Yeshua, Divinity, and the God of Israel
There comes a point in our spiritual journey when we must be willing to examine not only the beliefs we have rejected, but also the beliefs we have carried with us from previous religious traditions without ever seriously questioning them.
Many believers discover the Jewish roots of their faith and begin an extraordinary process of rediscovery. They begin observing Shabbat, studying Torah, celebrating the biblical moedim, learning Hebrew, examining Jewish history, and attempting to understand Yeshua within the Jewish world in which he lived. Yet it is entirely possible to change our practices, vocabulary, calendar, and outward religious identity while continuing to interpret Scripture through theological assumptions inherited from Christianity.
For me, one of the most important questions that deserves to be reconsidered is the identity of Yeshua and his relationship with the God of Israel.
I want to make something clear from the beginning. This discussion is not intended to diminish Yeshua, nor is it an attempt to reduce him to an ordinary rabbi, teacher, or prophet. I believe Yeshua is the Messiah. I believe God worked uniquely through him, that he carried divine authority, that the presence of God dwelled within him in an extraordinary way, that he revealed the Father, that God raised him from the dead, and that God exalted him above all other human authority.
The question I am asking is more precise.
Does believing that divinity was manifested through Yeshua require us to conclude that Yeshua himself is the God of Israel?
I have increasingly come to believe that these are two different theological statements, and that Scripture gives us good reason to preserve the distinction.
We Must Begin Where Yeshua Began
Before discussing John 1:1, Thomas calling Yeshua “my God,” the language of Hebrews, or the theological formulations developed centuries after Yeshua, we should begin where Jewish faith has always begun.
The Torah declares:
שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יהוה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יהוה אֶחָד
Shema Yisrael, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai Echad.
“Hear, O Israel: YHWH our God, YHWH is one.”
Deuteronomy 6:4
This confession stood at the heart of Israel's understanding of God, and when Yeshua was asked which commandment was the greatest, he did not replace the Shema with a new definition of God. Instead, he reaffirmed it.
“Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord.”
Mark 12:29
This matters greatly when attempting to construct a Messianic understanding of Yeshua. If we claim to understand Yeshua within his Jewish world, then Yeshua's own understanding of God must be allowed to shape our theology.
Throughout the Gospels, Yeshua prays to God, obeys God, speaks the words God gives him, submits his will to God, receives authority from God, and describes himself as the one whom God has sent. Even after his resurrection, Yeshua tells Miriam:
“I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God.”
John 20:17
The words “my God” deserve serious consideration because Yeshua does not merely identify the Father as the God of his disciples. He identifies the Father as his own God.
This distinction becomes even more striking in Yeshua's prayer recorded in John:
“And this is eternal life, that they might know You, the only true God, and Yeshua Messiah, whom You have sent.” John 17:3
Yeshua identifies the Father as “the only true God” and then distinguishes himself as Yeshua the Messiah, the one whom that God sent.
Whatever conclusions we eventually reach concerning the nature of Messiah, our theology must account for those words rather than passing over them.
Divinity Does Not Necessarily Mean Identity
Much of the confusion surrounding this subject begins when we assume that the manifestation of divine presence, authority, or power through an individual automatically means that the individual is God Himself.
Scripture presents a much richer concept of divine representation.
God places His Spirit upon human beings, gives His authority to representatives, places His Name upon chosen messengers, speaks through prophets, and performs His works through individuals whom He commissions. These representatives can speak with divine authority precisely because they have been sent by God.
A fascinating example appears in Exodus when God tells Israel that He will send a messenger before them:
“Behold, I send an angel before you, to keep you in the way, and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice... for My name is in him.”
Exodus 23:20 to 21
The messenger carries God's Name and therefore represents God's authority, yet carrying the Name of God does not automatically make the messenger identical with God.
This concept of agency is deeply rooted within Jewish thought. A representative may speak and act with the authority of the one who commissioned him while remaining distinct from the one who sent him.
