Although this is not a forum I feel compelled to respond to a reviewer. Yes, anyone can ride into town on a donkey, but it takes a real jackass to point out the obvious. What the Rabbi fails to mention is the fact that the prophecies are not Christian prophecies, they are Jewish. He also fails to point out that the concept of messiah was politicized by Jews of the first century because of Roman rule. Yes, anyone can ride into Jerusalem on a donkey, it is much harder to time it to fit perfectly with a six hundred year old prophecy.
What I found amazing about this book is that the Rabbi flings the same weak objections about the sabbath Jesus' contemporaries did, he defeated them them logically and the same arguments work today. The Jewish orthodoxy needs to come up with some new material two thousand years of the same argument falling mute has moved far past getting old.
The very idea that glorifiyig God by healing on the Sabbath is a violation of the Sabbath is absurd, but the argument is still the biggest gun in the orthodoxy's arsenal of fallacies. Tearing wheat is a violation of the prohibition of reaving on the sabbath, still even more proposterous. By that rational, a Jew today woudl not be able to crack walnuts on the sabbath, completely ridiculous.

I tell you this, Jesus put his contemporaries to shame with knowledge of logic and the law and he would eat alive any living rabbi. the entire Sanhedrin had to concoct an erroneous case against him, what makes them think they know more now than priests of the second temple period? Also, Jesus himself practically made them admit who indeed he was by using their own logic against them. They asked "By what authority do you do these things?" Jesus replied by asking by whay authority John the Babtist did and said the things that he did. They were unable to anwer because they had given approval to John and John pointed Jesus out as the Messiah. They knew that the crowd would stone them for deriding John against thier own judgment. That brings me to the final point and it is along those lines, how come the Priests and Scribes praised John and advised the people to listen to him because he speaks the truth. John told them flat out that he was the herald of the Messiah, and they accepted that. When he pointed "Behold the lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world" now all the sudden he doesn't know what he is talking about. Now if the herald of prophecy is alive and the Jewish establishment acknowledges this fact, why is it so hard to believe the messiah walked while he preached, it stands to reason. It's no wonder why Jesus pointed a finger at the temple establishment and called them a broof of vipers and hypocrites. Anyone who cannot stand by thier own judgment in the face of what they know is right is a viper and deserves the title.


This book is a stacked deck full of fallacies, half truth, and outright erroneous conjecture. It is full of the same tired tripe foisted by the Jewish Orthodoxy since the first century and the middle ages where rabbinic Judaism really took its modern form. The author fails to point out that the Rabbinical authority has shut the very possibility of messiah out by trying to shut out Jesus of Nazareth. However, it gets three stars for though provocation and serious discourse and debate.

This book does a nice job in its judeo-christian dialogue. I was raised Christian but now I am marrying a Jew and have decided to convert to have a single faith marriage.

To start with, this book is written for Christians (emphasis), not Jews per se, so it goes into some repetition to emphasize its distinctions between Jewish interpretations of the Torah vs. Jesus' intepretations. I like its candor and it is very respectful of the Christian viewpoint. Though the writing at times can be a bit "klunky", I read the book quickly in a two day period so it is not too theroetical and states its main points clearly. What is discusses includes: interpretation of the Sabbath; ritual purity vs ethics; God's (Moses/Scripture)thou and community message vs Jesus' I and you message; following the religious message vs. any conflict to commitment to parents, etc.

My only drawback to this book is that the Rabbi considers Judaism "the only way" not "a way", hence his rightness on his position again and again. Judaism (at least Reform) doesn't take this stance, and when looking at the chapter headings, I feared a hidden negative diatribe against Christianity. But not to worry! If anything, he goes over backwards trying not to offend Chrsitians, even at the cost of his fictional "dialogue" with Jesus (who wants to be accused of putting words in his mouth?)

Book gets five stars from me. It is clear that Judaism and Christianity are two distinct, ethical religions and there is nothing incomplete or inferior with Judaism. To bad religion historically has been used is such negative ways.

As a theologian (Christian) I have to support Dr. Neusner's critiques, because Jesus in fact, changed the Law and the author proves that. American Christians, or should I say American "Christians" (manly the ones on the right) should read this book and realize that we, Christians, are indeed not under the Law (cf: Galatians, Romans, Hebrews) we are instead under a new covenant, better than the Mosaic one. This prove that Jewish ehtics, based on the Law( or commandments) has nothing to do with Christian Ethics, which is based on Love and forgiveness instead. (cf. "You heard... but I say to you" statements coming from Christ's own mouth). Putting all this into a clearer perspective, I ask: Why do some Christians even take into consideration what comes out of Dr. Laura's mouth ? Just think about that.