The Son of Man, exploring the Biblical concept

Because Israel has been scattered as prophesied, and because it has been also restored to its Promised Land, (taking the Scriptures at their word) we know that we are at a time for testing this foundation of Truth found in the Scriptures of Israel. After all, many have come and gone, claiming they carry the Truth of God or, negating God altogether, they simply say they carry more Truth than any other. But no people on earth, except the Children of Israel, have ever offered a means of verification that they represent Truth. The Holy Scriptures of Israel provide a means of verification of the Truth. And that vehicle — a list of prophesies — is so clearly defined, we hope to show in this work, there can be no doubt that God exists and that He is the source of that list. When the List offering the Truth is fulfilled all should have no problem agreeing that it came from the Children of Israel's Source: God. Why so? The end of the work proclaims a great battle which will be between all the nations who had been against My People Israel. That battle is called Armageddon. It occurs basically before the face of Israel, when Israel is restored back to the map again, having been sifted among all the nations of the world, and its result is a horrifying spectacle of bloodshed capped with fire and brimstone raining down upon the heads of the nations. In this final Truth Israel is protected from harm and saved by God Himself from the belligerence of the nations who were once against them. And before the face of Israel the nations will destroy each other, leaving but a remnant reserved from a field of bodies too many to bury.

While this Truth was perhaps fantastic in the days of its prophets, as long as 3,000 years ago, it seems to be daily gaining more and more credibility in our own time. For we can see the formation of the nations according to the script; and the place they are forming themselves for battle is becoming very crowded and pointing towards Megiddo, as called out in the Script. So the Truth of the Holy Scriptures of Israel may not have to wait much longer to be established if there is any truth in the Scriptures at all. As a result of this prophesied battle, the Scriptures say, God will take the survivors, or Remnant, and they will be his people and He will be their God. And from that day forward all men will know peace. They will turn their swords into fishhooks and their spears into plowshares and war shall be forgotten from then on.

In the formative part of this Truth is the Suffering Messiah, Immanuel, who is born of a Virgin or Maiden. He is born out of wedlock. Because he is in the Scriptures offered as evidence of the Truth, it is necessary to investigate him and his relevance to the scenario just mentioned. Since Jesus of Nazareth is the only man who has claimed to be that Messiah and lived in a time when that Sign, Immanuel, was configured, we are forced to address Him, whether He fulfilled the requirements of that Son of Truth. Was He True to God, the Source of his being, and the Holy Scriptures?

Now we must offer more Truth. The gospels of Jesus show, early in his ministry, a confused Jesus. Two thousand years ago He thought John the Baptist, his cousin, was that Elijah of scripture, whom we just discussed as appearing before the battle of Armageddon, before the Deliverer Messiah. But the Gospel of John, on the other hand, said that John the Baptist denied he was Elijah. Jesus' point of view, described in the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, suggested that he initially thought He was the Deliverer Messiah and the world was about to see its great battle of Armageddon and the fire and brimstone raining out of the sky. Later Jesus discovered that he would be the Suffering Messiah and killed, laid in a tomb for three days, then resurrected: an entirely different scenario.

Jesus, in all the gospels, referred to himself consistently with the title of Son of Man. In his perception of himself he was the Son of God, he claimed that he and the Father were one, and he — at the end of his ministry — proclaimed that He, the Son of Man, would one day return in the clouds of heaven and reign over God's kingdom.

In investigating Jesus as a source of Truth we have to ask whether he was consistent with the Scriptures which created him; and, furthermore, we have to ask whether his disciples followed his teachings truthfully and passed down to this generation a True representation of the Will of the Scriptures. Finally, we have to ask whether Jesus was God Himself. If, for instance, we see a confused Jesus, we must ask whether God could be confused.

