Basic
Worldview:
104
Why Christianity?
Rabbinical
Judaism Accepts
Christian Interpretations (Part 5)
Judaism
and Christianity Introduction and History
History
of Judaism Continued
Scholarly
Objections and Historicity of Daniel (P. 1)
Historicity
of Daniel (P. 2) & Judeo-Christian Syncretism
A
Few Words on Gnosticism
Christianity
- A Sect of Judaism (P. 1)
Christianity
- A Sect of Judaism (P. 2) & Prophecy in Judaism
Is
Jesus the Jewish Messiah? (P. 1)
Is
Jesus the Jewish Messiah? (P. 2)
List
of Messianic Qualifications & the Resurrection of Jesus
(P. 1)
The
Resurrection of Jesus (Part 2)
Study
Conclusions and Overall Comparisons
Additional
Material
The
Sufferings of Eyewitnesses
Comparison
of Mystical Religions to Judeo-Christianity
Rabbinical
Judaism Accepts Christian Interpretations (P. 1)
Rabbinical
Judaism Accepts Christian Interpretations (P. 2)
Rabbinical
Judaism Accepts Christian Interpretations (P. 3)
Rabbinical
Judaism Accepts Christian Interpretations (P. 4)
Rabbinical
Judaism Accepts Christian Interpretations (P. 5)
Rabbinical
Judaism Accepts Christian Interpretations (P. 6)
Introduction | Section 1
| Section 2 | Section
3
(Continued)
8.
On the Death of Man Atoning for Sin –
Typical
Perception of Traditional Judaism:
God
does not require or accept human sacrifice. The Messiah is
a conquering King, not a dying priest.
Actual Interpretations of Talmudic (or Rabbinic) Judaism:
The
death of a righteous man atones for the sins of many. It is
only the blood (of the righteous) that provides atonement
for sins even as the death of the High Priest atones for sin.
56.
Here are the words of a respected Orthodox Jewish historian,
Rabbi Berel Wein. How was it that the Jewish people survived
the horrors of the massacres in Eastern Europe in the seventeenth
century? According to Rabbi Wein:
Another
consideration tinged the Jewish response to the slaughter
of its people. It was an old Jewish tradition dating back
to Biblical times that the death of the righteous and innocent
served as an expiation for the sins of the nation or the world.
The stories of Isaac and of Nadav and Avihu, the prophetic
description of Israel as the long-suffering servant of the
Lord, the sacrificial service in the Temple – all served to
reinforce this basic concept of the death of the righteous
as an atonement for the sins of other men. Jews nurtured this
classic idea of death as an atonement, and this attitude towards
their own tragedies was their constant companion throughout
their turbulent exile. Therefore, the wholly bleak picture
of unreasoning slaughter was somewhat relieved by the fact
that the innocent did not die in vain and that the betterment
of Israel and humankind somehow was advanced by their “stretching
their neck to be slaughtered.” What is amazing is that this
abstract, sophisticated, theological thought should have become
so ingrained in the psyche of the people that even the least
educated and most simplistic of Jews understood the lesson
and acted upon it, giving up precious life in a soaring act
of belief and affirmation of the better tomorrow. This spirit
of the Jews is truly reflected in the historical chronicle
of the time: “Would the Holy One, Blessed is He, dispense
judgment without justice? But we may say that he whom God
loves will be chastised. For since the day the Holy Temple
was destroyed, the righteous are seized by death for the iniquities
of the generation” (Yeven Metzulah, end of Chapter
15). 262 – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus,
Volume 2, Theological Objections, p. 155
Footnote
262: Berel Wein, The Triumph of Survival: The Story of
the Jews in the Modern Era 1650-1990 (Brooklyn, N.Y.:
Shaar, 1990), 14.
57.
In similar fashion, the Zohar, the most sacred book of Jewish
mysticism, states, “As long as Israel dwelt in the Holy Land,
the rituals and the sacrifices they performed [in the Temple]
removed all those diseases from the world; now the Messiah
removes them from the children of the world (2:212a).” 263
Footnote
263: This is the rendering of Patai, Messiah Texts,
116.
58.
