The Messiah must be descended on his father’s side from King David (see Genesis 49:10 and Isaiah 11:1). According to the Christian claim that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth, he had no father—and thus could not have possibly fulfilled the messianic requirement of being descended on his father’s side from King David!
from Why Don't Jews Believe in Jesus
SimpleToRemember.com
I believe that Deity of Moshiach is the most doctrine if not right there with the most important doctrine in Scripture! I think that many in the Messianic movement are denying the Deity of Yeshua is because they want to be accepted really bad by the Orthadox community (non believers). Now I would really want to be accepted by the Orthadox community also but are we to do that at the expense of denying the Deity of Yeshua? That's a compromise that can't be made, at least for me!
Anonymous comment from
What Our Leaders Believe: The Kinzer Edition
On the Kineti L'Tziyon blog
The "deity of Yeshua (Jesus)" issue has come up again in the Messianic blogosphere and it remains an interesting discussion. You might be thinking that "this is a no-brainer" and "of course Jesus is God", but it's not that clear cut. Let me explain.
There is a general "collision" between Messianic Judaism (MJ) and the rest of Judaism in relation to the identity and capacities of the Messiah. Of course, there's also this "conflict" between Judaism and Christianity, but Christians (for the most part) aren't trying to say that they are part of the larger Jewish community and have a direct affiliation with normative Judaism and Israel. Messianic Judaism is very much based on those propositions.
Messianic Judaism, at least in it's desire, is a "Judaism" in the same manner as the Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox branches of Judaism. In general, they have a cultural and religious view that matches the other Judaisms (and I'm being very simplistic here since their are major differences between the Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform movements, but they are still all considered "valid" Judaisms), accept the same identity markers and authorities (such as the authoritative rulings of the sages as recorded in the Talmud and other works), and strive to be internally consistent with larger Israel in all ways.
That is, except for the Messiah, and here is where we encounter dissonance. With that in mind, what do (non-Messianic) Jews believe about Jesus being God?
Who died on the cross? Was it Jesus-the-god, or was it Jesus-the-human? If it was Jesus-the-god, Jews don't believe that God can die. If it was Jesus-the-human, then all Christians have in the death of Jesus was a human death, a human sacrifice. Jews believe that God hates the very idea of human sacrifice.
from Jews believe that God hates human sacrifices
It is the hallmark of pagan, idolatrous faiths, to confuse God with human beings, either that God becomes human, or that humans become God. In Biblical history, one sees this confusion with Pharaoh, and with Haman (boo, hiss!), as well as with Antiochus, the Assyrian King against whom the Maccabbees rebelled. Furthermore, as one example, in Hosea 11:9 God tell (sic) us, "For I am God and not a man."
from Jews believe that God is God, and humans are humans
Now what about Messianic Judaism? Again, to the best of my knowledge, the vast, vast majority of individual Messianic Jews and Messianic Jewish organizations do believe that Jesus (Yeshua) was/is God.
Back in September, I wrote a blog post on the Trinity which elicited a number of interesting comments, but not the explosion of outrage I expected. Based on those responses, I believe there is room for discussion and exploration of the issue of Yeshua's deity in the Messianic community and how this diverges from mainstream Jewish thought. This matter is probably one of the few concepts in MJ that cannot rely on the Talmud or the opinions of the Jewish sages for support, since traditional Jewish authorities do not believe that Yeshua was the Messiah and do not believe he could be God.
In other words, this is just about the only point of theology where Messianic Jews must rely entirely on traditional Christian thought to define the Messiah's identity and role.
Messianic Judaism is the only "Judaism" which openly acknowledges that Jesus is the Messiah, born of a virgin, crucified dead and buried, raised on the third day, and who sits at the right hand of God the Father.
Very Christian.
All other Judaisms are still waiting for the Messiah to come (for the first time) and when he does, they believe he won't be God. Of all the issues in the Messianic movement, at least as conceived of and lived out by organizations such as the Messianic Jewish Theological Institute (MJTI), this is the one that puts Messianic Judaism squarely at odds with mainstream, normative Judaism. The barrier this creates is often downplayed in the Messianic blogsphere, but it's the only area where, when MJ says "We're a Judaism just like all other Judaisms", the most likely response from the other Judaisms will be "No, you're not. You're Christians."
The road is long and often, we travel in the dark...
89 comments:
Personally, yes I believe (purely by faith and not reason, and because of other factors), but I have never been able to get satisfactory answers to the following question:
1. How could Yeshua be a legal Davidic descendant eligible for the throne of David if he didn't have a human father who was a descendant of David. The Gospels recite his descent (primary from Joseph), but then we know that Joseph was merely an adoptive father. As far as I know, if, for example, a Cohen adopts an son who is just an "Israelite" (not a cohen), his adopted son IS NOT eligible to be a cohen by virtue of adoption.
2. Some of us freely use the term "Jesus is G-d", and yet, in the Gospels, the writers never seem to come around using that term for him directly. True, one could say that it's implied in some of the text - but why not just say it? In one instance, Yeshua is accused of making himself equal to G-d, but then he turns around and reminds the accusers that don't the scriptures (Psalm 82:6) say that "you are gods" (John 10:34)
I have many questions like that:)
Frankly, so do I. As far as my own limited understanding of the text is concerned, at best, it's ambiguous as to whether or not Yeshua is God. As far as I'm concerned, "the jury is still out" on the matter.
Some time ago, I read the book When Jesus Became God, written by Richard Rubenstein, and it brings up a lot of questions as to just when Christianity began worshiping Jesus as God. Rubenstein makes a good case for Jesus not "becoming" a deity until the time of Constantine, hundreds of years after his birth, death, resurrection, and ascension.
I'm hoping some of the Messianic folks who support Yeshua as God will show up here and present their cases and evidence and how it successfully counters the traditional Jewish viewpoint.
Shalom,
I believe in the Deity of Moshiach and yes there are hard things to understand, that's why it's such a great mystery!
But I also believe there is enough evidence to prove this.
But let me ask some questions: Is the Word/Memra if G-d the same as G-d? Is the Word of G-d of the same essence?
For example: I send my word when I speak, my word is exactly who I am as a person! But my word is subject to me. It is my mirror so to speak. My intellect/wisdom and my word is the real essence of who I am.
My 2nd question is, is the Shekhinah of G-d the same as G-d? The Shekhinah is the physical Presnce of G-d which dwelled in the mist of Israel. (The Pillar
of Cloud and the Pillar of Fire, the Fire that would descend to the Mountain or the Tabernacle).