Another criteria of bringing forth the Truth in this study is to enquire whether Jesus, or his disciples, had been deceptive or lied. Often when one looks for deception one finds it, particularly among those who claim to be messengers of the Truth. In the Gospel of Matthew we have a record of Jesus claiming to be the Deliverer Messiah, who carries the epitaph of one who does not go into the streets and who does not cause his voice to be heard in the streets; and yet He asked his disciples not to tell anyone he had been in the streets or caused his voice to be heard in the streets! This is deception at its very best and taints the record of Jesus as one who came forth bearing Witness of the Truth. Obviously, should Jesus have been Immanuel and were he to return as the Son of Man in the Clouds of Heaven, as He prophesied, He would first off see this anomaly in the New Testament Scriptures. As the Son of Truth, He ought to be embarrassed by this record in Matthew.

Taking this perception a bit further, He would also notice what we noticed: that the gospels are confused over his life, what he said, who he thought he was, and whom the people thought he was. Most agree that they thought He was Elijah resurrected or a prophet. As concerning the rest of his story, as evidence that He was a True Witness of God, as the Messiah, everything confirming Him as Messiah seems to rest on the facts of His death and resurrection. These facts, say Paul and his modern disciples, prove that Jesus was the Son of God. However, in searching out the Truth of these facts we learn from the gospels themselves that there were no two stories of Jesus' resurrection which matched one another. These stories are so inconsistent, in fact, they could never be accepted in a court of law. We make this statement boldly because the easiest way to prove their inadmissibility is to take them to the Law.

We have not gotten into this study to expose falsehood. We really thought to approach the Gospel record of Jesus and the subsequent teachings of Paul from the standpoint of supporting them. But the facts of the case, once questioned, required us to consider the negative issues surrounding the life and death of Jesus and his disciples, as well as the positive.

In preparing our study we began with a matrix which laid the Four Gospels together on a common mat, showing similarities and dissimilarities. Our purpose here, as with the purpose of all those who have done the same for the past two thousand years, was to determine how much agreement there was between the Four Gospels. The matrix, enclosed as an appendix, speaks for itself. There are major controversies between the Four Gospels. Examination of the matrix will offer evidence of tampering with the Truth. Comparing PaulÕs letters to the Gospels, as we have done, will lead to further confusion and evidence of major tampering with the Truth. Our study began to unfold blatant, unadulterated lies. And upon this foundation — a foundation of lies — is a building built by Paul, and that building is the modern Christian Church.

Before Paul there was a Christian Church built upon Peter, James and the Apostles in Jerusalem, the first disciples of Jesus. That church was originally called the Nazarene Church, taking its name from Jesus the Nazarene. The Church was a peculiar synagogue of Jews. After all Jesus was a Jew and Peter, to whom He delegated the Keys of His Church, was a Jew; and all the other Apostles were Jews. As recorded at the end of the Gospel of Luke, all of them continued teaching Judaism and Jesus as its Messiah, worshipping in the Temple in Jerusalem, until Jerusalem and its temple were destroyed in 70 A.D. We temper this comment with the fact that some of the Apostles suffered martyrdom prior to that date. Peter is believed to have been martyred in Rome circa. 66 A.D. Paul also suffered martyrdom about that time.

During the time Peter and James were leading the Nazarene Church in Jerusalem another man came along and taught the opposite of their teachings. His name was Paul and, being a self-appointed Apostle, he taught that the practices and teachings of Peter and the other Apostles were false. He called them Judaizers, among other terms. He specifically taught that the Law of Moses, which Jesus and His Apostles obeyed, was no longer valid. Furthermore, Paul taught that anyone following the practices of the Jews — or argued that the Jewish Law, or Torah, still applied — would be doing so to their condemnation. Such things as wearing a cap on your head during Church or even wearing long hair, as a Nazarite, a Holy one to the Jews (as seen even in the examples of Jesus and the Baptist) were banned by Paul. On top of this Paul taught that the Jews had forfeited their Inheritance Rights originally promised to them and it was now transferred to Paul's Gentile Church. In Truth, we shall see that Paul created a completely new religion which would be as foreign to Jesus as it would be to its source: the Torah of Moses. After all, in examining the truth of the matter, we find that Jesus derived His legitimacy, as Messiah, from the Torah; and Paul used Jesus as a vehicle of changing law and time, abrogating the Torah, negating all the Promises of Israel, and even justifying the condemnation of Israel. This new Truth of Paul eventually surfaced in a letter by Luther, the great Protestant Reformer, the father of modern Christian Protestant churches. In that Letter Luther advocated basically everything Hitler did to the Jews. In this context, though Luther is regarded as a saint to some people, to history we can say he really was the prophet of Hitler. For Hitler can use Luther as his authority for trying to exterminate the Jews; and Luther can point to Paul as his authority for directing Hitler's persecution of the Jews.