Before we look into the Hebrew Bible, however, I want to point
out that on several occasions the Talmud itself teaches that
“the death of the righteous atones” (mitatan shel tsaddiqim
mekapperet). In a well-known discussion (b. Mo’ed Qatan
28a), the Talmud asks why the Book of Numbers records the
death of Miriam immediately after the section on the red heifer
(see Num. 19:1-20:1). The answer is that just as the red heifer
atones, so also the death of the righteous atones (see also
Rashi to Num. 20:1). 264 And why, the Talmud asks, is the
death of Aaron recorded in conjunction with the Torah’s reference
to the priestly garments (Num. 20:25-28)? The answer is, just
as the garments of the high priest atone (see Exodus 28, especially
v. 38), so also the death of the righteous atones. (Some of
the Rabbinic texts read “atones for Israel” in all the cases
just cited.) This theme is actually fairly common in Rabbinic
literature. Look, for example, at Leviticus Rabbah 20:12,
repeated elsewhere verbatim (e.g., y. Yoma 2:1, Pesikta deRav
Kahana 26:16): “Rabbi Hiyya Bar Abba said: The sons of Aaron
[i.e. Nadab and Abihu] died the first day of Nisan. Why then
does the Torah mention their death in conjunction with the
Day of Atonement [which occurred on the tenth of Tishrei;
see Lev. 16:1]? It is to teach that just as the Day of Atonement
atones, so also the death of the righteous atones.” 265 –
Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume
2, Theological Objections, p. 155-156
Footnote
264: According to Siftey Hakhamim, commenting on Rashi’s words,
just at the red heifer, which is not a real sacrifice, atones,
so also the death of the righteous atones.
Footnote
265: Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, 3:191, cites Sifre
Deuteronomy 31: “The death of the pious man is a greater misfortune
to Israel than the Temples’ burning to ashes.” For further
references to the atoning power of the death of the righteous,
see Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, 6:75, n. 386; 6:107,
n. 602.
59.
An interesting passage in the Midrash reads, “Moses said to
God, ‘Will not the time come when Israel shall have neither
Tabernacle nor Temple? What will happen with them then?’ The
Divine reply was, ‘I will then take one of their righteous
men and keep him as a pledge on their behalf so I may pardon
[or atone for] all their sins.” (Exodus Rabbah, Terumah 35:4).
We have the same theme stated once again: When there is neither
Tabernacle nor Temple, the life and death of the righteous
will make atonement, just as we read earlier in Yeven Metzulah.
– Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume
2, Theological Objections, p. 157
60.
The Zohar supports this concept with a citation from Isaiah
53, the Messianic prophecy most widely quoted by Christians
and Messianic Jews.
The
children of the world are members of one another, and when
the Holy One desires to give healing to the world, He smites
one just man amongst them, and for his sake heals all the
rest. Whence do we learn this? From the saying, “He was wounded
for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities” [Isa.
53:5], i.e., by the letting of his blood – as when a man bleeds
his arm – there was healing for us – for all the members of
the body. In general a just person is only smitten in order
to procure healing and atonement for a whole generation. 267
– Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume
2, Theological Objections, p. 157
Footnote
267: Cited in S. R. Driver and Adolph Neubauer, eds. and trans.,
The Fifty-Third chapter of Isaiah according to Jewish Interpreters,
2 vols. (New York: Ktav, 1969), 2:9. The Zohar states
that this explains Ecclesiastes 7:15: “In this meaningless
life of mine I have seen both of these: a righteous man perishing
in his righteouness, and a wicked man living long in his wickedness.”
Cf. also b. Shabbat 33b, “The righteous are taken by the iniquity
of the generation.”
61.
As stated in Midrash Assereth Memrot:
The
Messiah, in order to atone for them both [ for Adam and David],
will make his soul a trespass offering, as it is written
next to this, in the Parashah [scriptural passage]. Behold
my servant [i.e., Isa. 52:13-53:12]: ‘shm [guilt offering],
i.e. cabalistically [i.e., using Rabbinic Bible numeric],
Menahem son of Ammiel [a title for the Messiah in the Talmud].
268 – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus,
Volume 2, Theological Objections, p. 157
Footnote
268: Ibid., 1:394-95 (the numeric value for guilt offering
is 341, which equals the numeric value of Menahem ben Ammiel);
the emphasis in the original indicates Scripture citations.
The midrash concludes with another citation from Isaiah 53:
“And what is written after it? He shall his seed, shall
have long days, and the pleasure of the Lords shall prosper
in his hand.”
62.
Rabbinic scholar Solomon Schechter summarizes the Talmudic
teaching that suffering and death atone for sin, with specific
reference to the death of the righteous:
The
atonement of suffering and death is not limited to the suffering
person. The atoning effect extends to all the generation.
