Home (Netzarim Logo)

Burning Issues Surrounding
The Mâ•shiꞋ akh

© 1972-2012 Yi•rәmәyâhꞋ u Bën-Dâ•widꞋ 

While there are compelling reasons to reject many Christian interpretations about Jzeus (e.g. its supposed divinity and even its idolatrous Hellenist derivation), prophecies about the Jewish Mâ•shiꞋ akh remain solid. Jews cannot deny them out of a knee-jerk hate-mongering just because Christians quote them and attempt to apply them to their man-god, Jzeus. None of the prophecies below describe the Christian Jzeus — who is invalidated from the outset by Dәvâr•imꞋ  13.1-6. But they do apply validly to its polar opposite: the first-century Tor•âhꞋ -observant RibꞋ i Yәho•shuꞋ a Bën-Yo•seiphꞋ  Bën-Dâ•widꞋ  from Nâtz•ratꞋ .

Consequently, to smear a Tor•âhꞋ -observant Orthodox (Pәrush•iꞋ ) RibꞋ i in the feculent image (cloak) of the idol concocted by Hellenist Roman gentiles over a century after his death (in 135 C.E.; see Zәkhar•yâhꞋ  3) constitutes si•natꞋ  khi•nâmꞋ , lәshonꞋ  hâ-•râꞋ  and khi•lulꞋ  --!

As a result, Jewish "anti-missionaries," who are nothing but hate-mongering crusaders, cannot justify their current practice of contorting or perverting Jewish Scriptures simply to avoid Christian claims, which are invalid from the start.

Click 'Fast-forward' arrow to go to topic
Non-Scriptural Judaic Sources (Talmud, et al.) Bible
Overview To Talmud References
Shemot 32.32
Devarim 8.16
Devarim 13.1-6
Devarim 18.15-19
Devarim 34.10

Aleppo Codex
Daniyeil 7.13-14
Hosheia 3.5
Mikhah 2.12
Mikhah 5.1 (1)
Mikhah 5.1 (2)
LXX (Septuagint)
Tzephanyah 3.9
Tzephanyah 3.20
Yekhezqeil 4.4
Yekhezqeil 11.17
Yekhezqeil 20.32-38
Yekhezqeil 20.40-42
Yekhezqeil 28.25-26
Yekhezqeil 34.10-16
Yekhezqeil 34.23-24
Yekhezqeil 36.23-38
Yekhezqeil 37.1-28
Yekhezqeil 37.24-25
Yәkhëzqeil 44.1-3 (1)
Yekhezqeil 44.1-3 (2)
Yekhezqeil 45.16-22
Yekhezqeil 46.2-12
Yeshayahu 7.14
Yeshayahu 9.5 (6)
Yeshayahu 11.6
Yeshayahu 11.10, 12
Yeshayahu 43.5-8
Yeshayahu 52.13-15
Yeshayahu 53
Yәshayâhu 53 in Berakhot 5a
Yeshayahu 53.1
Yeshayahu 53.2
Yeshayahu 53.3
Yeshayahu 53.4
Yәshayâhu 53.4 (1)
Yәshayâhu 53.4 (2)
Yeshayahu 53.5
Yeshayahu 53.6
Yeshayahu 53.7
Yeshayahu 53.8
Yeshayahu 53.9
Yeshayahu 53.10
Yәshayâhu 53.10,12
Yeshayahu 53.11
Yeshayahu 53.12
Yәshayâhu 54.6-9
Yәshayâhu 56.8
Yәshayâhu 60
Yәshayâhu 64.4
Yәshayâhu 66.23
Yirmeyahu 3.14ff
Yirmeyahu 4.5-6 & 19-23
Yirmeyahu 23.1-12
Yirmeyahu 29.14
Yirmeyahu 30.9
Yoeil 2
Khavaquq 3.13
Zekharyah 3 (1)
Zekharyah 3 (2)
Zekharyah 12.10 (12.1 — 13.1)
Zekharyah 14.16

Danieil 9.24-27
Mishlei Shlomoh 3.12
Nekhemyah 7.63
Shmu·eil Beit 8.18
Shmu·eil Beit 20.26
Tehilim 2.12
Tehilim 107.1-3, 8-9
Tehilim 118.22

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Tәhil•imꞋ  2.12: "Kiss the "

Aleppo & Masoretic Text:

-, -

Tar•gumꞋ :

Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon Project (Hebrew Union College, Jewish Institute of Religion, Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S.A. Mss.: (Lagarde, Paul de. Hagiographa Chaldaice. Osnabrück: O. Zeller, 1967. )

The meaning of is confirmed in the earliest extant and most pristine source for Halakhic discussion on the planet, preserved in Mәnorat ha-Mâor by Yitzkhâq Abuhav. In section ", we find the context of [son who is spiritually an uncultivated field] and fetus in the [empty] stomach of its mother [the nation] inescapable in Mi•shәl•eiꞋ  ShәlomꞋ oh 11.26:

"Rav Yәhudâh said, Rav said: "Anyone who withholds Halâkhâh from the mouth of a talmid, even fetuses in their mother's stomach curse him." As it is said: "One who withholds a [an open field, from being cultivated] will be cursed by the nation" (Mi•shәl•eiꞋ  ShәlomꞋ oh 11.26).

"There is no nation, except for fetuses. As it is said: "And, [alternating] nation from nation, [the offspring of each fetus] shall be tough" (bә-Reishit 25.23). There is no except for Torâh. As it is said: "Kiss the lest it be angry" (Tәhilim 2.12).

An infant said…"

Contrary to the ancient Sages, modern Jewish commentators pervert translations of Tәhilim 2.12 to erase the original intent. The meaning of is also confirmed in Mi•shәl•eiꞋ  ShәlomꞋ oh 31.2.

The Ivrit term is a cognate of the Aramaic meaning "son [of…]."

In 7 passages, means "clear": Tәhilim 19.9; 24.2; 73.1; Mi•shәl•eiꞋ  ShәlomꞋ oh 14.4; Iyov 11.4 and Shir ha-Shirim 6.9-10.

In 7 passages, means "clarity," which is a cognate of "clear" above: Shәmueil Beit 22.21,25 (not 'cleanness'); Yәshayâhu 1.25 (not 'purity'); Tәhilim 18.21,25; Iyov 9.30; 22.30.

There are a 14 passages in which refers to grain (not limited to corn or wheat, as KJV translates): bә-Reishit 41.35,49; 42.3,25; 45.23; Yirmәyâhu 28.28; Yo·eil 2.24; Âmos 5.11; 8.5-6; Tәhilim 65.14; 72.16; Mi•shәl•eiꞋ  ShәlomꞋ oh 11.26; Iyov 39.4.

Rendering the passage kissing "purity" (more accurately kissing "clear" or "clarified") or "product" (more accurately kissing clarified-grain) is convoluted. Both suggestions are ridiculous ploys – no has ever kissed (or can kiss) "clearness" or "clarified." Anyone going around kissing clarified-grain would be certifiably insane and described as an idolater worshipping grain. Such renderings are nothing more than a clumsy attempt to avoid the accurate translation, for no other reason than to avoid messianic implications – grinding a theological axe.

