Revealing the Jewish Messiah
By W. Glenn Moore
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
Who is the real Messiah? Is he Jewish? Is he Christian? Is he God? Is he the same as the Almighty One of Scripture? Is he part of a Trinity of “Gods?” Is there a false Messiah? Is there an antichrist? When and how was antichrist brought to our attention? And finally, is it really all that important for us to know all of these things?
On several occasions I have spoken to people about their concepts of the Messiah. Once I asked a dear friend of mine what he believed about the Messiah, “was he a Christian, or what?” His answer startled me, for he said (without even pausing), “yes, he was a Christian!” I was shocked! Sadly, this is the common answer people from all walks of life, and different denominations, will give. And yet, based upon my study of the Messianic Writings (commonly, but erroneously, called the New Testament), this is simply not true. Yahushua (the long form of his actual Hebrew name, the short form being Yahshua or Yeshua), was a Jewish rabbi, who used the standard Jewish form of teaching (a Yeshiva, which is based on question and answer format), who spoke in parables as did many other Jewish rabbis of his day, and most assuredly kept the Torah. He was not in any way or any sense of the word a “Christian”—he was a Jew, born of the seed of Abraham, and a descendant of king David through his father Joseph. This is clearly demonstrated in the article called Jesus Is a Jew:
In adult life, His disciples were Jews (John 1:47, Matt. 20:25-26) and they called Him ‘Rabbi (John 4:31). Mary called Him ‘Rabboni (John 20:16). They sought Him because they believed the Torah and the Prophets (John 1:45).
While many Christians will reluctantly admit that Yahushua (called Jesus by many) was indeed a Jew, they seem to be unable to take the next logical step in understanding. If the Messiah is a Jew, and he lived as a Jew, and was obedient to the commandments that all Jews were expected to be obedient to, then how is it that one can believe in this Jewish Messiah and yet not follow his example? How can we somehow think it is acceptable to ignore him as our “Jewish” example regarding how to live—especially as it applies to Torah obedience (the keeping of the law)? To me, the thought is incomprehensible—but then, I understand the problem also of having been raised to believe certain things without being told exactly why.
A Pharisee who had not yet come to faith in Him also addressed Yeshua as ‘Rabbi (John 3:2), as did a crowd of people (John 6:25). A Samaritan woman easily recognized He was a Jew (John 4:9).
Yeshuas disciples spoke Hebrew (John 1:38, 41) and so did He, as well as Chaldean, a closely-related language brought back by the Jews from their captivity in Babylon (Matt. 27:46). In the sermon on the mount He affirmed the authority of the Torah and the Prophets (Matt. 5:17) even in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt. 5:19-20). He regularly attended synagogue (Luke 4:16) and His teaching was respected by the other congregants (Luke 4:15). He taught in the Jewish Temple (Luke 21:37) and if He were not a Jew, His going into that part of the Temple would not have been allowed (Acts 21:28-30).
Although He differed with some of His contemporaries on how to keep the commandments (Matt. 12:12), He did not disagree on whether to keep them, saying such things as, "if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments," (Matt. 19:17). When He healed someone of leprosy, he instructed him to, "show yourself to the priest and present the offering that Moses commanded..." (Matt. 8:4, Lev. 14).[1]
While many Christians will reluctantly admit that Yahushua (called Jesus by many) was indeed a Jew, they seem to be unable to take the next logical step in understanding. If the Messiah is a Jew, and he lived as a Jew, and was obedient to the commandments that all Jews were expected to be obedient to, then how is it that one can believe in this Jewish Messiah and yet not follow his example? How can we somehow think it is acceptable to ignore him as our “Jewish” example regarding how to live—especially as it applies to Torah obedience (the keeping of the law)? To me, the thought is incomprehensible—but then, I understand the problem also of having been raised to believe certain things without being told exactly why.
In addition to that we still have the questions before us, questions regarding Yahushua’s role and status as the Jewish Messiah—assuming that he is the true Messiah (which I believe the evidence will support). Jews do not generally believe that he was the Messiah because of the countless years of persecution from Christianity, where many people (including Jews) were forced to submit to the Catholic and Protestant churches view of Messiah. If we do away with the element of persecution and just present the Messiah as given in the New Testament, does that change things?
The purpose of this study is not to convince Jews to become Christians, nor even to believe in Yahushua as Messiah. Likewise, this study is not given to convince Christians to become Jews and renounce Yahushua as Messiah. The purpose of this study is to present what the author believes is the true concept of Yahushua as given by both he and his faithful disciples in the Messianic Writings (New Testament), as well as shoring up the original foundations of the Hebraic concepts of Messiah as he is expected to relate to Yahweh (which is the most likely way the true name of the Creator should be transliterated). It may be that before this expose is completed both groups will have to make changes in their fundamental understanding of Messiah and of what it actually means to be the Messiah.
Now here is the dilemma: Today the world is at the brink of total destruction. Satan knows he is defeated, so he is rousting his armies for the final assault on Yahweh’s kingdom. The enemy of souls is gathering his army for that final battle between the forces of evil and good. Yahweh is also doing a mighty work, as he intensifies His efforts to bring the good news of salvation to a dying world—but, sadly, the laborers are few. The great weapon of choice for Satan is actually the counterfeit Messiah. The true Messiah really has a counterfeit, and as we examine the nature of the true Messiah we will also expose the counterfeit, or “anti-Messiah.” He is defined as “another Yahushua.”
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
For if he that cometh preacheth another Yahushua, whom we have not preached . . . (2 Corinthians 11:3-4)
If you (as a Christian) look at this text from your own current perspective, then you might be tempted to say that I am the one who is coming to you preaching "another Jesus" that your church does not preach. And you would be correct. But what you may not understand is that what you are hearing now from your church may not be the message that was given by the disciples of Messiah almost 2000 years ago. Just what did the disciples preach? Just exactly how did they understand the message and mission of Messiah? Lets put aside our pre-conceived opinions and look at this and other statements in the Messianic Writings from the Jewish perspective, for indeed the disciples were most assuredly Jewish. In fact, let us hear the testimony of Yahushua himself:
Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I. (John 14:28)
How can Yahushua be deity if he declares his heavenly Father is greater than he himself? And what of this text?
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Messiah; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Messiah is the Almighty. (1Corinthians 11:3, "Christ" is replaced with "Messiah" and "God" is replaced with "the Almighty," where it is appropriate throughout this presentation.)
Please notice the progression of authority given in this passage: The woman is subject to the man, the man is subject to Messiah, and the Messiah is himself subject to his heavenly Father. This same point is made in 1 Corinthians 15:28, and this text even describes the Millennial reign of Messiah perfectly:
For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Messiah shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Messiah the firstfruits; afterward they that are Messiah’s at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to the Almighty, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that the Almighty may be all in all. (1 Corinthians 15:21-28)
The Messiah Yahushua will subdue all things and place them under his authority and power during the Millennial reign. After this, when everything has been subdued, he will then transfer all of his authority to his heavenly Father and will himself be “subject unto him that put all things under him.” Not only does this indicate that the Messiah is a distinct person from our heavenly Father, but that he is subordinate to him. The Messiah is not the Almighty and he is not equal to the Almighty in any way. Such teachings are not based upon Scripture nor the Messianic writings. So now, ask yourselves the question: "Who is it that has come preaching another Messiah?"
When we ask the Jews themselves as to what the reasons are that they cannot accept Yahushua (Jesus) as Messiah, we get many different answers. However, there is one answer which is almost always listed as the number one reason for their inability to accept him as Messiah—the question of deity. Please note what is said about this in the Wikipedia article Judaism’s View of Jesus:
While Judaism has no special or particular view of Jesus, and very few texts in Judaism directly refer to or take note of Jesus, Judaism takes a strong stand against many views expressed by Christian theology. One of the most important Jewish principles of faith is the belief in one God and one God only with no partnership of any kind,[1] and belief in Jesus as deity, part of a deity, son of God, or Christ, is incompatible with Judaism.[2][2]
Now, please take note of how Christianity is stated to have actually separated from Judaism because of this very problem—the issue of “another Messiah.” At the very fundamental core of the problem is the divergence between the Jewish and the Greek understanding of deity (i.e., “God”). To the pagan Greek culture (which is based upon the philosophy of Plato and others), there were many “gods.” In Judaism, their faith is strictly monotheistic—there is but one supreme Elohim (“Mighty One”), and He is Yahweh. It was by proclaiming Yahushua to in-fact be deity by a certain group of Messianic believers near the end of the first century that the final separation between these two groups took place. Here is what Paul Johnson, in A History of the Jews, has to say about this problem:
To the question Was Jesus God or Man?, the Christians therefore answered: both. After 70 A.D., their answer was unanimous and increasingly emphatic. This made a complete breach with Judaism inevitable. The Jews could accept the decentralization of the Temple: many had long done so, and soon all had to do so. They could accept a different view of the Law. What they could not accept was the removal of the absolute distinction they had always drawn between God and man, because that was the essence of Jewish theology, the belief that above all others separated them from the pagans. By removing that distinction, the Christians took themselves irrecoverably out of the Judaic faith.[3]
If this is true (that the schism between Christians and Jews took place over the issue of who the Messiah is or was expected to be) then was this right? Did they have the authority from Scripture to do this? Did they have Yahushua’s blessings on what they did, as it only stands to reason if they are claiming to be following the Messiah they should obey his instructions? Let us consider the words of Yahushua himself as he plainly gives a distinction between himself and his heavenly Father:
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true Almighty One, and Yahushua Messiah, whom thou has sent. (John 17:3)
Here Yahushua plainly gives a distinction between himself and the Eternal One, the Almighty One—Yahweh, as His name is here transliterated from the Tetragrammaton. Does this sound like he is making himself out to be deity, seeing that he identifies Yahweh as “the only true Almighty One?” No, it does not. And yet, it is commonly taught by many Christian denominations that one cannot be saved unless they confess their belief in "the Cross" and a Messiah who is also deity. To do otherwise is (to them) considered blasphemy. However, in Judaism the opposite is actually true—to equate Messiah (or any other object, animal or person) as “deity” would be considered blasphemy to a faithful Jew!
In light of all of these questions I have presented here, there is one fundamental question remaining—the one introduced earlier in this study. We need to ask ourselves: Because of the vast discrepancy between the Messiah of Christianity and the Messiah as presented in the Messianic Writings, do we (as believers in Messiah) teach another Messiah? While we pause a moment to allow for contemplation on that most solemn question, please consider the words of Shaul (commonly known as Paul) as he addresses this very question to the believers in Corinth:
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Messiah. For if he that cometh preacheth another Yahushua, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. (2 Corinthians 11:3-4)
Shaul (Paul) speaks of a corruption from “the simplicity that is in Messiah.” Is there anything simple about a “Trinity” of “three gods in one?” Is it simple to say that the Messiah is both a “man” and a “God?” He also speaks of those coming who preach “another Yahushua” and “another gospel,” and “another spirit,” and that his greatest fear is that they “might well bear with him,” that is, allow him to continue preaching a false Messiah without hindrance. If this was fulfilled even in the time of the apostles, why do we think that such could not have continued into our own day?