This is especially the case with sufferers as cannot either
by reason of their righteous life or by their youth possibly
have merited the afflictions which have come upon them. The
death of the righteous atones just as well as certain sacrifices
[with reference to b. Mo’ed Qatan 28a]. “They are caught (suffer)
for the sins of the generation. If there are no righteous,
the children of the schools (that is, the innocent young children)
are caught for the sins of the generation” [b. Shabbat 32b].
There are also applied to Moses the scriptural words, “And
he bore the sins of many” (Isa. 53:12), because of his offering
himself as an atonement for Israel’s sin with the golden calf,
being ready to sacrifices his very soul for Israel when he
said, “And if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book (that
is, from the Book of the Living), which thou hast written”
(Exod. 32:32 [b. Sotah 14a; b. Berakhoth 32a). This readiness
to sacrifice himself for Israel is characteristic of all the
great men of Israel, the patriarchs and the Prophets acting
in the same way, whilst also some Rabbis would on certain
occasions, exclaim, “Behold, I am the atonement of Israel”
[Mekhilta 2a; m. Negaim 2:1]. 269 – Brown, Answering
Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume 2, Theological Objections,
p. 158
Footnote
269: Schechter, Aspects of Rabbinic Theology, 310-11,
my emphasis.
63.
But how many of us know what the Book of Fourth Maccabees
(written by a Jewish author between 100 B.C.E. and 100 C.E.)
records about the significance of their deaths? It is written
that they prayed, “Cause our chastisement to be an expiation
for them. Make my blood their purification and take my soul
as a ransom for their souls” (4 Maccabees 6:28-29). Of these
righteous martyrs it is recorded: “They have become as a ransom
for the sin of our nation, and by the blood of these righteous
men and the propitiation of their death, Divine Providence
delivered Israel” (4 Maccabees 17:22). – Brown, Answering
Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume 2, Theological Objections,
p. 158
64.
In fact, there is a midrash that says at the time of creation,
when God was about to make man, the angels asked what man’s
significance was. One of his answers was this: “You shall
see a father slay his son, and the son consenting to be slain,
to sanctify my Name” (Tanhuma, Vayyera, sec. 18). That was
the height of sacrificial service: A father offering up his
own son, and the son willingly laying down his life for the
glory of God. Yes, I know that sounds like the gospel. In
fact, the midrash compares Isaac, who carried on his shoulder
the wood for the burnt offering (himself!), to “one who carries
his cross on his own shoulder.” 270
Footnote
270: See Genesis Rabbah 56:3, cited in this context by Jon
D. Levenson, the Death and Resurrection of the Beloved
Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and
Christianity (New Haven: Yale, 1993), 105.
65.
One ancient source, compiled less than two hundred years after
the death of Jesus, states, “The Holy One, blessed be He,
said to Moses: ‘I keep faith to pay the reward of Isaac the
son of Abraham, who gave one fourth of his blood on the altar’”
(Mekhilta d’Rashbi, p. 4; Tanh. Vayerra, sec. 23). 271 – Brown,
Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume 2, Theological
Objections, p. 159
Footnote
271: See also the note of Buber in his edition of Tanhuma.
66.
Vermes also notes that the “blood of the Binding of Isaac”
is mentioned four times in the early Jewish midrash called
the Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishmael. In Exodus 12:13, God promise
the Israelites that when he passed through the land to destroy
the firstborn sons of the Egyptians, he would pass over the
houses of the Israelites who had applied the blood of the
Passover lambs to the lintels and doorposts of their houses.
The midrash interprets the verse to mean, “‘And when I see
the blood, I will pass over you’ – I see the blood of the
Binding of Isaac.” God wasn’t looking at the blood of the
lambs, he was looking at the blood of Isaac. Vermes even states
that
According
to ancient Jewish theology, the atoning efficacy of the Tamid
offering [the fixed, daily offering], of all the sacrifices
in which a lamb was immolated, and perhaps, basically, of
all expiatory sacrifice irrespective of the nature of the
victim, depended upon the virtue of the Akedah [the binding
of Isaac], the self-offering of that Lamb whom God had recognized
as the perfect victim of the perfect burnt offering. 272 –
Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume
2, Theological Objections, p. 159-160
Footnote
272: Vermes, “Redemption and Benesis xxii,” 211.
67.
This same thought is also carried over in a prayer still included
in the additional service for the Jewish New Year (Rosh Hashanah),
which culminates with the words, “Remember today the Binding
of Isaac with mercy to his descendants.” We are forgiven through
the merit of the sacrifice of Isaac! The rabbis even taught
that the final resurrection of the dead would take place “through
the merits of Isaac, who offered himself upon the altar” (Pesikta
deRav Kahana, 32). – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections
to Jesus, Volume 2, Theological Objections, p. 160
68.
