THE SHOOB HERESY
Denying the Incarnation and the New Testament
The New Heresy in Town
There is a 'new' heresy in town (in reality its just a revamped old one) which is doing the rounds of both the Messianic Movemant and in Orthodox Christianity. It was started by an ex-'messianic' called Scott Shoob who has created an organisation called Beit Tefillah which literally means the 'House of Self-evaluation/Self-judgment/Introspection'. He is spreading videos of his teachings on YouTube and images like the one below, designed to get believers to question the validity of the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament) and Yah'shua the Messiah (Jesus Christ):
A false statement being circulated by Shoob on the internet
More and More Messianics Denying Messiah's Deity
In a nutshell, Shoob claims that the Tanakh (Old Testament) repudiates the need for the kind of Saviour or Deliverer described in the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament) and says that the latter is a complete work of fiction. As a former 'Messianic' Shoob was already a heretic and unsaved, denying the deity of Messiah, a dark trend in the modern messianic moverment that is not only leading to its harsh judgment but will also lead to its destruction. According to one Messianic Jew I know living in Germany, almost no messianic congregation in his country believes in the deity of Messiah any longer, or is otherwise neutral about the matter. Messianic heresies are, sadly, multiplying making a careful watch on them absolutely necessary.
No Salvation Without Yah'shua Being Elohim
ANY TEACHING THAT DENIES THE DEITY OF YAH'SHUA THE MESSIAH (JESUS CHRIST) IS RANK HERESY and this has been the position of Messianic Evangelicals since the day of the foundation of this ministry in 1987. We are first of all, evangelical, and second, messianic - Torah-obedient Evangelical Christians. Indeed, I will further categorically state that it is my firm conviction that those who believe that Yah'shua as the Messiah (Jesus Christ) was 100 per cent human and lacking in any sort of deity are not born again or spiritually regenerated but remain in their sins as unsaved persons in need of the Besorah (Gospel). Without the deity of Messiah - without confessing that He is Elohim (God) - there is no Besorah (Gospel) and without the Good News of the New Testament there is no hope.
Catching Heresy While It is Young
It is not my purpose to examine every teaching of Scott Shoob. There are others doing this admirably well and I would refer enquirers about this latest set of false teachings to a very good preliminary article by Come Out of Her Ministries . I am sure others will do the same. My purpose is to solely refute the claims made in the image above that containing six statements and six counter statements which is being circulated over the internet and will, if not nipped in the bud, potentially cause considerable confusion, though I suspect those who will be most vulnerable will be messianics who already deny the deity of Messiah - Shoob seems determined to get them to deny the whole of the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament) too. I am grateful to Alexander Weiß (Weiss) who, as an independent messianic expert in Judaica and who holds firmly to the deity of Messiah , I asked to make a brief review of Shoob's six statements and counter-statements.
Not the First Heretic of This Kind
Scott Shoob is hardly the first to deny the deity of Messiah and the Messianic Scriptures. Non-Messianic Jews have been doing it for centuries. Any serious work countering Orthodox Judaism's claims will almost certainly cover Shoob's objections better than I could, to which end I refer you to our Messianic Jewish page and to the links there. You will soon see how shoddy Shoob's 'scholarship' is.
We will start with the titles on this statement. There is no disputing the first one which is clearly what an acceptable sacrifice is according to the Levitical system. We have nothing to say against the first column of six statements on the left-hand side. But is the header on the second or right-hand column - 'COMPLETELY UNacceptable' - justified? That will depend on what STANDARD you are following and as Shoob gives no definition of the standard he is using to make such a claim, there is no objective way with which to compare the two. But as Weiß points out:
1. 'Severely Whipped and (Blemished) HUMAN'
Are you reasoning according to YHWH’s standards or yours? If, let us assume, your reasonings were correct according to YHWH’s standards, you would still be committing a logical fallacy, since Yeshua never professed that His redemptional work would be performed under Levitical standards. The Levitical service (earthly, COPY) was given in order for us to understand the service after the order of Melchizedek (heavenly, ORIGINAL) and enable us to live our lives as a living sacrifice for YHWH.
The implication here made by Shoob is that for Yah'shua (Jesus) to be a proper sacrificial offering He needed to be unblemished - without so much as a mark on His flesh - whereas, in fact, He had been scourged to within an inch of his life by soldiers with whips and had a crown of thorns placed on His head. But before we can even make a comparison between these two statements, we have to first of all address the question as to why Yahweh commands a tamim (blameless) offering be made for sacrifice? Weiß explains:
2. 'Nailed to a Tree and Allowed to Die a Slow Death'
Firstly, as mentioned, Yeshua’s redemptional work has not been performed under Levitical standards. Secondly, was the Father concerned for the physical perfection of His incarnated, only Son, or was He rather focused on and delighted by the moral perfection of Him?
The physical perfection of the "blameless (tamim) lamb'" is a prophetic announcement of the moral perfection of "the Lamb of Elohim (God)" that takes away the sin of the world.
Isaiah 53:9b "because He had done no violence, neither was any deceit in His mouth."
Genesis 17:1 "And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, YHWH appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty Elohim (God); walk before Me, and be thou perfect "[tamim)."
The physical blamelessness/perfection of the animal sacrifices, were
Let us take a look at Psalm 40:6-8 to explain the concept of 'physical (Levitical) perfection' with regard to 'moral perfection':
- 1. TEMPORARY atonements in order to TEMPORARILY placate the wrath and justice of YHWH;
- 2. Prophetic, symbolic foreshadowings of the MORAL BLAMELESSNESS of the ultimate and MORALLY BLAMELESS only Son of YHWH who never sinned.
Verse 6 does not mean that YHWH never accepted animal offerings, He did; the Psalmist wants to convey the stark contrast and weakness of animal offerings in comparison to fulfilling YHWH's will wholeheartedly. Once they (the animal offerings) had fulfilled their function, i.e. being prophetic foreshadowings until the PERFECTION of these foreshadowings came, i.e. His only Son Yeshua, He put them away. Now, after the Son had performed this perfect sacrifice, the temple was utterly destroyed and Levitical animal sacrifices have not been performed for 2000 years – this is absolutely unique in the course of the history of Israel – everything exactly AFTER the Messiah and Son offered Himself up as a perfect (tamim) sacrifice for the sins of the world. Coincidence? Can YHWH speak louder in favour of His Son? The historical reality leaves no room for discussion.
"6 Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; a body thou hast prepared for me and sin offering hast thou not required. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my Elohim (God): yea, thy torah (law) is within my heart."
Verse 7 and 8 define in what YHWH delights – it is fulfilling His mitzvot (commandments) wholeheartedly. The animal offerings were a means to an end, a foreshadowing and NOT the perfection – TEMPORARY soothing of the wrath and justice of YHWH until the perfection and fulfillment thereof would become a reality – Yeshua.
The same logical fallacy obtains in Shoob's second premise as in the first. Weiß comments:
The sacrifice was not performed under Levitical standards. Yeshua offered His blood in the original temple in Heaven and not on earth. Who 'allowed' Him to die a slow death? He actually died much quicker than any other person hanged on a tree, because He had authority "to give His life and to take it back". No one took it from Him. He suffered only as long as it was required to pay for all the sins of the world.
3. 'Placed in a Grave'
As previously, this remains a logical logical fallacy in ´Shoob's premise. The sacrifice was not performed under Levitical standards.
4. 'Completed by Wicked/Lawless Pagan Romans'
As in his earlier statements, this statement remains a logical logical fallacy. The sacrifice was not performed under Levitical standards. Weiß notes:
5. 'NOT in the Place where Elohim Chooses'
Historically, yes. But universally, the offering was performed by every human being who ever lived, because our sins offered Yeshua. In a sense, everyone of us was the 'Levites and priests' who wanted to see Him dead, and the Romans who whipped Him (with our sins) and nailed Him to that tree by our iniquities.
Same logical fallacy in Shoob's premise. The sacrifice was not performed under Levitical standards. Weiß adds:
6. 'HUMAN Sacrifice – ABOMINATION'
Elohim (God) definitely chose the place "Golgotha", because the 'head-money'” everyone of us owes YHWH because of our sins was paid there in full, and the "head" of the serpent was crushed there, as Genesis 3:15 prophesied. Every tiny step of the only son of YHWH was watched and conducted by the Father.
