Jewish Interpretation of Psalm 51:5

[LivingWaters7]

Meltzerboy will volunteer about Gan Eden and I’m already curious also.
May I offer my explantion until he returns. With the serpent came to Eve the zohamah, the spiritual polutant and all subsequent behaviour was poisened by the original sin of the tree of knowledge. When the Torah was given the zohamma was gone but returned with the sin of the golden calf, and ever since then we fight the zohamah and it will only be gone completely when Moshiach will come.

Offerings are now replaced by an additional service called just that: „Musaf“. In this service that follows the Torah reading we (orthodox rite) also read about the animal sacrifices and long for the Temple being rebuilt. As you know, back then when the Temple still stood sacrifes had been offered also in order to attone for sins. The animal offering was a symbolic act of self sacrifice, you didn’t just sacrifice the animal, but your inner self. And this goes all the way back to Abraham and Isaac. The inner act of self sacrifice is the binding of oneself onto the altar. Even though the ram was offered, Isaak took on its form and was sacrificed with it, because when the Angel had told Abraham not to touch his son, the inner sacrifice had already taken place when Abraham held the knife in his hand. The corbanot, the offerings to G-d, demand human sacrifice, as the binding of Isaac means the binding of man, but it demands it in the form of an animal. Sacrifice is a ransom for man who is obliged to offer himself to G-d. This is (in short) what the sinoffering is about.

Now that there’s no Temple right now - and only in the Temple were animals offered - the physical symbol is gone but the human, inner sacrifice and spiritual act remains in place. When Musaf is said (and of course not only then), man hands over his existence to Him, he approaches G-d in sacrifice and in binding himself to the alter and he gives himself over to G-d completely. There are many references that show that prayer would replace sacrifice. Most important of all, for me personally, is this reference in the Megilla that says that G-d said that since the Temple wouldn’t stand anymore, he would forgive our sins when we read the law of the offerings as if we had actually brought the offering. So to be forgiven you need to bind yourself onto the altar. You can pray Musaf all day long, if you don’t return to the L0rd your G-d you might have fullfilled your mizvah (obligation) but you might not have returned in a spiritual way. This idea to give yourself to G-d and return to G-d in prayer and repentance is and was the same, in ancient times as well as today. Maybe this is comparable to the unintentional or venial sins that are forgiven at the beginning of Mass when you pray?

It might also be intereseting to note that Abraham said to G-d after he already had the knife in his hand „Here I am“. These are the words if I’m not mistaken that every Catholic Priest says when he gets ordained and hands his life over to G-d.

Thanks, that was very helpful!

I do look forward to learning more about how Jews regard the Adam and Eve events, especially since original sin isn’t part of Judaism. I also find it interesting that repentance and forgiveness of sins are possible in Judaism without the need for blood sacrifice (including the need for God to Incarnate and suffer and die).

 

[504Katrin]

Thanks, that was very helpful!

I do look forward to learning more about how Jews regard the Adam and Eve events, especially since original sin isn’t part of Judaism. I also find it interesting that repentance and forgiveness of sins are possible in Judaism without the need for blood sacrifice (including the need for God to Incarnate and suffer and die).

I just happen to know this because I have tefilla (prayer) and Tehillim classes once a week
I’m looking forward to learning more about what happened in the garden Eden myself.

 

[meltzerboy]

Ok thanks! Yes, whenever you have the time, I’m interested.

Firstly, Judaism does not interpret the fall of Adam and Eve as original sin. Indeed the word “sin” is not at all mentioned in the story: it appears only upon the slaying of Abel by his brother, Cain. One of the major reasons why Judaism does not believe in original sin is that Moses, our greatest prophet, in Deuteronomy cautions the Jewish people that the only means of their “salvation” is by behaving in accord with Torah teaching and that this accomplishment is surely within their reach. IOW, there is no need for anything but human perseverance to do G-d’s will.

So what does the loss of paradise by Adam and Eve mean according to Judaism? One interpretation (and there are several) is that it compels mankind to exercise its own free will in the physical reality of the world. That is, it must now choose its salvation rather than being handed it. The spiritual nature of the Garden of Eden has been transformed by G-d and Man into a physical necessity in which mankind is now given the task of choosing good over evil and thus drawing even closer to G-d than it would have were it fully obedient at the start. Mankind must henceforth hold in check its “evil” inclination and strive to exercise its good inclination. A punishment in one sense, but in another sense, a reward.

