Bible Insights | CafeLogos.org
FREE eBooklet Version for Easy Sharing - Jesus is the Messiah - Objections and Answers
Once in a while I will peruse some of the Christian forum boards, usually at the leading of the Lord when there is something He wants me to see. On one of those occasions I came across a post by a former Christian who had renounced her faith and had embraced Judaism. In the post I read she listed several things which to her refuted Jesus as the Messiah. Because her arguments are the same ones that are often cited by the adherents of Judaism, I thought I would answer them and some others for the benefit of other Christians who might be swayed by the same arguments. Let’s begin.
Jewish Objections to Jesus
Her first objection concerned the Trinity. –
OBJECTION # 1. - Christians teach that God is a trinity. God is Echad, one, not three in one. Anything that comprises the oneness of God cannot be accepted and is beyond comprehension.
ANSWER #1 - The Apostle Paul said in Galatians 3:20, “God is one.” Any Trinitarian theologian is going to tell you that there is no plurality in God the Father. Jesus said in John 4:24, “God is spirit.” God is one Spirit and the Holy Spirit is His Spirit as Jesus said in Matthew 10:20. The prophet David reiterates in Psalm 104:30 - “You send forth Your Spirit, they are created.” The word “Trinity” simply means a union of Three. We see this union taking place in Isaiah 42:1. “Behold My servant, whom I uphold; My elect, in whom My soul delights; I have put My spirit upon Him: He shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.”
Here we see all Three in one verse. God unifies Himself with the Messiah by His Holy Spirit making the Three One. That is the Biblical Trinity and it is not any more complicated than that. The wording of the definition that is used, “God eternally exists as three persons, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit” is misleading to the Jewish and Muslim minds and should not be used.
OBJECTION #2 - God is not a man. It is stated twice in Numbers 23:19, and a third time in Job 9:32. Christianity claims that Jesus is "fully God and fully man." The two are absolutely incompatible. Christians try to claim that "let us create man in our own image" is a reference to the triune nature of God, but in reality it is God talking to the host in heaven.
ANSWER #2 - God is not a man, that lies as in Numbers 23:19, or thinks as a man as in Job 9:32, as God’s ways are much higher (Isaiah 55:9). With God, nothing is too hard for Him and it is within His unlimited ability to be or appear as a man, if He so chooses. In Genesis 18, the man that Abraham is talking to is referred to as Yahweh Himself ten times in the original language. However, because God’s face is so brilliant that no man can behold it and live, God operates through His theophany which has always been the pre-existent Messiah, the similitude of the Lord (Numbers 12:8, Exodus 24:11).
To understand how Jesus can be described as “fully God and fully man” we need to understand how Jesus as a man was constructed. He had a physical body, and a soul, which is His person; and a spirit which is His life force. Jesus said, “As the Father has life in Himself, so He has given to the Son to have life in Himself” (John 5:26). To have life in ones’ self is a quality that only God can have. We are told that, “the life is in the blood,” Leviticus 17:11. Therefore the life force of anyone, the spirit, is in the blood. Therefore Jesus’ life force as a man is God’s Holy Spirit, the “life in Himself,” which enabled Him to rise from the dead, and why our souls are purchased by the blood of God (Acts 20:28). Jesus’ Holy Spirit unified with His soul makes Him fully God; His begotten soul unified with His body makes Him fully human. God operated in His Son through His Holy Spirit in His Son.God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself- II Corinthians 5:19.
Because Jesus preexisted, He was with the Father in the beginning and is the person God is addressing in Genesis; “let us make man in our image.” This is not inconsistent with the teachings in the Midrash who equate the “Mimra” with the Messiah who pre-existed with God.
OBJECTION #3 - The New Testament contradicts the teachings of the Torah. The Torah clearly teaches the following of the Law, in order to receive the blessings of prosperity and the Promised Land. Yet Paul teaches that the Law brings a curse; that circumcision is nothing and keeping the Sabbath is up to the individual; and is not something that is required for the Jew. Paul’s teaching, and that of the Tanakh and are totally incompatible. Both Jews and Christians agree that the Torah is the word of God, and is therefore the standard by which the orthodox is determined; therefore the New Testament doesn't pass the test.
