CHRISTOLOGY: THE DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH
by Dr. Arnold G.
This is the fourth Shofar study of Dr. Fruchtenbaum's
Previous studies may be accessed by links
in our Library.
was born, I am ~ John
I am the way, and
the truth, and the life: no one
cometh unto the Father, but by me ~
He that hath seen
me hath seen the Father ~ John 14:9
can be considered more
fundamental than the nature, character and works of
Messiah; and few teachers are able to convey such
truths with the thoroughness, detail, accuracy,
clarity, organization and fluidity that so
characterizes Dr. Fruchtenbaum. So fasten your
seatbelts, and let's continue!
Study 4: Ariel
Ministries' Messianic Bible Study # 14:
WHY DID MESSIAH
HAVE TO DIE?
Dr. Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum
© 1983, 2005 Ariel
Ministries. All rights reserved. This
manuscript is for your
personal use only. No part of this
manuscript may be reproduced in any form,
in brief quotation in a review or
professional work, without written
permission from the publishers.
• Website: www.ariel.org.
This manuscript is
republished by special permission of Ariel
the whole concept of a dying Messiah is so foreign to modern
Judaism, although it was once a part of Judaism, there is a
question that must be answered: “Why did the Messiah have to
die?” In the course of answering this question, a second one
arises: “What is the means of redemption?”
If there is one theme that seems prevalent
throughout the entire Scriptures, it is the theme of redemption
I. ACCORDING TO THE
Redemption became necessary when sin entered the
human sphere and separated man from God. When Adam and Eve
committed that first act of disobedience, sin entered and
separated them from God. From that point on, the means of
bridging the separation of man from God was by means of blood.
This bridging of the gap is called “redemption.” In the history
of God’s dealing with His People, the means of redemption was
always by blood.
The redemptive element of blood begins to come into the theme of
Scripture at the same time that sin does, for until sin came no
blood was necessary.
We read in Genesis 3:21, that just as soon as man is expelled
from the Garden of Eden: Jehovah God
made for Adam and for his wife coats of skins, and clothed them.
The skins were animal skins. The nakedness that the element of
sin now revealed, needed to be covered. But the covering
required the death of several animals, and so for the first time
in history, blood was shed. This provides the root meaning of
the Hebrew word for atonement, which is “a covering.”
The necessity of blood was a lesson soon learned by the sons of
the first human couple. The time came for both Abel and Cain to
bring their sacrifices before God (Gen. 4:3-16). Cain offered
for sacrifice the fruit of his labors in the field. The offering
was vegetable, and it was bloodless. Abel brought a
blood-offering taken from his flock. When God passed judgment on
the two types of offerings, that of Cain was rejected, and that
of Abel was accepted. So a lesson was taught: One cannot
approach God by whatever means one chooses. It is man who sinned
and offended the holy God; it is God who must do the forgiving.
Therefore, it is not for man to choose the means of forgiveness,
but for God, and God has chosen the means to be blood. Cain had
chosen to approach God in his own way, but he was rejected. Abel
chose the way God demanded, and his sacrifice was accepted.
As biblical history develops in the Book of Genesis, we find
that all the ones with whom God was pleased came to Him by means
of blood. Noah immediately offered up blood sacrifices when he
left the ark. He was followed by other great men in Jewish
history: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, all of whom were careful to
approach God by means of blood. When Moses received the Law at
Mount Sinai, the redemptive element of blood ran throughout the
entire Law with its 613 commandments.
A great summary statement for the entire Law is found in The
Third Book of Moses, Leviticus 17:11:
For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it
to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls: for it
is the blood that makes atonement by reason of the life.
It can easily be said that all of the Law revolves around this
one statement. There were commandments which God gave in the Law
that were to be obeyed. Disobedience was sin. If disobedience
did take place, the means of atonement for the sin was blood.
The Book of Leviticus opens by giving great detail to the
different types of blood-sacrifices. All of these different
sacrifices had the same purpose: that the Jew might be rightly
related to God.
