Pemikiran Yahudi Mazmur 89:21: Akeidat Yitzchak

When we examine the promise of the prophet Nathan to David concerning the future of his son Solomon, we find that G-d had almost precluded Himself from severing His covenant with Solomon even if the latter should be steeped in sin. (Samuel II 7, 12-17) We read there something that sounds like Solomon had been given carte blanche by G-d, come what may. Similarly, we see Eytan Haezrachi describe the absolute assurances G-d gave to David and his descendants. (Psalms 89,21-38) How does all this square with the statement "G-d is not mortal man that He deceives?" (Numbers 23, 19) Reading verses 39,53, in Psalms 89, certainly poses a difficult problem concerning the absolute nature of assurances from G-d. We also find Solomon being warned repeatedly that his kingdom would not endure if he failed to live up to G-d’s expectations of him. (Kings I chapter 9) Even though the tabernacle, i.e. temporary collapsible structure did endure long, -due to the sin of the spies-, G-d expressed His plan for residence on earth by giving all the instructions for such a residence. In G-d’s own good time, an enduring structure will be built, such as is envisaged in the concluding chapters of the book of Ezekiel. That however, will be when the Jewish people will have become so refined in character through having been persecuted in exile, that success can be ensured and the Divine Presence would not again be forced to withdraw. The entire book of Ezekiel can be viewed as concentrating on this subject, seeing that it commences with a vision of ma-asseh merkavah, i.e. G-d’s residence in the heavens, and concludes with visions of G-d’s residence on earth. The intervening chapters only provide the rationale why a permanent residence for G-d on earth had not been possible, due to the errant ways of G-d’s chosen people. Only after "and I shall sprinkle on you cleansing waters...and give you a new heart," (chapter 36) have the conditions been met that must precede the establishment of a permanent home for G-d on this earth. Interestingly, when Ezekiel mentions the date of his first vision, he begins with the exile of the Divine Presence,- when Jewish exile began-, only to mention the date of the day of Atonement, when forgiveness is granted as the last day in all his recorded visions. If G-d did not command building of a temple when Israel entered the holy land, it was because Israel did not remove all the vestiges of idol worship and idol worshippers from that land. They left in place many people and many objects that would cause them to sin at a later date. Even though David, of his own accord, proposed to establish such a temple, G-d asked "how could you do so unless I had commanded you?" As to the promise that his son would be chosen to do so, the son referred to, is not Solomon, but the Messiah. G-d emphasized that He never requested from Moses a permanent residence, neither does He request it at that time. (Samuel II 7,7) However, "your son" meaning the Messiah, "he will build it." David prepared blueprints etc., but he did not realise that it was not Solomon who had been meant by the words of the prophet Nathan, but that the descendant who would build the permanent house would do so many years after David's departure from this earth. Chronicles I chapter 17, confirms this interpretation. Verse 14 reads "I will make him stand in My house and My kingdom forever," a phrase that can certainly not be applied to Solomon. This is all in line with the prophecy in Isaiah chapter eleven, describing the nature of the Messiah. This is the person referred to already in David's time (Samuel II 7, 14) "I will be his father" etc. The kind of sins committed in those distant days will indeed be subject to forgiveness because the people will respond positively to teachings and rebukes. As the prophet Zecharyah (12,8) says "anyone that stumbles in those days will be equal to David; the house of David will be G-d like, like an angel before the Lord." G-d will not abandon them as He has not abandoned David himself." Nathan's prophecy to David referred in large measure to this distant future. Whether Nathan himself was fully aware of this, does not matter. When David refers to G-d’s promise for the distant future in gratitude, (Samuel II 7, 19) we notice that he was not unaware of the meaning of Nathan's message. David also understood that the very nature of man made it necessary for this process of refinement to extend over millenia. Chronicles I 17, 17, states "You have seen me and chosen me like the row (group) of men of the elite, Lord G-d." As the Talmud (Baba Metzia 114) says "man, i.e Israel will qualify for the term ADAM after going through long periods of trials and afflictions etc. before realising that the object of our hopes is the glory of G-d manifested by what He builds, not the glory of man manifested by what man has erected.