ANSWER #3 - The New Testament does not contradict the Torah, only in the minds of those who have not been able to properly correlate the distinctions between the Old Covenant and the New. God promised His people that when they were returned to their land after the Babylonian captivity, that He would give them a new “everlasting covenant” to replace the Old Covenant that was given through Moses which they broke (Jeremiah 31:31-34). Everyone who received this covenant would “know the Lord” (verse 34). Therefore there is going to be a difference, a change.
Under the Old Covenant, people were shown what to do. Under the New Covenant we are shown what we need to become, “new creatures,” where the law is internalized and through the workings of the Holy Spirit we become a new creation. The Apostles taught from the Old Testament and Paul encouraged the reading of it so that we would become furnished in righteousness (II Timothy 3:16). We are to be holy as God is holy as reiterated by the Apostle Peter, quoting from Leviticus 11:44-45 (I Peter 1:16).
What was done away was justification by law. Under the New Covenant we are saved through faith in Jesus’ atonement which is the fulfillment of the tabernacle services, which were a foreshadow of that atonement. The Sabbath was also a foreshadow of the coming rest we would have in Jesus. Circumcision was symbolic of the intimacy God desires to have with His people. Through the Holy Spirit, God comes into us and we are made one with Him.
We are always blessed by obedience to God’s word. The curse of the law as described in Deuteronomy, is removed by Jesus. That means believers cannot be condemned by the requirements of the law if they are not kept perfectly through the weakness of human flesh.
It is interesting to note that after Jesus’ death and resurrection, according to the Talmud, (Tractate Yoma 39b) during the forty year period before the destruction of the second temple, the miraculous sign of the scarlet cloth turning white on the scapegoat’s head ceased, and the lots that were cast by the priest, all indicated that the sacrifices were not acceptable. That was because Jesus had made the final sacrifice. The lot that was cast by the priest that indicated the sacrifice was not accepted happened consistently for forty years. The odds of that happening are 1 in 1,099,511,627,776.
OBJECTION #4 - If Jesus was the final sacrifice as Christians claim, then God would not reinstate the sacrifices again which He does in Ezekiel 43 during the time of peace.
ANSWER #4 – You need to understand the context of what has happened. We see in Ezekiel 38 and Zechariah 14:1,2, that Israel has gone through a second, brutal captivity. We see the Lord returning supernaturally in Zechariah 14, where He lands upon the Mount of Olives, the very place from where He prophesied of His return (Matthew 24). It is at this time the people realize that Jesus is the Messiah that they had rejected. “They shall look upon Me whom that have pierced, (God in Christ), and they shall mourn for Him, as one mourns for His only son, and shall be in bitterness for Him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn (Zechariah 12:10. In that day there shall be a great mourning in Jerusalem… (verse 11).
God then reestablishes the temple services and animal sacrifice. By this time the people have full understanding that the Old Covenant sacrifices were designed to represent the final sacrifice for their sins that Jesus had accomplished. Thus the reinstated sacrifices are made with the realization that they represent the final sacrifice that Jesus had made for them which they rejected. Therefore to the Jews the sacrifices are a memorial of Jesus’ sacrifice for them, just as Communion is a memorial of Jesus’ sacrifice for the Christian.
When a Christian is presented with the bread that represents Jesus’ body and places it into his mouth; the bread is crushed, mangled and broken. This is meant to remind us that it is our sins that sent Him to the cross to die for us. And when we ingest the wine that is symbolic of His blood that was released through His broken body, we are reminded of the forgiveness and eternal life that is freely given to us through that blood.
So the Christians are reminded through Communion, that their sins caused Jesus’ death and that they are forgiven; and in the sacrifices the Jews are reminded of His sacrifice for them, their rejection of Him and that they are completely forgiven. Every time an animal is slaughtered and its blood is shed, they are also reminded that these sacrifices represent for them hope, God’s love for them and eternal life.
Again, both Communion for the Christian, and the temple sacrifices for the Jews are memorials of the sin that has been forgiven by Messiah’s sacrifice for the people He loves and gave Himself to save.
OBJECTION #5 - The New Testament quotes prophecy out of context as in Hosea 11:1, which is about Israel, not the messiah, and misquotes prophecy. For example, Isaiah 7:14 is correctly translated as young maiden, not virgin. The prophecy in Matthew 2:23 ‘He shall be called a Nazarene’ which means someone from the city of Nazareth, does not even exist anywhere in the prophecies.