 

[DelsonJacobs]

Firstly, Judaism does not interpret the fall of Adam and Eve as original sin. Indeed the word “sin” is not at all mentioned in the story: it appears only upon the slaying of Abel by his brother, Cain. One of the major reasons why Judaism does not believe in original sin is that Moses, our greatest prophet, in Deuteronomy cautions the Jewish people that the only means of their “salvation” is by behaving in accord with Torah teaching and that this accomplishment is surely within their reach. IOW, there is no need for anything but human perseverance to do G-d’s will.

So what does the loss of paradise by Adam and Eve mean according to Judaism? One interpretation (and there are several) is that it compels mankind to exercise its own free will in the physical reality of the world. That is, it must now choose its salvation rather than being handed it. The spiritual nature of the Garden of Eden has been transformed by G-d and Man into a physical necessity in which mankind is now given the task of choosing good over evil and thus drawing even closer to G-d than it would have were it fully obedient at the start. Mankind must henceforth hold in check its “evil” inclination and strive to exercise its good inclination. A punishment in one sense, but in another sense, a reward.

Correct me if I am wrong, meltzerboy, but isn’t it a school of thought of some in Judaism that Torah sees the Mosaic Law as a panacea to sin?

As you mentioned, sin is first introduced with Cain and Abel with fratricide as the result, the older brother killing the younger because the younger is favored by G-d. The Torah ends with two brothers again, Aaron and Moses, but this time the older is lovingly accepting, even obedient to G-d’s favoring the younger, Moses, through whom HaShem gives us the Law. Some Jews, if I am right, see this as the Torah explaining Mosaic Law as the solution to sin, correct?

 

[meltzerboy]

Correct me if I am wrong, meltzerboy, but isn’t it a school of thought of some in Judaism that Torah sees the Mosaic Law as a panacea to sin?

As you mentioned, sin is first introduced with Cain and Abel with fratricide as the result, the older brother killing the younger because the younger is favored by G-d. The Torah ends with two brothers again, Aaron and Moses, but this time the older is lovingly accepting, even obedient to G-d’s favoring the younger, Moses, through whom HaShem gives us the Law. Some Jews, if I am right, see this as the Torah explaining Mosaic Law as the solution to sin, correct?

Not the ultimate solution since sin will always take place so long as we are human. However, the studying and practicing of Torah can be a means of averting sin. Or do you mean there is a progression in the Hebrew Bible whereby the Torah, particularly the recapitulation in Deuteronomy, makes it clearer what G-d requires of us in terms of striving not to sin?

 

[DelsonJacobs]

Not the ultimate solution since sin will always take place so long as we are human. However, the studying and practicing of Torah can be a means of averting sin. Or do you mean there is a progression in the Hebrew Bible whereby the Torah, particularly the recapitulation in Deuteronomy, makes it clearer what G-d requires of us in terms of striving not to sin?

I’m not sure exactly where this school of thought originated or where it was going which is why I asked, but I believe I read somewhere that it was as you mention in your second point above, namely that “the recapitulation in Deuteronomy, makes it clearer what G-d requires of us in terms of striving not to sin.”

I was just trying to see if I remembered the point correctly and if you’ve heard of it. I am now the keeper of a somewhat garbled “Swiss cheese” memory (which can be just as smelly too), so I was hoping for some clarity on the matter.

 

[meltzerboy]

I’m not sure exactly where this school of thought originated or where it was going which is why I asked, but I believe I read somewhere that it was as you mention in your second point above, namely that “the recapitulation in Deuteronomy, makes it clearer what G-d requires of us in terms of striving not to sin.”

I was just trying to see if I remembered the point correctly and if you’ve heard of it. I am now the keeper of a somewhat garbled “Swiss cheese” memory (which can be just as smelly too), so I was hoping for some clarity on the matter.

Garbled and smelly ‘Swiss cheese’ memory! LOL I love it and will have to try to remember it.

 

[LivingWaters7]

Firstly, Judaism does not interpret the fall of Adam and Eve as original sin. Indeed the word “sin” is not at all mentioned in the story: it appears only upon the slaying of Abel by his brother, Cain. One of the major reasons why Judaism does not believe in original sin is that Moses, our greatest prophet, in Deuteronomy cautions the Jewish people that the only means of their “salvation” is by behaving in accord with Torah teaching and that this accomplishment is surely within their reach. IOW, there is no need for anything but human perseverance to do G-d’s will.