Often the harbingers of truth carry peace on their lips but a sword at their side. In contrast to such messengers of truth there is a character in the Scriptures who is called The Word of God. He overcomes mankind not with the sword but with the weapon of His Mouth. He is called the Deliverer Messiah and the Son of Truth. He knows that the Truth can be far more damaging than any sword.

Let us give you a small example of the Sword of Truth: Just as Paul or Luther may not wish to be confronted with the legacy of Hitler, the truth is their mouths begat that beast.

Like many other books of philosophy and religion which try to persuade you into believing their Truth, this book is also dedicated to understanding that most elusive goal of mankind: Truth. Everyone attempts to cater to it, to hold it and cherish it, but no one can say without question that he possesses the Truth. For the Truth seems to be always changing.

When we attempt to present the Truth it must have some basis of authority to it. Many — like modern philosophers quoting Aristotle and Plato, or Hegel and Thomas Mann — enclose bibliographies with eons of truth to back them up; others, as in days past, simply quoted some Divine Authority. Books from the inner sanctums of Buddhism, for instance, quote their source from a man, Gautama Buddha. Other books from the same school quote him not as a man but God himself who, like Jesus Christ, will return to the earth to lead errant man back on the straight path of Truth.

Lord Krishna is one of interesting alternatives claiming to lead us to Truth. He is one of the earliest Lords who thought to lead man along the correct path. His name translated means the Great Spirit. It is a suitable name for the Wisdom which came out of him in the Divine Hindu scriptures. See our work, The Tapestry of One, on this perspective.

Of all the wise men we have studied, Lao Tzu is perhaps the most amicable — in computer parlance we would call him user friendly. We think that he often sat in a chair, with his feet propped upon the window sill, as he looked out upon the world. Like Buddha he saw much suffering. Like Buddha he concluded that to avoid suffering one ought to remove himself from it: Give up all material things; be simple, be humble and love one another; do unto others as you would have them do unto you were the guiding light of Buddha and Lao Tzu.

These teachings are also traced to Lord Krishna. With Lao Tzu, and later the Buddha, these precepts led a good part of humanity in their daily habits and lives.

Every new Truth breeds another. Confucius came along, seeing that Lao Tzu had separated himself from man, living as a hermit or a monastic way of life, to avoid suffering, and said, That's not the Way. By that time Taoism, which means, The Way, had been firmly entrenched. Confucius concluded that man must reconcile himself to the world and live within it, not separated from it. Thus, a new truth came into being, allowing man to live in society — not separated — according to the Truths of those who had separated themselves from mankind, and that Truth was conceived by Confucius.

Truth must be Eternal, I thought. How could it be that the Truth of Truths could change? Is it possible that there could be yet a greater Truth, one which would stand up to challenges from the past and the future? Is there yet a Truth which can Prove itself, that it reigns over all other truths?

Many men have claimed to be the messengers of Truth. Some have claimed to carry their message of Truth from their god. Among these are the carriers of Divine Truth. And being Divine they must stand up to our criteria of being True for Eternity. Anything claiming to be the Source of an Eternal Truth must, however, be able to back up his truth with evidence that the Truth came from His Divine Being. We compare Lord Krishna. We have a great deal of respect for the wisdom of the Upanishads, from which Lord Krishna comes forth. But can Lord Krishna present his being at any time or place, and do it again and again in such a manner that one has no doubts that the source of his being is Divine? Can Buddha do the same?

