The Scroll and the Cross: Unraveling the Messiah’s Hidden Thread

A Journey Through Cognitive Dissonance to the Heart of Scripture

Imagine a scholar poring over ancient scrolls, the flickering lamp casting shadows on weathered Hebrew letters. His heart beats with reverence, a conviction that these words hold divine truth. Yet, as he traces prophecies of a coming Messiah, he encounters Yeshua of Nazareth—whose life and teachings weave seamlessly into these promises. But what happens when this clashes with a long-held framework, built over years of study? The mind wrestles, torn between tradition’s comfort and the text’s call. This, dear reader, is cognitive dissonance—a tension revealing the complexity of belief and the stakes of understanding Scripture rightly.

As someone shaped by Jewish tradition and ignited by faith in Yeshua, I’ve spent countless hours in the Hebrew Scriptures, seeking their depths with precision and passion. These texts pulse with life, pointing to a redemption fulfilled in the One I know as Messiah. Yet, I’ve seen even devoted students—particularly in Reformed theology—stumble into a trap: the clash between their principles and cherished beliefs. Let’s explore this through cognitive dissonance, not to judge, but to illuminate a path toward clarity, humility, and a deeper encounter with the Word.

---

What Is Cognitive Dissonance?

Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort we feel when beliefs, actions, or commitments collide ¹. Picture a man pledging loyalty to truth, yet bending evidence to fit a narrative. The mind scrambles—reinterpreting, dismissing, or doubling down—to restore harmony. Psychologists call this universal; in theology, its implications are eternal.

For Reformed theologians championing “Scripture alone”—a principle known as sola scriptura ²—the stakes rise. This demands the text reign supreme, not tradition or doctrine. Yet, human nature pulls us toward protecting what we’ve built—a system, a reputation, a community. Let’s see how this unfolds, then turn to Scripture to hear Yeshua’s call to truth.

---

The Psychological Tug-of-War in Theology

Consider a Reformed scholar facing Isaiah 53, the suffering servant: “He was pierced for our transgressions… by his wounds we are healed” (Isaiah 53:5). To a Jewish reader expecting a triumphant Messiah, this jars—where’s the victorious king? ³ For the Reformed, it fits atonement, but challenges limited atonement—the doctrine that Christ died only for the elect⁴. If “our transgressions” hints at a wider scope, perhaps encompassing all humanity, the system quivers. Dissonance emerges, and Reformed theology, despite its commitment to sola scriptura, isn’t immune. Let’s explore how this plays out with specific doctrines and texts:

1. Commitment to Identity – Reformed theology often hinges on TULIP, including limited atonement ⁵. Yet, 1 John 2:2 states, “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.” A scholar might reinterpret “whole world” as “the elect across all nations” to preserve the system, even if the plain reading suggests a broader atonement. Identity as a Reformed thinker nudges the text into alignment, subtly bending sola scriptura.

2. Confirmation Bias – Predestination, rooted in Romans 9:15—“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy”—is a Reformed cornerstone. But what of 1 Timothy 2:4, where God “desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth”? The latter might dim in focus, explained as God’s revealed will rather than His decretive will⁶, while Romans 9 shines brightly. The text becomes a mirror for the doctrine, not a challenge to rethink it.

3. Motivated Reasoning – Take John 3:16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” A Reformed lens might argue “the world” means “the elect from every nation,” not all individuals, to safeguard predestination. Logic builds a compelling case, but the heart’s whisper—“Election must stand”—drives it, not a neutral reading of “whoever believes.”

4. Sunk Cost Fallacy – Covenant theology ties God’s promises into a unified system, often emphasizing continuity between Old and New Testaments⁷. Yet, Acts 10:34-35 disrupts this: Peter declares, “God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.” If salvation extends beyond a covenantal remnant, years of defending a tight-knit framework feel at risk. Rather than reshape it, the text might stretch to fit—perhaps by redefining “acceptable” as “elect.”

5. The Backfire Effect – When a Messianic Jew cites Psalm 110:1—“The Lord says to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand’”—as Yeshua’s exaltation (echoed in Hebrews 1:3), a Reformed scholar might dig deeper into cessationism or covenantal exclusion of new revelation ⁸. Admitting a broader fulfillment risks unraveling not just one doctrine, but a worldview tying Scripture to a specific tradition.

