Posted on 03/10/2004 12:12:29 AM PST by Brodyaga
Questions for a Rabbi or Talmudic scholar
In recent days there have been posts on the subject of how Judaism views Christianity. My Christian teachers have taught me a number of interpretations that I accept because I trust my teachers. However, that doesn't mean that they are right. In fact one of the principle reasons I trust these particular teachers is that they stress over and over again that we are not to take them at their word, but we are strenuously instructed to research, study, and think for ourselves and pray about our questions in order that we might be less susceptible to any interpretation of any man. And so always keep our eyes and hearts focused on G-d and His Word as the one and only Authority. As part of that effort to gather and analyze, to satisfy myself that my teachers do not mislead me I would like to pose some questions to Rabbinical or Talmudic scholars so that I might benefit from their education and perspective.
Before I begin, allow me to lay out some disclaimers :
Currently I am going through a difficult medical condition that does not allow me to get up and be on the computer except for brief periods a few times a day. So I am not going to be able to be an active participant in this discussion on any regular basis. I am posting these questions because in light of what our Jewish friends believe they present honestly puzzling questions to me. Now as a Christian I accept these on faith. But I am interested in how our Jewish friends view these things in the hopes that I can gain additional insights that would not otherwise occur to me. Not being a Hebrew or Talmudic scholar, not being Jewish, I naturally don't think in those cultural and religious terms. mitze HaSheM one day I will learn Hebrew and so have a little better understanding.
Until then I am hoping for that perspective which is not native to me. I am hoping that the rabid dispensationalist Christians will stay out of this discussion just as I hope that the rabid anti-Christians such as the followers of Rab Boteach will leave us alone. (I know, this is a relatively unrestricted public forum and there is no way to enforce civility. But I can hope. ) I am hoping that this will be an honest and sincere discussion between and by people who have respect for each other despite their differences.
Ok, having said all that, here are the questions :
In the first line of ToRaH it says BaRaCh BaRa ELOHIM I am told that Hebrew has a singular noun, such as in this case EL. Hebrew also has a dual noun, such as ELAH and eChaD which imply 2 discrete identities / personalities. And also a triple noun that is identified by the – im ending which explicitly implies 3 or more discrete identities / personalities. Now if we assume that ToRaH is in fact the Divinely inspired Word of G-d then why is the triple noun used?
And why is the dual noun, eChaD used in Sh’Ma, “Sh'ma Yisrael Adonai Elohaynu Adonai Echad”, "Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord", and is normally translated as “one”? Who or what is the other identity / personality that this noun specifies?
In a later passage pertaining to the marriage of a man to a woman it is written “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh” – “ken 'iysh `azab 'ab 'em dabaq 'ishshah 'echad basar”. This is pretty self evident in that there are specified 2 distinct individuals who will be for spiritual purposes joined in such a way as to be one person.
But why if ToRaH is the inspired Word of G-d, and it was HaSheM who chose the words that Moishe wrote, why are the dual and triple nouns used when referring to the Most High Himself? Who or what are the other identities / personalities that these plural nouns refer to? Why would G-d, who is “one”, not refer to Himself by means of a singular noun?
In Genesis is listed the 10 generations from Adam to Noah :
here are those names, and what their names mean in Hebrew :
Adam / Adomah = "man"
Seth = "appointed"
Enosh = "mortal", or "frail" or "miserable"
Kenan = "sorrow" or "dirge"
Mahalael = "the Blessed G-d"
Jared = "shall come down"
Enoch = "teaching" or "commencement"
Methuselah = "his death shall bring"
( and when he died, the Great Flood began )
Lamech = "lamentation" or "despairing"
Noah = "relief" or "comfort"
When we arrange those names into a chronologically sequenced sentence we get:
"Man appointed mortal sorrow, The Blessed G-d shall come down teaching His death shall bring despairing comfort"
Whose death is being referenced here? And why would Moishe write a synopsis of the Gospel of YeHoShua in coded form into ToRaH?
Naomi lost her land inheritance in Israel because after she and her family emigrated to Canaan her husband and sons all died. When she later decided to return to Israel her Gentile daughter-in-law, Ruth, came with her. Now Ruth was a Canaanite on which is an unmitigated curse going back to Lot’s daughters. Ruth was not merely a Gentile, she was an accursed Gentile.
