Aleph Tav
The messianic movements are currently wowing the Christian world with the latest revelation based on the New Testament (NT) book of Revelation. The book of Revelation calls both the Christian god (Jesus), the Messianic god (Yeshua) and the ‘almighty god’, the Alpha (Α) and the Omega (Ω), the first and the last. The latest revelation of course is an equating of the Alpha (Α) and the Omega (Ω), the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet with the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet; aleph (א) and tav (ת). The equating of course is no doubt the latest development for those in the Christian and Messianic movements hell bent on converting Jews to one of the many brands of what is essentially ‘Christian’, even though some Messianic movements swear blind they are ‘different’. The benefit of the equating is that a survey of the Jewish Scriptures shows the ‘aleph tav’ (את) or Jesus/ Yeshua is bouncing off nearly every page of the Jewish Scriptures. Many in the Christian and Messianic movements at this point are quite happy to say “see there is your proof for Jesus/ Yeshua” and take this ‘fact’ as a given.The ‘aleph tav’ (את) however, is a Hebrew grammatical sign of the definite direct object, not translated in English but generally preceding and indicating the accusative. A direct object is a noun or pronoun that receives the action of a verb or shows the result of the action. It answers the question “What?” or “Whom?” after an action verb. An action verb with a direct object is called a transitive verb. Going to the very beginning:
בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ
In the beginning G-d created the heaven and the earth. Genesis 1:1
The ‘aleph tav’ highlighted in bold tells us who (G-d/ אֱלֹהִים) created (בָּרָא) the heavens (הַשָּׁמַיִם) and the earth (הָאָרֶץ). The grammatical of course is largely ignored and in fact does not appear hardly at all in most web sites of the Christian and Messianic movements. In view of the fundamental grammatical use of the ‘aleph tav’ no wonder the ‘aleph tav’ is found on nearly every page of the Hebrew Scriptures, without ‘aleph tav’ one would not know who is doing what!
A flaw in the ‘aleph tav’ (את) revelations of the Christian and Messianic movements is that close to 2000 years of scholarship has not made any connection between the ‘aleph tav’ (את) and the Alpha (Α) and the Omega (Ω). Strangely, the Christian and Messianic movements have not as of yet made use of Jewish sources with respect to the Hebrew aleph bet (אב) and its deeper meanings. A source for the deeper meaning of the Hebrew aleph bet (אב) may be found in the Talmud in Shabbos 104a:
The Rabbis told R. Joshua b. Levi: Children have come to the Beth Hamidrash and said things the like of which was not said even in the days of Joshua the son of Nun. [Thus:] aleph bet (אב) [means] ‘learn wisdom [aleph binah]…..Tav (ת) [for] emet (אמת) [truth]: why are the letters of sheker (שקר) close together, whilst those of ‘emet are far apart? Falsehood is frequent, truth is rare. And why does falsehood [stand] on one foot, whilst truth has a brick-like foundation? I.e., each of the letters of sheker is insecurely poised on one leg (Shin (ש) was anciently written with a narrow pointed bottom) whereas those of, emet are firmly set, each resting on two ends, the mem (מ) too resting on a horizontal bar. Truth can stand, falsehood cannot stand.
The Christian and Messianic movements’ lack of use of Jewish sources with respect to the Hebrew aleph bet (אב) and its deeper meanings may well lie in the fact that many are insisting that the Hebrew aleph bet (אב) is not the same as it was anciently. Instead some Christian and Messianic movements insist on using what they say is the “Paleo script”. The ignorance and their use of the “Paleo script” often gets mixed with both the Phoenician script and/ the pictographic Proto-Canaanite script. What is often presented for aleph as the “Paleo script”, is the pictographic Proto-Canaanite script’s use of aleph, which is a bull or an ox and for the tav which looks like a multiplication sign (×). Without justification however, the tav often gets mysteriously rotated round forty five degrees to look like a cross (+). The rotation of tav to look like a cross cannot be supported anywhere in documented literature.
Of course to the Christian and Messianic movements the aleph tav now has great meaning (?), despite the inconsistency, failure to acknowledge the grammatical or lack of historical or traditional understanding of the aleph tav. With Jesus / Yeshua glasses on, for Christians and Messianics, Jesus is the aleph tav: (lamb?) bull of God and cross respectively (for more ridiculous word pictures click here) and points once again to the gospel being painted on every page of the Hebrew Scriptures! In the case of the pictographic Proto-Canaanite script, no such script is attested, and illustrations of it are modern inventions (see “How the Alphabet Was Born from Hieroglyphs”. Biblical Archaeology Review, Mar/Apr 2010).
Yet another Messianic mess!!
Latest Developments (as of 18 July 2012)
Rabbi Dov Ber, the Maggid of Mezritch, writes in Or Torah pg.35:
It is known in the Kabbalistic literature that the letters of the Aleph-Beis were created first of all. Thereafter, by the use of the letters, the Holy One, Blessed is He, created all the worlds. This is the hidden meaning of the first phrase in the Torah, “In the beginning God created (את)”- that is God’s first act was to create the letters from aleph (א) to tav (ת).
In a recent attempt to jump on the bandwagon of the success of this blog, the Jewish Adventists via the BTV facebook page has mysteriously tried to create a spin on the Aleph Tav using their version of what Rabbi Dov Ber, the Maggid of Mezritch has said. The spin of course ignores Kabbalah, which they, like most other messianics and Christians hate and selectively ignore what may be considered (from their perspective) to be the less than biblical idea of other worlds (even though their prophetess Ellen G White says there are other worlds). The spin still claims the non-existent link between the Greek Alpha Omega of the NT and the Aleph Tav of the Jewish Scriptures, applied to Jesus/ Yeshua. The spin also claims that their version has:
One G-d that creates many things alone as opposed to the pagan concept that each thing is created by a god. Hence, the plurality of gods.
The reality is that Seventh day Adventists hold to the trinity and messianics to a godhead which are by their nature a plurality of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, God in three persons. The Son (Jesus) creates the world as confirmed by the NT. In contrast, Elohim of Gen 1:1, has plural morphological form in Hebrew, but it is used with singular verbs and adjectives in the Hebrew text when the particular meaning of the God of Israel (a singular deity) is traditionally understood. Thus the very first words of the Bible are breshit bara elohim, where bara ברא is a verb inflected as third person singular masculine perfect. If Elohim were an ordinary plural word, then the plural verb form bar’u בראו would have been used in this sentence instead.
An honest use of the words of Rabbi Dov Ber, the Maggid of Mezritch, Adventist and messianics are unable to do because they would have to endorse the validity of Kabbalah and they would also have to consider that the Aleph Bet was created and of course according to the Adventists/ messianics and the NT, Jesus is God, so how could he be created?
Rabbinical sources always have deeper levels of meaning to a text. However, messianics fail to understand a problem with ‘messianic’ (mis)uses of rabbinic commentary. The problem is the (deliberate) rejection that each of the four levels (PARDES) of extended meaning of the text are entirely consistent within themselves and most importantly THE GENERAL RULE; that the extended meaning never contradicts the plain meaning of the text (Peshat). Peshat (פְּשָׁט) — “plain” (“simple”) or the direct meaning[1]. In the first instance, using the famous aleph tav (את), the plain meaning is the grammatical, where the aleph tav (את), tells us that G-d created the heavens and the earth. On an allegorical level G-d created the aleph bet and then used the created aleph bet to ‘speak’ the world into existence. There is no contradiction in the argument of the Rabbis in their use of the Sages in their commentary, just a selective lack on the messianics’ part as to how Jews have always read/ wrote their literature.
__________-
1. Abaye asked R. Dimi — others state, R. Awia, — others again state, R. Joseph [asked] R. Dimi — and others state, R. Awia whilst others state, Abaye [asked] R. Joseph: What is R. Eliezer’s reason for maintaining that they are ornaments for him? — Because it is written, Gird thy sword upon thy thigh, O mighty one, Thy glory and thy majesty (Psalm 45:4). R. Kahana objected to Mar son of R. Huna: But this refers to the words of the Torah?( ‘Thy sword’ is metaphorical for learning, which is Israel’s weapon. It is indicative of the peace-loving spirit of the Rabbis and their exaltation of Torah that they regarded it as axiomatic that such a verse could not be taken literally.) — A verse cannot depart from its plain meaning, he replied. R. Kahana said: By the time I was eighteen years old I had studied the whole Shas, yet I did not know that a verse cannot depart from its plain meaning, until to-day. What does he inform us? — That a man should study and subsequently understand.14 (Shabbos 63a)
Menashe's Blog 
I find it inconsistent for you to preface your argument with the idea that the et (Aleph/Tav) is nothing more than a direct-object marker, and then you go on to imply that it might really have a deeper meaning than just that, by quoting Jewish sources (whether kabalistic or not). You cannot have it both ways, even if it doesn’t refer to Yeshua. You have already defeated your own argument. Also, having studied the subject, I DO NOT find that the Messianic sites ignore the grammatical aspect of “et”. In fact, they add that the “et” is seen by some ancient rabbis as having a deeper significance! So then, WHO is the instigator of this deeper meaning idea after all??? Those rabbis didn’t seem to think it was ONLY an object marker! Do you impugn them also??? A school of thought concerning any subject may have elements of truth even if one does not subscribe to that entire school of thought. One need not ignore truth just because it may be in an artificial setting. Also, Alpha and Omega may equally be translated as A and Z just depending on what language one is speaking, so to say that it has no relevance to Aleph and Tav is really disingenuous. In your intent to find hypocrisy in the Messianics, you have only succeeded in showing your own. Thanks,
James https://www.facebook.com/james.presley.988?sk=wall
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rabbinical sources always have deeper levels of meaning to a text. However, you fail to understand a problem with ‘messianic’ (mis)uses of Rabbinic commentary. The problem is your (deliberate) rejection that each of the four levels (PARDES) of extended meaning of the text are entirely consistent within themselves and most importantly THE GENERAL RULE; that the extended meaning never contradicts the plain meaning of the text (Peshat). Peshat (פְּשָׁט) — “plain” (“simple”) or the direct meaning. In the first instance, the plain meaning is the grammatical which tells us that G-d created the heavens and the earth. On an allegorical level G-d created the aleph bet and then used the aleph bet to ‘speak’ the world into existence. There is no contradiction in my argument, just a selective lack on your part as to how Jews have always read their literature.