As mentioned above, the Aramaic (bar) is widely accepted to mean "son [of]…" In Mi•shәl•eiꞋ  ShәlomꞋ oh 31.2 there's also no doubt that, in Hebrew, (bar) also means son. In all of the other passages, there's no doubt that the meaning is "clear" or "clarified" (in the sense of carefully culling out the bad and leaving the best). Most compelling, there is no case in which the term doesn't mean "clear" or "clarified." This strongly suggests that even in the cases of Mi•shәl•eiꞋ  ShәlomꞋ oh 11.26 and Tәhilim 2.12 the meaning of "clear" or "clarified" remains consistent – but describing a "clarified-son."

Further, correlating with Torâh confirms that the messianic "clarified-son" must be 100% compatible and synonymous with – not contradictory to – Torâh.

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Regathering the Estranged & Assimilated (Including Christian) Jews

(Mikhâh 2.12; Tzәphanyâh 3.20; Yәkhëzqeil 11.17; 20.32-38, 40-42; 28.25-26; 34.10-16; 36.23-38; 37.1-28; 39.21-29; Yirmәyâhu 29.14; Tәhilim 107.1-3, 8-9)

The shiakh will inspire many assimilated and estranged Jews to make tәshuvâh to Torâh as well as gathering them to Israel (Tәhilim 107.1-3, 8-9; Tzәphanyâh 3.20; Mikhâh 2.12; Yirmәyâhu 29.14; Yәkhëzqeil 11.17; 20.32-38, 40-42; 28.25-26; 34.10-16; 36.23-38; 39.21-29) after the Holocaust (Yәkhëzqeil 37.1-10 with 11-14) under the shiakh Bën-Dâwid (Yәkhëzqeil 37.15-19 with 20-28).

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Talmud Masëkët Sunedrion 43a

First, read the overview to Talmudic references to Yësh"u.

The date given for the "hanging," the eve of Pësakh, agrees with the Gospel of John (19.14). This proves that the Talmudic discussion is based on Christian polemic entirely unrelated to historical Ribi Yәhoshua – since:

  1. The historical Ribi Yәhoshua was celebrating the Pësakh Seidër with his talmidim on ërëv Pësakh (NHM 26.20 with notes). Several proofs, including astronomical data and constraints of the Judaic calendar, demonstrate that the historical Ribi Yәhoshua was executed on ërëv of the 7th Day of Khag ha-Matzot – 3:15 P.M. Yәrushâlayim Time (1315 UCT) Yom Shәlishi, Firstmonth (Babylonian "Nisan") 20, 3790 (0030 C.E.; NHM 27.45 with notes).

  2. The Yësh"u of Masëkët Sunedrion 43a, by contrast, has only 5 talmidim, 3 of whom are clearly Hellenists, not Pәrushim (Nakai, Neitzër, Buni, Todah and Matthai), not 12, and none of the names match those of the 12 talmidim of historical Ribi Yәhoshua. (Matityâhu wasn't called by a Hellenist name until counterfeited by Paul, decades after the fact, and the Roman Hellenists in their Greek NT subsequent to 135 C.E. – which would prove the late apologetics were aimed not at historical Ribi Yәhoshua, who was a Pәrushi Ribi, but at Paul's, and the Romans', Hellenist Christian idol and counterfeit.)

  3. "In conformity with the Halâkhâh, (Masëkët Sunedrion 7:4) he was sentenced to stoning, the penalty for enticing, leading astray, or practicing sorcery" (EJ 10.15) – none of which are charges that any serious scholar dates much earlier than the 5th century C.E., in response to Christian polemics related to the counterfeit (Yësh"u), entirely unrelated to the historical Ribi Yәhoshua.

  4. "After the stoning he was hanged, since all who are put to death by stoning are subsequently hanged, according to R. Eliezer who often transmits ancient Halâkhâh (Masëkët Sunedrion 6:4)." This, too, isn't the same as Ribi Yәhoshua, who was charged with the political crime of usurping Caesar as king of the Jews – plainly written in Greek above his head on the Roman cross. The earliest, and well-attested historical, account of the execution of Ribi Yәhoshua conforms to Roman law and is intractably irreconcilable with the halakhic death penalty.

  5. The deaths of the 5 talmidim described in this section of Talmud bear no resemblance to the deaths of the talmidim of historical Ribi Yәhoshua.

  6. If this passage in Talmud is attributed to, lә-havdil, Ribi Yәhoshua, then all of the historical sources contradict this section of Talmud, from Josephus, who describes the Pәrushim defending qid Ya·aqov "ha-Tzadiq", to all modern historians in every leading university. Therefore, to hold that Talmud is authentic and reliable inescapably implies acknowledging that Talmud describes several apostates named Yәhoshua. Jews for Judaism has even acknowledged that the Christian Yësh"u is NOT the same as the Pәrushi Ribi Yәhoshua of Nâtzrat and Beit-Lëkhëm (click on the message relating to "Jews" in our Home Page).

  7. Talmud speaks of numerous apostate messiahs in the messianic fervor prevailing between B.C.E. 2nd century and the 4th century C.E., not even counting Bar-Kokh. Archeologists confirm that Yәhoshua was a very popular name in 1st-century Yәhudâh. There are several accounts in Talmud that are each incompatible with the other, confirming that there were a number of apostates named Yәhoshua; none of whom refer to Ribi Yәhoshua. That non-existent association is the lazy assumption of uninformed non-scholars.

  8. Perhaps surprising to the uninformed, this is further corroborated by the Birkat ha-Minim, the Notzrim and Jerome.

Although we know it was no longer true by medieval times, there is no assurance that, in Talmudic times, the acronym Yësh"u was even limited to one of who-knows-how-many apostate leaders named Yәhoshua. The acronym Yësh"u, meaning "may his name be blotted out," could easily have applied to any apostate leader by any name. After a few years, people would have gotten the word who (this apostate leader, in a long string of apostate messiahs) "Yësh"u" was, and instead of continuing to call him by his name, "blotted out" his name by referring to him thenceforth solely by the acronym, Yësh"u. (By medieval times, this seems untenable since the primary example, Shabtai Tzvi, is nowhere (that I know of) called Yësh"u.)

Thus, either this passage in Talmud is rife with errors and unreliable or, most probable, a later redaction in response to Christian polemics and, therefore, directed at the Hellenized anti-Torâh Roman counterfeit and having no connection to the pro-Torâh Pәrushi Ribi Yәhoshua.

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Yәsha•yâhꞋ u 11.6; 43.5-8; 54.6-9 &
Tal•mudꞋ  Sanhedrin 91b (1)

1QIsa 11.6

Hover the cursor over a word to see the modern Hebrew letters, then click on the word for further translation and explanation. Clicking in other areas of the scroll (that display the scroll citation) will open a window with a 100% scale view for closer examination.

1QIsa 11.6

1QIsa 43.5-8
1QIsa 43.05-08

1QIsa 54.6-9
1QIsa 54.06-09

-- -- --

Re: Yәshayahu 43.5-8; 54.6-9 — According to Sanhedrin 91b: "Let no one think that in the days of the shiakh anything of the natural course of the world will cease or that any innovation will be introduced into creation, [which, by the way, would introduce a logical contradiction of the Perfect and Immutable Creator; ybd]. Rather, the world will continue in its accustomed course. The words of Yәshayâhu: 'The wolf shall dwell with the lamb and the panther shall lie down with the kid" (Yәshayâhu 11:6) are a parable and an allegory which must be understood to mean that Israel will dwell securely even among the wicked of the heathen nations who are compared to a wolf and a panther. For they will all accept the true faith and will no longer rob or destroy.

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

vod of the Second Beit ha-Miqdâsh Greater Than First

Khajai ha-Nâvi prophesied (2.7-9): " - (Greater shall be the vod of this latter House than the First).

Torâh documented the withdrawal of the Shәkhinâh from the Beit ha-Miqdâsh hâ-Rishon in Yәkhëzqeil 9.3; 10.4, 19; 11.22-23. It never returned to the Beit ha-Miqdâsh ha-Sheini.

While the Beit ha-Miqdâsh ha-Sheini had "a" Mizbeiakh, it lacked the Eish mi-liphnei ha-Sheim that would have made it the legitimate (see Artscroll Yechezkel not, p. 650, to Yәkhëzqeil 41.22 with Malâkhi 1.12). Five essential elements of vod, contained in the First Beit ha-Miqdâsh were never in the Second Beit ha-Miqdâsh: the Aron Bәrit ha-Sheim, the Kaporët, the Kәruvim, the Eish mi-liphnei ha-Sheim and the Shәkhinâh (Masëkët Yomâ 21b; Artscroll Yechezkel p. 691).

Yet, "this latter House" was destroyed in 70 C.E. without any of these five missing elements of vod ever having been in it!!!

Therefore, since "this latter House" no longer exists and these five essential elements of vod were never in it, the only possibility that this prophecy can ever be true is if the shiakh was the Greater vod in the Second Beit ha-Miqdâsh.

Ribi Yәhoshua, who taught in the Second Beit ha-Miqdâsh, is the only possible candidate to fulfill that prophecy.

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Building the Third Beit ha-Miqdâsh

Talmud Sanhedrin-91b (2)

Likewise, all similar scriptural passages dealing with the shiakh [which would include those passages sometimes interpreted as his rebuilding the physical Beit-ha-Miqdâsh and Eiliyâhu ha-Nâvi; ybd] must be regarded as figurative. Only in the Days of the shiakh will everyone know what the metaphors mean and to what they refer. The sages said: 'The only difference between this world and the Days of the shiakh is the subjection of Israel to the nations.'" (Sanhedrin 91b; see Scholem, p. 28f).

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Midrâsh Shir ha-Shirim VI.10

"It is told of Rabi Hiy and Rabi Shim·on that they walked in the valley of Arbela early in the morning and saw the dawn breaking on the horizon. Thereupon Rabi Hiy said: 'So, too, is Israel's redemption; at first it will be only slightly visible, then it will shine forth more brightly, and only afterwards will it break forth in all of its glory.'" (Midrâsh Shir ha-Shirim Rabâh, VI, 10).

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

NHM 24.37ff

Ribi Yәhoshua said, "Yet, as it was in the days of Noakh, so shall it be in the Shәkhinâh of the person [i.e., shiakh]. For so they were in the days which were before the Mabul — eating and drinking, being fruitful and multiplying until the day Noakh went into the Teivâh. They did not know until the Mabul came and picked them all up. Thus shall the Shәkhinâh of the person [i.e., shiakh] also be" (NHM 24:37ff).

All over the world, for the first time since 135 C.E. significant numbers of born Jews who had been following Christianity are being won back from Christianity & Jesus to Torâh through the Shәkhinâh and (pre-135 C.E. pro-Torâh) teachings of Ribi Yәhoshua reconstructed from the earliest extant sources and published by the Nәtzârim of Ra·ananâ(h), Israel.

Nәtzârim books expose the deception of Jesus — the arch-antithesis of Ribi Yәhoshua — which was perpetrated by the post-135 C.E. pagan Roman Hellenists through their allies, the Hellenist pseudo-Tzәdoqim Kohanim (aka Kohanei hâ-Rësha), who had predominated the Beit-ha-Miqdâsh since Yәhoshua Bën-Shimon II Bën-Tzâdoq (ca. B.C.E. 170). As these estranged and assimilated Jews discover how they've been duped by the Hellenists into Christianity, they are abandoning the Roman counterfeit, Jesus, to instead follow the exact opposite, Ribi Yәhoshua in non-selective Torâh-observance.

Our generation has already witnessed the prophesied re-establishment of the State of Israel which marks the end of the dispersion (the NT 'Times of the Gentiles') marking the beginning of the Messianic Era. Moreover, this generation has witnessed the 'regathering' of the people Yisra·eil to the land of Yisra·eil from the four corners of the earth.

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Vicarious Atonement & Intercession

Shәmot 32.32; Dәvârim 8.16; Yәkhëzqeil 4.4; Yәshayâhu 53.4b, 53.10, 12; 64.4; Mi•shәl•eiꞋ  ShәlomꞋ oh 3.12

"20:40 Since one who truly mourns the righteous is forgiven all his sins, the death of the righteous is an atonement for their entire generation. Many righteous individuals therefore voluntarily accepted suffering and death for the sins of their generation. In doing so, they followed the example of Moses himself who pleaded for his people after the sin of the Golden Calf, "Now, if You would, please forgive their sin. If not, You can blot me out from the book that You have written (Exodus 32:32). It was in this spirit that G-d told His prophet, "You shall bear their sin" (Ezekiel 4:4). Regarding the type of righteous individual who gives his life for his generation, it is also written, "Surely he bore our sickness and suffered our anguish… he was wounded because of our transgressions, crushed because of our sins, his injury was a healing for us" (Isaiah 53:4). When the innocent joyfully accept suffering, they hasten the redemption, as it is written, "You struck the one who rejoiced in doing righteousness… and now we are delivered (Isaiah 64:4)." — Aryeh Kaplan, "Handbook of Jewish Thought," (Jerusalem: Moznaim & Wagshal, 1979), chapter on "Apparent Injustice."

1QIsa 64.4

Hover the cursor over a word to see the modern Hebrew letters, then click on the word for further translation and explanation. Clicking in other areas of the scroll (that display the scroll citation) will open a window with a 100% scale view for closer examination.

1QIsa 64.4

"20:44 There are times when G-d afflicts a person who is completely blameless and undeserving. Such afflictions are intended to attenuate the material barriers that obscure his light and strengthen him spiritually. He can then attain moral and spiritual heights beyond anything he was capable of realizing by his own efforts. These afflictions are called "sufferings of love" ( ), regarding which it is written, "ha-Sheim corrects those whom He loves, just like a father [corrects] a child whom he cherishes" (Proverbs 3:12). If accepted with love, such suffering can bring a person to the loftiest spiritual heights, as the prophet said, "But G-d preferred to crush him with disease, [to see] if he would offer his soul as compensation… Surely, He will grant him a portion among the great" (Isaiah 53:10,12)." — Aryeh Kaplan, "Handbook of Jewish Thought," (Jerusalem: Moznaim & Wagshal, 1979), chapter on "Apparent Injustice."

"20:47 At times, G-d brings undeserved suffering to the righteous to test them and make them realize their true potential. Similarly, it may be to demonstrate their greatness to others and thereby sanctify G-d's name by showing how the righteous do not serve G-d out of any thought of reward but accept suffering and still do not depart from Him. However, in all such cases, such suffering brings about a greater future reward, as we find, "He may have sent hardships to test you, but it was so that He would eventually do [all the more] good for you" (Deuteronomy 8:16)." — Aryeh Kaplan, "Handbook of Jewish Thought," (Jerusalem: Moznaim & Wagshal, 1979), chapter on "Apparent Injustice."

