The Jewish Messiah is not a “redeemer”. He’s not supposed to reverse the “fall”. That’s in part because the world isn’t “fallen” in Judaism, so being “redeemed” isn’t necessary.
Rather, the Messiah is someone who physically leads and rescues – originally, simply leads and rescues the Jews (as in Cyrus the Persian, who rescued the Jews from Babylonian captivity and is identified as a “messiah” in Isaiah, even though he himself was of course not Jewish, but Zoroastrian). Later, the concept was broadened into someone who will lead and rescue the world.
Christianity can be seen as a further abstraction of messiah-dom, from a physical leader and rescuer to a universal spiritual “redeemer”. This is however very different from the Jewish notion and draws on concepts alien to Judaism (not least, that a human could be in a sense also divine - Judaism is very much not into that idea).
OK, to address the OP first - What is the Jewish Messiah supposed to do, exactly?
As many have noted, the word “Messiah” literally means “annointed”, i.e., had oil poured on their heads in a ritual manner, and the term has been applied by the Bible to several offices (high priest/Kohen Gadol, King of Israel, King of Judah) and to several individuals (e.g., Cyrus, as many have noted). However, when the modern Jew refers to the Messiah, he is referring to the descendant of David, whose primary function will be to gather the exiled Jews (or their descendants) and unite the nation under his banner, in fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah chapter 11. (It should be noted that the word “Messiah” is not used in the Bible that way. In much Talmudic literature, this “Messiah” figure is referred to as "the son (i.e., descendant) of David. Not sure when this became synonymous with the term “Messiah”.) In some way connected to him (but not necessarily his direct action, the world will experience some form of spiritual renaissance in which people understand more about G-d than ever before, and there will be universal peace even between long-time enemies (it’s debatable whether the “lion and lamb” references are meant literally or are symbolic references to warring nations).
That, the re-unification of the Israelite nation from exile, is the focal point by which other prophecies can be recognized as Messianic. For example, Isaiah 56:7-8 mentions the bringing of sacrifices in the Holy Temple as something that will accompany the gathering of the exiles. This implicitly states that at the time the Messiah - the scion of David - will gather the exiles, there will be a Temple in which sacrifices can, according to Jewish law, be offered. It doesn’t necessarily say he will be the one to build it or bring about its construction, but simply that at that time, there will be one, and there will be active sacrificial service. This also means that such pre-conditions as the birth of a red heifer to purify those who are currently assumed impure will also have occurred. (this also answers a later post by tim314.)
Delicious:
In order to do things that require ritual purity, yes. There is not a requirement in Jewish law to always be ritually pure. Which connects to your next question…
For most Jews, yes, only entering the Temple complex (or its former location, but why go there with no Temple?) or handling Temple-consecrated sacrifices. For Kohanim, a consequence is that the portion of the produce that is due to them (called Terumah in Hebrew) and the similar portion of dough/bread (Hallah, like the Jewsh braided bread) cannot be eaten in a state of impurity and are in modern times destroyed by the farmer/baker instead.
They were always a rare variation of the species. According to the Talmud, there were only nine used for purification in the history of Temple service.
kaylasdad99:
If by “consequences” you mean “Original Sin”, Judaism does not believe in that. If by “consequences” you mean the loss of an idyllic existence as per Eden, as I said earlier, some commentators take such statements as “the lion will lie with the lamb” literally, in which case, the answer is yes, and some say they do not refer to the literal animals - Maimonides is very clear that he thinks the course of nature will remain unchanged after the coming of the Messiah, and the only change will be the Jewish kingdom and the non-Jewish nations acting subservient to it.
I’m afraid that’s as explicit as it gets. In other words, no, there’s nothing in Genesis, or the entire Hebrew Bible, that explicitly agrees with your Catholic school teachers.
“I’m the messiah!
The one true messiah!
I feel so much better now!
Dr Finkman was right.
He’s my therapist.”
I can never remember the name of the prayer. But, one of the daily prayers includes the lines “May Your Temple be speedily rebuilt. There we will serve Thee with awe.” To the average Jew, the Temple being rebuilt equates to the coming of moshiach.
Thanks to all who responded to my questions re: Gen. 3:15. Although I checked Wikipedia and learned that Christianity and Judaism have different interpretations of the verse, I’m still a bit confused about what exactly the Jewish interpretation is. It almost seems like it might mean nothing more that “People won’t like snakes, and will try to stomp on them; and snakes won’t like being stomped on, so they’ll bite.” That, at least fits well with the idea that it’s a “just so” story.
Also, do Jews see Adam and Eve as being Jews or Gentiles? How about Noah? Predating Abraham as they do, one supposes that neither term could be said to apply. But I have a feeling that expecting for Talmudic scholars to have ever left a question unexplored is practically the definition of an unwarranted assumption.
Messiah will come to Earth at latest in 2240 Common Era. The vast majority of people will live forever without any suffering. No one will have any inclination to commit any sins. Non-Jews who kept the Seven Laws of Noah will also receive some eternal reward.