Now I have asked this question to my Orthadox Jewish friends and they have responded that yes, the Word and the Shekhinah are of the same essence as G-d. That means that they are equal.
Let me play the other side of the argument for a moment.
Isaiah 66:1-2 says, Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. Where is the house you will build for me? Where will my resting place be? Has not my hand made all these things, and so they came into being?” declares the LORD.
While the Divine Presence inhabited the Mishkan and later Solomon's Temple and is divine, we still don't understand how it relates to God. It is God and yet, it isn't.
From both Genesis 1 and John 1 we know that God spoke the universe into being and that subsequently, the "Word became flesh and dwelt among us."
This certainly speaks of a "divine" Messiah but is Yeshua literally the same entity as God? When Yeshua prayed to God, did he pray to himself?
In Luke 22:42, Yeshua prayed to God to take "this cup" (his death) from him. If Yeshua and God (the Father) were a single, unified entity, how could the Son ask the Father to take away the cup, but it be the Father's will not to do so? It's totally crazy-making.
On the other hand, if the Messiah was of divine origin, but still human and not "God incarnate", it brings much more power to his sufferings, both during his temptation by the Adversary and in the crucifixion. It also means that when Yeshua said, "I and the Father are One" (John 10:30), he was saying "one in purpose" as opposed to a fused or corporate identity.
I don't have all the answers and, as I said before, scripture seems ambiguous on Yeshua's exact identity, so I think it's very difficult to conclude that he is or isn't literally God based on the Bible. But this also makes it dicey to pray to and to worship Yeshua rather than God, particularly from a Jewish point of view.
A very worthy conversation. Thanks for your input.
James,
What you said is very true those are some hard questions to answer and i don't have all the answers either... But yea Yeshua is worshipped and prayed to, acts that should only be to G-d!
But what do we do with statements like when Yeshua says He came from heaven? Or He was revealed in the Flesh? What other kind of being is there? If you were not flesh at first then what? "The Word became Flesh and tabernacled among us". What about when the disciples called Yeshua G-d (there are many examples).
The leaders understood what He was saying for they tried to kill Him every single time and with good reason... because a person should be stoned/killed for such statements, except for the very rare occassion (very rare) when you are G-d lol :). What about when they were going to kill Him and He would just disappear?
He forgave sin - ("who can forgive sins but G-d?").
The most important evidences of Moshiach Deity are the prophecies which are spoken in the Tanakh as being fulfilled by Adonai Himself but then we see Yeshua fulfilling them.
"If you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins... I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM." (Jn 8:24, 58, cf. Ex 3:14)
"I and My Father are One." Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him... saying, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself G-d." (Jn 10:30-33)
"He who has seen Me has seen the Father... Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?" (Jn 14:9-10). (doesn't this sound crazy if He isn't G-d?)
"And Thomas answered and said to Him, 'My Lord and my G-d.'" (Jn 20:28)
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with G-d, and the Word was G-d." (Jn 1:1)
"Let this mind be in you which was also in Yeshua HaMashiach, who, being in the form of G-d, did not consider it robbery to be equal with G-d." (Phil 2:5-6)
"He is the Image of the invisible G-d, the firstborn over all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth…All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist." (Col. 1:15-17)
"For in [Moshiach] dwells all the fullness of the G-dhead bodily." (Col. 2:9)
"G-d was manifested in the flesh." (1 Tim 3:16)
These are just some direct claims of His Deity.
"Woe is me…for my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts." And [G-d] said, ‘Go, and tell this people: …make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and return and be healed." (Isa. 6:5,10)
"But although [Yeshua] had done so many signs before them…they could not believe, because Isaiah said: ‘He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, lest they should see with their eyes, lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, so that I should heal them." These things Isaiah said when he saw His [Yeshua’] Glory and spoke of Him [of Yeshua]." (John 12:37-41)
"Laying the foundations of the earth"
"Of old You [G-d] laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands…" (Ps. 102:25-28)
"But of the Son He says, “Your throne, O G-d, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Your Kingdom..You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore G-d, Your G-d, has anointed You with the oil of gladness beyond Your companions.”You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands…" (Heb. 1:8,10)
"The good Shepherd"
"The Lord is my Shepherd." (Ps. 23:1)
"I Am the good Shepard". (John 10:11)
"The Stone of stumbling"
"The Lord/YHVH of hosts…will be a Stone of stumbling and a Rock of offense." (Isa. 8:13-14)
"Yeshua is "the Stone of stumbling and a Rock of offense." (1 Pet. 2:8)
"Infants praising G-d"
"Out of the mouth of babes and infants You [G-d] have ordained strength." (Ps. 8:2)
Yeshua applies this verse to Himself. (Matt. 21:16) "
and they said to Him, “Do you hear what these are saying?” And Yeshua said to them, “Yes; have you never read, “‘Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies You have prepared praise’?”
Anonymous... what is troubling is that for every point you gave in SUPPORT of Jesus being G-d, one can find points that could be used as proofs that he's not.
So, the conclusion that many critics draw from this is that NT is contradicting itself and unreliable.
A small example:
Jesus said:
"These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me." John 14:24
Why are they not "my words"? Is he not G-d?
I think that things are a bit more complex than people make it out to be. Sometimes I prefer not to think about these things too hard:) As James said "It's totally crazy-making."
I'm not going to try and refute every point you make, my anonymous friend, but as Gene points out, for each argument you can find for the deity of Yeshua, there are a lot of points that argue against it as well. I did want to point something out, though:
“See, I am sending an angel ahead of you to guard you along the way and to bring you to the place I have prepared. Pay attention to him and listen to what he says. Do not rebel against him; he will not forgive your willful sin, since my Name is in him. -Exodus 23:20-21
Whoever heard of an angel forgiving sins? I thought only God could do that. Also, what does it mean, "my Name is in him"? It almost sounds like God can delegate parts of His authority to others, including angels and perhaps, including the Messiah. If so, that would explain a good many things.
I'm not specifically trying to prove that the Messiah can't be God, only that the proofs for or against aren't conclusive. The other main point of the blog post was to illustrate a point of dissonance between Messianic Judaism and mainstream Judaism...the disagreement over whether or not the Messiah must be God.
I went through this whole bit some time back, there are plenty of passages where Yeshua is worshiped, by his disciples, by the Magi and some people. Yeshua never seems to have opposed it (obviously not when the Magi saw Him). Conversely angels tell men not to worship them...So the whole "we shouldn't worship Yeshua bit is touchy, but not unbiblical. Sometimes I wonder what Hebrew roots people think the Messiah is/supposed to be, He's far more than a guy.