There is a counterfeit gospel and a counterfeit Messiah which is often times entangled with the true. Even those who are searching to become a part of the true saving gospel message that was once delivered to the saints, are confused and bewildered by the agents of Satan masquerading as Yahweh’s true messengers. Also among those who say they are returning to their "Hebrew Roots," many of them have simply put away the formal attire of Christianity in exchange for formal Sabbath worship (i.e., Saturday church), the wearing of Jewish prayer shawls, chasing Torah scrolls around the room, reading some Hebrew, and thinking that they can go to heaven while confusing the true worship of Yahweh with the false worship of a man. It is because we “bear with them” when they parade around with their false message, instead of exposing them for who they really are, that people are still confused. Here is how the apostle described it:
For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom Yahweh shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause the Almighty shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. But we are bound to give thanks alway to the Almighty for you, brethren beloved of Yahweh, because the Almighty hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: (2 Thessalonians 2:7-13)
Do you, dear reader, have a love of the truth? Oh, yes, many claim to have the truth, many claim to be earnest truth seekers—but the bottom line is, do you have a love of the truth? Are you willing to humble yourself to the point of forsaking all for the sake of truth? Are you willing to admit that you could be deceived, even right now as you read these words? Are you and I willing to investigate the historical roots of the original Messianic movement (as begun by Yahushua) to determine where we may have diverged from the path of right?
If we are willing to admit that we could be deceived, then there is always hope. Yahweh will not condemn us for believing a lie, or because we have been deceived, but He will condemn us for not having a love of the truth. That means if Yahweh brings to us the saving message of truth and we reject it because we do not want the truth, then he will send us a strong delusion so that we will believe a lie. According to Shaul, they receive a strong delusion because they do not really want the truth, but instead fables:
As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine, Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do. Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. (1 Timothy 1:3-7)
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2 Timothy 4:3-4)
So, have we been “turned unto fables?” And what then of this great deception—this “mystery of iniquity?” Is this only in the future, or has it already happened? Here is my answer: It has already happened! We know it has already happened because the apostle plainly says that this “mystery of iniquity” was already at work in his time. Does that mean most (including possibly ourselves) are probably already part of that mystery religion which has deceived the whole world? Yes, almost certainly. Now for future reference, please take note of the fact that it is called a “mystery,” for that little bit of information will play out heavily as we consider the rest of this study.
If the great endtime deception is centered around the false premise regarding the Messiah, and a false gospel, is it important for us to understand the true concept of Messiah and his gospel? Yes it is. And how do we know which is the counterfeit? Well, we don’t focus all of our attention studying the counterfeit, do we? No, we focus our attention around studying the true—and when we have fully exhausted that, we are then able to turn our attention to the counterfeit so as to fully expose it for what it is.
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
Debunking the Myths About Yahushua
Before we continue to search out the questions we have already asked regarding the true fundamental nature of Messiah, as well as his purpose for coming to the Jewish people, I would like to preface that with some startling facts which many fail to realize—facts which are essential to a clear understanding of this subject.
Fact #1: The true historical Messiah mentioned repeatedly in the Messianic Writings (commonly, but erroneously, known as the New Testament) was (and still is) separate from his heavenly Father. Please see John Cordaro’s online article on this subject, called Yahshua the Messiah is Not Almighty Yahweh.[4]
To demonstrate this point could take many pages of detailed references, however, for the sake of brevity only a few will be listed here:
For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one Almighty, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Yahushua Messiah, by whom are all things, and we by him. (1 Corinthians 8:5-6)
Some (especially among Messianic groups) teach a so-called “oneness” doctrine, that our heavenly Father and the Messiah are one and the same person. That teaching says that the Messiah is the Almighty of the Old Testament. However, this belief is so convoluted and impossible to support from Scripture, that it is actually very easy to show how false it is. How can our Messiah Yahushua be both Father and son, when this text clearly says otherwise? Here are several more to seriously contemplate:
It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. (John 8:17-18)
Then said Yahushua unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him. Then said Yahushua to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. (John 8:28-32)
Yahushua said unto them, If Yahweh were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from Yahweh; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. (John 8:42)
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true Almighty One, and Yahushua Messiah, whom thou has sent. (John 17:3)
Clearly, the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of our Messiah and his heavenly Father Yahweh being separate. To ignore this evidence would be devastating, as it would mean we would have to alter the plain teaching of Scripture. When people attempt to use such mental gymnastics to explain away these plain and forthright texts, it often leads to psychotic behavior—as any animal would exhibit when given two contradictory choices at the same time. It is impossible to truly believe in Scripture and then force yourself to believe something opposite of what Scripture teaches, without creating mental conflicts—something which typically happens when the Trinity or Oneness doctrines are taught and accepted as foundational requirements for salvation.
Fact #2: If Yahushua is Yahweh (or part of a Triune Godhead) then how is it that he not only prays to but also gives worship to Yahweh, his heavenly Father? How is it that Yahweh can worship Yahweh? Why does part of an eternal Trinity need to pray for help and guidance to another part of that Trinity? Please see John Cordaro’s online article on this subject, called Monotheism and the Supposed Deity of Yahushua.[5]
Yahushua saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master. Yahushua saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my Almighty, and your Almighty. (John 20:16-17)
As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other Mighty One but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many) But to us there is but one Mighty One, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him, and one Lord Yahushua Messiah, by whom are all things, and we by him. (1 Corinthians 8:4-6)
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Messiah; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Messiah is Yahweh. (1 Corinthians 11:3)
And at the ninth hour Yahushua cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" which is, being interpreted, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? (Mark 15:34)
And this next one is the most damning of all:
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true Almighty, and Yahushua Messiah, whom thou hast sent. (John 17:3)
Remember, this verse in John 17 is actually part of an extended prayer from Yahushua to his heavenly Father Yahweh. Please note that not only is Yahushua praying to Yahweh (which makes no sense if he is also Yahweh, or even if part of a triune deity) but he also makes a clear distinction between himself and Yahweh. And finally, he states unequivocally that he was sent by Yahweh, and that Yahweh is the “only true Almighty!” If common sense rules the day, then this is singularly the most important text to explain the true plan of Yahweh, and the nature of his son Yahushua—for it plainly tells us that an understanding of that plan “is life eternal.” That means, my friends, that this study you are reading now is not just an academic exercise in Bible trivia—it is, most assuredly, an examination of the single most important salvational issue in the Bible!
In each of these texts a clear distinction is made between Yahushua and his heavenly Father. In fact, all of these texts clearly indicate that not only are they distinct persons, but that Yahweh is above Yahushua in power and authority. Those who ignore these plain statements from the Messianic Writings do so to their own injury!
The Jews have from the most ancient times understood the “oneness” of Yahweh to be singular—that there was no other deity with Him. And Scripture is also very clear about this point, that we are to worship only one (Deuteronomy 4:6) and that One is Yahweh, our heavenly Father, and Creator of all that is.
Hear, O Israel: Yahweh our Almighty is one Yahweh. (Deuteronomy 6:4)
Here is some more evidence from Scripture to consider, evidence which clearly demonstrates that Yahweh was alone at the time of Creation, and that there was no other “deity” with Him—and that would include the Messiah:
Unto thee it was showed, that thou mightest know that Yahweh he is the Almighty One; there is none else beside him. (Deuteronomy 4:35)
Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that Yahweh he is the Almighty in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else. (Deuteronomy 4:39)
There is none holy as Yahweh: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our Almighty. (1 Samuel 2:2)
Ye are my witnesses, saith Yahweh, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no Mighty One formed, neither shall there be after me. (Isaiah 43:10)
I am Yahweh, and there is none else, there is no Mighty One beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me. (Isaiah 45:5)
Fact #3: The Messiah is not Yahweh nor is he part of any triune or dual “Godhead.” The Messiah is a man! Sinless, yes. But he is a man!! Please see John Cordaro’s online article on this subject, called Did Our Savior Pre-exist?[6]
The very foundation of all the problems with the Messiah of Christianity is that they make the Messiah into something which he is not, and which he never claimed to be: they make him into a deity.. And yet, when this aspect of Messiah is also examined from Scripture, the evidence does not support such a belief. In addition to that, in order for the Messiah to be part of a trinity, he would have had to exist from the beginning. And yet there are many statements in the Messianic Writings which confirm that Messiah had a beginning—as a “firstborn son” of Yahweh:
For the Almighty so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)
The Almighty hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again, as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. (Acts 13:33)
So also Messiah glorified not himself to be made a high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee. (Hebrews 5:5)
And from Yahushua Messiah, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto the Almighty and his Father; to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. (Revelation 1:5-6)
The Messianic Writings do not teach the Messiah existed from eternity, but was born into this world as a man, and later “begotten” as Yahweh’s son. The time he is “begotten” is specifically given in this last text—he was begotten when he was resurrected! As all the other texts we mentioned earlier tell us, Yahweh is ONE, and there is none beside Him. Remember, the pre-existence doctrine and the belief that Messiah is deity is foundational to the trinity, for without it there can be no trinity.
The history of Christianity itself is enough to testify of the correctness of this view, that the original faith delivered to the saints did not involve a Messiah who is also deity. Please note how this view is expressed by these Biblical scholars, starting with Levi Paine:
In the Synoptic gospels ... there is no hint anywhere of a pre-incarnate life, ... or of a divine incarnation. He calls God his Father, but he also teaches that God is Father of All, and gives his disciples the Pater Noster. ... There is no evidence that the idea of a peculiar metaphysical union with God ever entered his mind. At least it did not appear in his synoptic teaching.[7]
With this critical explanation, we take the New Testament writings as we find them, and ask what evidence they give us on the question of the evolution of the doctrine of the Trinity. The earliest stratum of the evolution is contained in the Book of Acts, and in the Synoptic gospels. The doctrine of Christ in the first stratum is distinctly that of Messiahship. Jesus is a man of God, sent of God to declare his gospel .... There is no assertion of Christs divinity, or of his pre-existence or incarnation.[8]
That Paul ever confounded Christ with God himself, or regarded him in any way as the supreme Divinity, is a position invalidated not only by direct statements, but also by the whole drift of his epistles.[9]
While some church historians realize that early believers in Messiah did not regard him as deity, we might well ask—what of his actual apostles? Many Church historians (as quoted previously) are in general agreement—Messiah was not divinity, but one who was a perfect representative of Yahweh, and this was the teaching of his disciples. And in the writings of John that apostle defines what is the most significant heresy among those who profess belief in Messiah—and in doing so also defines who the Messiah really is. Here is what he says:
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of Yahweh: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of Yahweh: Every spirit that confesseth that Yahushua Messiah is come in the flesh is of Yahweh: And every spirit that confesseth not that Yahushua Messiah is come in the flesh is not of Yahweh: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. (1 John 4:1-3)
For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Yahushua Messiah is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. (2 John 1:7)
Here it is clearly stated what the very fundamental truth which divides the true ministers from the false is: What is their basic understanding and confession regarding who the Messiah really is? This being the case we need to merely ask the question: What exactly does it mean “come in the flesh?” Let’s look more closely at that issue.
