THE MESSIAH IN THE OLD TESTAMENT IN THE LIGHT OF RABBINICAL WRITINGS 

Copyright © Risto Santala Translated from Finnish by William Kinnaird TABLE OF CONTENTS: To the English reader INTRODUCTION THE MESSIAH IN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH The 'Theology of Fulfilment' controversy Judaism's traditional stance Christian study of Jewish sources Our common heritage CHOOSING THE APPROPRIATE METHOD OF STUDY The difference between biblical and western ways of thinking The difference betweenthe characters of the natural sciences and the humanities Method, and the choice of the appropriate source material THE MESSIAH IN THE PENTATEUCH The spirit of the messiah in the creation account The proto-evangel The messiah who will break down the hedge around the law The messiah who will rule the nations The Messiah as the Second Moses - The Messiah as the Last Saviour - Comparisons between Moses and Jesus. - The character of the revelation of God to Moses. - The name of the Lord as a sign of salvation - Did Moses believe in an avenging God or in a God of mercy? - The Prophet who will be conceived by the Holy Spirit The Torah of Moses and the Messiah - The Messiah's Torah and the future of the Law - The Torah interpreted by the False Messiah Sabbatai Tsvi - The basis of Paul's interpretation of the Torah The Messiah, Prince of the Countenance - Jacob sees the face of God - Christ as the 'Prince of the Countenance' - The Messiah, the Mimra or 'Word' of God - The message of spiritual counsel associated with Penuel The time of Christ's coming - The Christ seen from afar - Christ's first advent - What the Jewish scholars think about the coming of the Messiah - The destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple as a sign of the coming of the Messiah THE MESSIAH IN THE PSALMS - What the Psalms have to say about Christ
Page 2
2 - The Jews see the Messiah in the Psalms Psalm 2 and Psalm 110 - The Messianic tone of the second Psalm - The picture in Psalm 110 of the one sitting at the right hand of God Psalm 22 as the interpreter of the suffering Messiah Psalm 118 and the "stone which the builders rejected" Psalm 102 and the return of the Messiah in his glory. THE MESSIAH IN THE PROPHETS The general nature of the messianic office in the prophets The prophets of the Northern Kingdom, Israel - The prophet Amos - The prophet Hosea - The prophet Jonah, The prophets of the Southern Kingdom, Judah - The vision of Obadaiah, - Joel's Messianic message - Zephaniah - The prophet Habakkuk - The prophet Micah - The prophet Isaiah - Jeremiah, The prophets who were active during the exile - Ezekiel's Messianic message - Daniel, The prophets who appeared after the exile - Haggai - Zechariah - The book of Malachi THE BIRTH AND THE CHARACTER OF THE MESSIAH THE SUFFERING MESSIAH IN THE PROPHETS WHAT THEN SHALL WE SAY TO THIS? LITERATURE CONSULTED
Page 3
4 INTRODUCTION One of the most famous books of our century is Alex Haley's ROOTS. It has been translated into many languages and even made into a film. In the book a black American searches for his origins, finishing up in a remote village on the African continent. Such genealogical research can help us both to understand our own disposition and heritage, and to appreciate the achievements of previous generations; it can even help towards understanding ourselves. The Christian church ought also to study its own roots, manifest in the Old and New Testaments. Both of these, however, have their origins in distant lands with topography and language quite foreign to us today. The basic message of the Bible is perfectly clear. It tells us itself to "seek out the book of the LORD, and read!" "This is what the LORD says: Stand at the crossroads and look; ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is, and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls." 1 The way found by previous generations to be good tends to be forgotten. The Arabs say that, "The road is wiser than the man". The fundamentals of the Christian faith have often been violently assaulted. The simple message of the Bible is sufficient as it stands, without necessarily requiring all the expositors it has. But precisely this fact, that we have become increasingly alienated from the roots of our faith, gives us good reason to embark on our own spiritual genealogical search. Although the Bible as it stands speaks of life's simple realities, some of its truths can be seen only with the eyesof faith. In speaking of these the New Testament uses the Greek word mysterion, 'mystery' -- the 'mystery of the kingdom of heaven', 'the mystery of the gospel','the mystery of God', and even 'the mystery of faith'. The most frequently mentioned of these is 'the mystery of Christ'. This Messiah-mystery is closely bound up with the Old Testament prophecies, of whose nature and background we are often ignorant. There, if anywhere, we find the words of Peter relevant, when he says that, "No prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation... but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit". 2 Just like the writer Alex Haley, in attempting to explore the mystery of Christ we will be obliged to cross the wide ocean of history and to travel far back in time. It will be necessary for us to handle ancient documents whose concepts, mode of presentation, and thought patterns are different from our own. These earliest roots of our faith reach back to Jesus' own time, however, and they exemplify a way of interpretation obtained at the time the Christian faith was born. It is this challenge that we face, together. This ROOTS study is based upon two books of mine, originally written in Hebrew, "Christ in the Old Testament" and "Christ in the New Testament -- In the light of the Rabbinic Literature". They are the result of a special interest of over 35 years, born amidst practical work while in contact with Jewish scholars. This being so, one can rest assured that they will not contain mere armchair theology. In addition to the specialised Hebrew sources, approximately 300 works -- according to my files -- in various languages, concerned solely with the Messianic idea, have left their mark on the creation of the background. In my original Hebrew book on the Old Testament I refer to the traditional Jewish account of Nahshon, according to which a man of that name was the first to jump into the Red Sea when the Israelites crossed over at Moses' command -- followed then by the rest. This ROOTS study is a similar kind of leap of faith into an area which is both very broad and, in actual fact, comparatively unknown. At the same time, I know
Page 4
6 THE MESSIAH IN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH The concept of the Messiah has been both a unifying and a dividing factor between Christianity and Judaism. Christians speak about it as a question of the fulfilment of prophecy, whereas the Jews try to nullify the Church's Messianic interpretation. This being so, we should try at least to listen to each other, to discuss the common roots of our respective traditions. Indeed such discussions have already taken place. In October 1976 representatives of the evangelical churches and of the synagogues met in Berlin for a joint discussion, in which they issued an official public statement. This encouraged Christians to make the fundamentals of their faith known to Jews, and vice versa. It was felt that this kind of dialogue could promote mutual understanding. In discussing these things we are not, however, talking in a vacuum: behind us is a history of almost two thousand years of controversy. The schism between the mother and daughter religions created a conflict of tragic proportions, which is still going on. Nevertheless, a comparison of Jewish and Christian origins will show both parties the way to a better understanding of the roots of their respective faiths. The 'Theology of Fulfilment' controversy The Christian church has traditionally considered Christ to be the fulfilment of the Old Testament prophecies. One result of the religious debate of our day, however, is that some Christian theologians, those who represent the very liberal position, have called this kind of interpretation into question, in part because thus one of the major obstacles to Jewish/Christian dialogue can be removed. In the autumn of 1981 a Dr. John Pawlikowski from Chicago was in Israel and gave a lecture against this "theology of fulfilment" to a Jewish audience, offering in its place the idea of a continually unfolding revelation. Jesus' Messiahship, he maintained, was based primarily upon his own awareness of his call. In my remote homeland Finland a typical article in a clerical magazine stated that this "Bible-issue is a festering sore in the mother church's heart". The writer saw the problem as being specifically the Messianic prophecies, "which play a central role in the New Testament, because the writers of the NT read the Old Testament as a book which made constant reference to the salvation experienced in Christ. You do not need to be much of an exegete, however, to see that such bridges from one testament to another are without exception artificial, nor do they convince those who think rationally." 8 In the same way he declares that, "the Virgin Birth, for example, and the Doctrine of the Trinity have been put in a questionable light as a result of critical Bible studies". These and similar thoughts have been echoed in many theological treatises. They maintain that these matters "have been cleared up in the last two hundred years", and that they are "the common property of permanent and internationally generally approved research", One of these scholars crystallises his argument by saying that: "No OT student claims, neither could he with any basis claim, that Isaiah chapters 9 and 53 and Psalm 22 speak of Jesus". "The Jews," he generalises, "do not accept Jesus as the Messiah. They see in the Suffering Servant of the Lord primarily the nation of Israel." 9 Similar statements have been made in the ongoing international discussion. But is it also true? Of course no-one can demand that Jesus' name should appear in the OT prophecies before they can be applied to him. We understand perfectly well what Jesus meant when he claimed that Moses spoke of him.
