Return of the Kosher Pig: The Divine Messiah in Jewish Thought

by Itzhak Shapira

Far from a study of kosher dietary laws, this book is an unprecedented journey toward the true identity of the Divine Messiah―the one previously considered “unkosher” and “unacceptable” by Jewish people. This encyclopedic volume will surprise and challenge you with the compelling words of Jewish sages and rabbis over the last 2,000 years, many in English for the first time.

Genres: Judaism

336 pages, Paperback

First published June 21, 2013

Reviews

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

Among many Jews, belief in Yeshua–Jesus the Messiah–is incompatible with Judaism. While they would concede that Jesus was a first Century Jew, they find his qualifications as a rabbi spurious and his lifestyle incompatible with the Jewish faith. He was unclean. For a Jew to trust in Jesus as the divine Son of God would be nonsensical. It would be like believing in a ‘Kosher Pig’: the clean unclean. This simply cannot be.

This was the faith that Rabbi Itzhak Shapira was raised in. Born into a traditional Sephardic Jewish home in Israel, Shapira found the Messiah after searching the Hebrew Scriptures. He argues that that Jewish rejection of Jesus and the weight that mainstream Judaism gives to secondary literature is the result of an interpretive decision. Because Judaism, in general, has rejected Jesus as the Messiah, they give greater weight to secondary Jewish Sources (i.e. the Talmud, the Mishna, etc). Shapira has a great deal of respect for Jewish literature, but focuses his argument on where Jesus is revealed as the Messiah within the Hebrew Scripture itself.

Jewish exegesis follows a four-fold reading of the Hebrew Bible, summarized under the acronym: Padres. P’shat is the simple, literary meaning of the text. Remez are ‘clues’ within the Hebrew text. Drash or Midrash are allegorical commentaries on the text. Sod denotes ‘the secrets’ of Torah. There is also a fifth level of interpretation called the Remez HaRamezim which the Messiah himself will reveal. In the pages of the Return of the Kosher Pig, Shapira examines where the Hebrew Scriptures point to Jesus, by making use of P’shat and Ramez, quotes and refers to the Midrashim and attempts to uncover the Messianic secret (Sod) of the text.

There are five parts to this book (named after the first five letters of the Hebrew AlephBet (see what I did there). Part one (Alef) provides a overview of the historical framework, the sources and methedology for revealing the ‘Kosher pig). Part two (Bet) explores the Traditional Jewish framework for understanding the Messianic passages and his identity. Part three (Gimel) provides the heart of the book. Here Shapira explores five passages in the Hebrew Bible which point to Christ. Part four (Daled) looks at secondary evidence for Jesus’ messianic claims. Final part five (Hey) draws his argument to a close, exhorting his fellow Jews towards excepting Yeshua as their Messiah.

When I was in seminary my M.Div emphasis was Old Testament. I love the Hebrew Scriptures; however Jewish exegesis is at best ancillary to many Christian interpretations. The Mishnah and Midrash were interesting, sometimes illuminating, but the general theological understandings between Christian and Jewish interpretations was divergent. So I followed Rabbi Shapira’s argument with interest, but as a bit of an outsider. As a believer in the Messiah, I am inclined to believe his claims; as an outsider to Jewish interpretation, recourse to commentaries or biblical numerology is not compelling to me. Yet, this is an apologetic book geared toward his fellow Jew. The value of this book is how well Shapira is able to show how the Jewish story is part of the gospel story–where Jesus is revealed for who he is. From my perspective, he does this well, but a quick web search reveals that he has also raised the ire of traditional Jewish interpreters. This is to be expected. For traditional Jews to accept Jesus means turning their back on much of what their tradition has taught them and to side with a religion responsible for their persecution through out the centuries (Christians aren’t alone in this, but they are sadly over-represented). What Shapira does, is reveal how Jesus himself is not contarary to Jewish tradition but revealed by it.

I recommend it for Jewish readers or Christians wanting to engage the Jewish worldview. This is a technical book which would be inaccessible to many general readers without background in Jewish interpretation. For its intended audience, it is a goldmine. I give this book four stars.

Thank you to Crossfocused Reviews and Lederer Books for providing me a copy of this book in exchange for my honest review.

[Lawrence Jackson · Rating 5 out of 5]

More than I expected. This book is loaded with historical facts and detailed insight into the Jewish sages mindset. It explains Hebraic entomology and root words that provides a broader perspective in understanding the Scriptures the way it was originally intended.

The author pull no punches revealing who is the Jewish Messiah; Y'shua HaMashiyach (Jesus Messiah/Anointed One) from a Messianic Jewish perspective in contrast to Orthodox Judaism.

Although the title of this book doesn't have an appealing kosher depiction the author does a commendable job of defining the purpose and meaning behind the title...very interesting!

