Probably the most alienating thought for a Jew involved in Christian-Jewish dialogue, is the Christian understanding of divinity as interchangeable with deity. Jewish understanding of divinity conjures images of angels or beings emanating from God and not God Himself, although these divine beings may have attributes of deity bestowed upon them. This is made very clear by the vision Daniel had, (Daniel 7:13–14) where “one like a son of man” or as translated by the Jewish Publications Society’s (JPS) Tannach, “One like a human being” is brought unto the Ancient of Days and, then given dominion, glory and governing authority over all nations.” The Chachamim (sages) explains that this, “One like a human being,” is no other than a divine figure, the full representative of mankind and the Mashiach. In contrast, the difference in theological perception becomes evident even when one scans the lyrics of Christian songs/hymns. A good example is a popular song with lyrics taken from Daniel 7:13. In this song the Messiah is referred to as “The Ancient of Days” this is not a “forcing of the text” to fit, but rather gross misinterpretation or dogma being read back into the text. (Refer to the paper on “Hermeneutical Inconsistencies.“) Contrary to Judaism, in the Christian/Protestant world, as well as within Catholicism, divinity is normally ascribed to the Messiah with a capital D in order to emphasize their “high Christology” which equates divinity with deity. A correct rendering of this is that divinity is always derived from deity.  Shaliach (apostle) Shaul (Paul) makes this abundantly clear with a very simple statement; “And it is all from God, who through the Messiah has reconciled us to Himself and has given us the work of that reconciliation. Which is, that God in the Messiah, was reconciling mankind to himself.” II Corinthians 5:18 -19a. This thought is affirmed by modern day, orthodox rabbis, which we will briefly cover in the next paragraph

Is Messiah “divine” like the Mallachim (Angels), or does he have higher status?

The opening chapter of the Book to the Hebrews, the writer (whom we assume to be Shaul of Tarsus) deals with the fact that Yeshua was not just another divine messenger/angel from God, but that he shared his existence from of old, the beginning of time.  He is given “Son-ship,” unlike the angels who are messengers of The Most High.

       This is in line and a constant in Jewish Mysticism where this ”Son” is referred to as Adam Kadmon, or in Aramaic text the Memra or “Word” of God. (For more on this subject see the paper “Messianic Writings and Jewish Mysticism) This is not a strange thought, but common to Orthodox Jewish thinking; a treatise on the WebPages of Chabad.org states;

“Mashiach and the Messianic age is the ultimate end for the world, preconceived from the very beginning, for which the world was created. Mashiach, therefore, is one of the things that precede the creation. This refers, however, to the principal and soul of Mashiach. On the actual level of the physical world's reality, Mashiach is a human being.” (Chabad.org: The Personality of Mashiach) Italics mine for emphasis.

Shaliach Kepha, (the apostle Peter) affirms this with; “God knew him (Messiah) before the founding of the universe, but revealed him in the acharit-hayamim (the latter days) for your sakes. Through him you trust in God who raised him form the dead and gave him honor, so that your trust and hope are in God.” 1st Kepha 1:20 – 21 (bold & Italics mine for emphasis.)  True to the Hebrew scriptures, the focus and causative, is always HaShem (God) who appoints and anoints the chosen one.  His pre-existence, is affirmed in a number of places in the book of Enoch, and also by the Chachamim, in Pes. Rab. p. 152b; “You find that at the beginning of the creation of the world, King Messiah was born [and] that he emerged in the thought [of God] even before the world was created.”

This same treatise continues under the heading, The Character and Qualities of Mashiach, and states, quoting from the prophet Isaiah;

“The Spirit of God will rest upon him (Messiah), a spirit of wisdom, and understanding, a spirit of counsel and might, a spirit of knowledge and fear of God. He shall be inspired with fear of God, and he shall not judge with the sight of his eyes nor decide according to the hearing of his ears. He shall judge the poor with righteousness and decide with equity for the humble of the earth; he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth and slay the wicked with the breath of his lips. Righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faith the girdle of his reins.” Isaiah 11:2–5.

“Through his knowledge my servant shall justify the righteous to the many.”  Isaiah 53:10.