James, never noticed Exodus 23:20-21 regarding "forgiving of sin" by an agent (angel) acting on behalf of G-d. Obviously, even though the angel is authorized to bestow or withhold forgiveness, he's merely acting on behalf of G-d (because my Name is in him). Wow, awesome point.
I am sure people already claimed somewhere that the "angel" must have been preincarnate Jesus.
"I went through this whole bit some time back, there are plenty of passages where Yeshua is worshiped, by his disciples, by the Magi and some people. "
benicho, last time I looked the greek words translated as "worship" in English translation are actually "bowed down", not worship in the sense you go to church and worship. Well, Yeshua is the King of Israel, and Kings and high officials are routinely bowed down too, even with full prostration!
Small example:
"Then Potiphar summoned Joseph. The youth prostrated himself before this chief of the eunuchs, for he was third in rank of the officers of Pharaoh. "
Did Joseph worship Potiphar?
Gene, if your point about "worship" = "bowed down to" as in bowing in the presence of a King, then it adds a completely different flavor to all of the "worship" Yeshua was offered. The Messiah is King and by virtue of that fact, is entitled to be honored and bowed to.
I am sure people already claimed somewhere that the "angel" must have been preincarnate Jesus.
I've heard from various folks over the years that this angel or that angel was a "pre-incarnate Yeshua". If I accepted all of those opinions, I'd almost have to believe there are no other angels besides the pre-incarnate Yeshua. Why can't an angel be an angel and why can't God put His Name in an angel, and thus delegate some of this authority to the angelic being?
If we extend the inference to the Messiah, then could he have some of God's delegated authority but still not be God?
"Why can't an angel be an angel and why can't God put His Name in an angel, and thus delegate some of this authority to the angelic being?"
Exactly. I think that G-d has fill a particular vessel with Himself to the point that the vessel transmits the authority and even the very presence of G-d. The way G-d's presence fills the Temple and gives honor to it, yet the Temple by itself does nothing. Jesus called himself a Temple, and said that he does nothing apart from G-d (Father). Hmm...
I hear ya Gene, there are translations that include both, particularly Matthew 2:11. They bow down AND worship. I suppose "worship" is something that means something different to everyone else. One thing that many mainstream Christians try to pin me with is whether or not I believe "Jesus is G-d". I get this question all the time "so you're Messianic? do you believe Jesus is G-d????". Of course this is an attempt to force you one way or another. My answer is always the same, which is that I believe Yeshua is the Messiah. This typically gets little response because I really don't believe many Christians truly know what the title Messiah really means.
Very complex topic indeed. I believe that in regards to Yeshua the Messiah "G-d was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him..." (Colossians 1:19) To me this conjures up an image of a Temple of G-d and G-d dwelling therein among men. What that means exactly, I, a mere ant, have no clue. And that's OK.
Interesting comparison between Yeshua and the Temple, Gene. How about this?
In John 10:19-21, we see that the Temple Yeshua talks about rebuilding in three days is his body.
In Matthew 12:6, Yeshua says "something greater than the Temple is here", which I take to mean the Messiah himself.
Now here's the interesting part:
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own.. -1 Corinthians 6:19
I'm not suggesting a direct transfer of the concept of Yeshua as a "Temple" to the rest of us, but there seems to be a connection in relation to possessing the Holy Spirit. Paul also says that, in thus being a Temple, we don't belong to ourselves anymore since, we were "bought at a price".
I'm probably taking the symbolism too far, but it's as if God delegated or transferred something of Himself to the Messiah and, when we become disciples of the Messiah, something is transferred to us. Yeshua said that he could only do what he saw the Father doing, indicating that, while he had free will, his devotion to God made God's priorities the Messiah's priorities. I believe some of that responsibility is transferred to us when we become disciples.
No, we don't become divine in the sense that Yeshua had a divine appointment as Messiah, but there's definitely a relationship. That relationship may be why the disciples could perform supernatural miracles, just as the Prophets of old could.
While the Messiah has a special, unique, and divine appointment that no one can assume or share, we, his disciples, are a unique group of people upon the earth (though citizens of the kingdom) due to our pledge of fealty to the King. Also, don't forget the following:
"All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me" from Matthew 28:18. Yeshua didn't say the authority was his, but that it was given to him (presumably by the Father).
Gene, James,
Well if you can refute the points of Yeshua being Divine than why dont you?? And like I said Yeshua - The Word submits to The Father...The Word/Words are the Father's Word's! But The Word is still of the same essence!
James, that Messenger in exodus in my opinion is Moshiach. He is no regular Messenger that's for sure, there is no other like Him (The Messenger of Adonai). Judaism also acknowges this in various sources which I don't have room to quote.
"The Ten Commandments did not come to Israel in the simple way of writings. And the Angel who gave them… he is the redeeming Angel, and it is he of whom it is written 'and the Angel of G-d went.' This Angel is G-d, and it is He who announces the commandments to Israel, as it is written: "and G-d said all these things." (Rabbi Meir Bei Gabai, sefer Avodat Kodesh)
"'And the Angel of G-d went' this Angel is the house of judgment of the Holy One, blessed be He… this Angel is the Shekhinah and is called ‘the Angel prince of the world’ because the guidance of the world is carried out by Him. (Rabbi Menahem of Rekanati, "BiShlach" portion, Ex 14:19) (Note: angel in Hebrew is messenger!)
The prophet Malachi also mentions the Angel of the Lord. Rabbi David Kimchi, commenting on this passage, tells us that this Messenger/Angel is "the Lord" and "the Messiah-King."
"Behold, I send My messenger [מלאך - angel], and he will prepare the way before Me. And the Lord/YHVH, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple, even the Messenger [angel] of the covenant, in whom you delight… (Mal 3:1)
(Note: the first messenger is John the baptist and the second Messenger is YHVH)
Also guys - James and Gene you have not answered my question:
Is the Word of G-d or the Shekhinah the same as G-d, of the same Essence?
Like I said before, I'm not necessarily trying to disprove the deity of the Messiah, I'm just trying to point out that there's room for discussion. It's not a "slam dunk".
I didn't answer your question before because I don't understand it. What do you mean by "same essence"?
Speaking of the angels and Yeshua and all these unknown things, we can't forget Jacob's ladder and John 1:51.
"the heavens opened and the angels of God ascending up and coming down on the son of man"
James,
Ok i have asked this question to many of my Orthadox Jewish friends and they have answered yes!
Is The Word of G-d and the Shekhinah the same as G-d? Are They equal/same?
