Monday, December 18, 2006

Jews for Jesus apologizes to Jackie Mason

The New York Times reported on Dec. 5th that Jews for Jesus has apologized to Jackie Mason to settle Mason's lawsuit against the group based on a broadside that JFJ had been distributing that bore the words: "Jackie Mason: a Jew for Jesus?" The article states that Mason settled "for a three-paragraph letter from David Brickner, executive director of Jews for Jesus, offering ''sincere apologies for any distress'' the pamphlet had caused."

The NYT went on to report that after the settlement was reached in the federal judge's chambers, verbal jousting took place between Mason and Brickner in the courthouse hallway.

Along with the apology, Jews for Jesus has agreed to "retire" the pamphlet, perhaps the first time in its short history that JFJ has voluntarily censored itself.


Simon Ben David said...

I'm glad they apologised to the man. When I was with the JFJ cult, I was distributing some of their literature when Jackie Mason walked past, we had a lovely conversation, his avuncular attitude to JFJ was evident at the time.

It's a pity that JFJ sought to provoke him. True, he [Jackie Mason] could have been a Jew for Jesus - but heaven help him, there's a difference between a Jew who is for Jesus and the cult called Jews for Jesus.

I'd be rushing to sue if they [JFJ] said I was with Jews for Jesus (the group).

It's a feeling that many people who associate themselves with messianic jews have (in my experience).

Anonymous said...


Woman's suit against Jews for Jesus gets another chance
By Michael LaForgia

Palm Beach Post Staff Writer

Wednesday, November 29, 2006

A Delray Beach woman whose lawsuit against the Jews for Jesus group was thrown out last December will get another chance to make her case, an appeals court decided today.

Edith Rapp sued Jews for Jesus, a California-based group that aims to convert Jews to Christianity, after her stepson, Bruce Rapp, published in an Internet newsletter what she said was a made-up account of her conversion to the organization.

A Circuit Court judge dismissed Rapp's lawsuit last year, but the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed part of that ruling Wednesday, citing statewide ambiguity around a portion of the lawsuit dealing with false light invasion of privacy claims.

"This is great news for us," said Rapp's attorney, Barry Silver.

Attorneys with the Liberty Counsel, a nonprofit representing Jews for Jesus, were "strongly" considering appealing to the Florida Supreme Court, chief counsel Erik Stanley said.

"We are considering our options about the remaining claims that the court has let stand," Stanley said.

Anonymous said...

Why can't you stop your bitter merciless persecution of us Jews for Jesus who follow David Brickner in proclaiming Y'shua.
We do all we can to get the word out, we get our numbers and figures, you don't.

Anonymous said...

You ex-jfj cult are pathetic and so are your attempts at mocking us.
We do not follow David blindly in getting "numbers and figures." We follow David as he follows in the apostolic tradition of proclaiming the gospel.

When we are fortunate enough to be allowed by God to pray with someone to receive Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior, we are moved to share this wonderful news with other Christians who will rejoice with us.

Sometimes people we pray with have the gospel plucked away and they become ashamed. But we are not ashamed of the gospel for it is the power of God for salvation to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

The stories of salvation we do publish also serve to give others permission to consider what Messiah Jesus has done for them as well. Bruce Rapp is not a liar and we shared in his excitement when he had the opportunity to welcome his step-mother into the kingdom. If any mistake was made, it was his step-mother's in assuming she had confidentiality.

If someone wants confidentiality, nothing is stopping them from praying privately or with a local pastor. We are a public ministry and we are not bound to remain silent. We never identify people who are considering the claims of Messiah, but once such a decision is made, this is a matter for rejoicing.

One sign of discipleship is sharing what God has done through Christ. There ought to be an irrestible urge to share our salvation with others. Sometimes people need help to make the good news of their salvation public, and most people are quite grateful that we helped them overcome obstacles put in their path by the Enemy.

Our battle is not with Mrs. Rapp, but with forces not seen at work to promote darkness. Apologizing to Jackie Mason, an unsaved Jew, was expedient in the cause of Shalom Yisrael. But apologizing to Mrs. Rapp is a different matter altogether. She made a decision to pray with her step-son. If she wants to renounce her faith, that is her right. But denying the truth of what she did and calling her step-son and us liars is a totally different matter. We would never sue Mrs. Rapp, and are saddened that she persists in denying the truth. We are confident that the courts will side with us and that Mrs. Rapp's decision was not a private matter at all. What about you members of the ex-cult? Have you renounced your faith too?

Anonymous said...

Kid, you must still be high on the idea of being Jesus' little marine, so engaging you is kind of a waste of time.

However, I thought I'd address this:

What about you members of the ex-cult? Have you renounced your faith too?