It continues to explain, quoting from Isaiah 52:13, that this “servant of G-d” will be wiser than King Solomon, more exalted than Moses, and greater than all the prophets. His stature and honor shall exceed all the kings before him. He will be so caring for Israel, that he will suffer all kinds of agonies to assure that not a single Jew of all times will be lost. They further state, “Mashiach will reveal altogether new insights, making manifest the hidden mysteries of the Torah, to the point that all the Torah learned in the present world, will be vain compared to the Torah of Mashiach. With this in mind the “Sermon on the Mountain” sayings of Yeshua, takes on new significance when he elevates Torah understanding to a deeper level and higher obedience. Mattityahu, (Mathew) 5:27 – 48.

The above Orthodox explanation of the character and qualities of the Mashiach affirms the unique nature of this man both as a mortal but also as one uniquely anointed with power and might as the divine perfection of what Israel, the Jewish people, should represent as God‘s representatives on earth.

       The famous and well respected scholar, Abba Eban also affirms the uniqueness of the messianic figure depicted in Isaiah 9:5 – 6, when it discusses the characteristics of a future ruler over Israel as; “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father and Prince of peace.” Eban affirms that these are titles of deity and these are indeed all bestowed upon this individual. Judaism does not have difficulty in ascribing divine titles or worship to individuals as is abundantly clear throughout the Hebrew Scriptures. The title Mighty G-d or in Hebrew El Gibbor, in some translations is rendered as Valiant Warrior, which is an acceptable title for the Anointed who does war against the nations on behalf of HaShem as prophesied by the prophet, Zacharyah, when in the end of days, the nations gather against Israel, and at that time HaShem intervenes, sends Messiah to fight for Israel as he fought in the days of old. Zacharyah14: 3-4. The next title, the Eternal Father, however creates more difficulty as “Father,” has always been attributed to only one, and that is HaShem. The Messianic writings cast better light on this title, as Yeshua, whom we acknowledge as the promised Messiah of Israel, becomes the “eternal father” who brings, or perpetually births children for HaShem. This is understood to be so, as traditionally in the same sense, Avraham and Sarah birthed new children to HaShem, through the converts that they made. I believe a lack of understanding of Jewish mysticism, and the Christian aversion and misunderstanding of oral transmission of the Zohar and other mystical writings, contributes greatly to Christian exegetes misinterpretation of the Messianic Writings, of Yehochanan, (John) and also the book Revelation. Jewish Mysticism is an intrinsic part of Jewish tradition and essential to our understanding of scripture and in particular the New Testament writers. (Refer to the paper; “The Jewish Mystical Expressions of the Messianic Writers.”)

 

What about the Worship Ascribed to Yeshua in the Messianic Writings’ especially in the book of Revelation, does it confirm the Deity of the Messiah?

Certainly not. If one follows this sort of thinking the deduction should be that all the Hebrew Kings and Prophets were worshipped, therefore it would prove their deity. However, the Hebrew Scriptures make it very clear, that we are not to bow to any created thing.

       The Hebrew root and word commonly used for bow or worship, is Shachah which could be also be translated as prostrate. In Sh’mot (Genesis) 20:5, we are given the clear command not to bow down Shachah/prostrate ourselves to any image of any created thing in heaven or on earth. In Devarim 5:9 at the reiteration of the Decalogue, the Ten Living Words, or Ten Commandments, we are again reminded against idol worship, “you shall not bow down yourself to them or serve them.” In Chayah Sarah, Genesis 24:26, Avraham’s servant, in his quest to find a suitable wife for Isaac, bows low; vayiqod ha’ish va’yishtachu L’Adonai, “The man bowed low in homage to HaShem,” in recognition of the “Divine Will,” at play, and selection of Rebecca as his young masters wife. In Daniel however, Nebuchadnezzar prostrated himself and paid homage to Daniel, ordered that a meal offering and also thanksgiving offerings be made to Daniel. Verse 7 clarifies it, by explaining that this was in acknowledgement of Daniel’s God, as the God of god’s. So, in keeping to the context, Daniel receives “recognition” only because of the God that he represents, and is not actually worshiped as a deity by Nebuchadnezzar.