My words are the person I really am, they are me. I hope this helps.
Benicho,
That Passage is mysterious, I've been studying it for a while.
Makes more sense when Yeshua says the only way to heaven is through Him, hmmm.
You should read these posts:
http://mjti.blogs.com/midrash/2010/12/ladders-part-2-yeshua-jacobs-ladder-and-me.html
benicho, what you're saying is that Yeshua is a conduit or a gateway to God. It would make both Jacob's dream and Yeshua's words metaphorical and does fit, "no one comes to the Father except through me". Does being a conduit to God equal being God?
Anonymous (do you have a name?), your Orthodox Jewish friends tell you that the Divine Presence and the Word of God are the same as God Himself (not that we understand God). Do they follow the logic that the Messiah is the Word of God and therefore God?
Also, I previously asked, what an "essence" is, as in "the Divine Presence, the Word, and God being the same essence"? Even if we stick to the basic dictionary definition, it still is rather abstract when applied to God. What is God's "essential substance or ingredient"?
Hey James,
This is Rey. What mean about the same essence is this, in Scripture when The Word or The Shekhinah appear its synonymous with G-d. His Word and His Presence are the same as G-d! I'm not saying there is no ingredient to G-d because there isn't. Also I did not ask them (my friends) if they taught if Messiah was the Word or the Shekhinah...I asked them what I told you.
Hi Rey,
One of the things I'd suggest (and I'm probably going to get in trouble for this) is that traditional Christianity and traditional Judaism may not be entirely correct about the nature and character of the Messiah.
For the majority of the existence of Christianity, the church has believed that the Messiah is God. End of story. Historical Judaism takes an opposite stance and says that the Messiah can't be God. Each theology has their reasons for believing as they do, but the thing is, we never really question our assumptions. These beliefs have been handed down to us for a long time and, because the nature of the Messiah is at the core of particularly Christian belief, to question the deity of Jesus is just about the worst thing you could do.
So no one does it.
If we agree that God is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, we have to say that God is not One (yes, I've heard about the "Echad" viewpoint, but that doesn't fly from a Jewish point of view). If God the Father (whatever that may mean on a functional level), the Divine Presence, and the Word of God are "constructed" of the same "essence", does that mean they are the same?
Could it mean that "the essence" was somehow "delegated" to the divinely created but bodily human Messiah so that he possessed the spirital "fabric" of God without being an identical being?
A child possesses his or her parent's DNA, so you could say that the child shares the "essence" of the parent. But of course, that doesn't make the child a clone of the parent and the child is a unique individual with many capacities that set the child apart from the parents.
I know a human Yeshua had to possess his mother's DNA, but what did he do for the father's DNA? What did God provide Yeshua for DNA and what other essence of God did Yeshua possess that was unique to Yeshua?
There's no way to directly answer these questions, but I believe that it is at least possible for Yeshua to be all that he was (and is) and not actually be God.
For that matter, I quoted earlier how God said people couldn't possibly provide a house for Him to occupy since the earth is His "footstool". Nevertheless, the Divine Presence occupied the Mishkan and Solomon's Temple. How can we resolve this conflict...or can we? Maybe it's the same conflict as God the Father being and yet not being the Messiah.
It's getting pretty metaphysical in here.
To answer your question as plainly as I can James—no, I do not believe Yeshua literally is G-d the father. His divine being is probably beyond my understanding, but he is not simply a man. He will sit at the right hand of G-d, He was G-d's voice on earth, He was Torah, etc. Add all of these things up and you get substantial evidence that Yeshua was indeed divine yet separate from the Father. Did Yeshua pray to Himself on the Mount of Olives? C'mon, of course He didn't, He referred to Him as The Father.
Completely off topic but have any of you seen the video of the bright light over the top of the Dome in Jerusalem taken on Jan. 28? I'd take a look at it...and all the angles that were caught of it.
Here are three of the captures:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Vw5vB7Ppfw&feature=player_embedded
Here's the American perspective:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY2FFEufsuY&feature=player_embedded
I'd seriously love to hear your opinions or thoughts. I'm certainly no UFO enthusiast or anything but these videos have me scratching my head.
James said: Some time ago, I read the book When Jesus Became God, written by Richard Rubenstein, and it brings up a lot of questions as to just when Christianity began worshiping Jesus as God. Rubenstein makes a good case for Jesus not "becoming" a deity until the time of Constantine, hundreds of years after his birth, death, resurrection, and ascension.
This sounds like pretty bad scholarship. The idea of "not becoming a deity until the time of Constantine" is a misunderstanding of the background of the Arian controversy and various strains of it. But cutting through that there is plenty of earlier evidence anyway. I recommend you read of the recent books by Larry Hurtado (one is a massive tome,the other a little shorter).
I can't do it justice in a drive by blog post.
Todd V
no, I do not believe Yeshua literally is G-d the father. His divine being is probably beyond my understanding, but he is not simply a man. He will sit at the right hand of G-d, He was G-d's voice on earth, He was Torah, etc. Add all of these things up and you get substantial evidence that Yeshua was indeed divine yet separate from the Father.
I can live with that.
As far as the UFO videos, they're pretty spectacular and, since they were videoed by two unrelated sources, I can't say the video was doctored. As far as what it is, I have no idea.
I once saw what I thought was a UFO over Lake Mead, Nevada (near Las Vegas) in the early 1970s. However, in my case, there were a lot of "unannounced" miltary aircraft tests that went on around there, so I probably wasn't looking at an alien spacecraft or anything supernatural.
Todd, I found a ten minute video on YouTube of Hurtado giving a summary on the subject and his belief that Jesus was seen as God from the very beginning:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLeXpSCLrD8
It's probably a very brief summary of Hurtado's book How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God?
It's only 245 pages long, so hardly a huge tome.
Well...good news..I forgot that Larry Hurtado actually has a blog (unusual for an academic). And has published an essay that summarizes work in this area over the past 25 years. Hopefully would motivate you to read further
http://larryhurtado.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/early-devotion-to-jesus2.pdf
Todd V
The larger book is about 500 pages, I believe it is called "Lord Jesus Christ." Mentioned in the linked essay i just posted. Took me a long time to get through it.
Todd V
We can sit here and debate when Yeshua did or didn't become G-d, but there's no evidence for anyone literally calling the Messiah "G-d", Son of Man, Son of the Living G-d and many other names, but never is the Messiah called G-d. Not to mention that He never referred to Himself as G-d, and never asked anyone to pray to Him.
What about Acts 20:28?
"...to shepherd the Church of God Which He purchased with His own blood."