LikeLike
Yeshua (Jesus) is the First and the Last. In His native language this would be the Aleph and the Tav. Not all Aleph-Tavs (100s in the TaNaKh, or Old Testament) are direct object pointers; there are plenty of “stand-alone” ones. Expert lexicon authors (such as given in BDB) indicate that these stand alone Aleph Tavs (at best), even though not able to be translated, are an “entity.” When one looks, for example, at Genesis 1:1, the Aleph Tav there is a stand alone, not connected to the direct object, even though one could stretch things by saying it points there. However, by revelation (and not by our pee-brain minds) we can see that through Yeshua (Jesus), Elohim created the heavens and the earth. Four times in the book of Revelation is Yeshua (Jesus) called the First and the Last, and I really don’t think (in the instances where he personally spoke) that it was in Greek. In short, the Aleph-Tav was put there by Elohim (God) Himself as a revelation pointer to His Son (Prov. 30:4b). As an aside, the book of Revelation is about Yeshua (Jesus) Christ (Ha-Machiach), as given in the first verse of that book.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You may wish to review my reply to James.
“God is not a man, that he should lie, neither the son of man…”
and now understand this; the God of Israel tells us very specifically in Torah that “son of man” is not God!
4 Who has ascended into heaven, or descended?
Who has gathered the wind in His fists?
Who has bound the waters in a garment?
Who has established all the ends of the earth?
What is His name, and what is His Son’s name,
If you know? Prov 30
Yet Prov 30:4 is your clinching argument?
The God of Israel tells us very specifically in Torah that “son of man” is not God (Num 23:19)! Who is G-d’s son?
22 Then you shall say to Pharaoh, ‘Thus says the Lord: “Israel is My son, My firstborn. 23 So I say to you, let My son go that he may serve Me. But if you refuse to let him go, indeed I will kill your son, your firstborn.”’ Ex 4
LikeLike
It seems like Prov 30:4 is asking a riddle where the answer might be that His name is YHVH and His Son’s name is AT
LikeLike
Seems like you do not know Torah which defines who is G-d’s son: 22 Then say to Pharaoh, ‘This is what the Lord says: Israel is my firstborn son, 23 and I told you, “Let my son go, so he may worship me.” But you refused to let him go; so I will kill your firstborn son. Ex 4
LikeLike
I would appreciate if you didn’t read INTO what I wrote. I did NOT say that Yeshua was God – He is God MANIFEST IN THE FLESH. For He IS God’s Son. Isaiah Chapter 53 clearly spells out that He is the sin offering; Psalm 110 indicates that this is after the order of Melchizadek and not Aaron.
I know in Whom I have believed. Yeshua Ha Machiach was written of by Moses Himself. The entire life of Yeshua: He did not go against ONE jot or tittle of Torah.
If you are only willing to cut me down and slap me against the wall, then consider this my final reply.
LikeLike
1/ The Jewish rejection of a Trinity and Jesus’ divinity is based on their non-mention at the Sinai revelation, thus precluding the Trinity and Jesus’ divinity from legitimate Jewish worship.
2/ Deuteronomy 4 reminds Israel they saw no form at Sinai, and thus, Israel is to worship no ‘form’ (or manifestation) of God. If Deuteronomy 4 is not a command, and merely a statement of fact that Israel saw no form at Sinai then it makes no sense for God to place such emphasis on Israel to worship no ‘form’.
3/ The Jewish rejection of worship of God’s manifestation is not based primarily on the question of “whether God is capable of” taking on flesh, but rather, as in Deuteronomy 4, what our parameters for worship are. In other words, did God ever demand our worship of form? If not, form is excluded.
3/ The instances in the Hebrew Bible where God appears to be in human or physical form (Abraham’s guests, or the burning bush) are not clear teachings on idolatry or who Israel should worship. They are almost always vague and unclear. However perplexing they may be, they cannot be used to influence who we are to worship.
4/ Christian belief does not simply place Jesus as a physical manifestation of God, but as a member of the trinity distinct from the other two. There is no command anywhere in Scripture which demands Israel to worship these other two members of the trinity.
5/ If the Sinai revelation does not preclude belief in a trinity, or in the divinity of Jesus, then the trinity certainly does not preclude a 4 or 5-part godhead, or worship of the burning bush as god, or worship of God as manifested as anything imaginable. And if Sinai does not preclude all this, then Sinai becomes devoid of all meaning.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I do not believe in the Trinity. In your replies you continue to make assumptions about me, or at least to imply aligning me with a belief system that I do not espouse. Why don’t you ask me some questions first to gain clarity, instead assuming you know what I think?
LikeLike
So is he divine?
LikeLike
Of course Yeshua is not divine. That is reserved for the Most High alone. As you rightly pointed out in Proverbs 30:4, the Most High has a son. And the question asked is, What is His Son’s name, if you can tell. I personally do know the name of His Son. Do you?
LikeLike
Yes:
22 Then you shall say to Pharaoh, ‘Thus says the Lord: “Israel is My son, My firstborn. 23 So I say to you, let My son go that he may serve Me. But if you refuse to let him go, indeed I will kill your son, your firstborn.”’ Ex 4
LikeLike
The divinity of the Most High is perfectly manifest in His Son, Yeshua Ha Machiach, who died and was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father. He is the full and perfect culmination of the Father’s Son that is Israel: “prince with Elohim,” for He (Yeshua) is the only one who fully kept the Torah, who perfectly obeyed the Father’s Commandments from Moses, and thus is the only One who has earned the fulness of the title “Israel.” The blinders that are over the eyes of those who deny Yeshua (YHVH-shua) as the truth of the Father will be removed in His perfect time. Please open your heart to Him before it is too late!
LikeLike
In Deuteronomy 30:1-10, God sets down before His people a passage which gives a clear portrait of the Messianic era. The clear portrait is not one that is ambiguous and murky. Rather, God used sharp and well-defined brush strokes to paint this portrait. From the passage, the return of Israel to her land will be precipitated by her repentance. The passage teaches that repentance means turning back to obedience of God’s law as Moses taught it (i.e. all 613 commandments). The passage also teaches that repentance is effective even when Israel is in exile and when it is not possible to bring a blood offering. Further, the passage shows that God will accept exiled Israel’s repentance even before He circumcises their heart. Finally, from the passage it is learned that the commandments that Moses taught us, will be fully observed in the Messianic era. Theologians presentations of the Jewish arguments are often inaccurate at best. In stark contradistinction, Christianity teaches that Israel’s return to the teachings of Moses, will play no part in the ushering in of the Messianic era (cf Mal 4:4 – 6). Christianity teaches that repentance without a blood offering is not accepted by God. Also, the Church teaches that with the advent of Christianity, the law of Jesus has superseded the Law of Moses. How do theologians answer the Scriptural challenges from the passage, to the doctrines of Christianity?
Theologians claim that after the advent of Jesus, the central issue is; believing in Jesus, obeying Jesus, following Jesus and honoring Jesus. Speaking of the ‘inferiority’ of Israel’s high-priests when compared to the High priesthood of Jesus, Hebrews states, “The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless…”
Theologians often say that there is a divergence of views amongst followers of Jesus. Some Theologians understand that obedience to Torah which the passage speaks of, is a reference to obedience and faith in Jesus. Other theologians say that other followers of Jesus believe that the passage, a Scriptural prophecy, will never be fulfilled because of Israel’s failures. Both of these positions are openly refuted by the text. Moses told the people that they will return to obey God, “according to all that I (Moses) command you (Eternal Israel) today”. These words were spoken by Moses more than 1000 years before Jesus was born. Moses made it clear that he expected the last generation of Jews to look back to him (Moses) as their ultimate teacher, and that he expected them to follow his commandments as they were understood on the day he presented them to Israel. These words of Moses clearly preclude the Christian belief that Jesus is the ultimate teacher, and that the teachings of Jesus are somehow superior to the teachings of Moses. The second position that Theologians attributes to followers of Jesus, is also invalidated by the passage itself. The passage opens with words: “And it shall be that all these things come upon you, the blessing and the curse…” The curse that Moses is referring to is the curse that God warned would befall Israel should they fail to obey His voice. How then can one make the claim that on account of Israel’s failure to obey God, the Scriptural prophecy will never be fulfilled? The Scriptural prophecy clearly predicts Israel’s failure to obey and tells how, after Israel’s failure, Israel will ultimately return to God. It is clear that God took Israel’s failures into consideration when He encouraged Israel with these words, and God’s promises are irrevocable. The two Christian explanations that theologians offer readers of the passage are therefore, clearly refuted by the words of the passage itself. Theologians, therefore do not even begin to provide a textual justification for the Christian interpretation of Deuteronomy 30. The real question is: What do the Hebrew Scriptures teach? This passage in Deuteronomy clearly teaches that Israel’s repentance is the precursor of the Messianic age, this passage teaches that repentance is efficacious while Israel is still in exile, and this passage clearly teaches that the Law of Moses, as Moses taught it, is going to be observed in the Messianic era. Each of these issues is central to the debate between Judaism and Christianity.
LikeLike
Please correct a technical error in your text:
“the tav often gets mysteriously rotated round *forty five* degrees”
instead of *ninety*
LikeLike
done! Geometry is not my greatest strength!!
LikeLike
Using Aleph-Tav in the Creation doesn’t have to mean that at first Aleph-Tav is created, but one could read it as
“in_the_Beginning ; Created ; God Aleph-Tav”
as to attach Elohim and Aleph-Tav together, acting together in Creation
LikeLike
The problem of saying that G-d is anything especially like the aleph-tav or a form for example makes an infinite G-d finite. In the case of the aleph-tav; 22 letters each having a distinct shape, form and size. To give such a description of G-d is idolatrous:
1/ The Jewish rejection of the trinity and Jesus’ divinity is based on their non-mention at the Sinai revelation, thus precluding them from legitimate Jewish worship.