Same logical fallacy in Shoob's premise as previously. The sacrifice was not performed under Levitical standards. Weiß in conclusion:
The Forbidden Chapter in the Book of Isaiah
The Jewish Encylopedia, in the section 'Suffering or Death of the Righteous', states:
Now if the death and suffering of righteous (yet sinful) persons can temporarily appease the wrath of YHWH, how much more can the perfect, tamim, absolutely sinless suffering and death of the only Son of YHWH eternally pay for all sins that have ever been committed?
"That the death of the righteous atones is learned from II Sam. xxi. 14, which says that after the burial of Saul and Jonathan 'God was entreated for the land' (Pesi. xxvii. 174b). 'Where there are no righteous men in a generation to atone for the people, innocent school-children are taken away' (Shab. 33b). So also does the suffering of the righteous atone; as in the case of Ezekiel (Sanh. 39a) and Job (Ex. R. xxi.). R. Judah haNasi's suffering saved his contemporaries from calamities (Gen. R. 96). God is the King whose wrath is, in Prov. xvi. 14, referred to "as messengers of death," and the wise man who makes Atonement for it is Moses, who pacifies Him by prayer (Ex. R. xliii.). The death of Israel at the hands of his persecutors is an atoning sacrifice (Sifre, Deut. 333)."
YHWH does not accept human suffering for the sins of humans? You (Shoob) do err, because you don’t know the Scriptures nor the power of YHWH:
The word the LXX (Septuagint) uses for "purge" is katharizo (G2513), the Thayer definition for it is:
Isaiah 53:5 "for the transgression of My people was HE stricken. The chastisement of our Shalom (Peace) was upon HIM and by HIS bruises we are healed"
Isaiah 53:10 "YHWH also is pleased to purge him from his stroke. If YOU (a person) can give an offering for sin, your soul (i.e. a person) shall see a long-lived seed" (Brenton LXX)
- 1. to make clean, cleanse:
- a. from physical stain and dirt;
- b. in a moral sense.
- 2. to pronounce clean in a Levitical sense.
Isaiah 53, the 'forbidden' chapter in Judaism which is unmistakably pointing to Yah'shua (Jesus), is causing a revival amongst Jews in the Israeli Republic, as well it might, as religious Jews overcome the taboos instilled into them by their rabbis. There can be no doubt that the navi (prophet) Isaiah is proclaiming a human sacrifice, one that was foreshadowed generations earlier when Yahweh commanded Abraham to make a human offering of his son Isaac. Why did He not allow him to carry it out to its conclusion? Because:
- 1. It was a test of faithfulness and love; and
- 2. To give his navi (prophet) a vision and taste of what He, the Father, would be required to do with His Son in order to destroy sin and reverse the curse.
As Weiß strongly hints, we must be careful not to confuse categories - the two columns cannot be directly contrasted with the expectation that they be identical because the first column consists of carnal (Levitical) ordinances and the second one is spiritual (Melchizedekian). Shadows are never exact representations of the reality they are portraying or prophesying, not can they ever be.
Explaining the Messianic Qorban
The sacrifice (qorban) of Messiah is one of the chief themes of the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament) and one that carnal men like Shoob repeatedly stumble over. His saving work is sometimes spoken of in ethical, sometimes in penal, and often also in sacrificial terms. He is spoken of as the slain lamb of Elohim (God), whose precious blood (life) takes away the sin of the world (Jn.1:29,36; 1 Pet.1:18-19; Rev.5:6-10; 13:8)- a lamb being used in various sacrifices . More specifically, He is spoken of as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor.5:6-8), as a sin-offering (peri hamartias - Rom.8:3; cp. LXX Lev.5:6-7,11; 9:2-3; Ps.40:6, etc.) and in Hebrews 9-10 as the fulfilment of the covenant sacrifices of Exodus 24, the red heifer of Numbers 19, and the Day of Atonements offerings. The Messianic Scriptures (New Testament) constantly and consistently identity Yah'shua (Jesus) with the suffering Servant of Isaiah 52 & 53, who is a guilt offering (Is.53:10) and with the Messiah (Christ) of Daniel 9, who is to atone for iniquity (Dan.9:24). The Messianic Scriptures (New Testament) use the terms 'propitiate' and 'ransom' of Messiah in a sacrificial sense, and the idea of being cleansed by His blood (1 Jn.1:7; Heb. passim) is sacrificial.