"What about Acts 20:28?"
Dan, see footnotes from
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+20%3A28&version=NIV
Be shepherds of the church of God,[a] which he bought with his own blood.[b]
Footnotes:
1. Acts 20:28 Many manuscripts of the Lord
2. Acts 20:28 Or with the blood of his own Son.
Just saying... btw, lest you just to conclusions and start spreading stuff about me, I do believe that Messiah IS divine (being conceived of the Holy Spirit), I just do not understand exactly how that works - I'm not sure you do either.
James,
I understand what your saying, and I agree this subject of the Being of Messiah is very complex, very!
But have you thought about some Yeshua's statements like
" I came down from Heaven" ? How can this be? This is amazing, no other human could say such a thing!
John 3:13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the One who came from heaven--the Son of Man.
John 6:42 They said, "Is this not Yeshua, the Son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can He now say, 'I came down from heaven'?"
“Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God, believe also in Me. - John.14:1
"“Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God, believe also in Me. - John.14:1"
John 14:1 can actually be used to argue AGAINST deity of Yeshua, since he's making a distinction between himself and G-d, and because Moses was also to be believed, but of course Moses wasn't "G-d":
John 5:46
"If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me."
Gene,
Gene do you think Moshe could have said this?
“If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him.”
Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Yeshua said to him, “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? - John 14:7-9
"Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness:
G-d was manifested in the Flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory. - 1.Tim.3:16
From Acts 1:9-12
"...He was lifted up while they were looking on, and a cloud received Him out of their sight... two men in white clothing stood beside them. They also said, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven." Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, a Sabbath day's journey away."
and Matthew 25:31 (similar 16:27)
(Yeshua speaking) "But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne."
... and from Zechariah 14:3-5
"Then the LORD will go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fights on a day of battle. In that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which is in front of Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives will be split in its middle from east to west by a very large valley... Then the LORD, my God, will come, and all the holy ones with Him!"
Sounds like the LORD who is Zechariah's G-d, is this same Yeshua...
I've heard about the Angel of the LORD, who bears the NAME being possibly the pre-incarnate Yeshua. I can accept that thought, but won't bet the farm on it. I also agree with Gene that Yeshua is Divine, but is not the Father.
James, interesting blog. You seem like a hugely real and open-minded person.
Perhaps you would be interested to see why the Tora's system of sacrifice and atonement totally debunks the apparent need for a man/god sacrifice for universal sins.
Give it a read, and I'd love to hear your comments.
In 2 Kings 2, the Prophet Elijah is taken up bodily into heaven by a whirlwind, so Yeshua isn't the only one to ascend into heaven. In 2 Corinthians 12:2, Paul says "I know a man of Christ who was snatched away into third heaven..." and it's largely believed that Paul was talking about himself (of course, he came back).
If Yeshua was "begot by the Holy Spirit", that is, if the Spirit of God by some process we don't understand, caused Mary (Miriam) to become pregnant with Yeshua, then I think Yeshua can say he came down from heaven, in as much as what God contributed to Mary's pregnancy came from heaven.
I can't answer all these questions, at least right now (I just got up and I have a date with the gym soon), but it's good to see the debate continuing.
Aaron, I'll have a look at what you posted when I get a chance. Thanks for your input. It also looks like I'll have to put Larry Hurtado on my reading list.
"Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness:
G-d was manifested in the Flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory. - 1.Tim.3:16"
Anonymous... most translations (including NIV) say "HE was manifested in the flesh", not "G-d". Why do you think that is? (incidentally, it is the "authorized" King James version that may have been the first to insert G-d in place of He - I guess they thought this couldn't hurt:)
... most translations (including NIV) say "HE was manifested in the flesh", not "G-d". Why do you think that is?
I looked it up. Nine translations say either "he" was manifested or "Christ" was manifested. However, the KVJ, AKJV, Darby Bible Translation, Webster's Bible Translation, World English Bible, and Young's Literal Translation all say "God". Clearly, there is ambiguity about exactly who is being manifested in the flesh here.
Anyone able to take a look at the Greek and render a learned opinion here (I wonder what Derek is doing this morning...bet he reads ancient Greek)?
Looked it up in Greek - nope, no word "G-d" there. (I can read Greek text a bit as it's related to Cyrillic).
Thanks, Gene. In the Greek, does it say "he" or "Christ" or is the object implied (which sometimes happens and allows interpreters to "interpret" what *could* be inserted)?
Aaron, I read your blog and commented on it. Very interesting points.
I'm continuing to read The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Talmud and author Rabbi Aaron Parry makes some good points that seem relevant to our current conversation:
Knowing how to "read" a verse of scripture is an art. What is true about the Talmud concealing more than it reveals applies to scripture as well. Plus, more often than not, the literal translations found in versions of the Bible are erroneous or misleading.
The sages believed that one of the main goals of studying the Talmud was finding harmony between the written and oral traditions through discovering where all the laws were alluded to in scripture.
In my wife's studies with the local Chabad Rabbi, she learned that one must read the Torah through the eyes of tradition in order to understand what's actually being said. I've come to accept that you can't really understand how to "operationalize" the Torah mitzvot without consulting the Oral Law (how does one tie fringes on the four corners of your garment, anyway?).
If we can't understand the teachings of Jesus and the letters of Paul without understanding the Torah, and we can't understand the Torah without studying Talmud, is it possible we are missing something in our understanding of the identity of the Jewish Messiah himself?
"If we can't understand the teachings of Jesus and the letters of Paul without understanding the Torah, and we can't understand the Torah without studying Talmud, is it possible we are missing something in our understanding of the identity of the Jewish Messiah himself?"
Most definitely. However, I do wonder how much of it truly matters to G-d considering that even the little children are to be drawn to Messiah. Did even the participants in the events described in NT really know the nature of Messiah? It doesn't seem that they had much of a clue either. They certainly didn't argue about things like divinity of Messiah and the concept of Trinity, but they all agreed the Yeshua was indeed the Messiah promised to Israel, the King of the Jews who they must obey and serve.
I agree with your points, Gene. As you say, even little children were drawn to the Messiah and the Messiah said that anyone who doesn't receive the kingdom of heaven with the innocence of a child, will not receive the kingdom.
Also, of all the arguments recorded in the letters of Paul, none are about the divinity of the Messiah and the nature of the Trinity. While authorities like Larry Hurtado believe Jesus was worshiped as God during the lifetime of Paul, Hurtado admits that his critics say Paul, as a Jewish ethical monotheist, would never have done so, and that the deity of Jesus was "recognized" only decades after Paul's death.