2/ Deuteronomy 4 reminds Israel they saw no form at Sinai, and thus, Israel is to worship no ‘form’ (or manifestation) of God. If Deuteronomy 4 is not a command, and merely a statement of fact that Israel saw no form at Sinai then it makes no sense for God to place such emphasis on it.
3/ The Jewish rejection of worship of God’s manifestation is not based primarily on the question of “whether God is capable of” taking on flesh, but rather, as in Deuteronomy 4, what our parameters for worship are. In other words, did God ever demand our worship of it? If not, it is excluded.
3/ The instances in the Hebrew Bible where God appears to be in human or physical form (Abraham’s guests, or the burning bush) are not clear teachings on idolatry or who Israel should worship. They are almost always vague and unclear. However perplexing they may be, they cannot be used to influence who we are to worship.
4/ Christian belief does not simply place Jesus as a physical manifestation of God, but as a member of the trinity distinct from the other two. There is no command anywhere in Scripture which demands Israel to worship these other two members of the trinity.
5/ If the Sinai revelation does not preclude belief in the trinity, or in the divinity of Jesus, then it certainly does not preclude a 4 or 5-part godhead, or worship of the burning bush as god, or worship of God as manifested as anything imaginable. And if Sinai does not preclude all this, then it becomes devoid of all meaning.
The Jewish cleaving to God is based on simple command- worship the God who revealed Himself at Sinai. The Christian claim that God is a three-part godhead, one of which manifested himself as a human – is something that God never commanded Israel to worship.
LikeLike
Nice writing, but I should have mentioned that my writing was a comment to:
“On an allegorical level G-d *created* the aleph bet and then used the *created* aleph bet to ‘speak’ the world into existence. ”
AND
“The problem of saying that G-d is anything especially like the aleph-tav or a form for example makes an infinite G-d finite. In the case of the aleph-tav; 22 letters each having a distinct shape, form and size. To give such a description of G-d is idolatrous”
THEN
Jod-Hey-Vav-Hey would also be idolatry
Idolatry is worshipping either the fallen angels=demons=bad spirits
or sun, etc or imaginary things or hand made “gods”
If you will accept Abba having a Son (respectful as a perfect son is)
and they are one, no quarrel ever
then you would have no problem accepting
that the Father is married to Israel
and that the gentiles will be married to the Son (Yeshua Ha’Mashiach)
So instead of referring Him as a pig
you could at least think Him as a prophet and rabbi
when you don’t seem to know your own King yet
Well, one day we will all know the truth about it…
One thing I like about you is that you are SERIOUS about God
That’s the way it should be! and also practice it in every day life!
Live a godly life! That’s what ALL people are created to do!
Be blessed by the Holy One of Israel!
LikeLike
“They shall look upon Alef Tav whom they pierced….”
…. והביטו אלי את אשׁר־דקרו …
Zech 12:10
Here is the question:
“Who or what is the Aleph Tav in these verses? “
The Russian Hebrew Christian Rabinowitz relates how that the book of Revelation identifies the One described as “pierced” by Israel in Zechariah 12:10,
“Do you know what questioning and controversies the Jews have kept
up over Zechariah 12:10, ‘They shall look upon ME whom they have
pierced’? Hence the dispute about the “whom”. But this word
“whom” is, in the original, simply the first and last letters of the
Hebrew alphabet, Aleph and Tav. Do you wonder then that I was
filled with awe and astonishment when I opened to Revelation 1(7-8),
and there read,
“Behold, He cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see Him
and they also which PIERCED HIM…”, and then read on and
heard the glorified Lord saying,
“I AM ALPHA AND OMEGA”
The Lord Jesus seemed to say to me, “Do you doubt Who it is
‘Whom’ you pierced? I am Aleph and Tav of Zechariah 12(10)
the Alpha and Omega, Jehovah the Almighty.”
The One Who was pierced” is in both passages Alpha and Omega,
or, Aleph and Tav.”
Jesus is the One Who would be pierced!
It is His signature!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Your reasoning is contrary to the, fact that God would not let Moses see His Face, BUT! Moses DID see His “BACK PARTS”! You are too hung up on the “worship” aspect. We who are Mesianic do not look for any image when we worship, nor do we make an image for we, like Moses, have never seen His Face!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Zechariah 12:10 in context
A proper understanding of the pronouns in this verse should be sufficient to show that the various Christian renditions of Zechariah 12:10 are incompatible with the syntax of the verse, and the common Christian interpretation is inconsistent with context of the rest of the chapter.
The 12th Chapter in the Book of Zechariah describes a war of nations against Jerusalem, in which Judeans fought on the side of the enemy for a while and, when they realized that God was with the people of Jerusalem, they “turned around” and joined the battle against the enemy, which led to the deliverance of Jerusalem and the restoration of its status. The victory will, however, be followed by grievous mourning over those who fell in the battle. The passage Zechariah 12:8-14, when read in the original Hebrew text, or in a correct translation thereof, clearly shows that the prophet could not possibly have spoken of Jesus. For example, the prophet makes the promise that Jerusalem and its inhabitants will be protected:
Zechariah 12:7.8 — (7) And the Lord will save the tents of Judah first, so that the splendor of the House of David and the splendor of the inhabitants of Jerusalem should not overwhelm Judah. (8) On that day, the lord shall protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and it shall come to pass on that day that even the weakest among them shall be like David: and the House of David shall be as angels, like an angel of the Lord before them.
The historical record testifies that, less than 40 years after Jesus died, Jerusalem was torched and destroyed by the Romans, and its people were expelled and exiled. So, this is yet another prophecy that Jesus did not fulfill. The prophet also foretells the destruction of those nations that attacked Jerusalem:
Zechariah 12:9 — And it shall come to pass on that day, [that] I will seek to destroy all the nations that have come upon Jerusalem.
However, according to the historical record, none of these nations were destroyed in the days of Jesus. This, too, remains a prophecy not yet fulfilled.
LikeLike
“And they SAW the God of Israel: and there was under HIS FEET as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone…” Exodus 24:10 For a God Who doesn’t want us to think of Him in anthropomorphic terms, He sure does describe Himself thus! And, don’t use the argument that He only uses such terms for the sake of our finite minds because that is not necessary for Him to do so either.
LikeLike
I think Tom and Menashe you are men who follow too much in a rigid way “the Word” instead of following the “Spirit” w the gnostic side of scriptures…
You analize every material word, without realizing that these were written in different times, and can be read and interpreted from different viewpoints, in a rational way..
In my idea though, you forget the interpretation by testing the scriptures to the truth in your hearts…
This has been the problem in all religions,and in Judaism too, for centuries.; the emphasis on the male element of the dry dogma, power, and reasoning, as well as seperation……, instead of the female element of connection between people,compassion, love, and knowing with the heart. Exactly this female element has been neglected and oppressed by all religious authorities for their own interest and because of the early times. Even God was originally male and female: ( There was for example a canaanite goddess) which creates more of a balance and the harmony between the male and female elements. We see nowadays the result of this male emphasis; This sort of religion has never reinforced peace, because the heart was not there..
This exactly is what Jesus represented; an initiation into the reality of connection,, unconditionnal love, compassion and rising above duality without neglecting the male element of assertiveness and will power…
Jesus followed the Word of the Torah up to a certain degree, without forgetting the Spirit of the scriptures, the female element of unconditionnal love, which is essential in life..
In Judaism and also the other religions, there is question of the coming of the Messiah/or the Return of the Messiah, depending on the Religion…. This has been predicted in all of the teachings. The interesting point maybe that this Messiah will have to come out of ourselves; A process where we will realize that the divine is in ourselves, the fact that we are Creator ourselves, and Unity/ God altogether…
this coming of the new Messiah Consciousness is being developped in these times, where more and more people will realize that unconditionnal love and rising above duality is the real essence of all religions, also Judiasme..
It is all a matter of interpretation of scriptures..
A period of chaos and temple destruction, as well as the dominance of duality has been indeed predicted by judaism as well; the battle between the people of light and the dark..
But the temple would be rebuilt; and this is in process now; Not a physical temple but one of a new Consciousness, which will create peace and happiness among all people; In this Israel has an important role to play, as being predicted in the Bible; rising above the victim/ agressor complex, striving towards Unity and peace, compassion……Rising above dark and light, which all make part of life and are part of the Divine…
The conviction that in seperation we will fail, and in connection we will succeed…
All the rest is merely detail..
LikeLike
Judaism nor the Jewish scriptures are a dead letter. The ‘consider the emotional side of things’ is the very reason that a testimony of a woman in Judaism is invalid.
The plain simple meaning of a text has always taken precedence in Judaism.
LikeLike
If we consider thinking Jews of the past, even Jewish men, then why are the conclusions of these famous Jewish men disregarded?:
MartinBuber: “From my youth onwards I have found in Jesus my great brother. That Christianity has regarded and does regard him as God and Savior has always appeared to me a fact of the highest importance which, for his sake and my own, I must endeavor to understand . . . I am more than ever certain that a great place belongs to him in Israel’s history of faith and that this place cannot be described by any of the usual categories.” — Martin Buber, leading Jewish writer, thinker, philosopher, and theologian (1878-1965).
Albert Einstein: “As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Naza-rene . . . . No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life. Jesus is too colossal for the pen of phrase-mongers, however artful. No man can dispose of Christianity with a bon mot.” — Quote taken from “What Life Means to Einstein,” The Saturday Evening Post, October 26, 1929. Einstein was a physicist and professor at Princeton University. He lived from 1879-1955
Benjamin Disraeli, who became Britain’s prime minister, articulated Christianity’s dependence on Judaism: “In all church discussions we are apt to forget the second Testament is avowedly only a supplement. Jesus came to complete the law and the prophets. Christianity is completed Judaism, or it is nothing. Christianity is incomprehensible without Judaism, as Judaism is incomplete without Christianity.” — Benjamin Disraeli, Prime Minister of England (1868)
Israel Zolli: when asked why he had “given up the synagogue for the church,” Zolli replied, “I have not given it up. Christianity is the completion of the syna-gogue, for the synagogue was a promise, and Christianity is the fulfillment of that promise.” “Once a Jew always a Jew.” — Israel Zolli, Chief Rabbi of Rome (1943)
Rabbi Daniel Zion (World War II) “I am poor and feeble, persecuted and vulnerable, Yeshua (Jesus) conquered me, and with the New Man he honored me, He delivered me from the poverty-stricken self with his great love, he cherishes me.” — Daniel Zion, Chief Rabbi of Bulgarian Jews
And what of those two former students of the late Rav Kaduri? They have discovered Y’shua to be the Moshiach of the Tanakh and their testimonies may be viewed at the following web site:
http://www.messiahofisraelministries.org
LikeLike
http://www.yadlachimusa.org.il/?CategoryID=192&ArticleID=843
LikeLike
The rav kaduri thing is a lie
LikeLike
So, are you saying that the testimonies of these famous Jews is irrelevant?