I recommend reading this book slowly to take in the wealth of information it treasures. Two-thumb up!

[Davar Chaim · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic book! Can't say enough good things about it!! Excellent trip into the rabbinic writings under the guidance of a Messianic rabbi!

I'll keep this book around as source material for years to come!!

[Larry Guthrie · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was recommended to me by a close friend and fellow disciple of the Messiah. I can see why he enjoyed it so much. He is much more into complex, scholarly works than I am. That is not to say that I didn't glean some understanding from this book.

"Return of the Kosher Pig" is a very complex and thoroughly researched treatise on Yeshua (Jesus) as the Divine Messiah. This work contains many footnotes to quoted material and translations of Hebrew. Rabbi Shapira quotes The Zohar, Talmud, and other texts in support of his position. He even delves into a bit of Hebrew mysticism and Gematria.

All of the above makes for a fascinating read and a difficult one. I don't have the foundation of Judaism that this book bases itself on. That does pose an issue in grasping some of the terms and context of the arguments. However, the points are understandable to the western Christian mind. I won't say I agree with everything in this book. I do have an increased understanding of how the framework of rabbinical Judaism does indeed allow for the Divine Messiah.

Do you need to read this book? That all depends. This book will challenge your thinking theologically. It is a challenge to follow because of the perspective difference between Jewish and western thought. If a book like that appeals to you, then this is your book. I am glad I read it. I am also relieved I am finished with it. My brain needs the rest.

[Beverly · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book represents the personal journey of the author in investigating the identity of the Messiah according to the Scriptures and traditions within Judaism. The author was born in Israel, raised in a Mesorati Jewish household, and lived in Israel most of his life. It is his position that it is possible to cut through fiction, bias and misconceptions mostly aimed in a reactionary manner toward Jesus of Nazareth rather than based on beliefs in the rabbinical teachings, reason, and the Scriptures of the Hebrew Bible. For that reason, all the material presented in this volume is the study of the Deity of the Messiah as seen through Jewish eyes.

"The entire book is structured like a legal case, with evidence, argument and counterargument. Unlike most discussions of this topic through history, this one doesn't seek to nullify traditional Judaism and its conclusions about the Messiah. Rather the author...repeatedly expresses his respect and appreciation for the Jewish sources and emphasizes the many points of agreement with them ('shared premises'). His argument about the Kosher Pig draws from these shared premises and from the rabbinic writings themselves, to build the case that the Jewish Messiah is portrayed as more than human. Readers unfamiliar with rabbinic writings will discover a whole new area of thought--an approach to Scripture, sometimes from a different perspective, that is well worth exploring." [Forward: Rabbi Russel Resnik]

"May this book help all of us put on 'Jewish glasses' as we look upon the Jewish Messiah." Itzhak Shapira

There are five parts to this book to allow the reader to weigh the evidence.

Part 1: The framework of Judaism. It includes an introduction to the parameters of Jewish apologetics and Jewish understanding of the Scriptures.

Part 2: Identification. What are the charges made against Yeshua of Natzeret (Jesus)? Are the charges valid?

Part 3: Evidence supporting the case of a Divine Messiah.

Part 4: Exploration of external resources related to the identity of the Messiah.

Part 5: Reconciliation. A proposal of reconciliation between traditional Judaism and a Divine Messiah.

What does this book mean by a Kosher Pig? The pig represents the symbol of uncleanness to the Jew. In their eyes, Christians and even Messianic Jews are unkosher in their faith. It is considered idolatry to believe that God would take the form of a man. So in the eyes of modern Jewish thought and Orthodoxy, the idea that a Divine Messiah would share honor with HaShem (God) and the authority to forgive sins cannot be tolerated. Challenging this view is what could make the "pig" kosher. The goal of this book is to bring the "pig" back to the people of Israel through reconciliation.

If you are like me and are unfamiliar with most Hebrew and Aramaic terminology, there are extensive footnotes and a glossary in the back that can be printed to aid in reading the book. In addition, expect a thorough treatment with plenty of examples of the belief systems and thought processes of the many writings available. It is not light reading. Be prepared for a worthwhile challenge.

I do not have theological training to do any analysis of the content on my own. However, I was impressed with the organization of the content, the clarity of thought and the reasonableness and logic behind the author's conclusions. I can see how this research would be a valuable resource for Christians and Jews alike. For those who would like to gain a broader perspective of Judaism's teachings about their Messiah, this is a must read.

Overall, this is a thought provoking work of research worth our attention. It has the potential to bridge many chasms, should the Lord God Almighty be willing to use this book for the purpose of reconciliation. My prayer is that it will help to open the eyes of its readers, provide more appreciation for God's Scriptures, and challenge our hearts to break out of our comfortable way of thinking to embrace God's work of reconciliation wherever He leads us.