In the Translator’s New Testament, which is considered a very credible translation, this text is quoted exactly as written, and revealed here for your humble consideration:
Many deceivers have gone into the world who do not accept that Jesus came as a human being. Here is the deceiver and the antichrist. (2 John 1:7, Translator’s New Testament).[10]
There are those who will put their theological “spin” even on this text, to somehow come up with the idea that it says Yahushua would come “as God” in the flesh. However, when the text is read just as it is, you cannot come to that conclusion at all—for “God” is completely left out of this testimony.
In ancient societies the people worshiped many “gods.” It may come as a surprise, but they also believed in a “savior-god” who would save them through a miraculous resurrection. The fact that these false ideas of Messiah would permeate the world is not a great surprise, since Satan seeks to deceive the whole world.
the conception of a Saviour-God was quite normal in the ancient pagan world…a conception of salvation underlies the notion of such Gods as Osiris, Attis, and Adonis.[11]
Many have attempted to use this evidence as proof that Yahushua never even really existed—that he was created as another pagan mythical savior. However, if that be the case, then why do the Messianic Writings (New Testament) frequently allude to the Messiah’s belief that his heavenly Father is really the supreme deity? Such an affirmation (which is repeated many times) is a strictly Jewish understanding of divine worship—not pagan. Therefore, one has to ask why these sentiments are so frequently mentioned in the gospel accounts if the purpose of those accounts is to lead men to false pagan worship (including the worship of a man)?
When we realize that these pagan philosophies are a corruption of Yahweh’s plan, and that they were incorporated into the Christian faith long after the time of the early disciples, then it is certainly true that the original teachings of Yahushua and his disciples were in general harmony with Jewish concepts of righteousness. Yes, there were differences (as the dialogue in the gospels demonstrates). However, the differences were not so great as to require the formation of an entirely new religion—and almost all scholars attest that the original believers in Yahushua as Messiah remained a part of the Jewish synagogue for many years. If, indeed, the original believers were allowed to remain a part of Judaism (in that day) then they could not have simultaneously been teaching that Messiah is also deity—for such sentiments would have been cause for their immediate expulsion.
So let’s stop and think about this: The Greeks were looking for a Trinity, and a “saviour-God” to deliver them. But according to John, the true Messiah is a man while those who have the “spirit of antichrist” see the Messiah as something other than human. So who is it today that does not accept the fact the true Messiah came to us as a human being? [Hint: This false belief about the Messiah is often called a “Mystery”—which is appropriate, since it is also the “mystery of iniquity!!”]
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
For the mystery of iniquity doth already work. (2 Timothy 2: 7)
The Catholic Church maintains that the Trinity doctrine is a “mystery” which requires belief in it to be completely “by faith.” Here is what is said concerning this issue of “mystery:”
The Vatican Council has explained the meaning to be attributed to the term mystery in theology. It lays down that a mystery is a truth which we are not merely incapable of discovering apart from Divine Revelation, but which, even when revealed, remains ‘hidden by the veil of faith and enveloped, so to speak, by a kind of darkness’ (Constitution, ‘De fide. cath.’, iv). In other words, our understanding of it remains only partial, even after we have accepted it as part of the Divine message.[12]
Those who follow the teachings of Scripture would have to say that it is dangerous to depend upon mysteries which have no basis in Scripture, especially in light of the fact that Shaul clearly states that there is a “mystery of iniquity.”
Nowhere in Scripture is there any specific teaching regarding a Trinity, nor does history present to us any evidence that the early believers in Yahushua adopted such a view. The Trinity doctrine owes its existence to gnostic Greek philosophy, which was merged with teachings of Scripture to form another Mystery Religion (which was a perversion of the original Nazarene Jewish sect) called later by the name of Christianity!!
Anthony Buzzard has written a book called The Doctrine of the Trinity, Christianity’s Self Inflicted Wound. In an online article published by him, he says this about the history of non-trinitarianism:
Opposition to the Trinity is not confined to so-called "cults." That is a public myth. How many know what Sir Isaac Newton, John Locke and John Milton have in common? They are recognized as among the most intelligent Bible students of the seventeenth century. All objected strongly to the doctrine of the Trinity. These men cannot just be dismissed as ill-educated or prejudiced. They had very good reasons for what they believed and defended in writing. All three were vigorous anti-Trinitarians. So also was Thomas Jefferson, who examined the Trinitarian question carefully in the light of the Bible. How many know that Harvard University at one time expressed non-Trinitarian views? Many contemporary biblical scholars recognize that the Trinity is a post-biblical development.
One of the cruelest episodes in church history occurred when the reformer Calvin used the strong arm of the Catholic Church to burn at the stake a brilliant linguist, physician, geographer and Bible expert, Michael Servetus. The burning of others over an issue of doctrine is absolutely forbidden by the Bible and may cause some wonder about the spirit which drives such persecuting zeal over the definition of who God is. (For a recent fine account of this horrible cruelty in support of the Trinitarian cause, see Marian Hillar, The Case of Michael Servetus: The Turning Point in the Struggle for Freedom of Conscience, Edwin Mellen Press, 1997).[13]
John Cordaro and Matthew Jansen have also published an excellent book called Who Then is This… which deals directly with the issue of who the Messiah really is. His online articles have been referenced in the three major points given here for further reading on this subject.
Here is a summary of statements from various scholars (some of whom actually believed in a Trinity, but confessed it could not be found in the Bible) We will begin by examining this question from the vantage point of historical Jewish beliefs:
It was the proud boast of the Jew, who among all the nations of antiquity gloried in being a monotheist.[14]
Monotheism was the proud boast of the Jew. . . The first teachers of Christianity were never charged by the Jews (who unquestionably believed in the strict unity of God), with introducing any new theory of the Godhead.[15]
The Jews over 2000 years ago believed in a strict Monotheistic deity—with no other deity connected with him. Orthodox Jews today are of that same belief, and the Jewish religion has changed very little from those earlier times.[16] But wait! Stop! All throughout the gospels we have record after record of disputes between the disciples of Yahushua and Jewish leaders over various matters. Nowhere in those gospels, nor in any Jewish writings of the first century CE, do we find a statement such as “they believe their Messiah to be God,” or “they believe their Messiah is part of a Trinity of Gods.” Sometimes the people would falsely accuse Yahushua of claiming to be “God,” (as several statements in the Messianic Writings will attest). However, his responses never give any ascent to their accusations, and demonstrate that he himself believed in the “one God” of Judaism. So, these plain statements simply do not exist, and yet they should exist if a Trinity (or the deity of Messiah) was the original teaching of this ancient Jewish sect.
Many foolish and false charges were made against Christ; but this was never alleged against him or any of his disciples. When this doctrine of three persons in one God was introduced into the Church, by new converts to Christianity, it caused immense excitement for many years.[17]
Referring to the controversy generated by the introduction of the trinity doctrine, it is pointed out that prior to the fourth century no one even attempted to define such a belief (as it plainly did not exist). How can a doctrine newly introduced by new converts cause “immense excitement for many years” if it was, indeed, the original teaching of the disciples of Messiah?:
The subject of this fatal controversy, which kindled such deplorable divisions throughout the Christian world, was the doctrine of the Three Persons in the Godhead; a doctrine which in the three preceding centuries had happily escaped the vain curiosity of human researches, and had been left undefined and undetermined by any particular set of ideas.[18]
L. L. Paine, Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Bangor Theological Seminary, says this about the view of Yahweh as presented in the Bible:
The Old Testament is strictly monotheistic. God is a single personal being. The idea that a trinity is to be found there, or even in any way shadowed forth, is an assumption that has long held sway in theology, but is utterly without foundation. . . . On this point there is no break between the Old Testament and the New. The monotheistic tradition is continued. Jesus was a Jew, trained by Jewish parents in the Old Testament scriptures. His teaching was Jewish to the core; a new gospel indeed, but not a new theology. . . . And he accepted as his own belief the great text of Jewish monotheism: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one God.[19]
Many Christian scholars (while they still believe in the doctrine of the trinity) themselves openly admit that Scripture does not explicitly teach that doctrine—not even in the New Testament. Bishop Smallridge states:
It must be owned, that the doctrine of the Trinity as it is proposed in our Articles, our Liturgy, our Creeds, is not in so many words taught us in the Holy Scriptures. What we profess in our prayers we nowhere read in Scripture, that the one God, the one Lord, is not only one person, but three persons in one substance. There is no such text as this, ‘That the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. No one of the inspired writers hath expressly affirmed, that in the Trinity none is afore or after other, none is greater or less than another.[20]
Richard Hooker says it this way:
Our belief in the Trinity, the co-eternity of the Son of God with his Father, the proceeding of the Spirit from the Father and the Son, these with such other principal points are in Scripture nowhere to be found by express literal mention; only deduced they are out of Scripture by collection.[21]
Dr. Neander of the mid 19th century, states that the Trinity doctrine is not explicitly stated in any passage of the New Testament:
The Doctrine of the Trinity does not, it appears to me, belong strictly to the fundamentals of the Christian faith; as it appears from the fact that it is explicitly set forth in no one particular passage of the New Testament; for the only one in which this is done, the passage relating to the three that bear record (1 John 5) is undoubtedly spurious, and in its ungenuine shape testifies to the fact, how foreign such a collection is from the style of the New Testament writings. We find in the New Testament no other fundamental article besides that of which the apostle Paul says that other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, the preaching of Jesus Christ as the Messiah; and the foundation of His religion is designated by Christ himself as the faith in the only true God and in ‘Jesus Christ whom He hath sent.’[22]
Here is what the Encyclopedia of Religion has to say about the origins of the trinity:
Exegetes and theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity, even though it was customary in past dogmatic tracts on the Trinity to cite texts like Gen. 1.26 ‘Let us make humanity in our image, after our likeness.’ Although the Hebrew Bible depicts God as the father of Israel and employs personifications of God such as Word, Spirit, Wisdom, and Presence, it would go beyond the intention and spirit of the Old Testament to correlate these notions with later Trinitarian doctrine. ... Further exegetes and theologians agree that the New Testament also does not contain an explicit doctrine of the trinity ... In the New Testament there is no reflective consciousness of the metaphysical nature of God (‘immanent trinity’) nor does the New Testament contain the technical language of later doctrine.[23]
John Milton, 17th Century poet, civil servant, and “considered to be among the most learned of all English poets,”[24] wrote this blunt and direct statement about the trinity:
For my part I adhere to the Holy Scriptures alone, I follow no other heresy or sect. If, therefore, the Father be the God of Christ, and the same be our God, and if there be none other God but one, there can be no God beside the Father.[25]
Christopher Mill says that John Milton, John Locke, and Isaac Newton (among the greatest intellects of the 17th century) saw the rejection of the Trinity as thoroughly Bible based, and in harmony with both logic and common sense:
Miltons arguments against the Trinity are ultimately logical and commonsensical: Why create mystifications which are not to be found in the Bible? John Locke and Isaac Newton, with Milton the three greatest names of the period (c.1650), could not find Trinitarianism in the Bible.[26]
If the apostles were to be resurrected and brought back to life and then injected into our present world system, would they be accepted? Yes, admittedly, their dress and customs would be very different. But teach them our language, teach them to use our technology, give them suitable clothing, and then invite them to fellowship with Christians—would they feel at home in such an environment? Would our Messiah, even, feel at home there? And what message would they hear from the Christian pulpit? Would it be the same message that they themselves preached almost 2000 years ago?