The Early Jewish Belief in an Atoning Messiah
That the Messiah was a man who would be a qorban sacrifice was believed in Judaism both before and while Yah'shua (Jesus) was alive in mortality is proven by the Isaiah Targum of His day. The Masoretes attempted to surreptitiously mutilate this plain meaning by altering key words in the Book of Isaiah to deflect truth-seekers away from Yah'shua (Jesus).
The Revelation That is the Epistle to the Hebrews
The doctrine of messianic sacrifice is the most fully worked out in the Epistle to the Hebrews. The writer, believed by many to be Paul, stresses the importance, in Messiah's sacrifice, of His death (Heb.2:9,14; 9:15-17,22,25-28; 13:12,20), and the fact that His sacrifice is over (Heb.1:3; 9:12,25-28; 10:10,12-14,18). The Epistle confines Messiah's priesthood and sanctuary to heaven (Heb.8:1-5; 9:11), but it emphatically does not confine His sacrifice there (Heb.8:3). It states indeed that it was offered there (Heb.8:3), but 'offer' is a word used equally of the donor who brings and kills a sacrifice outside the sanctuary and of the cohen (priest) who presents it, either there on the altar or within. The reference here is doubtless to the sprinkling of 'offering' of blood in the Holy of Holies at Yom haKippurim by the Cohen Gadol (High Priest) (Heb.9:7,21-24), a typical action fulfilled by Messiah. All that was costly in the sacrifice - the part of the donor and the victim - took place at the cross: there remained only the priestly part - the presentation to Elohim (God) by an acceptable mediator - and this Messiah performed by entering into His Father's presence at the ascension. There is no call to think of any literal presentation of Himself or of His blood at the ascension - it is enough that He entered as the Cohen (Priest) of the sacrifice slain at the cross, was at once welcomed, and sat down in glory, His work complete.
Of Literal and Spiritual Sacrifice
It is a mistake to view Messiah's sacrifice as being any more a literal sacrifice than the spiritual sacrifices are, something Shoob does not understand. Both transcend their Tanakh (Old Testament) types, and neither is ritual. The contention by some that Messiah's sacrifice was a real (literal, physical) sacrifice was directed against the Socinian view that Messiah's death does not fulfil what the Tanakh (Old Testament) sacrifices set out to do, and failed to do - the view which denied that Messiah's death makes propitiation. But apart from the slaying (and this is not performed, as in the Tanakh ritual, by the donor), everything in His sacrifice is spiritualised. For the blood of an animal we have the blood of the Elohim/God-man (Heb.9:14). For spotlessness, we have sinlessness (Heb.9:14; 1 Pet.1:19). For a sweet smell, we have true acceptableness (Eph.5.2). For the sprinkling of our bodies with blood, we have forgiveness (Heb.9:13-14,19-23). For symbolic atonement, we have real atonement (Heb.10:1-10).
This, then, is the true meaning of Messiah's sacrifice, something that neither Shoob nor unsaved Jews are able to grasp. I very much doubt that he ever was saved, that he ever met the resurrected Messiah, for he speaks and argues like a Jehovah's Witness for whom these things are theoretical and which in his flesh he could not possibly grasp, therefore not enabling Him to grasp the deity of Messiah. And so now he has thrown it all away and is encouraging others to do the same, of whom scripture says they never knew Him, and of whom Messiah will say, "I never knew you" (Mt.7:23). So many people hear, and convert to, false gospels (like counterfeit messianic gospels that deny the deity of Messiah) and when these false gospels fail to deliver (as they cannot), they find fault with the wrongly explained Scriptures which they then come to doubt. It is one thing to be blind but it is another to try and convince those who see to become blind too. May Yahweh have mercy on his soul and bring Him to emet (truth) and to repentance, both for his sake and for the sake of those he has deceived.
 Scott Shoob of Beit Tefillah Proclaims That The Messiah of the New Testament if Fictitious. Endorsement of this article does not necessarily imply our endorsement of all this ministry's other teachings
 See his excellent article on Isaiah 9:6
 Letter to the author, 1 January 2018
This page was created on 3 January 2018
Last updated on 3 January 2018
Copyright © 1987-2018 NCAY
- All Rights Reserved