According to Maimonides, op. cit., ibid., 12, 1-3 Ruth was N.Sh.G.Z. Now since she had converted to Judaism she would no longer be N.Sh.G. But under HaLaKhaH she still would have been considered zonah, a prostitute. According to Maimonides, op. cit., 'Prohibitions on Sexual Intercourse' 12; 10; Ruth was condemned by the Law to death by stoning for “getting a Jew into trouble”, and Boaz was supposed to be flogged under the same statute.
So why was she not stoned to death? Why was Boaz not flogged? And why is King David descended from their unlawful and unclean relationship?
Why are Christians, who worship the G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, meshummadim – idolaters, but Muslims, who pray to a black rock, are not?
The only disagreement between Christians and Jews is over the issue of Jesus of Nazareth. Now I admit that it is a big point of contention. And one that goes to the roots of our faith. But if you leave that one issue aside for the moment, Christians and Jews worship the same Jewish G-d, from the same Jewish Bible.
I have read the Qu’ran. The deity portrayed in that book is not the same as the one in ToRaH or in the Christian Bible. And whereas Moishe, a first person witness to the events written about in ToRaH, himself wrote ToRaH. The Qu’ran on the other hand was written some 700 years after the death of Mohammed. But even if for the sake of argument we consider Qu’ran to be inspired and true, the Muslims of today who call in their daily prayers, PA children’s textbooks, and the published statements of all the internationally known Arab leaders, the Muslims who call for the extermination of the Jews and the expulsion of all Jews from the Middle East are in fact calling Muhammed and Al’ah liars.
"To Moses We [Allah] gave nine clear signs. Ask the Israelites how he [Moses] first appeared amongst them. Pharoah said to him: 'Moses, I can see that you are bewitched.' 'You know full well,' he [Moses] replied, 'that none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth has revealed these visible signs. Pharoah, you are doomed.'"
"Pharoah sought to scare them [the Israelites] out of the land [of Israel]: but We [Allah] drowned him [Pharoah] together with all who were with him. Then We [Allah] said to the Israelites: 'Dwell in this land [the Land of Israel]. When the promise of the hereafter [End of Days] comes to be fulfilled, We [Allah] shall assemble you [the Israelites] all together [in the Land of Israel]."
"We [Allah] have revealed the Qur'an with the truth, and with the truth it has come down. We have sent you [Muhammed] forth only to proclaim good news and to give warning."
[Qur'an, "Night Journey," chapter 17:100-104]
"And [remember] when Moses said to his people: 'O my people, call in remembrance the favour of God unto you, when he produced prophets among you, made you kings, and gave to you what He had not given to any other among the peoples. O my people, enter the Holy Land which God has assigned unto you, and turn not back ignominiously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin.'"
[Qur'an 5:20-21]
So why do Tractate Berakhot, p. 58b and other Talmudic writings call Christians, but not Muslims, idolaters?
The Babylonian Talmud was written some 300 + years after the death of Jesus, and during the political and military rule of Judea by Muslim Caliphates. Why do Talmudic scholars place more weight and authenticity on the Babylonian Talmud, with its emphasis on KaBaLa, regarding the events of 30 a.d. , i.e.: when the scarlet thread failed to turn white for the first time in Jewish history, and the Temple veil was torn from top to bottom, when Jesus was crucified, rather than contemporary, first hand eye witness accounts such as Josephus, and others that were written down during the first 5 or 6 decades of that century?
Why do orthodox Rabbis and Talmudic scholars always interpret “al’mah” as meaning “a young maiden”? Unless I am much mistaken, “young maidens” routinely get pregnant in every land and race throughout history on a pretty much everyday basis. I have trouble imagining the Creator of the Heavens and Earth using as a sign of His Coming an event that must have been taking place in dozens of homes, including pagan houses, even as the prophet spoke the words.
Now I don’t mean to come across as rude or disrespectful. For a Prophet of G-d to go to all the trouble to point out that a “young maiden” would get pregnant as the definitive and recognizable sign of the coming of a supernatural Messiah seems to me to be a dime store variety sort of miracle. I’m pretty sure that I am not Divine, and yet I feel pretty confident that I could make a “young maiden” pregnant with a modest effort.
So how hard could it be for The Eternal, who parted the seas, made Manna to appear out of thin air, leads people through the wilderness for 40 years as, alternately a pillar of fire and a pillar of smoke, who speaks through a burning bush, destroys the whole earth in a flood, how hard could it be for Him to cause a virgin to become pregnant? After all He caused Sarah to become pregnant long after her body had stopped being capable of ovulation. ( yes I know that it was through Abraham’s seed that she became pregnant. But that still does not account for the fact that her body was no longer physically capable of reproducing without a miracle from G-d ) And if it is reasonable to believe all these other miracles, and if a proven, legitimate Prophet of G-d who is otherwise believed in all the other things he said, said it would happen, why is it so hard to believe that G-d could cause a virgin birth if that is what He through His Prophet said would happen?