Next (Suffering shiakh): Rut Rabbah-5.6

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

False Shepherds

Yirmәyâhu 23.1-12

Now we see a polyfractured (sectarian) fratricidal people, too many of whose religious shepherds take bribes, extort, wallow in lәshon hâ- (each other as well as non-religious Jews, Reform Jews, Christian Jews, those they perceive to be 'Christian missionaries', etc.) and fester in internecine sinat khinâm. Concerning these shepherds who, by such khilul --, "lose and scatter [His] sheep" -- has also prophesied: Yirmәyâhu 23.1-12.

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Emblem of the kindreds —
Turning the Goy•imꞋ  to Tor•âhꞋ 

Zәkhar•yâhꞋ  14.16 and:

1QIsa 11.10

Hover the cursor over a word to see the modern Hebrew letters, then click on the word for further translation and explanation. Clicking in other areas of the scroll (that display the scroll citation) will open a window with a 100% scale view for closer examination.

Yeshayahu 11.10

1QIsa 11.12 (a & b)
Yeshayahu 11.12a
Yeshayahu 11.12b

1QIsa 56.8
Yeshayahu 56.8

1QIsa 66.23-24
Yeshayahu 66.23

-- ? ? ? ? ? ? ?--

(Yәsha•yâhꞋ u 56.8 & 11.10, 12; 66.23; Zәkhar•yâhꞋ  14.16; as well as the •leiꞋ nu) — As the historically accurate, pro-Torâh, Ribi Yәhoshua is becoming known again for the first time since 135 C.E., he is being widely recognized as the "emblem of the kindreds" and turning significant numbers of goyim toward Torâh. Most certainly, it is Ribi Yәhoshua, more than any other in all of history, whom the goyim seek—and the only figure who can persuade Christians and Muslims, both of whom claim to follow his teachings, abandon the counterfeit apostasy to follow the genuine historical RibꞋ i Yәho•shuꞋ a in practicing Tor•âhꞋ  in harmony–and eventual, inexorable peace–with Yi•sә•râ•eilꞋ .

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Tzephanyah 3.9
Sanhedrin-91b (3)

Ramb"m states of the shiakh, "He will then arrange the whole world to serve only [Elohim], as it is said, 'For then I shall convert the lips of the kindreds to a (bәrurah; clarified, clear) language for them all to call upon the Name of ', and, as one, to serve Him" (Tzәphanyâh 3:9 with Sanhedrin 91b; see Scholem, p. 28f).

The leadership of the legitimate followers of Ribi Yәhoshua can only be found where he and the leadership of his original Nәtzârim followers were: within the legitimate Torâh-observant Jewish community in Israel. Today, the Nәtzârim are headed by an Israeli Orthodox Jew in good standing in the Israeli Orthodox Jewish community who is a member of the board of an Israeli Orthodox Jewish Synagogue — in Ra·ananah, a suburb 15km north of Teil Aviv.

The Nәtzârim have students in various stages of progress on every continent… more than 40 countries — from Africa, Asia and the Middle-East to several provinces of Canada; from Europe and Scandanavia to South America and several provinces of Australia and more than 38 states of the US; too many countries to list exhaustively, going completely around the world — a sampling shows students of the Nәtzârim in Israel and Far East countries including Japan, Singapore, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan and the Philippines to Nigeria, Namibia and South Africa, Jordan, Finland, Norway, Scotland, Sweden, Switzerland, Spain, Italy, Greece, Austria, Britain and the Netherlands, to Washington, D.C., to Mexico, Jamaica, Trinidad & Tobago, Puerto Rico and the Antilles, to Argentina, Brazil, Columbia and El Salvador to Hawaii to Guam, New Zealand, Australia and more!

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

shiakh must be born in Beit-Lëkhëm

Mikhâh 5.1 (1)

(Mikhâh 5.1) Beit Lekhem — which is now an Arab village!

It is well documented that Ribi Yәhoshua was born in Beit Lekhem. Today, only Arabs are born in Beit Lekhem. The Israeli government has given Beit Lekhem to the Arabs! Therefore, only Ribi Yәhoshua can ever fulfill this messianic prophecy!

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

shiakh must be documented by Yukhasin as Scion

Of Dawid ha-Mëlëkh

Hosheia 3.5; Nәkhëmyâh 7.63; Yirmәyâhu 30.9

See Hosheia 3.5, Yirmәyâhu 30.9; et al. From the time this original prophecy was issued (ca. B.C.E. 465) this required documentation in the public genealogical registries.

"According to Hegesippus, Vespasian [69-79 C.E.], Domitian [81-96 C.E.] and Trajan [98-117 C.E.] hunted down all Jews of Davidic descent and executed them in order to extirpate the royal line on which the Jews had set their hopes" (Emil Schürer, The History Of The Jewish People In The Age Of Jesus Christ," I:528).

"It was not without reason…" (Salo Baron, "A Social and Religious History of the Jews," II:121). "The authorities searched out the Jewish families descended from the house of David in order to destroy them and thus eradicate the last remnant of the nation's hope of restoration of the Davidic kingdom" ("Israel," EJ, 9:238).

The sole surviving exceptions are the two genealogies of Ribi Yәhoshua.

Only after the Romans destroyed all of the Davidic genealogies except two (paternal and maternal genealogies of Ribi Yәhoshua) have some ventured that the public genealogical registries weren't required for validation of Kohanim and the shiakh.

However, even for valid Kohanim Scripture makes it explicitly clear that the required documentation by public genealogical registries cannot be circumvented (Nәkhemyah 7.63) (Kohanim today are ceremonial; honored as having traditional descent; but none would qualify for service in the Beit ha-Miqdash.)

The only historically authentic genealogies of the Davidic family from the public registries that survive today are those of Ribi Yәhoshua.

Therefore, Ribi Yәhoshua is the only possible candidate for shiakh that there can ever be!

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule


"If a scion of Dawid… "

According to Ramb"m, if a scion of Dawid advocates "repairing the breaches in Torâh" and "prevails upon Israel to walk in the ways of Torâh… then one may properly assume that he is the shiakh… "

"And if there arise a [scion] from the House of David who meditates on the Torâh and practices its commandments like his ancestor David in accordance with the Written and Oral Law, prevails upon Israel to walk in the ways of the Torâh and to repair its breaches [see discussions in Who Are The Nᵊtzarim? Live-Link (WAN)], and fights the battles of --, then one may properly assume that he is the shiakh" (Ramb"m shiakh, last two passages of his code of laws, in the eleventh and twelfth paragraphs of the "Laws Concerning the Installation of Kings," Gershom Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism, Schocken, 1971, p. 28).

Rambam rightly ruled out the arch-antithesis Jesus, but he was never presented with the authentic, historical and Torâh Ribi Yәhoshua and, so, never referred to him at all.

Unlike Jesus (the Christian antithesis), Ribi Yәhoshua is a documented scion of Dawid who advocated, and through his legitimate Nәtzârim followers continues to advocate, and will always continue to advocate, "repairing the breaches in Torâh" and "prevailing upon Israel to walk in the ways of Torâh."