ANSWER # 5 - In Hosea’s prophecy Israel is referred to as God’s Son. For this reason, the reference in Matthew’s gospel is disputed as a messianic prophecy. However, when we look at how God has woven the numerous foreshadows and typologies concerning the Messiah in His word, the application in Matthew’s gospel is viable. The story of Joseph (Genesis 37-50), is one of those remarkable examples of those typologies. Like Jesus, Joseph was rejected by his brethren, and that rejection in turn led to his becoming exalted among the Gentiles. Because of his position he was able to save the lives of his family. Jesus was also rejected by His own people; He was received by the Gentiles and saved the lives of multitudes from eternal death. When the Hebrews were led out of Egypt by Moses, Joseph’s bones were carried with them (Genesis 50:25, Exodus 13:19). The Hebrew Matthew who had full knowledge of this history, would have had no problem understanding the similitudes in scripture that were designed to represent the Messiah. Because of this understanding, he coordinated Hosea’s prophecy with the previous examples in scripture. Jesus is the Son of God and He was called out of Egypt, just as the bones of His similitude in Joseph were carried out. I have also spoken by the prophets; and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets – Hosea 12:10
The word Almah in Isaiah 7:14, means a young woman of marriageable age, which has the same meaning as virgin and is the same word in the Hebrew that is used to describe the virgin Rebecca in Genesis 24:43.
The prophecy that Jesus would be called a Nazarene, while not found in the scriptures we have today, was obviously recorded in one of the missing books - Iddo, Ahijah (II Chronicles 9:29), Shemaiah (II Chronicles 12:15) and Jasher (Joshua 10:13) and was handed down orally.
OBJECTION #6 - Jesus could not have been from the tribe of Judah and of David’s lineage because Jewish law states that a person is from the tribe of the father. Joseph was from the tribe of Judah, but he was not Jesus’ father, so Jesus could not be from David’s messianic line as the Christians claim. Also the lineages recorded in Matthew and Luke are both Joseph’s lineage.
ANSWER #6 – According to Jewish law, the moment that Mary married Joseph she would be of his tribe. Therefore Jesus would be of the tribe of Judah and the lineage of David, even though Joseph was not His biological father. The Bible records two genealogies for Jesus, one on His earthly father’s side in Matthew’s Gospel and Luke records Mary’s lineage. That is why the lineages are different. It was a Hebrew custom of the time to list the mother’s genealogy under the name of the father, because the two were viewed as one (Genesis 2:24). The custom of putting the wife’s lineage under the name of her husband is most likely the origin of our modern day custom of a married woman taking the last name of her husband. This is another reason why Joseph’s name is mentioned in Luke’s record instead of Mary’s name. Both Mary and Joseph were descendants of David of the tribe of Judah, the tribe of the Messiah. It’s interesting to note that Joseph’s line is traced from Abraham up to Joseph and Mary’s is traced down all the way to Adam. It has been discovered that the DNA of anyone is carried by the female. Therefore the Bible miraculously records Mary’s lineage connecting the DNA from the first Adam to the last Adam, Jesus the Redeemer of mankind.
OBJECTION #7 – Christians changed the translation of Genesis 3:15 to read –“ I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel” (Genesis 3:15). The correct translation is – “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; they shall strike at your head, and you shall strike at their heel,’ instead of ‘his heel.’ So this passage is saying that deliverance is not through one individual, but by the nation of Israel.
ANSWER #7 - The early Greek translation from the original Hebrew, the Septuagint, made by the Jews before Christ, and the later translation, the Masoretic text, both translate Genesis 3:15 in the singular ‘his heel.’ That is the correct translation and that is why this translation is used today. The Hebrew lineage is the lineage through which God birthed the Messiah Jesus and it is only in that sense that the Jews can say that they lineage contributed to the redemption of humanity.
OBJECTION #8 – Christians claim that Isaiah 53 is about Jesus; but God called Israel His servant, so the servant reference in the prophecy has to be about Israel as the redeemer, not Jesus.
ANSWER #8 - The bulk of Jewish scholars recognized that the prophet Isaiah was writing about the Messiah, who is also referred to as God’s servant (Isaiah 42:1). This correct interpretation is abundant in their writings and was the accepted interpretation.
