Any questions about Jewish religion, culture, or history?

[JanBowman]

Hello, Verus Israel, and welcome to CAF. http://bestsmileys.com/waving/5.gif

Yes, I do have a question, and would appreciate your thought
on same. The question has three parts.

-When did Rabbinic Judaism begin?
-With the destruction of the second Temple,
could you please tell me what form worship
has taken, with no Temple?
-Since animal sacrifice was offered to God,
before the first Temple was built, why was
this practice not continued, after the destruction
of the second Temple?

Thank you for your kindness, in addressing my question[s.]

Kindest regards,

reen12

I too wonder why animal sacrifices came to a halt around 200 AD in the Jewish belief. I am puzzled. Can someone please answer this? Thank you so much!

 

[Valke2]

They generally came to a halt after the Temple was destroyed. No Temple, no place to do animal sacrifices. If you ever want to impress your friends at a cocktail party, you can mention the fact that animal sacrifices did in fact occur after the Temple’s destruction, as some Jews sought to continue the practice. But in the end, normative Judaism adopted the view that there can be no sacrifices until the Temple is rebuilt.

 

[Valke2]

They generally came to a halt after the Temple was destroyed. No Temple, no place to do animal sacrifices. If you ever want to impress your friends at a cocktail party, you can mention the fact that animal sacrifices did in fact occur after the Temple’s destruction, as some Jews sought to continue the practice. But in the end, normative Judaism adopted the view that there can be no sacrifices until the Temple is rebuilt.

Prior to receiving the commandments, there were no specific restrictions on animal sacrifice. God set down the laws post Exodus and since then, it was required that they be done at the Temple. Some Jews (including myself) believe that the Torah purposely made animal sacrifices overly difficult, so that we would more easily accept prayer as the preferred method of atonement. (or more accurately, as the approved method of concluding an act of attonement )

 

[a_cermak]

Prior to receiving the commandments, there were no specific restrictions on animal sacrifice. God set down the laws post Exodus and since then, it was required that they be done at the Temple. Some Jews (including myself) believe that the Torah purposely made animal sacrifices overly difficult, so that we would more easily accept prayer as the preferred method of atonement. (or more accurately, as the approved method of concluding an act of attonement )

But in Genesis, the story of Noah’s ark, you’ve got:

1. Of all the clean animals you shall take for yourself seven pairs, a male and its mate, and of the animals that are not clean, two, a male and its mate.

and:

1. And Noah built an altar to the Lord, and he took of all the clean animals and of all the clean fowl and brought up burnt offerings on the altar.

Now, the explanation for why Noah took the 7 pairs of clean critters is that he was going to sacrifice, but Noah precedes Moses and Abraham by a long shot, so how would he know clean from unclean? Commentary I’ve read said that the clean reference is to show that Noah had read Torah, but given the chronology, that doesn’t seem likely!

My suspicion is that some of the references to clean vs. unclean were added in later (also, the fact that in one verse it says 2 of each with no reference to clean vs. unclean, and in the very next verse there is a reference to 7 clean).

 

[Verus_Israel]

Verus Israel: Thank you for your thoughtful and enlightening response.
Perhaps you might consider starting a new thread so that it will be easier for us to ask questions and view your answers?

You’re more than welcome. The questions people have been asking are fantastic.

I’m not sure what threads to start, but if anyone would like to start a new thread with questions for me, I’ll be more than happy to read and respond.

 

[Verus_Israel]

It was a sort of ‘hymn’ that Mary (the mother of Jesus) recited:

Thanks for sharing such a beautiful hymn. It reminds me a lot of the prayer of thanks uttered by Hannah upon giving birth to Samuel (see the book of Samuel).

 

[Verus_Israel]

I too wonder why animal sacrifices came to a halt around 200 AD in the Jewish belief. I am puzzled. Can someone please answer this? Thank you so much!

A great question! I provided a response earlier, but I’m sure there are many more opinions.

 

[Nickkname]

Yes, I enjoy that psalm a lot myself…we read it quite often during the liturgy. What is Mary’s Magnificat?

We haven’t sacrificed a lamb as a paschal offering since the Temple was destroyed. The paschal offering is the only one which we may offer with the Temple gone. However, for whatever reason - and this is a very complex and fascinating subject - we have declined to do so (the essence of the holiday is the dialogue at the Seder, not the sacrifice). It should be noted that there are some groups of Samaritans (who are outside of rabbinic jurisdiction) in Israel who offer a sacrifice on the holiday.

I hope that clears it up!

Very fascinating subject, and I agree, it must be complex. But if you have the time and energy, or a link to a webpage that’d explain this, why have you declined to do the essence of the holiday?

Mary’s Magnificat is a canticle which Mary sang after Elizabeth proclaimed, “Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. And how does this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For at the moment the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy. Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled.” The psalm of Mary goes as follows:

My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord;
my spirit rejoices in God my savior.
For he has looked upon his handmaid’s lowliness; behold, from now on will all ages call me blessed.
The Mighty One has done great things for me, and holy is his name.
His mercy is from age to age to those who fear him.
He has shown might with his arm, dispersed the arrogant of mind and heart.
He has thrown down the rulers from their thrones but lifted up the lowly.
The hungry he has filled with good things; the rich he has sent away empty.
He has helped Israel his servant, remembering his mercy,
according to his promise to our fathers, to Abraham and to his descendants forever.