So what does the loss of paradise by Adam and Eve mean according to Judaism? One interpretation (and there are several) is that it compels mankind to exercise its own free will in the physical reality of the world. That is, it must now choose its salvation rather than being handed it. The spiritual nature of the Garden of Eden has been transformed by G-d and Man into a physical necessity in which mankind is now given the task of choosing good over evil and thus drawing even closer to G-d than it would have were it fully obedient at the start. Mankind must henceforth hold in check its “evil” inclination and strive to exercise its good inclination. A punishment in one sense, but in another sense, a reward.

Thanks that was very helpful.

I must say, it’s very interesting for me to ponder how Jews understand their own scriptures, and how, in many significant areas (like original/ancestral sin, Savior, atonement for sins, etc) there are differences with the Christian view of the OT. Interesting because Christianity, which purports to be the fulfillment of Judaism (or at least the OT) begins with premises and understandings of the OT/Judaism that aren’t even shared by the community it is supposed to be fulfilling. And these are things that I don’t think many Christians even know about or care to think about, since in many cases its just assumed that Judaism and Christianity share the same views on those foundational issues that resulted in the need for Christ and Christianity. Hope that made some kinda of sense, I’m just rambling.

I actually just bought on Kindle the book “Judaism and Christianity: A Contrast” by Rabbi Stuart Federow, as it touches on these same issues from a Jewish perspective.

 

[DelsonJacobs]

Thanks that was very helpful.

I must say, it’s very interesting for me to ponder how Jews understand their own scriptures, and how, in many significant areas (like original/ancestral sin, Savior, atonement for sins, etc) there are differences with the Christian view of the OT. Interesting because Christianity, which purports to be the fulfillment of Judaism (or at least the OT) begins with premises and understandings of the OT/Judaism that aren’t even shared by the community it is supposed to be fulfilling. And these are things that I don’t think many Christians even know about or care to think about, since in many cases its just assumed that Judaism and Christianity share the same views on those foundational issues that resulted in the need for Christ and Christianity. Hope that made some kinda of sense, I’m just rambling.

I actually just bought on Kindle the book “Judaism and Christianity: A Contrast” by Rabbi Stuart Federow, as it touches on these same issues from a Jewish perspective.

Another good read is The Jewish Annotated New Testament. It contains the NRSV text with commentary from a Jewish perspective. It has received excellent reviews from both Jews and Christians, scholars and laypersons.

 

[504Katrin]

Firstly, Judaism does not interpret the fall of Adam and Eve as original sin. Indeed the word “sin” is not at all mentioned in the story: it appears only upon the slaying of Abel by his brother, Cain. One of the major reasons why Judaism does not believe in original sin is that Moses, our greatest prophet, in Deuteronomy cautions the Jewish people that the only means of their “salvation” is by behaving in accord with Torah teaching and that this accomplishment is surely within their reach. IOW, there is no need for anything but human perseverance to do G-d’s will.

So what does the loss of paradise by Adam and Eve mean according to Judaism? One interpretation (and there are several) is that it compels mankind to exercise its own free will in the physical reality of the world. That is, it must now choose its salvation rather than being handed it. The spiritual nature of the Garden of Eden has been transformed by G-d and Man into a physical necessity in which mankind is now given the task of choosing good over evil and thus drawing even closer to G-d than it would have were it fully obedient at the start. Mankind must henceforth hold in check its “evil” inclination and strive to exercise its good inclination. A punishment in one sense, but in another sense, a reward.

Makes sense. Thank you!

 

[Remnant1]

Firstly, Judaism does not interpret the fall of Adam and Eve as original sin. Indeed the word “sin” is not at all mentioned in the story:

Gen2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

So, when man disobeyed what God says here and recieved the death sentence, the Jews don’t believe that this is sin?

it appears only upon the slaying of Abel by his brother, Cain.

The conflict between Cain and Abel was over the acceptability of their burnt offerings though, Right? And burnt offerings were offered for sin, Right?

