Christians’ idea of a
Jewish messiah, literally “anointed one”, is limited to their interpretation of
prophecies which for the most part for Jews have never interpreted in that way
or else have interpreted as foretelling a figure other than the Messiah ben
David.
All the kings and priests
of Samerina (Samaria) and Yehud (Judaea) were anointed, so they all could be
called messiahs. In the sense of
“deliverer”, before the 2nd century BCE through 1st
century CE era two figures outside either entity were considered “messiahs” of
Yahweh: Cyrus the Great of Iran, who by
destroying the power of Babylon freed the Jews (and Samaritans) from its
domination, and Alexander the Great of Macedon, who a little over two centuries
later freed them from the chaos into which the Achaemenid Empire of Iran had
fallen into after the coup d’etat by Bagoas, vizier to Shahanshah (“King of
kings”) Artaxerxes III.
In this turn of the era
period, mainstream Judaism taught that there were going to be not one but two
apocalyptic figures with the title messiah.
This scheme is still the one taught by Rabbinic Judaism even now. One was the Messiah ben David, an idea with
which Christians are very familiar, and the other was the Messiah be Joseph.
Since its beginning,
Christianity has identified with Jesus bar Joses passages such as Zechariah 12:10,
Isaiah 52:13-53:12, and Psalm 22. At the
same time they believe him to be the Messiah ben David and have even fabricated
two separate geneaologies for him from the mythical David figure, one having
him descend from David through Solomon in 28 generations (Matthew 1), the other
from David through Nathan in 42 generations (Luke 3).
There are two problems
here. First, these passages and others
refer not to the Messiah ben David but to his predecessor, the Messiah ben
Joseph. Second, the geneaologies trace
to or from Joseph, who according to Christian doctrine is not Jesus’ father,
rendering these geneaologies meaningless even had they not been fabricated.
It is the Messiah ben
Joseph who is sacrificed as an atonement for sins, but of the sins of Judah, or
Yehud, as opposed to Ephraim or Samerinam not the sin of the whole world. The Messiah ben Joseph is the Lamb of God,
not the Messiah ben David, and he will be slain by Gog and Magog according to
Jewish myth.
After the death of the
Messiah ben Joseph, a time of trial will come for Israel, then the Messiah ben
David will appear. At the turn of the
era, the belief of the this messiah’s role was that he would restore kingdom of
David; gather the exiles; usher in world peace and knowledge of Yahweh; end
death and disease; raise the dead to new life; and spread the Torah.
Before this, however, the
Messiah ben David would first defeat the last ruler of the fourth kingdom (in
the schema in Daniel), interpreted as
the empire of Rome, and have him brought before his throne in Jerusalem to be
judged. After this last emperor’s sins
are enumerated, according to the belief, the Messiah ben David, Yahweh’s
Anointed and Vicar on earth, will pronounce sentence and slay the Roman himself,
with his own hands.
They don’t mention that
part of the doctrine in the Gospels, which, if they even knew about it, would
supply a reasonable explanation the reaction of the Romans and for the
crucifixion of Jesus bar Joses between two rebels, dubbed bandits in the
gospels though they probably called themselves freedom fighters. Like the Taliban.
Of course, even within the
Gospels themselves, their protagonist (Jesus) not only denies being “the
Messiah”, but also that the Messiah is David’s son. If you don’t believe me, just “ask” him: Matthew 22:42-44:
While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, Saying,
What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of
David. He saith unto them, How then doth
David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord,
Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
The Essenes, or at least
those at Qumran, did not teach or believe in either of the two above-mentioned
messiahs. Their documents solely or
preferentially speak of a priestly messiah.
The Damascus Document speaks
of one Messiah of Aaron and Israel while the Manual of Discipline speaks of
two, a Messiah of Aaron and a Messiah of Israel.
The pseudepigraphal Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs
teaches of three messiahs: a Messiah ben Ephraim, a Messiah ben Judah, and a
Messiah ben Levi, who will be first in authority.
Another eschatological
figure for whom the Jews looked at the turn of the era was the “Prophet like
Moses”, supposedly foretold in Deuteronomy 18:15-16:
The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me
from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to
him. For this is what you asked of the Lord your God at Horeb on
the day of the assembly when you said, “Let us not hear the voice of
the Lord our God nor see this great fire anymore, or we will die.”
Paradoxically, Christians, clearly not
well-versed in Jewish doctrine, many even being proudly completely ignorant of
it, also assign this role to Jesus bar Joses.
Among the Samaritans, the
“Prophet like Moses” was, and still is, called the Taheb, and he is their only
eschatological figure.
Further rabbinic doctrine
from the turn of the era teaches that two witnesses will take an active role in
events of the end times. These two are Enoch
and Elijah, the latter of whom has his own prophecy in Malachi (chapter 4:5-6 – Behold,
I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful
day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the
children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite
the earth with a curse). Lumped together
with these two is Melchizedek, priest of El Elyon, who appears to Abram in Genesis after the battle of five kings.
Another pseudepigraphal
book of interest is 1 Enoch. This book,
part of the canon of the ancient Ethiopian Orthodox Church, introduces an
eschatological figure it calls the “Son of man”, who is expected to preside
over the final judgment of sinners and righteous and deliver the former over to
angels for punishment. The only other
known turn-of-the-era instance of the phrase “Son of man” being used in this
sense is in the Gospels, always when Jesus bar Joses is speaking. Given this, one wonders why 1 Enoch was
rejected by most Christians when so much other questionable material (such as the certainly pseudepigraphal 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians) was accepted into Christian
canon.
No comments:
Post a Comment