Page 5
7 Even after the resurrection he is said to have spoken about Moses and all the prophets, "explaining what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself". Jesus functioned in a way that was understood by his contemporaries, and all Jewish exegesis from Jesus' time to the Middle Ages, even up to the present day, is founded on the same method. Precisely because of this fact that the fundamentals of 'fulfilment theology' are beginning to fade, we will try in what follows to speak of the roots of our faith. Judaism's traditional stance The concept of the Messiah has been entirely neglected in Judaism, left with hardly the status of a step- child. Making the rounds of the Jewish libraries only rarely will a slim volume on Messianic Expectation turn up amidst the vast literature on the Torah, the Jewish law. The Halakha 10 interpretation has completely taken over the position of guardian of the Jew's religious life, and the Torah has become a substitute for the Biblical idea of Salvation. Franz Delitzsch, in his day perhaps the most profound expert on Judaism, stated that the Jews no longer believed in the Messiah. Rather they have the general expectation that liberation for them will be effected without a Messiah figure. Along with this "nationalistic narrowing down" Judaism has also lost its universal character. 11 Jewish scholars have, on the whole, written on the Messiah concept only in their apologetic works. Foremost among these are Rabbi David Qimhi's "Book of the Covenant, the Polemics of RaDaQ 12 with the Christians" from the end of the 12th century, and the " Strengthening of Faith" by the 16th century Rabbi Isaac Ben Abraham Troki of the 'Karaim' sect. 13 Jewish Messianic belief is epitomised in the works of the Mediaeval scholar Moses Maimonides (RaMBaM - Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon), of whom it was said "From Moses to Moses no-one has risen like Moses". In his book "Ordinances of the Kings" he compresses all that he has to say about the Messiah into six pages: The Messiah-King will be first and foremost a teacher of the Torah; he will reinstate the strict punishments of the Law of Moses and draw up his own laws, which the people will then be compelled to observe; first he will initiate the milhemet mitsvah, the war of ordinances, and only then the overthrow of the dominating powers, and he will also build the Temple. When he mentions Jesus RaMBaM speaks respectfully, using the full form of his name Yêshûa, 'saviour'. 14 According to the Mediaeval slanderous treatise Toldôth Yeshu, the letters of the shorter, most widely used version of the name, Yeshu, were an abbreviation for "May his name and all memory of him be blotted out". RaMBaM states in his pamphlet that "Jesus the Nazarene, who appeared to be the Messiah, was put to death on the orders of the Great Synagogue", and that "the teachings of Jesus the Nazarene and that Ishmaelite [Mohammed] who came after him attempted to make straight the way for the Messiah-King and to restore the whole world so that together it would serve God". This favourable reference brings to mind the word used by Josef Klausner in his book "Jesus of Nazareth". For him Jesus was like a trailblazer of the Kingdom of God. 15 James Parkes states in his book "The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue" that, "Before the destruction of Jerusalem, the first Christians fled to the East bank of the Jordan and the Pharisees to Jamnia - that is why in the absence of the Temple the Jewish people had only the Torah as the foundation of their spiritual existence." 16 The ultimate disillusionment for them was when Rabbi Aqiba proclaimed Simon Bar-Kokhba as the Messiah. The subsequent military disaster estranged them completely from Messianic thinking and resulted in a simplified halakha Judaism in which the Hebrew statutes became axiomatic. We will see, however, that the Synagogue's earliest sources still spoke a great deal about the Messiah, referring to an even wider corpus of data than the Christian Church. It was really only at the end of the last century that interest in the Messiah began to grow. From then on the subject has been studied by, to mention a few Jewish writers, Leo Baeck, C.G.Montefiore, Martin Buber,
Page 6
8 Gershom Scholem, Josef Klausner, David Flusser, Schalom Ben-Chorin, and others less well-known. 17 The former prejudices have abated to the extent that New Testament lectures are now given in Jerusalem's Hebrew University, and selected extracts are even taught in the schools. Christian study of Jewish sources In the first few decades of this century in Christian circles there was a flurry of interest in the Rabbinic literature. This gave birth to many outstanding works illuminating the Jewish background of the Messianic concept, the most famous of which are the works of Hugo Gressmann, Moritz Zobel, S.Mowinckel, Eugen Hühn, and L.Dürr. These and corresponding studies, which laid the foundation for Joseph Klausner's books, attempt to explain the Messianic Expectation historicocritically, and its explicitly religious nature is neglected. 18 The specially Judaic character of the Messianic concept was perhaps most deeply understood in the 19th century by Alfred Edersheim and E.W.Hengstenberg, and in our own time by, for example, Gösta Lindeskog. The general presentation of the Messianic prophecies by the renowned Franz Delitzsch, who was mentioned above, is also without peer. 19 We might say that a century ago Christian theologians took the Rabbinic sources more seriously than they do in our own time. Worth mentioning of those Christian apologists whose aim was the defence of their faith and who used the Rabbinic literature are Alexander McCaul, A.Lukyn Williams, and Bernhard Pick. Dr McCaul compared the doctrines of the Talmud and the New Testament. His books have appeared in English, German, and even in the RaSHI Hebrew script. 20 A.Lukyn Williams replied to Troki's disputed "Strengthening of the Faith", in a work which was given a preface by Strack. 21 It is worthwhile acquainting oneself with the extensive work which learned men have done towards clarifying the roots of the Messianic concept. Historicocritical research tries to undermine the Bible's specific Messianic character because a similar expectation of salvation is found amongst other peoples; Jewish writers, as a result of their own historical disillusionment tend to deny a personal Messiah -- and the greater part of today's scholars is inclined to narrow down the Messianic Hope to what in their opinion are the precious few biblical prophecies upon which it can be based. OUR COMMON HERITAGE We often forget that both the devoted Jews and Christians do have a common exegetical startingpoint for Biblical studies. In the Daily Prayers, so-called "Sidûr" in Hebrew, there is a long section of beautiful morning prayers. It includes "Thirteen principles of the faith", which are to be repeated in every day. There we read as follows: clause 6: "I believe with perfect faith that all the words of the prophets are true." clause 7: "I believe with perfect faith that the prophecy of Moses our teacher, peace be unto him, was true, and that he was the chief of the prophets, both of those that preceded and of those that followed him." clause 12: "I believe with perfect faith in the coming of the Messiah, and, though he tarry, I will wait daily for his coming." clause 13: I believe with perfect faith that there will be a resurrection of the dead at the time when it shall please the Creator, blessed be his name..." 22 Every member of the Jewish community is bound to accept these words composed by famous Moses Maimonides RaMBaM (1135-1204). They resemble the words in Luke 24:44 and Acts 28:33 according to which the Christians approach was based on the prophecies found "in the law of Moses, the Prophets and
Page 7
9 the Psalms". This Messianic interpretation" is not "an artificial bridge". All this raises the question what other sources ought to be used in order to shed light on the roots of our Christology. From the scientific point of view it should be possible to approve as justifying a Messianic interpretation those OT passages into which the Jewish prescriptive and generally approved OT commentaries have read the Messianic concept, and those interpretations which the NT has understood as being Messianic. The older the tradition of interpretation, the greater the relative weight which can be assigned to the source as an original exponent of the Messianic concept. It must of course be borne in mind that the NT speaks of the "mystery of Christ". 23 Connected with this Messianic mystery are historical and "cosmic", temporal and spiritual features which ought not to be watered down. This becomes apparent from the old Jewish sources in particular. It may be that it is not possible to study spiritual phenomena or those of the history of ideas by a purely historicocritical approach. It is said that when the apple fell on Isaac Newton's head he discovered the Law of Gravity. If we cut this apple into pieces we would not find the law in the apple -- neither would a surgeon have been likely to find it in Newton's head: it was somewhere in between the apple and the head. Spiritual phenomena cannot be dissected, they must be internalised. This also applies to the Messianic mystery. If we study the Bible and the Rabbinic literature carefully, we cannot fail to be surprised at the abundance of Messianic interpretation in the earliest works known to us. An old Hebrew saying goes, "I did not seek, and so I did not find -- then I sought, and I found!" and another, "When we reveal the palm of our hand, another two palms are still hidden" -- in other words, when we look into an issue, behind it there are two new challenges which we could not have seen without looking at the first. And the Talmud states unequivocally: "All the prophets prophesied only for the days of the Messiah." 24 ---------- 8. Dr. Timo Veijola in "Pappisliiton Jäsenlehti" 9. Prof. Risto Lauha 10. the word Halakha means "decision", "norm", "systematized" legal precept. It is a Rabbinic word derived from halakh, to walk. It is part of the Mishna, the interpretation of the law. 11. Franz Delitzsch, "Messianische Weissagungen in geschichtlicher Folge", Leipzig 1890, p 11,102. 12. In the Rabbinic literature the Sages' names are written in these abbreviated forms, ie Rabbi David Qimhi. 13. The Karaim sect, which official Judaism does not accept, bases its exegesis solely on the OT and not on the Jewish tradition. The books mentioned are in Hebrew. 14. RaMBaM, Hilchot Melachim, 11:4. 15. J.Klausner, "Jesus von Nazareth", Jerusalem 1952, p574 16. p77. 17. cf Bibl. 18. cf Bibl. 19. cf Bibl. for main works. 20. RaSHI script. 21. cf Bibl. 22. Daily Prayers, A New Edition revised by Dr. M. Stern, New York 1928. 23. eg. Eph.3:4, and Col.2:2 24. Berakoth 34b. CHOOSING THE APPROPRIATE METHOD OF STUDY What is the right way to delineate the Messianic mystery? How can we find 'the very voice', the ipsissima vox, which will expound the Bible in the spirit of the Bible? Formally, we expect true scholarship to observe pre-determined methods. It is true that many of the so-called 'Messianic prophecies' to which the NT refers
Page 8
10 can be interpreted in the context of the early stages of Israel's history, and scientifically speaking, this historical background is the only legitimate and correct interpretation model which has any bearing on the issue. Nevertheless, the NT writers understood the texts "prophetically" and gave them a Christological interpretation. This means that they did not proceed "historicocritically" or strictly scientifically, in the way that modern theologians wish they would: for today's critics such ways of interpretation are artificial. We must therefore ask ourselves, Does the NT's "suprahistorical" approach reflect the central characteristics of the Messianic interpretation as it appeared in ancient times? And if so, the modern critic must find methods which will bring out, just as was manifestly obvious at the time of its origin, the full import and internal consistency of the subject he is studying. If no success has as yet been met with here, there is good reason to seek a method which will be more suited to the subject matter. We could define the difference between homiletics and theological reseach as being that theology strives to explain what each word of the Bible meant at the time it was written down, and homiletics primarily what the man of today can get out of it. It could be said that historicocritical studies have been unable or reluctant to understand the NT's Christology and its grounds. That is why it is necessary to find tools with which to dig more deeply into the roots of the Messianic idea. We are hardly likely to turn up a Philosopher's Stone which would solve all these problems, but there are three factors which will help us to get near to the heart of our problem. 1. We need to determine what modes of thinking and presentation held sway between the Old and New Testaments, the crucible in which Christianity was formed. 2. In the same way the problem ought to be solved as to how a discipline outside of the 'hard sciences' can find the internal integrity of its subject without doing violence to the real intentions of the people under study. 3.Furthermore, in choosing a method of study we must always determine which sources are most capable of shedding light on the ways of thinking current in the era in question. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BIBLICAL AND WESTERN WAYS OF THINKING The well-known Jewish writer Schalom Ben-Chorin characterises in one of his books the essential differences between Greek learning and Biblical thought. 1 The Greek world strove to find orderly rules, a method which obtained from Aristotle to Hegel: details were then fitted into larger wholes and forced into preformed structures. Hebrew thought, on the other hand, proceeds from details to rules, from concrete observations to ideals. Thus the Bible knows neither dogma nor system as such. Rather, it exhibits two typical basic aims: narrative, and a law intended as a guide to life. The Pentateuch, Psalms, and Prophets relate over and over again the great works of God. Thus historical facts are preserved unchanged, even though their interpretation receives a new colouring according to the requirements of each respective age. Neither does the sacred law as revealed in the commandments change with the changing fashions. In place of the Greek love of system the Bible exemplifies associative thinking, in which every detail is immediately related to the whole and all the parts are interdependent. This same associative principle is found throughout the Rabbinic literature right down to our own time. Recently the NT too has, in both Jewish and Christian circles, been studied as a kind of Midrash, as a creation similar to the preaching-exegesis of the synagogue, observing the laws of Jewish Biblical interpretation. Fundamental to this approach is the axiom that every detail of the revelation of God, the Torah, is to be expounded and must be explained both in relation to the subject under discussion and as an independent entity, because the word of God never loses its 'literal sense'. Furthermore, every argument is to be backed up with a word of Scripture because the opinions of men are in themselves of no value.