The Yad Lachim are a hate group as bad as the nazis so obviously they will be biased. If the testimonies of these former yeshiva students who studied under Rav Kaduri are fake, why would they risk their standing with unbelieving Jews by taking such a position unless it was real?
LikeLike
When you say yad lachim are nazis well that says it all.
LikeLike
Sir, you are intellectually dishonest to imply something derogatory or antisemitic in my statement regarding the *Yad Lachim and I find it a sidestep from answering the issue I presented to you about famous Jews and their statements concerning Y’shua. If no statements can be made about certain Jewish groups without being labeled an anti-semite, then this just shows your inability to discuss issues from an objective position. I love the Jewish people and you, sir, have insulted me. The Yad Lachim is a radical group that harasses Christian groups in Israel as you well know. If a Christian group were doing what they are doing to Jewish people you would categorize them with the nazis also. I am still waiting for your response to the issue of famous Jews who looked at Y’shua favorably- are their testimonies as Jewish men to be flung to the four winds??? Or, is it that you cannot answer original question???
* (“Christians in Israel have repeatedly complained of being persecuted, harassed, threatened and attacked by Yad L’Achim and a similar group, Lev L’Achim. These complaints, as well as slow response time by Israeli authorities, is a continued matter of concern to the U.S. State Department, as described in their Annual Report on International Religious Freedom for 1999: Israel,[8] and repeatedly in the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor’s annual International Religious Freedom Report, most recently in the 2009 report.)
LikeLike
http://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2012/05/31/covenant-nation/
LikeLike
If the Rav Kaduri thing is a lie, WHO, pray tell, among their people would make up such a lie? What would it advantage them to come up with such a lie?
What proof can you show to the contrary? Did you see the link to the two former Kaduri yeshiva students I sent you, or are you afraid to look at such things? I can tell you that if you continue to refuse to answer plain arguments with educated answers, I will cease coming to your web page since no one is interested in biased and prejudiced answers. Thank you.
LikeLike
Christians of varied stripes (Jewish as well as Gentile) have always been prepared to sacrifice themselves for a lie if it means the lie will lead to the conversion of others. Your so called proof is just plain nonsense.
LikeLike
I am through posting any dialogue here since your mind is hopelessly closed to reason and you cling to traditions and mind-conditioning from youth to discount and call such Jewish Messianics as non-sense (without senses). I am a Goy, I was raised in a pseudo-christian family and taught under a false religious system consisting of non-biblical tenets and rituals. I found the greatest Jewish Rabbi to have ever lived in 1969 and He changed my life! I am now a believer in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and no modern religious system could have convinced me of that, for I KNOW He is REAL and I have experienced and witnessed miracles in the lives of others I have layed my hands on and prayed for that are undeniable. I don’t expect you to believe any of this however, but would hope you would. May the world understand that ISRAEL will endure FOREVER and EVER!
LikeLike
Glad to not have you cluttering up the comments section. Just keep on belieeeeeeeeeeeeeeving.
LikeLike
Just so you will know I was baptized a Lutheran but my family had little to nothing concerning scriptural knowledge or teaching but G_D revealed Himself to me back in the 70’s causing me to desire HIS truth and HIS ways even though that has been difficult in many ways due to the prevailing dispensational teachings of mainstream Christianity but because of HIS grace and enduring mercy I keep getting up and continue to draw closer. I consider my lack of church life in my youth to be a blessing because I didn’t have a lot of false teaching or tradition to dispose of while studying the scriptures.
I have read through all the previous comments posted and would like to add a tidbit that I ran across while studying an Aramaic translation of the Epistle to the Galatian’s in the New Testament from the Peshitta scrolls and found this quote on the back of the book written by Avi ben Mordechai named “Galatians a Torah-based Commentary in First-Century Hebraic Context”
“If there are1000 prophets, all of them of the stature of Elijah and
Elisha, giving a certain interpretation, and 1001 Rabbis giving the
opposite interpretation, you shall incline after the majority and the
law is according to the 1001 Rabbis, not according to the 1000
venerable prophets… God did not permit us to learn from the
prophets, only from the Rabbis who are men of logic and reason.”
-Rambam’s Introduction to the Mishnah
I was wondering if you believe this statement and if you do have you considered it’s impact on the Jewish community and all who would turn to obedience to the Elohim of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
The message has always been clear and simple to those who trust Him and consider this warning,
(Deu 12:32 JPS) (13:1) All this word which I command you,
that shall ye observe to do; thou shalt not add thereto, nor
diminish from it.
(Deu 13:1 JPS) (13:2) If there arise in the midst of thee a
prophet, or a dreamer of dreams – and he give thee a sign
or a wonder,
(Deu 13:2 JPS) (13:3) and the sign or the wonder come to
pass, whereof he spoke unto thee – saying: ‘Let us go after
other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them’;
(Deu 13:3 JPS) (13:4) thou shalt not hearken unto the words
of that prophet, or unto that dreamer of dreams; for the LORD
your God putteth you to proof, to know whether ye do love the
LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
(Deu 13:4 JPS) (13:5) After the LORD your God shall ye walk,
and Him shall ye fear, and His commandments shall ye keep,
and unto His voice shall ye hearken, and Him shall ye serve,
and unto Him shall ye cleave.
And this what they are to believe concerning Elohim’s instruction,
(Deu 31:11 JPS) when all Israel is come to appear before the
LORD thy God in the place which He shall choose, thou shalt
read this law before all Israel in their hearing.
(Deu 31:12 JPS) Assemble the people, the men and the women
and the little ones, and thy stranger that is within thy gates, that
they may hear, and that they may learn, and fear the LORD your
God, and observe to do all the words of this law;
(Deu 31:13 JPS) and that their children, who have not known,
may hear, and learn to fear the LORD your God, as long as ye
live in the land whither ye go over the Jordan to possess it.’
This is what Y’shua’s teachings and life was all about, bringing the people back to simplicity of TORAH without the burden and baggage of manmade traditions that made G_D’s law seem a chore instead of the gift and joy it was meant to be. But alas as happened and is still happening to past and present prophets calling the people whom G_D loves back into simple obedience they are ridiculed, chastised and murdered.
It is interesting that there is not mention of commenting or extrapolating on the law but a simple instruction concerning THIS law.
You also mentioned being obedient to the 613 mitzvoth, does that mean that you are to adhere to the laws that only apply to the High Priest, only the Levitical priesthood, only men or only women?
Y’shua is the fullness of the Presence of Elohim bodily but is His flesh G_D? NO, He is the direct image of the creator that can only be seen by unveiled eyes, He is the ALEPH and TAV, that which encompasses all both in and on heaven and earth; amen.
LikeLike
Idolatry
An argument frequently used by Christian/ messianic apologists says that Jews cannot reject the trinity, or Jesus/ Yeshua as divine, on the basis of Scripture, because there are many places in Scripture which seem to indicate that God manifest Himself into physical form, or that God has a plural nature. And therefore, who is to say the God of Israel is not a 3-part godhead, one of which took on flesh?
Indeed, there are places in the Hebrew Bible where it appears God takes human form (Abraham’s guests in Genesis 18, Jacob fighting with the man in Genesis 32, God appearing to Moses in Exodus 33). There are also instances where it appears God has a plural nature. Thus, apologists say, the Christian worship of Jesus is not worship of a form, but rather of a manifestation of God in the flesh as a human being. This article will focus on the example of Genesis 18.
Does this Christian argument stand? Can a Jew reject the trinity and the claims of Jesus’ divinity if Scripture itself appears to show God’s plural nature, and God manifesting Himself in physical form?
There are a few points to consider.
If idolatry is the worst sin against God, we can presume that God taught us clearly who Israel is supposed to worship, and that we are not forced to guess or rely on hints or vague allusions.
The central place where God reveals Himself to Israel is the revelation at Mount Sinai. Mount Sinai was the foundational event where Israel as a people ‘met’ God. Prof. Kenneth Kitchen in “On the Reliability of the Old Testament,” calls the Exodus the central event of the Hebrew Bible, and the Sinai covenant its “pendant.” Clearly, the Sinai revelation is not only the only place where the people as a whole met God, but it is also clearly the most important narrative in Scripture for us to determine where the line between ‘God’ and ‘idolatry’ is drawn. Therefore, this must be the first place we look to see what God commanded on the subject of who Israel is to worship.
At Sinai, God expressly forbade Israel from making an idol because they saw no form. In fact, He repeated it (Deut 4:12, 4:15). This passage is not an irrelevant passage to the discussion- it is an explicit, direct passage placed in a central context, demanding Israel remember that they saw no form at Sinai.
This statement (Deut 4:12, 4:15) that Israel saw no form at Mt. Sinai is not simply a statement of fact; it is a command, direct and explicit – Israel saw no form at Sinai, Israel is to attribute no form to God. Christian theologian Edward P. Blair writes on this passage: “Men are not to worship anything that men can see.” Another theologian, WL Alexander, writes: “It is as a spirit that God is to be worshipped, and not under any outward representation.”
Clearly, then, the Sinai revelation teaches that, as far as Israel as concerned, they are to worship God as God, not in any form.