This becomes especially significant when we listen carefully to Yeshua's own explanation of his works:
“The words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwells in me, He does the works.”
John 14:10
Yeshua does not deny that something divine is taking place through him. Instead, he identifies the source of that divine activity as the Father dwelling within him.
Paul uses remarkably similar language when he writes:
“God was in Messiah, reconciling the world unto Himself.”
2 Corinthians 5:19
This provides an important framework for understanding Paul's statement that “in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” in Colossians 2:9.
The presence of God's fullness within Messiah is an extraordinary claim, but the fact that God dwells within someone does not necessarily mean that the person in whom God dwells becomes identical with God. Paul even prays in Ephesians 3:19 that believers might be “filled with all the fullness of God,” yet no one concludes that believers therefore become God.
Yeshua represents this reality uniquely and supremely, but the distinction between God and the one through whom God reveals Himself remains important.
Jewish History Itself Should Make Us Cautious
A fascinating modern Jewish example demonstrates how messianic expectation, extraordinary religious authority, and claims concerning divine representation can develop without necessarily beginning with the claim that a person is literally God.
Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, commonly known as the Lubavitcher Rebbe, became one of the most influential Jewish leaders of the twentieth century. Toward the end of his life, many followers within the Chabad Lubavitch movement became convinced that he was the promised Messiah.
The proclamation “Yechi Adoneinu Moreinu v'Rabbeinu Melech HaMoshiach,” meaning “Long live our master, our teacher and our Rebbe, King Messiah,” became strongly associated with Chabad messianists.
When the Rebbe died in 1994 without bringing the expected messianic redemption, the movement faced an enormous theological challenge. Some followers abandoned explicit messianic claims, while others continued to believe that Schneerson remained the Messiah and would eventually be revealed again.
Some radical voices went even further and expressed ideas that blurred the distinction between the Rebbe as a uniquely righteous representative of God and the divine presence manifested through him. These ideas have been highly controversial and have been rejected by many Orthodox rabbis, and it would be inaccurate to present such beliefs as the official theology of Chabad.
Nevertheless, the controversy illustrates something important for our discussion.
Jewish religious language has categories for extraordinary human representatives of God. A person may be regarded as a tzaddik, a uniquely righteous leader, a vessel through whom divine presence is manifested, or even, according to some followers, the expected Messiah. None of these categories necessarily require the conclusion that the individual is literally the God of Israel.
This should cause us to be cautious when reading exalted language concerning Yeshua. The existence of divine authority, divine presence, messianic status, or even extraordinary divine representation does not by itself answer the question of divine identity.
Yeshua Is the Image of God
Paul describes Yeshua as “the image of the invisible God” in Colossians 1:15 and again refers to Messiah as “the image of God” in 2 Corinthians 4:4.
The language of image is significant because an image reveals someone who is otherwise unseen.
This helps us understand Yeshua's famous statement:
“He that has seen me has seen the Father.”
John 14:9
This statement is frequently presented as evidence that Yeshua is claiming to be God Himself, yet the following verse provides Yeshua's own explanation:
“The Father that dwells in me, He does the works.”
John 14:10
Yeshua does not say that he is the Father. Instead, he explains that the Father is dwelling and working through him.
To see Yeshua is therefore to encounter the character, authority, works, compassion, justice, and presence of the God whom Yeshua represents.
This does not produce a low view of Messiah. On the contrary, it presents an extraordinarily exalted understanding of Yeshua. He becomes the supreme human revelation of the invisible God, the one through whom the Father makes Himself known in a unique and unparalleled way.
All Authority Has Been Given to Me
After his resurrection, Yeshua makes one of the most extraordinary declarations in the New Testament:
“All authority is given unto me in heaven and in earth.”
Matthew 28:18
We frequently emphasize the phrase “all authority,” and understandably so, because the statement places enormous authority in the hands of Messiah. Yet we should pay equal attention to the words “has been given.”