All seven feasts of Israel: Passover, Unleavened Bread,
Firstfruits, Pentecost, Trumpets, Day of Atonement, and
Tabernacles required the shedding of blood. The Yom Kippur or
Day of Atonement ceremony was greatly detailed in Leviticus 16,
where careful instructions are given for the shedding of blood
to atone for the sins of the Jewish nation. The Tabernacle and
the Temple both were built to expedite and to make efficient the
required shedding of blood for the atonement of the people’s
sins. The Holy of Holies that contained the Shechinah Glory, the
visible manifestation of the presence of God, could be entered
only once a year by only one man, the high priest. In order for
him to enter, he had to have the blood of the Yom Kippur
sacrifice with him, and this blood had to be sprinkled on the
Ark of the Covenant, which contained the tablets of the Law
This is detailed in Leviticus 16:15-17:
|Then shall he kill the
goat of the sin-offering, that is for the people,
and bring his blood within the veil, and do with his
blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and
sprinkle it upon the mercy-seat, and before the
mercy-seat: and he shall make atonement for the holy
place, because of the uncleannesses of the children
of Israel, and because of their transgressions, even
all their sins: and so shall he do for the tent of
meeting, that dwells with them in the midst of their
uncleannesses. And there shall be no man in the tent
of meeting when he goes in to make atonement in the
holy place, until he come out, and have made
atonement for himself, and for his household, and
for all the assembly of Israel.
And so the principle stood throughout the
remainder of Old Testament history. But it was a burden to the
individual. These blood-sacrifices had to be repeated year in
and year out and they had to be done in the Temple at Jerusalem.
For the Jews living elsewhere in the country, miles from
Jerusalem, it was a burden to come every year to offer their
sacrifices to the Lord for the atonement of their sins. Only the
faithful few, those whom the prophets referred to as the
Remnant, loved God and His Law enough to do so in spite of the
burden it created.
Others built their own altars on mountains and hills closer to
home and offered their sacrifices there. But no atonement was
granted at these rival altars, and the prophets of God railed
against these practices and condemned this deviation from the
Law of God. Many had failed to learn the lesson of Cain: that
one cannot come to God for forgiveness in any way one may
choose, but one must come in the way God Himself has chosen.
It was Isaiah the Prophet who first provided the hope that the
day would come when the yearly burden would be lifted. In Isaiah
53, God declared that the Suffering Servant, the Messiah, would
be the sacrifice for sin.
In Isaiah 53:10-11 we read:
|Yet it pleased Jehovah
to bruise him; he has put him to grief: when you
shall make his soul an offering for sin, he shall
see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the
pleasure of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand. He
shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be
satisfied: by the knowledge of himself shall my
righteous servant justify many; and he shall bear
The point of Isaiah 53 is basically this: the
animal sacrifices under the Mosaic Law were intended to be of
temporary duration, a temporary measure only. God’s intent was
for there to be one final blood-sacrifice and that would be the
sacrifice of the Messiah Himself.
That is why Isaiah 53 uses the same type of
wording, figures and emphasis found in the Book of Leviticus.
For example, in verse 10b we have the expression:
you shall make his soul an offering for
This is a sacrificial concept; these are words that come out of
the Mosaic Law itself.
And in verse 11b we read: by the
knowledge of himself shall my righteous servant justify many;
and he shall bear their iniquities.
Not only are these words of sacrifice used generally in the Old
Testament Law, but more specifically, we read of these very
terms in Leviticus 16, which is the chapter that expounds and
explains all the details regarding the Yom Kippur or Day
of Atonement sacrifice.
This, then, was the reason why Messiah had to die: to provide
the blood-sacrifice for sin once and for all. No longer would
the Jews be burdened with the yearly sacrifices. All a person
would need to do is accept the Messiah’s death on his behalf and
his sins are forgiven. Messiah had to die in order to provide
that atonement, for blood is the means of redemption.
Another key issue is found in these two verses from Isaiah 53.
There is a statement here that is somewhat confusing. Verse 11b
reads: by the knowledge of himself
shall my righteous servant justify many.
A more literal translation from the Hebrew text would read like
this: “the knowledge of him shall my righteous justify many.”
The word for knowledge is a
Hebrew word that emphasizes experiential knowledge, not mere
head knowledge. This is a knowledge of the heart or a knowledge
of faith. Those who have a faith-knowledge of this Servant, by
“the knowledge of him,” that He died for our sins, not
by the knowledge of himself, He will, as a result,
justify us. Justification
means, “to be declared righteous.” We cannot be declared
righteous unless our sins have been atoned for. Our sins can
only be atoned for by the shedding of blood; the Messiah’s blood
would be the final blood that would be sacrificed.