Rambam also wrote: "The shiakh will arise and restore the kingdom of David to its former might. He will rebuild the sanctuary and gather the dispersed of Israel. All the laws will be reinstituted in his days as of old [see discussions in WAN Live-Link Technology]. Sacrifices will be offered and the Sabbatical and Jubilee years will be observed exactly in accordance with the commandments of the Torâh. But whoever does not believe in him, or does not await his coming denies not only the rest of the prophets, but also the Torâh and our teacher Mosheh" (ibid.).

"Do not think that the shiakh needs to perform signs and miracles, bring about a new state of things in the world, revive the dead, and the like. It is not so… Rather it is the case in these matters that the statutes of our Torâh are valid and forever and eternally. Nothing can be added to them or taken away" (ibid.).

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Sha·ar ha-Rakhamim

Yekhezqeil 44.1-3

Yәkhëzqeil 44.1-3 — Not only is the East Gate closed, and controlled by Muslims, the Muslims have deliberately established a cemetary there to make it impossible for a human Jew (whom the Jewish shiakh must be) to pass through without being defiled. No candidate for shiakh can possibly fulfill the cited requirement — except Ribi Yәhoshua who already fulfilled this requirement!

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Yәsha•yâhu 7.14

To read the ms., hover your cursor over a word and it will display in Modern Hebrew letters. Click on the word for translation and further explanation–and often additional links to even further, and complete, explanations.

1QIsa 7.14

Hover the cursor over a word to see the modern Hebrew letters, then click on the word for further translation and explanation. Clicking in other areas of the scroll (that display the scroll citation) will open a window with a 100% scale view for closer examination.

1QIsa 7.14

-- -

(Sections missing or illegible in the scroll designated by ellipses.)

-- […]

(Therefore, -- Himself shall give to yo[u…]
the young-woman is pregnant and shall give birth to a son and call his name "With-us-[is]-Eil)

The Masoretic reads:

, , ; , , :

(Lâ•khein, yi•tein A•don•ai Hu, lâ•khëm ot: Hin•eih hâ-alәm•âh, hâr•âh wә-yo•lëdët bein, wә-qâ•rât shәm•o Im•ânu•Eil; Therefore, shall A•don•ai Himself give, to you a sign: Behold, the young-woman, she is pregnant and will give birth to a son, and his name shall be called, "With-us-[is]-Eil.")

The Aleppo Codex differs from the Masoretic only in separating the name into two words: (Im-ânu Eil; "With-us-[is] Eil").

There is an accurate term in Hebrew for "virgin"— (bәtul•âh). Of course, a "young woman" or "maiden" of Israel is expected to be a virgin until she is married! The Egyptian Hellenists of Alexandria undoubtedly assumed this passage referred to an unmarried "young woman" or "maiden" who would subsequently marry and become pregnant by her husband. Accordingly, interpreting the pâ•suq as describing the "young woman" / "maiden" before she was married, they rendered LXX, παρθενος (parthenos; virgin).

The error intrudes not in the translation of as "virgin," which (despite being not the most accurate rendering) is acceptable and true of unmarried "young women" / "maidens" of Israel, but in the introduction of the strictly-Hellenist, idolatrous notion that the virgin-maiden wouldn't get pregnant in the natural way—through the virgin-maiden marrying and subsequently becoming pregnant by her husband. This idolatrous notion of impregnation of a human woman by a divine god is well documented in Egyptian and the Hellenist theology of the Romans (who filtered—"redacted"—ALL of the post-135 C.E. Christian literature), but was never even remotely conceived in the Judaic community of Ribi Yәho•shua and the Nәtzâr•im.

Tar•gum Yo•nâ•tân reads:

(vәkhein yi•tein ha-Sheim hu lәkhon ât•âh hâ u•leiy•mә mәadә u-tliyd var wә-tiq•reiy shәmeiyh I•mâ•nu•Eil; So, A•don•ai Himself shall give, to you this sign: a young-woman with child; she will give birth to a son, and she shall call his name, "With-us [is] Eil.")

In contrast to LXX (which interprets a young woman prior to marriage), the Aramaic interprets a young married woman.

It becomes easier to see how Hellenist Romans, anxious to inject the traditions of (Egyptian) Horus through (Hellenist) Zeus, took advantage of the Judaic interpretations to syncretize their own idolatry.

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Yәshayahu 9.5 (not 9.6!)

Citing 9.6 for this passage shows that the person uses the Christian OT, not a Bible. In the Bible, this passage is 9.5.

While Christian interpretations distort the pasuq to support the pagan mythological notion of a divine Christ, some Jewish interpretations contradict the constraints imposed by the cantillation.

1QIsa 9.5-6

Hover the cursor over a word to see the modern Hebrew letters, then click on the word for further translation and explanation. Clicking in other areas of the scroll (that display the scroll citation) will open a window with a 100% scale view for closer examination.

1QIsa 9.5-6


I've additionally included pâ•suqꞋ  6 because the primary divergence of later mss. changes to ; and 1QIsa repeats, and corrects to a second time in pâ•suqꞋ  6.

Tar•gum Yo•nâ•tân 9.5-6

Allepo Codex

The constraints of cantillation require, in an English parallel, the insertion of a pause (e.g. a comma, dash or semi-colon) at a spot that Jews have, apparently, found difficult to harmonize with Judaic concepts. The following resolves, finally, all of the aforementioned problems. The traditional Masoretic reading of the phrase under discussion is supported by both IQIsa (the 'Great Isaiah Scroll' from Qumran Dead Sea Scrolls) and the Aleppo Codex. The latter also supports the Masoretic cantillation. (The cantillation wasn't committed to writing in the days of IQIsa.)

The cantillation requires a short pause, roughly equivalent to a comma in English, after the word Jibor. Since other commas are needed in the English to separate adjectives, I'll use semi-colons (red in the transliteration) to indicate the cantillation mark. Thus, the cantillation forces the following phrasing:

; - -‮:

(wa-yiqrâ shәmo Pëlë yoeitz Eil Jibor; avi-ad sar- shâlom;Pronunciation table "and he called his name 'Wonder,' a counselor of Eil Jibor; My Father is until [i.e. forever], a minister of peace").

According to the Tei•mân•i " '", Tar•gum Yo•nâ•tân reads:

, , , , ,

(a•mar nәvi•yâ lә-veit Dâ•wid, a•reiy râv•eiy i•tәyәleiyd la•nâ, bar i•tәyәheiyv la•nâ, wә-qa•beiyl o•rây•tâ al•o•hiy lә-mi•tәrah, wә-i•tәqәriy shәm•eiyh min qâ•dâm ma•phәliy eiy•tzâ ël•â•hâ ji•bâr•â qa•yâm â•lәma•yâ, mәshikh•â di-shәlâm•â yis•jeiy al•a•nâ bә-yom•o•hi; Said the Prophet to the House of David, "Behold a boy child is born to us, a son is given to us; and he will accept the Tor•âh upon himself for rain, and his name is to be called (since [he is] a wonder of counsel, of the Ël•oh•im Almighty, Who endures forever): 'The Mâ•shiakh of peace' [who] will grow on us in his days.")