I'm torn on the point of how much effort to put into this argument. On the one hand, as you say Gene, a child can accept Yeshua with complete faith and be totally accepted in that faith by God. On the other hand, I believe that we are required to try and understand the message of the Bible to the height of our capacity. If we weren't expected to delve into the various layers of knowledge and insight contained in the Bible (and the Oral Law), then why did God include them in the record of His Word?
We also tend to call the Messiah "our living Torah". If that is a correct representation of the Master, then the more we understand Torah, the more we understand the Messiah and thus, the more we understand about our faith and our role in the kingdom (which includes what we do in the here and now.
I don't think we can ignore genuine scholarship and study and certainly the Jewish people have delved into the mysteries of the written and oral Law for thousands of years. Since the Jews were the original people who kept and guarded the Torah, Talmud, and Shabbat for hundreds of generations, it seems that Christianity ignore that tradition and that process at their own peril.
"I don't think we can ignore genuine scholarship and study and certainly the Jewish people have delved into the mysteries of the written and oral Law for thousands of years. Since the Jews were the original people who kept and guarded the Torah, Talmud, and Shabbat for hundreds of generations, it seems that Christianity ignore that tradition and that process at their own peril."
Agreed - we SHOULD study ALL THE TIME to learn more about G-d and what He wants of us - so that we may be drawn close to him. The problem is that some folks make a huge deal about post-OT/NT-developed terminology and pet theological concepts of Christianity.
I understand that this topic is pretty difficult but I haven't heard of any reasons why you guys (James, Gene) believe in the Deity of Moshiach? You say you do well I want to understand in what way?
"I understand that this topic is pretty difficult but I haven't heard of any reasons why you guys (James, Gene) believe in the Deity of Moshiach? You say you do well I want to understand in what way?"
Anonymous... I specifically said that I believe in his "DIVINITY", that is he descends from the Father and Father is in him. To say "deity", in my mind, is to say that he's a separate second god and even Father himself. I want to say that I believe in his "divinity" because he was conceived directly by G-d without a human father - but then again, so was Adam and all the angels - so, may that's not so unique!
In the end, I believe in Messiah's divinity because he carries within himself the fullness of G-d - a "divine essence" (in Hasidic theology about Messiah).
In Scripture, Messiah is worshiped, praised, all creation bows before the Lamb, gives honor, praise, glory, blessing. He's called the first and last, the beginning and the end. He's called the savior. He's called salvation. He's called the Word who was God.
Only God is savior. Only God forgives sin. Only God is first and last.
Either that's idolatry, or Yeshua is God.
"Only God is savior. Only God forgives sin. Only God is first and last. "
OK, Judah...
We read in Daniel 7:14:
"He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed."
Did you catch that: "He was GIVEN authority". Who gave him the authority and why didn't he, being THE G-d, have it before? I think it's not as simplistic as you want to paint it.
Again, I want to emphasize lest my words are used in a vitriolic post against me (and I bet they will be) - I believe that Yeshua is indeed DIVINE, that he proceeds from the Father, that the Father is in him, that he's Torah, that Torah is inseparable from G-d.
About Daniel 7:14 - NIV uses "worship him", while MOST other translations use "serve him". I found that interesting - certainly translator bias (in either direction) comes into play.
I take the Bible seriously but have major reservations on its construction. The Gospel of John could be viewed as a philosophical treatise of Yeshua as God. Take away John, and Yeshua is the Messia chosen by God to spread monotheism to the ends of the earth.
Peace,
Jon
Gene,
In Daniel says that He was given the authority and the Kingdom, but that doesnt contradict anything. We must remember that Yeshua is The Word made Flesh so His Himanity must also be taken into account - it's a great mystery! But take a look at this:
"Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. - John 17:5
Proverbs 8:23 I was appointed from eternity, from the beginning, before the world began.
So He already was exalted to the highest from eternity (John1:1).
Philippians 2:6 Who, being in very Nature G-d, did not consider equality with G-d something to be grasped,
but made Himself nothing, taking the form of a Servant, being born in the likeness of men.
"In Daniel says that He was given the authority and the Kingdom, but that doesnt contradict anything. "
Who says it contradicts something? If anything, it only contradicts our own fallible human presuppositions. As I said before, Yeshua clearly descended from the Father. He's divine. Being Torah he existed within Father from always. He has Father's nature, but not the Father.
"Philippians 2:6 Who, being in very Nature G-d, did not consider equality with G-d something to be grasped"
Most translations say "being in the FORM of G-d". Well, man was created in the image of G-d. Just trying to make people think here - I am learning with the rest of you.
In Isaiah 43:3
כִּי, אֲנִי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, קְדוֹשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל, מוֹשִׁיעֶךָ
"For I am the LORD thy God, The Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour..."
... and again in Isaiah 43:11
אָנֹכִי אָנֹכִי, יְהוָה; וְאֵין מִבַּלְעָדַי, מוֹשִׁיעַ
"I, even I, am the LORD; and beside Me there is no saviour."
I find it interesting that in both instances (perhaps there are others) that the translation to "saviour" is not from "yeshuah", but actually "moshiach" (or some form of it), meaning "anointed." So, are we to expect that the ONE and ONLY anointed/messiah is... G-d?
Yes, the Father and Yeshua are not the same. No one's arguing that.
But Yeshua is nonetheless God, as Revelation put it, God and the Lamb are referred to as "Him", and He is worshiped, praised, honored, glorified by all creation.
You might think this is hard line and over the top. But James' post calls for a strong and unambiguous response. Anything less than that allows us to entertain concepts that fly in the face of key biblical truths.
As Kinzer said, the deity of Yeshua is a central principal of our very existence.
Cataract, if you want to remove Yeshua as God, you're going to have to throw out the whole New Testament.
In the gospels, Yeshua is worshiped. In the epistles, he's called God and Lord. In Revelation, all creation gives praise, honor, glory, blessing to the Lamb.
The deity of Yeshua is not an opened question.
"Yes, the Father and Yeshua are not the same. No one's arguing that."
Why NOT? Certainly that argument can be made. Does not Isaiah 9:6 say that his name will be "Everlasting Father"? Or what about Yeshua's own words: "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father." (John 14:9)?
Whatever our nuanced theology, we must look to the end: all of creation worships, praises, glorifies, exalts, and bows before the Lamb.
That's where we're headed. It's written in the Scriptures. It's going to come to pass.
And all the intellectualizing in the world won't sway me away from this promise.
"And all the intellectualizing in the world won't sway me away from this promise."
And that's why this is called "faith".