II. ACCORDING TO THE NEW TESTAMENT
The Book of Hebrews in the New Testament is the
counterpart of the Book of Leviticus in the Old Testament. To
understand Hebrews, one must first understand Leviticus. Just as
Leviticus had a central verse in 17:11 around which the entire
book and Law revolved, so the Book of Hebrews also makes the
very same point in its central verse, Hebrews 9:22:
And according to the law, I may almost
say, all things are cleansed with blood, and apart from shedding
of blood there is no remission.
In Leviticus 17:11, the principle was that the blood made
atonement for the soul. In the New Testament, using different
words but giving the same message, it says that
apart from the shedding of blood there is no remission.
All things are cleansed with blood.
The Book of Hebrews was written by a Hebrew believer to a group
of Messianic assemblies in Israel. It picks up the theme of
Leviticus and the prophecy of Isaiah to show the superiority of
the sacrifice of the Messiah. A number of passages bring out
these things. Notice carefully how the author definitely has two
things in the back of his mind: first, the Book of Leviticus
with animal sacrifices; and second, Isaiah 53 with the Messiah
being the final sacrifice.
In Hebrews 2:16-18 we read as follows:
|For verily not to
angels does he give help, but he gives help to the
seed of Abraham. Wherefore it behooved him in all
things to be made like unto his brethren, that he
might become a merciful and faithful high priest in
things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for
the sins of the people. For in that he himself has
suffered being tempted, he is able to succor them
that are tempted.
This passage makes the point that the Messiah
came as a Jew and underwent all the problems that a Jew had to
go through in order that he might become a merciful and
sympathetic high priest. The reason the Messiah came as a Jew
was so that He, too, would live under the Law and take upon
Himself the burden of the Law. He could clearly sympathize with
the Jewish state under the Law.
Another central passage is Hebrews 4:14-15:
|Having then a great
high priest, who has passed through the heavens,
Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our
confession. For we have not a high priest that
cannot be touched with the feeling of our
infirmities; but one that has been in all points
tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
This passage develops further the very same
point that Yeshua (Jesus) is the sympathetic high priest, for He
understands what an individual has to undergo because He Himself
underwent all these things.
Another passage is Hebrews 7:22-25:
|by so much also has
Jesus become the surety of a better covenant. And
they indeed have been made priests many in number,
because that by death they are hindered from
continuing: but he, because he abides for ever, has
his priesthood unchangeable. Wherefore also he is
able to save to the uttermost them that draw near
unto God through him, seeing he ever lives to make
intercession for them.
The superiority of the Priesthood of the Messiah
is pointed out by the fact of the mortality of all other
priests. One high priest would serve, but sooner or later he
would die and a new priest would need to be chosen to begin the
cycle all over again. The life-and-death cycle proved to be a
disadvantage to the old priesthood. The superiority of the
Priesthood of the Messiah is shown in that it abides eternally.
For Jesus was resurrected, and by virtue of that Resurrection,
Jesus remains a high priest forever.
Another shortcoming of the Levitical system of priesthood is
found in Hebrews 7:26-27:
|For such a high priest
became us, holy, guileless, undefiled, separated
from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; who
needs not daily, like those high priests, to offer
up sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for
the sins of the people: for this he did once for
all, when he offered up himself.
This passage indicates that the sacrifices had
to be repeated day in and day out, year in and year out. The
Messiah was to be the once for all sacrifice for sin. This is
what happened when Jesus came and offered up His own blood as
the atonement for sin.
Also, in the old order of priesthood, the high
priest had to sacrifice and shed blood for his own sins first
before he could sacrifice and shed blood to make atonement for
the sins of the people. Since Yeshua was sinless, He did not
need to first atone for His own sins, but with His own blood
made atonement for all who would accept it. He made atonement
for the whole world, of course, but the atonement is only
applied to those who would believe.
The first disadvantage of the Levitical Priesthood was that the
priests would eventually die. The second disadvantage of the old
system was that sacrifices had to be repeated year in and year
out. The third disadvantage was that the earthly priest had to
atone for his own sins before he could atone for the sins of
anyone else. In dealing with the priesthood we have through
Jesus the Messiah, all three of these disadvantages rectified.