Popular translations render as "to keep it." However, there is no basis in the Aramaic text for such rendering. comprises the prepositional prefix (lә; to, toward, for) + (mi•tәrah; rain). This may be understood either as [a] "to precipitate," as the Mâ•shiakh accepting—and then precipitating—Tor•âh upon the land like rain, or [b] likening Tor•âh to rain that gives water (sustenance and life) to the land.

Some charlatans argue that is a feminine noun —and, therefore, refers to Yi•sәr•â•eil rather than the Mâ•shiakh. First of all, this is a conspicuously admission of ignorance of the well-known usage in the Qa•dish. It also contradicts the related masculine endings in this same pâ•suq that modify the Mâ•shiakh.

Both Christians and Jewish polemicists seem to agree on an error, rendering the noun as an adjective (wonderful). The phrase comprises two nouns, meaning "a wonder of counsel."

means "since, because" according to Marcus Jastrow, Dictionary of the Targumim, Talmud Bavli, Talmud Yerushalmi and Midrashic Literature (Judaica Treasury, 1971, 2004; p. 1317).

Relative to the original Hebrew text, "Counselor of Eil Ji•bor" refers to one who counsels others in the Spirit of Eil Ji•bor—just as I, and other Orthodox Jews, are servants (and, as we follow His Spirit, counselors) of Eil Ji•bor. This does not remotely suggest one who deigns to counsel Eil Ji•bor, Who is in no need of any man's counsel.

Notice also that most of the hyphens some interpretors use to string it all together as if it has to be one name are not only absent in the Hebrew, but precluded by the cantillation!

It's essential to understand that this passage was originally interpreted in its historical setting. That understanding remained unchanged for nearly a millennium and Scripture informs us that ha-Sheim doesn't change. The original meaning is the only true understanding.

Yәshayâhu ha-Nâvi wrote this passage ca. BCE 720 relative to Âkhâz ha-mëlëkh (7.1). The child Yәshayâhu names in 9.5 prophesies a wonderful and righteous son of the disappointing and evil Âkhâz: Khizqiyâh ha-mëlëkh (see Mәlâkhim Beit 18.3-8; 20.2ff; Divrei ha-Yâmim Beit 31.1-4). Nor was Yәshayâhu the only vi prophesying about the blasphemous rule of Âkhâz and the cleansing of Yisrâ·eil by his son, Khizqiyâh ha-mëlëkh. Hosheia ha-Nâvi (see 1.1ff) and Mikhah ha-Nâvi (see 1.1ff) were proclaiming parallel prophecies.

These prophecies about Khizqiyâh ha-mëlëkh were seen as harbingers of the role of the shiakh. However, no one in Yisrâ·eil regarded Khizqiyâh ha-mëlëkh as divine!!! Before 135 CE, neither did anyone in Yisrâ·eil associate this prophecy with a "divine son." This pagan concept wasn't associated with this Scripture until the Roman Hellenists introduced their pagan idea into their budding Christianity some time after 135 CE.

Yәshayâhu 9.5 was understood by the Sages as a general vision of the role of the shiakh, but has never been regarded in Yisrâ·eil as suggesting divinity of the prophesied son / shiakh. This is confirmed in that all three of these nәviyim clearly prophesied within the teachings of Torâh (or they would have been stoned to death as heretics, not recognized as Nәviyim and included in the Bible). Dәvârim 13.2-6, along with a plethora of other Scriptures from Torâh, absolutely prohibits this post-135 CE pagan Roman, Hellenist-Christian, goyim fabrication.

Ha-Sheim doesn't change (Malâkhi 3.6; Tәhilim 89.35). The meaning of this passage from BCE 720 cannot have changed. For more than 8 centuries after Yәshayâhu proclaimed this prophecy, Messianic implications remained strictly within Torâh constraints, envisioning a mortal human king patterned after Khizqiyâh ha-mëlëkh – whom NO one regarded as a 'divine son savior'!!! For these first 8 centuries, NO one in Yisrâ·eil would have even imagined that this prophecy by a Torâh-teaching vi patterned his prophecy after the Egyptian Isis and Horus!!!

The implications of Christian claims is unavoidable: if the passage prophesies a 'divine son savior' then Khizqiyâh ha-mëlëkh HAD to have been the first 'divine son savior'!!! (Well, after Horus anyway.)

The idea of a divine son savior doesn't predate 135 CE in the Judaic community. The conclusion is therefore unavoidable: The post-135 CE Christian innovation of a divine son savior, contradicting Torâh, cannot be true.

Confirming this, the concept of a divine son savior tracks back to the Roman religion of Zeus and the Roman pantheon and, before that, the Greek gods and, before that, Isis and Horus in the Egyptian religion.

The 'divine son savior' concept has NO documentation in Tana"kh, is prohibited by Tana"kh, yet DOES track back to Roman, Greek and Egyptian religions. Hello?

Therefore, the Christian concept of a 'divine son savior' is nothing more than yet another repackaging of the religion of the pagans deriving from the Egyptian, Greek and Roman religions, explicitly prohibited by Torâh.

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Talmud Sukkot 52a

According to Talmud (Sukah 52a), the coming of the Mashiakh Ben-Yoseiph is described as one "whose coming precedes that of the Mashiakh Ben-Dawid, and who will die in combat with the enemies of -- and Israel" (see also "Messiah," Ency. Jud., 11.1411).

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Rut Rabbah 5.6

The Midrash also declares that the shiakh was prophesied to suffer for his people. Ruth Rabbah 5.6 explains that Rut 2.14 refers to the shiakh. "Come here," Ruth Rabbah 5.6 explains, refers to approaching the royal Davidic palace. "Eat of the bread" refers to the bread of the royal palace and "dip your morsel in the vinegar" refers to the sufferings of the shiakh, as it is said, "and (mәkholal; he is pierced) (mi-pәsha·einu;as a result of our felonious-transgressions-of-Torâh)" — commentary to Yәshayâhu 53.5 in Midrash Rabbah.

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Talmud Sanhedrin-98b (1)
Suffering shiakh Resurrected from the Dead

As Khab"d (anglicized to Chabad) argued in defense of their belief in Rebbe Schneerson as the shiakh (www.moshiach.net/blind/count.txt):"Many Torah sources refer to Moshiakh rising from the dead, starting with the Talmud (Sanhedrin 98b): "Rav said 'If he [Moshiakh] is from the living, [then he is] like Rabbeinu ha-Qadosh [Rabbi Yehuda ha-Nasi]; if he is from the dead, [then he is] like Daniel, the delightful one.'"

In Hebrew, significant elements of Khab"d continue to argue that Rebbe Schneerson is the shiakh, as evidenced on the cover of their magazine "Beis Moshiach" (Beit Mashiakh Magazine, Issue #360, 2002.03.08; also their website at www.beismoshiach.org):

, , ,

(Yәkhi Adoneinu Moreinu u-Rabeinu Melekh ha-Mashiakh lә- Olam wa-ed; Long live our Lord, our Instructor, and our Rabbi, the King shiakh, forever and ever).

To avoid English-speaking Christian flak, they conveniently omit the translation of Adoneinu (our Lord) entirely in their English translation of their Hebrew cover.

