My Response to Nehmia Gordon (Ira Michaelson's Rejection of Messiah)
Nehemia Gordon responded to my recent blog Messianic Leader's Apostasy: What We Can Learn on Facebook saying:
I know I'm supposed to be on Sabbatical, but I had to get some input on something I just read. A well-known "Nazarene" teacher posted the following (as part of his blog bashing me as an alleged "anti-missionary"):
"Now the idea of Yeshua as the Messiah makes perfect sense in terms of Jewish tradition, but without Jewish tradition, there is no concept of a Messiah at all, Yeshua or otherwise."
Really?! There is no concept of a Messiah in the Tanakh (Old Testament)?! Seriously? So why is the expectation of a coming Messiah part of the "Principles of Faith" professed by both Karaite Jews and Rabbinical Jews?
Jews and Christians may disagree about certain passages referring to the Messiah (like Zechariah 4:14 and 12:10). However, there are also indisputable passages that according to all opinions refer to what is commonly known as Mashiach, such as Isaiah 11:1; Jeremiah 23:5; Ezekiel 34:24; 37:25; etc.
It seems to me that a "Nazarene" teacher who claims that there is no concept of Messiah in the Hebrew Bible is doing more to advance the "anti-missionary" cause than any Jew ever could. Does such a teacher really even believe in the Messiah or does he worship Jewish tradition?
My reply to Gordon (which he did not allow on his facebook page):
My point is this: Using the Tanak alone, one cannot demonstrate that there is a single eschatology figure to come called "The Messiah". If you presented a group of people who never heard of the concept of "The Messiah" with copies of the Tanak and left them alone for years, you would not come back to hear them talking about a figure known as "The Messiah" to come.
Yes there are references to a figure called "servant" in Isaiah, there is a prophecy of "a prophet" like Moses in Deut 18 (some take this to refer generally to each of the prophets after Moses). And there are prophecies of a figure called "the branch" using a variety of different Hebrew words for "branch". And there are another of other passages of such figures sometimes with no appellation at all. How do we know that these and other prophecies speak of a single figure called "The Messiah" and not to a number of different figures? The answer is "tradition". Do a word search on "The Messiah" in the Tanak and you will get zero results.
If one rejects tradition, then one rejects the very basis for the concept of "The Messiah", Yeshua or otherwise.
I have found in seeking to debate an anti-missionary that they want to limit the material to be cited in the debate to be the Tanak only. This is odd because the anti-missionaries I am speaking of are Rabbinic Jews. Why should they want to eliminate the Targums, Talmuds, Midrashim, Zohar and other Rabbinic literature from the debate? Neither of us are Kaaraites, so why take a Kaarite position in the debate? The reason friends is that the concept of the Messiah is largely an Oral Law concept! And the anti-missionaries KNOW THIS WELL. The Messiah is almost never mentioned in the Tanak by that title (The possible exceptions being "YHWH has anointed me" (Is. 61:1); "His anointed" (Ps. 2:2) "an anointed shall be cut off" (Dan. 9:26). Even these passages are unclear in the Tanak alone, as they could simply refer to a "an anointed one" rather than "The Messiah." The only way to demonstrate clearly that any given passage is in fact a reference to Messiah is to rely upon the Oral Law (thru such sources as the Targums, the Talmuds, the Midrashim and the Zohar). For example the word "Messiah" never appears in Isaiah 53, yet we know form the Targum, the Talmud, the Midrash Rabbah and the Zohar that Isaiah 53 speaks of the Messiah. This is why, while some Rabbinic Jews and even Orthodox Rabbis have accepted Yeshua as the Messiah, I know of no case where a Kaarite has come to Messiah. There is virtually no way to make the case to a Kaarite that Yeshua is the Messiah. By contrast I can show any open minded Rabbinic Jew that Yeshua is the Messiah of Judaism, and I have done just that in our new book Mashiach: The Messiah from a True Jewish Perspective.
In fact it is for this very reason that Yeshua's original followers came from the Pharisees and Essenes and few if any from the Sadducees. That is because the Sadducees rejected the Oral Law and thus had no framework for the very concept of the Messiah and they could not accept Yeshua as a Messiah when they did not even accept the concept of Messiah at all.
Now the idea of Yeshua as the Messiah makes perfect sense in terms of Jewish tradition, but without Jewish tradition, there is no concept of a Messiah at all, Yeshua or otherwise. Nehemia Gordon does not need to directly attack the idea that Yeshua is Messiah, he need only attack Jewish tradition, for without Jewish tradition, there is no Messiah concept.
This ministry stands up for Messiah and for Torah and against the anti-missionaries. We have distribute hundreds of copies of free books and have a profound and successful outreach to the Jewish community. We were pioneers in restoring the original Hebrew and Aramaic text of the books known as the "New Testament" and just a few days ago we restored the lost original Hebrew text of 1st Maccabees to the Community. Thousands of people visit our website every month, and hundreds of free copies of Mashiach: Messiah from a True Jewish Perspective have been distributed. And we have only just begun!