First, since Jesus by virtue of His Resurrection now lives
forever, we never have an interrupted priesthood.
Secondly, since this was Messiah’s innocent blood, this was a
one-time shedding. Never again will Yeshua have to shed His
blood. So another clear advantage over the Mosaic Law is that
the sacrifice of the Messiah does not need to be repeated, it
was once and for all.
The third situation lies in the fact that, whereas in the Old
Testament system, the earthly priest had to atone for his own
sins. That was not the case with our Messiah since our Messiah
is a sinless Messiah. There is no need to have Yeshua first
offer up a sacrifice for His own sins and then offer up a
sacrifice for the sins of the others. In other words, our High
Priest is a sinless priest, whereas the Levitical Priesthood was
a sinful priesthood.
The concept of the question of why the Messiah had to die in the
Book of Hebrews is kept in strict conformity with that which was
demanded by the Book of Leviticus and by the hope of Isaiah 53.
That which the Old Testament hoped for was found in the New
Testament in complete fulfillment by the death of the Messiah.
The superiority of the Messiah as over against all other
sacrifices is pointed out in Hebrews 9:11-15:
|But Christ having come
a high priest of the good things to come, through
the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made
with hands, that is to say, not of this creation,
nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but
through his own blood, entered in once for all into
the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption.
For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the ashes
of a heifer sprinkling them that have been defiled,
sanctify unto the cleanness of the flesh: how much
more shall the blood of Christ, who through the
eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto
God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to
serve the living God? And for this cause he is the
mediator of a new covenant, that a death having
taken place for the redemption of the transgressions
that were under the first covenant, they that have
been called may receive the promise of the eternal
Unlike the animal sacrifices, the sacrifice of
Jesus was to bring eternal redemption rather than temporary
atonement. This is the fourth distinction between the two
Furthermore, even after the animal sacrifice, the Jew was still
conscious of his sins. Faith in the sacrifice of Jesus, however,
brings a complete cleansing of the conscience of sins. This is
the fifth contrast.
Another passage is found in Hebrews 9:28:
so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of
many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that
wait for him, unto salvation.
Here the twofold aspect of the Messiah’s career is pointed out.
Yeshua first came to be the sin-offering for the people, just as
the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 needed to be. Also, just as
the Suffering Servant was the One who bore the sins of many,
Yeshua did so through His death. Then, the verse states that
Yeshua will come a second time for a different purpose. The
purpose of the First Coming was to die for sin. The purpose of
the Second Coming will be to establish the Messianic Kingdom.
Once again, a contrast is drawn between the animal sacrifices
and the blood-sacrifice of Jesus in Hebrews 10:1-4:
|For the law having a
shadow of the good things to come, not the very
image of the things, can never with the same
sacrifices year by year, which they offer
continually, make perfect them that draw nigh. Else
would they not have ceased to be offered? because
the worshippers, having been once cleansed, would
have had no more consciousness of sins. But in those
sacrifices there is a remembrance made of sins year
by year. For it is impossible that the blood of
bulls and goats should take away sins.
The animal sacrifices had to be repeated year in
and year out. While these sacrifices provided temporary
atonement, they never provided permanent forgiveness of sins.
Rather, the yearly sacrifices served to remind the Jewish person
of his sins; he knew he would have to bring another sacrifice
the next year as well. The consciousness of sins was still
there. But the sacrifice of Jesus was once and for all and never
needs to be repeated. Acceptance of the sacrifice of Jesus does
not bring temporary atonement but permanent forgiveness. By
accepting the substitutionary death of Yeshua for one’s sins,
one is not continually reminded of those sins, but one receives
a complete cleansing. That is why the sacrifice of Yeshua is so
superior to the animal sacrifices of the old system.
The last passage is found in Hebrews 10:10-14:
|By which will we have
been sanctified through the offering of the body of
Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest indeed
stands day by day ministering and offering
oftentimes the same sacrifices, the which can never
take away sins: but he, when he had offered one
sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right
hand of God; henceforth expecting till his enemies
be made the footstool of his feet. For by one
offering he has perfected for ever them that are
This passage again points out how the high
priest had to sacrifice day in and day out, and his work was
never done. The high priest is viewed as “standing” to indicate
this unfinished ministry. But Jesus, who offered Himself as a
sacrifice once and for all, is viewed as “sitting at the right
hand of God,” thus showing that His work is complete.
