretation where it will read these things into the text and it's zeal for trying to understand the significance of every word and every letter. 866-34-TRUTH, let's go to Joseph in Kansas City, Missouri. Welcome to the Line of Fire. Hi Dr. Brown, thanks for taking my call, I appreciate it. Sure. So... Are you there? All right, hang on. Hey Joseph, not sure what happened, but here we go, back to your questions. Sorry, go ahead. Oh, that's okay, you can hear me? Yep.

Okay, great. So, I grew up in the Messianic movement and always heard about, you know, Yeshua fulfilled the spring feasts, and in the second coming he's going to fulfill the fall feasts, which really is the most important part of the fall feast, which recently has got me thinking about prophecy in it. I wonder if that's the most accurate term, so I kind of have a three-part question. So, basically, did Yeshua fulfill the feast in the sense that typical prophecies are fulfilled, or did he fulfill the feast in the same sense that he fulfilled the law and the prophets as a whole, or would it be more accurate to say that Yeshua's life and his second coming are analogous to the feast? Right.

In a sense, there's overlap in those, the third choice being more different from the first and second. So, I'm going to respond the way I understand it, and you can see where it fits in your spectrum here, okay? So, by his life being analogous, that is part of fulfilling. So, when he says in Matthew 5 17, don't think I came to abolish Torah or the prophets, I didn't come to abolish, but to fulfill, right?

And then reiterates that in 7 12, whatever you want others to do to them, this is the law and the prophets. So, it just kind of bookends there in the Sermon on the Mount, which is an aside, but when I look at his life and his whole ministry and mission, it is bringing to fullness and fulfillment what God previously spoke and previously promised. So, for example, in his own life, he brings to perfection the standards of the Torah, and then imparts his righteousness to us. How does he fulfill the sacrificial system?

Well, what was it about? It was about atonement, it was about cleansing, it was about life for life and the innocent taking place of the guilty, and so on. And so, because of that, he now brings it to its full meaning by dying on the cross. What about priesthood and that whole mission? So, everything the priest stood for and did, he brings it to its full meaning and becomes our great high priest. So, what about the calendar?

How does he fulfill that? Well, he brings out the fullest meaning and significance of these holy days and seasons, and what they ultimately point to. So, the ultimate liberation from sin and bondage through the blood of the Lamb, and the firstfruits now from the dead, and setting the pattern for those who will follow in the future. And then, ultimately, with Pentecost, Shavuot, being another harvest-related festival, but now the time of the fullness of the Spirit being poured out. And then, the culmination of the calendar, so in the seventh month, in terms of the culmination of the holy days, his return in conjunction with the sounding of the trumpet, the 10 days of awe from the sounding of the trumpet until Day of Atonement cleansing for Israel. And then, after that, five days after that, Sukkot tabernacles the in-gathering of the nations to Jerusalem, as you know all this having grown up with it. So, it's not fulfilled in the sense of prophecy in that a specific prophetic word could say, this must happen in this way before this time. Or, for example, there were prophecies about King Josiah going back to 1 Kings 13, and long before his birth, and this king will arise and do X, Y, Z, and then he comes, rises up in Judah, and does those very things. The feasts are not like that, so it's not really like number one, because it's not a specific prophecy, but rather, in the way that he fulfills the law and the prophets, he fulfills the feasts by his life and death, resurrection, and return. To me, the specific question about the future is, should we expect him to come at that time, the time of Yom Teruah, the day of the sounding of the trumpets, which becomes Rosh Hashanah, the new year in Jewish tradition. The infamous book, 88 Reasons Why Jesus is Coming in 1988, predicted that Jesus was coming back September 12th of 1988, because that was Rosh Hashanah that year. And when people ask me, are you going to read the book, I said, I'll read it on September 13th. That was my way of saying it's not going to happen. But, no one knows the day or the hour makes us question, can we know a specific date, so you just put a giant question mark there. But certainly, what that points to will be fulfilled in the future. So hopefully, that was a specific enough answer that you can kind of place it on your spectrum.

Yeah, yeah, that was, I appreciate that. Yeah, because I guess with the future, my one question about the calendar in relation to eschatology, didn't Yeshua already go up to the heavenly temple and perform basically the Yom Kippur ritual with his own blood in the heavenly temple? Like, wouldn't that throw off the parallel there? No, because I look at it in terms of cleansing for Israel. In other words, Zechariah 13, which follows Zechariah 12, and they look to me and they've pierced, Zechariah 13, on that day, God will open a fountain for cleansing. It doesn't say Lech haper, it doesn't use the word to make atonement. But this is when the fountain for cleansing is opened up for the nation in Zechariah 14, the nations come to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles in Jerusalem. So this is when Israel receives its atonement.