       First Kings 1:23 presents a different picture when Nathan the prophet bows low to king David, literally with his face to the ground; v’yish’tachu lamelech al–apaif artzah. We see the same taking place in I Chr. 21:21, Ornan the Jebusite, throws himself down on the threshing floor, with his face to the ground in front of King David; v’yish’tachu l’David apayim ar’tzah. We see a repeat of this in the wonderful narrative of Rut, and Boaz, which contains the same imagery, Rut prostrates herself in front of Boaz with her face to the ground, and said to him, “Why are you so kind as to single me out, when I am a foreigner?” Vatipol al paneyha vatish’tachu aretzah.

       Keeping within the culture, and context of the revealed will of God to Israel, we have to ask; would David or any other Jew allow himself to be worshipped as a deity? Second, would Nathan, David or Rut succumb to the worship of a man and violate the revealed will/Torah of God? So, in maintaining a constant, with the revealed will (Torah) of God, it would be preposterous and a violation of sound Hermeneutical principals, to even consider this so.

       In the Messianic Writings, the Greek for bow or bend is Kampto the equivalent of the Hebrew kara as found in Isaiah 45:23 which is the quotation in Romans 14:10b For all of us will stand in front of God’s judgment seat; Since it is written in the Tanakh, “As I live, says HaShem, every knee will bend before me, and every tongue will publicly acknowledge God.”  We know from Scripture, to sight a few references; Psalms 2, ICorinthians.15, the book of Revelation, the Apocrypha, Talmud and also in the mystical writings, that Messiah is appointed by God as His Judge in the final day.

Shaul in Phillipians 2:10 – 11 proclaim; “That in honor of the name given Yeshua, every knee will bow, in heaven and under the earth, and every tongue will acknowledge that Yeshua the Messiah is Master to the glory of God the Father.” The law and commandment does not change in its transmission or application between the Hebrew Scriptures and Messianic Writings. If that be the case, which is indeed so in certain circles, the text ends up being violated because of an applied pre-text.  Keeping the context of the text as it appears in its historical original form is essential and so Shaul’s words to the Ephesians, affirms the Torah, when he proclaims, “For this reason, I fall on my knees before the Father, from whom every fatherland in heaven and on earth receives its name. Ephesians 3:14. The book to the Hebrews further affirms; “When God brings his Firstborn into the world, he says, ‘Let all God‘s angels worship him.‘” The fact that HaShem commands the angels to worship His Anointed One, the firstborn, which are all euphemisms for the Messiah, does not violate the principal that was established in the Tanakh. We see this also clearly in Yeshua’s statement to the High Priest in Mattityahu26:64 “You’ll see the Son of Man seated on the right-hand of the Power High” a very obvious and direct link to the “One like a Son of Man being given power, rulership and a Kingdom without end,” of Daniel 7:13&14. Euphemisms, that leads one to see him as the Anointed One (Messiah) and appointed by God. In Psalm 2:6 HaShem makes the decree; I Myself have installed My King on Tziyon, My holy mountain,” and then continues till the end of the chapter, to define Messiah, His Holy One’s power to rule judge and govern His Kingdom. This is replicated in Revelation 4 & 5. The focus of worship always remains upon HaShem, the Ancient of days. (The papers on Hermeneutical Inconsistencies and A Study of Logical Fiction, deals with some of the subject manner in-depth.)

 

So, does Yeshua measure up to Moses' prediction that Messiah will be a normal human being from amongst Israel?

Absolutely, if this was not the case, Yeshua quite correctly could not have been the Messiah. This and a number of other criteria have to be retained within the scriptural profile for a potential Messiah.

       The issue at stake again is one of keeping a constant Hermeneutic with the flow of the Hebrew text. After all, the Hebrew Scriptures declare through the mouth of Moshe, that The anointed one (Messiah) will be “One like Moshe” and one from among Israel. Deuteronomy 18:15. Therefore, if one of the fundamental beliefs in Judaism is, that the Messiah will be a normal human being, and all the earlier followers were Jews, how come we have the greater majority of modern day followers bestow deity upon him? The earlier Jewish followers of Yeshua, in the Messianic Writings concur. Shaliach (apostle) Paul, or more correctly, Shaul, explains to the gentiles in Rome 8:3b; that “God sent his own son as a human being, with a nature like our own sinful one.” It therefore stands for reason that Yeshua had the capacity, temptation and potential for sin, the same struggle with the Yetzer HaRah (evil inclination) as you, I and Moshe! This being the case Yeshua or the Messiah cannot be a deity, neither God Himself, as God cannot be tempted by sin in any way. The same fact is further emphasized in the Besorah of Mattityahu,  (Gospel or Good News of Mathew) when Yeshua is lead into the wilderness by the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit) to be tempted by HaSatan, the Evil One, for forty days and nights. Hebrews 4:15, further acknowledges Yeshua as a high priest, a Cohen Gadol, after a higher and eternal order, who suffered the same temptations and weaknesses as we do, yet without sin.

