People Worshipping Yeshua

GalileeIn a fascinating study, Larry Hurtado examines the ways people in Yeshua’s lifetime exhibited worshipful behavior toward him (How On Earth Did Jesus Become God? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005, pgs. 134-151). To be clear, people would fall on their knees before a king or general or even a landlord to implore their favor. Just because someone in the Gospel accounts knelt before Yeshua or “worshipped” him does not mean they realized he was divine or even that he was the one and only king. They viewed him as a person able to give them something they greatly desired, such as healing or freedom from guilt.

But it is true that after the Gospels were written people would show reverence to Yeshua that was truly worship in the divine sense. It is also true that the Gospel writers, between four and six decades after the events they wrote about, were using stories to comment on issues relevant for their time. It is not surprising, then, that in some cases, they hint in many scenes that kneeling or falling on your face is the truest way to relate to the king that is Yeshua.

Hurtado notes differences in the ways the Gospel writers handle this particular issue. Luke avoids the verb “worship” (“prostrated,” “knelt down”) with reference to people’s posture toward Yeshua until after the resurrection (22:52). In other words, it seems Luke was careful to distinguish between attitudes toward him in the periods before and after his glory was revealed.

Mark has a different approach, one which fits well his ironic Gospel (as Hurtado wryly observes). Those who do obeisance to Yeshua in Mark are the demons (the only ones who correctly grasp Yeshua’s transcendent identity, 5:6) and mocking soldiers pretending he is Caesar for a day (15:19). Mark’s point is indirect, but powerful: people easily miss who Yeshua is and few can see it correctly.

This article is an excerpt from a book I am writing, a discipleship guide for Messianic Jews and Gentiles.It is one of several book projects I have underway right now (a Paul book, a short commentary on Genesis, a short commentary on Matthew). For news and more free excerpts of my work sign up for the MJ Musings Weekly email list here. And for daily notes on readings from Torah and the Gospels sign up for the Daily D’var here.

Yeshua received obeisance or worship only once (some might think surprisingly) in John. It is the blind man in 9:38, returning to thank Yeshua after having caused some notable controversy over him among the elite in Jerusalem. He said, “Lord, I believe,” and then worshipped him — meaning he prostrated himself in front of Yeshua. Hurtado’s comment is that John and Luke are both depicting acts of characters to Yeshua as role models for their audience. Those who have “seen” through faith that Yeshua is the risen Lord should pay homage to his glory and we who have been cured of our blindness should worship him.

Matthew’s use of the verb for worship may be the most interesting of all. Being the first Gospel after Mark, and clearly using Mark as a source, nonetheless Matthew edits the worship verb out of both the demoniac scene and the incident about mocking soldiers. In Matthew 8:28 the two demoniacs “met him” rather than the “worshipped before him” of Mark 5:6. Instead of saying the soldiers “knelt down in worship” as in Mark 15:19, Matthew says “they knelt down and mocked him” (27:29). Matthew’s Gospel is known for having a focus on teaching virtue, scripture, and doctrine.

There are ten scenes in which characters offer reverence toward Yeshua in Matthew (2:2, 8; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 17:6, 14; 28:9, 17). Hurtado singles out the story of Yeshua walking on water as the greatest example of Matthew diverging from the other Gospels to depict worship of the earthly Yeshua. The disciples are bewildered in Mark 6:52 (of course, if you know Mark’s literary style). They were frightened in John 6:16-21 until Yeshua said, “it is I,” in a typical Johannine allusion to Yeshua as the divine “I am.” But in Matthew 14:33 they “worshipped him” and said “Truly you are the Son of God!” (ESV). Of course, in that historical moment the disciples did not truly understand Yeshua’s transcendent identity. They did not actually grasp that Yeshua was Lord of wind and wave or that he shared God’s unique identity. But Matthew’s readers would see the story that way and so what was probably just amazement and awe from the disciples about Yeshua’s miracle is projected into Matthew’s time and context as the appropriate response to Messiah’s greatness.