We, of course, ought not to ask Lao Tzu or Confucius to stand according to the measure of Divinity, since they did not claim to be from a Divine Source, but from man. But the other Truths of Buddha and Lord Krishna, their followers claim, are from God. And being from God, Lord Krishna and Buddha ought to be able to back up their truth. And they must be able to do it in such a way that no one could doubt that they were the source of that Truth!

Most religions like people to believe in their Divine Source through Faith alone. By Faith you are saved or protected, they generally allege. Usually, for one to receive the beneficence of a Divine Source, the ministry ask you to make an offering. Salvation, or protection, among most of the religions we have examined, costs you money. Some ministers, realizing the unlimited treasures in men's pockets, dedicate themselves to withholding Salvation until their flock's pockets had been satisfactorily emptied. One commune along the Dead Sea concluded that membership in their elite group required giving up all of your material possessions. To join them you must deliver your home, your livestock, etc. to them and these things would be cashed in to be placed into the commune's common coffers. The Commune was not unique to this place or people, however. Neither was it confined to devine purposes.

When comparing all these ways to Truth to another, the Bible, we conclude a Truth of Truths. They all like to endorse the same value: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Love one another as you would have others love you. This, we concluded, must be Divine because everyone in every diverse place received it! Most of them, we conclude, whether Divine or not, contain a good foundation for responsible social behavior.

In our search for Truth we were struck by a claim in the Bible which we have found in no other mythologies, philosophies, or religions offered by man! That claim involves a God who calls Himself I Am. He not only offered a good foundation for social behavior, as is apparent in most other religions and myths, but He also offered a claim that He would Prove that He exists. When He introduced Himself to Moses some 3,500 years ago, He introduced Himself to him as I Am. The common Christian rendering of that name is Jehovah. This, then, is a good foundation for investigating Truth. I Am says He can Prove He is!

Imagine my quandary if you will. I had been looking for Truth for all of my life and had before me a claim saying, I am The Truth and I am The Way and I can Prove it. The Bible, I discovered, not only offered a Divine Plan for mankind's well being, as is the case with most myths and religions, but also recognized that the Truth of the Plan would be best appreciated if Proof of its source were offered. Upon examination we found that the Vehicle for the Proof is clearly defined, not only in its person(s) or agents but also its time and place. In contrast with all other attempts to present the Truth, the Bible concluded that one day clear evidence, not faith alone, will persuade you on the power of God's being. And in this scenario God concluded He would send forth His Wisdom to Prove Himself.

A simple scenario from early myths would be to send Apollo to bring mankind wisdom. The actual scenario chosen by the source of the Bible, on the other hand, offered to send a Savior, to bring Wisdom (and Truth) to mankind, using a character not unlike Apollo. Unlike the Greek myths of Apollo, the Bible chose to offer specific means of recognizing the Saviour sent from Heaven to lead mankind back on the right Way.

The first thing noted about this Saviour sent from God, as listed in the Bible, is the fact that He carries the Wisdom of God; and He attempts to Prove it: His Wisdom is so great that all the wise men put their hands over their mouths, hearing things they had never heard and seeing things they had never before seen. In literal terms He makes the Wisdom of the Wise Men Perish. Thus one can see, in searching for Truth, that only one Source in all man's history has claimed to Prove He exists through such concrete, measurable terms. Again, that Source, in offering His Proof, guarantees you that you will see the Wisest of your Wise men being dumbfounded, because of His Messiah, over what they hear and see. The Messiah, the Christ as Christians know Him, is dedicated to destroying all false teachings in one fell swoop; and He does it not with a glittering sword hanging at his hip, but another sword, the sword of his mouth. False lips shall be stricken dumb, say the scriptures.

