To which Robert Klein, of Jerusalem replied:
<<There are many responses, but the most elegant is based on Exodus 4:22-23
where G-d tells Moses to say to Pharoah, "My son, my first-born, is
Israel...Send forth my son so that he may serve Me..."
The "son" of G-d is Israel. This relationship is a metaphor of mutual love
and devotion.>>
My comment is:
Mr. Klein's citation of Exodus 4:22-23 is offered as a response to the
Christian assertion that all biblical references to the "Son of G-d" must
refer to Jesus. Mr. Klein's response is excellent, yet, insofar as it
applies to the Christian "Jesus", yet it does not exclude the possibilty
that the term "Son of G-d" is still possibly a reference to Messiah, not to
just a reference to Israel.
The fact that Israel is referred to by Hashem in the cited scripture from
Exodus as "b'ni b'chori", "my first born son", does not disprove that
Messiah is the Son of G-d, because, the Messiah, son of David, is an
Israelite himself, and therefore a "Son of G-d" also.
Furthermore, it is very important to consider what we mean when we quote
the Prophet Hoshea as we wrap tefillin each morning: "V'erashtich li
l'olam", "I shall betroth you to me". Messiah, whose seed was present in
the loins of Israel at the time G-d declared Israel to be his first-born
son, is actually a husband to Israel, and therefore, when G-d spoke that
Israel is his first born son, he was actually speaking of the husband, not
the wife. That husband was Mashiach who was yet to come, and his seed was
alive in the people Israel at that time. Though this may seem confusing,
i.e. why would G-d not speak more clearly what he meant, actually, it is no
more confusing than, as he instructed us in Gen. 3:22, the principle that a
husband and wife are one flesh. So too, are Mashiach and Israel one flesh,
and therefore, to speak of one is to speak of both.
Mr. Klein's argument does prove the important point that Mashiach and
Israel cannot be separated. By his reference to Exodus 4:22-23, he clearly
demonstrates that the popular conception of the Christian "Jesus", as a
"Messiah" who is divorced from Israel, and re-married through a "new
covenant" to the Goyim (nations), is a doctrine not founded upon the bible.
Nevertheless, as Jews, in resonding to Christian proselytizers, we must be
careful not to go to the extreme of writing off the existence of the
Messiah altogether. G-d has created Israel as his people, but he has
placed Mashiach on the throne to be our King forever. He does play a
special importance in our destiny with G-d, and cannot forget about the
promise of his Kingdom, simply because the rest of the world misunderstands
him.
Michael Stepakoff
Tampa, Florida