Messiah Son of David
In the book tittled " Tales And Maxims From The Midrash By Rev. Samuel Rapaport (Late Rabbi Of Port Elizabeth And Eastern District Of Cape Colony), I found an interesting challenge to the belief the Jesus is The Messiah:
And there is, in my humble opinion, amongst other arguments, one argument against the belief in Jesus as the Messiah, which is unanswerable.
The Messiah, according to all who believe in a personal Messiah, Jews and Christians alike, is to be a descendant of David. Now, according to Christianity, Jesus, the son--though not the only son--of Mary, was the offspring of immaculate conception, and had no earthly father from whom to take his pedigree. Even assuming that (as some of my Christian friends assert, but without proof) Mary was a descendant of David, that would not make Jesus a descendant, because pedigrees are reckoned from the father's, and not the mother's, side. God being the Father of Jesus, and God notbeing a descendant of King David, it follows that Jesus, His alleged son, cannot be King David's descendant.
In support of my argument I may state that in the first four chapters of Numbers, the words לבית אבתם למשפהיתם 'After their families by the house of their fathers,' occur more than twenty times. There is not in the whole range of Holy Writ an instance where we find a phrase repeated so many times in so short a space.
And this tends to show Moses' anxiety to impress us with the fact that descent is to be reckoned on the father's side. On his father's side Jesus is not a scion of David, and consequently he cannot be the Messiah. (1)
The argument outlined by Rabbi Rappaport is that Jesus was not considered coming from the lineage of David, because he was not the fleshly son of Joseph, the husban of Mary. I must say that this argument is interesting, and it does make sense bringing it forward. Specially because the Rabbinical traditions (Midrash, Talmud) support the idea that an adopting father is only supporting the child while he grows.
However, the scriptures documents one case of adoption. And it's a very important one. The Torah documents that both Manasseh and Ephraim are tribes of Israel. However, both Manasseh and Ephraim were not children of Israel, of Jacob. Rashi, the respected Rabbi presents the following commentary about Genesis 46 (2):
4. And He said to me, 'Behold, I will make you fruitful and cause you to multiply, and I will make you into a congregation of peoples, and I will give this land to your seed after you for an everlasting inheritance.' 5 And now, [as for] your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt, until I came to you, to the land of Egypt they are mine. Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine like Reuben and Simeon.
Rashi's commentary:and I will make you into a congregation of peoples: He announced to me that another congregation of peoples was to be descended from me. Although he said to me, “A nation and a congregation of nations [shall come into existence from you]” (Gen 35:11) [meaning three nations], by “a nation,” He promised me [the birth of] Benjamin. “A congregation of nations” means two in addition to Benjamin, but no other son was born to me. Thus I learned that one of my tribes was destined to be divided [in two]. So now, I am giving you that gift. — [from Pesikta Rabbathi ch. 3]
who were born to you…until I came to you: Before I came to you, i.e., those who were born since you left me [and] I came to you.
they are mine: They are counted with the rest of my sons, to take a share in the land, each one exactly as each [of my other sons]. — [from Baba Bathra 122b-123a]
We see that though Ephraim and Manasseh were not fleshly sons of Jacob, they were counted with their uncles, and took share in the inheritance same as the other sons. Rashi continues:
6. But your children, if you beget [any] after them, shall be yours; by their brothers' names they shall be called in their inheritance.The understanding from Rashi is that no other child from Joseph would be treated as Ephraim and Manasseh. It was simply because Jacob decided to treat them as if they were his sons. Next in verse 16 we see the most important point. Ephraim and Manasseh would be called by the Name of Jacob and the name of his fathers:
But your children: If you have any more [children], they will not be counted among my sons, but will be included among the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, and they will not have a [separate] name like [each of] the [other] tribes as regards the inheritance. Now, although the land [of Israel] was divided according to their heads (the population of each tribe), as it is written: “To the large [tribe] you shall increase its inheritance” (Num. 26:54); and each man received an equal share, except for the firstborn. Nevertheless, only these (Ephraim and Manasseh) were called tribes [regarding the ability] [to cast a lot in the land according to the number of names of the tribes and [regarding having] a prince for each tribe, and groups [of tribes in the desert] for this one and for that one]. [Note that the bracketed material does not appear in early editions of Rashi.]
16 may the angel who redeemed me from all harm bless the youths, and may they be called by my name and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac (vayiqqare' bahem shemi veshem abotei abraham veyitschaq), and may they multiply abundantly like fish, in the midst of the land."
This was because the adoption that Jacob pronounced over these two sons of Joseph only. Not over any other sons. So adoption could transfer the name of the father and the forefathers of whom was adopting over those who were adopted.
Joseph's (the husband of Mary) acceptance of Jesus in his household, adopting him as earthly father who rose from the child, allows Yeshua to be named after the forefathers of Joseph, including David.
The main view of Rabbinic judaism is to reject Jesus as Messiah because several of the Messianic prophesies have not been completely fulfilled in Jesus. Many of the followers of main stream rabbinical judaism tend to focus on the King-type Messianic prophecies and dismiss the prophecies related to the Priest-type prophecies. The main view of Messianic Jews and Christians is that Jesus has fulfilled some of the prophecies in his first coming, and as He promised he will complete fulfilling the others in his second coming. Interestingly, even in the Talmud there are references to this:
When King Solomon speaks of his 'beloved,' he usually means Israel the nation. In one instance he compares his beloved to a roe, and therein he refers to a feature which marks alike Moses and the Messiah, the two redeemers of Israel. just as a roe comes within the range of man's vision only to disappear from sight and then appear again, so it is with these redeemers. Moses appeared to the Israelites, then disappeared, and eventually appeared once more, and the same peculiarity we have in connexion with Messiah; He will appear, disappear, and appear again.--Numb. Rabba 11.This quote is found in the book that Rabbi Rappaport wrote. As one person once said, it seems like many of the followers of mainstream judaism have decided to look at the Messiah with only one eye open.
============================
Footnotes
(1) Tales And Maxims From The Midrash By Rev. Samuel Rapaport (Late Rabbi Of Port Elizabeth And Eastern District Of Cape Colony) , page 56. The e-book can be found at:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/tmm/tmm06.htm
Comments
Post a Comment