The entire issue of religion eventually gets back to the basis of Truth. Truth, that mysterious lady of Wisdom who knows no apparent home, eventually is seen coming not by the sword but by the Word. Ultimately, according to the Bible, all mankind is defeated by the Power of God's Word. Because of this claim, which is like no other claim ever found in mankind's sanctuaries of truth, we concluded that we must investigate it. And this becomes the foundation of our work: to determine whether the God of the Bible has any fellowship in Truth at all. To determine this we must investigate His Messiah.

We search the Messiah out first for good reason: He is the only One in mankind's experience who is recorded as preexisting mankind and, at the same time, He is the only one who has attempted to Prove His eternal nature, that He is Truth! Thus, we hope you can appreciate our conclusion that our investigation of the Truth must reconcile the Bible before any other agenda.

I am a worm and no man. This is the foundation of a series of epitaphs in the Bible which produced a man two thousand years ago who rode into Jerusalem riding upon an ass. He called himself the Son of Man in most of his teachings. His name was Jesus of Nazareth and He claimed to be the Anointed One sent by God. The Anointed One is the English definition of the Hebrew name, Messiah. In Greek The Anointed One is spelled, Christ. Most people recognize the meaning of The Christ, but few (except the rabbis) would see anything significant in the name, The Anointed One. To illustrate the magnitude of this misunderstanding, we ask you to consult the book of Zechariah, chapter 4.14 which says:

These are the Two Anointed Ones that stand beside the Lord of the whole earth.

There is no way to read this passage except to read it as Two Christs who stand beside the Lord of the whole earth. This passage was understood as Two Christs in Jesus' day (see The Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan and The Dead Sea Scrolls) and has continued to be understood as such by the Jewish rabbis today. Any translation of The Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan, a Talmudic work, or the Dead Sea Scrolls will bring up the same conclusion: The Pharisees of Jesus' day believed that Two Christs would be sent to Deliver Israel. This, of course, creates a problem for Christians investigating The Truth, for the Christian foundation believes that Jesus is the Only Begotten Son of God and the Messiah. There can be no other Christ who could compete with Jesus, from the Christian point of view.

We introduce this anomaly of Two Anointed Ones, or Two Christs, into our discussion so to set ourselves on the right road to Truth. If we intend to investigate the Bible as a source of Truth, we must be willing to listen to what it says! Most people tend to read into truths their own preconceived notions. If you are a Christian you would never read in the Bible Two Christs, would you? But you did not write the Bible, did you? Neither did your pastor! And neither you nor your pastor can deny that the Two Anointed Ones described by Zechariah do not translate into Two Christs! Such is the bite of Truth.

What is interesting about the Bible, as a vehicle of Truth, is the fact that it is interdependent upon its own precepts as building blocks to the Truth. No one precept can outweigh the other. The process is marvellous to our eyes.

Let us give you an example from the deepest part of the Bible. In its darkest corridors roams an innocent term called, The Son of Man. Two thousand years ago some priests in Jerusalem heard a man call himself by this name and dove into the Scriptures to find out whom he thought he was. According to the gospels, they found nothing in scripture to cause any concern. Finally, not being able to reconcile the term with anything concrete, they asked the man, Who is this son of man? The answer that came to them was, in so many terms, that I am the Light and while I am here you ought to dwell in it.

From the outset of this work we dedicated ourselves to writing as much as possible the Truth as it unfolds itself. We really have nor have had no bias, excepting, as noted, that we prefer to first exhaust the Truths of the Bible before we attempt other truths. From the outset we intended neither to confirm nor destroy the things we have come to discover.

The peculiar nature of the Bible is that it predicts that it will one day, called the Latter Days, prove its source of Truth. In the Latter Days, says the Lord, you will understand Him perfectly.

