Peter Kirby

Suppose that someone were to take time over a summer vacation to read the following:

The Hebrew Bible
The Deuterocanon
Charlesworth's Pseudepigrapha
The Dead Sea Scrolls

What would you want to know concerning what is mentioned in this texts? That is, what would you look for if you had the time to read it all?

thanks,
Peter Kirby

Celsus

Try arranging them in chronological order.

Peter Kirby

I have a 1917 book titled An Introduction to the Old Testament Chronologically Arranged by Harlan Creelman. Apikorus is correct to point out that a list of dates next to Old Testament documents is not especially helpful because many of these documents developed in stages over centuries. Besides, dating isn't the ultimate goal of studying these texts, as we've missed the point if we don't go on to examine what was written after we know when.

One thing that I know that I would be looking for is any reference to a Messiah figure, as the subject of messianic expectations in Second Temple Judaism is of interest to me. Anything else I should look for?

best,
Peter Kirby

Apikorus

Peter, if you are interested in the development of messianism in pre-rabbinic Judaism, I highly recommend John J. Collins' The Scepter and the Star.

The Hebrew Bible itself presents no real coherent messianic framework. The term mashiakh appears as a noun less than 40 times in the HB, and usually applies to Saul, Solomon, David, or some later Davidide, or to the high priest (and once to Cyrus of Persia!). The notion of messiah as eschatological savior is developed in late 2nd Temple Jewish literature (pseudepigrapha, DSS, and later Targumim). Collins' assessment is a nuanced one; he identifies different types of messiah figures (e.g. priest, king, heavenly). See also Gerbern Oegema, The Anointed and His People: Messianic Expectations from the Maccabees to Bar Kochba.

Peter Kirby

Hi Apikorus,

I actually have The Scepter and the Star. I agree that it's a good book.

In that book, Collins states that the Christian concept of a Messiah whose role was to suffer and to die was a departure from pre-Christian Judaism, and I am inclined to agree. However, I have seen a few exegetical documents used to controvert this idea.

One is a midrash on Psalm 2:

Another is the Targum Jonathon on Isaiah 53. "There the Messiah is clearly redemptive, and he
dies, although one can point out that the suffering is principally that of Israel for her sins." It is found in The Suffering Servant of Isaiah According to the Jewish Interpreters, translated by Samuel R. Driver and Adolf Neubauer 1877. What is current opinion on the date of the Targum Jonathon and its messianic content?

Finally, in the Talmud, there is a reference in b. Sukkah 52 to "the slaying of the Messiah the son of Joseph" (explaining Zech 12.10), which, what with the reference to *the son of Joseph*, at first sight seems to me to be influenced by Christian claims. Is there anything I should know about the context of this quote? Do scholars see this phrase as dependent on Christian ideas, or is it plausible that Jews had an independent tradition that the father of the Messiah was to be named Joseph?

thanks,
Peter Kirby

Apikorus

The difficulty in dating the rabbinic materials poses severe methodological problems here, Peter. Two remarks:

• The Targum Jonathan (falsely attributed to the tanna Yonatan ben Uzziel) is generally accepted to depend on the Targum Onqelos and probably dates to ca. 400-500 CE. By that time, Jewish messianism had flowered.
  
• I'm skeptical that mashiakh ben yosef has anything to do with Jesus' father, although the possibility is intriguing. The term most likely means "messiah, descendant of Joseph," just as mashiakh ben david means "messiah, descendant of David." Indeed in some medieval rabbinic texts the former is referred to as mashiakh ben efraim = "messiah son (descendant) of Ephraim." Recall Ephraim was one of Joseph's two sons. So again this connotes lineage, rather than strict paternity.

I don't have much time to write - must get ready for synagogue! - but if you are interested in the development of messianic ideas in rabbinic Judaism, which means after ca. 200 CE, you should get or borrow a copy of Raphael Patai's The Messiah Texts. The scholarly analysis there is brief, but Patai has assembled a useful collection of citations from the dauntingly vast rabbinic literature.

chimaira

Does the thora have the origin contained the 5 books?

Evangelion

While they were compiled at a relatively late period, the Targumim drew heavily on the wisdom of sages from centuries earlier. Work on the Palestinian and Babylonian Talmuds began in before AD 250, and circa AD 219 respectively.

As Risto Santala has correctly observed:

• Targum Jonathan, the most strongly Messianically tinged, contains material from pre-Christian times. For example, in connection with Deut. 33.11 Jonathan has a long prayer which refers to Johannes Hyrcanos, who lived from 135--105 BC. It would appear that a significant part of Jonathan's exegesis is indeed representative of pre-Christian ideas.
  
  The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings (1992.)

Apikorus

Risto Santala isn't much of a scholar, but the point he makes is hardly controversial. That is, the rabbinic literature often draws on traditions of untraceably old provenance. One vivid example of this fact concerns the laws of tefillin, the small boxes containing portions of the Torah that observant Jews affix to their right hand and forehead during prayer. The laws of tefillin are laid out in the early rabbinic writings (mishnah berurah). It is tempting to attribute this tradition to hypernomian rabbis who literalized the metaphorical uqshartam l'ot al yadekha vehayu l'totafot bein einekha = "you shall bind them as signs on your hands and frontlets(?) between your eyes." The Rashbam, premier pashtan that he was, was sensitive to the metaphor here (i.e. keeping God in our deeds and in our thoughts). All this makes a good story, except for the fact that tefillin were found at Qumran (some with their scrolls partially intact). So clearly the tradition of wearing tefillin is untraceably old.

Again, the Hebrew Bible contains no coherent messianic framework. Attempts to read one into it tell us more about an exegete's interpretive lens and confessional stance than they do about the plain sense of the HB.

Diverse messianic models were explored in the late Second Temple period, and these models are reflected in its literature. Within Judaism, messianism has been a somewhat arrested development. There are, to be sure, some traditions about mashiakh, and even evidence of a dual messiahship (ben yosef and ben david). But in general traditional Jewish eschatology remains rather impoverished.

At any rate, one small detail that seems to have escaped Christian apologists who selectively invoke rabbinic writings about mashiakh -- those rabbis also were quite familiar with Christian claims regarding Jesus, and still, emphatically, they rejected them. There are detailed rabbinic discussions of why Jesus could not qualify as the messiah, but of course Christian apologists never seem to quote those.

Evangelion

I am aware of this, and it doesn't concern me in the slightest. The fact remains, however, that many of these rabbis interpret the OT messianic prophecies in the exact same way that the Christians had done. To me, this is the most important issue because it lays to rest the base canard that "The Christians misinterpreted the Scriptures."

The question of whether or not Jesus Christ was indeed the messiah of the prophecies, is a secondary consideration. Of primary importance is the accuracy of the exegesis itself.

Well, I'd suggest that most of us aren't even familiar with them. But I'd be interested in reading some, if you could post a link.