echariah, the Satan is promptly rebuked (gaar/epetimao) and a few verses later HaShem says, "Now listen, Joshua the high priest, you and your friends who are sitting in front of you--indeed they are men who are a symbol, for behold, I am going to bring in My servant the Branch...every one of you will invite his neighbor to sit under his vine and under his fig tree" (Zech. 3:8, 10 italics inserted). Both epetimao and gaar are commands issued to demons to make them ineffective (Ibid, 160). He comments, "Jesus rebuked the winds and the lake as though they were conscious beings possessed with demons...the winds as well as the sea were said to be represented by a sar, as in the expression sar shel yam, "a prince, angel, or demon of the sea." Perhaps Matthew purposely calls up rhetoric from Zechariah as an implied answer to the disciple's question, "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?" He is, of course, "My Servant, the Branch" both significant titles of Messiah.

CHRISTOLOGY IN HISTORY

Since the Scriptures themselves contain very few, direct statements concerning the nature of Messiah (exceptions being John 1:1 and Phil. 2:6), it has been the task of the generations after the Apostles to the present, to answer Yeshua's imposing question, "But who do you say that I am?" (Mat 16:15). The ancient answers from the early Church are varied. Ignatius, writing

INTRODUCTION

The idea of the Messiah is so closely tied to the Jewish people that any study on the divinity and humanity of the One who comes in the flesh from them (Romans 9:5) is incomplete and is destined to have flaws. In fact, this divorcement between the second century Christian church and her Hebrew roots caused many of the heretical notions about Yeshua's (Jesus') nature as both God and man. Modern Christianity is still feeling the effects of some of these notions (and that ancient split). Recent research shows that "across ethnicity, 43% of Hispanics, 43% of whites, and 32% of blacks agree with the idea that 'when He lived on earth, Jesus Christ was human and committed sins, like other people.'" (see http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=Topic&TopicID=6). While there are many views on the matter, there are only three possible answers; Yeshua is human, divine, or both. This paper will survey key Scriptures that address but not necessarily advocate these views; discuss salient opinions from recent and ancient theologians; and summarize the importance of this topic for the Body of Messiah today.

THE TANAKH AND APOSTOLIC SCRIPTURES

On the fourth day of creation, accounted for by the hand of Moshe in Bereshit, HaShem said, "Let there be light! And there was light. And HaShem saw the light, that it was good." The Sages say of this verse, "Whose is this light which falls upon the congregation of the Lord? It is the light of the Messiah." (Pesikhta Rabbati, vol. 62, 1). From the beginning, the Tanakh reveals the nature of Messiah Yeshua. The Sages were on target as Paul, writing by the Holy Spirit, affirms their view of the passage, "For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible...all things have been created through Him and for Him." (Col 1:16).

Jewish expectations of a "divine envoy" from heaven are well accounted for in their traditions and writings (Pannenberg, p. 150). This coming king was expected to be fully human as seen in the titles for this Messiah. One of the best known cryptic messianic titles is "Ben Parets," son of Perez (Santala, p. 43).The title is found in Gen 38:29 speaking of the son of Judah and Tamar, "'What a breach you have made for yourself!' So he was named Perez." The fulfillment of this prophecy is easily discovered in the genealogy of Yeshua, "And Judas begat Phares" (Mat 1:3). Thus, Yeshua was indeed as son of Perez. Ben Parets was known to be a conqueror of death and therefore an appropriate name for the coming Messiah. The Midrash goes further into depth, "The last Savior is Messiah, the Son of David, who is descended from Judah's son Perez...this is the Messiah-King; as it is written, 'A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse' and 'The Lord will extend your mighty scepter from Zion.'" (Is. 11:1 and Ps. 110:2). The Rabbis expound on these passages by saying, "This is the Messiah who will soon appear, because it is written of him that, 'One who breaks open the way [poretz] will go up before them.'" (Micah 2:13). The significance of these passages and the title "Ben Parets" is that the Messiah was thought, even from ancient times, to be a man come from God. Risto Santala astutely points out, "...the Targums and Midrashim generally speak of the 'Messiah-King', and not so much of some nebulous 'Messiah concept'" (Santala, p. 44). So far the passages which have been introduced from the Tanakh have been "lighter" prophecies concerning Messiah's nature and relatively unknown to most Christian commentators. Here one can see the value of a Jewish principle of theology codified by R. Hillel, qal v homer, which draws conclusions from the lighter or smaller matter to broader contexts. In the larger context of all Messianic prophesy, these passages are no less spectacular and valuable in their ability to impart understanding of the nature of Messiah Yeshua. The Apostolic Scriptures (commonly known as the "New Testament") are equally revealing.