In understanding Him perfectly, we began to focus on an unusual character listed in His prophesy: He is a divine being, who can be best summed up as the Suffering Messiah. Because He exists in Scripture it could be expected that someone will one day try to claim that he is that Divine Being. Since Jesus' day and before many tried to claim that Divine Crown and failed. One man came closer than any others however. He was called Jesus and the evidence suggests that he, more than any other, had a firm claim to the Suffering Messiah so clearly described in Isaiah 53 and Psalms 22 and 69. If He is the same character of Isaiah 7.14, born of a Virgin, then He, as the Suffering Messiah offered in the Truth of the Bible, could only come two thousand years ago. Had he not appeared at that moment in time, because of the clarity of the time factor involved, he could never appear again: Because Israel is on the map again, The Suffering Messiah cannot appear again. This aspect of the Messiah sets the foundation of our Truth in the prophesy of the Bible. Israel is on the map again after a two thousand year exile from the Holy Land; their exile is one of the signs listed in prophesy, and before the exile is the Sign of the Virgin; and her sign produces a son who must become the Suffering Messiah. Because of history — not faith, but facts — The Virgin can never appear again. But this is getting a bit ahead of ourselves, and we will further on explain the significance of this sign, as a measure of Truth.

Launching ourselves into the investigation of the Sign of the Virgin, which thing, as mentioned, could only have appeared two thousand years ago before the destruction of Jerusalem, we suddenly came face to face with a man named Jesus who, the Gospels say, claimed to be the son of the Virgin Mary. He never said he was born of a virgin. However, those who wrote his story hung their thesis on this fact, that he is born of the Virgin, and therefore a Divine Sign from God. Since his disciples have made that claim, we are forced to investigate it and its relevance, if any, to the founding of Truth. The Koran (IMRANS 3:45) also recognizes Jesus as that Messiah, strengthening our need for a just inquiry.

Investigating the Sign of the Virgin immediately leads one to her son, a man named Jesus, who claimed to be the Son of God. He really never directly said he was the Son of God, however; but He made so many claims in scripture, fulfilling the List of the Messiah, that there is no doubt that He believed he was the Son of God. Most often Scripture has him claiming to be the Son of David, which thing, taken by the sons of wisdom, would mean Son of God and the Messiah! But in all the conversations recorded of Jesus there is but one common name he called himself by: The Son of Man. Now just who is this Son of Man? The rabbis two thousand years asked this question and we asked it again today.

The key to understanding the Son of Man in scripture, because Jesus called himself by that appellation, falls upon the gospels. For Jesus was either a new Son of Man or he used the term in a new way. Originally the term was used in the book of Job and the Son of man in that book was described as a Maggot: What is man which is a worm [from the womb] and what is the Son of Man which [ends up in the earth eaten] is a maggot? This is the essential thrust of that reference in the book of Job. Not surprisingly, in the prophets to come the Christ begins to voice Himself from the pages of the Scriptures and exclaims: I am a worm and no man. He is the least of all things. This, then, becomes the intent of the prophesies in the Bible: to present a Christ who is of the humblest beginnings yet The Word of God. He is not seen as anything important, denied by those around him; and even his closest friends and family refuse him. Finally, he is killed by God Himself because of the wickedness of my people Israel. And His death is described as an Atonement for sin for all peoples. In the scenario the Christ is configured as a blood sacrifice, as ransom for the life of men.

So what is the Son of Man? He is a worm and no man. And so says chapter 53 of Isaiah, it pleased me to bruise Him, so saith the Lord. Many have claimed to be the Christ of the Jews. Least among them, from the Oral Torah's — the oral teachings of the rabbis through the centuries — point of view is Jesus of Nazareth.

When Jesus rode into Jerusalem on an ass he offended many. For his disciples were running ahead of him crying, Hosanna to the Son of David; Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. Anyone hearing the appellation, Son of David, would know that the disciples were calling that man riding on an ass the Christ. Furthermore, the cry, Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, comes from the Psalms and is a prophesy which applies to the Christ. To become the Christ, a man must be born in Bethlehem, Judah, of the Seed of David, and come riding into Jerusalem upon an ass, the foal of an ass; and to cinch his claim, to make it clear, people proceeding his procession should be uttering the infamous cry, Hosanna, to the Son of David; Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.