Next (Resurrection of shiakh): Dâniyeil 7.13-14 & Talmud Masëkët Sunedrion 98a and 98b (2)

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Daniel 7.13-14;
Talmud Sanhedrin-98a and 98b (2)

"So it states in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 98b) 'If the Moshiakh comes from the dead it will be etc.' The great and holy scholar Rabbi Khiam Midini in his work Sdei Khemed (Peyat ha-Sadeh, Maarekhet 'Alef', os Eyin), connects this Talmudic statement to an earlier one (ibid 98a) referring to the prophecy of [Daniyeil 7.13-14]: "If the generation is fortunate the Moshiakh will come from the dead, i.e. on 'clouds of heaven' and then everyone will accept him with no reservations, but if not he will come from the living, i.e. riding on a donkey (lit. 'khamor' which also means 'physical' in Hebrew)."

"Rashi, the basic Talmudic commentary, explains: "If Moshiakh is from those who are alive now, [then] surely he is Rabbeinu Hakadosh [Rabbi Yehuda HaNassi], who suffers sicknesses and is an absolute saint… If he is from those who have already died, [then] he is Daniel, the delightful one, who was condemned to suffer in the lions' den and was an absolute saint."

"In the second to the last Rashi, (the foremost explainer of the scripture and the Talmud, printed in every text) in the book of Daniel he writes: 'The Moshiakh will reveal himself and then be concealed… and then revealed once more, and so it says in the Midrash on Ruth and in the poems of Rabbi Eliezer ha-Kalir'"

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

(p. 47, col. 2)

Rav Mosh•ëhꞋ  Bën-Khai•yimꞋ , ha-QoꞋ dësh of

(15081593 C.E.)

Mehlmann Collection, Mehlmann Library, Tel Aviv University. (Written in RashꞋ "i script, the much-abused quotation begins on line 4.)

Hover the cursor over a word to see the modern Hebrew letters, then click on the word for further translation and explanation. Clicking in other areas of the scroll (that display the scroll citation) will open a window with a 100% scale view for closer examination.

Quotation from   (Marot Tzovot) by Mosheh al-Sheikh (p. 47, col. 2; photograph © 2005 Yael Ben-David)

'' '' '

"Our Rabbis, of blessed memory, are of one mouth, they have preserved and accepted that [the passage] shall speak about MëlꞋ ëkh ha-Mâ•shiꞋ akh; and we shall pull along [following] after those [Rabbis], of blessed memory, that it is because he is Dâ•widꞋ , he is the Mâ•shiꞋ akh, that is known, and the full Scripture of ha-Nâ•viꞋ  spoke in the Name of --: 'And My servant David shall be over them, for a king.' " 1

"Therefore, it is right that we say this concerning [the phrase] "Judicious shall My servant be" because that which is enigmatic is taught from that which is commented. Then look, too, that we won't make comments that are in the Scriptures, revealing absolutely [everything] for the eyes of everyone. The introduction — [the Prophet's] saying — isn't too inaccessible for any heart: "Look, judicious shall My servant be," and not saying 'Thus says ha-Sheim,' like the beginning of every parashah except this.

"Indeed look, Sages of blessed memory say that of all the torment that comes into the world, one third was for David and the Patriarchs, the second third was for the generation of the Decree (of oppression), and the third is for the King Messiah. He prophesied regarding this matter, and [that prophecy] is that there is torment for a deliberate misdemeanor and there is torment that, out of love, the Tzadiq shoulders for a deliberate misdemeanor by the generation. Marot Tzovot (photograph © 2005 Yael Ben-David)

"Look, the man who is appalled by this [undeserved torment] is [the one who] doesn't realize the extent of the reward truly being given to [the Tzadiqim], as it is said: Would ha-Sheim desire that one man should be the (yekhateh [pieil]) misstep-sacrifice? Or that the whole generation [be the misstep-sacrifice] for a just and innocent man who didn't misstep much?

"This will be the reward for Israel in the Exile, for [the innocent man] delivered himself to death by the gentiles. Therefore, the psyches [of Israel] are subsumed under his psyche and the mamon (a tallied-belonging) [of Israel], which [the Israelis] took while in the Exile, is subsumed under his mamon.

"This [principle of subsuming psyches], they said, is [learned from the verse]: "subsumed under which he poured out his psyche to die." 2 … Subsumed under which [the principle of subsuming of mamon is also learned from this same verse]: "with rebelious-felons he was nimnah (tallied-as-a-belonging)." (Rabbi Mosheh Ben-Khayim al-Sheikh, Marot Tzovot, Tzәphat member of the Sanhedrin, ca. 1507, Mehlmann Collection, Mehlmann Library, Tel Aviv University, p. 47, col. 2)

  1. Yәkhëz•qeilꞋ  37.24. Return to text

  2. Yәkhëz•qeilꞋ  53.12. Return to text

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Ma•sëkꞋ ët Avod•âhꞋ  Zâr•âhꞋ  17a

The various and conflicting earliest extant ms. of Ma•sëkꞋ ët Avod•âhꞋ  Zâr•âhꞋ  17a demonstrate that the association with Christians and YeshꞋ "u was still being formulated in the 3rd-5th centuries C.E. and, correspondingly, against the venomously misojudaic Christian image being propagated by the Church against Jews during that period; not with the original experience of R. Eliezer.

This is proven by Josephus' record that the Pәrush•imꞋ  were busy defending the Nәtzâr•imꞋ  (against the Hellenist-Tzәdoq•imꞋ  who had murdered Pâ•qidꞋ  Ya•a•qovꞋ  ha-Tza•diqꞋ  (the brother of RibꞋ i Yәho•shuꞋ a) before the Roman tribunal during this time!!! The Pәrush•imꞋ  (who included the Nәtzâr•imꞋ ) were in the same conflict, and being persecuted together by, the Hellenist-Roman Christian Church. See Oxford scholar and historian, James Parkes, The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, A Study in the Origins of Antisemitism.

This is further proof that the first-century Pәrush•imꞋ  RibꞋ i – having sәmikh•âhꞋ  from the Nâ•siꞋ  of the Sanhedrin (the only way he could have been addressed as such and taught as such in synagogues within Judea), and his Nәtzâr•imꞋ  followers, were the polar opposite of the 3rd-4th century anti-Tor•âhꞋ  image (idol, feculent cloak of Zәkhar•yâhꞋ  3) counterfeited by Christianity and the Church. AZ 17a rightly condemns any assimilation of Christianity, the Church, their Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) or their idol, YeshꞋ "u.

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

ba-Midbar Rabbah 11.3

"The Midrash (Bamidbar Rabba 11:3) says that the future Redeemer will be revealed, then concealed, then revealed again. This is quoted by Rabbeinu Bakhayei and by the Khasam Sofer on the Torah (both at end of Parshas Shmos). The latter writes: "This is a great test that the Redeemer is concealed [Moshe] . . . and so it will be at the time of our righteous Moshiakh [that] he will be concealed after [his] revelation, as mentioned in the Midrash." [This is also corroborated by the symbolism of the Matzah and aphiqoman in the Pesakh Seider. YBD]

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Mikhâh 5.1 –
Two Comings of the shiakh

Mikhâh 5.1, with commentary quoted from NHM note 26.23.1.

Mikhâh ha-Nâvi clearly speaks of the shiakh when he prophesies, "And you, Beit-Lëkhëm Ëphrâtâh, though you are to be junior among the thousands of Yәhudâh, from out of you shall come forth to Me he who shall be the ruler of Yisrâ·eil, and his goings forth are from antiquity, from past eternity."