In the Talmud (Sanhedrin 98b), it says, “The Rabbis said that Messiah’s name is the Suffering Scholar of Rabbi’s House (or ‘Leper scholar’). For it is written ‘Surely He has born our griefs and carried our sorrows yet we did esteem Him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted’ (Isaiah 53:4).
In a commentary on Genesis, Rabbi Moses (The Preacher, 11th century), wrote; - From the beginning God has made a covenant with the Messiah and told Him, “My righteous Messiah, those who are entrusted to you, their sins will bring you into a heavy yoke’…And He answered, ‘I gladly accept all these agonies in order that not one of Israel should be lost.’ Immediately, the Messiah accepted all agonies with love, as it is written: ‘He was oppressed and He was afflicted.”
There are many other references to the suffering Messiah, but the traditional view began to change when it was noted that the Christians were using Isaiah 53 as an effective tool to bring Jews to the Messiah Jesus. The concept of the nation of Israel being the suffering servant of Isaiah’s prophecy began to emerge from the shadows. Then a Rabbi named Rashi (1046-1105) promoted the budding concept that Isaiah was somehow speaking about the nation of Israel as the suffering servant. Many of the Rabbis of his day rejected Rashi’s interpretation. One of them, Rabbi Moshe Kohen Ibn Crispin of Cordova, (1350), called it “forced and farfetched.” He was absolutely right.
One of the Rabbis who refused to depart from the correct interpretation wisely noted; “Since Messiah bears our iniquities which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whoso will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities, must endure and suffer for them himself” (Rabbi Elijah de Vidas (16th century) – Driver and Neubauer pg. 331).
I think that it’s important to understand how the Jewish scholars choose to interpret scripture. They have a concept called “Takanot.” This allows them to take a scripture out of context, build new doctrine around it or alter its meaning. If all the other Rabbis are in agreement with it, then it becomes “law” even if it contradicts the Bible. So we can see why it is easy for them to ignore verse eight in Isaiah’s prophecy that contradicts their interpretation that the nation of Israel is the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 and not Jesus.
In verse eight God makes a very definite designation between His people, Israel, and a specific individual, the Messiah: – “…for the transgression of my people (Isaiah's people, Israel) was He stricken.” It is also fairly ludicrous to believe that sinners can atone for the sins of another sinner, when all have sinned. Every human being is standing on the same feet of clay that tripped and fell in Eden’s garden.
OBJECTION #9 – The Christians say that the prophecy in Isaiah 9:6 is about Jesus, when it is really talking about Hezekiah. The letter, “m” in the Hebrew is not placed where it is supposed to be, so it cannot be a messianic prophecy as it was thought to be originally.
ANSWER #9 - The apparent anomaly in the Hebrew is there for a purpose. It is designed to draw our attention to the wording in the prophecy that designates the unique unity of God with a man, the “Prince.” In Isaiah’s prophecy we see very clearly the reference that can only be used in conjunction with God; “The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father.” Applying these terms to a mere man such as Hezekiah would constitute blasphemy. In the same verse the person being described is also referred to as a prince, a title never used for God, but is used for the Messiah (Ezekiel 46:2).
The anomaly in the Hebrew is a reflection of this fact, and is a linguistic recognition of the anomaly that is contained in the verse, which is describing a combination of God and man. This matches the New Testament’s recognition of the union of God with the Messiah.-
God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself (II Cor. 5:19)
…the Father is in Me and I am in Him …(John 10:38).
The error of associating Isaiah 9:6 with Hezekiah, also arose because the context of the passage is ignored. The first verse of chapter nine records that the person being described in verse 6, arises out of Galilee. Hezekiah arose out of Judea. It is a characteristic of the Hebrew scribes to take verses out of context like this, and as we have been shown, this practice can result in serious error.
The following verse seven is also not coordinated with its previous companion. –
“Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this” (Isaiah 9:7).
It is obvious from the historical record that Hezekiah’s reign did not last “forever,” and ended with his death. It is the Messiah who is promised to reign on the throne of David “forever.” (Ezekiel 37:25). Only a man who is also described as God could do what Jesus did; die, and be resurrected with an eternal body that could reign forever. Therefore the only one who could possibly match the description in Isaiah 6:9, is Jesus, the Messiah, the Man that God was in, The Mighty God and The Prince of Peace.