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from Cross Focused Reviews (A Service of Cross Focused Media, LLC)on behalf of Lederer Books: A division of Messianic Jewish Publications. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

[Zomick's Bakery · Rating 4 out of 5]

Funny thing happened to me with this book. A friend gave it as a birthday present, saying he got me a cookbook with some interesting challah recipes in. As I am working in Zomick's bakery I was quite keen to learn a new interesting kosher bread recipe but at that time I was short on free time... Read it couple of months ago and I found it interesting. It is a bit hard book to read for the ordinary reader but leaves open space for wondering especially if you are Christian. - Zomick's Challah Recipe

[David Hodges · Rating 3 out of 5]

A longer version of this review appears on Amazon.com and the Pious Eye site (reviewer's blog)

In The Return of the Kosher Pig (hereafter, Kosher Pig), Messianic [Jesus-accepting] Rabbi Itzhak Shapira argues for the acceptability of the idea of “a divine Messiah” within Jewish thought since Judaism parted ways with believers in Jesus. (He also draws upon such earlier sources as the Hebrew Bible and the Targumim [Aramaic Jewish paraphrases of the Hebrew Bible].) In spite of being an admittedly minority viewpoint, Judaism that accepts Jesus as Messiah is, he argues, a variety of traditional Judaism even those who currently reject Jesus should find acceptably Jewish (and should, thus, be willing, as faithful Jews, to consider embracing). This is Shapira's contention and the persistent theme of his arguments in Kosher Pig, a book that early reviewer endorsements suggest readers can expect to be, not only “Well researched” and “learned,” but “Well written” and “A great read” (back cover). While I certainly agree the text is “Well researched” and “learned,” my experience as a reader does not incline me to call it “Well written” or “A great read.” The feeling I get is that I'm reading a first draft, an initial attempt to organize copious research notes under headings in a loose structural framework. Awkward locutions and an excess of unneeded adverbs and adjectives make the reading tiresome. For instance, sources never “state” anything; they always “clearly state,” usually in a way that Shapira informs us is “interesting” or “incredible” or “wonderful.” Reference is never made to something untrue being the case “in no way”; rather, it is always “in no way, shape, or form.” How English editors could fail to eliminate most of this is unclear; one might speculate that excitement about the overall point of view (a “divine Messiah” is consonant with traditional Judaism and Jesus is that “divine Messiah”) blurred the critical eye of editors (and early reviewers). As well, a meandering structure seems to have made tiresome repetition of points necessary, and the addition of headings, intermittent summaries, and various tables does not suffice to make Kosher Pig orderly or perspicuous. Were the English writing style more readable, perhaps the presentation would feel less discursive, less in need of significant reorganization. At the very least, it might then be pleasant reading.

The bringing together of sources is not without value, however, and Kosher Pig, however laborious it is to read, does bring together a large collection of source quotations. Shapira translates passages from multiple Hebrew sources that (apparently) have not previously been translated into English. If you're looking for a collection of quotations, citations, and translations you might draw upon in your own work, you might find Kosher Pig worth acquiring. If, on the other hand, you're looking for a book to give to non-Messianic Jewish friends to persuade them to consider Jesus' claims, or if you want a pleasant-to-read introduction to Messianic Judaism and its take on broader Jewish thought, this edition of Kosher Pig probably isn't for you.

Style and structure are not the only things about Kosher Pig I find off-putting. Some content also troubles me. For instance, Shapira, evidently considering this a good thing, writes that he has “no connection or relationship to Christianity other than following the same Messiah” (xii). He rejects the idea that “Messianic Judaism is Christianity” and emphasizes how his “entire background and theological training is Jewish” (xi). Since Jesus-followers were labeled “Christians” when Jewish believers were still the leaders and important members of the movement (Acts 11:26, 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16), and since “Christ” is just a translation of “Messiah,” Shapira's wish to separate believers-in-Jesus into two groups, only one of which he labels “Christian,” is at best confusing. Shapira's terminology has the unfortunate effect of implying that Jews who accept Jesus as Messiah have more in common with Jews who reject Jesus than with gentiles who accept him; it also implies that Shapira considers himself an adherent of Judaism first, a believer in Jesus second. Surely the Jesus who identified faith in himself as more important than ties to family (Luke 14:26) would not approve.

Shapira seems to believe that background in a tradition that rejected Jesus two millennia ago is all one needs to work out a full-orbed Jesus-following faith. Can one really expect to formulate sound biblical doctrine by ignoring the faith-tradition that has alone followed Jesus all the intervening years, has alone had the Holy Spirit's guidance and completed Bible? This seems unlikely, and does not accord with what Scripture predicts. Gentile and Jewish Christians are to be part of the same tree, and Jews who come to true faith after long rejecting it are to be grafted back into the same tree on which the gentile believers have been growing and thriving during all the intervening years (Romans 11). While one can certainly understand Jewish discomfort with past behavior of many gentile Christians, Scripture nowhere suggests that unbelieving (Jesus-rejecting) Jews are a true tree of faith that simply needs to add Messiah and go from there; rather, they are detached branches needing to be reincorporated into a tree of faith that God has continued to cultivate since his people “of the flesh” (Romans 9:8) rejected him in the person of his Son.