One of the major reasons why Judaism does not believe in original sin is that Moses, our greatest prophet, in Deuteronomy cautions the Jewish people that the only means of their “salvation” is by behaving in accord with Torah teaching

I would be interested in knowing where in Deuteronomy Moses gives this caution.

and that this accomplishment is surely within their reach. IOW, there is no need for anything but human perseverance to do G-d’s will.

So, are the Jews awaiting the Messiah and if so what will be his function?

So what does the loss of paradise by Adam and Eve mean according to Judaism? One interpretation (and there are several) is that it compels mankind to exercise its own free will in the physical reality of the world.

I don’t understand. Are you saying that Adam and Eve did not have free will? And that the Garden was not the real world?

That is, it must now choose its salvation rather than being handed it.

Salvation from what?

The spiritual nature of the Garden of Eden has been transformed by G-d and Man into a physical necessity in which mankind is now given the task of choosing good over evil

It seems to me that was the reality from the beginning.

and thus drawing even closer to G-d than it would have were it fully obedient at the start. Mankind must henceforth hold in check its “evil” inclination and strive to exercise its good inclination.

Again wasn’t this always the case?

A punishment in one sense, but in another sense, a reward.

I don’t see how holding in check our “evil” inclinations could be constued as either.

 

[LivingWaters7]

Firstly, Judaism does not interpret the fall of Adam and Eve as original sin. Indeed the word “sin” is not at all mentioned in the story: it appears only upon the slaying of Abel by his brother, Cain.

So as I mentioned, I’m reading “Judaism and Christianity: A Contrast”, and in Chapter 4, “The Nature of Humanity”, it says the same thing:

**"The concept that we die because of the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden is simply unbiblical. The Biblical text tells us that Adam and Eve were not removed from the Garden of Eden because they sinned. The first time the Bible uses the term, “sin”, it is not in reference to Adam and Eve, but in reference to the jealousy of Cain against Abel in Genesis 4:7. Rather, Adam and Eve were removed from the Garden of Eden because there was another tree in the garden from which God did not want them to eat. That tree was the Tree of Life.

Genesis 3:22-24 And the Eternal God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the Tree of Life, and eat, and live forever: 23 Therefore the Eternal God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. 24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the Garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword that turned every way, to keep the way of the Tree of Life.

If, according to Christian theology on original sin, I die because Adam and Eve sinned, it violates the first part of Deuteronomy 24:16:

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children; neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers. Every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

One does not die because Adam and Eve sinned. It is against what the Bible says.**

:coffeeread:

 

[Moses613]

I’m not sure how to intersperse the quotes properly, so my responses will be in bold.
remnant1 said:
Gen2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

So, when man disobeyed what God says here and recieved the death sentence, the Jews don’t believe that this is sin?

That is not the only interpretation. Some commentators view it as having been a sin. The explanation if it was not a sin, is that God was simply informing Adam that if he chose to eat from the fruit of the tree, the result of that would be that he becomes mortal. As to why he would have made that choice, there is an answer but it’s beyond the scope of what I have time for right now. Either way, it’s not the sin that Adam and Eve did per se that Judaism focuses on, but the results of that sin, because it cast the world down to a much baser, more physical level where spirituality and God’s presence in the world are much more concealed. In other words, in Judaism no human inherits the sin itself from Adam and Eve, but they inherit a baser world and stronger inclinations toward sin.

The conflict between Cain and Abel was over the acceptability of their burnt offerings though, Right? And burnt offerings were offered for sin, Right?

No. The Bible allows for voluntary sacrifices (for one example, see Leviticus 7:16). A person may vow to offer a sacrifice in thanksgiving to God for a specific event, not connected with any sin. I do not remember ever reading a source that attributed their offerings to atonement.

I would be interested in knowing where in Deuteronomy Moses gives this caution.

I’m not sure I follow meltzerboy’s original reasoning, but for indications that keeping the law is integral to Israel’s mission in the world, see Deut 8:11 and onward, 10:12-14, 11:26-32, as just a few of the places where this is mentioned. (I don’t know if the verses might be off, as I am working from a Hebrew version of the Bible, and I know there are some slight differences from the Christian version.)

So, are the Jews awaiting the Messiah and if so what will be his function?

The 12th principle of Maimonides’ 13 Principles of the Jewish Faith is that we await the coming of the messiah every day. He will inspire all Jews to repent from their sins, lead them back to the Holy Land, re-establish the Temple in Jerusalem and usher in an era of world peace and universal knowledge of God for all humanity.