Page 9
11 The Midrash often repeats the Aramaic saying, Hâ bê-hâ talî, "This depends on this", forming internal bridges within the Bible's own message. Time and time again we are told that such and such a Sage has said in this or that other Sage's name, "as it is written, va-gomer... " ('and so forth... '). Then no more than the first few words of the Bible quote are given, the reader, knowing the Scriptures off by heart, recites the remainder silently to himself. This kind of OT use gives a certain "comprehensivity" to the whole presentation and prevents philosophising of an over-subjective kind. Even a short Midrash may contain hundreds of OT quotes and the names of hundreds of Rabbis. In this way the whole presentation is anchored in history and in the tradition of the synagogue. We can see the same principle in operation in the NT which, according to Nestle's Greek register, contains 993 separate OT references. In addition to the 'associative principle' the Old Synagogue used various expressions which, outside of its own literature, appear only in the NT. The so-called middôth or "measures" -- the ways of interpretation, of which there are 7,13,32 or even 70 -- help in checking the text's internal connections, taking into consideration the 'literal sense', Peshat; the 'hint' or 'quotes', Remez; the 'homiletics' or 'spiritual message', Drashah; and the 'mystery' Sôd. These four Hebrew words form the mnemonic PaRDeS or 'paradise', to which the Bible is often compared. In the teaching of both Jesus and Paul we find here and there certain stylistic devices such as al tiqrâ, 'read not thus, but thus'; tartei mashma, 'the word has another meaning'; muqdam umeuhar, 'noting the earlier and later'; the change of word roots, and various forms of expression which the Midrash literature exemplifies. 2 They all spring from Jewish thought patterns. No serious NT or OT study can be developed in ignorance of the special character of Hebrew thought and the soil from which the NT and OT originated. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CHARACTERS OF THE NATURAL SCIENCES AND THE HUMANITIES The research methods of the natural sciences and the humanities are considered to be fundamentally different from each other. The study of religion, ethics, and eg. aesthetics often have to content themselves with narrative and hermeneutic interpretation. The study of Method distinguishes between the nomothetic or the search for general laws (Greek nomos) and idiographic, that is, disciplines concerned with individual ideas and facts. 3 Aristotle created the topika(from topos 'place') according to which in rhetoric and in the study of juridic problems philosophers attempted to find the leading motifs -- later it was developed by eg. Giovanni Batista Vico, who is considered to be the founder of the history of Philosophy. 4 For this reason the humanities ought to survey the whole field of human thinking and put the main aspects in their place. Only from a wider "topical" -- I might almost say "topographical" -- base for comparison can the significance of the whole picture be envisaged. Theology is one of these "idiographic" disciplines which must be studied in the light of their own special laws. If this theological "autonomy" is overlooked, the whole object of the studies will be violated. So that we might understand just how fundamental an issue is in question, it is worth looking at how Ye .hezkel Koifman assesses the state of today's Theology. 5 In his four volume work "The Religious History of Israel from ancient times to the end of the Second Temple", he describes how Israel had its own personally stamped spiritual revelation, which does not lend itself to analysis by the usual historical criticism. It is not possible, for example, to think of Israel's religion as developing from the Canaanite cult which Israel
Page 10
12 destroyed, because in those areas where the cult was allowed to remain, no corresponding religion of revelation developed. Professor Koifman stresses that, "Biblical studies in our day are faced with a rather strange situation: it is bound by the 'dominant method', although no-one knows exactly why this method 'dominates' research. It sometimes happens in the Humanities that some thesis or tenet which was originally founded on definite, generally accepted axioms maintains an artificial existence even after those axioms have been discredited. In our time this has also happened to Biblical studies... " The critical proofs of Wellhausen and other liberals faded out long ago... " "In the interim those axioms have one after another been retracted and broken down... and the protagonists of that school have been forced to admit that, for the most part their proofs can no longer stand up to criticism. But still they will not retract their conclusions, especially not those regarding literary criticism." Professor Kaufmann maintains that, "historical truth is crystallised in the Bible message to a much greater extent than the Wellhausen school reckoned." Regarding the Pentateuch he says that, "Today it can be shown that even if it were arranged and compiled after the time of Moses its source material is very old, not only in part or in its general tenor, but in its entirety, in its content, language, and even in its very letters." For this reason the researcher ought to extend his critical attitude to critical studies as well. METHOD, AND THE CHOICE OF THE APPROPRIATE SOURCE MATERIAL Jewish tradition contains many tales of the Wise Youngsters of Jerusalem. Once someone asked one of them the way to a certain village. He answered, "Do you want the short long road or the long short one?" A shortcut may have obstacles which require a great deal of time to get over or round. And so a road which at first glance looks long may turn out to be the shortest. In this way the preceding introduction with information regarding the method has served as the key to what follows. In our attempt to find the roots of our Christian faith it will be important while dealing with the OT and NT to select sources which will delineate as early as possible an understanding of the Bible and the way of thinking of the people we will be studying. The choice of an appropriate source material is always a part of research. Even though the Messianic concept in Judaism today has come in for some rather roughhanded treatment, at the beginning of our era it was still of central significance. The main work of Judaic legislation, the Talmud, compiled over a period of three centuries from around the year 200, comprising 60 separate treatises in 13 thick volumes, states simply that, "All the prophets prophesied not but of the days of the Messiah." "The world was not created but only for the Messiah" 6 These statements lay the foundation for the entire discussion between Judaism and Christianity. In the years of its formation the Talmud underwent its own internal censorship. Its scholars consciously avoided speaking about the Christian faith and certain Messianic prophecies, which were considered sensitive issues. In addition to this the Catholic church in the Middle Ages pressurised Jews into removing from the Talmud certain portions which were from a Christian point of view considered offensive -- they were actually preserved in a separate pamphlet which I also have. This "great silence", as the scholars sometimes characterize it, and the "double censorship" have resulted that the Christian Church has seldom received any help from Jews in getting to know its own roots. In the main body of the book we will discuss the date and significance of the various source texts. Even at this stage, however, it is worth noting two primary sources -- the Midrash and the Targum -- which have not suffered the similar strict censorship which befell the Talmud.
Page 11
13 The MIDRASH or "exposition", the synagogue's 'homiletic literature', which follows a certain, often strictly defined, form, dates in its six oldest Midrash sections from the second century AD, although they received their final written form in the 5th or 6th century. The censorship peculiar to the synagogue cannot be seen in them, and their tradition can often be traced back to before the time of Christ. In addition, there are another thirty or so later Midrash works which also here and there shed some light on the Messianic concept. 7 The TARGUMS are explanatory versions of the OT in Aramaic. As they stand they also give support to the Jewish expositors of the Torah. The Talmud states that, "The whole Torah in its entirety is in Hebrew, but certain things from the Targum also belong to it." 8 Only the Targum of Onqelos received the synagogue's official approval. It contains expository material on the whole Pentateuch and dates from the 2nd century AD. The Targums which go under the name of Jonathan Ben Uzziel were written later on the basis of a tradition which was handed down from one generation to another, although Jonathan himself lived very near to Jesus' time. The Targum of Jonathan contains also material which, according to some, dates from as far back as the 2nd century BC. Just as in the Midrash literature the hand of the censor is not obvious in the Targums. This is further illustrated by the fact that, according to counts made, 72 OT passages are explained in the Targums as applying to the Messiah. More than the other Targums, the tradition associated with the name of Jonathan highlights the Messianic concept, and for this reason we will describe him in the light of the Talmud. Jonathan was the greatest pupil of the elder Hillel before the destruction of the Temple. One traditional account relates that Hillel had 80 pupils: "40 of them earned the descent of the Holy Spirit upon them, just as Moses did. 30 that the sun would stand still above them, as in the time of Joshua the son of Nun; 20 were average; but the greatest of them was Jonathan Ben Uzziel, and the least Johanan Ben Zakkai. ... and let it be remembered that the latter was the creator of the renaissance of the Torah in Jamnia immediately after the destruction of the Temple." 9 Jonathan translated the prophets into Aramaic, accompanied with brief explanations. His work of course aroused opposition from the scholars of the time, as they felt that the Hebrew original would thus be forgotten. But, in his own words, Jonathan went ahead so that doctrinal disputes would not multiply in Israel. It is remarkable that the synagogue accepted Onqelos' work even though he was a ger or proselyte. Jonathan's specifically Messianic emphasis was one of the reasons that his translation was not accepted. Early Messianic expectation among the Jews is also brought out by the literature known as Zohar (brilliance, brightness), which is usually associated with the name of the 2nd century Shimeon Ben Johai. This esoteric Aramaic work, thousands of pages long, based on the Pentateuch and dealing with the being of God, achieved general approval alongside the Talmud in the academies of both East and West. Although it was put into a written form only in the 8th and 9th centuries it reflects a very early tradition. It contains, for example, delineations of the Suffering Messiah, of the Trinity, and of the Messiah as the Son of God, the origins of which are difficult to trace. The Zohar can also be regarded as belonging to the Jewish 'normative' sources. As far as our source material is concerned it makes sense also to refer to Mediaeval Jewish Bible exposition, since certain Rabbis, such as the most famous exegete of Judaism RaSHI (Shalomon Jarchi, d.1105), often leaned on the Midrashim and the Targumim for support. In the same way, the Dead Sea Scrolls and the ancient Jewish 'Wisdom' literature may give some incidental support when discussing our material.
