John 1_41      Is Jesus the Messiah?

Rev. David Holwick

Study notes for video debate by "Messianic Vision" representatives with

   anti-missionary Orthodox Jews.

[debate is summarized and categorized]

John 1:41


IS JESUS THE MESSIAH?



PARTICIPANTS:


Jewish:

   Rabbi Steven Baer

   Mickey Miller (anti-missionary society)


Christian:

   Dr. Mike Brown (Stony Brook)

   Dan Juster  (Messianic congregation president)



  I. The necessity of blood atonement.

      A. In the OT, blood was required for atonement.

          1) Even willful sin had a sacrifice  (asham - guilt offering).

              a) But blood not enough for "asham" - restitution required

                   an extra (20%?) amount.

          2) Scapegoat.

              a) But scapegoat sent out live, and not killed.

          3) Passover, lamb's blood on door.         Exod 12

              a) But not considered a sacrifice of atonement.

          4) Sacrifice even when Torah given.        Exod 24:8

          5) But all sacrifices must be on altar.    Lev 17

              a) Jesus wasn't sacrificed on an altar.

              b) But blood sacrifice went beyond the altar.

                  1> Rabbis saw Abraham's circumcision as a sacrifice.

                  2> God passed between animal pieces, pledging his

                         life.                          Gen 15:9,10,17

                      A> But this is not referred to as a sacrifice.


      B. Principle of blood sacrifice is substitution.

          1) Rabbis - when God looks at blood of animals, He sees blood of

                Isaac.

          2) Priest Phineas brought atonement by spearing 2 people. Num 25

          3) If ox kills man, its life must be taken.   Exod 21:30

              a) Forgiveness of sins not in view, but substitution.

          4) Rabbi Rashi - life atones for life. There must be substitution.

          5) The Messiah must be our "asham" (guilt offering) for sin.  (Xn)

              a) But Resurrection disqualifies ransom motif of atonement.

              b) But why does Ezekiel reinstitute blood sacrifice, if Jesus

                    fulfilled it?                 Ezek 43:23-27; 46:2


      C. Atonement by other (non-blood) means?

          1) Prayer or charity (instituted after fall of Temple).

                Prov 16:6, Hos 6:6 (mercy), Hos 14 (prayer), Ps 78 (weak-

                  ness), Ps 8,10 (seekers), Isa 27 (destroy idolators)

              a) If no atonement without blood, then generation of 70 year

                   Exile not saved.

              b) Blood not needed.  Only prayer.       2 Chron 7:14

                  1> But Temple is described as "house of sacrifice" in

                       previous verses.                2 Chron 7:12

          2) Prophets extoled obedience to God.   1 Sam 15:22

              a) But they did not reject sacrifice.

              b) Hosea told Northern Israel that prayer and repentance

                   were sufficient.

          3) Flour offering instead of goat.      Lev 5:10

              a) But flour had to be mixed with blood on altar.

                  1> But flour alone was sufficient for worshipper.

          4) Censor used in worship brought atonement.     Num ??

              a) But censor also mixed with blood.

          5) Nathan forgave David without sacrifice.

              a) But in Psalm 51 David offers a sacrifice.

          6) No atonement for murder.

              a) But King David committed murder and was forgiven.

              b) Psalm 51 refers to his sacrifice.

          7) David and census.   Atonement - lose your kingdom.

              a) But David concluded with a sacrifice.

          8) Miriam healed.

          9) Abimelech atoned by Abraham's prayer after potential sin with

                Sarah.

         10) Samuel and Saul.

         11) Ezra - no blood or other action required, except to get rid

               of foreign wives.

      D. Contradictions in NT view of sacrifice.

          1) Hebrews says sacrifices don't atone for sin.  Did they in OT?

          2) Judaism teaches no sacrifice for future sin, only past sin.

