I was thinking of the differences between rabbinic Judaism verses that of the Sadduces and Essenses. Each would have claimed to be true representatives of the Jewish faith, but they had major disagreements in interpretation as to what that meant with one another. Even there understanding of what was and what was not sacred scripture varied. Rabbinic Judaism accepting the teachings of the prophets, but the Sadduces rejecting everything accept the works of Moses.
The Sadduces said that no such thing as the ressurection of the dead would occur, and did not accept the oral law. The Talmud explains that those who say the ressurection of the dead will not occur among Am Yisroel, will not get a share in the world to come:
The Mishna states: "The following have no share in the world to come: He who says that there is no allusion in the Torah concerning resurrection, and he who says that the Torah was not given by Heaven."
The Sadduces said the ressurection of the dead would not occur, and it is not present in the Torah, therefore, according to the Talmud, they have no share in the world to come. Why might you ask? The Gemora explains:
GEMARA: "Is he who does not believe that the resurrection is hinted at in the Torah such a criminal that he loses his share in the world to come? It was taught: He denies resurrection therefore he will not have a share in it, as punishment corresponds to the deed;"
It is also taught that the reason you do not see anymore of these other sects who deny the oral law other than a very few who do not number very many is because they were incorrect. They did not survive because they were basically wrong. That is why they died out.
Though you may blanch at the thought, Christianity appears to be a descendant of Rabbinic Judaism as it expressed itself in the last couple of centuries BCE. I said, descendant, not continuation. Christianity does make a radical departure from Judaism as it elevates faith above law and accepted the concept that a human being can be a manifestation of the one true G-d without that being either idolatry or contrary to the long-standing practice and belief of monothesim.
I do, in a way. And strongly disagree. Unless, I am mistaken, I believe early Christians followed about none of Halacha.
The reason that I can agree with it, is in part that. But also, that given that, I can then see a second-coming of Jesus as the Messiah (I know something else where we disagree as even being relevant to the issue at hand) and that just as prophesied and interpreted that all would then acknowledge this Jesus as the one G-d.
Everyone on this board, other than the few Christians here, must shudder at the thought.
May I ask you, where exactly there is mention or any type of hint at a "second coming"? It is clearly outlined what requirements are and there is no place in the Tanakh that speaks about a secong coming, at all. The second coming was developed because Jesus did not fufill the requirements to be Moshiach.
I am welcome to discuss any passage in the Tanakh which you feel hints at any type of "second coming".
Rav, earlier you spoke of the writings of rabbis such as Rambam and Maimonides, and another poster spoke of Rashi. I have heard of Maimonides, but know little of him, and have never heard of these others. Can you please fill me in on them and their major contributions to Jewish thought today. Can you share links to material that will help to education me more?
Rambam and Maimonides are the same person. His name was
Rabbi
Moshe
ben
Maimon (RaMBaM) Acronyms were commonly given to scholors (for example Rashi =
Rabbi
Shlomo
Yitzhaqi). It may seem odd, but when looking at his name sounded out by the Hebrew alphabet it all makes sense.
These websites have pretty good descriptions of him and his life:
http://www.ou.org/about/judaism/rabbis/rambam.htm
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Maimonides.html
http://www.campsci.com/iguide/rambam.htm
Here is a summary:
If one did not know that Maimonides was the name of a man, Abraham Joshua Heschel wrote, one would assume it was the name of a university. The writings and achievements of this twelfthcentury Jewish sage seem to cover an impossibly large number of activities. Maimonides was the first person to write a systematic code of all Jewish law, the Mishneh Torah; he produced one of the great philosophic statements of Judaism, The Guide to the Perplexed; published a commentary on the entire Mishna; served as physician to the sultan of Egypt; wrote numerous books on medicine; and, in his "spare time," served as leader of Cairo's Jewish community.
Maimonides's full name was Moses ben Maimon; in Hebrew he is known by the acronym of Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, Rambam. He was born in Spain shortly before the fanatical Muslim Almohades came to power there. To avoid persecution by the Muslim sect — which was wont to offer Jews and Christians the choice of conversion to Islam or death — Maimonides fled with his family, first to Morocco, later to Israel, and finally to Egypt. He apparently hoped to continue his studies for several years more, but when his brother David, a jewelry merchant, perished in the Indian Ocean with much of the family's fortune, he had to begin earning money. He probably started practicing medicine at this time.
Maimonides's major contribution to Jewish life remains the Mishneh Torah, his code of Jewish law. His intention was to compose a book that would guide Jews on how to behave in all situations just by reading the Torah and his code, without having to expend large amounts of time searching through the Talmud. Needless to say, this provocative rationale did not endear Maimonides to many traditional Jews, who feared that people would rely on his code and no longer study the Talmud. Despite sometimes intense opposition, the Mishneh Torah became a standard guide to Jewish practice: It later served as the model for the Shulkhan Arukh, the sixteenthcentury code of Jewish law that is still regarded as authoritative by Orthodox Jews.