All four Gospels, then, depict Yeshua as Lord and worthy of worship in their own way.

7 Comments

    1. I do advocate what Trinity stands for, that God’s Nature is differentiated and manifested in three who are one: God, Messiah, Spirit. The Trinity is the best humans have been able to understand something beyond comprehension, how three “persons” share one unique identity. My preference is to use biblical language about God, Messiah, and Spirit or Father, Son, and Spirit.

    2. Oh, and I forgot to add, all Messianic Jewish leaders who are affiliated with a denomination such as the UMJC or IAMCS (and that’s most of us) believe in the Father, Son, and Spirit as divine (Trinity). It is only in splinter movements (Hebrew Roots, One Law, Two House, Sacred Name) where you sometimes (not always) find disagreements with the idea.

      1. Are you familiar with Joe Shulam? As best I understand him he eschews trinitarian language when attempting to describe Yeshua.

  1. “Hebrew Roots” and “One Law” are splinter movements? And then lumping them together with “Sacred Namers”? Not a very fair or kind comment. And in fact, two of the most respected scholars who take a One Torah approach (Tim Hegg & J.K. McKee) do uphold the Trinity. C’mon Derek. You’re better than that.

    1. Rob Roy:

      You have two objections to my comment. So let me treat each separately.

      First, I said Hebrew Roots and One Law are splinter movements. Here is my rationale. Messianic Judaism was started by Jewish people. It was more Christian than Jewish in the beginning (and still is in many places) but still, the founders of MJ are Jewish. Hebrew Roots and One Law movements splintered off from Messianic Judaism. Hence my term “splinter movements.” And they splintered off in some cases because MJ was not teaching Torah obligation for non-Jews and in some cases because people wanted Torah without rabbinic traditions.

      Second, I said “It is only in splinter movements where you sometimes (not always) find disagreements with the idea [of the divinity of Father, Son, and Spirit].” I said sometimes, not always. How would you prefer me to say it?

      1. My response to your points.
        1) You said: “Hebrew Roots and One Law movements splintered off from Messianic Judaism. Hence my term ‘splinter movements.’ And they splintered off in some cases because MJ was not teaching Torah obligation for non-Jews and in some cases because people wanted Torah without rabbinic traditions.”

        Regarding Hebrew Roots, I’m not sure why you view it as having splintered from Messianic Judaism — the Hebrew Roots movement goes back to the 1930s and the Worldwide Church of God (WCOG). It’s primarily a movement within the Christian Church (and has since broadened past its WCOG origins) not Messianic Judaism (which is why most HR congregations don’t follow Rabbinic halacha very closely — not because they want the Torah ‘without rabbinics’).

        Regarding the One-Torah sub movement, can you point to a date when the One-Torah sub-movement “splintered” from Messianic Judaism? Last I checked, the folks over at TorahResource.com (some of whom are indeed Jewish) never sought nor claimed to leave Messianic Judaism. You might disagree with them encouraging non-Jews to keep Torah (2 Jews, 3 opinions), but that doesn’t place them “outside the camp” so to speak.

        2) You said: “It is only in splinter movements where you sometimes (not always) find disagreements with the idea [of the divinity of Father, Son, and Spirit].” I said sometimes, not always. How would you prefer me to say it?”

        I won’t get into those within Messianic Jewish leadership who *have* rejected the divinity of Yeshua. So here’s how I’d make your comment more accurate:

        “Oh, and I forgot to add, all Messianic Jewish leaders who are affiliated with a denomination such as the UMJC or IAMCS, as well as independent Messianic groups such as the One-Torah sub-movement (and that’s most of us), believe in the Father, Son, and Spirit as divine (Trinity) — and this also applies to most teachers in the Hebrew Roots and Two House movements. You really only find disagreement with this idea on the fringes of these movements.”

        See? Treating others fairly and respectfully is so much more edifying. :o)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *