Interview with Shelly Volk
May 31, 2008 | 41 Comments
5/31/08: Interview with Shelly Volk
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Category:
Israel
Comments
41 Responses to “Interview with Shelly Volk”
Leave a Reply
Listen Live 2-4
E-Newsletter Signup
Ask Dr. Brown
Subscribe to the Podcast
Station List
June 1st, 2008 @ 12:45 am
Thank you for posting this. Incredibly encouraging.
June 25th, 2008 @ 6:44 pm
Dr. Brown, I’ve been e-dialogging with an Orthodox Jew I met at Jerusalem Post using much of the material you covered in your “Countering the Counter Missionaries” CD series and am praying that the LORD would show him the truth of Messiah. I’ve been waiting for a response from him regarding the issue of the time frame of Messiah’s coming before the destruction of the Temple in 70 ce but have yet to receive a response. Please pray for this young man, that he would respond to me shortly with good news!!! The Biblical support for the expectation of the Messiah prior to 70 ce is overwhelming and irrefutable. Thank you so much for your contributions to the Body of Messiah. Your Messianic apologetics material as well as your holiness/revival teachings are much cherished by me and my family. Shalom and GOD bless!
Ant
June 25th, 2008 @ 10:06 pm
Thanks for the good report. May the Lord cause His truth to triumph!
June 26th, 2008 @ 3:20 pm
Dr. Brown I just wanted to say thank you!!! You always inspire me to want to give more to the Lord and to learn more about Him. It’s such a blessing to hear a Jewish brother claim and honor the Messiah, Yeshua. Please continue to be faithful as you are a blessing and a father to the likes of me spiritually.
Love you brother!
Emanuel
June 26th, 2008 @ 5:57 pm
Thanks for the gracious words. The Lord is good!
June 28th, 2008 @ 11:43 pm
Dr Brown…. Be encouraged in your ministry. You wouldn’t believe how many lives you are touching, both Jews and gentiles. I think of how David Wilkerson reached Nicky Cruz and Sonny Argonzoni and in turn Nicky Cruz and Sonny reached many more and it has been snowballing since. The other day I had 2 young Jehovah’s Witness gentlemen show up at my door. We discussed the deity of Messiah and, once again, I pulled from your material. I eventually played one of the “Countering the Counter Missionaries” CDs dealing with the nature of GOD and they were speechless. They asked to borrow them to let their elders hear them. I gave them the one dealing with the Person of the Holy Spirit as well as 3 others dealing with the Complexity of GOD’s unity. Needless to say, it is not just reaching Jews but gentiles as well. Who knows….one of them may be the next evangelist for the the truth of Messiah. Be encouraged! Your work in the LORD is producing fruit. Shalom
June 29th, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
Thanks for the good report. The Lord is faithful!
June 29th, 2008 @ 9:06 pm
Anthony,
I wouldn’t be so sure that Daniel 9 implies that the Messiah had to come 2000 years ago.
Matt
June 29th, 2008 @ 9:21 pm
Matthew,
Could you explain how Daniel 9 could be interpreted in a way that would allow for a later coming of the Messiah?
June 29th, 2008 @ 10:33 pm
Sure Marcus:
I’m not sure if this passage talks about “the Messiah” at all. If it does not, then it seems to allow for a later coming of the messiah.
June 29th, 2008 @ 11:50 pm
Marcus and Matthew,
Take a look at my treatment of Dan 9:24-27 in vol. 3 of my Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus series, along with my shorter treatment in vol. 1.
Although there is legitimate debate about the translation “the Messiah” in the verses, they definitely point to the Messiah’s coming before the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD, so I would definitely differ with the “later coming of the Messiah” argument from this passage. Again, for details, see the vols. I mentioned, with summaries of the arguments on the Real Messiah website.
June 30th, 2008 @ 6:06 am
Dr. Brown:
I don’t have your book. But I still do not understand how the passage precludes the Messiah from coming later. I read your “Answers to Objections” on your website, but you seemed to have stopped short of explaining this point.
Thanks
June 30th, 2008 @ 11:03 am
Daniel 9:24-27 speaks explicitly of what the Messiah would do — and only the Messiah could do — and that had to take place before the Second Temple was destroyed according to Daniel’s prophecy. Making atonement for sin — once for all! — and bringing in everlasting righteousness, just to mention two things, were clearly the work of the Messiah, and since the text explicitly speaks of “an anointed one/messiah” who would be involved in this process, the conclusion is unavoidable.
Again, for more detailed info, you’ll have to check out vol. 3, since time precludes me from reproducing the entire argument here.
July 1st, 2008 @ 6:49 pm
Dr. Brown,
I can understand why you may be inclined to interpret the text in this manner. However, I too have read these passages, and am not sure how you derive at the conclusion that they “explicitly” describe what the Messiah “had to do” before the destruction of the temple. I do see certain aspects of a messianic age described (i.e. end of sin, fulfilment of prophecy, and everlasting righteousness), but it is not clear to me that they had to be fulfilled before the coming of the Messiah strictly based on the words of the text, which seem more ambiguous to me. Further, the text certainly does not link the abovementioned elements to the actions of either of the two messiahs mentioned in the text. Therefore, I must disagree with your conclusion.
July 1st, 2008 @ 9:33 pm
Matthew,
Feel free to disagree! If you’d like to dig into this more from my perspective, then, again, I point you to the relevant portions of vol. 3 of my Jewish Objections series.
July 1st, 2008 @ 9:57 pm
Dr. Brown,
OK. If I ever get a hold of it, I will read your arguments in depth.
July 2nd, 2008 @ 12:00 am
Matthew,
Fair enough.
July 2nd, 2008 @ 8:57 pm
Hey Matthew (good Biblical name!), I would encourage you to get the relevant book as it contains an in depth analysis of the passage at length, not to mention some amazingly intricate study notes in the back.
July 2nd, 2008 @ 9:01 pm
Dr Brown,
Speaking of this very issue…..I still have yet to hear from the Orthodox gentleman I was dialogging with via e-mail. At first he seemed rather antagonistic and sure of himself. It has been 2 weeks now and nothing back from him concerning Isaiah 9. Dr. Brown…..do you suggest I send him a message, or give it more time?
July 2nd, 2008 @ 10:55 pm
There is a really good software out there that I use, it is called PC Biblesoft version 4
July 3rd, 2008 @ 12:38 am
Anthony,
Give it more time, and pray for God to open his heart and convict him of sin.
July 3rd, 2008 @ 8:13 pm
Dr. Brown,
Don’t you know that Orthodox Jews (such as myself) have ways of dealing with “conviction” of sin?
Matt
July 4th, 2008 @ 1:09 pm
Matt,
With all due respect (as a fellow Jew…don’t let the name fool you. LOL) I wonder what you mean by “ways of dealing with conviction of sin”? By this do you mean atonement through good deeds, charity and prayer? Please provide a Biblical basis for this argument based on the written Torah (aka the one and only Torah). Shalom and GOD bless.
July 6th, 2008 @ 12:16 am
Hi Anthony:
I mean repentence. Asking God for forgiveness of sin. I’m not talking necessarily about “charity, repentence, and and good deeds” although it might help someone repent.
It’s funny that I am being asked to provide Biblical evidence when perhaps it is you that should be providing evidence that repentence alone does not atone.
But anyhow, check out these sources: Ezekiel 33: 11-20; Jonah 3:5-10; Numbers 14:18-20; Hoshea 14:1-3; Micah 7:18-20. There are others. I hope that these verses will enlighten you to why I believe in the power of atonement through repentence.
July 6th, 2008 @ 1:01 am
Matthew,
I deal extensively with the question of repentance in vol. 2 of my series in Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus. Since I have written what will be a total of more than 1,500 pages once vol.l 5 comes out, I would really suggest that you dig into these volumes rather than try to get into an argument about these points here on this blog, which is really devoted to the topics I’m covering on the radio show each week.