Christians retained the same faith, believing in the strict unity of God, and the proper humanity of Christ, all the time of the Apostles and of those who conversed with them, but began to depart from that doctrine presently afterwards; and the defection advanced so fast, that in about one century more, the original doctrine was generally reprobated and deemed heretical.[27]
Dr. W. Matthews (Dean of St Pauls) sums it all up in this very honest statement of how the original disciples would view this Trinity doctrine:
It must be admitted by everyone who has the rudiments of an historical sense that the doctrine of the Trinity, as a doctrine, formed no part of the original message. St. Paul knew it not, and would have been unable to understand the meaning of the terms used in the theological formula on which the Church ultimately agreed.[28]
Once the Trinity doctrine is taken from its high pedestal to be exposed as a grievous error, and the doctrine of true oneness is exalted to its proper place (which is Unitarian in its very core, and very much like the Jewish faith), then the questions remain of Messiah, his life, his role, and his status as (supposed) deity. The fact is, without a Trinity doctrine to defend, the doctrine of the deity of Messiah is also brought to dust.
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
Did Yahushua Receive Divine Worship?
Now some will respond by saying “wasn’t Jesus ‘worshipped’ as deity while he was alive on this earth? Isn’t there plenty of evidence to support this?” While there are many other issues and references that well meaning people will bring up as proof of Yahushua’s deity, this is one of the most often used. Briefly, let us deal with that particular issue.
Here is an example of just one of the many texts in the Messianic Writings which talk about Yahushua being “worshipped:”
And, behold, there came a leper and worshiped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. And Yahushua put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed. (Matthew 8:2-3)
Actually, there are many examples similar to the text above, where Yahushua is “worshiped,” and it would seem that those who use such texts have an “open and shut case” to support the belief that Yahushua is deity, as it would appear that only deity can receive worship like he did. These texts are listed here for your consideration: Matthew 2:2; 2:8; 2:11; 9:8; 14:33; 15:25; 20:20; 28:9; 28:17; Mark 5:6; Luke 24:52; John 9:38; and Hebrews 1:6.
However, let us not be so quick to assume that this is real proof of one who is a deity to be worshiped. Please note a few other verses which use this exact same word in the Greek (proskuneo, from strong’s Greek Dictionary #4352):
Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants. And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. . . The servant therefore fell down, and worshiped (proskuneo) him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. (Matthew 18:23-24; 26)
In this text it is clear that the word proskuneo is being used to represent something like worship, and yet it is directed toward a king (not to deity). While it could be argued that the ‘king’ in this parable represents Yahweh, it is clear that Yahushua is introducing this literal ‘king’ using actions in that parable (such as bowing to a king) that would be understood as normal behavior among the people of his day. Therefore, this example of “worship” is not a special type of worship directed to Yahweh Himself, but the typical practice of the day of bowing before a king. Here is another even better example:
By faith, Jacob, when he was a dying, blessed both the sons of Joseph; and worshiped (proskuneo), leaning upon the top of his staff. (Hebrews 11:21)
The text this is based on is Genesis 48:12, where it plainly states that Jacob (Israel) “bowed himself with his face to the earth,” before the two sons of Joseph. This word for “bowed” is the Hebrew word shachah, #7812 in the strong’s Hebrew Dictionary. If Israel is worshiping the two sons of Joseph, then it is a serious breach of Yahweh’s laws. However, such is not the case, as that word can be used to denote either worship of Yahweh or bowing before a king or prince.
In Scripture, the act of prostrating oneself before kings, princes, and other noblemen is actually very common. Please note some examples of this in which, again, the Hebrew word shachah is used:
And Abraham stood up, and bowed himself (shachah) to the people of the land, even to the children of Heth. (Genesis 23:7)
And he passed over before them, and bowed himself (shachah) to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother. (Genesis 33:3)
For behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and, lo, my sheaf arose, and also stood upright; and, behold, your sheaves stood round about, and made obeisance (shachah) to my sheaf. (Genesis 37:7)
And Moses went out to meet his father-in-law, and did obeisance (shachah), and kissed him; and they asked each other of their welfare, and they came into the tent. (Exodus 18:7)
We could continue with other examples, but it is evident that bowing down itself is not necessarily the same as giving worship to Yahweh. The same words are used, but those words are not always being used to express divine worship. Often times, the bowing down of one before another is simply an example of “obeisance.” It is not strictly used to describe divine worship of a deity. As the examples we have given show, bowing down is commonly done as a way of showing honor to one who is in a superior position (such as a prince or king).
Here is another clear example of how bowing down (proskuneo) is not being used to describe divine worship at all:
Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship (proskuneo) before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee. (Revelation 3:9)
The Messiah is himself speaking to those from the assembly of Philadelphia. He does not say it is wrong for the wicked to prostrate (proskuneo) themselves before the righteous—therefore, that word for “worship” cannot be speaking strictly of divine worship, but instead includes the common ancient custom of bowing before a superior (like a king or a prince). And please note also that in this text being a true and faithful “Jew” is very important. Actually, it is only those who falsely claim to be Jews that are required to bow down before the saints of Yahweh, who would (by analogy) be true and faithful Jews.
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
The Messiah as Son of David and Son of Yahweh
In the Hebrew Scriptures, the Messiah is introduced to us in various statements. One such statement is found in the book of Psalm and the other in Second Samuel:
For thy servant Davids sake turn not away the face of thine anointed. Yahweh hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne. If thy children will keep my covenant and my testimony that I shall teach them, their children shall also sit upon thy throne for evermore. For Yahweh hath chosen Zion; he hath desired it for his habitation. (Psalm 132:10-13)
Yahushua was the direct descendant of David. This prophecy in the Psalms clearly states that the throne would be given to a direct descendant of David—“of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne.” If Yahushua is some sort of special “God-man,” whose seed is from heaven, from some “space alien,” or something other than the lineage of David, then how can he also fulfill this prophecy?
And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men: But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever. (2 Samuel 7:12-16)
While the primary fulfillment of this prophecy is in regard to Solomon, it is Yahushua who will ultimately sit on David’s throne and establish it “for ever.”. We know this because it plainly says “thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee.” Now notice the account of Matthew which ties it all together:
But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of Yahweh appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Yahushua: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of Yahweh by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, the Almighty with us. (Matthew 1:20-23)
Please take note of one key fact: Joseph is called the son of David. In order for the Messiah to fulfill his role as the king of Israel, and as a son of David, he would have to be literally the actual biological descendant of David. Now someone will protest and say, “no, he has to be born of a virgin in a miraculous way, so that could not be Joseph’s literal offspring!” Well, first, that is not what this text or other Scripture texts teach. Scripture teaches that Messiah is to be a biological descendant of David. And second, why not? Just because Yahweh performed a miraculous conception does not mean the child was not or could not be the son of Joseph. Yahweh would have had no problem placing the actual DNA of Joseph in the womb of Mary, and thus fulfill the divine directive. And in the case of John the Baptist, the same general story is given of a miraculous birth—but no one claims John to be deity, do they? John is even said to be filled with the holy spirit from before his birth, so does that mean he is also divinity? Remember, the Messiah must be of the seed of David for him to be the true Messiah!
Yahushua was the son of Joseph, and the son of David. He was also (in a special sense) the son of Yahweh since Yahweh’s spirit dwelt in him in a most profound manner. While he partook of and was given (through Yahweh’s spirit) a divine nature, he was clearly human in all respects. And the other prophecies do not speak of a coming “God-man,” but instead the Scripture speaks of Yahweh sending to them a “prophet like unto Moses.” (Deuteronomy 18:15-18 and Acts 3:22, 7:37). If the Messiah was to be a “God-man,” would not Moses have told us that? Instead he calls him a “prophet like unto Moses.” Do these Scriptures even suggest that the Messiah would be some pre-existent eternal deity who comes later to inhabit a human body? No, it does not.
The Messiah is truly human, even though his conception was supernatural. He is a direct descendant of David, and ultimately Adam. If this were not true, then he could not substantiate his claim to be the true Messiah, since the true Messiah was to come from the lineage of David. If we say that the Messiah is actually “God” who takes for himself a human body, then what about his descent from David? And if that be the case, why does it matter who he descended from, if he is some special “God-man?” When they say that the Messiah was simply a pre-existent spirit deity that takes on a human body, it totally negates the significance of his descent from David, as well as John’s statement that the true Messiah must be “human”—i.e., “come in the flesh.”
The official declaration of the Christian religion is that the Messiah is not a real human person, since they make him both human and divine. In 1 John 4:2 the true Messiah is depicted as being strictly human, while the anti-christ is depicted as being something other than purely human. And that makes all the difference in the world. The true Messiah did not just appear to be a man (as the Gnostics originally claimed), nor was he half man and half god (as Constantine injected into the Catholic belief system). He was a man—the “man Messiah Yahushua.” (1 Timothy 2:5)
The Babylonian “mystery religion” was based upon the worship of many deities, and as such Christianity has clearly followed suit with a Trinity of “gods” to worship. By exalting the Messiah to the rank of “deity” they have, in effect, made for themselves “another Messiah,” as the Apostle Shaul has warned us. The only way that they can sustain this most serious deception is to proclaim that “it is a mystery that cannot be explained,” so we must simply accept it “by faith.” However, while true religion does involve elements of “faith,” true saving faith does not override the importance of basing our beliefs upon a plain and simple “thus saith Yahweh.” If it did, then our faith would be in vain.