The Apostolic writings certainly indicate that Yeshua is the Son of God. While the Tanakh is full of references to God taking humans as His children (e.g. the entire nation of Israel), it is only in the Incarnation of Yeshua, HaShem's Word, which reveals the ultimate fulfillment of the earlier types. At Yeshua's baptism, a bat qol (a daughter of a voice--an echo spoken in heaven and heard on earth) speaks from heaven saying, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" (Mat. 3:17). Note that in Judaism, the term "beloved" is another name for the Messiah (Lachs, p. 47).

Even demons recognized the nature of Yeshua when exclaiming in Luke 8:28, "What do you have to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?" Samuel Tobias Lachs comments, "The demons recognize his true identity, even though, as yet, humans do not...'Son of God' is a messianic title. It is the Messiah who will break the power of the demons" (Ibid, 163).

Yeshua demonstrates a power over nature that is only reserved for the Creator: "And He got up and rebuked the wind and said to the sea, 'Hush, be still.' And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm" (Mark:39). The word epetimao "rebuke" has a Hebrew equivalent (gaar) and a striking example of it is found in Zechariah 3:2 where Joshua, the cohen gadol, is standing before HaShem with Satan. Keeping in mind that Yeshua is a derivative of Joshua, Satan is trying to oppose Joshua and the worship of HaShem. Might Satan be at work in the stormy sea in order to oppose the worship of Yeshua that was to follow in Mark chapter 5? Back in Zechariah, the Satan is promptly rebuked (gaar/epetimao) and a few verses later HaShem says, "Now listen, Joshua the high priest, you and your friends who are sitting in front of you--indeed they are men who are a symbol, for behold, I am going to bring in My servant the Branch...every one of you will invite his neighbor to sit under his vine and under his fig tree" (Zech. 3:8, 10 italics inserted). Both epetimao and gaar are commands issued to demons to make them ineffective (Ibid, 160). He comments, "Jesus rebuked the winds and the lake as though they were conscious beings possessed with demons...the winds as well as the sea were said to be represented by a sar, as in the expression sar shel yam, "a prince, angel, or demon of the sea." Perhaps Matthew purposely calls up rhetoric from Zechariah as an implied answer to the disciple's question, "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?" He is, of course, "My Servant, the Branch" both significant titles of Messiah.

CHRISTOLOGY IN HISTORY

Since the Scriptures themselves contain very few, direct statements concerning the nature of Messiah (exceptions being John 1:1 and Phil. 2:6), it has been the task of the generations after the Apostles to the present, to answer Yeshua's imposing question, "But who do you say that I am?" (Mat 16:15). The ancient answers from the early Church are varied. Ignatius, writing

which falls upon the congregation of the Lord? It is the light of the Messiah." (Pesikhta Rabbati, vol. 62, 1). From the beginning, the Tanakh reveals the nature of Messiah Yeshua. The Sages were on target as Paul, writing by the Holy Spirit, affirms their view of the passage, "For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible...all things have been created through Him and for Him." (Col 1:16).