Page 12
14 Nowadays more and more emphasis is being laid on the fact that in both OT and NT studies these sources are indispensible. This is confirmed by recent scholars such as John Bowker, S.H. Levey, David Daube and W.D. Davies as well as the older H.L.Strack and B.Pick. 10 We will find as we search for the roots of the Christian faith that we have landed on a strange, unfamiliar continent. We are nevertheless on the right track. If someone wishes to familiarise himself with Chinese thought he would do well to take a trip to the Far East. Sometimes it almost requires the skills of an undercover agent to get to the heart of the problem. However, along the way many exciting and utterly captivating observations will be made, which can only serve to strengthen the grounds of our faith. One of the best examples illustrating the search for one's own roots is on my bookshelf. I once had the opportunity in Israel of buying, from a certain Jewish Christian's estate, a book published in Helmstadt in 1609. The author, a Jewish scholar by name of Christianum Gerson, relates how he bought for eight schillings, from an old poverty-stricken Christian woman, the New Testament in Luther's translation. With his two brothers-in-law he began to study it to find out how this "grave mistake" could possibly have conquered hundreds of thousands of hearts. The Gospel message shook him so much that he had to go on reading it alone, in secret. He compared its message with that of the OT and his own Jewish sources, and so, according to his preface, through this "written word" he came to a personal faith in Jesus. At first his family and friends rejected him. In describing this he borrows the words of Psalm 27:10, "Though my father and mother forsake me, the LORD will receive me." Soon, however, his wife and children followed in their father's footsteps. In order to prove to his friends the grounds of his decision he wrote this 700 page treatise on the Christian faith, in which he compares the teaching of the NT and of the Talmud with each other. Although Gerson compares the roots of Christianity primarily with the OT, the hundreds of quotations from the Talmud and the dozens of references to the Midrash give the feeling of being at the roots of the Christian faith." Luther said in his time that,"Christus universae scripturae scopus est", which freely translated runs, "Christ is the true perspective of all the scriptures". 11 The whole of this "Roots" book is founded on that basis. ---------- 1. Schalom Ben-Chorin, Jüdischer Glaube, pp 17-21. 2. See eg. M. Gertner, Midrashim in the New Testament, Addison G. wright, The Literature Genre Midrash; and I.L. Seeligmann, Voraussetzungen der Midraschexegese; cf Bibl. 3. See eg. Wilhelm Dilthey, Der Aufbau der geschichtlichen Welt in den Geisteswissenschaften. Ges. Werke, Band 7. 4. Lothar bornscheuer, Topik, Zur Struktur der gesellschaftlichen Einbildungskraft, Fr am Main 1976 pp 26-7. 5. We will quote the name in Hebrew way and follow the characterization of the introduction to his Hebrew work. 6. Berakoth 34,b, San. 99a, San 98b. 7. See Encyclopaedia JUDAICA. vol 11 8. Masechet Sopherim 1. 9. P. 518 in the Hebrew reference work of Mordechai Margalioth on the "Wise" of the Talmud 10. John Bowker, The Targums & Rabbinic Literature. An Introduction to Jewish Interpretation of Scripture. Cambridge 1969; S.H. Levey, The Messiah, An Aramaic Interpretation. The Messianic Exegesis of the Targum. Cincinnati 1974; H.L. Strack, Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash, 1st ed. Berlin 1887; B. Pick, Old Testament Passages Messianically Applied by the Ancient Synagogue, Hebraica 1885-88 11. Christianum Gerson, Der Juden Thalmud, Fürnembster Inhalt und Widerlegung, zum andermal gedruckt in Helmstadt 1609, 700 pp. THE MESSIAH IN THE PENTATEUCH
Page 13
15 The Rabbis often refer to Genesis as "The Book of Creation". In it we see everything as it must have been at the beginning -- the world, humanity, the various peoples, the Hebrew tribe, the chaos brought about by the Fall, and the first signs of the salvation promised to humanity by God. Everything is still in a nascent state, and so we cannot expect to find a fully developed conception of the Messiah there. The old Jewish literature, however, even in the creation account, finds the Messianic motif. THE SPIRIT OF THE MESSIAH IN THE CREATION ACCOUNT Genesis begins with the creation of heaven and earth: the earth was without form, and void. Even in this description the Talmudic Sages scented the beginning of the plan of salvation for humanity: "The tradition of Elijah teaches that the world is to exist for six thousand years; In the first two thousand desolation; in the next two thousand the Torah will flourish and the next two thousand are the days of the Messiah but on account of our sins, which were great, things turned out as they did." 1 It was essential to this traditional expectation that the sovereignty of the Torah -- the Law of Moses -- would last 2000 years, the same as that of the Messianic period. In the same farranging discussion from which the above citation is taken we find, in explanation, that: "The seventh millenium will be war, and at the close of the millenium the Son of David will come". In the discussion which follows mention is made of "The war of Gog and Magog and the remaining period will be the Messianic era, whilst the Holy One, blessed be he, will restore his world only when the seventh millenium is over." 2 This so-called "Elijah Tradition", which represents the understanding of the majority of the Sages, brings to mind the mainstream Christian teaching of the Last Days and the Millenial Kingdom. When six millenia have passed, there will follow, according to some, a thousand-year Sabbath, shabaton. This could be the "Messianic era" after which the "world" will be renewed. 1985 AD is equivalent to the year 5745 in the Jewish calendar, which means that the Messiah ought to have come already. Something in this plan of salvation seems to have gone awry. The synagogue's official morning prayer brings this continually to mind with the words: "Because of our sins the Temple has been destroyed and the perpetual sacrifices suspended, neither have we a consecrated priest". The Rabbis are not, it must be said, unanimous in their doctrine of the Messianic times, but the plan of salvation does, for them, begin right back at creation. When the Bible speaks of how "the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters", they see a reference to the Messiah. The Midrash Rabbah says in this context that, "this was the "spirit of the Messiah", as it is written in Is. 11:2, "And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him" 3 . A couple of other writings also mention that this refers to the "anointed king" 4 . This kind of hint is understandable when we bear in mind the Rabbis' view that even the names of the Messiah were determined before the creation of the world. God's first words in the Bible are: " 'Let there be light!' And there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good." When we study the creation account closely we notice that it was not until the fourth day that God created the "two great lights", the sun and the moon. The Sages understood this too to be a Messianic allusion, and so the Midrash known as Pesikhta Rabbah, which was read from the 9th century on in connection with feast days, asks, "Whose is this light which falls upon the congregation of the Lord?" and answers, "It is the light of the Messiah" 5 . The Yalqut Shimoni, comprising catenae of Talmudic and Midrashic passages drawn up in the 12th and 13th centuries, adds this thought to the exposition of the verse: "This is the light of the Messiah, as is written in Psalm 36:10,'In your light, we see light' ". 6
Page 14
16 The Rabbis considered the Aramaic word Nehora, 'light', to be one of the secret names of the Messiah, since we read in the Aramaic part of the book of Daniel that, "He knows what dwells in darkness, and light dwells with him" (2.22). Furthermore, on the strength of the prophecies of Is.42:6 and 60:1--3 the Messiah is seen as "the light of the Gentiles". Did not Jesus announce that he was himself the "light of the world", and that, "Whosoever follows me will never walk in darkness"? The Midrash understands the words of Daniel chapter 2 Messianically: " 'And Nehora dwells with him.' This is the Messiah-King, for it is written: 'Arise, shine, for your light has come' " (Is.60:1). We can see from the above that the associative Jewish method finds Messianic allusions in places where Christians have not seen them. The Apostle Paul says that this Christ-mystery "has been kept hidden for ages and generations" (Col.1:26). Could it be possible that with these words Paul was referring to Jewish tradition? Not improbable, since we find similar expressions in the Dead Sea Scrolls. 7 THE PROTO-EVANGEL Part of our church's Messianic interpretation is inherited straight from Judaism. Gen. 3:15, often called the "proto-evangel", is found with a Christian explanation only from the time of Iranaeus in the second century. The NT does not refer directly to it, and it has even been claimed by some scholars that there is "no hint of Messianism in it". The Aramaic Targum tradition, however, finds a central Messianic prophecy even here. 8 The Proto-evangel reads: "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel." The text speaks first of the "enmity" -- or, in what would be a better translation of the Hebrew, "hatred" -- which came into the world on account of sin. Communion with God was broken and Man began to flee, to try to hide himself from His presence. The consequences of the Fall were sin, sickness and death. The Bible speaks of the personification of evil in the Devil, and the Wisdom of Solomon, an Apocryphal book from the second century before Christ, says that, "Because of Satan's jealousy death came into the world." 9 One of the Messiah's tasks is just to conquer death. Since the style of exposition in the Midrash is, as we have seen, to try to elucidate "every single detail" of the Torah, it is worth looking at the whole message of the Proto-evangel using more or less the same of method. According to the Rabbis the Messiah will effect a "reparation", tiqun ha- .Olam, in the world. Theologians of today have begun to discuss the concept of "rehabilitation". When Christ atoned for our sins, bore our sicknesses, and conquered death he 'rectified' the consequences of the Fall. Daniel 9:24 describes this Messianic commission more briefly and clearly as "to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness." In this way the seed of the woman is to crush the head of the serpent. These aspects of the Proto-evangel are handled figuratively in both Jewish and Christian exegesis. The Targum of Jonathan Ben .Uzziel states here that if the woman's offspring observe the Law they will be in a position to crush the serpent's head: "And they will finally make peace in the days of the Messiah-King". The Targum plays on the words aqev, 'heel', and iqvah, 'end'. The Jerusalem Targum calls attention to the endtimes when it interprets the verse as, "They will make peace in the end, at the close of the end of the days, in the days of the Messiah King." The Aramaic word for
Page 15
17 "making peace", shefiyuta, resembles the Hebrew word for "crush", yeshufchah, and some Aramaicists would accept the translation, "Finally, in the days of the Messiah King, he will be wounded in the heel." This is in keeping with verse 16 of Psalm 22, which in Christian exegesis is understood as a type of the Messiah. In many languages this verse has been translated, according to the most probable reading of the original, as, "They have pierced my hands and feet". Similarly Zechariah 13:6 in Hebrew reads: " 'What are those wounds between your hands?' and he will answer,'They were struck into me at the house of my friends.' " The most common understanding of this verse among the Rabbis is illustrated by the so-called 'Jonathan's interpretation': " 'They will be healed (from the bite of the serpent)' means that they will receive an antidote; 'Make peace' means 'peace and security'; and 'He will be their healer in the future, in the days of the Messiah' that there will be peace and rest." 10 The serpent has also from early times had its own place in the exegesis of the hope of Messianic deliverance, as we shall see when we come to Jacob's blessing. During the wanderings in the wilderness Moses made a serpent of bronze, which healed the people from their snake bites when they looked upon it. 2 Ki. 18:4 relates how Hezekiah destroyed this talisman which had become a substitute for true religion: "He broke into pieces the bronze serpent Moses had made, for up to that time the Israelites had been burning incense to it; it was called 'Nehushtan' " [a piece of brass]. Such is human nature that an inanimate object can become the focus of a false worship. I remember a delightful conversation I had in a shop with the name of 'Nehushtan' which sold copper- conductors, owned by devout Jews. I said to the distinguished looking gentleman behind the counter, "You've certainly got a good Biblical name". The man knew me and understood what I was getting at. I asked half seriously if he knew what the shop name referred to. He nodded, and asked in return, "Do you know what RaSHi (R.Solomon Ben Yitshak) says about it?" I promised to check it up, and laid down a counterchallenge: "Do you know how the Wisdom of Solomon interprets Nehushtan?" He didn't know, so I quoted from the 16th chapter of this work, which dates from before the time of Christ; "For you gave them a token of salvation to remind them of your law's command. He who turned toward it [the brazen serpent] was saved, not by what he saw, but by you, the Saviour of all..." "You lead men down to the gates of Hades and back again." 11 Back home I looked up RaSHi's exposition of the subject, which ran as follows: "It was called by the name 'Ne .hushtan' which is a derogatory term and is understood to mean,'What do we need with this?' This is nothing but a serpent of bronze!" 12 RaSHI, a Mediaeval scholar, must have known Jesus' words about being "lifted up" just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness. The pious businessman too may well have been aware of this. According to our Christian faith the cross was given as a "token of salvation". Jesus went down into Hades and rose again, taking away enmity and bringing in peace. The Targums stress that the Messiah will come "in the end times". The Aramaic term "in the end", be-Iqva, resembles the notion iqvoth meshiha, which means the 'footsteps of the Messiah'. The Talmud contains an extended discussion of these "Messianic footsteps," signs of the end times, to which we will return in the NT section. For the Rabbis anything to do with the End Times has a Messianic flavour to it. RaDaQ, Rabbi David Qimhi -- of whom it was said, "Without him we will not find the correct way to interpret the Scriptures" -- states in connection with Is.2:2 that "everywhere the Last Days are mentioned reference is being made to the days of the Messiah." 13 This can be seen both in the interpretation of the Proto-evangel and in those OT prophecies which contain some term referring to the Last Days. But who is this "seed of the woman"? Why is the personal pronoun hû, 'he', used of it? Is 'seed' to be considered a singular or a collective noun? The Targum certainly associates 'him' with the Messiah King.