This is when the price that was paid becomes efficacious for the nation. So I don't see any contradiction there at all. Okay, so he kind of started the atonement process, but once Israel fully accepts them, that'll be the kind of completion of that? Yeah, well he did everything that he needs to do for atonement by dying on the cross, and then makes the heavenly application, but it is finished when he dies on the cross. So nothing has to be added to that ever, but it will be received on a national level by Israel. So yeah, and remember, we're talking about the fulfilling of a purpose, not a very specific, this must happen on this day in this way. I believe firstfruits, when Messiah rises, was a specific day, the first day after the Sabbath, not just the Sabbath of Passover, but the actual Sabbath seventh day within Passover. So it was an eighth day resurrection that was part of firstfruits.

But the rest of this is symbolism, the rest is what it's pointing to, what's it about as it affects the nation. Hey, great questions, I appreciate it, and we'll be right back with more of your calls. Stay right here. It's The Line of Fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get on The Line of Fire by calling 866-34-TRUTH.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Oh yeah, I cannot wait to be back in Israel, maybe even next year, maybe even going with some of you. 866-34-TRUTH. I got a few more things I want to share with you, but let's grab one more call. James in Arlington, Texas, welcome to The Line of Fire. Well thank you, how are you doing?

I'm blessed, I'm doing really well, thank you. Yes sir, my question was in Revelation, where the sea will give up the dead. A few weeks ago you talked about the sea being more like Hades or hell. Is Revelation referring to Hades or hell, or literally the sea?

Or both? Right, no I did not equate the sea with Hades or hell, but rather to say... Oh, I'm sorry, okay, I'm sorry. No, no, that's okay, rather to say that the sea, there's no sea at the end of Revelation in the 22nd chapter in the holy city, because sea is often an image of chaos and destruction.

Okay, that's right, I'm sorry, I remember. No, no, that's okay, it has those negative connotations. So no, you know, hell, Hades gives up its dead in Revelation 20. The sea giving up its dead, I just take that to mean all the bodies that were in the sea, all the people that have died in the sea.

So I read that in that sense literally, as opposed to speaking of something else. And in fact, if you look at it in Revelation, the 20th chapter, let me just grab that on my accordance software. I need to talk about this more, it's such a great tool, accordancebible.com, check it out, friends. So we go to Revelation chapter 20, I saw the great dead, I saw the dead great and small standing before the throne and books were open.

It's one of the most overwhelming passages in all the Bible. And another book was open, which is the book of life, the dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them. And each person was judged according to what they had done. So it seems to literally be saying that, and even the vast oceans will give up the dead.

If there's more being pictured, more imagery, maybe so, but it's certainly not speaking about hell or Hades, which is mentioned immediately after that. Hey, thank you for the call, James, I appreciate it. No, thank you, thank you, thank you. All right, you have a great day, thank you. You too. All right, maybe, maybe I'll take another call.

866-348-7884. First I gotta share something with you because I'm smiling. I just saw some reviews that were posted, there's an author page and I'll go there periodically and it'll say here all the latest reviews to books you've written and boy, I'm just blessed at some of the reviews and how people are impacted. Revival or We Die, boy, this is, what a great review. My heart is burning. If after reading this book your heart does not burn within you and every cell in your being cries out for more and more of God, then as the old saying goes, your wood is wet.

Yes, this person's burning, which is one of the fruits I hoped in writing the book. So I got a five-star review. So here's my book on Christian antisemitism, Confronted the Lies in Today's Church. It says there are far better books on Christian antisemitism out there and it gives one star.

Why? Because I'm a Jewish believer in Jesus. Oh yeah, I'm a Jewish believer in Jesus and they're not keen on that.

So it's Thirdly Jewish Thursday, I'll share it with you. The author of this book, Michael Brown, purports to be a Jewish believer in Jesus. There are no Jews who believe in Jesus. Hey, here I am and there are multiplied tens of thousands of us, born Jews, die Jews, in obedience to the God of Israel and following the Jewish Messiah, Yeshua.

Yep. If a born Jew decides to believe in Jesus, he is an apostate and is for all intents and purposes no longer a Jew. Yes, I'm aware of Jewish law but he says I know what Jewish law says and I know that Jewish law largely recognizes you as still Jewish, right? Once a Jew, always a Jew. I remember when my dad was all concerned I was going to get baptized in February of 1972 and my dad talked to the rabbi about it, the previous rabbi of the synagogue, and he said if your son gets baptized, he's a baptized Jew, don't worry about it.

And he just took it much more, it's no big deal, he's a kid, etc. You know, he's still a Jew. So in any case, in any case, I know what Jewish law says, but so how about a Jewish atheist? How about a liberal Jew?

How about on and on? You know, Dennis Prager told me, we talked a few weeks ago by phone, he said look, I tell the Jewish community you're all upset about Jews for Jesus, how about Jews for Marx? The movement to which he belongs, Messianic Christianity, embodies one of the most insidious types of anti-Semitism in the world today, supersessionism. No, quite the contrary. The body that I'm part of rejects supersessionism. Telling Jews that our texts and beliefs are wrong, that we can only be fulfilled through a belief in Jesus is anti-Semitism at its worst.