When we examine the promise of the prophet Nathan to David concerning the future of his son Solomon, we find that G-d had almost precluded Himself from severing His covenant with Solomon even if the latter should be steeped in sin. (Samuel II 7, 12-17) We read there something that sounds like Solomon had been given carte blanche by G-d, come what may. Similarly, we see Eytan Haezrachi describe the absolute assurances G-d gave to David and his descendants. (Psalms 89,21-38) How does all this square with the statement "G-d is not mortal man that He deceives?" (Numbers 23, 19) Reading verses 39,53, in Psalms 89, certainly poses a difficult problem concerning the absolute nature of assurances from G-d. We also find Solomon being warned repeatedly that his kingdom would not endure if he failed to live up to G-d’s expectations of him. (Kings I chapter 9) Even though the tabernacle, i.e. temporary collapsible structure did endure long, -due to the sin of the spies-, G-d expressed His plan for residence on earth by giving all the instructions for such a residence. In G-d’s own good time, an enduring structure will be built, such as is envisaged in the concluding chapters of the book of Ezekiel. That however, will be when the Jewish people will have become so refined in character through having been persecuted in exile, that success can be ensured and the Divine Presence would not again be forced to withdraw. The entire book of Ezekiel can be viewed as concentrating on this subject, seeing that it commences with a vision of ma-asseh merkavah, i.e. G-d’s residence in the heavens, and concludes with visions of G-d’s residence on earth. The intervening chapters only provide the rationale why a permanent residence for G-d on earth had not been possible, due to the errant ways of G-d’s chosen people. Only after "and I shall sprinkle on you cleansing waters...and give you a new heart," (chapter 36) have the conditions been met that must precede the establishment of a permanent home for G-d on this earth. Interestingly, when Ezekiel mentions the date of his first vision, he begins with the exile of the Divine Presence,- when Jewish exile began-, only to mention the date of the day of Atonement, when forgiveness is granted as the last day in all his recorded visions. If G-d did not command building of a temple when Israel entered the holy land, it was because Israel did not remove all the vestiges of idol worship and idol worshippers from that land. They left in place many people and many objects that would cause them to sin at a later date. Even though David, of his own accord, proposed to establish such a temple, G-d asked "how could you do so unless I had commanded you?" As to the promise that his son would be chosen to do so, the son referred to, is not Solomon, but the Messiah. G-d emphasized that He never requested from Moses a permanent residence, neither does He request it at that time. (Samuel II 7,7) However, "your son" meaning the Messiah, "he will build it." David prepared blueprints etc., but he did not realise that it was not Solomon who had been meant by the words of the prophet Nathan, but that the descendant who would build the permanent house would do so many years after David's departure from this earth. Chronicles I chapter 17, confirms this interpretation. Verse 14 reads "I will make him stand in My house and My kingdom forever," a phrase that can certainly not be applied to Solomon. This is all in line with the prophecy in Isaiah chapter eleven, describing the nature of the Messiah. This is the person referred to already in David's time (Samuel II 7, 14) "I will be his father" etc. The kind of sins committed in those distant days will indeed be subject to forgiveness because the people will respond positively to teachings and rebukes. As the prophet Zecharyah (12,8) says "anyone that stumbles in those days will be equal to David; the house of David will be G-d like, like an angel before the Lord." G-d will not abandon them as He has not abandoned David himself." Nathan's prophecy to David referred in large measure to this distant future. Whether Nathan himself was fully aware of this, does not matter. When David refers to G-d’s promise for the distant future in gratitude, (Samuel II 7, 19) we notice that he was not unaware of the meaning of Nathan's message. David also understood that the very nature of man made it necessary for this process of refinement to extend over millenia. Chronicles I 17, 17, states "You have seen me and chosen me like the row (group) of men of the elite, Lord G-d." As the Talmud (Baba Metzia 114) says "man, i.e Israel will qualify for the term ADAM after going through long periods of trials and afflictions etc. before realising that the object of our hopes is the glory of G-d manifested by what He builds, not the glory of man manifested by what man has erected.