Now with Traditional Judaism which I accept as authoritative we must use discernment when reading the writings of the Sages. For the most part traditional and Rabbinic Judaism rejects Yeshua as Moshiach and that's really important. For the most part they don't believe in a Divine Moshiach, but there are some texts that will make you think, well more than think lol. In the writings of the Sages there are many different understandings of the Being of Moshiach.
Midrash on Isaiah 52:13.
The Scripture says " See, My servant will act wisely; He will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted."
Who art thou, O great Mountain? (Zec. Iv.7.) This refers to the King Messiah. And why does he call him "the great Mountain?" because he is greater than the patriarchs, as it is said, "My servant shall be high, and lifted up, and lofty exceedingly" - he will be higher than Abraham, who says, "I raise my hands unto the Lord" (Gen. Xiv.22); lifted up above Moses, to whom it is said, "Lift it up unto thy bosom" (Num. Xi.12); loftier than the ministering angels, of whom it is written, "Their wheels were lofty and terrible" (Ez.I.18). And out of whom does he come forth? Out of David (Yalqut Shim'oni 2:571).
Why did the Midrash attribute such prominence to the Messiah here, based on Isaiah 52:13? It could be said that elsewhere in Isaiah such terms of exaltation (raised, lifted up, highly exalted) were rightly applied only to G-d.
Now listen to the explanation of Rabbi Don Yitshaq Abravanel on the Midrash of Isa.52:13:
It is extremely difficult to understand how any child of man can be exalted above Moses, of whom the Law bears witness, saying, "No prophet ever arose in Israel like him (Deu. Xxxiv.10); still more so, then, how any one "born of woman" can assume a position higher than the angels, whose substance admits of nothing above it except the substance of the First Cause: from the latter expression, in fact, Christian teachers have attempted to establish their doctrine of the Divinity of the Messiah.
Some time ago, I read the book When Jesus Became God, written by Richard Rubenstein, and it brings up a lot of questions as to just when Christianity began worshiping Jesus as God.
An excellent book. I highly recommend it to anyone in the Messianic Judaism movement.
But deity was not the issue in the 4th century disputes. It was the nature of that deity. Both sides held to a form of deity. And of course, the doctrine of the "trinity" was not even on the horizon yet. That could come 100 years later.
Whatever our nuanced theology, we must look to the end: all of creation worships, praises, glorifies, exalts, and bows before the Lamb.
@Judah, clear and unambiguous. Right on!
Where some in BE are playing games is the issues surrounding ontology. They think that because the Bible's lack of an ontological answer to the question, that they can play games with redefinining words like "divine" and "deity" when in fact the Bible's lack of ontological information regarding HaShem reveals of the Hebraic concept of knowing someone: You know what they are "made of" by examining what they do. Form follows function.
Likewise, the worship of the Messiah, particularly in Revelation is something that some in BE must be very uncomfortable with. Worship means only one thing...
"Anything less than that allows us to entertain concepts that fly in the face of key biblical truths."
Please. Discussion of paramount theological concepts is not allowed because it flies in the face of "key biblical truths"? We are not called to "blind faith" - and we are given Bereans as example of how we are to approach our faith - by examining what others are saying we should believe.
Christians almost universally claim the "Law is done away with", and yet for you (for example) to claim the opposite and also insist that it MUST be still practiced is, in the mind of majority of believers, to go against EVERYTHING that Yeshua did for for believers (e.g. "freed us from the Law"). For them it's a part of the "key biblical truths". Thank G-d you took time to examine your faith - did it not become stronger as the result?
Just to pause for a moment, I take it the vast majority of commentators believe in the divinity of Yeshua, with most of that group believing that Yeshua is literally God. Some, like Gene, acknowledge the divine origin of the Messiah without necessarily believing he is God the Son. From that position (which is one I also attempted to outline), the Messiah has received authority and power from the Father, which allows him to be worshiped, forgive sins, and such, without literally being God.
I don't think I've heard anyone say they have a position about the Messiah that is precisely like that of traditional (non-Messianic) Judaism where the Messiah is not divine at all, but a man in all ways.
I encourage you all to continue this conversation, for I feel it's very worthwhile and it is very illuminating to take our assumptions and long held beliefs and give them a good airing out. Often, you don't know what you truly believe until you are in the position of trying to defend it.
I notice that most (but not all) of the evidence for Yeshua being God is in the NT and that evidence in the OT is deemed "mistranslated" or "misinterpreted" by mainstream Judaism. As was previously pointed out, opinions in the Talmud are difficult to apply because the sages, by definition, did not believe Yeshua was Messiah or God, but if the Talmud is the oral law given to Moses by God on Sinai, then wouldn't it contain some hint, clue, or suggestion that the Messiah is indeed God?
I don't know if a definitive answer will come from this. While Christian scholars all agree that Jesus is God, they disagree as to how it works and at what point in Christian history Yeshua's divinity was first recognized. Even though this blog post is very unlikely to be the crucible that burns off all the dross and reveals the truth for all, it may inspire some of us, as it has me, to study and learn more about this important aspect of our faith in God and our devotion to Messiah.
"Likewise, the worship of the Messiah, particularly in Revelation is something that some in BE must be very uncomfortable with."
Rick Spurlock, always the opportunist to turn a peaceful discussion into a platform for spewing hate. You disgust me.
Oh, another thing. For those of you on the East Coast, the Shabbat must be rapidly approaching. Here in Southwestern Idaho, it's about three hours away. I hope we can suspend this rather passionate discussion on a peaceful note and not enter the Shabbat with anger or frustration in our hearts.
We attempt to examine a perfect God with our imperfect intelligence and doubtless, we're not going to get everything right. Regardless of all that, God is God and, in the end, He is the light we see shining in the darkness. I remember that every Friday evening when my wife lights the Shabbos candles.
Thanks, James and the gang. Have a Gut Shabbos.
"Psalm 110:1 Of David. A psalm. The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."
"Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Yeshua asked them a question: what do you think about the Messiah, whose Son is He?" They said to Him, "The Son of David. He said to them, "Then how does David in the Spirit call Him 'Lord,' saying, 'THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, "SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL I PUT YOUR ENEMIES, If David then calls Him 'Lord,' how is He his Son?" - Matt.22:42-45
Moshiach is no normal Human, He is preexistent and by definition that makes Him Divine.
"Moshiach is no normal Human, He is preexistent and by definition that makes Him Divine."
I don't think anyone here argues that he is not either pre-existent (in some form) or divine.