I wonder if Brown can see the irony, I doubt he does. There are far better books on anti-Semitism than any less, he lists a few. They're actually good books, I've used them, read them, quote them, the other books he references, and of course mine is treating things from a totally unique and different way. But that's what happens, there is so much bias against us as Jews who believe in Jesus. Yes, I believe the traditional rabbis are wrong about the messiah, correct, and I am not a practicing traditional Jew, and I don't try to give the appearance that I am, I don't give any indication that I'm a traditional Jew.

I respect the traditions, many are beautiful, many are wonderful, but I reject the authority of Talmudic rabbinic Judaism, otherwise I'd be a rabbinic Jew. Yes, of course, no arguing there, but the question is what does the Hebrew Bible say, and is it possible that we have been mistaken about the messiah, we've been mistaken about other things through history. But in any case, he's not happy with my book on Christian anti-Semitism because in his mind I'm an anti-Semite by saying Jesus is the messiah, that means the rabbis are wrong.

I didn't know that following the footsteps of Moses and the prophets and trying to tell the truth to our people made one an anti-Semite, but may the Lord bless the reviewer of that book and bring him or her into the fullness of God's love and truth. Hey friends, if you've got questions as you're reading about about what I do with the Old Testament, what do I make of the fact that sometimes it's just like God's just angry and mean-spirited, and what happens when I pray and I don't get answers? Hey, let me just share a resource with you that I think will really help you, and if you're not struggling in this way, maybe a friend, family member is, this book could be the lifeline for them coming back to God.

Let's share. Are you struggling in your faith? Do you have doubts and questions and you really don't know where to go with them? Or maybe you have a friend or a loved one that's completely fallen away from the Lord.

Well friends, we've got a great resource for you. Has God failed you? Finding faith when you're not even sure God is real. This is the book that is a first aid kit for seekers and strugglers and doubters, and ask the difficult questions. What happens when prayer doesn't seem to work? What happens when that love whom we're praying for isn't healed? And what about those passages in the Old Testament? It looks like God is an angry, vengeful God.

What do we do with those? There's even a whole chapter called Permission to Doubt, and what can we learn from the book of Job? And what's unique about this book is we invite the questions and then we speak to the heart without bypassing the mind. As you read this book, faith will rise inside of you. As you read this book, confidence and hope will be restored.

As you read this book, questions will be answered and your mind will be at ease. And this could really be the lifeline for a loved one that has fallen away from the Lord. So order your copy of Has God Failed You today. AskDrBrown.org. That's A-S-K-D-R Brown dot org. Order today, and when you do, I want to give you free instant access to a powerful video I preached on why so many Christians are leaving the faith. So order Has God Failed You today at AskDrBrown.org. All right, and when you do, once you read the book or give it to a lover, let us know the impact it makes. All right, back to the phones, Doug in Winchester, Indiana.

Time is short, so please dive right in. Yeah, I just wanted to ask you, was Mary Magdalene, she wasn't the gal that they caught in adultery and Jesus wrote the line in the sand, was she? No, some traditions might try to make that point, but no, there's no evidence, there's nothing that says that she was that same woman there.

We just know that she was previously immoral, but no, people will always try to connect the dots, you know, but no, there is nothing authoritative and certainly nothing within the New Testament that tells us that at all. Great, I kind of figured that, but I wasn't for sure, so thank you for your answers and have a wonderful day and God bless you. Yeah, God bless.

Thank you, Doug. And let me just say this, you'll hear something sometimes from a pastor or a teacher and you'll say, wow, I never knew that. When I was a new believer, I would hear certain teachings like, wow, I never knew that. I guess I just didn't have that much insight or I'm newer in the Lord because I really esteemed my elders and the pastors and teachers that we'd have. Then as I kept reading the Bible, I'd wonder, where'd you get this from? Because I've read this over and over and over and over and over and over and I don't see where you got this from, or like in the tabernacle that the pillars represented this or the hooks represented this.

And I thought, wow, how did you get that? And often you heard it from someone. These days, just read it online. So just because somebody said it or one church leader once said this or one rabbi once said that, doesn't mean it's accurate. Doesn't mean it's accurate. So just because you hear something, even from your pastor or from me, you always want to check it out.

If it's a controversial issue, check it out. And many times you just haven't learned it. There are plenty of things.

It's going to happen until I see the Lord face to face. Plenty of things I didn't know that someone presents me and say, wow, I never knew that. And it's something related to the Bible or to the nature and character of God or history.

Wow, I didn't know that. Sounds so far-fetched, but it's true. And there are sources that you can rely on that, you know, are not just pulling things out of thin air, but just because something is said doesn't mean it's true. It could just be a tradition that's being passed on. So dig to get to the roots. May the blessing and smile of God be yours. Another program powered by the truth network.