Page 16
18 But does the 'seed' concept have Messianic implications in other contexts too? Indeed it does: the Rabbis discuss this very issue at great length. In Gen.4:25 we read (in the Hebrew and in the AV): "God has granted me another seed in place of Abel." Rabbi Tanhuma -- of whom it was said that he was "the seal of the Midrashim" -- mentions that "here we are dealing with another seed who is from another place. And who is he? He is the Messiah-King." 14 Rabbi Huna says that "God prepared another seed from another place, and he is the Messiah-King." 15 The promise of Abraham's seed in Gen. 22:18, which occupies a central position in Christian Theology, is also seen in the Midrashim as referring to the Messiah: "And through your seed all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice." Midrash Rabbah discusses the subject extensively and declares that "in the days of the Messiah, Israel will be compared to the sand of the sea." 16 Paul, in Gal. 3:16, understood the meaning of 'Abraham's seed' in a similar way: "The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say 'and to seeds'. meaning many people, but 'and to your seed', meaning one person, who is Christ." Here Paul uses the typical Midrash al tiqra formula, 'Read not so, but so' -- a promise given in the singular is taken as referring to Christ as the Messiah. We might add that even Midrash Ruth associates the 'seed' concept with the Messiah, when speaking of the 'kinsmanredeemer' in Ruth 4:18. The Midrash highlights Perez, familiar from the genealogy in Matt. 1:3 and the account in Gen. chapter 38. The phrase "another seed from another place" is used again, here in reference to Perez. It is precisely to Perez that the observation about the Messiah rectifying the havoc caused by the Fall is related. The Midrash itself mentions this as an example of "profound" understanding. The Midrash Rabbah describes as follows the new phase which began with Perez: "This is the history of Perez and it has a profound significance. ... When the Holy One created his world there was as yet no Angel of Death... But when Adam and Eve fell into sin, all generations were corrupted. When Perez arose, history began to be fulfilled through him, because from him the Messiah would arise, and in his days the Holy One would cause death to be swallowed up, as it is written, 'He will destroy death forever'(Is. 25:8)." 17 It is hardly possible in a Jewish source text to find a nearer convergence to Paul's discussion of Christ as the conqueror of death. In Romans 5:12 we read: "Therefore just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, in this way death came to all men." 1 Cor. 15:22 adds, "For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive." The roots of this mystery of the history of salvation reach right back to the account of the fall of humanity. Professor Gottlieb Klein wrote at the beginning of this century that by means of the method known as notarikon, one aspect of which regarded each letter of a word as the initial letter of another word, the three Hebrew letters of the word 'Adam' were interpreted as referring to Adam, David, and the Messiah. 18 In this way Christ will 'correct' Adam's fall. Perhaps this is all just fanciful nonsense, but it derives from the Messianic expectation of believers who lived in ancient times. The prominence given to the Messiah-King by the Targums öthat he will make peace in place of the Proto- evangel's enmityö is reflected in Paul's letter to the Ephesians, although it is highly unlikely that there is any intrinsic connection. In chapter 2:14’-’16 we read, "For he himself is our PEACE, who... has destroyed... HOSTILITY... to create ONE NEW MAN out of the two, thus MAKING PEACE... through the cross, by which he put to death their HOSTILITY. He came and preached PEACE... " Although the NT does not quote the Proto-evangel directly, some trace of it can be seen in the greeting of Rom.16:20: "The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with
Page 17
19 you." ---------- 1. Sanhedrin 97a. 2. Sanhedrin 97b. 3. Midrash Bereshith Rabbath 1:2 and Yalqut, Mechiri to psalm 139:12 4. Pesikhta Rabbati 33 and Yalqut. 5. Pesikhta Rabbati 62,1 6. Yalqut Shimoni 56. 7. Megillath haSerachim 8.11 8. The subject has been dealt with by eg. Eugen Hühn in his book Die Messianischen Weissagungen - bis zu den targumim, Leipzig 1899, p 135. 9. The Wisdom of Solomon 2:27 10. The Rabbis' explanation of Jonathan. This interpretetation also corresponds to the understanding of S.H. Levey in his book The Messianic Exegesis of the Targum, in connection with Gen. 3:15. 11. The Wisdom of Solomon 16:7-8 and 13. 12. RaSHI on 2 Kings 18:4 13. Mikraoth Gedoloth in connection with Isaiah 2:2 14. Bereshit Rabbah 23. 15. Ruth Rabbah 8. 16. Bamidbar Rabbah 2. 17. Shemoth Rabbah 30. B.Pick in hin extensive series of articles Old testament Passages Messianically Applied, (Hebraica 1885 p 31) interprets this midrash in the same way. 18. G. Klein, Bilddrag till Israels Religionshistoria, Stockholma 1898, p 11. THE MESSIAH WHO WILL BREAK DOWN THE HEDGE AROUND THE LAW The search for the OT roots of the Christian faith is somewhat reminiscent of diving for pearls in the depths of the ocean. The diver first brings up a great quantity of shells from the sea bed and deposits them on the beach. The bystander sees only these outer casings until the shells are opened, upon which some may reveal a precious pearl hidden inside. Reading the old Jewish literature can be very frustrating since, for the most part, it concerns itself with the exposition of the religious ritual law, which is really of interest only to the Orthodox Jew. The spiritual and psychological dimensions so characteristic of the OT prophets are conspicuous by their almost total absence. Not infrequently, nevertheless, the tightly closed shell may yield up a rare pearl. Although the Rabbis find 'mysteries' in the OT in far greater abundance than that to which the Christian church is accustomed, they still frequently stress the words of Deut. 29:29: "The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children for ever." Mental and spiritual concepts must, by their very nature, be described figuratively. We cannot explain precisely what, for example, 'faith', 'hope', or 'love' is. By the same token, the Messianic mystery has, as it were, created its own secret code, which must be "cracked" before it will be understood. One of the toughest nuts is Gen.38:29 on the son of Judah and Tamar: " 'So this is how you have broken out!' And he was named Perez." We have already come across the discussion associated with the name of Perez, regarding the Messiah as the conqueror of death. Ben Parets, "son of Perez" is actually one of the best known cryptic Messiah epithets. In Matthew's genealogy of Jesus the name appears in the form 'Phares': "And Judah begat Phares." (Matt. 1:3 AV) Therefore Jesus was, in a sense the 'Son of Perez'. The 'Seal of the Midrashim', R. Tanhuma Bar Abba, speaks again and again of the Messiah in connection with Perez. "He is the final saviour, the Messiah-King." Tanhuma states that there are sinners who through their falling have sustained great loss, and those who have benefitted from their misdemeanours.
Page 18
20 "Thus Judah profited, because from him came forth Perez and Hezron from whom are descended David and the Messiah-King, he who will save Israel. Behold how great the difficulties the Holy One indeed gave until he was to raise up the Messiah-King from Judah, he of whom it is written, "And the spirit of the Lord will be upon him." 19 The Midrash Rabbah discusses this verse at greater length. Firstly the half-humorous observation is made that, "Judah was busy taking a wife, while the Holy One, blessed be He, was creating the light of the Messiah." 20 One of the Rabbinic expository works known as "The Priestly Gift" says of this that, "The last Saviour is the Messiah, the Son of David, who is descended from Judah's son Perez," and the Midrash part continues, "This is the Messiah-King; as it is written, 'A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse' and 'The Lord will extend your mighty sceptre from Zion.' " (Is. 11:1 and Ps. 110:2) The Rabbis' explanation adds: "This is the Messiah, who will soon appear, because it is written of him that,'One who breaks open the way [Heb. porets, from the same root as Peres] will go up before them.' " (Micah 2:13) It is important to take note of the Bible passages mentioned above. They illustrate a method by which weakly founded Messianic prophecies are set in their larger context. We see furthermore that the Targums and Midrashim generally speak of the 'Messiah-King', and not so much of some nebulous 'Messiah concept'. RaMBaN (R. Moses Ben Nahman), who lived towards the end of the 13th century, describes the birth of Perez as follows: "He was encircled by a hedge, and he was enclosed within it. That is why it is said 'So this is how you have broken through the hedge and come out from within it'." Perez was the first-born, "The first-born through the power of the Most High, as it is written, 'I will give to him a first-born son'. This was written about the holy person who is to come, David, the King of Israel -- long may he live. Those who are wise will understand." 21 What would 'those who are wise' understand, and what is meant by 'breaking through the hedge'? Historically this well depicts what happened when Christianity broke out of the Judaic mould, as we can see from the following. The Rabbis speak a great deal about the 'hedge of the Law'. Galatians 4:4--5 says that Jesus "was born under law" and "redeemed those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons." "It is for freedom," Paul continues, "that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery"(5:1). "If you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law"(5:18). From being a gift, the Law in Judaism can become an enslaving yoke. In the Judaism of today there are officially 613 commands and prohibitions. It would appear that the development into a religion of law took place at a very early stage. The prophet Isaiah wrote ca. 700 years before Christ that instead of being the 'word of repose' religion had become a demand: "Do and do, do and do, rule on rule, rule on rule; a little here, a little there -- so that they will go and fall backwards, be injured and snared and captured" (28:10--13), and that the fear of God was nothing more than "rules taught by men" (29:13). The Targum of Jonathan explains that God made Man of 248 bones and 365 sinews, the number of days in the solar year (together = 613). In addition to these 'thou shalt' and 'thou shalt not' commands there was a separate group of ancillary commands which made up the 'hedge around the Law'. In the shelter of this fold the devout Jew had to live.