If authority was given to Yeshua, then there is a Giver from whom that authority originates.
Yeshua makes the same distinction in John:
“For as the Father has life in Himself; so has He given to the Son to have life in himself; and has given him authority to execute judgment also.”
John 5:26 to 27
Peter follows this same pattern when proclaiming Yeshua after the resurrection:
“God has made this same Yeshua, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Messiah.”
Acts 2:36
Paul likewise writes that “God also has highly exalted him” in Philippians 2:9.
Throughout these passages there are consistently two participants. There is God, who gives authority, raises, appoints, and exalts, and there is Yeshua, the Messiah who receives authority, is raised, is appointed, and is exalted.
Recognizing that distinction does not dishonor Yeshua. It honors the testimony Scripture itself gives concerning him.
What Does “God” Actually Mean in Scripture?
At this point we need to address something frequently overlooked when discussing the identity of Yeshua.
When English readers encounter the word “God,” we naturally assume that the word can refer only to the Creator, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Biblical Hebrew, however, uses the word אֱלֹהִים, Elohim, with a broader range of meaning.
Most importantly, the appearance of the word Elohim does not automatically identify someone as YHWH, the God of Israel. Context determines the identity and function of the person or being described.
One of the clearest examples appears when God commissions Moses to confront Pharaoh:
“See, I have made you elohim to Pharaoh, and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet.”
Exodus 7:1
The Hebrew reads:
רְאֵה נְתַתִּיךָ אֱלֹהִים לְפַרְעֹה
Re'eh netaticha elohim le'Pharaoh.
God tells Moses that He has made him elohim to Pharaoh.
Obviously, Moses did not become God. He remained Moses, yet before Pharaoh he functioned as the authorized representative of the God who sent him.
God had already explained this arrangement in Exodus 4:16 when He told Moses concerning Aaron:
“He shall be to you as a mouth, and you shall be to him as God.”
This establishes an important biblical principle. A human being can represent God with such authority that divine terminology can be applied to that individual without transforming that person into the Creator.
Psalm 82 provides another important example:
“I have said, You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High. Nevertheless you shall die like men.”
Psalm 82:6 to 7
The Hebrew word translated “gods” is again Elohim.
There is considerable debate regarding the identity of these elohim. Some understand them as human judges or rulers, while others interpret them as heavenly members of a divine council. Regardless of which interpretation one accepts, the passage demonstrates that the word Elohim itself does not exclusively identify the one supreme God of Israel.
What makes Psalm 82 particularly relevant is that Yeshua himself appealed to this passage.
When Yeshua's opponents accused him of blasphemy, he responded:
“Is it not written in your Torah, ‘I said, you are gods’? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came... say you of him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, I am the Son of God?”
John 10:34 to 36
Yeshua's response is fascinating because he does not simply answer the accusation by declaring, “Yes, I am God.”
Instead, he appeals to Scripture's own use of divine terminology and then describes himself as the one “whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world.”
Once again, we encounter the Sender and the one who was sent.
The same caution must be exercised when approaching the Greek word θεός, Theos, in the New Testament. The word commonly refers to God, but context remains essential. We cannot simply locate the word Theos near Yeshua and assume that every theological question has therefore been settled.
Biblical language allows divine titles, authority, representation, and even God's Name to be associated with agents of God without eliminating the distinction between the agent and the God who commissioned him.
This becomes particularly important before approaching passages such as John 1:1 and John 20:28.
What About “My Lord and My God”?
One of the strongest passages used to identify Yeshua directly as God appears near the end of John's Gospel.
When Thomas encounters the resurrected Yeshua, he responds:
“My Lord and my God.”
John 20:28
This passage deserves to be taken seriously. We should not weaken its language simply because it creates difficulties for our theology.
At the same time, we should not isolate Thomas's confession from the rest of John's Gospel.