Furthermore, the animal sacrifices provided a yearly atonement
but never permanently took away sins. But those who accept the
sacrifice of Jesus are perfected for
ever; their sins are permanently removed.
As to the question, “Why did the Messiah have to die?” according
to the New Testament, the reason is twofold: first, to fulfill
all Old Testament prophecies and requirements, and secondly, to
bring in a permanent atonement rather than a temporary one.
The conclusion of both the Old and New
Testaments is that the means of redemption was by blood, and the
permanent blood-sacrifice was to be the Messiah Himself. That is
why the Messiah had to die according to the Old Testament. That
is why Yeshua did die according to the New Testament. Who killed
Yeshua was never the issue as far as the New Testament was
concerned, for the Messiah had to die. It only became an issue
years later because of anti-Semites seeking excuses to persecute
the Jews. The only issue in the New Testament itself is whether
or not one will accept the substitutionary sacrifice of Yeshua
III. JEWISH OBJECTIONS
A. What Kind of God Do You Have?
Some Jewish objections to the Messiahship of
Jesus rest on questioning the Virgin Birth and Jesus’
Resurrection from the dead. Objections to these two matters are,
however, not the real issue in themselves. The real issue is
what kind of God one believes in. The question is not: “Is such
a thing as the Virgin Birth possible?” Or, “Is such a thing as
resurrection from death possible?” From the strictly human
viewpoint, they are not. The real question is, “Can God do such
things?” If He cannot, He is not much of a God. But God is God,
and from all that this particular title infers, includes, and
indicates, He can do anything He wants to do. The only possible
limits to God are the limits He places on Himself.
If God is all-powerful, things like the Virgin Birth and the
Resurrection are easy things for Him to accomplish. It is an
amazing inconsistency to allow that God has created the heavens
and the earth and then to doubt His ability to bring about a
Virgin Birth. If He can create the wonder and vastness of the
universe and all the complexity of the single cell, the Virgin
Birth and the Resurrection are very simple matters. For a Jew
who believes in God, there is no reason to doubt the miracle of
the Virgin Birth. The real question is, “Did it happen with the
birth of Yeshua?” The Old Testament said that it would happen
with the Messiah. The New Testament said that it did happen with
Jesus Did Not Bring Peace
The most common objection one hears to the
Messiahship of Jesus is this: He could not be the Messiah since
He did not bring peace. Well, since He was not accepted, He
could not very well bring peace, could He? Furthermore, the
purpose of the Messiah’s First Coming, or as the early rabbis
would have it, the purpose of the coming of the first Messiah,
Messiah, the Son of Joseph, was not to bring peace but to suffer
and die. Peace would come through the coming of the second
Messiah, Messiah, the Son of David, or as the New Testament
would have it, by the Second Coming of the Messiah. So the
Messiahship of Jesus must first be judged on whether He did
suffer and die for sin, and then on whether those who believed
in Him received their justification and forgiveness of sins.
That He suffered and died for the sins of Israel is the
testimony of the eyewitness accounts we have in the New
Testament. That Jews have been receiving and experiencing the
forgiveness of their sins through faith in the substitutionary
death of Jesus has been testified by many. Both Talmudic Judaism
and the New Testament agree that there would be one coming of a
Messiah to suffer and die, which would precede the coming of a
Messiah to bring peace. The point of difference is in the
formers’ claim of two different Messiahs, and the latter’s’
claim of one and the same person, Yeshua. So while it is true
that Jesus did not bring peace, that was not the purpose of the
Messiah’s First Coming. This is not a valid argument against His
Messiahship, for Jesus will yet come again and will yet bring
Theological objections to Jesus by rabbinical
authorities have all repeatedly attacked the same areas so as to
become stereotyped. These will usually center on the question of
three things: first, the Virgin Birth; secondly, the claim of
Jesus to be the Son of God; and thirdly, the fact that Jews
cannot believe that a man can become God. Objections to the
Virgin Birth have already been dealt with in this study. The
kind of God one believes in is still an issue.
As to the claim of Yeshua to be the Son of God, one objection
reads like this: “The New Testament knows Jesus as the son of
God and as Messiah. Judaism, however, does not acknowledge a son
of God who was set apart and elevated above other human beings.