Page 19
21 Jesus, in his teaching, was forced to speak about this very misapplication. Referring to the words of Isaiah quoted above, he added that: "They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men... Then the disciples came to him and asked, 'Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?' He replied, 'Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. Leave them alone' " (Matt. 15:8--14). Thus Jesus truly broke through the hedge of the Law. Moses, when he instituted the commandments, said to the people, "Hear now, O Israel, the decrees and laws I am about to teach you... Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it!" 22 Jewish scholars have, of course, tried to give the taryag, the 613 precepts, a foundation in the Pentateuch, but in both these and in the seyag, the ancillary rules, there are elements which the Rabbis themselves would concede have no basis in the written law. Precisely these halakha or traditional precepts are one of modern Israel's most difficult internal problems. Paul spoke about this 'hedge around the Law' in Ephesians 2:14--15; "For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has DESTROYED THE BARRIER, THE DIVIDING WALL of hostility, by 29 shepherd. Jesus too showed himself to be the good shepherd who searches out his lost sheep. In one well- known story of the Rabbis there is a description of Moses carrying a stray lamb to a well. A voice is then heard from heaven to say, "Because you have shown mercy to a creature of flesh and blood, I will make you the shepherd of your people". Moses came to Egypt to liberate his brothers from slavery; Jesus came to redeem us from the yoke of sin. Moses was the leader of his people; Jesus went before his disciples. Moses gave the tables of the Covenant; Jesus wished to write the dual commandment of Love in believers' hearts. Moses also served as a judge; similarly, Jesus stressed that all judgement was entrusted to the Son, that all may honour the Son. Moses prayed for those who opposed and maligned him, such as Miriam. When the people had been worshipping the golden calf Moses called out, "Whoever is for the LORD, come to me". He prayed, "Please forgive their sin -- but if not, then blot me out of the book you have written" (Ex. 32:26,32); in the same way Jesus said, "Come to me all who are heavy laden and weary, and I will give you rest," and he prayed on the cross for the malefactors. Moses was "a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth" (Num. 12:3); Jesus too was "meek and lowly in heart". Such comparisons show that Jesus really was the promised prophet who would be "like Moses". The character of the revelation of God to Moses. Moses' relationship with God differed from that of his predecessors. Jewish writers often put so much emphasis on the ordinances of the Pentateuch that Moses' personal devotional life is ignored. Christians, for their part, often caricature the "religion of Moses" as the religion of vengeance, the religion which demands "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But does this tally with the revelation of God which Moses received? In the early stages of his vocation Moses heard the word of God: "I am the LORD. I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob as God Almighty, but by my name the LORD I did not make myself known to them." (Ex. 6:2--3) When Miriam and Aaron maligned Moses God said to them, "Listen to my words: When a prophet of the LORD is among you, I reveal myself to him in visions, I speak to him in dreams. But this is not true of my servant Moses; he is faithful in all my house. With him I speak face to face, clearly and not in riddles; he sees the form of the LORD" (Num. 12:6- -8). What does it mean that Moses knew God "by his name the LORD", and what is the significance of him "seeing the form of the LORD"? The leading Mediaeval Talmud and OT expositor RaSHI states that apparently Moses did not actually see the "form of the LORD" but it was as if in a "spoken vision" or in a "Holy Spirit vision", and as if from behind. 52 Jacob was another who saw the face of God when, by the stream Jabbok, he wrestled with the "Angel of the Presence" (lit. 'of the faces'), Peniel, and said, "I have seen God face to face, and yet my life was spared" (Gen. 32:30, Is. 63:9). Jacob's vision was more an angelic vision in which, according to the Rabbis -- as we shall see later -- the Messiah appeared. But how is it possible that Moses could actually have "seen" God, since before the verse concerned he is told, "But you cannot see my face, for no-one may see me and live" (Ex. 33:20)? Could it be that what is meant by "seeing the form" of the LORD is that Moses came to understand something of the "inner being" of God? The Bible does not, however, speak of God as an abstract idea but as a person. There is a danger in present Judaism of handling God agnostically or in a deistic way, just as if he was not the God of revelation, Deus revelatus. In this way the thinking goes that a demiurge created the world but left it then to its own devices. This danger in Judaism is partly a reaction to Christianity, in its emphasis that "the word became flesh" and "was made manifest in the flesh" (John 1:14 and 1.Tim. 3:16) -- God became a man. Even though the oldest
Page 28
30 Jewish writings imply a divine origin in speaking of the Messiah, this 'incarnation', Christ's becoming a man, is one of its greatest stumbling blocks. It was for this reason that RaMBaM, Maimonides, formed the 3rd of his 13 articles of faith, which states: "I believe with perfect faith that the Creator, blessed be his name, is not corporeal and that he is free from all the accidents of matter, and that he has not any form whatsoever." 53 As early as the time of the Jewish philosopher Philo in the first Christian century the custom of avoiding the name of God began to take root. The circumlocutions "the Name", ha-Shem, and 'the Place', ha-Maqom, were used in its stead. Indeed God promised when giving the commandments that, "In every place that I cause my name to be honoured, I will come to you and bless you" (Ex. 20:24). In the Creation account God says: "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness... So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him" (Gen. 1:26--7). There are two Hebrew words here tselem, 'image' (in modern Hebrew, 'photograph'), and demuth, 'figure' or 'similitude'. When Moses is allowed to look at the "form of the LORD" the word temunah is used, which in its primary sense means a 'drawing'. All of these expressions are very concrete. God is a person and he has a definite form and being. This was experienced by Moses on a deeper level than by his predecessors. We could not conceive of God as being material. Still, he has revealed himself in a form which "the material person can understand". The religion of Moses was not just a general Creator-belief in the Almighty. In what, then, lies the difference between the religion of the Patriarchs and that of Moses? The Jerusalem Talmud states that the Patriarchs knew only the "God of heaven, but God did not reveal to them the Lord's MIMRA". This Aramaic word MIMRA the Rabbis often identified with the Messiah. It corresponds to the Greek logos or 'word'. Targum Jonathan says that, "My name the LORD I did not, however, reveal to them through my Holy Spirit." The name of the Lord as a sign of salvation But who is this Lord who revealed himself to Moses? Abraham, after all, built an altar to the Lord; but it was reserved for Moses to hear this name and its explanation from the burning bush (Ex. 3:14). The word "LORD" appears approx. 6700 times in the OT. In its Hebrew form Yahweh it highlights the presence of God. The words 'was', 'is', and 'is to be' can be formed from its root letters. The Past, Present, and Future -- the whole "trinity" contained in the concept of time -- are united in God's essential being. When Moses enquired about the name of God he received in reply the answer, "I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you'." God is! He is the key to the whole of reality. In the revelation of God in the Burning Bush the word anochi, 'I', which God uses of himself, is given as an ôth or 'sign'. Small wonder that the Midrash sees here a reference to the Messiah: "And he said, 'I (anochi) will be with you' and 'This will be the sign to you' (v 12); What do these words mean? Our Sages, blessed be their memory, say that, 'It is symbolic of the first deliverance, for with an anochi Israel came into Egypt, as it is said, 'I (anochi) will go with you into Egypt and with an anochi I will lead you back from there (Gen. 46:4)'. It is also symbolic of the latter redemption, as it is said, 'I (anochi) will heal you and [in the Messianic times] save you'." And indeed, the name of the Messiah in Isaiah 7:14 is Immanu-EL, 'God (is) with us', and he will speak in the name of God. The Talmud Sages too see in the name Yahweh a reference to the Messiah: "Three things were created on the basis of the name of the Holy One: the Righteous, the Messiah, and Jerusalem." 54 The thought about the Messiah is inferred here from Jeremiah 23:6 and 33:16, according to which God will raise up to David a Righteous Branch; "And this is the name by which he will be called: The LORD our righteousness". Rabbis
Page 29
31 Shmuel Ben Nahman (ca.260 AD) and Abba Bar Kahana (ca.300 AD) came to the conclusion that, "this is the name of the Messiah". 55 Christian interpretation usually understands the name Yahweh to mean 'the Lord of the covenant'. The early Christian church also saw in Yahweh more than a hint of Messianism. In their use of the so-called "translation of the Seventy", the 'Septuagint', in which the Hebrew 'Yahweh' is translated by the Greek 'Kyrios', the early Christians understood it as referring to Christ. It is certainly true that Jesus acted with the authority of God, preaching that, "No-one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father"... "He who looks at me sees the One who sent me"... "I and the Father are one"... "Come to me"... "Learn from me"... "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life". This is highlighted by the early church's briefest creed: "Jesus Christ is Lord!" (Phil. 2:11). The sign of the Latter Redemption is precisely here in the way our Saviour used the word 'I', which proves his lordship. Did Moses believe in an avenging God or in a God of mercy? In the 33rd chapter of Exodus we read that, "The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend". And Moses prayed, "If your Presence does not go with us, do not send us up from here. How will anyone know that you are pleased with me and with your people unless you go with us?" (vv 11,15--16) When Moses carved out two new stone tablets to replace those which he had broken in his wrath, the "LORD" passed in front of him, then he heard the Old Testament's most beautiful hymn of grace which is repeated over and over in the Prophets and in the Psalms: "The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation" (Ex. 34:6--7). In this short hymn which signs of the character of God there are found four separate expressions for 'mercy' and three words meaning 'sin', which the LORD promises to 'carry' -- in other words, to forgive. The Old Testament emphasises in many different ways Man's 'guilt' before a Holy God, and to refer to this the Hebrew language employs eight separate terms, which are used extensively. Their primal meanings have been studied by Martin Buber, among others: The word het, 'crime, offence', may come from the idea of a 'dividing wall', as in the Arabic hataya /hit; pesha, 'rebellion', comes from the same root as the word for 'step, stride' and is connected with a virtuous walk; avon means 'distortion'; averah means 'passing over or through'; avel comes from the word ôl meaning 'yoke'; resha expresses 'violent wickedness', mirmah 'deception' and 'betrayal', and âven 'wrongness', derived from the same root as 'grief'. The Greek New Testament uses mainly one word for 'sin', hamartia, which depicts 'going astray' and 'error'. The Bible takes up the issue of man's sin right from its very first pages. Even the two main Hebrew words for prayer lehitpallel and lehithannen reflect this thought: the first comes from plili, 'guilty', and the second from the word hanun, meaning 'gracious' -- and both words are in a grammatical form which illustrates a self-repeating act. In prayer we always confess our sins and give thanks to God that he is gracious. The OT speaks only a couple of times about the "love" of God. Rather, the love of man for God and for his neighbour is stressed from time to time. The Hebrew term for love, then, refers primarily to human feelings. When speaking of God the word 'mercy' corresponds to 'love', because we do not deserve the favour of a Holy God. The Greek NT solved the problem by creating a special term agape for the love of God -- the word eros being associated with the sensual life, and phileo, which is also used for 'love', means 'to kiss'. The hymn of grace heard by Moses depicts this agape using four different 'mercy' words, and relates the forgiveness and faithfulness of God to the context of 'mercy': he "abounds in love and faithfulness". For