Only eleven verses earlier, Yeshua himself had said:
“I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God.”
John 20:17
Earlier in the same Gospel, Yeshua had addressed the Father as “the only true God” in John 17:3.
Whatever Thomas means when he calls Yeshua “my God” must therefore be understood within a Gospel in which Yeshua himself repeatedly distinguishes himself from God and explicitly refers to the Father as his God.
This is precisely why understanding the biblical use of Elohim and Theos becomes important. Divine terminology can communicate authority, representation, status, and the manifestation of God's presence without necessarily erasing the distinction between God and His appointed representative.
Thomas's declaration is therefore important evidence that John presents Yeshua in extraordinarily exalted terms, but the verse should not be used in isolation from John's equally clear statements concerning the God of Yeshua.
What About “The Word Was God”?
John begins his Gospel with some of the most discussed words in all of Scripture:
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
John 1:1
The Greek reads:
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγοςκαὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόνκαὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
En archē ēn ho logos,kai ho logos ēn pros ton theon,kai theos ēn ho logos.
John tells us that the Logos was πρὸς τὸν θεόν, pros ton theon, “with God,” and then states θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος, theos ēn ho logos, traditionally translated “the Word was God.”
Whatever theological conclusion we ultimately reach, both statements must be allowed to stand.
The Logos possesses a divine characterization, yet the Logos is simultaneously described as being “with God.”
This means that the text contains both intimacy and distinction.
It is therefore too simplistic to point to the word Theos and declare that the theological discussion is finished. John's language deserves careful grammatical, literary, and Jewish consideration.
The question is not whether John presents the Logos in divine terms. He clearly does.
The question is what kind of relationship John is describing between the Logos and the God with whom the Logos existed.
That question becomes even more significant when the remainder of John's Gospel repeatedly distinguishes Yeshua from the Father whom Yeshua calls his God.
The Question Is Not Whether Yeshua Is Divine
At this point an important clarification is necessary.
I am not uncomfortable describing Yeshua as divine, provided we carefully define what we mean.
The divine presence operates through him uniquely. The fullness of deity dwells in him. He carries God's authority, reveals God's character, bears God's image, speaks God's words, performs God's works, and fulfills God's redemptive purpose as Messiah.
The question is not whether something profoundly divine is present in Yeshua.
The question is whether carrying divine presence, authority, and representation necessarily makes Yeshua identical with the One God who gave him that authority.
Scripture itself gives us reasons to distinguish those categories.
Moses could be called elohim without becoming YHWH. God's messenger could carry His Name without becoming the One whose Name he carried. Judges could exercise God's judgment without becoming God. Prophets could speak in the first person on behalf of God without becoming the God whose words they proclaimed.
Yeshua is greater than all of these representatives, yet the biblical principle of agency remains important.
Moses was a servant, while Yeshua is the Son. Moses represented God's house, while Messiah is appointed over God's house. Moses delivered Israel from Egypt, while through Messiah God accomplishes a redemption of far greater scope.
The comparison is therefore not one of equality of rank, but of biblical category.
If Scripture already possesses categories in which God's representatives can bear His authority, speak His words, carry His Name, and even receive divine terminology without becoming YHWH Himself, then those categories deserve consideration before we conclude that every divine statement concerning Yeshua means that Yeshua is literally the God of Israel.
One God and One Messiah
Paul gives us one of the clearest formulations of this distinction:
“But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things... and one Lord Yeshua Messiah, by whom are all things.”
1 Corinthians 8:6
These words contain tremendous theological depth.
Paul identifies the “one God” as the Father while identifying Yeshua as the “one Lord,” the Messiah through whom God's purposes are accomplished.
Traditional Trinitarian interpreters have argued that Paul is reformulating the Shema in a way that includes Yeshua within the divine identity, and that interpretation deserves to be acknowledged and examined fairly. Nevertheless, the grammatical distinction remains visible in Paul's language. The Father is identified as the one God, while Yeshua is identified as the one Lord Messiah.