I don’t understand. Are you saying that Adam and Eve did not have free will? And that the Garden was not the real world?

According to that interpretation, they had free will (this is a central concept to Judaism) to choose perfection in knowledge and worship of God, or not to do so, but they were not tempted to sin per se. The Garden was not the world as we know it today, it was on a much more sublime plane of existence. Many believe it existed in some area of today’s physical world as well but is now hidden.

I don’t have time to respond to the rest of it, but I don’t agree with everything in meltzerboy’s presentation of the issue. The whole ‘salvation’ thing is not really the same at all in Judaism as it is in Christianity.

 

[Remnant1]

I’m not sure how to intersperse the quotes properly, so my responses will be in bold.
remnant1 said:
Gen2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

So, when man disobeyed what God says here and recieved the death sentence, the Jews don’t believe that this is sin?

**That is not the only interpretation. Some commentators view it as having been a sin. The explanation if it was not a sin, is that God was simply informing Adam that if he chose to eat from the fruit of the tree, the result of that would be that he becomes mortal.
**
Well I’m a Christian and I believe in Rom.6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
The reason that mankind must now die is that Adam and Eve sinned

As to why he would have made that choice, there is an answer but it’s beyond the scope of what I have time for right now. Either way, it’s not the sin that Adam and Eve did per se that Judaism focuses on, but the results

Ya, sure but either way Adam and Eve did sin because they disobeyed God and now they and all of mankind must die which is the result of sin.

The conflict between Cain and Abel was over the acceptability of their burnt offerings though, Right? And burnt offerings were offered for sin, Right?

No. The Bible allows for voluntary sacrifices (for one example, see Leviticus 7:16). A person may vow to offer a sacrifice in thanksgiving to God for a specific event, not connected with any sin. I do not remember ever reading a source that attributed their offerings to atonement.

That’s all well and good, but the offering of Cain and Abel was not that kind of offering. It was a sin offering and that is why Cain’s offeringwas not accepted.

Hebrews 9:22
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

Cain did not offer a blood sacrifice which was required to forshadow the comming Messiah and therefore his sacrifice was rejected.

I would be interested in knowing where in Deuteronomy Moses gives this caution.

I’m not sure I follow meltzerboy’s original reasoning, but for indications that keeping the law is integral to Israel’s mission in the world, see Deut 8:11 and onward, 10:12-14, 11:26-32, as just a few of the places where this is mentioned. (I don’t know if the verses might be off, as I am working from a Hebrew version of the Bible, and I know there are some slight differences from the Christian version.)

Deu.8
19 And it shall be, if thou do at all forget the Lord thy God, and walk after other gods, and serve them, and worship them, I testify against you this day that ye shall surely perish.
20 As the nations which the Lord destroyeth before your face, so shall ye perish; because ye would not be obedient unto the voice of the Lord your God.

Sounds pretty close to Rom.6:23

So, are the Jews awaiting the Messiah and if so what will be his function?

The 12th principle of Maimonides’ 13 Principles of the Jewish Faith is that we await the coming of the messiah every day. He will inspire all Jews to repent from their sins, lead them back to the Holy Land, re-establish the Temple in Jerusalem and usher in an era of world peace and universal knowledge of God for all humanity.

So, you are looking for a Messiah that is totally of this world and you don’t believe that you need a Messiah that will save you from your sins, because you think that you can do that for yourself by good works. Is that right?

I don’t understand. Are you saying that Adam and Eve did not have free will? And that the Garden was not the real world?

According to that interpretation, they had free will (this is a central concept to Judaism) to choose perfection in knowledge and worship of God, or not to do so, but they were not tempted to sin per se. The Garden was not the world as we know it today, it was on a much more sublime plane of existence. Many believe it existed in some area of today’s physical world as well but is now hidden.

Gen3
1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

So you don’t see this as being tempted to disobey God?

I don’t have time to respond to the rest of it, but I don’t agree with everything in meltzerboy’s presentation of the issue. The whole ‘salvation’ thing is not really the same at all in Judaism as it is in Christianity.

Ya I can see that. Hope we can continue this when you have more time.