Page 30
32 'faithfulness' the OT uses here the word emet or 'truth'. These characteristics are also true of Jesus: "He was full of grace and truth"... "Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ" (John 1:14,17). A representative of the Helsinki synagogue once complained in a television discussion that the words Moses heard had been translated to sound like they were thoroughly vengeful: "God does not leave unpunished but will avenge!" The Authorised Version is closer to the Hebrew when it says that, "God will by no means clear the guilty", and the German Bible states that before him "no man is without guilt". The original text reads, ve-naqqeh lo ye-naqqeh; behind this lies a root meaning 'cleansing', which is emphasised by the repeation. Accurately translated, this verse reads as "cleaning he will not clean", in other words, he will "leave uncleansed". And as for 'vengeance'? Hebrew uses the milder term poqed avon, the verbal root form of which means 'counting' and in one of its forms the 'giving of a task'. Modern Hebrew's paqid or 'official, functionary' comes from the same root. The English 'reckon with' in the sense of 'take into consideration' is probably closest to the Hebrew. Rather than the vengeful translations of today it would be clearer to stick closely to the original and say that, God "forgives wickedness, rebellion, and sin, or he leaves them uncleansed, and he reckons with the wickedness of the fathers..." The Hebrew Bible uses six main concepts instead of "vengeance or retribution". Their meaning; like "reckon with", "to pay", "restore", "recompense", "to bring up", or "return"; 56 is very mild by nature. There is also of course the harsh word, naqam, 'vengeance', which God uses of himself: "Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord". When Hebrew idiom is given its due respect, 'vengeance' means the justice of God and its natural consequences: "What a man sows, that shall he reap". In the book of Job we read: "Far be it from God to do evil, from the Almighty to do wrong. He repays a man for what he has done; he brings upon him what his conduct deserves." 57 The Prophet who will be conceived by the Holy Spirit We have already seen how the Targum of Jonathan twice mentions that the prophet like Moses will be "conceived by the Holy Spirit". When looking more closely at the background to this thought, the Judaist H.L.Strack comes to mind. In 1911 he initiated a discussion of the so-called Sadducean documents of Damascus, which speak at length of a "teacher of righteousness" and the "Holy Spirit". 58 In these literary finds -- which actually belong to the same genre as the Dead Sea Scrolls -- there is an account of God concealing himself and rejecting the remnant of Israel: "And he will raise up to them a Teacher of Righteousness to lead them in the way of their hearts." The Messiah is referred to here by the name 'the Branch': "And he will teach righteousness in the last days". Of him it is said that God will "make his Holy Spirit known to them through his Messiah, and he will be the TRUTH." Reference is made four times to the "Messiah of Aaron and Israel". The "Messiah of Aaron" means his priestly role, and the "Messiah of Israel" his kingly state. The Dead Sea Scrolls contain a section which also brings to mind the above. Speaking of the "Godly men" in the Essene community we read that, "When God begets the Messiah, 59 with them will come the Priest, head of the whole congregation of Israel and of all the elders of the sons of Aaron... And they will sit before him, each man according to his dignity. And the last to sit will be the Messiah of Israel." Dr R.Gordis says that if this excerpt is taken seriously it will be "highly important as a source for the concept of a Divinely begotten Messiah". 60 The word yolid which appears in the text means in its primary sense to 'beget'. The Targum's mention of the prophet who will be raised up through the Holy Spirit has been completely overlooked by critics, although it is more important than the Dead Sea Scroll excerpt in
Page 31
33 that it relates directly to the exegesis of the Old Testament. The Targum uses the word aqim, 'I will raise up' , for the begetting of the prophet like Moses. This is all set in relief by the saying in Psalm 2:7: "You are my son; today I have begotten you". This verse -- which the Rabbis considered a Messianic prophecy -- contains the same term as in the Dead Sea Scrolls for "beget". It was also of central importance in the early church (Acts 13:33, Heb. 1:5 and 5:5) We have seen that in the light of the old Jewish literature the Messiah is to be a "Second Moses" and the "Last Saviour"; he will be called by the name "Lord"; grace and truth will be united in him; he will be conceived by the Holy Spirit; he will speak and act in the name of God, and that will be his distinguishing "sign"; in this way he will show himself to be Moses "redivivus". All of these features apply to Jesus. ---------- 49. David L. Cooper, The Messiah, His redemptive Career, p15. 50. In Hebrew, respectively be-Ruah qudsha and de-Ruah qudsha 51. Midrash Qoheleth Rabbati 1. 52. Mikraoth Gedoloth Bamidbar 12:8 53. The Jewish prayerbook Sidûr, Shakharit 13 ikarim, 3. 54. Masekhet Baba Bathra 75b. 55. Masekhet Baba Bathra 75b. 56. lifkôd, leshallem, leshavôth, lehamtsî, lasîm al, lehashîv. 57. See Galatians 6:7 and Job 34:11. 58. G. Margoliouth, The Two Zadokite Messiahs, J.T.S. 1911, pp446-450 59. Here we have the word "beget", im yolid El eth ha-Mashiah 60. R. Godis, The begotten Messiah in the Qumran Scrolls, Vet. Test. 1957, pp191-194. Fragment I QSa I1 1-15. THE TORAH OF MOSES AND THE MESSIAH Tradition assigns to the Messiah a threefold role: kingly, priestly, and prophetic. When speaking of Jacob's blessing we also mentioned Judah's "ruler's staff", for which Hebrew uses the word me .hoqêq, 'lawgiver'. In his prophetic role the Messiah will draw up a new Law for the people. On the strength of this we must now ask, "What then is the role of the Law? Does it always lead into bondage? Can the Torah liberate man? Were all of Moses' injunctions intended to be eternally binding? Where do we draw the line between the commandments of God and the commandments of men? Could it be that the law of God is centred upon some less common fundamental rules? Does God demand more from his chosen people than from the Gentiles? Does he show favouritism towards some of his children and not to others? Will the Messiah institute a new Torah? Are there essential differences between the Torah of Moses and that of the Messiah? Such questions are tough nuts to crack, particularly for the Jews. The Messiah's Torah and the future of the Law The future of the Law has preoccupied the Rabbis from early times. They sometimes asked, "Torah, whatever will become of you?" 61 And further, in the Talmud there is a discussion of the possible ranking of the precepts in order of importance: "Moses was given 613 precepts; of these there are 365 (thou shalt) in accordance with the number of days in the year, and 248 (thou shalt not) according to the number of bones in a man's body... Came David and cut them down to eleven... Came Isaiah and cut them to six... Came Micah and cut them to three... Isaiah came back and cut them down to two... Came Habakkuk and cut them to one, as it is written (Hab. 2:4), 'The righteous shall live by faith'." 62
Page 32
34 Paul founded his teaching of Justification by Faith partly on these words of Habbakuk when he wrote: "For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: 'The righteous will live by faith'." 63 I remember once in a Jerusalem public park chancing upon an acquaintance of mine, a builder from Yemen, someone I knew as a devout man who possessed an intimate familiarity with the Scriptures. I sat down next to him on the park bench where he was sitting, and in the course of our conversation he told me how he had originally come to Israel by "flying carpet", and how his father had said to him before his departure, "My son, you will never manage to fulfil all the requirements the Law will make of you in Israel. Just remember the words of Habakkuk, that 'the righteous are to live by faith'." My friend was helped by his father's wise counsel to see what is central to the Law. The ancient Sages reject on the one hand the idea that the injunctions received from their fathers will cease to be valid, yet on the other hand they sometimes stress that the Messiah will give Israel a new Torah. RaMBaM states in the 8th and 9th of his 13 dogmas that the "Torah which we now have was given to Moses" and "This Torah will not be changed nor will the Creator -- may he be blessed -- institute any other Torah". He nevertheless explains in his work "Ordinances of the Kings" that the King annointed as Messiah will "sit on his kingly throne and write for himself a Book of the Law in addition to the Law given to our Fathers" and "He will compel Israel to obey these commandments". Not even the NT speaks of the abrogation of the Torah but rather of its "fulfilment". Could this be the same as when the Pesikhta Rabbati says that "The Torah will revert to its original state"? 64 Jesus "fulfilled" the punishment of the Law by his atoning death. According to the Rabbis the Messiah will be invested with such authority. Yalqut Isaiah states that, "The Holy One -- may he be blessed -- will sit (in the Garden of Eden) and draw up a new Torah for Israel, which will be given to them by the Messiah." 65 Even the fearful thought of "abrogation" appears in the traditions of the Wise: "In the future the commandments will be annulled.' 66 In the Midrash Mekhilta from the time of the Tannaites -- that is, from the first two Christian centuries -- we find the statement that, "At the end the Torah will be forgotten." 67 R.Shimon Ben Eleazar, who was active from ca. 170--200 AD, declares that, "This is how it will be in the days of the Messiah; there will be no 'thou shalt' and 'thou shalt not' commandments (zechut ve-hovâh)." 68 Klausner, in his book "The Messianic Idea in Israel", explains that, "The natural interpretation of this is that in the days of the Messiah, the Torah and the Commandments will lose their significance". 69 In so far as we understand redemption history as different eras, as we have seen the Sages above doing, we can interpret mentions of the 2000 years of the Torah and the 2000 years associated with the days of the Messiah as more or less mutually exclusive -- which is how Klausner and others have understood it. In practice this means that in the Messianic age there will be Messianic laws. RaMBaM insists upon the natural character of the Messianic age. He writes: "Do not entertain the idea that the natural course of this world will change in the days of the Messiah, or that the laws of nature will be suspended then. No. The world will follow its own course." 70 This would seem to imply that the Messianic age will be quite normal history in which the Messiah will govern by his spirit those who believe in him. The Sages could hardly have meant that the Messiah would live for these 2000 years. Isaiah's prophecy about peace on Earth in which even the physical world will be renewed and where "the wolf will live with the lamb" (Is. 11:6) may, according to the Sages, apply to the 1000 year "sabbath". This picture of a sabbatical age, of which we catch glimpses now and then in the Rabbinic literature, brings to mind the vision of the millenial kingdom in Revelation chapter 20, where the phrase "1000 years" appears six times. In Christian understanding, the actual Day of Judgement and the
Page 33