Paul gives us another striking formulation:
“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Messiah Yeshua.”
1 Timothy 2:5
The mediator stands between God and humanity.
The greatness of Yeshua therefore does not require us to erase the distinction between Yeshua and the God whom he represents.
We can confess Yeshua as Messiah, acknowledge him as Lord, believe that the fullness of divinity dwelled within him, recognize him as the image of the invisible God, accept the authority God gave him, and proclaim that God raised and exalted him without necessarily concluding that Yeshua is identical with the God whom Yeshua himself worshiped.
Even the Exalted Messiah Has a God
One possible response to passages in which Yeshua speaks of the Father as his God is to argue that these statements belong primarily to Yeshua's earthly condition.
Revelation makes that explanation more difficult.
In Revelation 3:12, the exalted Yeshua says:
“Him that overcomes will I make a pillar in the temple of my God... and I will write upon him the name of my God...”
Yeshua repeatedly uses the expression “my God.”
This occurs not during his earthly ministry before resurrection, but within the vision of the exalted Messiah.
Paul presents a similar distinction when describing the ultimate completion of Messiah's reign:
“And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto Him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.”
1 Corinthians 15:28
At the culmination of Messiah's reign, the Son remains distinguishable from the One who placed everything beneath his authority, and the Son ultimately subjects himself to God.
This is not a picture of an insignificant Messiah. It is the picture of an exalted Messiah who faithfully accomplishes the mission given to him by God.
Returning to the Shema
For me, this discussion is ultimately not about winning an argument with Christianity, attacking the Trinity, or finding a theological label with which to identify ourselves.
It is about returning to Scripture and allowing the Jewish Messiah to speak within his own Jewish world.
We should be willing to question inherited traditions, including traditions we may have carried with us unknowingly into Messianic Judaism. Wearing a tallit, observing Shabbat, celebrating the moedim, using Hebrew terminology, or attending a Messianic congregation does not automatically mean that we have reconsidered the theological framework through which we interpret Scripture.
At the same time, we must remain humble enough to acknowledge the difficult passages rather than constructing theology only from verses that support what we already believe.
John 1:1 matters.
John 20:28 matters.
Hebrews 1 matters.
Philippians 2 matters.
Colossians 1 matters.
But John 17:3 also matters.
John 20:17 matters.
Mark 12:29 matters.
Acts 2:36 matters.
1 Corinthians 8:6 matters.
1 Timothy 2:5 matters.
Revelation 3:12 matters.
And 1 Corinthians 15:28 matters.
Our understanding of Messiah must be broad enough to account for all of them.
I do not believe that preserving the distinction between Yeshua and the God of Israel diminishes Yeshua. On the contrary, it allows us to appreciate the extraordinary role Scripture actually gives him.
Yeshua does not need to replace God in order to reveal God.
He does not need to be the Father in order to perfectly represent the Father.
He does not need to be the One who gives authority in order to possess the authority that God has given him.
He does not need to be the God of Israel in order to be Israel's Messiah.
Yeshua came from God, spoke the words of God, performed the works of God, carried the authority of God, revealed the character of God, submitted himself completely to the will of God, and ultimately directed humanity toward the God whom he himself worshiped.
Perhaps, then, one of the highest ways we can honor Yeshua is not by making him into the God whom he called “my God,” but by recognizing the extraordinary identity Scripture gives him as the Messiah, the Son, the image of the invisible God, and the uniquely appointed one through whom the Father has made Himself known.
When Yeshua was asked about the greatest commandment, he returned to the confession that had defined Israel for generations:
שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל
Shema Yisrael.
“Hear, O Israel: YHWH our God, YHWH is one.”
That is where Israel begins.
That is where Yeshua began.
And that is where our understanding of Messiah should begin as well.
Comments