The Jewish conviction is that all men are equal before God, and
no mortal can claim divinity.”
Here is an example of how the Messiahship of Jesus is judged
purely on the basis of modern Judaism. “Jesus could not be the
Messiah,” the writer says, “since Judaism does not acknowledge a
Son of God to begin with.” The writer would have been more
honest had he said that Judaism, as he knows it, which is only
modern Judaism, does not acknowledge a Son of God. In the case
of Reform Judaism, there would be no Messiah at all! The writer
effectively ignores centuries of Jewish theological treatments
that certainly do treat the Messiah as being a Son of God. Had
the writer taken the time to look at the early rabbinical
interpretations of Psalm 2, they would have shown him not to
make such a rash statement. The Old Testament, which is the
basis of Judaism, did teach that God would have a Son. That Son
is the Messiah Himself. The issue is not whether Judaism
acknowledges it or not. The issue is whether the Bible teaches
it, and the Old Testament certainly teaches it loud and clear!
And, of course, Jews cannot believe that any man could become
God, and that is why Jews cannot accept Yeshua. To begin with,
the fact that a man cannot become God is very true, and no man
can claim divinity. This is where modern Judaism has
misconstrued the teachings of the New Testament. The New
Testament never claimed that Yeshua was a man who became God.
This is heresy. This goes contrary to Judaism of any form:
biblical, rabbinical or otherwise, and it also goes contrary to
the faith in the Messiah. Neither the New Testament nor Yeshua
ever taught that there was a man who became God.
The New Testament claims the reverse: It was God who became a
man in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. If God became a man,
this man would certainly be superior to other men. He would now
be the God-Man. Certainly Judaism does not dare claim that God
cannot become a man if He wanted to. The God of biblical Judaism
is all-powerful. God can do anything He wants to. If there is
anything God cannot do, He is less than God. So the real
question is: “Did God choose to become a man?” not, “Can He?”
The New Testament claim is that, yes, God did become a man. It
is amazing how so many rabbinical writings about Jesus refuse to
discuss this very point and insist on discussing how could a man
Other common objections also miss the real point. One such
objection is the fact that Yeshua forgave sins, which is
something only God can do. Again, this is true, only God can
forgive sins. But if Yeshua were the God-Man, God who became a
man, the forgiving of sins would be part of the authority of
Another objection of this nature centers around the fact that
Jesus performed His miracles in His own name. First of all, it
might be said that many times Jesus claimed that He was doing
His miracles by the power and authority of the Spirit of God. It
is true that the prophets did miracles and gave God the credit,
but again, the Messiah was not going to be just another man or
just another prophet. Rabbinical theories taught that the
Messiah, because He had the name of God Himself, would be able
to do things in His own name. That is why the Messiah kept
playing such a prominent role in rabbinical theology. That is
why the Jewish people throughout the centuries before modern
liberalism crept into Judaism, continually looked forward to the
coming of the Jewish Messiah. The Messiah would have such
authority and such power that He would be able to accomplish
great things in His own name. Jesus claimed to be that Messiah
and so should, in fact, have been able to do those things in His
own name. Jesus did accomplish those things in His own name. By
doing so in His own name, He substantiates His Messiahship
rather than disproving it.
All scriptures are in the
American Standard Version unless otherwise noted.
enjoyed this Bible study, Dr. Fruchtenbaum
recommends the following messianic Bible studies
mbs 003: The Basis of the Second Coming of the
mbs 007: Jews, Gentiles, and Christians
mbs 011: The
Suffering of Messiah of Isaiah 53
mbs 012: The Messiah of the Old
mbs 013: What the New Testament Says About Jesus
016: Nicodemus, A Rabbi's Quest
026: Zionism: What It Is and What It Is Not
mbs 087: The Book of Romans and the Jews
Also the Ariel series on Christology by Dr. Fruchtenbaum.
Many of Dr.
Fruchtenbaum's studies are available for free online
listening at Ariel Ministries' Come and See. All of
his materials are
available for purchase at Ariel
Ministries in various formats.
Other select materials and resources are
available at Ariel, as well.
Fruchtenbaum, Th.M, Ph.D,
is founder and director of Ariel Ministries.
Return to Home Page