The writer draws one’s attention in Hebrews 5:7 to Yeshua’s frailty and humanity with the following statement; “During Yeshua’s time on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions, crying aloud and shedding tears, to The One who had the power to deliver him from death, and he was heard because of his godliness. (Italics, my emphasis.) There is no literal evidence, in the “New Testament” that Yeshua embraced, or that his followers bestowed deity on him at any time. The Messianic writings however affirm the Jewish expectation, the anticipation of a “greater prophet” which Moshe foretold, would come out of the house of Israel. What is apparent in the narrative about Yeshua, was his personal awareness of, and had an increasing revelation of divine origin, pre-ordination and Messianic call. Professor David Flusser, past Professor Emeritus, Hebrew University, (may he rest in peace) in his book “Jesus” deals with this very aspect in detail. Kepha (Peter) affirms this; “God knew him (foreknew him, Grk. “Proskeneo”) before the founding of the universe, but revealed him in the acharit-hayamim (latter days) for your sakes."  1st Kepha 1: 20

 

What is the main theme of the historical writings of Yeshua?

The main theme of the books called the Gospels or in Hebrew, the Besorot or glad tidings is the good news that HaShem (God) fulfills his promise to Israel through his Anointed One, and re-affirms His forgiveness of Israel’s stubbornness, should they individually or corporately repents, turn around or make T’shuvah. This is rewarded by the subsequent resurrection from the dead and ultimate restoration to Himself as Kepha reminds us; “Through him you trust in GOD, who raised him from the dead and gave him honor; so your hope will be in GOD.”  

       The contrast that Judaism has with Christian/Protestant soteriology, (the knowledge or doctrine of “salvation,”) is that Christianity is centered in “Incarnation,” the belief that God became a man, absolute deity taking on mortal flesh. The complications that arise from this is then countered with a belief that Messiah has two natures, both “Fully Man” and “Fully God.” This theory however violates all logic and at best could be described as “Logical Fiction” or “Illogical Logic.” (For more on this subject, refer to the paper entitled, “I Used to be Confused, Now I Just Don’t Know Anymore” - A Study of Logical Fiction.) What we do know however, based on historical record, are that a cataclysmic theological shift took place at the fall of the Second Temple and at close scrutiny; we find the Church, as well as Rabbinic Judaism, birthed out of the ashes of the Beit Mikdash (Temple.)  When the followers of Yeshua, along with the rest of the surviving Jews, fled Jerusalem in 70 CE, they left behind a group of non-Jewish believers, all from pagan backgrounds, who where not born or raised with Torah as the core and foundation of their faith, culture and existence. These were strangers to the customs, traditions and culture of Israel. Doctrines, and traditions, where shaped, in the void and absence of Jewish and Torah influence. The Jewish question; “Who is the Messiah” was replaced with; “Is the Messiah God?” and a new doctrinal emphasis and soteriology were established. Shaul in both Acts 2, and his letter to the Romans, emphasize that the Jewish hope of salvation was focused on the hope of resurrection;

“Men of Israel! Listen, to this! Yeshua of Natzeret was a man demonstrated to you to have been from God by the powerful works, miracles and signs that God performed through him in your presence. You yourselves know this. This man was arrested in accordance with God’s predetermined plan and foreknowledge; and through the agency of persons not bound by the Torah, you nailed up on a stake and killed him! ’But God raised him up and freed him from the suffering of death.’”  Acts 2: 22 – 24a (Bold italics mine)