I was under the impression that if a Prophet said one single thing that was not true, then he was a false prophet and it was required to stone him to death. So why was Isaiah not stoned to death for making a false prophecy?
And if as the Talmudic scholars insist, that this prophecy by Isaiah had to do with Israel, not Messiah, and was fulfilled in Isaiah’s time, why then did Herod go to the trouble of killing all the male children under 2 years of age in Bethlehem? Were the Pharisees and Sadducees and High Priests of the 2nd Temple ignorant of the fact that Isaiah’s prophecy had already been fulfilled hundreds of years before?
When Abraham and Isaac had finished sacrificing the ram on the alter on Mount Moriah Abraham named the place of the altar “in the Mount of the L-RD it shall be seen”. Everything that G-d had commanded was complete and they were ready to go down the mountain and go home. Everything was finished.
Just what is it that “shall be” seen on that specific spot on Mount Moriah at some unspecified time in the future?
When Moishe led the people into the Land of Promise G-d told them to keep the Sabbath for the Land, warning them that if they did not He would punish them 70 times 7. After being in the land for 490 years, G-d allowed the Children of Israel to be led into captivity for 70 years.
So why when the Angel Gabriel gives to the Prophet Daniel a prophecy explicitly telling how many days from a fixed starting date it would be until Messiah comes, that prophecy is still considered to be sometime in the unknowable distant future? If the “weeks of years” formula is used to mean days in one prophecy, why is it not interpreted to mean the same definition of time in other prophecies?
As I said, I am not trying to pick a fight with anyone. I honestly don’t understand why these things seem to be contradictory or confusing. My Christian teachers provide me with what seem to me to be reasonable and understandable explanations of these things. But I know that Judaism views them differently. And I would like to know, even if I don’t understand the explanation, what the Jewish interpretation is. I suppose that I am a fool to even bring up such subjects in a public forum. But I can’t help but feel that there are people of good will and respect who, like me, want to know more than what is within the confines of our own limited experience.
Thank you in advance to all those who take the time and effort to participate in a civil and sincere manner in this discussion.
(1) ...why then did Herod go to the trouble of killing all the male children under 2 years of age in Bethlehem?
There is no historical account of that massacre anywhere other than in the Gospels.
(2) the Babylonian Talmud. I was under the impression that the Babylonian Talmud preceded the Jerusalem Talmud by approximately 100 years -- c. 550 BC.
And also a triple noun that is identified by the ? im ending which explicitly implies 3 or more discrete identities / personalities.
This is incorrect. -im is generally a plural ending, but it isn't universal. One indicator of this is that the verb used in the Hebrew you quoted -- bara -- is singular. As in English, singular verb forms go with singular noun forms.
In Exodus 7:1, God tells Moses, "I make you elohim to Pharoah". I think you'd agree that this doesn't imply more than one Moses. Similarly, chaim is the Hebrew word for "life", and is plural in form but singular in meaning and use.
echad is not a "dual" noun form. It is exactly equivalent to the English "one". Whether is indicates singular or plural unity depends upon context (for example, "one table" or "one dining room set").
here are those names, and what their names mean in Hebrew :
Where are you getting these meanings from?
From Strong's Concordance (so you know I'm not pulling from a source biased against a Christian interpretation):
Adam = "man"
Seth = "compensation"
Enosh = "man" (son of Seth)
Kenan = "possession"
Mahalael = "praise of God"
Jared = "descent"
Enoch = "dedicated"
Methuselah = "who is of God"
Lamech = "powerful"
Noah = "rest"
Putting all that together: "Man compensation man possession praise of God descent dedicated who is of God powerful rest".
Doesn't make much sense.
I suspect the version you posted is something of an "internet myth".
I'll post this part now, and go back to look at more of your questions.
It is asserted by Christians that Jesus is of the line of David. If so, then he is likewise descended from this "unlawful and unclean" relationship.
God is the Boss; He makes the rules.
Why are Christians, who worship the G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, meshummadim ? idolaters, but Muslims, who pray to a black rock, are not?
There was a difference of opinion in rabbinic sources about whether or not Christianity is idolatrous. Generally, most Jewish authorities today would hold that it is not idolatrous.