“But wait,” the apologist would say. “We worship God, not a form. God simply manifested Himself in human flesh as Jesus, and thus that is who we have to worship.” Firstly, this is a distinction without a difference, as ‘manifestation’ is no different than ‘form.’ Secondly, this line of reasoning utterly misses the purpose of the revelation at Sinai. Sinai was the formative event in Israel’s history- Sinai is where the people were given a full understanding as to who they were commanded to worship. Thus, the question is not whether God ‘could’ manifest Himself as a human, but Who God commanded Israel to worship. And on this question, the Hebrew Bible never demanded Israel worship God’s alleged manifestation as a human being.
What about Genesis 18, for example, where it seems God appears in human manifestation to Abraham?
Here, Abraham is visited by three men, and God seems to be interchangeable with (at least) one of the men. So doesn’t this prove God can indeed take on form?
Contrast Genesis 18 with Deuteronomy 4. Genesis 18 is neither a central teaching on who Israel is supposed to worship, neither is it a teaching at all. This is a narrative on Abraham, and the prophecy of his future son Isaac. This episode is never characterized by Scripture as being a central teaching (or a teaching at all) on who Israel should worship. Again, the Jewish claim is not based on the fact that “God can’t” manifest Himself as a human; rather, that He never commanded that we worship such a thing.
Not only is Genesis 18 not a teaching on idolatry, but it never even explicitly makes the Christian apologetic claim that God was one of the three men. At most, it is an inference.
This episode in Genesis 18 is also very vague.
In ‘Genesis: A Commentary,’ Lutheran pastor and scholar Gerhard von Rad says this episode is “troublesome,” with its “lack of clarity,” and is “strange and singular” in the Hebrew Bible.
In ‘Genesis,’ David W. Cotter says “This has proved to be an insoluble riddle to scholars throughout the centuries…difficulties are as numerous as solutions.”
Even among Conservative Christians, there is significant disagreement on who God is (or isn’t):
From Gerhard von Rad:
“In the narrative ch. 18.1-16 the notion that Yahweh appeared with two messengers is not the only one possible; it is not even the most likely. That the three men accepted the invitation together, if we were to think of the two as only a guard of honor to Yahweh, would be just as strange as their common question about Sarah (v.9). One is therefore rather inclined to think that Yahweh appeared in all three…”
Does that mean the trinity?
He continues:
“The interpretation given by the early church that the trinity of visitors is a reference to the Trinity has been universally abandoned by recent exegesis.”
David W. Cotter suggests a different interpretation:
“Two different incidents are being described…in the first, the circumcision of Abraham is concluded by a visitation from YHWH, described in 18:1a. Subsequently, starting in 18:1b, the second incident begins with the arrival of the three visitors. This approach completely avoids one of the chief enigmas of the text as it is ordinarily read…it seems simpler, and more true to the text, to say that 18:1 introduces a new block of narrative.”
Protestant minister and scholar Walter Brueggemann (In ‘Genesis’) writes: “There is no need either to harmonize the two versions or to divide into sources or to seek a Christian statement of the Trinity here. The story is an unreflective account of a revelatory disclosure. That is enough.”
In the ‘International Standard Bible Encyclopedia,’ he writes:
“These three men had “appeared” to Abraham as a “sign” of the appearance or presence of the Lord. Even though they conveyed His Word, they were certainly not the Lord Himself.”
These citations demonstrate that the use of Genesis 18 as a ‘proof text’ for the trinity, or for our requirement to worship a physical manifestation of God, are at best, a vague inference. If Genesis 18 is supposed to teach us about God’s nature, and who we are to worship, it makes no sense that it is so helplessly ambiguous; that would defeat the entire purpose of the passage.
In contrasting Deuteronomy 4 and Genesis 18, we see Deuteronomy 4 is a direct command. It is not simply a statement of fact; rather, it is placed in a context where Israel is being taught who they are to worship. It is explicit, and unambiguous. There is no question what it is talking about, or what the message is.
It is important to contrast these two verses because the Sinai revelation is characterized in the Hebrew Bible as the standard against which all understandings of God must be compared. In other words, when God did reveal Himself to Israel, He did it in an unambiguous manner. He said nothing of a Trinity, nothing about Jesus or the messiah, and said explicitly Israel saw no form at Sinai. Now, yes, there are verses in Scripture which appear to teach the opposite of this. But make no mistake- those verses like Genesis 18 must be read in light of the Sinai revelation.
The apologetic use of Genesis 18 represents something more: that while Judaism relies on explicit, direct commands as the basis for understanding who Israel is to worship, Christian apologists argue that, as in Genesis 18, there is evidence of God’s nature throughout Scripture.
This debate is not a philosophical question of what God could theoretically do, but about ‘Who should I worship’ and ‘what constitutes idolatry.’ After all, this debate is about whether worship of Jesus is idolatry, and about whether belief in the trinity is precluded by the Sinai revelation. This is not an academic debate; it is one where one must choose who to worship. Therefore, in order to find God’s teachings on idolatry, it only makes sense to look to places where God explicitly teaches us about idolatry, and not rely on allusions and hints in Scripture.
But if, as Christian apologists do with Genesis 18, one is going to look beyond the direct commandments for guidance on God’s nature, and see hints everywhere, there is no reason to stop at the trinity and Jesus. Why not join many biblical scholars who say Moses and the Israelites were not monotheists at all, but henotheists (i.e. – they worshipped one god, while accepting that others existed). Would the same apologists who claim Genesis 18 is proof for God having taken on flesh, say that Exodus 12:12, where God says He will defeat the Egyptian gods, proves the existence of other gods aside from the God of Israel? And since Exodus 3 features God manifested in the ‘burning bush,’ does that mean the burning bush is the fourth member of the godhead?
Scripture has indeed many vague references where one can develop an infinite number of beliefs, but the central question is not what do these ambiguous passages seem to indicate, but rather- What did God command? At Sinai, where the teaching of idolatry was given, did God command worship of the Trinity or of the messiah? No. It is God’s commands to Israel – direct, explicit and unambiguous – which we need to use as the standard for our worship.
So when apologists say they do not worship a ‘manifestation’ of God in Jesus, it also minimizes their belief that Jesus was not simply a ‘representation’ of God, but rather, an entirely distinct member of the godhead- a member which Israel was never commanded to worship at Sinai. If at Sinai, Israel was never commanded to worship two of the three members of the trinity, then they are outside of what Israel is allowed to worship.
So the correct Biblical definition of idolatry would include two categories: worshiping another entity aside from God, and using any image to represent God to ourselves in our worship.
Christianity advocates a devotion that is a violation of the prohibition against idolatry according to both definitions.
If they were to advocate devotion to Jesus without claiming that Jesus is one and the same with the God of Israel that would be a violation of the first definition of idolatry: directing worship to an entity other than the God of Israel. If the Church were to claim that Jesus is merely a symbol, a representation of the God of Israel, with no significant character of his own – that would be a violation of the second definition of idolatry: using an image to represent God to ourselves in our worship.
But Christianity insists that Jesus was a distinct person with an identity of his own, yet they also contend that worship of Jesus is somehow also worship of the Father. The devotion, the love and the adoration that the Church is encouraging is devotion to an entity other than the God of Israel and at the same time, it is using an image to represent the God of Israel.
There is no shortage of Christian responses to the charge that the devotion that the Church advocates is idolatry. The Christian theologians speak of a “mystery of the god-head”, and the impossibility of understanding God’s nature.
But God did not expect us to understand His nature, nor did He expect us to base our devotion to Him on our lack of comprehension. God made a covenant with us. A covenant that He expects us to keep! He spoke the terms of the covenant clearly and unequivocally. He did not send us on a “mystery search” or on a trip to the realm of the unknown. He told us in no uncertain terms what it is that we are not to worship. According to our limited human understanding of God’s command, devotion to Jesus is exactly what God does not want us to do. We are well aware of the fallibility of human understanding, but we are also cognizant that God knows our weaknesses even better than we do. God spoke to us, and He handed the responsibility of keeping His commandment to us, fallible humans. He made it clear to us, to the degree that nothing is clearer to our fallible minds. It behooves us to obey.
Summary:
1/ The Jewish rejection of the trinity and Jesus’ divinity is based on their non-mention at the Sinai revelation, thus precluding them from legitimate Jewish worship.
2/ Deuteronomy 4 reminds Israel they saw no form at Sinai, and thus, Israel is to worship no ‘form’ (or manifestation) of God. If Deuteronomy 4 is not a command, and merely a statement of fact that Israel saw no form at Sinai then it makes no sense for God to place such emphasis on it.
3/ The Jewish rejection of worship of God’s manifestation is not based primarily on the question of “whether God is capable of” taking on flesh, but rather, as in Deuteronomy 4, what our parameters for worship are. In other words, did God ever demand our worship of it? If not, it is excluded.
4/ The instances in the Hebrew Bible where God appears to be in human or physical form (Abraham’s guests, or the burning bush) are not clear teachings on idolatry or who Israel should worship. They are almost always vague and unclear. However perplexing they may be, they cannot be used to influence who we are to worship.
5/ Christian belief does not simply place Jesus as a physical manifestation of God, but as a member of the trinity distinct from the other two. There is no command anywhere in Scripture which demands Israel to worship these other two members of the trinity.
6/ If the Sinai revelation does not preclude belief in the trinity, or in the divinity of Jesus, then it certainly doesn’t preclude a 4 or 5-part godhead, or worship of the burning bush as god, or worship of God as manifested as anything imaginable. And if Sinai does not preclude all this, then it becomes devoid of all meaning.
The Jewish cleaving to God is based on simple command- worship the God who revealed Himself at Sinai. The Christian claim that God is a three-part godhead, one of which manifested himself as a human – is something that God never commanded Israel to worship.
The Angel of the Lord
Let us move on now to those passages in which God seems to be interchangeable with an angel. In chapter 18 of Genesis three men appear to Abraham. It turns out that two of these men were actually angels (Genesis 19:1). But who was the third one? According to some Jewish commentators (Rashbam, and Ibn Ezra), the third man was actually an angel who is called by God’s name. It is this third angel whom Abraham was speaking to and addressing as “Lord”. The Christians argue that this proves that God can take on the form of an angel and even the form of a human; after all didn’t this angel eat and drink with Abraham under the tree? The Jew would point out that this angel was not worshiped by Abraham and that there is no commandment that we are to worship this angel. When God appears to the prophets in the Bible He often sent an angel to represent Him for the purpose of passing on His message to the prophet. The angel speaks the words of God to the prophet, and the prophet addresses God by speaking to the angel – but the angel is not God.