          3) Humans aren't valid as sacrifices.

              a) Sacrifice had to be partially eaten by the worshippers.

              b) The blood had to be smeared.

              c) Animal had to be 3 years old.

              d) Animal had to be female.

              e) Animal had to be clean.  (Jesus was dirty?)

              f) Humans are never sacrificed for atonement.


II. Genealogy of Jesus.

      A. Genealogy cannot be adopted.

          1) Jesus' genealogy is through Joseph, but Joseph wasn't his

                real father.

              a) Adoption is valid for genealogy.

              b) But texts say it is not.   <find out more>

          2) If at least one of the genealogies is actually Mary's line,

                women cannot pass on inheritance of kingship.

              a) If they could, then Athaliah would have had her son take

                    throne.

              b) Athaliah killed the male heirs, but not the female.

              c) But in special case in OT, widowed women passed on land

                   rights.               Num ??

              d) And note that the first messianic prophecy (Gen 3:15)

                    speaks of the woman's seed defeating Satan, not Adam's.

                  1> But doesn't apply for this argument.  (Jewish)


      B. Kingly line must be through David by way of Solomon.

          1) Luke traces descent through Nathan, David's brother rather

                than son.  Therefore, Jesus is not of kingly line.

          2) Promises descend through only one male line.

              a) Abraham's promise only goes through Isaac.

              b) Aaron's promise only goes through Phineas.

              c) David's promise only goes through Solomon.


      C. The curse of Jeconiah [Jehoiachin] (no descendant would be on

            throne).

          1) Matthew has Jeconiah in genealogy.

          2) But Jeconiah's descendants had a legal right to rule.

              a) Curse may apply only to immediate family.  (Jer 22:30)

              b) Promise was renewed for Zerubbabel.

                  1> But Zerubbabel didn't become king.  Curse still valid?

                  2> Yet Zerubbabel is extoled on Hanukkah.

                      A> The Davidic covenant was renewed for him.

          3) Biblical authors didn't deal with curse, but rabbis did.

              a) Other heirs besides son could be king.

                   (Jeconiah's uncle followed him.)

          4) And if Messiah must come through kingly line, and Jeconiah

               is cursed, then Messiah must have non-human descent.

              a) If curse is on father's line, then Jesus avoided this.

              b) Testimony of genetics:  males have mixed chromosomes

                   (x & y).  Jesus' male chromosome must come from God.


III. The fulfillment of Messianic promises and prophecies.

      A. Messiah brings worldwide peace.   Hasn't happened yet.

          1) Even Second Coming won't fulfill it.

          2) But first he is a "light to the Gentiles," which Jesus is.

              a) But "Gentiles" really means "nations."


      B. Holistic reading of Bible fits Jesus.

          1) Supernatural vs. suffering Messiah.

          2) Rabbinic problem of 2 (3?) Messiahs:  ben Joseph, ben David.


      C. Messiah called names that don't fit humans.

          1) "Mighty God."    Child identified with God.     Isa 9:6

              a) But all throne names contained God's name.

                  1> The altar was even called "God of Israel."

              b) Yet they didn't refer to person directly as God.

                  1> Compare Psalm 45:  "Your throne, O God, is forever."

          2) King David's lord.        Psalm 110

              a) Messiah greater than greatest human king.

              b) (not necessarily divine, since "lord" can mean "sir")

      D. Isaiah 42.

          1) Messiah cuts a covenant for the people.

          2) But kings don't represent covenant of sacrifice, high priests

               did.

      E. Isaiah 53.

          1) Israel considered Messiah stricken for his own sins.

          2) Corporate solidarity for Israel.

          3) Death, burial fits Jesus.

              a) Rabbis - the leper Messiah.

      F. Problems with interpreting prophecies.

          1) Scholars disagree on application.

              a) Mowinkel (not a Jew) thought Isa 9:6 was not messianic.

              b) "Suffering servant" doesn't have to be Messiah.


IV. Argument from experience.

      A. Jesus continues to heal people.




Copyright © 2024 by Rev. David Holwick

Created with the Freeware Edition of HelpNDoc: Easily create Web Help sites