God is love
Remnant1

 

[Moses613]

Well I’m a Christian and I believe in Rom.6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
The reason that mankind must now die is that Adam and Eve sinned…

Ya, sure but either way Adam and Eve did sin because they disobeyed God and now they and all of mankind must die which is the result of sin.

I have no argument with the assertion that the fact that mankind must now die is a result of their action, whether sinful or not. But that in and of itself does not confirm the doctrine of original sin which is specific to Christianity. I would not be surprised that this belief is explained in the New Testament but I don’t see how the verse you cited from Romans is very explicit on the matter.

That’s all well and good, but the offering of Cain and Abel was not that kind of offering. It was a sin offering and that is why Cain’s offering was not accepted.

Hebrews 9:22
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

Cain did not offer a blood sacrifice which was required to forshadow the comming Messiah and therefore his sacrifice was rejected.

You offer two reasons why Cain’s sacrifice was rejected: A. It was insufficient to atone for his sins. B. It did not fulfill its purpose to foreshadow the Messiah.

Were these both conditions of the sacrifice? In any case, I see no indication from the context that either of these things must be true. Cain was the first human to innovate the concept of sacrificing of one’s own property to God, but this first sacrifice should have been something of a more significant concession, for God’s honor. Instead, he offered the earth’s produce, which is a relatively cheap and less significant sacrifice than first-born sheep.

You offer a verse from Hebrews to assert that there can be no forgiveness without a blood sacrifice. However, I view this as being contradicted from the very passage we are discussing, when God says to Cain (Gen 4:7) “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?” meaning that good deeds can redeem as well. Furthermore, Judaism does not share this belief of Hebrews 9:22, because the Bible (Torah) only offers atonement through sacrifice for accidental sins; willful sin must be confessed to God and the sinner must make amends and resolve never to repeat the sin. A sacrifice is not allowed in such a case.

Deu.8
19 And it shall be, if thou do at all forget the Lord thy God, and walk after other gods, and serve them, and worship them, I testify against you this day that ye shall surely perish.
20 As the nations which the Lord destroyeth before your face, so shall ye perish; because ye would not be obedient unto the voice of the Lord your God.

Sounds pretty close to Rom.6:23

No one argues that God may punish sin through death when He sees fit. There is no indication of the second half of Rom. 6:23 in the verses you cited.

So, you are looking for a Messiah that is totally of this world and you don’t believe that you need a Messiah that will save you from your sins, because you think that you can do that for yourself by good works. Is that right?

Yes, precisely. God alone removes our sins if we so merit. The Messiah will help people reach God on their own, as the most significant teacher of God’s will.

Gen3
1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

So you don’t see this as being tempted to disobey God?

Personally, I view the explanation that eating from the tree was actually a sin as more understandable and supported by a broad base of traditional Jewish sources. However, those who argue that it was not a sin will point out that “lest ye die” is not a typical Biblical mode of expressing the death penalty for a sin, and instead means that the inevitable result of the action of eating from the tree will be mortality, but not that it is a sin punishable by death. The truth is that I’m not well-versed in the arguments against it being considered a sin.

 

[Moses613]

One thing I think it is important to point out, is that the interpretation of these verses is not at all central to any fundamentals of Judaism, and therefore the resolution of their ambiguity is not an urgent topic for us. This is because the doctrine of original sin is completely foreign to Jewish belief. The Bible (OT) does not indicate anywhere that this sin is something that all Adam’s descendants need atonement for. It’s kind of like before the Flood, when humanity was almost entirely sinful, and God made a decree that generally the human lifespan would be lowered to 120 years or less. That changed humans’ physical nature forever, but the sins of the generation of the Flood are not with us today. IOW, whether or not Adam and Eve sinned or simply made a “bad choice” doesn’t affect us practically. Christians, on the other hand, of necessity believe that there must be one authoritative interpretation of the verses which indicates a sin, because that belief is fundamental to their religion.

That leads into why we don’t believe that humanity needs to be “saved.” People are born with a blank slate. If they act sinfully, then they must repair that which they perverted. Otherwise, the point is to gain closeness to God, as much as possible. Of course, we view the goodness of the afterlife as something which has to be earned. But the “default setting” is not eternal damnation.