BTW, James, regarding mainstream Judaism's view on divinity of Messiah - not exactly as you may have imagined (e.g. a mere man). From Chabad website:
"Chassidic philosophy has added significantly to our understanding of the resurrection generally, and of Moshiach specifically. Moshiach's case is somewhat different, since his soul comes from the Divine Essence (atzmus in Hebrew). At this level, life and death are equal.10 In fact this Essence transcends all limitations, for a soul of this Essence, the miraculous and the natural are equal and coexist. It follows that the life of Moshiach is completely above the laws of nature, which our Sages confirm."
http://www.chabadworld.net/page.asp?pageID=1104AEE3-3064-4CC9-A4D8-A4355AF2A77C&moshHdr=1
Shabbat Shalom to all as well!! I really hope that we can continue this subject as it is very important! Take care guys!!
One more quick note which is very important! In Scripture only G-d is ever seen with the clouds of heaven, the only other Person this is true about is "Guess who"? The Heavenly Moshiach! B.H
"Chassidic philosophy has added significantly to our understanding of the resurrection generally, and of Moshiach specifically. Moshiach's case is somewhat different, since his soul comes from the Divine Essence (atzmus in Hebrew). At this level, life and death are equal.10 In fact this Essence transcends all limitations, for a soul of this Essence, the miraculous and the natural are equal and coexist. It follows that the life of Moshiach is completely above the laws of nature, which our Sages confirm."
Wow! Does anyone else see how this could be applied to our current understanding of the Messiah?
Gene,
Good post! I'm aware of the Chassidic thought of Moshiach most interesting! I have great info on this topic of Moshiach and the Chassidic thought!
Rick Spurlock, always the opportunist to turn a peaceful discussion into a platform for spewing hate. You disgust me.
Glad to see my comments weren't taken personally, Gene!
Does anyone else see how this could be applied to our current understanding of the Messiah?
@James, the problem for folks in BE is that they are encumbered by the creedal formulas when they speak to "trinitarian" Christianity; all the while trying to find words acceptible to traditional Judaism. The result is often a weird compromise that makes neither party happy when fully examined.
Actually, I'm just trying to follow a chain of logic, Rick.
In Christianity, Yeshua is believed to be God because for almost 2000 years, church authorities have said he's God. However, if you look at it from a Jewish point of view, the Torah can't be taken at face value and requires the Talmud (Oral Law and commentary) to understand what's being said.
Messianic Judaism (including One Law) often says that you can't really understand the teachings of the Messiah unless you understand the Torah in it's own context. If that's true and, if it's true that you can't understand the written Torah without the Oral Law, then it stands to reason that information about the nature and character of the Messiah might be included in the Talmud...at least to some degree.
Christianity divorced itself from a Hebraic understanding of the scriptures a long time ago, so they don't look at the Jewish Messiah, they look at the Gentile Christ...not always the same guy. Most non-Jews go into the Messianic world because of that understanding, so why shouldn't we believe that the people who have kept the Torah, Talmud, and Shabbat alive for hundreds of generations might also have some sort of understanding on their own Messiah.
Granted, I don't believe *anyone* holds all the cards or all the keys to exactly who the Messiah is or how this whole thing works, but I don't believe we can afford to casually dismiss opinions just because they don't line up with the church fathers and noted Christian scholars.
Somehow, I think when this whole thing is finally revealed, we'll find out that no one got it right. The important thing is that we keep asking hard questions and don't back down because the answers don't always fit our preconceptions.
Somehow, I think when this whole thing is finally revealed, we'll find out that no one got it right.
Most certainly!
What matters most is not what we claim to "believe" but what we do. In that regard as well we will all fall short to some degree.
Shavuah Tov
B"H
What matters most is not what we claim to "believe" but what we do. In that regard as well we will all fall short to some degree.
I completely agree, Rick.
Shavuah Tov.
I know that traditional Judaism for the most part does not believe in the Deity Moshiach but I have read and have some really amazing quotes from the Sages about a Heavenly Moshiach that most certainly has quality's of Deity and is preexistent/eternal. I will post some in a few...
If you are interested to read good discussions about the issues at stake I would suggest the following books:
-Hurtado, How on earth did Jesus become a God?
-Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel
-Dunn, Christology in the Making
-Dunn, Did the first Christians worship Jesus?
-Casey, From Jewish prophet to Gentile God
Ack! More books to add to my reading list. I need to pace myself.
It's only fair to post a link here to Judah Himango's latest blog post: God in Human Form. He quotes from a paper presented at the 2010 Borough Park Symposium titled Response to Joe Shulam on the Deity of the Messiah and Rabbinic Tradition
by Michael Brown.
There are a number of other papers presented that address the deity of Yeshua. I'm sure they add illumination to this topic.
Well I might be a little late on here, but I thought it was a good discussion. I do not claim to understand everything, but I also think about these things,I do not think Jesus is God as in being interchangeable Jesus=God. I do believe he has a divine essence. According to Judaism though, we all have a 'divine soul' the neshama, a spark from God which descends into this world and whose purpose is to ascend back up. So I believe Jesus had a special 'spark' so to speak. As he was the Memra/Logos/Shekhina or whatever term you understand it with. Hebrews does say he is the image of the glory of God, he is of the same essence, His soul descends from the upper crown of GOd's glory. His essence is not created as he is also equated with the spirit of God hovering over the waters in genesis 1. The world was created through him. Yet he is not totally God. As for his human essence, I believe he was in all manner as us. Who said he did not have a father? His birth was a miracle in that he was born of a virgin (no intercourse) but what if the Holy Spirit took Joseph's dna and implanted it into mary's womb? I know it is not provable, but then neither is the other option. The Spirit of God deffinitely rested upon him in full measure and at all times, not as with the other prophets. Nobody can say his miracles were a result of his divinity, he even said his disciples would do greater works than that! anyways just some things i muse about, we never stop learning!
Yes JD, I'd say you're late to the party. ;-)
I've written a number of other posts on this blog addressing the "deity of Jesus" such as The Descent of God to Man and Search for Messiah in Pools of Unknowing. Additionally, here are quite a few others in which I write of the nature of the Jewish Messiah in relation to God the father, but basically, I consider Jesus, as he walked the earth among men, to be a sort of "extension" of the Divine Presence, but not literally the totality of God or the Ayn Sof.
I recently stopped contributing to this blog as it represents a year-long search to question my assumptions on faith, God, Jesus, and the Bible. Having come to several conclusions, I've "closed up shop" here, and moved on to another blog with a related but different emphasis. If you're interested, see what I'm writing about now at Morning Meditations.
Post a Comment