And in a moving account from the Holocaust, Rabbi Shem Klingberg,
known among his followers as the Zaloshitzer Rebbe, was led
out to be slaughtered by the Nazis. In a matter of moments,
after saying his last prayer, he would be gunned down, but
first, he stopped, lifted his eyes to heaven, and cried out
in a piercing voice, “Let me be an atonement for Israel!”
275 – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus,
Volume 2, Theological Objections, p. 160-161
Footnote
275: Avraham Yaakov Finkel, Contemporary Sages (Northvale,
N.J.: Aronson, 1994), 84.
69.
The Talmud (m. Makkot 2:6; b. Makkot 11b; see also Leviticus
Rabbah 10:6) asks the question: Isn’t it the exile of the
innocent manslayer [in the city of refuge] that expiates?
The answer is no. “It is not the exile that expiates, but
the death of the High Priest.” And Milgrom comments, “As the
High Priest atones for Israel’s sins through his cultic [i.e.,
ritual] service in his lifetime (Exod. 28:36; Lev. 16:16,
21), so he atones for homicide through his death.” 280 – Brown,
Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume 2, Theological
Objections, p. 164
Footnote
279: Milgrom, Numbers, 371, my emphasis.
Footnote
280: Ibid., 294.
70.
And what of the words of Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai recorded in
the Talmud in b. Sukkah 45b:
[Because
of the troubles I have known], I can free the entire world
from punishment from the day on which I was born to this very
moment, and were my son, Eliezer with me, it would be from
the day on which the world was made to this moment, and were
Yotam ben Uzziah [a famous, righteous sufferer] with us, it
would be from the day on which the world was made to its very
end. 282 – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus,
Volume 2, Theological Objections, p. 165
Footnote
282: This is the rendering of Neusner in his American translation;
the words in brackets reflect the universal understanding
of the passage. Rashi explains Shimon bar Yohai’s statement
as follows: “Through my merit, I can bear all your iniquities
and cancel them from the judgment.” Note also the comments
of R. Hananel, another of the major Talmudic commentators.
See also b. Erubin 64b-65a.
71.
It even seems that the Zohar, in its typical mystical terms,
grasped the role of the Messiah in all this. In commenting
on a passage just cited, Isaiah 53, the Zohar relates:
The
Messiah enters [the Hall of the Sons of Illness] and summons
all the diseases and all the pains and all the sufferings
of Israel that they should come upon him, and all of them
come upon him. And would he not thus bring ease to Israel
and take their sufferings upon himself, no man could endure
the sufferings Israel has to undergo because they neglected
the Torah. 283 – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to
Jesus, Volume 2, Theological Objections, p. 167
Footnote
283: See Patai, Messiah Texts, 116.
92.
There is also an extraordinary comment about the atoning power
of the death of Messiah ben Joseph made by Moshe Alshekh,
the influential sixteenth-century rabbi, in his commentary
to Zechariah 12:10:
I
will yet do a third thing, and that is, that “they shall look
unto me,” for they shall lift up their eyes unto me in perfect
repentance, when they see him whom they pierced, that is,
Messiah, the Son of Joseph; for our Rabbis, of blessed memory,
have said that he will take upon himself all the guilt of
Israel, and shall then be slain in the war to make atonement
in such a manner that it shall be accounted as if Israel had
pierced him, for on account of their sin he has died; and,
therefore, in order that it may be reckoned to them as perfect
atonement, they will repent and look to the blessed One, saying
that there is none beside him to forgive those that mourn
on account of him who died for their sin: this is the meaning
of “They shall look upon me.” 385 – Brown, Answering Jewish
Objections to Jesus, Volume 2, Theological Objections,
p. 223
Footnote
385: As cited in David Baron, The Visions and Prophecies
of Zechariah (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1972), 442.
106.
The Messiah took our place in judgment, in keeping with a
traditional Jewish concept expressed in the Zohar: “The children
of the world are members of one another, and when the Holy
One desires to give healing to the world, He smites one just
man among them, and for his sake heals all the rest” (see
above, 3.15). – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus,
Volume 2, Theological Objections, p. 261
107.
Later Rabbinic tradition even taught that the garments
of the high priest atoned (see b. Zevahim 68b; cf. also
b. Moed Katan 28a). 7 – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections
to Jesus, Volume 3, Messianic Prophecy Objections, p.
