The Christian may claim such as “If you were a 2nd Temple Jew living 100 years before the birth of Jesus, this is what the OT (from Genesis to Malachi) reveals about the Messiah:”
In this section we will show why the Christian Claim of Jesus in the Old testament generally false – yet we will still examine each claim in detail in the following section.
There are two types of contra-indicative prophecy.
Type D is the weakest form because the Christian may claim Jesus will fulfill it “later” (ex. when he returns a second time).
Stronger forms of these types have context in the form of being attached to, or dependent upon, other prophecies.
To understand this categorization principle we will perform a light analysis of Isaiah 7:14; a full analysis wll appear in the section on verse analysis.
Type A refutations would be to point out ways in which the prophecy was completely fulfilled by Hezekiah. This leaves no room, meaning or purpose for Jesus to have a “second fulfillment” because it would no longer be considered a sign, and would invalidate/render meaningless the earlier fulfillment.
Ex. The prophecies in 7:14 and 8:3 were shown to have been completely fulfilled in 2 Kings 16:7-20 and therefore could never apply to Jesus.
Type B (type two) refutations show that because the events surrounding Jesus create an opportunity cost by which he may never be able to fulfill the prophecy, that the prophecy itself could never have been referring to Jesus.
Note: Some christians have claimed that the hebrew word for Jesus means “God With Us” as “Emmanuel” means “God is With us” and therefore Jesus and Emmanuel have the same meaning. This is incorrect; Yehoshua means “God is my salvation” and Emmanuel means “God is with us”. They are categorically not the same meaning and not the same name.
Type C prophecies are related prophecies which Jesus must have fulfilled in order to be granted fulfillment of a prophecy.
So for example, if we state that this is a prophecy about Jesus, then it all has to be about Jesus. Level two examples are prophecies which, in the direct context of the passage, show that the prophecy was fulfilled by Hezekiah and not Jesus: ex. v.16 Before he grows up the two enemies of Ahaz will be defeated ex. v.17 The King of Assyria is shown again to play a central role during this time ex. v.20 The king of Assyria will attack Israel ex. v.21 Animal keeping will be prevalent in Israel ex. v.22 (as a result) “he” will eat curds and honey. ex. v.22 (as a result) everyone (in) the land will eat curds and honey. ex. v.23 the land will become desolate
Going a step deeper, we see that in fact Isaiah 8:3 shows the typology of a prophetic name; these people are Isaiah's sons, whom God commands him to give prophetic names. Thus these signs never could have been prophecies referring to Jesus.
The difference between level two and level three then is, that level two is when Jesus explicitly violated the fulfillment of a prophecy via the opportunity cost of an action, whereby level three is where Jesus explicitly violated the fulfillment of a prophecy via non-action – yet with the added clause that there was a sunset clause on the fulfillment of the prophecy. So when Isaiah states “In that day…” the christian may no longer claim this prophecy may be fulfilled during a proposed second-coming.
Ex. Isaiah 9:6 “And the government will be upon His shoulder.” Christians may claim that while Jesus did not remove foreign rule from Israel in the time of Jesus, he may do so when he returns; Matthew 24:30 “Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” or “so shall he startle many nations; kings shall shut their mouths because of him;” (Septuagint, RSV, Sefaria, etc.)
Following is a reasonable analysis of the individual claims made that Jesus appears in the bible.
This passage is striking because whether or not it states the messiah would be human, it does not say that Jesus would be the Messiah. Therefore, it does not really say what the Christian thinks that it says.
It is very difficult to draw anything out of this passage. None of the original commentary finds this to be specifically messianic, but rather to show that enmity was put between the woman and the serpent in that an advantage was given in order to punish the serpent for his attack against eve. Henceforth, while he would only be able to attack the heel of the woman's seed, they would attack his head.
Ramban eloquently writes the same as any other; “AND THOU SHALT BRUISE THEIR HEEL. This means man will have an advantage over you [the serpent] in the enmity between him and you for he will bruise your head but you will bruise him only in his heel, with which he will crush your brain.” while Ibn Ezra notes “A bet has been omitted from the word rosh (head) in '…they shall bruise thy head.' The verse literally reads, 'They shall bruise thee head.' With a bet it reads, 'They shall bruise thee upon the head.' The bet is to be supplied by the reader. We find the same in 'into the house (bet) of the Lord' (II Kings 12:17) (The verse should read, be-vet Adonai. However, it reads, bet Adonai).