Rabbi Shaul, now addressing a mix of Jews and gentiles in Rome, exhorts them to faith and again focus on the resurrection; “If you acknowledge publicly with your mouth that Yeshua is Lord (Adon – master) and trust in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be delivered.” A not so careful study of the various councils makes it quite clear that the perplexity they were dealing with, no longer had a Jewish ring to it. They sought to establish a “new” doctrine, the Doctrine of Incarnation, God becoming a man. The various scripture references that are normally quoted by well meaning and sincere Christian scholars and ministers as a defense, or proof text, are misunderstood because of the incarnation pretext, the myth of a dual natured man which is supported and influenced by nearly 2000 years of non-Jewish tradition. The divide between scripture and tradition “becoming scripture,” is extremely narrow, as we will discover when we deal with the various “I Am” texts, the “My Lord, my God” exclamation of Thomas in the “upper room” and many others that seem to support this hypothesis. For an in-depth study, refer to the paper entitled, “Hermeneutical Inconsistencies.”

 

Why was the Christian Cannon, the record of the time, life and events of Yeshua rendered as the “New Testament?”

In short the New Testament canon was named that, because of the Gentile perception that God was done with the old and brought in the New. If that was the case, nobody could ever trust God (including the Christians that assume that they have displaced Israel and the Church represents the “New “Covenant People,”) as God has proven himself to be unfaithful, and not trustworthy to the covenant sworn to Israel.

A helpful source is Christian scholar, Bart D. Ehrman’s work, a New York Bestseller, “Misquoting Jesus” - The Story behind Who Changed the Bible and Why.  (This book can be accessed through our web site‘s Amazon link.)

       Displacement theology, or also referred to as Supersessionism, is a theological construct, that does away with Israel, the Jews as God’s eternal covenant people. The nomenclature “New Testament” alone is evidence of the Church’s historical approach. It is also makes evident the deep-seated antinomianism (being against the Law) of the Church Fathers. This attitude and mind-set in theology and practice permeated the thinking of the Church Fathers that established the doctrines that govern the Catholic and Protestant world. The truth is that the Canon of the “New Testament” was formulated after the fall of the second Temple and the subsequent break with the Jewish body and pioneers of Judaism akin to some of the other sects of the day, like the Essene and Cumran community. The various counsels that established the doctrines of the church which, includes the establishment of the Canon, were all gentiles with not one Jew amongst them. These were all from a pagan background, and not raised within the Torah driven culture of Israel. Torah or more correctly the Chumash, or five books of Moses, were not foundational to their understanding of scripture and because of this, the gentiles soon developed a warped sense and understanding of Law, as opposed to Grace. This became one of the hallmarks of Christian theology and is still maintained to various extremes. The other misunderstanding is because of the reference to “new” Covenant of Prophet Yeremiyahu in the Messianic text. The assumption has always been that the “New” covenant is a “New” Testament article. We futher have Yeshua‘s explicit reference, and it is assumed that this was the time and moment of its inauguration. First, we need to understand that Yerimiyahu is referencing Moshe and the “new” Covenant that HaShem made with Israel during their sojourn in Moav, Devarim 28:69. The truth is that it is a Renewal of the original covenant at Sinai and an addition to the covenant HaShem made with Israel in Horeb. Brit Ha Chadasha has the intimation of being a “re-freshed” covenant. This is made abundantly clear in Devarim 30, when Israel is made aware of this being an additional covenant, based on T’shuvah, repentance, and on better promises; a subsequent, resultant, circumcision of the heart. Yeshua weeps, when he witnesses the stubbornness of our hearts and foresaw the trouble and agony that awaited Israel. The Renewed Covenant was open and available for anyone who was willing to repent. Yeshua fulfills the outworking of this covenant and crowns it with his mediation. This is what he proclaimed during his Pesach Seder. Nothing intrinsically new, only a fulfillment of the just demand which the Torah makes on our lives, a complete surrender to the will of God. Second, the Renewed Covenant can and will only be fully inaugurated when Messiah comes for the final redemption of Israel. (Romans 10: 1 – 5). Shaul reminds the gentile believers that God’s covenant was and is with Israel. (Romans. 11: 25 – 27). Last, the central theme of Revelation is the outworking of the end of the age, and Israel’s final redemption and restoration. Then, and only then, the Renewed Covenant will be fulfilled.

Amein