7
Footnote
7: See b. Zevahim 68b for additional, relevant discussion;
cf. also b. Moed Katan 28a.
153.
Zechariah 12:10 is discussed in the Talmud in b. Sukkah 55a.
The verse – read with a singular, not plural, subject – is
first interpreted to mean that it is the evil inclination
(i.e., the sinful tendency in man) that was slain, and the
people wept when they saw how easily it could have been overcome.
The second interpretation states that the people wept over
Messiah son of Joseph who was slain fighting in the last great
war (i.e., the last great future war) for his people,
after which Messiah son of David asked God to raise him from
the dead, and his request was granted. From this we learn
two significant points: (1) The Hebrew was understood to be
speaking of an individual person or thing, not of a plural
subject (in other words, the one who was pierced through and
slain, not those who were pierced through and slain); and
(2) there was an ancient Jewish tradition interpreting the
text in terms of a Messiah figure who died and then was raised
from the dead. Recently, the Stone edition and the NJPSV translated
Zechariah 12:10 with a plural subject: “They shall look toward
Me because of those whom they have stabbed; they will mourn
for him” (Stone); 301 and, “They shall lament to Me
about those who are slain, wailing over them” (NJPSV). 302
But these interpretations are not reflected in some of the
most ancient Jewish sources (cf. the Septuagint and the Talmud,
b. Sukkah 52a; the Targumic rendering is similar to those
just cited), nor are they a grammatically natural reading
of the text. – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus,
Volume 3, Messianic Prophecy Objections, p. 148-149
Footnote
301: The footnote to the translation reads, “The salvation
will be so complete that people will be astonished if even
one man is killed by the enemy (Radak).”
Footnote
302: A note to the word “lament” states that the meaning of
the Hebrew is uncertain, which is odd, since the Hebrew wehibitu
simply means “they shall look.” Apparently the translators
saw something else in the text that made them think the Hebrew
here was ambiguous.
154.
Either the text shifts from the first person (lit., “look
to me”) to third person (lit., “mourn for him”), something
that is not uncommon in biblical texts, 305 or we should follow
the reading preserved in some Masoretic manuscripts, reflecting
the tiniest variation in the Hebrew but resulting in a very
different translation in English, namely, “they shall look
to him whom they pierced.” 306
Footnote
305: It is actually so common that the preface to the NIV
states that “the Hebrew writers often shifted back and forth
between first, second, and third personal pronouns without
change of antecedent, this translation often makes them uniform,
in accordance with standard English style and without the
use of footnotes” (cited in the EBC endnote to Zech.
7:13, providing a case in point). Note also that in Zechariah
12 the Lord speaks in the first person a number of times,
as cited above, but alternating with third-person language
as well – in other words, going from “I” to “the Lord;” cf.
verses 7-9.
Footnote
306: The difference in the Hebrew is from ‘elay (“to
me”) to ‘elayw (“to him”). This reading is also supported
in John 19:37. As to why this is quoted in John’s gospel as
a past event (“These things happened [i.e., the Messiah’s
crucifixion] so that the scripture would be fulfilled: ‘Not
one of his bones will be broken,’” and, as another scripture
says “They will look on the one they have pierced.”), cf.
George R. Beasley-Murray, John, Word Biblical Commentary
(Dallas: Word, 1987), 355.
9.
On the Importance of the Messiah –
Typical
Perception of Traditional Judaism:
Belief
in the coming of a Messiah is not a central or defined theme
in Judaism.
Actual
Interpretations of Talmudic (or Rabbinic) Judaism:
The
coming of the Messiah and belief in him are central tenets
of Rabbinic Judaism, so much so that to deny this is to deny
the Torah and Moses.
28.
Thus, the prayer for the Davidic Messiah in the Amidah (also
called the Shemoneh Esreh, i.e., the eighteen foundational
petitions in Judaism) talks about waiting for God’s salvation
to come through his Messiah, the one literally called “the
horn of salvation.” In fact, the footnote to this benediction
in the ArtScroll Siddur (reflecting traditional Jewish
scholarship) reads, “Here we are taught that the salvation
of the Jewish people is possible only through the Davidic
Messiah.” 88 – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus,
Volume 2, Theological Objections, p. 60
109.