Now, I certainly have no objection to Messianic Judaism. The discussion at the Jerusalem council (Acts 15) and other New Testament indicators (e.g., in Acts 16) do seem implicit permission for Jews who accept Jesus to continue uniquely Jewish practices if they wish (thus continuing to practice Judaism while embracing Christianity). (Any effort to make such practices mandatory for all Christ-followers would be out of bounds, of course [Colossians 2, Romans 14].) Nevertheless, it does seem to me that a background in Judaism alone should not be considered sufficient by those who embrace Jesus today. For two millennia, traditional Judaism, the dominant faith of Jews “according to the flesh” (Romans 9:3), has rejected Jesus. In contrast, during this time God's Holy Spirit has been guiding believers in Jesus, most of whom have not been Jewish, in the understanding and application of “all truth” (John 16:13). To ignore this stream of Jesus-accepting thought in favor of exclusive focus on a tradition grounded in rejection of Jesus is misguided. Such misguided behavior is not unknown within gentile Christianity, of course, where early heresies continually reemerge as individuals think themselves uniquely qualified to discern in Scripture what Spirit-guided believers of past generations have “misunderstood.” Ignoring centuries of Scripture- and Spirit-guided self-correction of Christ's followers is unwise. Granting that I am a gentile and do not grasp how strongly someone who grows up in Judaism must desire to hold fast the words of his people's “sages,” I simply cannot see Shapira's approach as adequate.

The inadequacy of an exclusively Jewish background reveals itself in Shapira's unpacking of exactly what it means to identify Messiah Jesus as “divine.” As we know from church history, it took believers in Jesus, even with the Holy Spirit's guidance, a very long time and much debate to harmonize all that Scripture teaches about the one God who is three eternal persons and about what was involved when one of those persons added to his eternal deity the full nature and physical body of a human being. While some might grant that more could yet be discovered, that the harmonizations (doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation) might be even further worked out and clarified, those humble enough to accept that Jesus-followers before them were as likely to be guided to understand Scripture correctly as they are will surely not dare to reject a doctrinal understanding won with such difficulty by past Christian generations. By trying to formulate his understanding of Jesus' incarnation without reference to past Christian thought, Shapira risks inadvertently embracing errors Jesus' followers have already, under the Spirit's guidance, corrected and moved beyond.

Not only does he risk doing so but, if I do not misunderstand him, he in fact does so. In his final chapter, Shapira writes: “I suggest that we view Yeshua of Natzeret [Jesus of Nazareth] in a slightly different light than 'God, the Son,' as he is known within the Trinity in Christian circles” (266). Identifying Jesus as “God, the Son,” is a careful expression of a hard-won doctrinal understanding of a range of scriptures and all that they imply, yet Shapira sets it aside as unimportant. Apparently, Shapira wishes to get away from the “God, the Son” locution because it does not fit with his understanding of Judaism. He writes: “Although this book has presented extensive evidence in favor of a Divine Messiah, it is impossible to label over 2,000 years of Jewish thought on this topic as wrong” (266). Therefore, Shapira believes (apparently), unpacking of the implications of the “Divine” in “Divine Messiah” must comport with that last 2,000 years of Jewish thought, at least with that portion of it that (while still rejecting Jesus) has believed that the Messiah will be divine. Shapira's way of making Jesus' incarnation comport with Jewish thought is to present Messiah Jesus as a manifestation of God “through the process of tzimtzum,” meaning God's self-limitation, a “reduced” presentation of God, or of “a part” of God (266-7; Messiah is identified as “part of” God often, such as on page 94). Since in Jesus “dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” (Colossians 2:9), identifying him as “a reduction” or “reduced manifestation” of God seems inadequate. In taking on humanity (not just human form but genuine and full humanity, adding this to his eternal deity), Jesus indeed set aside (“emptied” himself of) independent and visible exercise of most of his divine attributes (Philippians 2:5-9; mentioned by Shapira 269-70), but in his person there was nothing “reduced.” Jesus' manifestation of his own divine nature might have been largely veiled, so that its degree of visibility could be called “reduced,” but referring to Jesus himself as a “reduced manifestation” of God, or as “part of” God, is inaccurate and dangerous. Overall, the impression one gets from Shapira's discussion is that he embraces a form of modalism , where the one God presents himself in a variety of modes (God is “compound” in manifestation) but where, ultimately, he is a single (non-compound) person, a hidden entity who never interacts with his creation or creatures except through his (partial, reduced) representations. Shapira, in fact, at one point chooses the term “mode” to describe the Jewish understanding he wishes to promote, offering the following translation from the Zohar (a source he quotes frequently): “Hear, O Israel, YHVH Elohenu YHVH is one....How can the three Names be one? Only through the perception of Faith....the mystery of the threefold Divine manifestations designated by YHVH Elohenu YHVH – three modes which yet form one unity” (64). He comments: “Christians often use these types of arguments to prove the Trinity; however, Judaism speaks of ten sefirot, or manifestations, of God. Either way, the concepts are quite similar, as Judaism supports the idea of the compound unity of the Mighty One of Israel” (Ibid.). Three or ten “modes” of divine “manifestation” are, of course, not at all similar to a divine Trinity where three persons are the one living and true God. If I have not misread him, Shapira believes that God is “compound” (possesses “parts,” three or ten) in his manifestation, but one (not compound) in his hidden, eternal, transcendent nature. While this belief may seem acceptable to some groups claiming the “Christian” label, it goes contrary to Christian orthodoxy, embracing basic errors that the mainstream of Spirit-guided believers-in-Jesus considered and rejected long ago. I pray this view is not prevalent among Messianic Jews or, if it is, that it will not remain so.