6. Replacement Theology’s Tension – Some Reformed thinkers embrace Replacement Theology, asserting the Church has superseded Israel as God’s people ⁹. Romans 11:1-2 challenges this: “Has God rejected his people? By no means! … God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew.” Likewise, Romans 11:25-26 promises, “a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved.” If Israel retains a distinct role in God’s plan, the replacement framework falters. Dissonance might lead to redefining “all Israel” as “spiritual Israel” (the Church), preserving the system over the text’s apparent literal intent.

This isn’t unique to Reformed theology; it’s human. But in a tradition prizing sola scriptura, the irony stings. Could this principle demand we face these biases?

---

Scripture’s Answer: Yeshua as Fulfillment

Yeshua steps into this tension, not disrupting the Law, but fulfilling it: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets… but to fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17). The Torah and promises find their “yes” in Him (2 Corinthians 1:20).

The Passover lamb (Exodus 12) spared Israel, its blood a redemption sign. John the Baptist sees Yeshua: “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29). In Genesis 22, Abraham’s ram spares Isaac—“God will provide the lamb” (Genesis 22:8)—foreshadowing Golgotha’s substitute ¹⁰. Micah 5:2 promises a ruler from Bethlehem, “from ancient days,” born in Yeshua (Matthew 2:1). Psalm 22’s cry—“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”—and pierced hands unfold on the cross (Matthew 27:46).

These threads aren’t forced; they’re woven deep. Yet, objections arise: “The Messiah brings peace—where’s the restoration?” Jewish tradition expects a world renewed (Zechariah 14), not a crucified king¹¹. Scripture answers with two acts: first, the suffering servant (Isaiah 53); then, the reigning king. Yeshua fulfills the first, promising the second—a tension resolved by embracing the text’s fullness.

---

Bridging the Gap with Humility

Why does this matter? Dissonance clouds not just theology, but the One revealed. Clinging to systems over Scripture risks missing Yeshua. The Pharisees, tradition-bound, stumbled (John 5:39-40): “You search the Scriptures… they bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me.” Their lens blinded them.

Reformed, Messianic, or any seeker—we’re all prone. But sola scriptura invites us back to the source. The Hebrew Scriptures sing of Yeshua—from the serpent-crusher (Genesis 3:15) to the new covenant on hearts (Jeremiah 31:31-34)—binding old and new.

---

A Call to Reflect

Dear reader, join me—not as a critic, but a traveler seeking truth. Trace the Messiah’s promises through Torah, Prophets, Writings. Does Yeshua fit? Does He resolve our dissonance—justice, mercy, restoration?

This isn’t about debates, but encountering the bridge between God and us. Yeshua offers evidence in Scripture and transformation in the heart. Explore it—wrestle with the questions. The stakes are eternal; the discovery, life-changing.

What do you think? Share your reflections—seasoned scholar or beginner. Let’s seek truth together, with humility and rigor.

---

Footnotes

1. Cognitive dissonance was first theorized by Leon Festinger in 1957, describing the mental stress caused by holding conflicting beliefs or behaviors, from his work “A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance,” published by Stanford University Press.

2. Sola scriptura, a Reformation principle, asserts Scripture as the sole infallible authority for faith and practice, often contrasted with tradition’s role in other Christian streams.

3. Jewish Messianic expectations often emphasize a kingly figure establishing peace, based on texts like Isaiah 11:6-9, contrasting with the suffering servant motif.

4. Limited atonement, part of TULIP—Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, Perseverance of the saints—holds Christ’s death was efficacious only for the elect, not all humanity.

5. TULIP is a mnemonic summarizing five key Calvinist doctrines, formalized at the Synod of Dort, 1618-1619, in response to Arminianism.

6. Reformed theology distinguishes God’s revealed will—what He desires, like in 1 Timothy 2:4—from His decretive will—what He ordains, like election—reconciling apparent contradictions.

7. Covenant theology views God’s redemptive plan through covenants, such as Abrahamic, Mosaic, and New, often stressing continuity over discontinuity between Testaments.

8. Cessationism, common in some Reformed circles, holds that miraculous gifts, like prophecy, ceased after the apostolic era, potentially limiting new Messianic interpretations.

9. Replacement Theology, or Supersessionism, varies in form; some see the Church fully replacing Israel, others see partial fulfillment, debated within Reformed thought, like Calvin versus later Puritans.

10. The ram in Genesis 22 is widely seen in Christian exegesis as a type of Christ, though Jewish tradition focuses on Abraham’s obedience without Messianic linkage.

11. Zechariah 14 depicts a triumphant Messianic reign, fueling Jewish arguments against a crucified Messiah; Christians often split this into two comings.