First, however, to demonstrate just how “un-Jewish” the objection
is – and by that I mean un-Jewish in a traditional sense –
I quote here the words of Rabbi Shmuley Boteach from his book
on the Messiah in Hasidic thought. He claims that “the belief
in the coming of the Messiah is more central to Judaism than
even the observance of the Sabbath or Yom Kippur,” 25 even
referring to the belief in the coming of the Messiah as “the
cardinal principle of Jewish faith,” and noting that “one
is required not only to believe in the coming of the
Messiah, but to actually await his arrival.” 26 – Brown,
Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume 3, Messianic
Prophecy Objections, p. 14
Footnote
25: Rabbi Smuley Boteach, The Wolf Shall Lie with the Lamb:
The Messiah in Hasidic Thought (Northvale, N.J.: Aronson,
1993), 7.
Footnote
26: Ibid., his emphasis. Rabbi Boteach also emphasizes the
need to long for the Messiah’s arrival (ibid.).
110.
Similarly, Rabbi Shmuel Butman, a Lubavitcher leader in “the
Rebbe is the Moshiach” movement, 27 answered the question,
“Why we must look forward to the coming of the Moshiach?”
as follows:
“…In
the opening paragraph of his laws about the Moshiach (Hilcos
Melachim 11:1), Rambam states:
“…Whoever
does not believe in him [the Messiah], or does not look forward
to his coming, denies not only the other prophets but the
Torah and Moshe, our Teacher, for the Torah attested concerning
him [the Moshiach]…” (and he goes on to quote verses in the
Torah that refer to the Moshiach). – Brown, Answering
Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume 3, Messianic Prophecy
Objections, p. 14
155.
That is a good question to ask, but before answering it directly,
let me draw your attention to several Rabbinic statements
that point to the widespread nature of Messianic prophecy
in the Scriptures. In a famous dictum of the Talmud it is
stated, “None of the prophets prophesied except of the days
of the Messiah” (meaning “the Messianic era,” b. Sanhedrin
99a). This is in harmony with the statement of Yeshua’s disciple
Peter, who said, “All the prophets from Samuel on, as many
as have spoken, have foretold these days” (Acts 3:24). Writing
in the twelfth century, Moses Maimonides stated that “this
belief in the Messiah is in accordance with the prophecies
concerning him, by all the prophets, from our master Moses
until Malachi, peace be unto them.” 315 – Brown, Answering
Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume 3, Messianic Prophecy
Objections, p. 153
Footnote
315: As translated by Boteach, The Wolf Shall Lie with
the Lamb, 3, my emphasis.
10.
On the Afterlife and the Age to Come –
Typical
Perception of Traditional Judaism:
Jewish
views do not include a belief in the afterlife, either in
eternal punishment or reward.
Actual
Interpretations of Talmudic (or Rabbinic) Judaism:
Rabbinic
Judaism contains a substantial belief in the afterlife comparable
to other major religions including descriptions of heaven
and hell.
103.
Rabbinic Judaism has much to say about the fleeting nature
of this life and the importance of belief in the afterlife.
According to Rabbi Paull Raphael, “teachings on life after
death have always been part and parcel of the Jewish spiritual
legacy.” 418 While acknowledging that “Judaism does value
life, here and now, over and above a future death and eternal
life,” he is careful to point out that “this does not imply
that there is no Jewish belief in afterlife” (13). Rather,
“there exists a profound and extensive legacy of Jewish teachings
on the afterlife. Over the course of four millennia, Judaism
evolved and promulgated a multifaceted philosophy of postmortem
survival, with doctrines comparable to those found in the
great religions of the world” (14). – Brown, Answering
Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume 2, Theological Objections,
p. 237
Footnote
418: Simcha Paull Raphael, Jewish View of the Afterlife
(Northvale, N.J.: Aronson, 1994), xxxiii.
104.
Rabbi Dan Cohn-Sherbok can also state that “as with Heaven,
Jewish sources contain extensive and elaborate descriptions
of Hell.” 419 – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus,
Volume 2, Theological Objections, p. 237
Footnote
419: Cohn-Sherbok, The Jewish Messiah, 55.
105.
Again, to use the Rabbinic phrase, this world is only the
corridor to the world to come (see m. Avot 4:16). 442 – Brown,
Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume 2, Theological
Objections, p. 246
Footnote
442: As noted in “Death,” EJ (CD ROM), 5:1420-27, “Death
itself, though imbued with mystery – contact with the corpse,
for instance, meant defilement in the highest degree – was
thought of as that moment of transformation from life in this
world to that of the beyond. In terms of the mishnaic image,
‘This world is like a corridor before the world to come’ (Avot
4:16), death is the passing of the portal separating the two
worlds, giving access to a ‘world which is wholly good.’ (Kid,
39b).”
(Continued...)