Also troubling is how Shapira rejects the doctrine of Scripture's sufficiency (2 Timothy 3:16-17). One “good work” for which Scripture alone, in Shapira's understanding, does not “throughly furnish” a man is “search for the Messiah.” He writes: “some would try to argue that all we need is to hold firm and true to the words of the Bible in our search for the Messiah....This argument falls apart quickly” (44). Though we must indeed “depend upon the Hebrew Bible or the Tanach as the primary source,” it is also true that “to interpret difficult verses, we can employ authorized Jewish resources that are recognized across the entire Jewish world using the Pardes methodology” (44). Why “authorized Jewish resources” by thinkers who rejected Jesus should be considered helpful in determining that Jesus is in fact the Messiah might be unclear, but Shapira's effort to show support for a “divine Messiah” in Jewish thought of the last two millennia, among thinkers who have not embraced Jesus as their Messiah, is an interesting one. That belief in a “divine Messiah” seems more prevalent in the earliest sources, in those preceding and closely following Jesus' time, does seem to support the contention that those first believers in Jesus as “divine Messiah” remained within the range of belief acceptable within the Judaism of their day. That expectation of a “divine Messiah,” such as Jesus claimed to be, has remained present in Jewish thinking ever since, even as rejection of the idea has become dominant, might indeed prove a useful fact for believers-in-Jesus reaching out to adherents of traditional Judaism. My own tendency, gentile Christian that I am, has been to identify “traditional Judaism” as having become a false religion when it rejected Jesus, and as having become increasingly false as it has developed and elaborated upon that rejection. That is still my tendency, though Shapira's collection of citations from non-Christ-following Jewish sources does suggest that traditional Judaism has not become so completely false as I might have believed.

That non-Christ-following Jewish thought contains Jesus-compatible truths useful for outreach does not justify rejection of Scripture's sufficiency, however. Neither does a desire for effective outreach justify adopting dubious hermeneutics. This is an additional difficulty I have with Kosher Pig. In his just-quoted repudiation of Scripture's sufficiency, Shapira notes his intention to use “the Pardes methodology” to guide his hermeneutics. This method, reminiscent of gentile Christianity's medieval experiments, asserts that Scripture has four layers of meaning accessible by interpreters. The first, most basic (27-8), is “the literal textual meaning” or p'shat. This is essentially the historical-grammatical meaning we heirs of the Reformation see as the meaning, a meaning beyond which no additional meaning should be sought. The second level (30) comprises “hints,” remez, alleged to provide additional true insights. This level can be used to associate passages based on such things as common letters, even when the passages (in their p'shat) address unrelated topics. The third level (Ibid.), drash, “mostly refers to allegorical interpretation” (of evidently literal passages), and figures importantly in midrashim (Jewish “sermon notes of 2,000 years”). The fourth and final level (31), sod (“a secret”), proposes valid interpretations can be found “hidden” in the text, such as in the numerical values of the words or phrases of different passages (values assigned through “Gematria, a numbering system for the Hebrew language”).

