As the life of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden was free from care and trouble, and such a life was the ideal of human hopes and wishes, the Garden-Eden, גן עדן (lit., “the garden of pleasure”), became the symbol of man’s happiness in its perfection, such as will fall to the share of the good and the righteous. On the other hand, the valley of Hinnom, near Jerusalem, was a place of horror and disgust; a place where at one time children were burnt to Moloch, and where later the refuse of the city was cast. Dwelling in the valley of Hinnom (גיהנום) became the symbol of the punishment to be inflicted on the wicked. Gan-eden or Paradise, and Gehinnom or Hell, are thus mere figures to express our idea of the existence of a future retribution, and must not be taken literally as names of certain places.
The detailed descriptions of Paradise and hell as given in books both profane and religious are nothing but the offspring of man’s imagination.
The question has been asked, How long shall the punishment of the wicked last? Will it be eternal? and if so, is it compatible with God’s goodness? This and similar questions do not concern us in the least. Our task is to do what the Lord has commanded us to do, and to trust, as regards the future, in Him, who knows best to combine goodness and [[224]]justice. We must here bear in mind that “God’s thoughts are not ours.”
Equally ignorant are we as to the cause of the suffering and of the death of each individual; but of this we are certain, if death is punishment, that every one dies for his own sin. This theory is so frequently repeated in the Bible that it is surprising how the theory of Vicarious Death and Vicarious Atonement could be considered as harmonising with the teaching of the Bible. We are taught that God visits the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, upon the third and upon the fourth generation; but at the same time we are told that the children are only punished if they repeat the sins of their fathers, and even then only for their own sins (comp. p. 251). It has been asserted that Isaiah in chap. liii. assumes the principle of vicarious atonement. That this is not the case we can easily see if we turn from the Anglican Version to the original Hebrew, and translate it literally and in accordance with the context. Isaiah, in describing the future glory of the servant of the Lord (= Israel), tells us what those people who oppress Israel will then feel, and how they will give expression to their feeling of shame and regret, saying, “Surely he hath borne griefs caused by us, and carried sorrows caused by us: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded through our transgressions, bruised through our iniquities” (comp. Family Bible, Anglican Version, revised by M. Friedländer). Sin-offerings were brought, but not as a vicarious atonement, although the sinner might well have felt that he himself deserved the treatment endured by the sacrifice. The sin-offering could not have been a vicarious atonement, as it was not offered when the sin was committed knowingly. Maimonides explains the various laws concerning sin-offering as based on the principle that the sacrifices serve as the means of reminding us more vividly [[225]]of our sins, and of their evil consequences (The Guide, III. xlvi.; comp. Mic. vi. 6–8).
On the Twelfth Principle, p. 155.
A belief in Messiah, although not directly taught, is assumed in the Mishnah as existing; and the days of Messiah (ימות המשיח) are spoken of as an event that admits of no doubt (comp. Mishnah Berachoth, i. 5). That this belief was in reality taught by the religious heads of the Jewish community is clearly shown by the introduction into the Amidah of a prayer[25] for the speedy appearance of Messiah.
The belief in the coming of Messiah in some future time has been, like the belief in the Unity of God, the source of vexatious disputations between Jews and non-Jews. Mohammedans and Christians tried by all means in their power to convince the Jews that the Anointed whose advent was prophesied by the Prophets had already appeared, the former pointing to Mohammed, the latter to Jesus, as the person realising those predictions. The Biblical passages adduced as evidence prove nothing of the kind. E.g., the three names, Sinai, Seir, and Paran, in Deut. xxxiii. 2, were interpreted by Mohammedans to refer to three revelations through Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed; and Mohammed being mentioned last, his revelation was to be the final one. It is not necessary to contradict such reasoning; one need only read the text in order to see the absurdity of the argument. Christians quoted passages from Isaiah which had no reference whatever to Messiah in evidence of the Messianity of Jesus. Children born in the days of Isaiah (vii. 14; viii. 18), whose names had reference to good or evil events of the time, were wrongly interpreted as referring to the birth of Jesus; the sufferings and final relief of the [[226]]servant of the Lord, that is, Israel (chaps. lii. and liii.), were applied to Jesus; the Psalmist who sings of victories which God will grant to David (cx.) is made to declare the divinity of Jesus.