Mikhâh ha-Nâvi wrote (u-motzâ·otâv; "and his goings forth" or "issuings forth") – in the plural!!! – of the shiakh. Thus, the shiakh would go forth shәtei-pә·âmim – two times. Here we have the concept of the shiakh Bën-Yoseiph and the shiakh Bën-Dâwid in one person – "his [singular] goings-forth" [plural]!!!

Like the first dipping of karpas (Biblical hyssop = fresh sprig of Syrian oregano) in red wine vinegar recalling hyssop in the blood of the Pësakh lamb at the Seidër, so that the destroyer would sakh (skip-over) obedient Jews, so, too, with the blood of His shiakh, -- has provided a permanent Pësakh lamb for those who keep Torâh non-selectively according to Halâkhâh.

From this, we see that the second "going forth" of the shiakh will be like the second dipping – ror, the bitterness, into Kharosët, sweetness. The bitterness and suffering of the first going forth of the shiakh as the Pësakh lamb shall be dipped into the sweetness of his second going forth as the shiakh Bën-Dâwid. This also symbolizes the merging in one person, Ribi Yәhoshua Bën--Yoseiph Bën--Dâwid ha-shiakh, the role of Pësakh lamb and the eternal king as it is said (Yәkhëzqeil 37:25), "And My servant wid shall be their si forever."

Next (Suffering shiakh): Yәshayâhu 60

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Zohar ha-Raqiya, Shaar ha-Gilgulim, Shemot 8b

"From the Zohar (Shmos 8b) — as explained in Zohar Harakiya and Shaar Hagilgulim (ch. 13, both by the ARI-Zal, Rabbi Yitzkhak Luria, one of the greatest Kabbalists) — it is clear that the man designated to be Moshiakh is born naturally in this world, then the soul of Moshiakh in the heavenly "Garden of Eden" is bestowed upon him so that he realizes that he is Moshiakh, then he becomes concealed, ascending to heaven, and only afterwards is he revealed to the full extent, the whole Jewish people recognizing him as Moshiakh.

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Zohar Balaq

"The Zohar in Parshat Balaq (pg 203b) states that the Moshiakh will have to 'die' i.e. go to a higher spiritual level, and return again with the new level he has attained."

Next (Resurrection of shiakh): Shaar ha-Kavanot

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Zohar Part b, pg. 43b, The Faithful ShepherdShәm•aꞋ 

(For original Aramaic text of this passage, with translation, click on title.)

Hear, O Israel, Y--H Elohenu Y--H is one. These three are one. How can the three Names be one? Only through the perception of Faith: in the vision of the Holy Spirit, in the beholding of the hidden eyes alone. The mystery of the audible voice is similar to this, for though it is one yet it consists of three elements fire, air, and water, which have, however, become one in the mystery of the voice. Even so it is with the mystery of the threefold divine manifestations designated by Y--H Elohenu Y--H three modes which yet form one unity.

Is this an accurate quotation and interpretation? I'm never satisfied relying on a Christian's translation / interpretation. Even Christian scholars have a Christian orientation that emerges in their interpretations.

For decades, I've seen this quotation purported to be a commentary on the MishꞋ nâh, which was written by Ram•ba"mꞋ . Countless (non-Christian) Jews, who were well educated in Tor•âhꞋ , have long argued with me over the years that Ram•ba"mꞋ , despite being a well-documented #1 adversary against the irrationalists ("Kabbalists" – which implies opposing the Qa•bâlists' core source text: the Zo•harꞋ ), was an advocate of the Zo•harꞋ  (not realizing that this implied that Ram•ba"mꞋ  advocated this purported quotation). While this always seemed a near-certain contradiction and impossibility, I never felt confident to dispute their contention—until now.

After decades of searching for the source text, to translate it for myself and get to the bottom of the matter the same way I've managed to deal with everything else, I have finally obtained the source text underlying these quotations.

The first point to clear up is that there is no indication in the source text of any connection whatsoever to Ram•ba"mꞋ 's Commentary on the MishꞋ nâh. Ram•ba"mꞋ  had no connection to this quotation. Accordingly, finally, this misperception should be edited out of notes 3.17.2 and 26.23.1 of NHM.

The second point to clear up is that "modes" isn't the best English translation of the Aramaic .

See the source text for further details.

While we share Ram•ba"mꞋ 's rejection of the irrationalists' heresy (Qa•bâl•âhꞋ  and the 10th-century C.E. Zo•harꞋ ), the quotation does prove two things:

  1. The Trinitarian concept of "three facets Unified in One Singularity" is herein documented to have concrete roots in medieval Qa•bâl•âhꞋ , and

  2. Even more importantly, the large segment of the Jewish world that accepts Qa•bâl•âhꞋ  and the Zo•harꞋ  (which is not all of the Jewish world by any means) unavoidably embraces the Trinitarian principle of "three facets comprise the Singularity" – making any criticism on their part of Trinitarianism completely self-contradicting, hypocritical and sanctimonious.

However, unlike the Zo•harꞋ  departure from the punctuation of the Masoretic Text, the Nәtzâr•imꞋ  read the Shәm•aꞋ  as punctuated in the Masoretic Text:

Shәm•aꞋ  Yi•sә•râ•eilꞋ -- is Ël•oh•einꞋ u-- is

In terms the earliest Israelis, breaking away from idolatry, understood: "Hearken Yi•sә•râ•eilꞋ : -- is sing. our gods! -- is One!"

While the number three is found often in Tor•âhꞋ  numerology – including the three matz•otꞋ  in the PësꞋ akh SeiꞋ dër, the onerous "three facets is One" conundrum is found, contrary to the Kabbalists and their Zo•harꞋ , not to occur in the Shәm•aꞋ .

While scholars acknowledge that "Judaism" was originally called "The Way," the void of any explanation or derivation in the literature attests that they have no idea of the origin of that phrase. There are two letters in the Shәm•aꞋ  that are enlarged in the SeiphꞋ ër Tor•âhꞋ : the in and the final letter, the in . These two letters form an acronym: ", the acronym for, inter alia, (al dërꞋ ëkh; The Way; lit. "on the way")!

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Shaar ha-Kavanot

"So writes the famous Rabbi Yitzkhak Luria in the eleventh chapter of his work 'Sha·ar ha-Kavanot,' that after the Moshiakh arrives he will be hidden in heaven like Moshe was hidden on mount Siani and then he will appear again.

"We see here three stages in the revelation of Moshiakh: a) revelation, b) concealment, c) final full revelation.

Next (Resurrection of shiakh): Yәshayâhu 60; Midrash Pesikta Rabbasi 37; Yalkut Shimoni 499

Go Top Go Back
Rainbow Rule

Yeshayahu 60;
Midrash Pesikta Rabbasi 37; Yalkut Shimoni 499

"The Midrash Pesikta Rabbasi (37, quoted in Yalkut Shimoni 499 on [Yәshayahu] 60) states: "At that time G-d will raise Moshiakh up to the highest heavens and spread over him the radiance of His glory" — after Moshiakh has already suffered in this world, as is clear from the context.

Rainbow Rule
Go Top Home (Netzarim Logo) Go Back

Nәtzâr•im′ … Authentic