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
Who is Messiah, According to Christianity?
In the fourth and fifth century, Christianity (which was basically the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches at that time) dealt with several disputes regarding doctrinal issues. One of the major disputes was over the question of the nature of Yahweh (which included the Messiah). In the Council of Chalcedon, in 451 CE, the issue was dealt with and it was decided what exactly the fundamental belief would be concerning the nature of Messiah. This decision has been faithfully followed by almost every single Christian denomination since that time, no matter what sect they belong to. Here is what they decided:
The Messiah is both fully God (Deity) and fully man (human)!
This is the essence of the Chalcedonian decision regarding the fundamental nature of Messiah. Does this declaration present a problem? Yes it does! A Roman Catholic theologian, named Thomas Hart, published a book called To Know and Follow Jesus. In that book he gives a critical examination of the creeds of Christianity, as initially introduced in the Council of Chalcedon. Here is what he says about this:
Jesus is called ‘man’ in the generic sense, but not ‘a man.’ He has human nature, but is not a human person. The person in him is the second person of the Blessed Trinity. Jesus does not have a human personal center. This is how the Council gets round the possible problem of split personality.[29]
Hart continues to explain the problem with this interpretation that teaches the Messiah is both fully God and fully man:
The Chalcedonian formula makes genuine humanity impossible. The conciliar definition says that Jesus is true man. But if there are two natures in Him, it is clear which will dominate. And Jesus becomes immediately very different from us. He is omniscient [all-knowing], omnipotent, and omnipresent.... This is far from ordinary human experience. Jesus is tempted but cannot sin because he is God. What kind of temptation is this? It has little in common with the kind of struggles we are familiar with…[30]
Just to clarify what the official position of the mainstream churches are in this regard, we have a definitive answer from What Think Ye of Christ?, by Leslie Simmonds, regarding the decisions of these councils and their doctrinal definitions:
Now the doctrine of the Incarnation is that in Christ the place of a human personality is replaced by the Divine Personality of God the Son, the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity. Christ possesses a complete human nature without a human personality. Uncreated and eternal Divine Personality replaces a created human personality in Him.[31]
Please take note of the fact that whether one holds to the orthodox Trinitarian view, the less than orthodox view of “Oneness”, or even the “duality” view, the conclusion regarding their understanding of Messiah cannot be changed. Most who believe this basic Catholic/Christian interpretation of the Messiah are completely unaware of the serious implications that go along with it. According to those views, the Messiah is not strictly human. And by that definition, those who hold to such views are following “another Yahushua”—an antichrist spirit! So says John the Apostle in his brief but poignant letters.
Think about it: In order for the Christian churches (Catholic, Protestant, Messianic, etc.) to justify their belief that Yahushua (Jesus to most of them) is God in the flesh, the second member of the trinity, or another manifestation of God in the flesh, they have no choice but to take away (to some degree) his humanity. For them Yahushua is an eternal spirit deity, who took a human body form at a later time, to partake of human nature—but his humanity was lost to divinity (according to their thinking) after his resurrection. Surprisingly, this is an exact fulfillment of the warning of John—that the antichrist spirit would be one which declares that the Messiah is not really human, but instead he is divinity occupying a human body for mystical purposes. It is the most significant aspect of the “Mystery Babylon” world religious system, which replaces the true Messiah with “another” Messiah.
These are the three basic facts (from the plain teaching of Scripture) which must be acknowledged before any further study on this regard will mean anything. #1. The Messiah is not the same as his heavenly Father—they are both distinct individuals. #2. The Messiah prays to and gives worship to Yahweh, therefore, he is clearly subordinate to Yahweh (which means he cannot be deity). #3. The Messiah is not Yahweh, nor is he part of a Trinity (or Duality). He is not deity. He is in fact a man—a sinless man, son of David, son of Adam, and (by adoption) the firstborn son of Yahweh. He clearly has the imprint of the divine nature of Yahweh, he is a carbon copy of Yahweh’s character in human form, but he is not divinity. If you cannot come to grips with these basic fundamental “facts” then you might as well stop right here and continue no further (until such time as you are reconciled to accepting these “facts”), otherwise everything else presented in this study will be of no value to you and will mean nothing.
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
We have established that the true Messiah is a man, not deity. However, these same texts are used by Christian evangelists to teach just the opposite—that Messiah was “God in the flesh.” Since they truly believe this with all their heart, they therefore believe that Antichrist will be a person who rejects the Messiah of Israel as “God in the flesh.” However, as we have read those texts several times over already—nowhere does it say that the Messiah has to be “God in the flesh,” only that Messiah would come to us “in the flesh.” Basically, it means the true Messiah would be strictly human, whereas the Anti-Messiah would be the spirit which denies the fundamental humanity of Messiah. Since this is indeed the true meaning of that text, the “God-Man” preachers of a Messianic “God in the flesh” (i.e., Catholics, almost all Protestants, and Messianics) are without Scriptural foundation.
Let’s look at where these beliefs have led people in their understanding of a personal “Anti-Messiah” (which is not Scriptural, since nowhere in the Bible does it teach that there is a single solitary person who qualifies as “Antichrist”):
It is said that the Antichrist will sit in the rebuilt Jewish temple in Jerusalem and declare himself to be “God.” However, this does not mean he will try to pass himself off as the personal, infinite, triune God of the Christian Bible, but only as a god of the New Age variety. (The letter “g” does not have to be capitalized in the Greek.) In fact, in this very same passage it is said that he “opposeth” everything associated with the true God in Heaven. Furthermore, not only will he oppose God immediately after the Rapture when he executes Christian believers for their faith in Christ, but even before the Rapture, he will advocate his own brand of morality and spirituality as confirmed in a number of passages.
Daniel 7:25 gives us additional insight: “And he (the Antichrist) shall speak great words against the most High.... and think to change times and laws...” In other words, Antichrist will speak boldly and defiantly against the true God of biblical Christianity while advocating his own standard of morals and values for society. No decent standard or sensible norm will be safe from attack or immune to criticism. Accordingly, from the very outset, there will never be any pretense on his part at feeling very sympathetic towards Israel or Jews or Bible-believing Christians, nor will he ever pretend to be the Jewish Messiah as some people suppose — especially since Israel will be one of the very first countries he will attack when he first rises to power. (Dan. 8:9). Instead, he will begin soon after his initial appearance to criticize and defy traditional Christian beliefs and moral values and cultural conventions, and then immediately after the Rapture, will even kill anyone who proclaims their faith in Christ. Later, he will also violate the sanctity of the sacred Holy of Holies room in a rebuilt Jewish Temple while proclaiming himself to be the god of gods.
I John 4:3
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. (KJV)
II John 1:7
7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. (KJV)
I John2:18,22
18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. (KJV)
In the above passages, not only are we told that a specific, unique personage called the “antichrist” will appear some day, but we are also informed that since the inception of Christianity, there always have been people who have denied that the historic Jesus Christ is God manifested in the flesh. Or as noted in I John 2:22, that both God the Father and God the Son are the true God in Heaven. Thus, these people, too, are “little” antichrists in a manner of speaking. So, while we are warned against the heresy these people teach, we are also given further insight as to exactly what the Antichrist will advocate, and how the Bible itself actually defines the word “antichrist.”[32]
Those who believe the way this author teaches the Anti-Messiah would come, along with the works he will do, will most likely stand in opposition to the true Messiah when he comes. Scripture actually teaches that when Messiah comes he will restore the temple sacrifices (just as this author says the Antichrist will do)! Scripture teaches that Messiah is a man, not deity! Most Christians are waiting for a Messiah who actually does proclaim himself to be “God!” What an enigma!
Please note that the author says “Instead, he will begin soon after his initial appearance to criticize and defy traditional Christian beliefs and moral values and cultural conventions.” If we follow the logic of this person, those who “criticize and defy traditional Christian beliefs . . .” would have that same “antichrist spirit” which he ascribes to those who deny the deity of Messiah. Based upon that, I could actually be called antichrist since I do not ascribe to his system of belief. However, according to the apostle John it is clear that antichrist is one who strictly denies the humanity of Messiah—a true definition of that text on anti-christ which I faithfully uphold.
Since when are “traditional Christian beliefs and moral values” worthy of saving anyway? Christian beliefs are a hodgepodge of truth and error, gnostic Greek philosophy and Biblical values. It is Christianity itself which has become the vehicle by which the “spirit of antichrist” has found safe haven, and this vehicle has been allowed to drive unhindered in the world for about 1700 years. And while Judaism has its share of non-Biblical values, it has weathered the storm far better than Christianity as it has essentially remained faithful to the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4) and to upholding Torah as the fundamental standard on righteous living.
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
What Was Yahushua Our Messiah Like?
The Messiah of the Messianic Writings was a man. Yes, he was without sin. Yes, he was the son of Yahweh. Yes, he had a divine nature and was a carbon copy of the eternal Father. But he was not the Father, and he was not divinity—he was a man. And as a man he had a human nature that was handed down to him from Adam—a nature which tends to produce sin in our lives. It is because of that tendency toward sin that Satan sought to seduce him into committing sin, for it would make no sense for Satan to attempt to seduce someone who was incapable of committing sin (as it is obvious that someone who was deity could not even be tempted to sin). Now let’s look at what Hebrews says about this, and how Yahushua shared our fundamental nature:
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to Yahweh, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted. (Hebrews 2:14-18)
Please note that this plainly says that the Messiah was human, and did not take on the nature of angels—but of the seed of Abraham. He was made like his brethren, so that he could be a merciful high priest, faithful to his calling, as he makes reconciliation (because of their sins) between them and Yahweh. He was tempted, he suffered, and he is fully able to save those who have also been tempted like he was.
But we see Yahushua, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of the Almighty should taste death for every man. For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren. (Hebrews 2:9-11)
Not only was Yahushua made perfect through sufferings, but he was one with humanity, as the text says “are all of one.” And in Philippians 2 we, as believers in Messiah, are called to emulate the example of Yahushua as he did not seek to be placed on equality with Yahweh, but humbled himself and eventually died on the cross.
make my joy full, by being like-minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind; doing nothing through rivalry or through conceit, but in humility, each counting others better than himself; each of you not just looking to his own things, but each of you also to the things of others. Have this in your mind, which was also in Yahushua Messiah, who, existing in the form of Yahweh, didnt consider equality with Yahweh a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, yes, the death of the cross. (Philippians 2:2-8, World English Bible)
Yes, this is one of the texts which (when taken from the King James Version) seems to teach that Yahushua did not think it wrong to be equal to Yahweh. However, as several other translations attest, this is clearly a translation error. The theme of this whole statement is that of humility and submission—it is not talking about exaltation to become equal to Yahweh. It is telling us the exact opposite—that our Messiah (even though he was in the form of Yahweh) did not even consider exalting himself to equality with Yahweh! And in this text, we are explicitly told to do the same.