Source: vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PWK.HTM

 

[Valke2]

But in Genesis, the story of Noah’s ark, you’ve got:

1. Of all the clean animals you shall take for yourself seven pairs, a male and its mate, and of the animals that are not clean, two, a male and its mate.

and:

1. And Noah built an altar to the Lord, and he took of all the clean animals and of all the clean fowl and brought up burnt offerings on the altar.

Now, the explanation for why Noah took the 7 pairs of clean critters is that he was going to sacrifice, but Noah precedes Moses and Abraham by a long shot, so how would he know clean from unclean? Commentary I’ve read said that the clean reference is to show that Noah had read Torah, but given the chronology, that doesn’t seem likely!

My suspicion is that some of the references to clean vs. unclean were added in later (also, the fact that in one verse it says 2 of each with no reference to clean vs. unclean, and in the very next verse there is a reference to 7 clean).

Noah preceded Exodus and the laws of sacrifice. During his time, sacrifices could take place anywhere. Your suspicions may be correct. Certainly the events of Noah were written sometime after they occurred, even if one believes the entire Torah was given to Moses at Sinai

 

[a_cermak]

Noah preceded Exodus and the laws of sacrifice. During his time, sacrifices could take place anywhere. Your suspicions may be correct. Certainly the events of Noah were written sometime after they occurred, even if one believes the entire Torah was given to Moses at Sinai

You know, I misread your original post and thought you were saying that there were no provisions for sacrifice prior to the giving of the Law.

I tend to believe the Torah developed over time as an oral tradition and then was eventually written down (and in that context you could certainly believe that the Torah was given to Moses).

 

[Verus_Israel]

Very fascinating subject, and I agree, it must be complex. But if you have the time and energy, or a link to a webpage that’d explain this, why have you declined to do the essence of the holiday?

That’s a great question!

The essence of the holiday of Passover is not the sacrifice of the lamb, but rather the arranged discussion that took place over the consumption of the meat; the precursor to the modern Passover Seder. This discussion is intended as inter-generational dialogue, in which one generation conveys to the next the basic information underlying our cultural history and spirit, in a response to the younger generation’s inquiry.

When the Passover sacrifice was still offered, it was eaten in groups (Heb. Haburoth), often composed of the members of one’s family and/or neighbors, who would discuss the meaning and impact of the exodus from Egypt, the covenant of Sinai, and the settling of Canaan. The modern Passover Haggada touches upon all of these themes, in addition to some passages pertaining to post-Temple circumstances.

Does that help a bit?

 

[7_Sorrows]

kind of a passing on of an oral tradition in a way.

i have never attended a passover seder, but i am sure it is a beautiful way to remember what happened. seder means order, is that correct.

and they always leave a chair for elijah.

i have often wondered if Jesus asked his apostles “why is this night unlike any other?” (i think that is how the question is stated)
and the significance as it was the Last Supper so it had a different meaning to them. or two meanings.

 

[coleraine]

Hi! If you have any questions about our religion, our culture, or our history, please feel free to ask. I promise I won’t be offended!

hello and welcome. you said you would not be offended, but you gotta understand that it is very rarely someone of a different religion just presents him/herself for questioning and we are full of questions.

 

[Analyzer]

I’m not sure what threads to start, but if anyone would like to start a new thread with questions for me, I’ll be more than happy to read and respond.

What is Judaism’s stance (theologically in the light of Torah, the Prophets and Talmud ) towards Jesus the Son of Mary and Christianity taught by Saul/Paul and Catholic Church?

 

[Valke2]

What is Judaism’s stance (theologically in the light of Torah, the Prophets and Talmud ) towards Jesus the Son of Mary and Christianity taught by Saul/Paul and Catholic Church?

What is it’s stance? We don’t belive Jesus was messiah or God. And personally, I don’t believe Paul was a knowledgeable Jew. I’m not sure I believe he spoke Hebrew and I don’t believe He was the kind of student he said he was or that he studied with whom he said he studied).

 

[Verus_Israel]

hello and welcome. you said you would not be offended, but you gotta understand that it is very rarely someone of a different religion just presents him/herself for questioning and we are full of questions.

Thank you! Thus far, the questions have been superb.

 

[Verus_Israel]

What is Judaism’s stance (theologically in the light of Torah, the Prophets and Talmud ) towards Jesus the Son of Mary and Christianity taught by Saul/Paul and Catholic Church?

An excellent question! As I’m sure you know, there is no monolithic Jewish stance towards anything; the Tora, the Prophets, the Talmud, and all the rest of our religious literature comprise a polysemic symphony of diverse voices and perspectives. That said, I believe that we can evaluate the Christian perception of Jesus, as portrayed in the narratives of the Christian testament, vis-a-vis the realities of Jewish history.