Bereshit Rabbah 29 states that Rabbi Shimon said, "G-d made three finds in this world. One is Abraham, ‘You have found his heart true before You’ (Nechemyah 9,8). The second one is David, ‘I have found My servant David.’ (Psalms 89,21). The third one is Israel, ‘Like grapes in the desert, I have found Israel’ (Hoseah 9,10).” Rabbi Shimon was questioned by his colleagues who asked, “Does not the Torah also mention Noach as having been a find of G-d, seeing it says "Noach found favor in the eyes of G-d?" (Genesis 6,8). Rabbi Shimon answered "Noach found, G-d did not find." Upon examination, you will find that the three finds represented three profound principles. Abraham primarily expounded the existence of G-d. David propounded the truth of the reward and punishment principle, composing many hymns on the subject. Israel propounded the Power of G-d, be it in Egypt or many subsequent historic events involving Israel. When the prophet describes the finding of Israel as like the finding of grapes in the desert, he draws attention to the unexpected nature of the find. The emergence of Israel was almost as if it had already been despaired of ever coming about. When it did finally happen, it was unexpected. Not so David, who emerged as the result of a diligent search for just such a person (Samuel I chapter 13). Abraham, on the other hand, was like the result one obtains after refining an orebody waiting for the precious metal to distil and crystallize in the crucible. The objection of Rabbi Shimon's colleagues was, "Did not Noach also demonstrate the Power and glory of G-d through the deluge and his being saved?" The answer was that this had not been G-d’s purpose when He saved Noach; in fact, there had been no one left to prove G-d’s Power to who had not already been aware of it though personal experience. When Israel appeared on the stage of history, however, G-d proclaims that He will demonstrate His Power by punishing Egypt for its treatment of Israel (Exodus chapters 7,9,10 and 14). All these quotes prove that Israel could have been saved by many other means, but that it served as a tool for G-d to demonstrate His Power through them. Since Abraham had become the founding father of this nation, it is only proper that he should be no less vis a vis Israel than Noach had been vis a vis the human race. Since G-d had made a covenant with Noach, promising to keep the human race going forever, G-d had to make a covenant with Abraham, promising to keep Israel going forever, and for Abraham to maintain his distinctive lifestyle and to transmit it to his descendants. G-d has granted man three faculties with which to achieve the level of perfection he is capable of achieving. 1) Willingness to listen to and absorb words of wisdom by those who teach him. 2) A basic intelligence characterized by his ability to communicate his thoughts by speech. 3) The ability to reason speculatively and to arrive at ideas not presented to him by outsiders in a finalized form. Unless man possesses all these three faculties, he cannot attain his purpose. When he does possess them, he is well equipped to advance towards his perfect state. Since man is inclined towards evil from his early youth, "for the inclination of man's heart is evil from his youth on" (Genesis 8,21), and this is an impediment to his achieving his goal, G-d in His great kindness equipped Abraham/Israel with a tool to counteract this impediment by legislating circumcision of the male on the eighth day of his life. Vayikra Rabbah 25 writes, “It says ‘at eight days old.’ Where does he have to be circumcised? If at the ear, he does not hear properly yet; if at the mouth, he does not speak yet; if at the heart, he cannot think yet. So where shall he be circiumcised? Clearly it must be from part of his body. Rabbi Tanchum remarked that since there is no foreskin which is exclusive to the female of the species, the foreskin referred to must be that of the male organ.” When viewed objectively, these questions posed in the Midrash can hardly be taken at face value, since all the other areas mentioned could have been subjected to a surgical procedure. However, since a surgical procedure of the mouth for instance, would also affect the ear's ability to hear and the heart's ability to understand, the effect of such surgery would have been self-defeating. The three organs are needed to be fully operative to help man achieve his goals. Moreover, unless the organ circumcised does itself benefit through that procedure, how can it hope to improve the function of the remaining organs? This is the reason that the Midrash which describes Abraham as a High Priest, could not conceive of the same person becoming a baal mum, physically defective. Such a defect would nullify his priestly status. All of this is true despite the fact that we have scriptural proof for also the other above mentioned organs being described as arel, uncircumcised. Since the male organ is also described as "the body's summit," the point at which all the body's forces coalesce, whoever touches that area is as if he had touched the whole body, the whole person. Whoever reduces its power is as if he had weakened the whole body. We observe that surgery in the face results in a loss of hairgrowth; frequently one's voice is affected also. Similarly, surgery on the male organ leaves its mark on the whole person. When the Talmud (Baba Batra 16) states, "Woe to the person whose children are female," the meaning is that it is shameful to have children who allow the physical to dominate them like women. Surgery on the male organ then inhibits the owner from being too preoccupied with his body, makes it easier for him to concentrate on the development of mind and soul. It is clear then why this mitzvah had to be given to Abraham prior to Isaac having been conceived.