In any case, here’s a little challenge for you: Which finds a greater emphasis in the Torah — the most foundational document in Judaism — blood atonement or repentance? Please list all the verses dealing explicitly with repentance in the Torah, and then list all the verses dealing with blood atonement. Then, answer me honestly: Do you follow the emphasis of the Torah?
July 6th, 2008 @ 7:21 am
Dr. Brown:
That’s quite a task to sift through the Bible to do this (which I admit I don’t have time).
Still I would submit that it is not quite a fair test. One could argue that the the necessity of the multiple verses dealing with the sacrifices are due to the fact that they were ritualistically complex to perform and there were many different kinds of sacrifices that were performed for different purposes (also necessitating multiple verses). However, I don’t believe that by just listing verses, one can come to the conclusion that repentence is less central than sacrifice.
July 6th, 2008 @ 1:35 pm
Matthew,
Let’s face the facts: When the Temple was destroyed, it was devastating for our nation, a sign of God’s disfavor. And one of the great issues was that they could no longer offer sacrifices.
No doubt, BOTH blood sacrifices and repentance are essential, but the Torah puts far and away the greater emphasis on the need for blood. I have done exactly what I asked you to do in terms of the study, and I lay things in out in detail in vol. 2 of my series. If you want to dig more, the truth is there to be found.
July 6th, 2008 @ 5:31 pm
Dr. Brown:
I absolutely agree that the destruction of the temple was a tragic event in our nations history and part of the tragedy is the lack of our ability to bring sacrifices.
However, there is a quite a big logical jump from this unfortunate fact to the presumption that these sacrifices are necessary to affect atonement. I would submit that a bigger reason for the tradgedy associated with loss of the temple is the loss of opportunity to serve God through these sacrifices. However you look at it, there were more sacrifices not involving atonement than those involving atonement.
I am not sure where you draw the conclusion concerning the “need for blood [for atonement]” If you were to perhaps provide a verse that proves this contention, it would be far more convincing. It is nice that in your book you attempt a quantitative study of verses in scripture in an effort to demonstrate the greater emphasis of blood over repentence in Torah (and I will consider your arguments if and when I ever get your book), however, as I said above, I am not so convinced by numbers (of verses) because there are other reasons that the Torah may have had more verses dealing with sacrfices than repentence. However, if the Torah really wanted to say that there was no repentence without blood, it should have said so, and to the best of my knowledge, it never did.
Matt
July 6th, 2008 @ 11:03 pm
Matthew,
I think you’re crisscrossing two distinct concepts. Repentance is saying “I will change my ways and not commit “x” anymore”. Atonement is saying “I hereby pay for the past sin of “x” with a sacrifice”. Atonement is that which satisfies the required penalty for sin committed (the taking of one life to preserve another life). Forgiveness is asking forgiveness for the sin committed and not doing it again. One doesn’t cancel out the other. It is not “either/or”….they are both necessary. The absence of the Temple means that, while you may repent of sins committed (ask forgiveness and not do it again….though we usually do), you have no valid way to PAY FOR the sins you’ve committed. A murderer may say “Im sorry and I won’t do it again”, but there is still a price to pay. Unless, of course, there was a substitution. That is what atonement is, in essence……substitution (Life for life).
Ant
July 7th, 2008 @ 12:50 am
Matthew,
No presumption at all in my points. They are simply based on many clear statements in the Scriptures. The problem for me is that for years I had discussions like this and was always asked for more info, so I wrote 1,500 pages of material answering every serious question in real depth. Time does not permit me to rehash what I spent years writing, so if you want to study the issue seriously — and not just in a few paragraphs in a blog here — pick up the books (in this case vol. 2) and look at the scores of Scriptures cited, with many clear statements. If you can’t afford it, just write to our ministry and we’ll send it to you for free, provided you take the time to read. Fair enough?