To start with, I think that it should be noted that there is much discord in the Christian testament as to the nature and teachings of Jesus. This isn’t to discredit the book out of hand, but rather to note that even Christian perceptions of Jesus (Catholic dogma du jour notwithstanding) aren’t uniform, even within the book redacted by the church itself!

Concerning the title given to Jesus by some of his followers - “king of the Jews” - I would like to quote from a teacher of mine, Jose Faur:

…Jesus’s demeanor, as portrayed in the Christian Scripture, is not of a common man but of a Rex. He is free to award riches and honors to some, and condemn others to eternal torment by his say: whether deservedly or not. Paul posited a human scale on the top of which stands Jesus. However, Jesus is not to be worshiped qua God but qua Christ. The distinction is crucial. ‘Christ’ is the Greek translation of the Hebrew mashiah ‘anointed’ - a term referring to the ‘anointing ceremony’ performed at the installation of the monarch and high priest. I would like to propose a question concerning the semantic content of mashiah/Christ: is it that of a Hebrew king or of a pagan Rex? By postulating that Jesus qua Christ is god, and that Jesus qua Christ is to be worshiped as god, Paul was substantiating the pagan ideology Rex/god [Rex = god]. At this point it would be relevant to raise a second question. Does Jesus’ kingship, as depicted in Christian tradition, correspond to a Jewish monarch of the House of David, or to a pagan Rex? Jesus’ miraculous birth and eventual apotheosis conform to that of a pagan Rex claiming bodily supremacy as a testimony to his hierarchic authority, as it was claimed by Caligula and Pharaoh. This is contrary to everything that the Tora and prophets taught, thus confirming pagan political theory contra the Law.

…the first question that springs to mind is whether the abrogation of the Tora presupposes a Christ/Rex, yielding absolute and unlimited sovereignty, or a Christ/Jewish king with limited sovereignty under the Law? A follow-up question: was the basis for Jesus’ authority a matter of might or right? Did it depend on consent or on his alleged power to exorcise demons and perform all sort of magical acts, as attested by so many trustworthy witnesses (questioned only by feeble minded Jews and odious Pharisees)? A Christ based on might is a Rex - not a king of the House of David - regardless of alleged pedigree!

As you can see, when we evaluate Jesus’ behavior (specifically as portrayed by the church in the Christian testament) against the realities of Jewish governance and political thought, we find that the depiction does not match the expectation.

Similarly, many Jews have a problem with the essence of Paul’s theology; namely, the degree to which they contravene our cultural sensibilities and attitudes, especially vis-a-vis the Law/Tora. To quote the great Christian Hebraist, Professor George Moore:

Paul’s definition of righteousness as perfect conformity to the law of God would never have been conceded by a Jewish opponent, to whom it would have been equivalent to admitting that God had mocked man by offering a salvation on terms that they both knew to be impossible…
…How a Jew of Paul’s antecedent could ignore, and by implication deny, the great prophetic doctrine of repentance, which, individualized and interiorized, was a cardinal doctrine of Judaism, namely, that God, out of love, freely forgives the sincerely penitent sinner and restores him to his favor - that seems from the Jewish point of view inexplicable.

As you can see, much of what Paul taught was completely alien to the Jewish mind, especially the notion that there could be salvation through faith alone (whoever “believes with his heart” will be “justified” regardless of behavior). Furthermore, the notion that “sin” produces “guilt” and “guilt” can only be expiated by death runs contrary to the way the Law/Tora was understood and lived by the Jews for over a thousand years.

I personally believe that Jesus was a young man who sought to universalize the message and values of the Tora and make them accessible to the illiterate masses and to the non-Jewish world in general. His mistake was in attempting to do so outside of the system already in place for such a worthy endeavor; by placing himself outside of the inter-generational chain of our tradition (which abides by various rules that allow it to survive, intact, throughout history), he opened up his “prophecy” to be hijacked by later followers with a different political agenda in mind.

The church, like all institutions and organizations created by human beings, has inherent worth and reflects a deep-seated yearning that could be seen as a universal part of human nature. It is my sincere hope that, with time, the church will come to reach its full potential in serving the spiritual needs of humanity.

I hope that helps to answer your question!

 

[Muslim_Woman]

Salaam/peace

I was told in other Chirstian site that some or many jews think jesus was son of God. Is that true ? If a jew starts believing that , will s/he remain as a jew or become a Christian ?

 

[Spirithound]

Good morning! My next request is for your interpretation of God’s curse on Adam and Eve after they disobeyed Him in the Garden of Eden. Particularly, about God saying that if they eat of the tree, on that day they shall surely die, but they lived for many more years.
Shalom, and a restful Shabot!

 

[7_Sorrows]

Salaam/peace

I was told in other Chirstian site that some or many jews think jesus was son of God. Is that true ? If a jew starts believing that , will s/he remain as a jew or become a Christian ?

i am not the one who started this thread, but there is a movement called messianic judaism and they are jews who believe that Jesus is the Son of God, the Messiah, or if a jewish person believe that Jesus is the Son of God, he/she can join any regular Christian denomination and would become a christian. as far as the messianic movement, i do not know if they continue to consider themselves still jewish or if they refer to themselves as christians or perhaps call themselves jewish christians.