35 New Heaven and New Earth do not take place until after this. Could the Talmud be referring to something like this when it says that: "The Holy One -- blessed be his name -- will not renew his world until 7000 years have elapsed."? 71 The concept of the 'annulment of the Law', a phrase used by some of the Rabbis, has had serious consequences for both Jews and Christians. Certainly there are differences of emphasis between the teachings of Moses and Christ, but both of them strove to realise the unchanging will of God. The Midrash on Ecclesiastes says that, "The Torah which man learns in this world is but vanity compared with the teaching of the Messiah." 72 Referring to Psalm 146:7 the corresponding Midrash says: " 'The LORD sets prisoners free'... What does this 'setting free of prisoners' mean? There are those who say that in the future the Holy One will make all unclean animals fit for eating." 73 For 'prisoners' the Hebrew OT uses here the word asûrîm, 'forbidden things', rather than the normal word asirîm, and this gives rise to a discussion of forbidden foods. We remember how Jesus stresses that "What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean', but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean' " and, "In saying this Jesus declared all foods 'clean' " (Matt. 15:11 and Mark 7:19). In actual fact the Old Testament's regulations concerning food do not particularly refer to the pollution of the body, as Lev. 11:43--4 in the original Hebrew regarding the eating of unclean beasts twice declares: "Do not pollute 'your souls', eth naphshotêchem!" In other words, it is not merely a question of health but also an aesthetic matter. The Torah interpreted by the False Messiah Sabbatai Tsvi In the teaching of the Greek Neo-Platonists body and soul are so distinct from each other that immoral conduct does not necessarily affect the inner man. In its day, this way of thinking crept into both Jewish and Christian circles with the result that Psalm 146, for example, received the interpretation that "The Lord frees us from prohibitions", and so the door was opened to one of religious history's most odious phenomena. Professor Gershom Scholem, an authority on Jewish mysticism, in his book "The Messianic Idea in Judaism" writes at length about the False Messiah Sabbatai Tsvi. 74 The name Sabbatai in Hebrew means 'the star Saturnus' -- small wonder that he became a false Messiah, just like Bar Kokhba, the 'son of a star', before him. Balaam, son of Beori, prophesied in his time that, "A star will rise from Jacob and the sceptre will ascend from Israel" referring, in accordance with both Jewish and Christian exegesis, to the Messiah (Num. 24:17). Nevertheless that same Balaam enticed Israel into immorality. More abominable yet, however, was the way in which Sabbatai Tsvi and his compatriot Yankiev Frank were to appear and interpret the Torah. Only one year after Sabbatai Tsvi had proclaimed himself in Israel to be the Messiah he converted to Islam, forced to do so by the Sultan of Turkey. This was in the year 1666 AD. His followers, however, explained that their master had merely "gone down into the world", klipôt, 75 in order to save those who were in the world. He became "stricken with illness" for our sakes; he had to descend to the level of those who were still ba-Hol, in bondage to the daily round and superficiality, without holiness. In this respect Sabbatai himself explained: "Be blessed, Thou who freest us from prohibitions!" He claimed that the Messiah was to startle those who believed in him by performing "strange works". "The denial of the Law," he proclaimed, "is its fulfilment." His followers too were to descend to "trivialities" and to "open the doors of uncleanness" committing sin so much that it would no longer disturb them. There was nothing forbidden in the "sublime Torah". The word atsilim which means literally the 'sublime' or 'noble' ones became the nickname of Shabtai's followers. These believers really had to do quite revolting acts in secret. To illustrate, let the following suffice: In Turkey the 'Atsilim' held special "lights-out rituals" in which they exchanged sexual partners, a custom they had apparently learned from an Islamic sect. The members of the movement had to swear an oath of secrecy which forbad them to speak to outsiders about their teaching. Only by denying the "Torah of Creation", the laws of society, could they reach the
Page 34
36 level of the "sublime Torah". They invented their own Confession of Faith with 13 articles, in which it was explained that the Ten Commandments had been abrogated, but that the ritual law was still to be observed. The Confession ends with the plea that the saviour and Messiah Sabbatai Tsvi will come back "quickly, and in our own day". The closest parallel to the follower of Sabbatai Tsvi is the Nazi Übermensch, the 'superman' who is also above all morality. The "man of lawlessness", the Antichrist, is said to "oppose and exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshipped" (2 Thess. 2:4). We learn from the Sabbatai Tsvi episode that bare religiosity with no conception of holiness really does open wide the "gates of uncleanness". We see, however, in this error some aspects of Jewish Messianic expectation, albeit negatively developed. If we were to compare the Torahs of Jesus and Sabbatai we would first of all notice that Jesus did not come "to abolish the Law but to fulfil it". He prayed for his disciples: "My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of it. Sanctify them by the truth" (John 17:15-17). The followers of Sabbatai were taught to perform obscenities in secret; Jesus taught his disciples to carry out good deeds in secret. Only a good tree can bear good fruit. Jesus even went as far as to give his listeners the challenge "Which of you can prove me guilty of sin?" The Christian is to walk always in the light. It is true that the whole Jewish exposition of the Torah is intended as a private matter for Israel alone. The Sages frequently repeat that "The Torah was intended only for those who ate manna in the wilderness". The Jewish understanding of the Torah can be depicted as a series of concentric circles: the innermost rings are the Ten Commandments; then come the 613 precepts -- the taryag; next come the ancillary rules, the seyag or 'hedge' around the Law; In addition to all this the 'Law' signifies the teachings of the Pentateuch and also the exposition given to it by both the Talmudic and the Mediaeval scholars. The word 'Torah', however, means only 'teaching', even though the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the OT made ca. 200 BC, translated the Hebrew by the word nomos, 'law'. Frequently we come across the distinction drawn between the Written and the Oral Law. The scholars themselves do not always consider it necessary to explain the different aspects of the Law because like Paul they are addressing "those who know the Law" (Rom. 7:1). However, in the context of the Messianic Idea the Torah receives a universal significance, made clear by the Prophet Isaiah: " The Law will go out from Zion, the word of the LORD from Jerusalem". 76 The basis of Paul's interpretation of the Torah Paul's interpretation of the Torah arose from the awareness that the teachings of Christ were meant for all nations. In this way he was forced to take a stand as to what were mere 'commandments of men' in the Jewish exposition of the Torah. As a profound authority on his own tradition he recognised that the Messiah had the right to give 'a new interpretation to the Law' and even to tear down the 'hedge'. In the Christian camp the claim is sometimes made that Paul's logic is "capricious", internally "inconsistent", and "vacillating". 77 The Jewish camp, for its part, reckons that Paul's attitude to the Torah was "completely negative". 78 One factor which contributes to this Jewish misunderstanding of Paul is the way Rom. 10:4 has been translated into many western languages as "Christ is the end of the Law!" 79 However, the Greek word translated as 'end', telos, means primarily 'goal', as in "The end justifies the means". This same word telos is found in 1.Tim. 1:5, which in the NIV is translated as "The goal of this command is love!". Jesus made this point perfectly clear in the Sermon on the Mount when he said: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them" (Matt. 5:17). In this spirit it would be better to translate the verse in Romans regarding Christ that he is the 'goal' of the Law. There is nothing negative in that.
Page 35
37 What then is the logic of Paul's interpretation of the Law, and how does his scholarly exposition square up with the teachings of the Old Testament and with the points brought out by the earliest Jewish Messianic Expectation? For the sake of clarity it may be best to divide the answer into a number of basic points. 1. Firstly, we must see that the Bible depicts God as holy and that he demands holiness. Moses on several occasions received the words "Be holy, because I, the LORD your God, am holy" (Lev. 11:44, 19:2, 20:26). Therefore Paul too wrote: "The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men... There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil; first for the Jew, and then for the Gentile" (Rom. 1:18 and 2:9). When a certain pastor once expressed the wish that young people might be burdened with a guilty conscience until the problem of their sin was dealt with, people took offence at him. Nevertheless, he spoke just as Paul had done: "So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good" (Rom. 7:12). "We know that the Law is good if a man uses it properly" (1 Tim. 1:8). The Law is also "spiritual" (Rom. 7:14). When God through his Holy Spirit reveals to us our sin, we are forced to say with Paul: "I know that nothing good lives in me"; "So I find this law at work: when I want to do good, evil is right there with me"; "I see another law at work in my members... making me a prisoner" (Rom. 7:18,21,23). Only the person whom God has his hand upon "knows, finds, and sees" his true state. This is also brought about by the Law, which was given "so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God" (Rom. 3:19). "So the Law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith" (Gal. 3:24). Here we see the logic of Paul's interpretation of the Law, which every believer inevitably experiences as real. Modern Judaism's understanding of Man is quite different from that found in the New Testament. The devout Jew reads every morning in his prayer book, Sidûr, the words: "My God, the soul which thou hast given me is pure." Israel's most popular TV Rabbi once stated in his Sabbath morning service that, "In us there is more light than dark, more goodness than bad -- the Christians teach otherwise". And indeed: Jesus taught that "From within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, murder, adultery", the whole gamut of our sinfulness (Matt. 15:11 and Mark 7:21--22). Man is utterly corrupted by inherited sin. That is why he needs forgiveness and atonement for sin. Judaism generally rejects the idea of original sin and claims that the demands of God are not disproportionate. Hence the above-mentioned morning prayer asks: "Do not let the evil inclination (Heb. yetser ha-Râ) rule over us. Deliver us from evil men and evil companions and let us be joined to good inclinations." In other words, evil lies in wait for Man as if it were external to him. Gen. 6, however, contains an account of the generation of Noah which uses just that word yetser: "The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time". And Proverbs 20:9 asks: "Who can say, 'I have kept my heart pure; I am clean and without sin'?" It is none other than the holiness of God which leads to the conviction of sin and ultimately to genuine repentance. 2. Secondly, the will of God is manifestly much simpler than the hundreds of ritual and human commandments created by Jewish tradition. Furthermore, differentiating between the true manna eaters and the Gentiles in their relationship to God results in spiritual discrimination. The prophet Amos cried out: " 'Are not you Israelites the same to me as the Cushites?' declares the LORD... Surely the eyes of the Sovereign L

aquí sigue lo de arriba
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:NuxKP2BaF30J:https://wit-resources.s3.amazonaws.com/Messiah-in-the-Old-Testament-in-the-Light-of-Rabbinical-Rabbis.pdf+&cd=3&hl=es&ct=clnk&gl=es