This hew and cry, of course, becomes only a means of the Christ to establish his formal claim on Jerusalem. We do not know whether Jesus was the first to perform such a feat; nor do we know of any after him who did the same. It is doubtful that after 134 A.D., after Bar Cochba's rebellion (another figure who was supposed by his disciples to be The Christ), anyone would could have done the same. By that time the Jews were suffering a man hunt. First they were hunted because there was a desire to kill competition to the emperor from the seed of David; and then all men of Judah were either rounded up and shipped to the corners of the Roman empire as slaves or massacred in a general attempt to destroy the seeds of revolution in Judaea. The edict of the time forbade the Jews from getting close enough to Jerusalem to even gaze upon its heights. A general by the name of Turbo — who performed a service to Rome like General Sherman's march to the sea — made sure that all Jews were cleared out of Palestine. He swept through Palestine and left nothing behind but briars and thorns, so Eusebius and others record.

Thus, history says that the Messiah, after 134 A.D., was cut off from making his appearance in the land of Israel. We say he was cut off because one of the most important epithets of the Christ is that concerning a son named Immanuel, who is born of a Virgin. Her sign and her son are configured at a special point in history: they would appear before Israel is scattered and the land turned into briars and thorns. This is a Truth we must all confront one day. For Israel was scattered — even on a far more terrifying scale than prophesied — and now that Israel has been accepted back on the map again we have to ask, as Israel has been asking, where is the Christ?

The Oral Torah dealt with this question over the centuries. Some rabbis concluded that perhaps He came and left without leaving any evidence! Others concluded that He is delayed and waiting for Israel to be returned from Exile. Now that Israel has been returned from exile we wonder what other reason there might be for His Delayed coming.

Christians have been maintaining all along that Jesus is the Christ and he came two thousand years ago and was crucified. The Jews still don't believe. And this brings us to the final aspect of the Truth of the Bible.

Somehow, in the Thesis of the Suffering Messiah, the playwright of the Bible concluded that there was a need for the presentation of the Proof, that he who suffered as the Messiah is the King of Kings and (we can only speculate) the same Messiah as he who comes in the final days, the day of Israel's Restoration to the Holy Land. He who comes in the day of Israel's Restoration is another like unto Moses. And he is called the Deliverer Messiah or King Messiah. He is called in the book of Daniel a prince, named Michael; and he is One who is like unto the Son of Man. Now those of you who are searching for Truth have all the facts: Jesus called himself the Son of Man. The Deliverer Messiah who comes when Israel is Restored to the map again, as today, is One like unto the Son of Man. So who is the Son of Man? Do you see our point? If Jesus is the Son of Man and the Deliverer Messiah is One like the Son of Man, then who is the Son of Man?

A great deal of water has flowed under the pontificate of Rome since Jesus was crucified, and yet no one has attempted to answer the priest's question in the gospel of John: Who is the Son of Man?

Eusebius, writing his history of the Church, seems to have recognized the need to answer the question, but failed to pursue it. He came up with the same similes as those before him: The Son of Man is obviously the Christ.

In Job the Son of Man is compared to a maggot. Actually, the term used in the King James Bible is Worm. But the Masoretic Bible, that of the Jews, calls it a maggot. We have deferred to the Masoretic version because it appears to be closer to the original Hebrew. In the King James version the phrase, what is a man who is a worm and the son of man who is a worm is rendered in the Masoretic version as what is a man who is a worm and the son of man who is a maggot? Apparently the Dead Sea Scrolls, scriptures lost in the sands of the Dead Sea for the past two thousand years, corroborate the Masoretic version; thus we defer to its conception of the Son of Man.

Was Jesus referring to Himself as a maggot?

What a contradictory position he would have been taking! When he focused upon being the Son of Man he also repeatedly maintained that he would be put to death and then raised up after three days. This certainly is not the fate of a man, eaten by maggots, but much rather evidences eternal being.