Since the Messiah was born into this world with the same tendency toward sin as we, he is ideally able to both identify with us and redeem us through his atonement. In order for him to fully identify with us, he would have to be completely like us in every detail. He could not be part God and part man, for this would make it impossible for him to atone for us—since he would not truly be fully like us in nature, as the text from Phillippians 2 plainly says.
Having then a great high priest, who has passed through the heavens, Yahushua, the Son of Yahweh, let us hold tightly to our confession. For we dont have a high priest who cant be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but one who has been in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin. (Hebrews 4:14-15)
Our Messiah fully understands our infirmities, and was tempted in every way as we are, but without having committed sin. In the next reference, he is clearly stated to be the direct physical offspring of David, and as such could not possibly be some sort of “god-man.”
Of this man’s [David’s] seed hath the Almighty according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Yahushua: (Acts 13:23)
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
The first Adam failed to live up to his righteous calling. Yahushua our Messiah (who was a descendant of Adam) did not fail to do this. As a result, he is able to save us to the uttermost. That makes him the last Adam—the only one who can restore us to a right relationship with our heavenly Father Yahweh.
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. (1 Corinthians 15:45)
If in this life only we have hope in Messiah, we are of all men most miserable. But now is Messiah risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Messiah shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Messiah the firstfruits; afterward they that are Messiah’s at his coming. (1 Corinthians 15:19-23)
This last text says that “in Adam all die.” What exactly does that mean? Does that mean we all inherited sin from Adam? Well, no, because if that were the case then Messiah also inherited sin from Adam—as he was clearly a descendant of Adam. When it says “in Adam all die” it is simply reiterating the well known declaration of Yahweh from the beginning that because of Adam’s sin, death would be our inheritance:
And Almighty Yahweh commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. (Genesis 2:16-17)
As a result of the curse, Adam and all of his descendants have been given a death sentence. But because of the Messiah that death sentence has been commuted, so that those who believe in the Messiah who came in the flesh (as a true human being) might be given eternal life.
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
Our Messiah was a man, who in all ways was tempted as we are—yet without sin. He was flesh and blood, just like us, and partook even of our very nature.
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same, that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is the devil. (Hebrews 2:14)
The so-called “orthodox” view of the Messiah’s death was that deity died on the cross, and therefore was our “substitute.” However, the idea that deity can die is really monstrous—and Scripture does not permit such a view. And since Yahushua was a man, and not deity (although he had the imprint of the divine nature), this view cannot work, and again, is not based on Scripture nor even reason.
Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Messiah Yahushua: Whom the Almighty hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of the Almighty; (Romans 3:24-25)
It is not through some legal requirement of a strictly “substitutionary” death that we are saved, but because of the “forbearance” (i.e., forgiveness) of sins from our heavenly Father. The idea of a strictly substitutionary death implies that Yahweh doesn’t really care, that He believes in human sacrifices, and that someone had to die in our place to make reconciliation possible. It also implies that our salvation requires nothing on our part. Yahweh does care, but because of His righteousness he cannot permit sin to continue forever, nor can he allow it to be exhibited in His presence. Yahushua lived a sinless life, and died for us according to the law, and as such is able to save us if we submit our will to his. We are “hidden” in Messiah, and considered by Yahweh to be part of him—therefore, because of that, worthy of eternal life. It is not because of works or merit that we are saved, although it is natural that the works will follow.
Because of what our Messiah has done for us, Yahweh has indeed forgiven us—and if we come under the protective wing of our Messiah, we will be saved. We do this first through baptism in his name, then by living a new life in Messiah. In doing this, however, that does not give us license to sin. The righteous requirements of Torah are still in effect and we no longer live to the flesh, with its fear of death, but live to the Sprit—to please Yahweh. The atonement is complete in Yahushua.
But the Almighty commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Messiah died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to the Almighty by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not only so, but we also joy in the Almighty through our Lord Yahushua Messiah, by whom we have now received the atonement. (Romans 5:8-11)
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
The Blood Atonement of Messiah
In the book of Hebrews a comparison is made between the Torah (which typified the works which bring salvation) and the work of Messiah Yahushua (which shows us the way of salvation). There it speaks of the Day of Atonement (the most holy day in the Hebrew calendar) which is a shadow to point us to the complete forgiveness of our sins which could only ultimately be made possible by the death and resurrection of Yahushua Messiah. Leviticus 16 describes for us the complex process through which the High Priest would enter the Most Holy Place once a year (the Day of Atonement) to minister on our behalf.
The High Priest was given several duties to perform, and each of these duties has an important place in typifying the work of Yahushua. Only the High Priest was allowed into the presence of Yahweh on that day, but something which is often forgotten is that the High Priest had to enter the Most Holy Place twice—not just once. Leviticus 16:11 says that the High Priest had to sprinkle the blood upon the Ark to make a “sin offering for himself” and the second time he did this for the purpose of making a blood atonement for the sins of the people (Leviticus 16:15). Following the typology of this, did Yahushua (our ultimate High Priest) have to make an atonement for Himself? Or do we simply throw out the typology and say it has no meaning?
Hebrews reiterates the same details as mentioned in Leviticus 16, as it tells us that the double atonement of Leviticus 16 is still applicable to the ministry of Yahushua:
He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did this once for all when he offered up himself. (Hebrews 7:27).
This is clearly stating that the Messiah does not need to offer sacrifices on a daily basis, but did this “on one occasion” (the actual meaning of “once”) when he offered his own blood that was shed on the cross. But please notice the two-fold aspect of this is still reiterated in the text, and the text speaks primarily of the work of Yahushua along with all other high priests. The author could have left this information about this dual aspect out if it were not important, since he left out many other details which he could have mentioned. This shows it was clearly important to him. Hebrews nine continues to reiterate this two-fold aspect of the High Priests ministry:
but into the second the high priest alone, once in the year, not without blood, which he offereth for himself, and for the errors of the people (Hebrews 9:7)
Yahushua was clearly free from sin, and yet he was a man who was made like us in the human (as in mortal) flesh. While he did not need to repent of sin, he still had to make atonement for himself since he was born as a son of Adam and was (therefore) subject to death. Otherwise, as our Great High Priest, he would not have needed to offer up a blood atonement for himself also. Yet the first text I mentioned from Hebrews clearly says he did (which I will demonstrate more fully later).
Now regardless of popular ideas regarding Messiah’s work, it is important to recognize that Yahushua always did that which his heavenly Father told him. And (as recorded in Matthew 5) he taught strict obedience to Torah, as he says:
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17-19)
If, as this text explains, Yahushua did not come to destroy the law, then he would have been obedient to that law (the Torah) in all things. The Torah plainly says that the high priest was to offer up a sacrifice for himself and the people on the Day of Atonement. Hebrews reiterates this twice, and the Messiah himself acknowledges that the Torah has not been changed or done away with. Therefore, it is clear that since Yahushua is our great high priest, he made an atonement for himself and for the people—and there is no way of getting around that simple fact, for it is commanded in Torah to do that.
Now let us consider the example of Yahushua’s baptism. Why did he submit to baptism, when baptism was primarily a demonstration of repentance from sin? Note what he says about this:
I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire. Then cometh Yahushua from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? And Yahushua answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him. (Matthew 3:11-15)
Was the Messiah a sinner, who needed baptism to show repentance from sin? No, he was not. Yet he was baptized. Was he a son of Adam, under the death penalty for sin? Yes, he was.
He was baptized, even though he was sinless, just as he offered an atonement for himself for sins he did not commit. Why, again, did he do this? Because he was still under the curse of death because of Adam. Please note that the Messianic Writings even say that he was made to be sin, while without having any sins of his own:
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of Yahweh in him. (2 Corinthians 5:21)
The Messiah has atoned for our sins, and he died for us. But for those who deny that the Messiah was ever under the condemnation of death because of the sins of Adam, they need to be made aware of the fact that this is exactly what Romans says:
For we know that Messiah being raised from the dead will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him (Romans 6:9).
If death no longer has dominion over him, then it is true that at some point in time death did have dominion over him—for “in Adam all die.” And again in these texts:
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. (Romans 5:14)
For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Messiah shall all be made alive. (1Corinthians 15:21-22)
This last text plainly says that “in Adam all die.” Since our Messiah was a man, a son of David, a son of Abraham, and a son of Adam, this statement applies to him also. There is simply no way of getting around it—our Messiah was (while alive on this earth) subject to death, for “in Adam all die.” Did he atone for his own personal sins? No, because he had no sin. Then why did he have to do this other than it being a requirement of Torah? Because he was still under the death sentence given to Adam and all of his descendents. Remember, that text plainly says that “in Adam all die.” Since our Messiah was also a descendent of Adam, he was also subject to the death that Adam and all of those after him were subject to.
Conclusion: Yahushua needed redemption for himself, just as his blood would provide redemption for us. Sounds heretical, doesn’t it? Read on….
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
Messiah the Firstfruits of Salvation
If our Messiah was indeed deity in the flesh, then yes, he would certainly not need redemption for himself. However, he is not deity (as I have already amply demonstrated). If the Messiah did not need salvation as well, then how is it that Romans plainly says that death “no longer” has dominion over the Messiah? Such a statement makes no sense unless our Messiah was indeed fully man, and fully under the death sentence which we all inherited from Adam. He did not obtain eternal life until his resurrection!
Our Messiah is called the “firstfruits” of those that are dead. That plainly means that he is the first to fully conquer death, and therefore shows that he was indeed subject to death.[33] Because his heavenly Father saw righteousness in his shed blood, Yahweh did not permit his body to see corruption beyond three days. At his resurrection he conquered death, first for himself and then (by faith) for everyone else who is descended from Adam.
But now is Messiah risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Messiah shall all be made alive. (1 Corinthians 15:20-22)
If all of us are sons of Adam, and (according to this text) are appointed to die, does that include the Messiah himself? Yahushua called himself the “son of man” very frequently in the gospel accounts—he clearly identified himself as a “son of Adam,” for that is what “son of man” truly means. So yes, he also had to obtain eternal salvation. And having obtained that eternal salvation, he has provided the same for us as well.
Is there other evidence that Yahushua was going to provide redemption for himself? Yes there is.
Zechariah 9 is a prophecy of the Messiah’s magnificent entry into Jerusalem. In the marginal reading of the Authorized Version of Zechariah 9:9, it translates the text as this:
Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and saving himself: lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. (Zechariah 9:9, Authorized Version)
This marginal reading shows another possible meaning of the text to be that the Messiah King would humbly ride into Jerusalem on an ass, and that he would soon after that bring salvation to himself. Just remember, it is His own personal victory over death that gives us true hope of salvation for ourselves as well.
Please note that this alternate reading of the text is mentioned from another source:
He is a powerful protector to all those that bear faith and true allegiance to him, for he has salvation; he has it in his power; he has it to bestow upon all his subjects. He is the God of salvation; treasures of salvation are in him. He is servatus-saving himself (so some read it), rising out of the grave by his own power and so qualifying himself to be our Saviour.[34]
Going back to the book of Hebrews, the reading of Hebrews 9 demonstrates the difficulty the translators had with another related text. Here is how the text reads:
But Messiah being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. (Hebrews 9:11-12)
Please notice that the text has the last words “for us” in italics. That means the words do not appear in the original, which begs the question, why didn’t they just leave off these words so that it would simply read “having obtained eternal redemption?” Some translations do that, but the answer to our question is that the original text actually should have an additional set of words in it, but the translators could not bear to translate it that way. Those last words should actually read “for himself”—however, the translators (evidently) could not allow themselves to translate it exactly as given, even though the typology of the Day of Atonement sacrifices strongly suggested that the Messiah saved himself. In the book The Blood of Christ, it is explained in more detail regarding a better translation of this text:
You will observe that the two italicised words, for us, are not in the original. In the Authorised Version of 1611 they are added to the translation, and they are added in defiance of grammatical propriety. In the Revised Version of 1881 they are omitted. The verb is in the middle voice, and the meaning of that is remarkable in this connection. We have no middle voice in English: we have passive or active voice: you either do or are done to in English; but in Greek, there is another voice, a middle voice, a state of the verb in which you do a thing to yourself. "Having obtained in himself eternal redemption.”[35]
The author of Hebrews purposely used a form of Greek which indicated that the Messiah obtained eternal redemption “for himself,” “in himself,” “to himself.” And there may be other possible ways of translating this text, but the bottom line is that the middle voice is to be understood as indicating an action that is being done “to yourself.” Adding the words “for us” would not be correct, nor would just leaving those words out. While alternate translations are possible, the fundamental idea to be conveyed with the middle voice is that the person in question is doing something “to himself.”
Now let’s look more closely at this word euramenos which means “to obtain.” In several reference works regarding the Greek language, examples of the middle voice are given and various translations are suggested. Note that in the second reference given here, they actually use Hebrews 9:12 as an example of the middle voice. For the readers benefit, online sources of information are also given for reference purposes. Please note how they translate that text:
2. Indirect (Indirect Reflexive, Benefactive, Intensive, Dynamic) Middle
The subject acts for (or sometimes by) himself or herself, or in his or her own interest. This is a common use of the middle in the NT; apart from the deponent middle, it is the most common. This usage is closest to the general definition of the middle suggested by many grammarians.
Acts 5:2 And he kept back [some] of the price [for himself][36]
Voice is that property of the verbal idea which indicates how the subject is related to the action. In Greek, the active and passive voices are just like the English equivalents, but the Greek has an additional voice called the Middle Voice which has a reflexive force.
Greek Voices
|
VOICE |
THOUGHT |
EXAMPLE |
|
Active |
The subject of the verb produces the action us..." (Rom. 5:8). |
"But God shows his love for us..."(Rom. 5.8). |
|
Passive |
The subject of the verb receives the action. |
"...but you were sanctified, you were justified..." (1 Cor. 6:11). |
|
Middle |
The subject of the verb participates in the results of the action |
"He himself secured eternal redemption" (Heb. 9:12). |
The middle voice is peculiarly Greek in its usage and defies exactness of translation into English. But we can understand several things about its various uses.
1. It refers the action back to the one acting. The action in some way reflects back upon the subject of the verb. It can have roughly the force of a reflexive pronoun as we would use it in English. For example, "...I will myself be a Father to him..." (Heb. 1:5, italics mine) in which the verb will be is in the middle voice.
2. It can have the force of emphasizing the part taken by the subject of the verb as in "...having by himself made a cleansing of sins..." (Heb. 1:3, literal translation, italics mine).
3. It can represent the subject as voluntarily yielding himself to the action of the verb, e.g., "Why not let yourselves be wronged?" (1 Cor. 6:7, literal translation, italics mine). [37]
In the first reference it says that the middle voice can often denote how “The subject acts for (or sometimes by) himself or herself, or in his or her own interest. This is a common use of the middle in the NT; apart from the deponent middle, it is the most common.” The indirect middle is the most common middle form, and the deponent middle is the second most common form, according to this reference. The deponent middle form is one which does not have an active form, and so has been forced by common usage to always be translated as active.[38]
This last reference also gives us the translation of Hebrews 9:12—"He himself secured eternal redemption" (Heb. 9:12). Another online study of Greek tenses gives a similar translation of that text as its example regarding Hebrews 9:12:
2.
Middle Voice.
The subject participates in the results of the
action ("He hanged himself" - Matthew 27:5).
Additional
stress is laid upon the subject as producing the action ("He
himself obtained eternal redemption"
- Hebrews 9:12).[39]
You may have to read these over a few times to understand the basic meaning, but it seems the message is clear—our Messiah was a righteous high priest, whose spilt blood was accepted as an atonement for sin, such that he was victorious over death, and therefore “he himself obtained eternal redemption,” for himself and (as a result) all those who place their banner under him. While we do not need to depend strictly upon this information alone from Hebrews (as there is plenty of evidence from the Messianic Writings that Messiah only obtained eternal life at his resurrection), it is certainly in line with other gospel accounts since our Messiah was indeed a man, and as such subject to death. He therefore needed redemption from the death penalty given to all of us, for “in Adam all die.” His success in this regard opened the door of salvation to us as well.
Some may object to this understanding as blasphemous, however, we must not look at the Bible from our own feeble understanding. One of the objections to this translation of the text is that the middle voice is used in other places, and such usage does not always point to the individual himself receiving the benefit of the action. While this is true sometimes, it is not always the case. So, the key is to realize that without the inclusion of the actual qualifying phrase “for us” in Hebrews 9:12 (which is often supplied by the translators) it is much more likely that the reading should be given as suggested—“for himself.”[40]
However, let us not stop here with a passage which some may wish to dispute. Let us go to another passage which clearly, emphatically, and without reservation states that our Messiah benefited from his own sacrifice, such that his salvation from death was assured to him by his own shed blood! The text is also in Hebrews, Hebrews 13:
Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Yahushua, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, Make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Yahushua Messiah; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. (Hebrews 13:20-21)
This text plainly states that it was Yahweh who raised Yahushua from the dead, and it was the “blood of the everlasting covenant” that made it possible. Simply put, it was Messiah Yahushua’s own blood which was the master key to bring about his own salvation from the bonds of death. Such a statement merely augments and reinforces what has been said earlier regarding the proper translation of Hebrews 9:12—“he himself obtained eternal redemption.”
Another translation of Hebrews 13 states it even more clearly:
Now may the God of peace, who made that great keeper of his flock, even our Lord Jesus, come back from the dead through the blood of the eternal agreement,[41]
All of this makes perfect sense when (and only when) you realize that Scripture clearly presents Messiah as a man (not deity) and that he is the “firstfruits” of salvation (because of his resurrection). With that as our foundation, it is clear why our Messiah obtained for himself “eternal redemption.” He did not have eternal life prior to that event, because (as stated and amply demonstrated many times prior to this) he was a man—not an eternal member of some “godhead,” who supposedly pre-existed and then stole another man’s body!! It is because of this act from our Messiah that we also have the hope of eternal life. Clearly, based upon this and other statements we have listed here, our Messiah not only obtained redemption for us who truly believe on him (and follow in his footsteps), but first and foremost for himself. And it is for this reason that we now have the hope of eternal life!
Now let’s read that text from Hebrews 9:12 again, supplying the words which were left out of most translations:
But Messiah having come a high priest of the good things to come, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation, nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, entered in once for all into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for himself. (Hebrews 9:11-12)
The other translation given earlier conveys the same basic meaning, where it says “having himself obtained eternal redemption.” The “eternal redemption” which he provided was first “for himself,” and afterwards for us (as we appropriate it for ourselves). All of this has been confirmed in Hebrews 7:27, 9:12, and 13:20, as well as other texts in Scripture which clearly point to a Messiah who delivered Himself from eternal death through the merits of his own shed blood. The Messiah was given deliverance from eternal death by his own blood, just as we also have been delivered from the curse of death (if we are willing to accept his offer of salvation).
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
Perfection Through Messiah’s Atonement
Because of prevailing views regarding the nature of sin, it is necessary to review some important information about the doctrine of original sin. There is the false teaching which was introduced by Augustine and made popular for protestants by Calvin that we all inherited sin in our lives. This teaching says that an innocent baby is born a sinner. Scripture does not teach that. Scripture teaches that we inherited the death sentence for sin from Adam, and we inherited the propensity to sin, but we did not inherit sin itself. As free moral agents we can (through the power of Yahweh and the atonement of Messiah) overcome sin, and even live a perfect sinless life!!
Notice what is said in the Messianic Writings about the so-called “original sin:”
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of Yahweh, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Yahushua Messiah, hath abounded unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one mans offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Yahushua Messiah.) Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. (Romans 5:12-19)
Please notice that this text nowhere says that we actually inherited sin in our lives. That is merely Augustine’s and Calvin’s interpretation. However, it is right to say that we inherited a natural tendency to commit sin, as the history of this world clearly demonstrates. And, of course, while death reigned on this earth because of one man (Adam), because of the perfect righteousness of one man (Yahushua, the last Adam) we can be partakers of eternal life.
The truth regarding Yahushua’s life shows that he is 100% human, the son of David, and that he grew in wisdom and knowledge throughout his life, until he was perfected as a man. Yes, he was sinless, but then all of us are sinless when we are born. At some time in our lives we choose to sin, and thereby bore the guilt of sin. Yahushua never did sin, and as he grew he became the perfect representative of the human race (the last Adam) who alone could atone for our sins. Yahweh is already perfect, already fully mature, and already all-knowing and all-seeing. Since Yahushua needed to grow into the perfect man, he therefore could not in some way be part of deity. Notice how plainly all of this is proven just through these passages alone:
And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of Yahweh was upon him. . . . And Yahushua increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with Yahweh and man. (Luke 2:40, 52)
For the law appoints as high priests men who have weakness, but the word of the oath, which came after the law, appoints the Son who has been perfected forever. (Hebrews 7:28; New King James Version)
though He was a Son, yet He learned obedience by the things which He suffered. And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him. (Hebrews 5:8-9)
Those who believe that the Son of Yahweh was immaculately conceived by Mary, is part of a triune Godhead, or even is Yahweh himself in the flesh, must contend with these and other verses which plainly state that Yahushua was perfected as a man, to become our perfect atonement and our perfect example. As the Messiah gives us a perfect example to follow, we (as the children of Yahweh) are expected to follow that example of living a perfect sinless life. Those who deny that we can become perfect (either in word or action) show by their own faulty example that they are not sons of Yahweh!!
Whosoever believeth that Yahushua is the Messiah is born of Yahweh: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. By this we know that we love the children of Yahweh, when we love Yahweh, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of Yahweh, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. For whatsoever is born of Yahweh overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Yahushua is the Son of Yahweh? (1 John 5:1-5)
Yahushua was far beyond all other men, in knowledge of Yahweh, in wisdom, in purity, and without any sin. But he was a man, and (while sinless) he also grew in knowledge and wisdom, and finally attained complete perfection through his sufferings to eventually acquire eternal life. And it was through his death and resurrection that the power of Satan over us was also broken. He is the first to obtain eternal life, and is therefore called the “firstborn” among brethren. While he was without sin, he still had a tendency toward sin (as we all do) which came to us because of Adam (which caused death to come to the human race). He is the firstfruits, and we who follow him in perfection will also become firstfruits to Yahweh at the Messiah’s coming and the resurrection of the dead. We will be accounted worthy to be priests and rulers in his soon coming Messianic kingdom.
Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of Yahweh was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whosoever is born of Yahweh doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of Yahweh. In this the children of Yahweh are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of Yahweh, neither he that loveth not his brother. For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. (1 John 3:6-11)
Those who teach that we will continue to sin until Messiah comes do not seem to understand. Yes, many will continue to sin until Messiah comes, but those who teach that and live that (the wicked) will be destroyed by the brightness of his coming. John has plainly told us that those who commit sin are of the devil, and those who are truly born of Yahweh do not and cannot sin.
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, Yahweh sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against the Almighty: for it is not subject to the law of Yahweh, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please Yahweh. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of Yahweh dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Messiah, he is none of his. (Romans 8:3-9)
The true Messiah is nothing like most of us have ever considered, as I have revealed that he is the Jewish Messiah, a man sent by Yahweh to “show us the Father” and at the same time redeem us from the curse of sin. The Messiah is the way of salvation for all mankind (the Jew first, and the Gentiles to follow). He who did not know sin was made to be sin for us, that the power of Satan over us might be broken and we might be given a way of escape from the penalty of sin and the dominion of sin over our lives. While Satan has his “mystery” religion, with its false “messiah,” and “triune Godhead,” Yahweh has His true “mystery” of salvation—“Messiah in you, the hope of glory:”
To whom the Almighty would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Messiah in you, the hope of glory: Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Messiah Yahushua: (Colossians 1:27-28)
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
Reveal Jewish Messiah - Jesus Yahshua is Not God
Are you a Jew? If so, I certainly cannot blame you for not believing in the “Christian” Messiah. But the man who came to us almost 2000 years ago was also a Jew, a man just like you—only without sin, and a perfect representative of Yahweh. He kept Shabbat, he ate kosher, and followed Torah. And most important of all, he recognized that Yahweh was the Creator, his heavenly Father—the one and only Deity, as expressed by the Shema of Deuteronomy 6:4. And while he placed the Shema foremost in his thoughts, he fulfilled that command by always seeking to do "the will of his Father." And he is coming again soon to save those who truly follow Torah and who place themselves under his protection, the Jew first, the other tribes to follow (which are being gathered even now), and the strangers (gentiles) who are willing to also submit to his authority—the authority invested to him by Yahweh, the Eternal One. So, whether you accept him now as Messiah or not, please search the Torah, live out the true principles of Torah in your life, and prepare to receive the Jewish Messiah that is coming. Hopefully, we will all be waiting for and seeking after that same Messiah--not the messiah of our vain imaginations. When and if you and I are found worthy to meet him we can ask him together the question—“Is this the first time you have come, or did you come before?”
According to the Jubilee Code, Messiah is coming soon. Shouldn't we prepare to receive this Messiah by having a clearer understanding of who Messiah really is?
[1]Jesus Is a Jew, http://jesusisajew.org/Jesus_is_a_Jew.php
[2]Wikipedia, Judaism’s View of Jesus, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_view_of_Jesus#cite_note-7
[3]Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews. Harper Collins, 1987, p.144.
[4]John Cordaro, Yahshua the Messiah is Not Almighty Yahweh. http://www.intergate.com/~jcordaro/yahweh_yahshua.html
[5]John Cordaro, Monotheism and the Supposed Deity of Yahushua. http://www.intergate.com/~jcordaro/Monotheism
[6]John Cordaro, Did Our Savior Pre-exist? http://www.intergate.com/~jcordaro/preexist%3F.html
[7]Levi Leonard Paine, A Critical History of the Evolution of Trinitarianism (Boston and New York, 1900), p. 5.
[8]Ibid., p. 6-7.
[9]Ibid., p. 22.
[10]The Translator’s New Testament, British and Foreign Bible Society, 1973.
[11]John M. Robertson, Christianity and Mythology, p. 395.
[12]The Catholic Encyclopedia, The Blessed Trinity—The trinity as a mystery, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm#IV
[13]DOES EVERYONE BELIEVE IN THE TRINITY?, by Anthony Buzzard, http://www.mindspring.com/~anthonybuzzard/trinity.htm
[14]Farrar, Frederic William. The Early Days of Christianity. Vol. 1. (Boston, Massachusetts: DeWolfe, Fiske & Company, 1882), p. 336.
[15]Ibid., p. 55.
[16]This is not to say that Judaism does not have its own share of beliefs which come from tradition, merely that it has remained most faithful to the ‘core beliefs’ that come from Scripture, especially Torah and the Shema, “Hear O Israel, YHWH is one YHWH.” (Deuteronomy 6:4)
[17]Jortin, John. Remarks on Ecclesiastical History. 5 vols. (London, England: Printed for C. Davis, R. Manby, H. Shute Cox and J. Whiston, 1751-54, 1773). Also quoted in Stannus, Hugh Hutton. A History of the Origin of the Doctrine of the Trinity in the Christian Church, With an Introduction and Appendix by the Rev. Robert Spears. (London, England: Christian Life Publishing Company, 1882), pp. 35, 36.
[18]Ecclesiastical History, from the translation by Murdock and Soames (1863), p.
[19]Levi Leonard Paine, A Critical History Of The Evolution Of Trinitarianism, (Boston and New York, 1900), p. 4.
[20]Sixty Sermons, No. xxxiii, p348.
[21]Hooker, Richard, Ecclesiastical Polity, Bk. i, para 14.
[22]Neander, History of Christian Religion, vol. ii, p. 286.
[23]The Encyclopedia of Religion, Mircea Eliade, Vol. 15, “Trinity,” p. 53-57.
[24]Wikipedia, John Milton. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Milton
[25]Hugh Hutton Stannus, Origin of Doctrine of the Trinity, p 29.
[26]Christopher Mill, Milton and the English Revolution, pp. 286, 295.
[27]Joseph Priestly, A History of the Corruptions of Christianity. The British and foreign Unitarian Association, London, 1871, p.7.
[28]Matthews, W.R. God in Christian Thought and Experience.
[29]Thomas Hart, To Know and Follow Jesus, Paulist Press, 1984, p. 44.
[30]Ibid., p. 46.
[31]Leslie Simmonds, What Think Ye of Christ?, p. 45.
[32]The Ultimate Deception, by Frank L. Caw Jr. http://www.frankcaw.com/God-Not-Messiah.html
[33]Many others prior to him were resurrected from the dead, but only temporarily.
[34]Biblos.com, Zechariah 9:9, Parallel Translations. http://biblebrowser.com/zechariah/9-9.htm
[35]Robert Roberts, The Blood of Christ, p.6-7.
[36]Greek Voice, http://www.bcbsr.com/greek/gvoice.html
[37]The Greeks Had a Word for It, Basics of Bible Interpretation - Chapter 10, http://www.raystedman.org/leadership/smith/ch10.html
[38]“A deponent middle verb is one that has no active form for a particular part in Hellenistic Greek, and one whose force in that principle part is evidently active.”—Greek Voice, http://www.bcbsr.com/greek/gvoice.html. A deponent middle always has to be translated as active, and not as a direct reference to oneself. One of many examples of texts which have the deponent middle verb is 2 Colossians 2:13 (charizomai—meaning “having forgiven”) which indicates that Yahweh personally (Himself) has forgiven the Colossians of their sins. It does not mean that Yahweh forgave “himself,” for this middle verb form is “deponent” and therefore must always point to another object to receive the action described. The strong’s Concordance, Greek Lexicon with Tense/Voice/Mood lists this verb form (G5483—charizomai) as “Aorist Middle Deponent Participle.”
[40]In Hebrews 9:12 the verb is listed in Strong’s Concordance, Greek Lexicon as G2147 (hyoorisko) meaning to “find” or to “obtain.” It is listed there as “Second Aorist Middle Participle.” In 2 Corinthians 5:19 the Greek word tithaymee (G5087) is also given in the middle voice (as themenos). so does it always mean the individual involved receives the benefit of the action? No, for the context will always determine what direction it should go. “To wit, that Elohim was in Messiah, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed (themenos—‘Second Aorist Middle Participle’) unto us (en haymeen) the word or reconciliation.” It is clear from the context that the qualifying words “unto us” clarify that the action is personally directed toward another. It could validly be translated “and he himself hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.” 1 Timothy 1:12 gives the only other example of themenos: “And I thank Yahushua Messiah our Lord, who hath enabled me (G3165, me), for that he counted me (G3165, me) faithful, putting me (themenos —‘Second Aorist Middle Participle’) into the ministry;” The Greek word “me” (G3165, me) appears twice in this verse, and the context shows that Shaul is the object of discussion. The context clearly shows that the object of themenos is “me” (that is, Shaul). Since themenos is middle voice, it would mean that the Messiah himself had placed Shaul’s (G3165, me) in command of his own ministry. The text could be translated as “And I thank Yahushua Messiah our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, himself putting me into the ministry.” In both 2 Corinthians and 1 Timothy, Yahushua is acting in his own interests when the word themenos is used—and those texts clearly indicate that they are pointing to a particular object (me or us). Unlike these two texts, Hebrews 9:12 does not supply the qualifying object (the phrase “to us”) in the original manuscripts—leaving only the subject to also receive the benefit of the action. Our prior reference to the Greek voice clearly indicates that the majority of middle verbs fall into this classification of “Indirect Middle,” which indicates the subject “acts for (or sometimes by) himself or herself, or in his or her own interest. This is a common use of the middle in the NT; apart from the deponent middle, it is the most common.”—Greek Voice, http://www.bcbsr.com/greek/gvoice.html
[41]The 1965 Bible in Basic English, Hebrews 13:20.