|
The New Testament intimates that Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) was the Messiah only in a
symbolic fashion (as he aimed at portraying the one true Messiah that is a life of sincere repentance,
justice, humility, and obedience to God's commandments)
The Hebrew Scripture is clear, when it states that the God worshiped by the ancient Israeli people was no
man at all (“For He is no man...”- 1 Samuel 15:29; “God is no man...”- Numbers 23:19).
And it is also clear when it states that, while this God is inherently sinless (“... His work is perfect: a God of
truth and without iniquity, just and right is He”- Deut. 32:4), it is no less true that man is inherently flawed
and sinful (“For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth [only] good, and sinneth not”- Ecclesiastes
7:20).
In addition, Scripture teaches that there's no other Savior, nor anointed (Messiah) Redeemer, besides this God
60
whose Hebrew name is “YHVH” (Adonai Yah, the God of Abraham). As is written: “I, I am הוהי (Adonai
Yah), and there is no Savior beside me”- Isaiah 43:11 (Tree of Life Version Bible).
Finally, Scripture states that, if there is anyone worthy of being called “the Son of God”, as well as “God's
own Servant”, it is the community of believers represented by the ancient Israeli people. As it has been said:
“And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, 'Thus saith the Lord, Israel is My Son, even My Firstborn' ”- Exodus 4:22;
And also in another place, “And said unto me, Thou art My Servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified”-
Isaiah 49:3.
But if the former is true, then why do the Christian gospels ascribe all of the former titles (God, sinless man,
Savior, Redeemer, Messiah, Son of God, God's Servant, etc) to the man named Jesus? Well, the answer is
very simple, and is actually provided by the gospels, when they go on to say: “Jesus told the crowds all these
things in parables, and he did not tell them anything without a parable”- Matthew 13:3.
In other words, since Jesus spoke only in parables, none of the claims he made were supposed to be taken in
a literal sense, but rather in an allegorical fashion. Consider a first example: Jesus is quoted saying that John
the Baptist is the promised Elijah that would come right before the Jewish Messiah (“And if ye will receive
it, this is Elijah, which was for to come...”- Matthew 11:14). But the fact is that the former cannot be literally
true, as John himself openly declares that he isn't the literal Elijah (who, according to the Hebrew Bible, is a
different physical person still alive somewhere in the heavens).
As is written: "And they asked him [John the Baptist], What then? Art thou Elijah? And he saith, I am Not.
Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No"- John 1:21. Again, John states that he is not Elijah, while Jesus
says that he is. Is one of them lying? No! John says he is not Elijah [in a literal sense]; while Jesus says he is
Elijah [in an allegorical sense].
Consider a second example: Jesus claims to be the King of the Jews (“Now Jesus stood before the governor.
And the governor asked him, saying, 'Are you the King of the Jews?'. [And] Jesus said to him, 'It is as you
say' ”- Matthew 27:11).
But, did Jesus really want to be the [literal] king of the Jews? Of course not! Jesus didn't want to have
anything to do with human politics. How do we know it? We know it from the fact that when the Jews tried
to make him their [literal] king, Jesus fled away from them (“When Jesus therefore perceived that they [THE
JEWS] would come and take him by force, TO MAKE HIM KING, he departed again into a mountain
himself alone”- John 6:15).
The truth is that Jesus wasn't talking about any physical kingdom somewhere in this world, but rather about
an “out of this world” (non physical) kingdom. As he himself said: “Jesus answered, 'my kingdom in not
from this world... my kingdom is not from here' ”- John 18:36.
Finally, consider the following: first century Jews did expect the coming of a literal Messiah- the “branch of
Jesse” (or the biological “Son of David”) mentioned by the prophet (“There shall come forth a Rod from the
stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots. The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, The Spirit
of Wisdom and understanding... He shall strike the Earth with the rod of His mouth, and with the breath of
His lips He shall slay the wicked”- Isaiah 11:1-4).
But, was Jesus the literally (biological) Son Of David? Of course not! Why? Two reasons; in the first place
[and according to the gospel], Jesus had no biological father, as he was [allegedly] conceived by the Holy
Spirit; therefore he could not have been a biological son of any of Jesse's male descendants (keep in mind
that Jews traced tribal lineage by their father's genealogy).
Secondly, Jesus himself rejected the idea that the Messiah would be a literal son of David. Why? Again,
because such requirement would disqualify him for the post of Messiah; but also because Jesus argued that
Scripture never made such literal promise, since it wouldn’t make sense for a sane father to call any of his
61
biological offspring “Lord”. As is written:
«How can the scribes say that the Messiah is the son of David? David himself says by the Holy Spirit: “The
Lord declared to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet’… DAVID
HIMSELF CALLS HIM ‘LORD’; HOW THEN CAN HE BE HIS SON?”»- Mark 12:35-37.
No wise and mature believer would entertain the notion that the non-created, infinite, unlimited, all knowing,
omnipresent, and omnipotent Creator of the Universe can ever be tempted to bow down [in worship and
submission] to any of His weak, finite, and limited creatures. And that’s why Reformed Samaritanism rejects
the Christian dogma of Jesus deity, as the gospel portrays him [the alleged Creator of the Universe] being
tempted to worship Satan [one of his alleged creatures]. As is written: “Again, the devil taketh him up into an
exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; And saith
unto him,
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