You would like to hope that, wouldn't you? Speaking for myself, I have not renounced Christ. And further, we support missionaries including a mission to the Jewish people.

Jews for Jesus isn't worthy of one dime of support due to their un Christian methods of spreading the Gospel. (see Phil 1:17 for an example)

Judging from your barely-veiled hostility, I can see that your organization hasn't changed one bit.

I would advise you to check with your branch leader or Brickner and see if you're allowed to represent JfJ on this blog. Frankly, you're embarassing the Ministry.

Anonymous said...

To all of you who are seeking to besmirch the good name of God's anointed ministry led by David Brickner... please be aware that we have sued with success those who slandered and libelled us before on these kind of forums and we will have no hesitation to do so again, consider yourself to be warned.
Jews for Jesus, Hineni Ministries, Haight Street, San Francisco.

Anonymous said...

consider yourself to be warned.

An anonymous blog comment threat? Is this was passes for an attorney's letter these days?

Heh! Please tell me that this is one of my fellow xJfJ cultists funnin' me.

Anonymous said...

Jews for Ahmadinejad

The Jerusalem Post
Alan Dershowitz

By this time, everyone knows that Jews for Jesus are not really Jews. They are Christians using the cover of their Jewish origin to fool people into coming to their proselytizing services. But many people still think that the seven bearded enemies of Israel - members of an extreme cult called Neturei Karta - who accepted an invitation from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to come to Iran's Holocaust denial festival, are also real Jews.

Still others believe that supporters of Hizbullah and Holocaust minimizers like Norman Finkelstein - who uses his Jewish birth to cover for his anti-Semitism - are real Jews. Nothing could be further from the truth, and I now propose a new vocabulary for describing these imposters. From now on, the Neturei Karta should be known as Jews for Ahmadinejad, and Norman Finkelstein and his ilk should be known now as Jews for Hizbullah.

The Neturei Karta describe themselves as part of the "Orthodox Jews United Against Zionism." In reality, they are a tiny sect that is unwilling to recognize Israel's right to exist as a secular state. According to the Neturei Karta, Jews may not reoccupy Jerusalem until the Messiah arrives and God explicitly allows the establishment of a Jewish nation grounded in halacha, or Jewish religious law.

The Neturei Karta are so incensed by a secular Israel that their principal mission is to align themselves with people and organizations such as Yasser Arafat, Hizbullah, and Ahmadinejad in order to do whatever they can to help eliminate Israel. They number no more than a few thousand people.

Noam Chomsky probably deserves a category all his own. In light of his having written an introduction to a book by Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson - who also spoke at the Iranian hate-fest - Chomsky should now be known as a Jew for Holocaust Deniers. Chomsky has claimed that he was only defending Faurisson's freedom of speech, but that defense rings hollow.

In the first place, Chomsky is not remotely a civil libertarian. Civil libertarians defend everyone's freedom of speech and conscience, whether they agree with the content of that speech or not. Chomsky, on the other hand, defends only those with whom he agrees.

Second, Chomsky did, in fact, defend the substance of Faurisson's Holocaust denial. He called Faurisson as "a sort of relatively apolitical liberal," praised his "extensive historical research," and characterized his assertions about the Holocaust as historical "findings." He also said that he did not see any "hint of anti-Semitic implications" in Faurisson's claim that the so-called Holocaust was a fraud perpetrated by the Jewish people.

Finkelstein's wholehearted hatred of Jews and support for Hizbullah is well documented and easily accessible. He is a denouncer of all Holocaust victims -calling survivors "frauds" and "hucksters" - while appropriating Nazi language himself when he characterizes American Jews as "parasites." He wears his vileness on his sleeve. For a quick overview of his positions, please see a chapter of my book The Case for Peace.

Just like consumers of food and tobacco products must be warned by labels, so too, consumers of propaganda should be warned by appropriate labeling. And just as a person can renounce his citizenship by deed or word, so too can a person renounce his ethnicity in the same manner. I hope my labeling of anti-Semites of Jewish heritage will put to rest any misconceptions that these fringe hate-mongers are representative of or speak for anyone but themselves.

Simon Ben David said...

Well said, why should we be Jews for
(an after 20 centuries of gentile syncretism and interpretation of)

Abraham said...

Hahahah - Mr Mason was very kind not to sue - surely - JFJ would have sued Mr Mason if he did anything wrong to them - JFJ is sue happy. it seems that JFJ needs to learn how to turn the other cheek

Abraham said...

If JFJ has a chance to sue Mr Mason - they would have - too bad Mr Mason did not sue JFJ and give them a taste of their own Chutzpah and money hungry ways