We tentatively assume then, that if this is a messianic passage, it teaches that the house of Israel – if not all men – will be protected, or have an advantage over the serpent. In Or HaChaim we read,
“You may well ask how could the Torah in the same breath as allowing man to avenge himself on the serpent permit it to attack man's heel? What kind of penalty is it for the serpent to be allowed to continue harassing man? The answer is simply that the serpent could have retorted that no one forced Eve to listen to its advice. Our sages (Kidushin 42) have formulated this by asking rhetorically: “When the instructions of the teacher conflict with those of the disciple, whose instructions is one to follow?” If Eve had followed this simple piece of logic there would not have been any unfortunate developments as a result of the serpent's argument. The serpent therefore felt aggrieved that Eve's lack of logic had caused it permanent harm. There is an allusion as to how long this condition of enmity between man and the serpent will continue. As long as man, i.e. Israel, is ראש, deserving of the title “head” by performing G'd's commandments, it will prevail over the tempter called serpent and smash it. On the other hand, when Israel ignores G'd's commandments, the serpent will bite it because Israel has itself become like a heel instead of like a head. ”
This is highly characteristic of other commentaries in that a strong messianic interpretation is completely absent.
Therefore we conclude that this passage should not be used to show that “the messiah would be a man”. However we do not disagree with this as a doctrine, we merely point out that it is useless and convoluted to try to apply this verse to that subject – it is more applicable to use the prophecies surrounding King David, for example, in 1 Chronicles 17:11-14, 2 Chronicles 6:16, 2 Samuel 7:12-13 and numerous other places (Gen 49:10, Jeremiah 23:5; 30:9; Isaiah 9:7; 11:1; Luke 1:32, 69; Acts 13:34; and Revelation 3:7). By these references to the Davidic covenant one may see that the Davidic Messiah would clearly be a human, as he must be of the tribe of Judah. There is no need to crowbar Genesis 3:15 in order to prove this, even if it were possible to do so.
Christians state this is about Jesus. Here's why it's not.
1. It is a statement of the passage itself that it is an Angel who went before them. “I am sending an angel before you…” (23:20). The passage is actually very clear! Angels are exactly created beings, so even a Christian shouldn't be so confused to state that Jesus is an Angel.
2. The idea that “My name is in him” does not mean the angel IS God. It means God's authority is with him. Read it for yourself, the key word is SINCE, or BECAUSE: “He will not pardon your offenses, because my name is in him.”
3. The idea that “My name is in him” does not mean the angel IS God. It means he is NOT God because God said “My,” and “he”. God is specifically delineating between himself and the angel so no one could confuse the two.
4. The continuation in v. 22 again repeats ”…but if you obey him and do all that I say, …“ This shows again the continuing distinction and separation between the two.
5. The idea that God's name can be in, at, on, or with a place, never indicates that (thing) is God. It only ever indicates that God's authority is expressed by that (thing). Here are many verses which show this principle:
In the above, God is not claiming to “be” Israel, neither is he claiming to “be” a city, nor is he claiming to “be” the temple. The meaning of why his name will be there – esp. wrt the Temple, is merely to show Israel that he will be there for them – that his power will be there. Not that Jesus will be sitting in the temple and that Jesus is therefore God – which is de facto the Christian argument for Exodus 23:21-22.
Ibn Ezra also writes, “I have already explained that God’s glorious name is a proper name, as it refers only to the Lord. It is also found as an adjective. Ex. 3:15; 6:3”
The answer according to this opinion of the Rabbis is that this decree was not fulfilled in the days of Moses, and it is with reference to this that Moses said, So that we are distinguished, I and Thy people,399 and G-d answered him, For thou hast found grace in My sight, and I know thee by name,398 and He further said, And all the people among which thou art shall see the work of the Eternal [that I am about to do];400 however, after the death of Moses our Teacher He did send with them the angel. It is with reference to this that Scripture states: And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand, and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him: ‘Art thou for us, or for our adversaries? ‘And he said: ‘Nay, but I am captain of the host of the Eternal; I am now come.’401 And there you will see that Joshua asked him, What saith my lord unto his servant?402 Now the angel did not command Joshua anything in connection with his appearance to him, but merely told him, Put off thy shoe from off thy foot,403 nor did he explain why he came. But the vision was for the purpose of informing Joshua that from now on there would be an angel sent before them to go out in the host in battle. It is with reference to this that he said, I am now come.401 And so did the Sages say in the Tanchuma:404 “The angel said to Joshua: ‘I am he who came in the days of Moses your master, and he pushed me away and did not want me to go with him.’” The Rabbis have also said expressly:405 “The promise that