Jewish expectations of a "divine envoy" from heaven are well accounted for in their traditions and writings (Pannenberg, p. 150). This coming king was expected to be fully human as seen in the titles for this Messiah. One of the best known cryptic messianic titles is "Ben Parets," son of Perez (Santala, p. 43).The title is found in Gen 38:29 speaking of the son of Judah and Tamar, "'What a breach you have made for yourself!' So he was named Perez." The fulfillment of this prophecy is easily discovered in the genealogy of Yeshua, "And Judas begat Phares" (Mat 1:3). Thus, Yeshua was indeed as son of Perez. Ben Parets was known to be a conqueror of death and therefore an appropriate name for the coming Messiah. The Midrash goes further into depth, "The last Savior is Messiah, the Son of David, who is descended from Judah's son Perez...this is the Messiah-King; as it is written, 'A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse' and 'The Lord will extend your mighty scepter from Zion.'" (Is. 11:1 and Ps. 110:2). The Rabbis expound on these passages by saying, "This is the Messiah who will soon appear, because it is written of him that, 'One who breaks open the way [poretz] will go up before them.'" (Micah 2:13). The significance of these passages and the title "Ben Parets" is that the Messiah was thought, even from ancient times, to be a man come from God. Risto Santala astutely points out, "...the Targums and Midrashim generally speak of the 'Messiah-King', and not so much of some nebulous 'Messiah concept'" (Santala, p. 44). So far the passages which have been introduced from the Tanakh have been "lighter" prophecies concerning Messiah's nature and relatively unknown to most Christian commentators. Here one can see the value of a Jewish principle of theology codified by R. Hillel, qal v homer, which draws conclusions from the lighter or smaller matter to broader contexts. In the larger context of all Messianic prophesy, these passages are no less spectacular and valuable in their ability to impart understanding of the nature of Messiah Yeshua. The Apostolic Scriptures (commonly known as the "New Testament") are equally revealing.

The Apostolic writings certainly indicate that Yeshua is the Son of God. While the Tanakh is full of references to God taking humans as His children (e.g. the entire nation of Israel), it is only in the Incarnation of Yeshua, HaShem's Word, which reveals the ultimate fulfillment of the earlier types. At Yeshua's baptism, a bat qol (a daughter of a voice--an echo spoken in heaven and heard on earth) speaks from heaven saying, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" (Mat. 3:17). Note that in Judaism, the term "beloved" is another name for the Messiah (Lachs, p. 47).

Even demons recognized the nature of Yeshua when exclaiming in Luke 8:28, "What do you have to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?" Samuel Tobias Lachs comments, "The demons recognize his true identity, even though, as yet, humans do not...'Son of God' is a messianic title. It is the Messiah who will break the power of the demons" (Ibid, 163).

Yeshua demonstrates a power over nature that is only reserved for the Creator: "And He got up and rebuked the wind and said to the sea, 'Hush, be still.' And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm" (Mark:39). The word epetimao "rebuke" has a Hebrew equivalent (gaar) and a striking example of it is found in Zechariah 3:2 where Joshua, the cohen gadol, is standing before HaShem with Satan. Keeping in mind that Yeshua is a derivative of Joshua, Satan is trying to oppose Joshua and the worship of HaShem. Might Satan be at work in the stormy sea in order to oppose the worship of Yeshua that was to follow in Mark chapter 5? Back in Zechariah, the Satan is promptly rebuked (gaar/epetimao) and a few verses later HaShem says, "Now listen, Joshua the high priest, you and your friends who are sitting in front of you--indeed they are men who are a symbol, for behold, I am going to bring in My servant the Branch...every one of you will invite his neighbor to sit under his vine and under his fig tree" (Zech. 3:8, 10 italics inserted). Both epetimao and gaar are commands issued to demons to make them ineffective (Ibid, 160). He comments, "Jesus rebuked the winds and the lake as though they were conscious beings possessed with demons...the winds as well as the sea were said to be represented by a sar, as in the expression sar shel yam, "a prince, angel, or demon of the sea." Perhaps Matthew purposely calls up rhetoric from Zechariah as an implied answer to the disciple's question, "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?" He is, of course, "My Servant, the Branch" both significant titles of Messiah.