Is this angel God incarnate and deserving of worship as the Christian would have it? Or is the angel only passing on God’s words but is an entity distinct and separate from God and therefore not worthy of divine worship?
Fortunately we have some other passages in scripture which could help us sort things out. Exodus 23:20 has God telling Moses that He will send an angel before the Jewish people.God commands Moses to hearken to the voice of this angel. Here is the direct quote(Exodus 23:22 -) “But rather you shall hearken to his voice and do all that I speak”. In other words God wants Moses to obey the command of the angel because it is God’s words that the angel speaks, but the angel is clearly an entity separate from God.
Similarly in Numbers chapter 22 we find an angel speaking God’s words, yet the angel is an entity distinct from God. In verse 35 of that chapter the angel tells Bilam “but the word which I speak that you shall speak”, yet in chapter 23 verse 5 it is God who puts the words in Bilam’s mouth. Again, the angel is the one who speaks God’s words and scripture refers to it as “God speaking”. The very designation “mal’ach” (generally translated as “angel”) literally means “messenger”, highlighting the fact that the angel is an entity subservient to God charged with a mission – but is not an entity who is to be seen as co-equal with God. In fact we find that human messengers of God (also referred to by the term “mal’ach – angel” Haggai 1:13) speaking God’s words. In the book of Deuteronomy we find Moses speaking God’s words without any introductory phrases, he just slips from speaking God’s words in the third person to speaking God’s words in the first person – (Deuteronomy 11:15). No-one attributes divinity to Moses, yet in capacity of messenger to the Lord he speaks for God. God uses messengers, both human and angelic through whom He brings His word to this physical world – but there is no indication that any worship is to be directed to these messengers. These messengers are clearly distinct from God, and as such, are not deserving of divine worship. – Rabbi Yisroel Blumenthal
Exodus 23:20 has God telling Moses that He will send an angel before the Jewish people. God commands Moses to hearken to the voice of this angel. Here is the direct quote (Exodus 23:22 -) “But rather you shall hearken to his voice and do all that I speak”. In other words God wants Moses to obey the command of the angel because it is God’s words that the angel speaks, but the angel is clearly an entity separate from God. Similarly in Numbers chapter 22 we find an angel speaking God’s words, yet the angel is an entity distinct from God. In verse 35 of that chapter the angel tells Bileam “but the word which I speak that you shall speak”, yet in chapter 23 verse 5 it is God who puts the words in Bileam’s mouth. Again, the angel is the one who speaks God’s words and scripture refers to it as “God speaking”. The very designation “mal’ach” (generally translated as “angel”) literally means “messenger”, highlighting the fact that the angel is an entity subservient to God charged with a mission – but is not an entity who is to be seen as co-equal with God. In fact we find that human messengers of God (also referred to by the term “mal’ach – angel” Haggai 1:13) speaking God’s words. In the book of Deuteronomy we find Moses speaking God’s words without any introductory phrases, he just slips from speaking God’s words in the third person to speaking God’s words in the first person – (Deuteronomy 11:15). No-one attributes divinity to Moses, yet in capacity of messenger to the Lord he speaks for God. God uses messengers, both human and angelic through whom He brings His word to this physical world – but there is no indication that any worship is to be directed to these messengers. These messengers are clearly distinct from God, and as such, are not deserving of worship. – Rabbi Yisroel Blumenthal
LikeLike
Please explain these:
Paradise: God walking, talking (1.Moos. 3:8-> )
Sinai – no form? 2.Moos.24.10-11, finger 2.Moos. 31:18, face-to-face 33:11,
but in the other hand: no face shown as 2.Moos. 33:23
form? 4.Moos.12:8
LikeLike
Moos?
LikeLike
hallo david
u say that tav mark in poleo writing is not a cross – u r right : but in ancient hebrew lexcion it is a mark and still it resemble cross – the problem still there
– another thing
talmud said that (yasho) is hanged at the night of passover and no one deny that fact
did u noticed that the area of crossification is called (golgotha) golgol means roll or return (tha) תא the first and last letters
if u returned to eica (lam.) midrash 1:2 u find that your rabbis said that sons of israel sinned from א to ת
it seems that golgotha is an illusion that god in that area will convert the end that mankind choose (which is death) by there sin – to the beginning of mankind when they were resemble god in purity (genesis 1)
if we ignored that figure also there is other things that we can not ignore — what about psalm 22 that till us about the crossification of the coming messiah ?
excuse my bad English
LikeLike
Your English is a whole lot better than my Arabic!! Here is a link which you may find useful as far as Psalm 22 goes and indeed other items too:
http://noahide-ancient-path.co.uk/index.php/judaism-articles/2012/08/psalm-22/
LikeLike
thanx 4 answering
u ignored the first part of my comment – do u think that golgotha name is coincidence or a deep meaning?
the link u gave me – the only thing it matters is the verse 16
lets talk about that
1- (cari) as a lion cant be the right reading – cause the literal translation would be (inclosed me as alion my feet and foot ) the meaning is nlot clear – the scriptures should have said bind or hold so that the reader could understand – what u say is against hebrew properties
2-(caro) pierced – make that hebrew sentence make sense
3- qumran scrolls in Q88 psalms f in frag1-2 it said clearly (caro) wich means pierced — u must know already that the date of scriptures in qumran is away older than masuritics
4- by the past point we conclude that ([pierced) reading is the oldest and more trusted if we looked at the grammer — finally we will head to
Yalkut Shimoni (687): “‘Many dogs have encompassed me’- this refers to Haman’s sons. ‘The assembly of the wicked have enclosed me’- this refers to Ahasuerus and his crowd. ‘Kaari my hands and feet’- Rabbi Nehemiah says, ‘They have PIERCED my hands and feet in the presence of Ahasuerus.’”
what u say about that mr david?
LikeLike
Click to access Psa22.pdf
LikeLike
by the way nehal hanvar shows (caro) clearly – not as the link u gave me said
LikeLike
Click to access Psa22.pdf
LikeLike
wrong theory that u said about qumran — is there any prove that u r right?
do u got images of the manuscript it self ?
what u say about yalkut shimoni
LikeLike
Very complicated this Alve Tav……
But concerning Jesus, I must wonder why Jews do not study it more in detail the book of Daniel…
I think a detail study of Daniel 9 will prove that Jesus is the Messiah….Even the first century Jews studying that book were awaiting to coming of the Messiah in the first century of this era……but most of them did not recognize Him. Certainly I must say that He is there for all of us Jews and Gentiles alike..
So what does Daniel 9 says…
well first of all describes the functions of the Messiah to come….which were to be accomplished within a 70 weeks prophetic time period( 490 prophetic days =490 literal years, when taking in consideration Eze 4:6, in which a prophetic day is told to represent a literal years)…among them reconciliation (atonement, referring to his death as the expiatory lamb causing our reconciliation with God)
we are told that the Messiah was to come at the end of the initial 69 weeks, and his death was to occur after the 69 weeks(same as saying within the 70th week)….
as such we have a timeline of 483 years from the decree to the arrival of the Messiah
but which is the starting point of that timeline of 483 years?
according to the vision itself the starting point is that decree (or culminating decree) to restore Jerusalem, this means more than just the reconstruction of Jerusalem, in fact it means it re-institution as a city, as the capital of Israel, as such the re-institution of Israel once again as a nation before God…as simple as that…
So which is the decree that was to induce the total restoration of Jerusalem and by default of Israel, and which is therefore the starting point of the 69weeks(483 years)?
The answer is simple, the one of Ezra 7, given by Artarxerxes in 457BC, which is the decree which provides for the re-establishment of the governing of the nation of Israel with magistrates and judicial system as decreed..(in fact this decree culminates what the other decrees started)….as such the starting point of the 483 years is the decree of 457BC…..which bring us to 27 AD…as the time when the Messiah was to arrive as a Messiah (means the anointement of the Messiah was to take place in that year, as such he was to become “the anointed one”)….
decree=457BC—+483years —>27AD
Truth be told the Messiah was to arrive in 27AD, and his death was soon after in the midst of next 7 years….actually in 30 or 31 AD….
So who was anointed in 27AD and died in the cross 3 or 3.5 years later (30 or 31 AD)..?
answer= none other but Jesus Christ….who was baptized and anointed by the Holy Spirit as a dove in 27 ad (see Luke 3, the 15th coreignal year of
Tiberius)….and who died soon after around 30 or 31 AD….Who fulfill the prophecies as described and who brought salvation to man, becoming their expiatory lamb…which takes away the sins of this world…
I think a detail study of the book of Daniel, and all its vision will clarify who is the Messiah…and also who is the Antimessiah(which is the apostate christian church, papal Rome, baptize paganism which took over the christian church….)…Jesus is coming again very soon, to save those that accept Him as their savior…This is a matter of life or death…and it behooves each and every one of us to know who is the Messiah…and then accept his salvation…freely given to all…
Dan 9:24 = 70 WEEKS INCLUDE THE ATONEMENT, AT THE DEATH OF THE MESSIAH)=
Seventy weeks(490 PROPHETIC DAYS =490 LITERAL YEARS) are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation (ATONEMENT)for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
Dan 9:25 THE DECREE= TO RESTORE JERUSALEM, GIVEN BY THE MEDOPERSIAN IN 457BC= ADDING TO THIS DATE THE 69WEEKS(483 YEARS) WILL BRING US TO HIS ARRIVAL AS THE ANOINTED ONE…THE MESSIAH=
“Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment(DECREE OF 457BC) to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks (69 WEEKS=483 YEARS): the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.”