In Jewish thought, non-Jews are under the covenant of Noah. They are not under the Sinaitic covenant, and thus are not bound by all of the commandments of the Torah. Christian theology would be problematic for a Jew to believe. But Christianity is an acceptable form of monotheism for gentiles -- existing, as they do, under a different covenant.
The Qu?ran on the other hand was written some 700 years after the death of Mohammed.
That is incorrect. It was written several hundred years after the death of Jesus. Mohammed lived from roughly 570 to 632 C.E.
The Talmud doesn't mention Islam for the simple reason that it was written down prior to the existence of Islam as a religion.
as far as where I get some of the meanings from, at the risk of quoting myself "My Christian teachers have taught me a number of interpretations that I accept because I trust my teachers. However, that doesn't mean that they are right." those teachers being, primarily, the pastors of the Calvary Chapel and its affiliates, and Koinonia House Ministiries.
kosta50, the illusion that I am knowledgeable about ToRaH and Hebrew is the result of having access to the internet. when I have a question I type it into a search engine and wade through the avalanche of results, comparing, contrasting, and hoping that eventually I begin to see a pattern repeated that may point the way to useful knowledge.
the reason for posting this longwinded set of questions is to hopefully benefit from the education and understanding of people who have more learning than I in this highly specialized area of knowledge. it doesn't mean that they are right. but it does give me more to chew on and pray over. and one day, perhaps, G-d will sort it out for me.
That is confused. The Talmud doesn't emphasize kabbalah. You must be thinking of the Zohar, a separate work.
Why do Talmudic scholars place more weight and authenticity on the Babylonian Talmud ... rather than contemporary, first hand eye witness accounts such as Josephus, and others that were written down during the first 5 or 6 decades of that century?
Josephus was not an eyewitness to the events of the gospels. Further, most scholars believe that at least part of the two passages of the works of Josephus which mention Jesus were not original, but were later interpolations by Christian scribes.
The identities of the gospel writers are not known with certainty. "Tradition" attributes them to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, but they are not named in the gospels themselves. Believing that these are firsthand accounts, and that they accurately describe what happened, is a matter of faith.
Why do orthodox Rabbis and Talmudic scholars always interpret "al?mah" as meaning "a young maiden"?
Because that is the correct translation.
The prophecy of Isaiah 7 was made to King Ahaz, 700 years before the birth of Jesus. It was a sign to Ahaz, and was fulfilled within several years of being given. You need to read that prophecy in its context. It isn't messianic, and has nothing to do with Jesus.
why then did Herod go to the trouble of killing all the male children under 2 years of age in Bethlehem?
As someone else already posted, there is no record of any such thing outside of the gospel account. Josephus, who was meticulous about recording the atrocities of the Herods, makes no mention of this.
Just what is it that "shall be" seen on that specific spot on Mount Moriah at some unspecified time in the future?
The Temple was built on that site.
that prophecy is still considered to be sometime in the unknowable distant future?
There is no consensus answer, but as I understand it, it is generally understood that this was fulfilled about 100 years before the life of Jesus, during the high priesthood of Alexander Yannai.
#1 In the first line of ToRaH it says BaRaCh BaRa ELOHIM I am told that Hebrew has a singular noun, such as in this case EL. Hebrew also has a dual noun, such as ELAH and eChaD which imply 2 discrete identities / personalities. And also a triple noun that is identified by the – im ending which explicitly implies 3 or more discrete identities / personalities.
The first line of Torah is BERASHIT BARA ELOKIM. Literally translated, it means "At the beginning of G-D's creation." ELOKIM has a plural ending, signifying G-D's multiple attributes as Ruler, Creator and Judge. However the verb BARA (created) is singular. ECHAD means "one" and it is singular.
#2 "Generations from Adam to Noah"
There are many different aggadic explanations. This is not one I am at all familiar with.
#3 Now Ruth was a Canaanite on which is an unmitigated curse going back to Lot’s daughters. Ruth was not merely a Gentile, she was an accursed Gentile.
Ruth was a Moabite, not a Canaanite. Moab was also an accursed nation, but not of the same degree as Canaan. The reason for this was they did not show hospitality to the Israelites who were wandering in the desert. This prohibition, however, applied only to the Moabite men, but not the women, since it was considered immodest for women to go out to strangers. Therefore the women of Moab were not cursed and were accepted as converts.
#4 Why are Christians, who worship the G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, meshummadim – idolaters, but Muslims, who pray to a black rock, are not?
Meshummadim refers to Jewish apostates, not to gentile Christians.