While drash, if not disconnected from the p'shat, might capture valid applications of Scripture by correctly exercising analogical reasoning (as Paul does in 1 Corinthians 9:9-10), both remez and sod, used extensively in Kosher Pig, strike me as uncontrollably eisegetical. At one point, for instance, Shapira notes how selection of a set of letters from a certain text spells out the name “Yeshua,” as though this “hint” strengthens his case (68). In another place, in an effort to buttress his argument (if I understand him) that Jesus does not so much replace/surpass Moses (whom one widely accepted Jewish confession requires must be seen as the greatest prophet) as fulfill or complete Moses, Shapira adduces the following evidence: the phrases “The Messiah” and “Moses is alive” have matching numerical values (363). I'll leave it to creative readers to see what range of weird beliefs they can support with appeal to such coincidences. Do such “arguments” merit any better response than the marginal “Ugh!”s and “Groan!”s I've added to my copy of Kosher Pig? I agree with Shapira that Jesus is the Messiah, yet find these remez and sod exercises ridiculous. Should anyone expect readers who disagree with Shapira to find them persuasive?

I don't know how widely such imaginative hermeneutical exercises are accepted among Jewish believers, but we gentile heirs to the Reformation realized some time ago that, if Scripture is to function as authoritative, its interpretation must not depend on human inventiveness; it must be clear (if often difficult) and subject to objective interpretation. If the true meaning of Scripture resides in such subjective exercises as “the Pardes methodology” permits, Scripture ceases to be an authority to be obeyed, becoming instead merely a source of creative inspiration. Even where one does not replace the plain sense with the “hidden” but, like Shapira, only adds the “hidden” to the plain, Scripture loses authority, since one places creative human invention (the “hidden” sense) on a level with authoritative divine utterance (the plain sense). I know these proposals of a “hidden” sense can be appealing; often they “feel right” to us. However, we Bible-believers, Jews and gentiles alike, must discipline ourselves to avoid such interpretive malpractice, keeping always in mind that the feeling of rightness often attending it indicates nothing more than that the proposed “hidden” sense happens to agree with our preexisting opinions. “Hidden” senses that we happen to agree with seem plausible to us solely because we agree with them, not because they are at all valid hermeneutically.

So, then, while granting the learnedness of it (Shapira's mastery of Jewish source materials seems exhaustive), and though aware that much research and effort went into it (how many hours must Shapira have spent just translating his Hebrew sources for us?), there is much that I find troubling in Kosher Pig. Whether these things will trouble others, and whether Shapira and his publisher will issue a less-troubling edition in the future, time will tell.

[Michael Boling · Rating 5 out of 5]

Digging through ancient and more modern Jewish thought even on matters concerning the Messiah is arguably a notion most Christians are not involved in for a variety of reasons, most importantly being the relative unfamiliarity most have with those documents and their importance in the Jewish faith. Thus, when discussing Christ as the Messiah with those of the Jewish faith, Christians are relatively incapable of conversing on this vital issue from a position that most Jews would appreciate or accept. A new book by Rabbi Itzhak Shapira called The Return of the Kosher Pig: The Divine Messiah in Jewish Thought seeks to provide believers with those needed skills in order to argue that Jesus is indeed the Messiah promised long ago both in Scripture and in the numerous Jewish writings.

The Return of the Kosher Pig is definitely one of the more catchier titles of recent memory and just what exactly the “Kosher Pig” is all about forms the locus for Shapira’s discussion. Born and raised in a traditional Sephardic Jewish home in Israel, Shapira came to know Jesus as the Messiah after years of studying rabbinic writings. Those years of studying the writings of the Jewish sages and the mastery of understanding what those Jewish writers were addressing to include exegeting the number of places where they note the Messiah of Scripture while still rejecting Christ as that Messiah are quite evident throughout this book. Shapira provides the reader with a well-researched and cogent study of the past 2,000 years of Jewish writings on the subject of the Messiah and the return of the “Kosher Pig”.

For those who might have the impression that Shapira is looking to the writings of Jewish scholars as the definitive work on the subject of Jesus as the Messiah, that impression can be set aside as Shapira notes from the outset of this outstanding work that his goal is “to prove that the idea of a Divine Messiah is not foreign to Judaism, and the claims by the Kosher Pig are not foreign to Jewish thoughts. Shapira engages in this examination with the underlying truth that God’s Word is the ultimate authority over and above any Jewish writings by even the most noted Jewish sages. With that said, when engaging a group of people who have been so greatly influenced over the years by the writings of their religious scholars, it is quite necessary to dive in to the writings of those scholars as a jumping off point of conversation, one that seeks to prove from their own writings what Scripture has been saying all along, namely that the Kosher Pig is Jesus the Messiah.

Shapira roots his approach to the writings of the Jewish sages in a process of interpretation known by the acronym Pardes which stands for P’shat, Remez, Drash, and Sod. Each of these represents a path to interpretation that progressively engages the text on a variety of different levels with the intent and purpose of getting to the deepest understanding of the text possible. The methodology utilized most often by Shapira is that of P’shat or the “literal textual meaning of God’s Word.” Knowing that the Jewish sages often pressed further into the text to try and draw out additional and what they believed to be deeper meanings, Shapira also throughout this book looks at things such as Gemetria or the numerical attributes given to the Hebrew alphabet as well as more mystical elements of Jewish interpretation, again with the understanding that at all times, God’s Word is the ultimate purveyor of truth over and above even the most wisest of Jewish sages. Additionally, Shapira goes to great lengths to outline the sources he will use in his examination of Jewish writings to include the Talmud, Targums, various rabbinic minds and their writings, and even elements of oral tradition as it relates to the topics at hand.