Israel would not be turned over to ‘a captain’ all the days of Moses now became void; thus as soon as Moses died ‘the captain’ returned to his position, for Joshua saw him, as it is said, And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho… And he said, ‘Nay, but I am captain of the host of the Eternal; I am now come.’401 This is why it is said, Behold, I send an angel before thee.” By way of the Truth, [the mystic teachings of the Cabala], this angel they were promised here is the redeeming angel406 in whom is the Great Name, for in Y-a-h the Eternal is an everlasting Rock.407 This is [what He meant when] He said, I am the G-d of Beth-el,408 for it is the custom of the King to dwell in His Palace. He is called mal’ach (angel) because the whole conduct of this world is by that attribute. And our Rabbis have said392 that this is Mattatron, a name which signifies “the guide of the road” — I have already explained this in Seder Bo393 — and this is the sense of the phrase here, [Behold, I send an angel before thee,] to keep thee in the way. — And to bring thee into the place which I have prepared, referring to the Sanctuary, as it is written, the Sanctuary, O Eternal, which Thy hands have established.409 The meaning of the expression: which I have prepared, is “for Myself, to be My holy and beautiful house,”410 for there the Throne is perfect. I will yet mention411 the Rabbis’ meaning in saying that Mattatron’s name [in the sum of letter-numbers] is even as the Name of his Master. His voice is thus the voice of the living G-d, and it is mandatory upon us to hearken to His voice by the mouth of the prophets. Or the meaning may be that “they should not mutilate the shoots” of faith412 and thus come to abandon the Oral Torah, just as the Rabbis have interpreted:413 “And they have spurned the word of the Holy One of Israel414 — this refers to the Oral Torah.” Thus the explanation of the expression, and hearken unto his voice,415 is “to My words.” Similarly He said, But if thou shalt indeed hearken unto his voice, and do all that I speak.416 Onkelos hinted at this, for he translated [‘ki sh’mi b’kirbo’ — for My Name is in him]: “for in My Name is his word,” as he speaks with it. He said, Then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies,416 for even with the attribute of mercy I will be an enemy to them; and an adversary unto thine adversaries — through him, [the angel], through the attribute of justice. Hence He explained, For Mine angel shall go before thee, and bring thee in unto the Amorite etc. and the Canaanite etc. and I will cut him off,417 when he will bring you to them, that we may know that it is He [through the attribute of justice] that will cut them off. He mentioned them in the singular [“and I will cut him off], for He will cut them all off as if they were one man. Now when this angel dwelled in the midst of Israel, the Holy One, blessed be He, would not have said, For I will not go up in the midst of thee418 — [for He said] for My Name is in him, so He was in the midst of Israel! But when they sinned by worshipping the golden calf He wanted to remove His Divine Glory419 from their midst, and that one of His angels should go before them as His messenger, and Moses pleaded for mercy, and He again caused His Divine Glory to dwell amongst them as before. There I will explain the verses, with the help of G-d. The Rabbis have also hinted to this in Midrash Rabbah420 in that section. Thus they said: “Behold, I send an angel. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: ‘The one who guarded the fathers will guard the children.’ And thus you find with Abraham, that when he blessed Isaac he said, He will send His angel before thee.421 In the case of Jacob we find [that he blessed Joseph’s sons by saying], The angel who hath redeemed me etc.422 He said to them: ‘He redeemed me from the hand of Esau; He redeemed me from the hand of Laban; He fed me and sustained me in the years of famine.’ Said the Holy One, blessed be He, to Moses: ‘Now too, the one who guarded the fathers will guard the children,’ as it is said, Behold, I send an angel before thee.” Again the Rabbis have said there clearly:423 “The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel: ‘Be heedful of the messenger, for he does not go back on his mission; he is the attribute of justice, be not rebellious against him, etc.’”415 In any case, according to all authorities the Midrash I have mentioned is true, that as long as Moses lived the angel who was captain of the host402 did not go with them, for Moses filled his place, similarly to that which is said, And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed.424 And in the days of Joshua it was necessary that the angel captain of the host of the Eternal402 come to him to fight their battles, this being Gabriel who fights for them, and this was why Joshua saw him with his sword drawn in his hand,425 because he came to execute vengeance upon the nations, and chastisements upon the peoples.426 For he will not pardon your transgression; for My Name is in him.415 He is saying: “Be not rebellious against him, for he will not pardon your transgression if you rebel against his word, for he who rebels against him, rebels against the Great Name which is in him, and he deserves to be cut off by the attribute of justice.” It is possible that the expression My Name is in Him, is connected to the above verses: hearken to his voice, for My Name is in him, and his voice is the voice of the Supreme One.