I know I'm supposed to be on Sabbatical, but I had to get some input on something I just read. A well-known "Nazarene" teacher posted the following (as part of his blog bashing me as an alleged "anti-missionary"):
"Now the idea of Yeshua as the Messiah makes perfect sense in terms of Jewish tradition, but without Jewish tradition, there is no concept of a Messiah at all, Yeshua or otherwise."
Really?! There is no concept of a Messiah in the Tanakh (Old Testament)?! Seriously? So why is the expectation of a coming Messiah part of the "Principles of Faith" professed by both Karaite Jews and Rabbinical Jews?
Jews and Christians may disagree about certain passages referring to the Messiah (like Zechariah 4:14 and 12:10). However, there are also indisputable passages that according to all opinions refer to what is commonly known as Mashiach, such as Isaiah 11:1; Jeremiah 23:5; Ezekiel 34:24; 37:25; etc.
It seems to me that a "Nazarene" teacher who claims that there is no concept of Messiah in the Hebrew Bible is doing more to advance the "anti-missionary" cause than any Jew ever could. Does such a teacher really even believe in the Messiah or does he worship Jewish tradition?
My reply to Gordon (which he did not allow on his facebook page):
My point is this: Using the Tanak alone, one cannot demonstrate that there is a single eschatology figure to come called "The Messiah". If you presented a group of people who never heard of the concept of "The Messiah" with copies of the Tanak and left them alone for years, you would not come back to hear them talking about a figure known as "The Messiah" to come.
Yes there are references to a figure called "servant" in Isaiah, there is a prophecy of "a prophet" like Moses in Deut 18 (some take this to refer generally to each of the prophets after Moses). And there are prophecies of a figure called "the branch" using a variety of different Hebrew words for "branch". And there are another of other passages of such figures sometimes with no appellation at all. How do we know that these and other prophecies speak of a single figure called "The Messiah" and not to a number of different figures? The answer is "tradition". Do a word search on "The Messiah" in the Tanak and you will get zero results.
If one rejects tradition, then one rejects the very basis for the concept of "The Messiah", Yeshua or otherwise.
I have found in seeking to debate an anti-missionary that they want to limit the material to be cited in the debate to be the Tanak only. This is odd because the anti-missionaries I am speaking of are Rabbinic Jews. Why should they want to eliminate the Targums, Talmuds, Midrashim, Zohar and other Rabbinic literature from the debate? Neither of us are Kaaraites, so why take a Kaarite position in the debate? The reason friends is that the concept of the Messiah is largely an Oral Law concept! And the anti-missionaries KNOW THIS WELL. The Messiah is almost never mentioned in the Tanak by that title (The possible exceptions being "YHWH has anointed me" (Is. 61:1); "His anointed" (Ps. 2:2) "an anointed shall be cut off" (Dan. 9:26). Even these passages are unclear in the Tanak alone, as they could simply refer to a "an anointed one" rather than "The Messiah." The only way to demonstrate clearly that any given passage is in fact a reference to Messiah is to rely upon the Oral Law (thru such sources as the Targums, the Talmuds, the Midrashim and the Zohar). For example the word "Messiah" never appears in Isaiah 53, yet we know form the Targum, the Talmud, the Midrash Rabbah and the Zohar that Isaiah 53 speaks of the Messiah. This is why, while some Rabbinic Jews and even Orthodox Rabbis have accepted Yeshua as the Messiah, I know of no case where a Kaarite has come to Messiah. There is virtually no way to make the case to a Kaarite that Yeshua is the Messiah. By contrast I can show any open minded Rabbinic Jew that Yeshua is the Messiah of Judaism, and I have done just that in our new book Mashiach: The Messiah from a True Jewish Perspective.
In fact it is for this very reason that Yeshua's original followers came from the Pharisees and Essenes and few if any from the Sadducees. That is because the Sadducees rejected the Oral Law and thus had no framework for the very concept of the Messiah and they could not accept Yeshua as a Messiah when they did not even accept the concept of Messiah at all.
Now the idea of Yeshua as the Messiah makes perfect sense in terms of Jewish tradition, but without Jewish tradition, there is no concept of a Messiah at all, Yeshua or otherwise. Nehemia Gordon does not need to directly attack the idea that Yeshua is Messiah, he need only attack Jewish tradition, for without Jewish tradition, there is no Messiah concept.
This ministry stands up for Messiah and for Torah and against the anti-missionaries. We have distribute hundreds of copies of free books and have a profound and successful outreach to the Jewish community. We were pioneers in restoring the original Hebrew and Aramaic text of the books known as the "New Testament" and just a few days ago we restored the lost original Hebrew text of 1st Maccabees to the Community. Thousands of people visit our website every month, and hundreds of free copies of Mashiach: Messiah from a True Jewish Perspective have been distributed. And we have only just begun!
Comments
Post a Comment