Having established these issues as the basis for his approach, Shapira then digs into a plethora of Jewish writings as he builds his case that Jesus is the “Kosher Pig” written about in Jewish religious literature. This effort involves the discussion of 2,000 years of Jewish thought as simply relying on 21st century Jewish beliefs does not capture the wide variety of perspectives despite what many anti-missionary Jewish organizations might propose.

The approach utilized by Shapira throughout this book is extremely engaging. While he certainly could have just taken Scripture and stated to those in the Jewish community that Jesus is the Messiah and by doing so he would have been well within the parameters of Scriptural truth, looking at the writings of the Jewish sages in order to prove from their own hand that Jesus is the promised Messiah is indeed a valuable way to approach this, in particular with those so steeped in Jewish religious tradition. For instance, Shapira points out the rejection of Jesus as the Messiah based on the firmly monotheistic approach of Judaism. He also notes that such a rejection of Jesus as being divine goes against their own writings and understanding of the attributes of the godhead. Hebrew words used in rabbinic writings such as devar point to the Word mentioned in John 1:1 which of course is Jesus the Messiah.

Shapira also rightly demonstrates that despite the 13 Principles of Faith developed by the great Jewish scholar Rambam, utilized “by the various Orthodox groups as the true and valid framework for Judaism”, it is not idol worship to recognize Jesus as being Divine and as being the Son of God. For example, Shapira uses the words of the Yalkut Shimoni, remez number 2:571which states “Why did God call the Messiah “great mountain”? He is greater than the fathers. More exalted than Abraham…Greater than the ministering angels.” Thus the servant noted in passages such as Isaiah 52:13 cannot refer to Israel as the servant given the notation of exaltation stated in that passage, exaltation which the rabbinic writings themselves attribute to the Messiah, specifically, the Divine Messiah who is the Son of God and not just a holy prophet or really righteous human being.

In part three of this book, Shapira spends a great deal of time making further connections between the rabbinic writings and what is found in Scripture in order to provide copious reasons as to why the Messiah is Jesus. A prime example of the excellent scholarship and connections made by Shapira is found in his discussion of the terms “Son of Man” and “Ancient of Days” found respectively in Daniel 7:14 and Daniel 7:22. Shapira notes “The implication of these verses is clear. Any worship that is not geared toward the God of Israel represents idol worship. Yet, in Daniel 7:14 it is clear that the nations will worship the one like a Son of Man! Unless this entity represents the manifestation that holds the complete authority of the “Ancient of Days,” the prophecy of Daniel violates the Torah itself! Since this conclusion is illogical based on the sixth principle of the Rambam (all the prophets’ words are true) the only logical conclusion is that the “Son of Man” holds the full authority as a manifestation of the Ancient of Days or God himself!” This of course means that the Son of Man is Jesus the Messiah, the Divine One sent to be the Redeemer of mankind.

For anyone interested in understanding how to present the reality of Jesus as the Messiah from the writings of the Jewish sages, this is a book to dig into with the utmost zeal. Admittedly, much of this book involves some heavy reading and making the necessary connections between what the truth of Scripture says and the inferences written by the Jewish scholars. With that said, Rabbi Itzhak Shapira skillfully weaves and presents his case, clearly laying out the facts of the matter in a way that while scholarly in its approach is nonetheless accessible to those who will take the needed time to work through what he is presenting. I highly recommend this book, especially for those who interact with people steeped in the writings of the Jewish sages as it is a valuable tool for conversation and sharing with them from the pages of their own religious leaders that Jesus is the one for which they have been longing these many, many years. I know for myself this book has introduced me to a number of additional resources for study, specifically a plethora of Jewish writings which I will explore in later months and years. The Return of the Kosher Pig is indeed a resource to which I will return time and again as it is a veritable encyclopedia of information that thoroughly proves Jesus is the Divine Messiah in Jewish thought.