OBJECTION #10 - Jesus cannot be the Messiah because he simply did not fulfill all the messianic prophecies. Anyone can claim to be the messiah and say they will fulfill the prophecies at another time. The messiah must fulfill all of them, and Jesus did not, so he cannot be the messiah. He did not usher in an era of worldwide peace, He did not rule from Jerusalem; and he did not bring the Jews back to the Land of Israel.
ANSWER #10 - There are many Hebrew traditions concerning the Messiah that point to Jesus. So far the Jews have not been able to connect the dots. In one of those traditions it was taught that the messiah would come, and then be hidden. It was also recognized that the messiah would be killed. They also know that the scriptures reveal that the messiah would rule and reign in David’s throne. Because they could not coordinate what they were being shown, they came up with this explanation: there would have to be two messiahs, one that would be killed and another following after that would reign. This explanation was accepted, even though their previous writings, prophecies and the Scriptures reveal that there is only one messiah that is the Redeemer. Unfortunately they failed to see that the Messiah Jesus fulfilled their traditions. He came, was killed and is currently being hidden from them until the time of His return to rule the world from Jerusalem. When we look at the prophecies concerning the messiah in the Old Testament, they all contribute to the same scenario. In order for Jesus to rule forever as the scriptures tell us that the Messiah will do, He would have to come, be killed and receive a new resurrected body which would enable Him to live forever.
There are over two hundred Messianic prophecies that Jesus fulfilled. Let’s look at just eight of them. –
1. He was born in Bethlehem. (Micah 5:2, Matthew 2:16, Luke 2:4, John 7:42). Bethlehem was the town where the lambs were raised for the temple sacrifices. Thus God ordained that Jesus our Passover lamb would be born in that little town of Bethlehem.
2. He was of the family of David (Isaiah 9:7, Jeremiah 23:5) and the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10, Micah 5:2, Matthew 1:2, Rev. 5:50).
3. He came when the scepter (ability to govern) had departed from Israel (Genesis 49:10). That is why the Jews had to take Him to Pilate to be crucified because it was the only time when they were not allowed to pronounce capital judgments.
4. He came after the captivity when the temple was built. - Malachi 3:10- Behold, I will send My messenger, and he shall prepare the way before Me: (John the Baptist) and the Lord, whom you seek, shall suddenly come to His temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom you delight in: behold, He shall come, says the LORD of hosts.The prophecy states that the Lord will come to His temple and He is the messenger of the covenant. “He shall come, says the LORD of hosts.” That’s God talking about the Messiah coming to the temple. It would have been the understanding of the people at that time that messiah was coming to that new temple, which He did before it was destroyed, according to Daniel 9:25,26.
5. He ministered in Galilee. - Isaiah 9:1,2, Matthew 4:14-16
6. He healed the blind (Psalm 146:8, 42:7, John 9:32). There is no record of God healing the blind in the Old Testament. Psalm 146 is a messianic prophecy which Jesus fulfilled. God healed through Him (John 14:10).
7. He was killed before the temple was destroyed in 70AD (Daniel 9:26).
8. He gathered the Gentiles. Isaiah 11:10, 42:6. There are two billion of them on the planet at this moment, not counting the multitudes that came to Him through the centuries.
Engineer MB Bleecker who invented the ram jet engine and the helicopter prototype, was a Christian who calculated the odds of Jesus fulfilling just eight prophecies. The odds of one man fulfilling eight prophecies in a life time are one in 100,000,000,000,000,000.
According to the book of Daniel, an Anointed One (Messiah) is killed before the destruction of the second temple. Then Daniel gives an accurate history of the events concerning the Jewish people up to the judgment. There is no benevolent messiah appearing during that time. We are shown in Zechariah’s prophecy (Zechariah 14) that Israel will go into another captivity and then Jesus will return as He said, and usher in the time of peace and restore the people to the land. If Jesus had ushered in a time of peace when He was on earth, it would have proven that He could not have been the Messiah because that time does not occur as we have shown until after the second captivity, the time of Jacob’s trouble, the tribulation, which is fast approaching. It would behoove all the Jews who are reading this to reevaluate their positions regarding Jesus, repent of their sins and receive Him as Messiah while there is still time.
Copyright 2024 by H.D. Shively