To bring the thread back to the original verse from Psalms which was asked about, King David is saying that he himself was conceived through a sinful act, not that he had sin from the time he was conceived. One explanation of this sin found in the Talmud, I believe, is that Jesse did not know that the woman he was with was actually his wife (perhaps he mistook her for another one of his wives, or a concubine?), and it is considered sinful to a certain degree to be with one woman while thinking of another. However, I don’t know if this is universally accepted, because there is another Jewish tradition that Jesse is one of the four people in history who never committed a sin. Maybe I’ll do some research.

 

[504Katrin]

One thing I think it is important to point out, is that the interpretation of these verses is not at all central to any fundamentals of Judaism, and therefore the resolution of their ambiguity is not an urgent topic for us. This is because the doctrine of original sin is completely foreign to Jewish belief. The Bible (OT) does not indicate anywhere that this sin is something that all Adam’s descendants need atonement for. It’s kind of like before the Flood, when humanity was almost entirely sinful, and God made a decree that generally the human lifespan would be lowered to 120 years or less. That changed humans’ physical nature forever, but the sins of the generation of the Flood are not with us today. IOW, whether or not Adam and Eve sinned or simply made a “bad choice” doesn’t affect us practically. Christians, on the other hand, of necessity believe that there must be one authoritative interpretation of the verses which indicates a sin, because that belief is fundamental to their religion.

That leads into why we don’t believe that humanity needs to be “saved.” People are born with a blank slate. If they act sinfully, then they must repair that which they perverted. Otherwise, the point is to gain closeness to God, as much as possible. Of course, we view the goodness of the afterlife as something which has to be earned. But the “default setting” is not eternal damnation.

To bring the thread back to the original verse from Psalms which was asked about, King David is saying that he himself was conceived through a sinful act, not that he had sin from the time he was conceived. One explanation of this sin found in the Talmud, I believe, is that Jesse did not know that the woman he was with was actually his wife (perhaps he mistook her for another one of his wives, or a concubine?), and it is considered sinful to a certain degree to be with one woman while thinking of another. However, I don’t know if this is universally accepted, because there is another Jewish tradition that Jesse is one of the four people in history who never committed a sin. Maybe I’ll do some research.

I believe I know what you mean. Yesse was one of the only four righteous persons that never sinned on earth and who were immune so to speak towards sin. The only reason Yesse physically died was because death was ordered upon man since the tree of knowledge incident had occured.

David, and I very strongly and firmly believe this, loved G-d so, so, so much that he wanted to be perfect before Him, and he suffered from his grandfathers’ marriage with Ruth. He would have been more happy had his mother been a Levite (for instance) I’m sure. The question, however, is this: Would David have been the same great man we know today had he not had Boaz and Ruth as his Great-grandparents?

As to the view of sin of the tree of knowledge, I agree that this isn’t an urgent topic, there’re other and more pressing topics every day. This original sin topic that I have never been able to understand myself is huge for the church though. In their eyes you get the blank slate after you’ve been baptized. This is what baptism is for and this is when you become a member of their church.

 

[Remnant1]

I have no argument with the assertion…

I’m a Christian, but I am not a Catholic, and I do not believe in the doctrine of original sin as the Catholics do. I believe there was an original sin but that was committed in heaven by Lucifer.

You offer two reasons why Cain’s sacrifice was rejected: A. It was insufficient to atone for his sins. B. It did not fulfill its purpose to foreshadow the Messiah.

Were these both conditions of the sacrifice? In any case, I see no indication from the context that either of these things must be true.

Ya, I can see that I was a little unclear. First of all, I don’t believe that Cain innovated the sacraficial system at all. I beleive it was God. This can beseen in the day of atonement sacrifices here.
Lev.16
15 Then shall he kill the goat of the sin offering, that is for the people, and bring his blood within the vail, and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the mercy seat, and before the mercy seat:
16 And he shall make an atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins: and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation, that remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness.

These sacrifices were confirmed here in Lev. but we see them throughout. By Cain and Abel one can only think that they learned this from their father who learned it from God, also Noah, Abraham, and Job. This sacrifice required the blood of an animal without blemish, which was a foreshadowing of Christ.

Jn.1
25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?
26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;
27 He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose.
28 These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing.
29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
30 This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.