I received this book from Lederer Books via Cross Focused Reviews for this review. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 : “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

[Jimmy · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is a book written by a Jewish Rabbi name Itzhak Shapira who spent years studying rabbinic Jewish texts and came to the conclusion that Jesus is the Messiah. The main thesis of the book is that within the traditions of Judaism, the Messiah is understood as someone who is more than a mere man; some sources even suggest that the Messiah possesses divine authority. Throughout the book the author reminds his readers that he is not arguing that everyone within Judaism accepts the idea that the Messiah is more than a man; instead he argues that the belief in the supernatural origin and character of the Messiah has historically been within the bounds of orthodox Judaism and should not be dismissed as a heretical belief. Along the way the author also argues that the fulfillment of these characteristics of the Messiah has been fulfilled in the person and work of Jesus of Nazareth.
Before we look at the strength and weaknesses of the book, it is important to make a comment about the controversial title of the book. My initial reaction to the title was whether or not this was design to provoke and offend. The author makes it clear in the introduction that he’s not out to offend other Jews unnecessarily, and the tone of the rest of the book affirms that. What Shapira is trying to do is to play on the Hebrew word “return” and “pig,” which share the same Hebrew consonantal roots. The title of the book also play on the Rabbinic concept that some held that the Messiah will be rejected like a pig as unkoshered, but one day will return and acknowledged as the Messiah.
STRENGTH
This book will help Christians become familiar with the development of rabbinic traditions from the time of Jesus onwards. Throughout the book the author regularly footnotes what certain Hebrew phrases mean and the glossary in the back of 300 Hebrew phrases will prove to be helpful for the Gentile readers. I also appreciate that in the beginning of the book the author defines and discusses essential facets of rabbinic Judaism over the last two thousand years.
Whether or not you agree with the author, one can appreciate that in the beginning of the book he makes it clear what his theological methods are. Since Shapira desire for his Jewish audience to come to know Jesus as their Messiah he adopts the Jewish hermeneutical system call PARDES which is the Hebrew acronym for P’Shat, Remez, Drash and Sod. P’Shat refer to the literal reading of the Scriptures, with the other three moving on from the literal and direct level of the text. These four interpretative methods are explained in the book and the author makes it known that he will adopt this Rabbinic framework in approaching the question of the Messiah. Non-Jews will no doubt find it fascinating to learn of the hermeneutical approach of Rabbinic Judaism. I appreciated also that the author stresses the literal interpretation of the Bible comes first before employing the other three methods.
The book is well documented, with hundreds of footnotes. I am amazed at how many Jewish sources the author cited. As a result of reading this book, I was able to do some further research including looking up the portion of the Talmud that talks about the Messiah in Sanhedrin 98a. It is a plus any time a book helps points the reader to the primary sources for further study.
The best part of the book are the moments the author deal with the literal interpretation of the Jewish Scripture and draw out from it what it teaches concerning the Messiah. In addition I appreciated the discussion of the evidence for Jesus Christ involving the Stone Messianic references that I first learned about from Gregory Harris’ book The Stone and the Glory. There are some excellent literal prophecies that were fulfilled by Jesus—and that should move us to worship if we know Him!
WEAKNESS
At times the book was too speculative in its argumentation. For instance, the author uses the PARDES method beyond the literal interpretation yielded some strange fruits. Take for example how the author allegorizes the donkey in Zechariah 9:9. Contextually the Messiah is to ride on according to this passage. The author took “donkey” to mean “the world” since the Hebrew word for donkey and “substance” share the same root (199). This commits the exegetical word study fallacy by appealing to etymology. Then on page 205 the author tells us that bread represents a spark of heaven and is referring to resurrected spirit even though he doesn’t establish his case from the Hebrew Scripture. This is followed by page 206 that tells us “that the feminine manifestation of God represents the part of that God that we can see and remain alive” (206). The Bible never indicates God’s revelation to us is His feminine manifestation. I also wasn’t too thrill about the counting of the numerical value of certain Hebrew words to show the value was equal to another Hebrew word; we never see this kind of hermeneutical ploy used by anyone in the Bible to make sense of the Jewish Scripture. Again, as I said earlier it is way too speculative. A book full of these interpretative gymnastic is distracting; I think it would have served the cause better and have the case stronger if the authors just stuck to the literal interpretation and the collobration of those interpretation from Jewish rabbinic sources.
At times the author could have done a better job explaining what he was quoting or who it was he was quoting from and why is it that it is important (note, he certainly does this at times but could do it more). The list of Jewish Rabbis in the back of the book wasn’t helpful when you are reading through the book and wondering who this or that Rabbi was since the Rabbis were not listed in alphabetical order but according to their time period.
NOTE: I received this book for free from the publisher Messianic Jewish Publishers through Cross Focused Reviews in exchange for my honest opinion. The thoughts and words are my own and I was under no obligation to provide a favorable review.

[David Schiff · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an excellent resource for apologetics and examining the claims of Jesus to be the Messiah including references in the Mishnah and other Jewish commentaries. It contains many debates with rabbis and leaders.

[Jose Rivera · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is my second time reading this book, and I have to say, it was just as revealing as when I read it the first time! This book can also be used as an exceptionally superb reference book.

[Michellea Sefton · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book, very well written & presented.. highly recommend. In terms that even a lay person can comprehend.
Well worth getting your hands on. Enriching.