Having concluded that he would be sacrificed for the atonement of sin — which is a precondition in Isaiah 53 — Jesus concluded that he would have a Second Coming, or visitation, which would represent the Final Judgment of mankind. He characterized his Second Coming as the Son of Man coming in the Clouds of Heaven ( or Glory). The main reference to such a thing in Scripture (coming in the Clouds of Heaven or Glory) is in Daniel 7.13, but Psalm 72 sets his foundation, and I Enoch 48 connects the Son of Man to one who is called the Light of the Gentile. Isaiah 42.6, 61, and 63 display the Light of the Gentile in more detail, showing Him as the Deliverer Messiah — appearing to the Redeemed of Israel — and being one who carries a reed (even a reed of quick learning) in Judgment. He has a peculiar nature: He does not go into the streets, lift up, or cause his voice to be heard in the streets and is seen coming from wearing a robe from Bozrah at the time of God's Wrath against the Nations.

In Daniel that thing which comes in the clouds of heaven in Judgment, to judge the quick and the dead, is One like unto the Son of Man. Oops! Did someone miss the cue? Here then is where the record of Jesus and what he said seems to break down. His Second Coming, to be faithful to the prophets, must never refer to Himself as The Son of Man but rather, One like unto the Son of Man. Ergo: His Second Coming must be as another like Him.

Let us look at the problem of the Messiah from the other end of the perspective: Assume that you are the Deliverer Messiah come at the time Israel is Redeemed to the Holy Land. Before you was a Suffering Messiah: whom we may call the Son of Man. As the Deliverer Messiah, you must identify yourself as One like unto the Son of Man. Although this identity readily points you out as Daniel's Deliverer Messiah, it leaves one question unanswered: If you are one like unto the Son of Man, then who is the Son of Man against whom you are compared? Of course the comparison requires one to juxtapose one Messiah for the other, with one being a similitude of the other. It is like asking, Who's on first? When we ask the question a bit of wisdom comes through: Jesus arrived first and chose to call Himself The Son of Man. He who follows must call Himself One like the Son of Man. Jesus, either by choice or accident, had himself tied into becoming the scale against which the Deliverer Messiah, Light of the Gentile, must weigh!

To appreciate Jesus as the Suffering Messiah one ought to become a Jew. We do not say this with sarcasm but in all sincerity. Jesus was an extremely clever man and left an heritage of comments which would cause the wisest of men the greatest perplexity. The issue of the Son of Man, really a leading issue into the controversy of the Messiah, is an example of his wisdom. Unfortunately, because of biases either towards the Jews or to the Christians, scholars do not look upon Jesus as a Jew answering to Jews. They don't see him being the Wise answering those who claimed to be wiser than he. Whether by wisdom or instinct, Jesus left a legacy only the Deliverer Messiah, because he is designed as a Jew — though drawn out of many waters — can answer and no doubt appreciate.

In our search for Truth we thought about many different ways of getting you to see the perspective of the Deliverer Messiah, so to better evaluate what Jesus had done and also appreciate what the Deliverer Messiah must yet do. We finally concluded that the best way to convey the issue is to take on the Similitude ourselves and ask you to follow along with us in creating the Similitude.

The Similitude of the Messiah, as it turns out, is described in scripture as the Similitude of the sons of men. Daniel was introduced to the Messiah, One like the Son of Man, through a man who had the appearance as one like the similitude of the sons of men. We took this to mean the Similitude of the prophets. In as much as we believed that in Christian terms the Body of Christ, or a person reborn in Christ Jesus, is a perfect Similitude of the Messiah, we thought to use that model, the Similitude of the Christ or Messiah, as our vehicle for examining this work.
Come with us, then, as the Messiah, to investigate this matter of the Bible, a book called Truth.

To the Advocate....

Table of Contents
(Page numbers are as in the original publication)

Preface
Concerning the Investigation of Truth

Israel's Unique Verification of Truth

To the Advocate....

Table of Contents (Page numbers are as in the original publication)

Preface Concerning the Investigation of Truth

Israel's Unique Verification of Truth

Table of Contents
(Page numbers are as in the original publication)

Preface
Concerning the Investigation of Truth