You offer a verse from Hebrews to assert that there can be no forgiveness without a blood sacrifice. However, I view this as being contradicted from the very passage we are discussing, when God says to Cain (Gen 4:7) “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?” meaning that good deeds can redeem as well. Furthermore, Judaism does not share this belief of Hebrews 9:22, because the Bible (Torah) only offers atonement through sacrifice for accidental sins; willful sin must be confessed to God and the sinner must make amends and resolve never to repeat the sin. A sacrifice is not allowed in such a case.

Here’s what my commentary says about that.

1. If thou doest well. This verse presents certain linguistic difficulties that have led some modern commentators to think that a copyist’s error has changed the Hebrew text. That the translators of the LXX found its meaning obscure even in their time is apparent from their garbled translation of it. The rabbis tried to explain it in the sense that Cain’s offering was rejected because he did not follow precisely the rules of Levitical ritual. But the obvious contrast between the results of “doing well” and those of “not doing well” precludes such an explanation. The first clause reads literally, “Is there not lifting up if thou doest well?” What will be lifted up? The burden of guilt or the countenance? The expression “to lift up one’s face” for “to be joyful or innocent” is common in Hebrew (Job 11:15; 22:26; 2 Sam. 2:22), and probably appears here in an abbreviated form as a complement to the preceding statement that Cain’s countenance had fallen (v. 6). God wished Cain to understand that if he would mend his ways and live according to the divine precepts, there would be no more reason for God to show His displeasure and no more reason for Cain to show a disappointed and angry face. However, if Cain would not change, but would continue in the pathway of evil, sin would overwhelm him. The phrase “sin lieth at the door” (like a wild beast) is probably a proverbial one (see 1 Peter 5:8).

This is saying that if you follow God’s direction then your countenance will be lifted up. If not sin lies at the door.

No one argues that God may punish sin through death when He sees fit. There is no indication of the second half of Rom. 6:23 in the verses you cited.

Ya sorry, it’s hard to eliminate Christ from my thinking.

Yes, precisely. God alone removes our sins if we so merit. The Messiah will help people reach God on their own, as the most significant teacher of God’s will.

What Messiah are you talking about here?

Personally, I view the explanation that eating from the tree was actually a sin as more understandable and supported by a broad base of traditional Jewish sources. However, those who argue that it was not a sin will point out that “lest ye die” is not a typical Biblical mode of expressing the death penalty for a sin, and instead means that the inevitable result of the action of eating from the tree will be mortality, but not that it is a sin punishable by death. The truth is that I’m not well-versed in the arguments against it being considered a sin.

So you believe that it was a sin and that sin caused not only Adam and Eve to die but the rest of mankind?

God is love
Remnant1

 

[Kaninchen]

One thing I think it is important to point out, is that the interpretation of these verses is not at all central to any fundamentals of Judaism, and therefore the resolution of their ambiguity is not an urgent topic for us.

I think it’s always important to stress in any discussion here that ‘Christianity is not Judaism plus Jesus and Judaism isn’t Christianity minus Jesus’ and that when it comes to the NT, we don’t believe a word of it so there’s not much point in quoting it.

Otherwise we can end up trying to find Jewish answers to what are merely Christian questions/problems (in other words merely problems that exist within the terms that Christianity was set up).

 

[Augustine3]

Thanks that was very helpful.

I must say, it’s very interesting for me to ponder how Jews understand their own scriptures, and how, in many significant areas (like original/ancestral sin, Savior, atonement for sins, etc) there are differences with the Christian view of the OT. Interesting because Christianity, which purports to be the fulfillment of Judaism (or at least the OT) begins with premises and understandings of the OT/Judaism that aren’t even shared by the community it is supposed to be fulfilling. And these are things that I don’t think many Christians even know about or care to think about, since in many cases its just assumed that Judaism and Christianity share the same views on those foundational issues that resulted in the need for Christ and Christianity. Hope that made some kinda of sense, I’m just rambling.

I actually just bought on Kindle the book “Judaism and Christianity: A Contrast” by Rabbi Stuart Federow, as it touches on these same issues from a Jewish perspective.

As I continue to dialogue with Jews (God bless them!) I’m noticing the same thing more and more and have come to realise the ultimate dividing factor that distinguishes how Christians and Jews interpret scripture is Christians are Christocentric. Their eyes are fixed on Jesus when it comes to reading the entire bible. Every passage must be read in light of Jesus. That is why Original Sin makes sense to Christians but none whatsoever to Jews.