July 7th, 2008 @ 6:28 pm
Hi Anthony:
I don’t think that I am “criscrossing” any concepts at all since I believe that repentence serves as a means of atonement. I am not sure where you have derived this concept of “paying for sins” or “substitution.” Sin is something that separates man from God. There is nothing on earth that could ever “pay” for that and the idea of God being appeased by blood sounds very pagan to me. Needless to say, I maintain that such a concept of “payment” or “substitution” is not found in the Hebrew scriptures. Atonement through repentence (or even if it had been done through a sacrifice) was only through God’s Grace and not, Heaven Forbid, because we had “payed” for the atonement. Now I provided clear scriptural evidence that repentence alone effects atonement. Why can’t you do the same?
July 7th, 2008 @ 6:40 pm
Dr. Brown:
I concluded that your points were presumptive simply based on what you wrote above. If you have effectively argued for blood being necessary for atonement in your book, that is entirely different story. However, I am still unsure what the “many clear statements in Scriptures” which argue for blood being necessary for atonement, and remain quite skeptical that they actually exist. However, it would be only fair that I read your book to hear your side. On the other hand, I’m not really sure why it is impossible for you to present the salient points of your argument in this blog.
Thanks, Matt
July 7th, 2008 @ 7:04 pm
Matt,
Time is the biggest reason that I can’t rehash what I spent hundreds of hours already doing! So, what stops you from reading what I compiled and wrote?
Dr. Brown
July 7th, 2008 @ 7:29 pm
Hi Dr. Brown:
Nothing other than the fact that I don’t have the book.
Matt
July 7th, 2008 @ 7:48 pm
Matthew,
I offered to send it you free if you’ll read it and you can’t afford it. Just email our ministry and reference this blog.
Dr. Brown
July 7th, 2008 @ 8:08 pm
Dr. Brown:
I wouldn’t feel in good conscience accepting your book for free knowing that I could afford it. Of course I would read it. I am very curious about your arguments. But my real poverty is time (I am a husband, a father of a 7th month old boy, and a 3rd year medical student on his surgery clerkship). But bli neder, I will try to procure your book at some point to consider your arguments.
July 7th, 2008 @ 11:31 pm
Matthew,
Fair enough, and your statement is accepted in a non-binding way. Please understand that every statement I make here leads to another good question, which leads to another statement, etc. — which is why I wrote the books!
However, please do take the time to at least listen to some of the online debates (free at realmessiah.org), and if the issues are that important to you, by all means, dive into the material provided in my books. As Yeshua himself said, “The truth will set you free.”
July 8th, 2008 @ 9:06 pm
Hey Matt……I can send you some audio stuff if you’d like. If you’re interested, email me at hazakimcamp@yahoo.com and I’ll send some mp3s. Blessings…….
July 20th, 2008 @ 8:11 pm
I never tire of hearing this testimony, or Art’s. It is just amazing.
Hearing Art’s testimony and now Shelly’s has encouraged me greatly in my own life of faith and trusting God.
This kind of supernatural intervention into the life of a man seems to carry in it the same life interupting power in the speaking of it.
Thank you Jesus…
mark jr.
September 24th, 2008 @ 9:27 pm
What a blessing to hear Shelly Volk’s voice again. He is a Fantastic Pastor, a true witness of Faith and a dear Brother in Christ. I have been mentored by his walk by Faith. I have to admit during the walk it was NOT always delight. But looking back, I would NOT have been able to have the true testimony of walking by Faith in my life, if it wasn’t for the discipleship and friendship of Shelly!
Vince Oselette
November 1st, 2010 @ 7:08 pm
Hi,
I’m key era on this forum. I as a matter of fact apologetic for my english, but I’m flat learning. I would like to invite you on my websites:
The 1st is download
where you can find a in actuality tidy program, other program which I recommended is
realplayer
and sopcast
. All these programs are at one’s disposal quest of free download But the outdo of all is gimp pobierz
.