Out of all people who ever lived less then 1 in 10,000 will suffer eternally.
It’s actually a very important point in Judaism - Noah was, of course, not Jewish (though in the mythology he was the actual ancestor of everyone who is alive today - Jew and non-Jew alike).
Yet Noah was, famously, a “good man”. God himself confirms it; Noah and family is saved by God himself, when the wicked are not.
Therefore - and the logic is inescapable - it is possible in Judaism to be a “good person” and not be Jewish.
Now, God issued some commandments to Noah in the Bible, which have been codified by Jewish scholars into the so-called “Noahide Laws”, that is, the laws for being a “good person” (like Noah) but not Jewish … these are probably the first attempt in history to create a truly universal set of moral laws, laws that are, in theory at least, binding on all of humanity regardless of religion, tribe, etc.
The laws are as follows:
Note that a positive belief in God is not required (you can’t “curse God” or “worship Idols”, though). The only positive injunction is to “establish courts of justice”.
(As an aside, modern Jews have very different interpretive approaches to what “worshiping idols” means - one approach I like is that this is the transgression of mistaking the fake for the real, and extends further than mere religion … similarly, the injunction against eating living flesh torn from an animal is generalized to an injunction against unnecessary animal cruelty).
Interestingly, a non-Jew who obeys these is said, by Jewish scholars, to be just as “righteous” as a practicing Jew who obeys all the Jewish laws, and will “have a place in the world to come” - a very different position from the other great monotheistic faiths (such as Christianity), which tend to require conversion to their religion to obtain such status.
When looking for a stone for the breastplate of the Kohain Gadol, they wanted to buy one from a gentile. He agreed to sell for 1000. He went home to get the stone. His elderly dad was taking a nap, with his feet up on the chest containing the stone. The man goes back to the buyers to explain he can’t wake dad just to make money and they’ll have to wait. The buyers interrupt when he says they can’t have the stone yet. “Fine, we’ll pay 10,000!”. The righteous gentile refuses. He explains the situation and says ‘I cannot take money just for being respectful of my father.’
When Jonah is on a boat, fleeing G-d and heading away from Nineveh, there is terrible stormy weather and rough seas. The rest of the men on board guess that one among them is cursed. They perform a lottery as diviniation. Jonah keeps drawing the short straw. They ask him what’s going on. He tells them “The Lord is mad at me. The storms and rough seas will calm only if you throw me overboard.” The crew refuses. They say that if they throw Jonah overboard, he’ll surely die. Jonah has to convince them to throw him in order to save their own lives. As for the folk of Nineveh, we know they turned from wickedness. I don’t know what the exact wording is and whether they became righteous gentiles or converted en masse to Judaism.
In modern times, the Holocaust Memorial in Israel has an avenue of trees and plaques to commemorate righteous gentiles like KIng Christian II of Denmark.
As usual, two Jews have three opinions between them.
Way I understood it, there were no gradations of righteousness - you either were or weren’t - and so observing Jews don’t get a greater reward.
Reasoning: if observing Jews got a greater reward, then it would be a good deed to spread that message, so that others would be motivated to obtain that reward by following the 613 laws; yet Jews do not seek converts from non-Jews - on the contrary, they tend to dissuade them. Nor is it suggested that Noahides follow those 613 laws.
The idea, as I understood it, was that observing Jews follow the 613 laws not out of hope of surpassing the reward available to righteous non-Jews (who need only obey the necessary 7 Noahide Laws), but for two other reasons:
Because of the covenant - God will look out for the Jews as a people, ensuring they are never extinguished, if the laws are fulfilled; and
To act as an example to other peoples, a light unto the world. The glory all the more, because it is not done for personal benefit.
The notion of “reward” (and punishment) is something of an illustration to simplify understanding of the afterlife experience for the unsophisticated. The reality (theologically speaking, in the eye of believers) is more metaphysical than that.
The notion of commandments (both Jew-specific or Noahide) in Judaic theology is that observing them is how human beings can best emulate the attributes of G-d, and thereby reach an understanding of G-d. The effect that this has on the soul is that a deeper such emulation/understanding that one has achieved during one’s lifetime, the better prepared that person’s soul is for the experience of interfacing with G-d (which is a pleasure for the soul) after separation from the body. Righteous gentiles who have observed the seven Noahide commandments certainly have an interface with G-d, but it is not the refined, nuanced understanding that Jews who observe all the commandments of the Torah are able to manage. It is not a matter of more or less reward deserved/earned/received, it is a matter of the degree to which one has sensitized him/herself to the Divine. (To contrast, one who has been decidedly evil will have developed a revulsion for G-d in his/her soul, which will, after death, be a painful experience.)
The term is often used alongside the term savior (in the old and new testaments), which has a very much a military connotation. as in a general who saves his nation from peril by his military victorys.
The Greek word for savior, soter is actually formal title bestowed on generals by the people he saved (e.g. Antigonus Soter)