Dan 9:26=THE DEATH OF THE MESSIAH AFTER THE 69 WEEKS(SAME AS AFTER THE 62 WEEKS, ALL DEPEND FROM WHERE ONE IS COUNTING)
“And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
Dan 9:27 THE MESSIAH” ENFORCES” THE OFFERING OF THE NEW COVENANT (THE ONE ALSO TOLD BY JEREMIAH) DURING THE LAST WEEK OF 7 YEARS…THE FIRST 3.5 YEARS HE OFFERS DIRECTLY THE NEW COVENANT UNTIL HIS DEATH IN THE MIDST OF THE 70TH WEEK, AND THE LATER 3.5 YEARS HIS DISCIPLES CONTINUE THIS MISSION)=
“And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week (7 YEARS): and in the midst of the week(70TH WEEK) he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease(OLD COVENANT TO CEASE), and for the overspreading of abominations ….. shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
(THE “HE” IN ….. IS NOT IN THE ORIGINAL WRITINGS)
…
457bc——————-(69W/483y)————–>27ad——X—–>34ad
70th week…in the midst of it…dies the Messiah…Jesus Christ, in 30/31AD
Jesus is the Messiah spoken by Daniel…and He came as it was told that it was to be so….some received Him …others did not….But you and I still have the opportunity to do so…to do the right thing…
We gentiles must thank the believer Jews for sharing this Blessed Hope with us!
By the way….I am an SDA….I do keep the 7th day Sabbath as you do…but I have accepted Jesus, and I am awaiting His soon coming….because many other prophecies are being fulfilled right now…Like the extension of Babylon the Great(Papal Rome) to soon rule the whole world…with terrible tribulation to come…but thanks God short lasting…and then Jesus the Messiah as King of kings and Lord of lords will arrive…
If you have second thoughts about the divinity of Christ…
then try to explain to me who was the Angel in the Burning Bush that Moses
saw and which he called his Lord…?
LikeLike
If you cannot deal with the basic alpha bet and a simple thought process, then itis rather presumptuous to propose that you have something to say WRT Dan 9.
LikeLike
I have not gone through these comments, I have read enough in the past to know what is being said. I am going to leave you, Christians and Messianics with a picture to ponder……Really see this in you minds eye if it is really “truth” you seek…..
“There is a village of people who every day read their beloved fathers diary. They enjoy close fellowship with him, always have, but he chose to write things down for them to be able to pick up and read over and over.
They put the book down most carefully, as it is precious to them, and go about their work for the day. Now along comes a stranger from another country, who doesn’t speak their language. He finds their beloved book and picks it up, but when he opens it he realizes it is useless to him because he cannot read it. “It must be important, because I see the way they handle it with such love and care! I must learn this language and read it for myself.”
So he goes off to take some classes to learn this new language, he only needs the basics, nothing too deep, just enough to be able to read what is written on those pages! In a little while, he feels he has learned enough. He goes back to the village and when they people are working he picks up this book and begins to read in his broken Hebrew. He feels quite proud of himself that he is now able to read this mysterious book!
After he reads it he become so full of himself that he goes to these people, the children of the man who wrote the diary, and begins to tell them “You have it all wrong! Let me tell you what your father really meant!” Of course the people look at him as if he is nuts! He can’t even read it with fluidity and he doesn’t even understand the basics rules of their language! They try to explain this to him, but he will not listen! In his arrogance he is convinced he knows more than they do!
Off he goes to try to find someone who will hold him in the high esteem he feels he deserves! Sure enough, it doesn’t take too long before he finds more people who don’t understand the language and are all too willing to follow him in whatever he says! He speaks with such authority he must know what he is talking about…and hence ignorance and lies become the truth of this new group of people and they too spread the lies, and on and on it goes!”
It is incredibly arrogant and ignorant for foreigners to tell the Jewish people what their own scriptures are “really saying”! SMH
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bingo Jenna Best!!
LikeLike
Who is incredibly ignorant??? When you imply that only foreigners believe what is written about the Alef and Tav you show your own ignorance. You admit, “I have not gone through these comments” It would do you well to read Proverbs 18:13 before you answer a matter before investigating. “He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.” And to imply that just because one is Jewish that he can automatically understand Hebrew better than anyone else is to display your own prejudice! And as for you Menashe, you are shameless in your own willful support of such prejudicial and unfounded arguments! Perhaps you would do better to PLAY “BINGO”.
LikeLike
Prejudicial and unfounded arguments?
LikeLike
Pingback: The Passover Celebration with “Rabbi” Jonathan Cahn on The Jim Bakker Show 2013 | Noach ben Avraham
Menashe, how do you explain the miracles of Jesus? What power or authority enabled Jesus to do these miracles – in your opinion?
Shalom,
H.
LikeLike
Deut 13
LikeLike
Can the accuser create life?
LikeLike
Pingback: Menashe's Blog
The Son is the Aleph and Tav, the First and the Last. His name is YHVH-shua, or Yeshua Ha Machiach. He is the Father manifest in flesh. This has been foretold from the beginning, and will carry through eternity.
LikeLike
I understand that facts are not going to get inthe way of what you want to believe.
LikeLike
I left a comment on this topic on the 22 May 2014, but I see that it is still awaiting moderation. My comment was polite and I think well reasoned. Is there a problem? It’s your site so of course you can control the content, but I do feel the point I made was a serious one that you should address.
LikeLike
I did not think your remark added to the discussion and I was not agreeing with Jenna best either. Perhaps you may wish to re-edit / submit your remarks again?
LikeLike
Your response to Jenna Best’s post was “Bingo Jenna Best”. If you did not agree with Jenna’s remarks, then what exactly did you mean by “Bingo”? James Ashmore also seems to have understood your comment in the same way that I did i.e. you giving your assent to Jenna’s argument. In light of the above I felt the responsible thing to do was to point out the self-refuting position you appeared to have taken. I only happened upon your site when looking for reviews of a provocatively titled book ‘The Return of the Kosher Pig’, having never heard of its author and knowing nothing of the author’s academic credentials; I am not entering the discussion as some sort of missionary.
I will post my remarks again; of course if you do not agree with Jenna Best then you need take no notice of them, but perhaps you’ll explain what you meant by “Bingo Jenna Best”?
My previous post:
“Menashe, I am disappointed that you seem to be in agreement with Jenna Best’s presupposition that no non-Jew is able to understand Hebrew or Aramaic well enough to form a reasoned opinion on what any given text in those two languages really means. Apart from being plain silly, it is also, as far as your Blog goes, self-refuting. The NT is written in Koine Greek and since the argument works both ways, if Jenna’s presupposition is valid it must follow that no Jew is able to understand the NT well enough to refute any claim a Christian missionary might make. If that is the case, what is the point of your Blog?”
LikeLike
Certainly not in the way you think I was agreeing with Jenna Best that is for sure.
LikeLike
Well I can only comment on what you write, not on a meaning you intend but fail to make explicit (and still fail to make explicit). In common usage writing “Bingo” as a response to another person’s post is to declare “That’s it, you’ve hit the nail on the head”. Unfortunately your reply is just too enigmatic, too zen like, to be of any use. You
agree with Jenna, but not in the way I think you agree with her, but you’re not going to make clear in what way you agree with her. I was hoping for a serious response.
LikeLike
First I think you need to review the article itself. Secondly the fact as the article states is that neither Jewish or Christian scholarship (which includes messianic Judaism) has any reference to a messiah being the aleph tav. It is a recent innovation of so called messianic Judaism which erroneously equates the alpha omega of the New Testament with the aleph tav found on every page of Tanach.
If anything Jenna’s comment underscores the very situation which caused me to remark bingo. Why? Because underpinning what she said (in the way of a story) was the fundemental way in which scripture has always been understood by Jewish people. The latter part of my article discusses how PARDES and in particular how the simple meaning of text always takes presidency over any midrashic meaning. The simple meaning of the aleph tav is as pointed out in the article, the direct definite object used in Hebrew to signify who is doing what. The article pointed out a midrashic interpretation of the aleph bet as being the first thing that G-d created and was subsequently used to speak the world into existence which contradicts the nt account of the pre existent word which was not created. In other words Jenna’s story highlights how Christians/ messianics use midrash over the plain meaning of scripture to believe what they want to believe.
LikeLike
The delay in answering your comment was due to the onset of shabbat BTW.
LikeLike
Thanks for your reply; I understand now why you responded to Jenna’s post in the way that you did. I still don’t care much for Jenna’s story, but as it is directed at what might be described as inadequate scholarship I suppose I can live with it. I was aware that Shabbes was imminent so I didn’t expect an immediate reply.
LikeLike
Well you got a reply first thing after Shabbat, how is that for diligence?
LikeLike
Hi Menashe, my name is Peter. Hope you had a peaceful shabbat(not sure where you are, but its over for me here in Australia) I came here because of your response above to the Aleph Tav being misrepresented. Please look past my belief in Yeshua because i really need your help. Within my group of brethren i have noticed my idea and understanding and nature of(i hope i don’t offend) Y – – H, my Father in Heaven, the G-d of Israel, blessed be his Holy name.
I am grieved in my spirit when i see glory that should be attributed to my Father, going to someone else. So much so that i am working on a book “The Nature of G-d and his Mashiach”
While the explanation above has satisfied me with the Aleph Tav, there are other arguments i come up supporting Yeshua as being co-eternal, the Father himself, the creator, angel of the LORD, pre-existent, all of which i believe is a grand delusion Hear’o’Israel, Adonai our G-d, Adonai is ONE! Its PRETTY SIMPLE!!
BUT , some are sadly not convinced, SO can you please if you can provide some insight to the Hebrew word ECHAD, because i fight this fight a lot, to me it really means one, which means Duet 6:4 becomes a powerful doctrine smasher, its always amusing to me that my brethren always want to apply the plural meaning here to echad to support multiplicity in the g-dhead.
Please help, what do you see in Echad? HONESTLY can this be used as an argument?
Shalome Peter.
Jeremiah 31:9 . . . for i am a Father to Israel and Ephraim is my firstborn.
LikeLike
When One is Just One
Genesis 2:21 And LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one (echad) of his ribs.
How many ribs? Maybe God took a single rack of ribs (As you would receive a rack of barbecue ribs in a restaurant).
Genesis 22:2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one (echad)of the mountains which I will tell thee of.
How many mountains did Abraham go to?
Exodus 25:19 And make one (echad) cherub on the one (different word) end and the other cherub on the other end.