#5 Why do Talmudic scholars place more weight and authenticity on the Babylonian Talmud
The Jewish community in Babylon was more stable than the community in the Holy Land and the Babylonian academies were not disrupted by war or persecution and had a stronger authority than the rabbis of Palestine. Furthermore the writings of Josephus are not accepted as accurate by rabbinical authority, since he skewed his narratives to favor the agenda of the parties who were paying him.
#6 Why do orthodox Rabbis and Talmudic scholars always interpret “al’mah” as meaning “a young maiden”?
Because that's what the word means. The word for "Virgin" is bethulah. Now, when Isaiah was making his prophscy, he was telling King Ahaz what to look for as a "sign" that two kingdoms who were making war on him would be defeated. The wife of King Ahaz was the "young woman" referred to, and she was pregnant. Isaiah predicted that she would have a son, which she did (Hezekiah) and that before the child would "know to reject the evil and choose the good" (i.e. before being weaned) the two kingdoms that were at war with Ahaz would be defeated.
why then did Herod go to the trouble of killing all the male children under 2 years of age in Bethlehem? Were the Pharisees and Sadducees and High Priests of the 2nd Temple ignorant of the fact that Isaiah’s prophecy had already been fulfilled hundreds of years before?
Herod did conduct a policy of killing all the descendants of the Hashmoneans, whose throne he usurped. He also killed the families of those he thought would be a threat to him politically. The Jews of that time, just as today, also understood Isaiah's prophecy applied to King Ahaz and not to anyone who lived during their time.
#7 Just what is it that “shall be” seen on that specific spot on Mount Moriah at some unspecified time in the future?
That is the site of the Temple
#8 After being in the land for 490 years, G-d allowed the Children of Israel to be led into captivity for 70 years.
So why when the Angel Gabriel gives to the Prophet Daniel a prophecy explicitly telling how many days from a fixed starting date it would be until Messiah comes, that prophecy is still considered to be sometime in the unknowable distant future?
There are two exiles: Galus Bavel, The Babylonian Exile, which lasted for 70 years, and Galus Edom, the exile which began with the destruction of the Second Temple. This is the Exile we are still in today.
Obviously Jews do not interpret scripture the same way that Christians do, and I am sorry that I am not able to do your questions justice with a more detailed response. But I do think that you are unfamiliar with some basic translations so I hope that my brief answers have helped you in some small way.
Generally I do not like to become involved in an argument which ultimately comes down to matters of faith.
Well, not always. For instance, "the police" is a plural noun and usually but not always complements a plural verb form. However, "the army," a plural, is usually associated with singular verbs.
A better example though is the one of a monarch using a plural pronoun ("we") for oneself, as in "We, the King/Queen of ..."
There is also an interesting section in the OT where Abraham sees three men and says "Lord" to them. As it goes, they ended up eating together (!), but that's another story. I am not sure if the number of men and Abraham addressing them (I believe) as "Lord" is sigfniciant.
Maybe soemone can enlighten.
Because that is the correct translation.
The Orthodox Jewish Bible calls "almah" a "virgin" with extensive commentary of the translator which I was not able to retrieve:
The term maiden implies vigrinity, a sentiment echoed in the KJV of the OT Hebrew, and is substantially different from just a young woman seen in the MT.
Meshummadim refers to Jewish apostates, not to Gentile Christians.
Thank you, I am learning a great deal from you and malakhi, just being a side bench observer. I do have a question, however, regarding your answer: I suppose by "apostate Jews" you mean Jews who have embraced Jesus as deity, i.e. "Jewish Christians?" If so, why would they be considered idolators and not the Gentile Christians?
The name of of God usually translated into English as "LORD" is "YHWH". This appears in Genesis 18:1, at the beginning of the scene you mention. The word in Genesis 18:3 that Abraham speaks to the mean is adonai, which Strong's Concordance (to cite a Christian source) indicates can be used in reference to either men or God.
Also of interest is verse 22:
So the men turned from there, and went toward Sodom; but Abraham still stood before the LORD. (Genesis 18:22)
God is there in verse 1, before the men arrive, and he is there in verse 22, after the men have departed.
Yes.
That is not a Jewish translation.
I went to that page. The "Orthodox Jewish Bible" is published by a Christian missionary organization. No Hebrew commentary translates "almah" as virgin, because the word for virgin is "bethulah." Read the verse before and the verse after for the correct context. The "almah" referred to is the wife of Ahaz.
It mainly refers to Jewish hellenizers who embraced the Greek and Roman pagan religions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.