CHRISTOLOGY IN HISTORY

Since the Scriptures themselves contain very few, direct statements concerning the nature of Messiah (exceptions being John 1:1 and Phil. 2:6), it has been the task of the generations after the Apostles to the present, to answer Yeshua's imposing question, "But who do you say that I am?" (Mat 16:15). The ancient answers from the early Church are varied. Ignatius, writing

end your mighty scepter from Zion.'" (Is. 11:1 and Ps. 110:2). The Rabbis expound on these passages by saying, "This is the Messiah who will soon appear, because it is written of him that, 'One who breaks open the way [poretz] will go up before them.'" (Micah 2:13). The significance of these passages and the title "Ben Parets" is that the Messiah was thought, even from ancient times, to be a man come from God. Risto Santala astutely points out, "...the Targums and Midrashim generally speak of the 'Messiah-King', and not so much of some nebulous 'Messiah concept'" (Santala, p. 44). So far the passages which have been introduced from the Tanakh have been "lighter" prophecies concerning Messiah's nature and relatively unknown to most Christian commentators. Here one can see the value of a Jewish principle of theology codified by R. Hillel, qal v homer, which draws conclusions from the lighter or smaller matter to broader contexts. In the larger context of all Messianic prophesy, these passages are no less spectacular and valuable in their ability to impart understanding of the nature of Messiah Yeshua. The Apostolic Scriptures (commonly known as the "New Testament") are equally revealing.

The Apostolic writings certainly indicate that Yeshua is the Son of God. While the Tanakh is full of references to God taking humans as His children (e.g. the entire nation of Israel), it is only in the Incarnation of Yeshua, HaShem's Word, which reveals the ultimate fulfillment of the earlier types. At Yeshua's baptism, a bat qol (a daughter of a voice--an echo spoken in heaven and heard on earth) speaks from heaven saying, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" (Mat. 3:17). Note that in Judaism, the term "beloved" is another name for the Messiah (Lachs, p. 47).

Even demons recognized the nature of Yeshua when exclaiming in Luke 8:28, "What do you have to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?" Samuel Tobias Lachs comments, "The demons recognize his true identity, even though, as yet, humans do not...'Son of God' is a messianic title. It is the Messiah who will break the power of the demons" (Ibid, 163).

Yeshua demonstrates a power over nature that is only reserved for the Creator: "And He got up and rebuked the wind and said to the sea, 'Hush, be still.' And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm" (Mark:39). The word epetimao "rebuke" has a Hebrew equivalent (gaar) and a striking example of it is found in Zechariah 3:2 where Joshua, the cohen gadol, is standing before HaShem with Satan. Keeping in mind that Yeshua is a derivative of Joshua, Satan is trying to oppose Joshua and the worship of HaShem. Might Satan be at work in the stormy sea in order to oppose the worship of Yeshua that was to follow in Mark chapter 5? Back in Zechariah, the Satan is promptly rebuked (gaar/epetimao) and a few verses later HaShem says, "Now listen, Joshua the high priest, you and your friends who are sitting in front of you--indeed they are men who are a symbol, for behold, I am going to bring in My servant the Branch...every one of you will invite his neighbor to sit under his vine and under his fig tree" (Zech. 3:8, 10 italics inserted). Both epetimao and gaar are commands issued to demons to make them ineffective (Ibid, 160). He comments, "Jesus rebuked the winds and the lake as though they were conscious beings possessed with demons...the winds as well as the sea were said to be represented by a sar, as in the expression sar shel yam, "a prince, angel, or demon of the sea." Perhaps Matthew purposely calls up rhetoric from Zechariah as an implied answer to the disciple's question, "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?" He is, of course, "My Servant, the Branch" both significant titles of Messiah.

CHRISTOLOGY IN HISTORY

Since the Scriptures themselves contain very few, direct statements concerning the nature of Messiah (exceptions being John 1:1 and Phil. 2:6), it has been the task of the generations after the Apostles to the present, to answer Yeshua's imposing question, "But who do you say that I am?" (Mat 16:15). The ancient answers from the early Church are varied. Ignatius, writing

only in the Incarnation of Yeshua, HaShem's Word, which reveals the ultimate fulfillment of the earlier types. At Yeshua's baptism, a bat qol (a daughter of a voice--an echo spoken in heaven and heard on earth) speaks from heaven saying, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" (Mat. 3:17). Note that in Judaism, the term "beloved" is another name for the Messiah (Lachs, p. 47).