How many cherubs on one side?
Leviticus 16:5 And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats for sin offering, and one (echad) ram for a burnt offering.
How many rams? Maybe God meant a “whole herd”? He said one
Mal 2:10 Have we not all one (echad) father? Hath not one (echad) God created us? Why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, profaning the covenant of our fathers?
Multiple fathers a biological possibility?
Numbers 10:4 And if they blow but with one (echad) trumpet, then the princes, which are heads of the thousands of Israel, shall gather themselves unto thee.
Were they supposed to blow with an orchestra of trumpets in unison?
Compound unity?
And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Genesis 1:5
Yes a compound unity!
And they came unto the brook of Eshcol, and cut down from thence a branch with one cluster of grapes, and they bare it between two upon a staff; and [they brought] of the pomegranates, and of the figs. Numbers 23:13
One what? One grape? No. One cluster of grapes. Is one cluster of grapes the same as one grape? Absolutely not! In addition to that, the word here is grapes (plural). If echad was used in reference to the word grapes, the phrase would be nonsensical. In the phrase, “one cluster,” does one sufficiently describe what the numeral “one” is supposed to describe? Without a doubt!
Rule for determining?
Answer is derived from the context.
Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God, the LORD is one. Deut 6:4
What do you reckon?
Cf
Ye shall not go after other gods (elohim), of the gods (elohai) of the people which [are] round about you; Deut 6:14
“Elohim has plural morphological form in Hebrew, but it is used with singular verbs and adjectives in the Hebrew text when the particular meaning of the God of Israel (a singular deity) is traditionally understood. Thus the very first words of the Bible are breshit bara elohim, where bara ברא is a verb inflected as third person singular masculine perfect. If Elohim were an ordinary plural word, then the plural verb form bar’u בראו would have been used in this sentence instead. Such plural grammatical forms are in fact found in cases where Elohim has semantically plural reference (not referring to the God of Israel). “God created. The Hebrew noun Elohim is plural but the verb is singular, a normal usage in the OT when reference is to the one true God. This use of the plural expresses intensification rather than number and has been called the plural of majesty, or of potentiality”
And the LORD said unto Moses, “See, I have made thee a god (Elohim) to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.” Exodus 7:1 (KJV)
Are we to imply from the above that there is a plurality in Moses? This would be silly in light of what has been explained above!!
From the above examples and Exodus 7:1 it would appear that the intensity applied to Moses is an evidence of his uniqueness and exalted status
LikeLike
Excellent reply and the grape analogy when properly understood, reflects how we are to understand ‘one’, its hard sometimes trying to undo greek/philsophical thought. Adam and eve are ‘one’ but i still recognise TWO people!
In regard to your correct highlight of the ‘Plural of Majesty’, I still see unfortunately a small window where people will try to ‘insert’ Yeshua in there as co-creator ,which i can very easily refute anyway., but centuries old doctrine has a hard time dying sometimes.
Consider for example,
Isa 44:8
Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God H433 beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.
As my understanding goes, elowahh(433) is the strict singular root from which elohim comes from and here G-d says he knows of ‘no others who are g-d’, also i hope i am correct in understanding that ‘el is also strictly singular? Which is used of Y – – H many more times throughout the Isaiah 40’s where G-d expounds a lot about his ‘singleness’ but i digress. Thankyou so much for your insight Menashe and may you continue strong and steadfast in your assurance that the G-d of Israel truly is only one.
Blessings, Peter.
LikeLike
Glad to be of assistance.
LikeLike
Thank you for this helpful explanation. I’m a Catholic and somebody was telling me about this… it just didn’t seem right to me and I presumed there was a reasonable explanation, as there is. My very first thought was what you mentioned above, about how there is really no association between first and last in the Greek alphabet and the Hebrew, but I didn’t know what part of speech it might be. My problem is I don’t know anything at all about Hebrew, so I can be a sitting duck to people who want to write their own version of the meaning into the sacred text. Eisogesis from fundamentalists gets so exhausting.
LikeLike
The Talmud taught about the Metatron or lesser YHVH……as a matter of fact the prayer Sar HaPanim during Rosh Hashanah named the kohen gadol as Yeshua who is the One who atones for our sins.
The prayer is as follows:
“May it be Your will that the sounding of the shofar, which we have done, will be embroidered in the veil by the appointed angel, as You accepted it by Elijah, of blessed memory and by Yeshua, the Prince of the Face (Face of Hashem) (Prince of God’s Presence) and the one who sits on God’s throne. May You be filled with compassion toward us. Deserving of praise are You, LORD of compassion.”
– S. Birnbaum, Behind The Curtain, Siddur HaShalem, part 2, p. 282.
LikeLike
Yehoshua ben Yehotsadak, and Yeshua ben Yotsadak are the same person. He was the High Priest at the time of the rebuilding of the Temple and together with Zerubavel led the people who returned to Israel from Babylon. Spelling changes occur quite often in the Bible. The spelling Yeshua (without the hey) is in the books Ezra and Nehemia, while the other spelling [with the hey] is in Hagai Zecharia and Divrei Hayamim.
A devious plan by modern day Jewish prayer books to acknowledge that Jews have always prayed to Yeshua? Or is it simply that a word in old Rosh Hoshana Machzor (prayer book for Rosh Hoshana) has been subject to Christian censorship and is now indeterminable? Perhaps there is another explanation?
See the video
menashedovid1.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/the-rosh-hoshana-conspiracy/
LikeLike
http://openallhours.org/?p=70
LikeLike
What do you say about the Messiah Ben Yosef and Messiah Ben David with regard to Zechariah 12:10 according to the Talmud Sir?…thanks
LikeLike
May I suggest you read the blog pages as most of your questions are addressed. In regard to Zech 12 here is the post found at;
The Jewish perspective on Zechariah 12:10 is that it may be viewed either as an historical biblical event or, alternatively, as a messianic event that is yet to be fulfilled. Neither of these interpretations can accommodate, nor agrees with the Christian view of Zech 12. The Christian view includes those who would describe themselves as messianic ‘Jews’. Both Christians and messianic ‘Jews’ are both agreed that Jesus/ Yeshua is ‘the’ substitutionary vicarious blood sacrifice. According to Christians, Zachariah 12 gives an example of the necessary functional nature of the ‘godhead’. The example insists on a physical/ divine ‘Messiah’ (Jesus) fulfilling the necessary role/ purpose of being pierced and killed for people’s sins so as to bring about ‘the’ substitutionary atonement. The argument for the necessary functional nature of the substitutionary atonement comes about as a result of a spiritual being (god) not having a physical body to be pierced.
So the ‘godhead’ taking on a human form, which is described as a unique and ‘unexplainable mystery of godliness’, allows for this necessary functional nature of the ‘god head’. In the Christian viewpoint Zech 12 is a messianic prophecy that was fulfilled with the crucifixion of Jesus working in cahoots with the other two members of the plural/ composite ‘godhead’. Judaism however, does not and has never subscribed to a plural/ composite ‘godhead’. Instead Judaism asserts that G-d is absolutely One, the Torah forbids human sacrifice, that each person is individually responsible for their sins and that G-d is very willing to forgive without the use of blood, flower, incense or the giving of money[all ways of achieving atonement].
However, The 12th Chapter in the Book of Zechariah describes a war of nations against Jerusalem, in which Judeans fought on the side of the enemy for a while and, when they realized that G-d was with the people of Jerusalem, they “turned around” and joined the battle against the enemy, which led to the deliverance of Jerusalem and the restoration of its status. The victory will, however, be followed by grievous mourning over those who fell in the battle. The passage Zechariah 12:8-14, when read in the original Hebrew text, or in a correct translation thereof, clearly shows that the prophet could not possibly have spoken of Jesus. For example, the prophet makes the promise that Jerusalem and its inhabitants will be protected:
Zechariah 12:7, 8 — (7) And the Lord will save the tents of Judah first, so that the splendor of the House of David and the splendor of the inhabitants of Jerusalem should not overwhelm Judah. (8) On that day, the lord shall protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and it shall come to pass on that day that even the weakest among them shall be like David: and the House of David shall be as angels, like an angel of the Lord before them.
The historical record testifies that, less than 40 years after Jesus died, Jerusalem was torched and destroyed by the Romans, and its people were expelled and exiled. So, this is yet another prophecy that Jesus did not fulfill. The prophet also foretells the destruction of those nations that attacked Jerusalem:
Zechariah 12:9 — And it shall come to pass on that day, [that] I will seek to destroy all the nations that have come upon Jerusalem.
According to the historical record, none of these nations were destroyed in the days of Jesus!!
According to Talmudic tradition, the first “Messiah”, מָשִׁיחַ בֶּן־יוֹסֵף (maSHI’ah BEN YoSEF), Messiah son of Joseph, will be a hero out of either of the tribes that emerged from Joseph – Ephraim and Menasheh. He will fight and be killed in the Great War, an event that will be the catalyst for all of Israel to turn to God and repent. Jesus was not a warrior or from the tribe of Joseph!!! After that, מָשִׁיחַ בֶּן־דָּוִד (maSHI’ah BEN DaVID), Messiah son of David, the Davidic Messiah, will appear and usher in the messianic era and its promised redemption of Israel.
According to the New Testament Jesus was from the tribe of Judah by adoption through Joseph since G-d was the father of Jesus. Adoption can never cause a change in tribal affiliation according to Torah, however! In contradistinction, “Messiah”, מָשִׁיחַ בֶּן־יוֹסֵף (maSHI’ah BEN YoSEF), Messiah son of Joseph, will be a hero out of either of the tribes that emerged from Joseph – Ephraim and Menasheh. May he come soon!!
LikeLike
The clearest evidence that Yeshua is NOT the messiah, or at the very least, evidence that Yeshua’s blood does NOT atone for our sins, is found in a Messianic era prophecy:
Ezekiel 45:22 And upon that day shall the prince prepare for himself and for all the people of the land a bullock for a sin offering.
First off, you will note that “the prince” (clearly a messianic figure) requires a sin-offering, and second you will note that “all the people” require such as well.
So much for:
Hebrews 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God
LikeLike