Even demons recognized the nature of Yeshua when exclaiming in Luke 8:28, "What do you have to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?" Samuel Tobias Lachs comments, "The demons recognize his true identity, even though, as yet, humans do not...'Son of God' is a messianic title. It is the Messiah who will break the power of the demons" (Ibid, 163).

Yeshua demonstrates a power over nature that is only reserved for the Creator: "And He got up and rebuked the wind and said to the sea, 'Hush, be still.' And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm" (Mark:39). The word epetimao "rebuke" has a Hebrew equivalent (gaar) and a striking example of it is found in Zechariah 3:2 where Joshua, the cohen gadol, is standing before HaShem with Satan. Keeping in mind that Yeshua is a derivative of Joshua, Satan is trying to oppose Joshua and the worship of HaShem. Might Satan be at work in the stormy sea in order to oppose the worship of Yeshua that was to follow in Mark chapter 5? Back in Zechariah, the Satan is promptly rebuked (gaar/epetimao) and a few verses later HaShem says, "Now listen, Joshua the high priest, you and your friends who are sitting in front of you--indeed they are men who are a symbol, for behold, I am going to bring in My servant the Branch...every one of you will invite his neighbor to sit under his vine and under his fig tree" (Zech. 3:8, 10 italics inserted). Both epetimao and gaar are commands issued to demons to make them ineffective (Ibid, 160). He comments, "Jesus rebuked the winds and the lake as though they were conscious beings possessed with demons...the winds as well as the sea were said to be represented by a sar, as in the expression sar shel yam, "a prince, angel, or demon of the sea." Perhaps Matthew purposely calls up rhetoric from Zechariah as an implied answer to the disciple's question, "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?" He is, of course, "My Servant, the Branch" both significant titles of Messiah.

CHRISTOLOGY IN HISTORY

Since the Scriptures themselves contain very few, direct statements concerning the nature of Messiah (exceptions being John 1:1 and Phil. 2:6), it has been the task of the generations after the Apostles to the present, to answer Yeshua's imposing question, "But who do you say that I am?" (Mat 16:15). The ancient answers from the early Church are varied. Ignatius, writing

echariah, the Satan is promptly rebuked (gaar/epetimao) and a few verses later HaShem says, "Now listen, Joshua the high priest, you and your friends who are sitting in front of you--indeed they are men who are a symbol, for behold, I am going to bring in My servant the Branch...every one of you will invite his neighbor to sit under his vine and under his fig tree" (Zech. 3:8, 10 italics inserted). Both epetimao and gaar are commands issued to demons to make them ineffective (Ibid, 160). He comments, "Jesus rebuked the winds and the lake as though they were conscious beings possessed with demons...the winds as well as the sea were said to be represented by a sar, as in the expression sar shel yam, "a prince, angel, or demon of the sea." Perhaps Matthew purposely calls up rhetoric from Zechariah as an implied answer to the disciple's question, "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?" He is, of course, "My Servant, the Branch" both significant titles of Messiah.

CHRISTOLOGY IN HISTORY

Since the Scriptures themselves contain very few, direct statements concerning the nature of Messiah (exceptions being John 1:1 and Phil. 2:6), it has been the task of the generations after the Apostles to the present, to answer Yeshua's imposing question, "But who do you say that I am?" (Mat 16:15). The ancient answers from the early Church are varied. Ignatius, writing circa 112 C.E. writes, "There is one physician, fleshly and spiritual, begotten and unbegotten, God in man, true life in death, both of Mary and of God, first passible then impassible, Jesus Christ our Lord" (Bettenson and Maunder, p. 32). It is difficult to agree with Ignatius' position on "begotten and unbegotten" in light of the Greek of John chapter 1. The word en, the imperfect of eimi is found in every instance in this chapter where John refers to Yeshua in His external, pre-incarnation state. In contrast, John, using the word egeneto, which is the aorist form of ginomai, is describing something or someone becoming that which it was not before. It appears from the text that Yeshua's essence was spirit and has now (at that point in time) become flesh. Ignatius is concerned with the translation of the word "monogeneis" in verse eighteen. The poor translation of the phrase, "the only begotten," led to much of the problem; it leads to the idea of the Father "generating" the Son. A better translation would be "the unique Son," thus making it clear that Yeshua was brought out (exeigeisato) at a particular time in history; from the modern point of view, in the past. This is John's progression from verse fourteen where Yeshua, "became flesh and dwelt among us..."

Much of the early Church's concerns center around the two natures of Messiah--His humanity and His divinity. The influence of this question is apparent in Stanley Grenz's treatment of the Incarnation, "...the Son did not unite with a human person, but with human nature, which gained existence in its connection with the Logos. As a consequence of the incarnation, the one person Jesus Christ enjoys the properties of the two natures" (Grenz, p. 306). Grenz's use of the Logos hearkens back to Tertullian's view of the Incarnation: "...God made this universe by his word and reason and power. Your philosophers also are agreed that the artificer of the universe seems to be Logos--that is, word and reason...This Word, we have learnt, was produced from God, and was generated by being produced, and therefore is called the Son of God, and God, from unity of substance with God. For God too is spirit" (Bettenson, p. 34). From these two similar perspectives, the Word (Logos) was united with God and with humanity. However, these views (both ancient and current) do not speak to the issue of Yeshua's pre-existence--a certain condition of the divine. Wolfhart Pannenberg adds his voice writing, "...Jesus' unity with God in the revelatory event of his resurrection from the dead can be understood only as his unity with God's eternal essence, so that the eternal divinity of God cannot be appropriately conceived except in relation to Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus' unity with God, insofar as it belongs to God's eternal essence, precedes, however, the time of Jesus' earthly life" (Pannenberg, p. 150). The strength of this statement lies in its emphasis on unity between Father and Son. Dionysius is quick to point out that the Messiah is not a "work" that came into "being": "For if the Son came into being there was when these attributes were not; therefore there was a time when God was without them; which is most absurd...." (Ibid, p. 35). Dionysius neatly curbs the issue of the Messiah as a created being and leaves the John chapter mentioned above to be freely heard for what it is saying; namely, that the Messiah always was and came forth from the Father. Therefore, He is divine and He also became flesh.

Again, it is important to consult Jewish writings on the matter. In the Zohar there is a telling description of how the Messiah was "exegeted" from the Father,

"The term 'And...said' (Heb. vayomer consists of the Hebrew letters Mi (who) and Or (light), which is an inquiry (Who is this Light?). 'And...said' alludes to a raised force, and the raising is done in silence. A light is drawn from the secret of Ein-Sof (the One without end); from the beginning of thought. 'And Elohim said' means that now the Temple (in heaven) gave birth to the holy seed, with which it was pregnant, in secret. And He who was born, namely Zeir Anpin (a title for the Messiah), was heard without. Whoever gave birth to him, to Zeir Anpin, did it secretly and was not heard at all. This refers to giving birth to the mochin of Zeir Anpin while still in biynah (Heb. "understanding"). But as soon as it emerged from there, from biynah, a sound was heard without (Biynah in Hebrew when rearranged one can see bein yah which means 'Son of God.'") (R. Simeon ben Yochai, Zohar, Bereshit, 16).

MODERN RELEVENCE

Christians must still answer Messiah's question, "Who do you say that I am?" Believers must search for the answer to this question quickly and then structure their lives around it. This search for truth is becoming a consuming flame in modern times. George Barna observes in his latest book Revolution, that a new Christian is emerging, called a "Revolutionary Christian." Barna says this new category is "...a new breed of disciples of Jesus Christ. They are not willing to play religious games and aren't interested in being part of a religious community that is not intentionally and aggressively advancing God's kingdom. They are people who want more of God--much more--in their lives. And they are doing whatever it takes to get it" (Barna, p. 14). If this group is serious about advancing the Kingdom of Heaven, their worthy cause must be tempered with truth about Whose Kingdom they are advancing. Modern pastors, teachers, and laymen alike must answer Yeshua's question with a clear affirmation