Commentators and philosophers have taken notice of these arguments and refuted them. Of the many works on these topics a few may be named: “Nitsachon” (נצחון), by Lipmann Mühlhausen (1400), “Strengthening of Faith” (חזוק אמונה), by Isaak ben Abraham Troki (1594), “Vindiciæ Judæorum,” by Manasseh ben Israel (1650).
In refuting arguments brought by Christians and Mohammedans against Jews and Judaism, and rejecting the Messianic claims of Jesus and Mohammed, Jews are ready to acknowledge the good work done by the religions founded by these men, Christians and Mohammedans, in combating idolatry and spreading civilisation. Maimonides says as follows:—“The King Messiah will in some future time come, restore the kingdom of David to its former power, build the Temple, bring together the scattered of Israel, and all the ancient laws will again be in force: sacrifices will be offered, and years of release and Jubilees will be kept as prescribed in the Law. Whoever does not believe in him, or does not hope for his coming, shows a want of faith not only in the Prophets, but also in the Law; for the Law testifies concerning him in the words: ‘And the Lord thy God will again bring back thy captivity, show mercy to thee, and again gather thee, &c. If thy outcasts be at the end of the heavens, thence will the Lord gather thee,’ &c, ‘and the Lord will bring thee,’ &c. (Deut. xxx. 3–5), &c.
“You must not imagine that Messiah must prove his Messianity by signs and miracles, doing something unexpected, bringing the dead to life, or similar things, &c. The principal thing is this: the statutes and precepts of our Torah remain for ever, and nothing can be added to them nor ought [[227]]taken from them. If, therefore, a descendant of David earnestly studies the Law, observes, like David his father, what the Law, both the written and the oral, enjoins, causes all Israelites to act similarly, exhorts those who are lax in the performance of the commandments, and fights the wars of the Lord: he may possibly be Messiah. If he succeeds, builds the Temple in its place, and gathers the outcasts of Israel, he is certainly Messiah; and if he does not succeed, or is killed in war, it is certain that he is not the Messiah promised in the Law; he is like all the noble and good kings of the House of David who have died; and the Almighty only caused him to rise in order to try us thereby, as it is said, ‘And of the wise some will stumble, and through them the people will be tested, purified, and made white, till the time of the end comes; for there is yet a vision for an appointed time’ (Dan. xi. 35). Also Jesus, the Nazarene, who imagined that he would be Messiah, and was killed through the court of law, is alluded to in the Book of Daniel, as it is said, ‘And the sons of the transgressors among thy people will rise, in order to establish a vision, and will stumble’ (ibid. xi. 14). Can there be a greater stumbling than this? All the prophets said that Messiah will be a redeemer and a saviour to the Israelites, will bring together their outcasts, and will strengthen their obedience to the Divine precepts, but he (Jesus) caused destruction by the sword to Israel, the dispersion of those left, and their humiliation; he changed the Law, and misled many people to worship a being beside God. But the thoughts of the Creator of the universe cannot be understood by any human being, for the ways of men are not His ways, nor their thoughts His thoughts; for all the events connected with Jesus and with Mohammed, that rose after him, served only to pave the way for the King Messiah, who will reform all mankind and lead them to the unanimous service of God, as it is said, ‘For [[228]]then will I turn to the peoples a pure language, that all may call by the name of God, and serve him unanimously’ (Zeph. iii. 9). How can this be done? Almost all people have through them—Jesus and Mohammed—become acquainted with the idea of Messiah, with the words of the Torah and the Divine precepts. Through them the knowledge of the Bible spread even unto the remotest islands and unto many nations ‘uncircumcised’ in heart and uncircumcised in flesh. They seek to justify their disobedience to the precepts of the Torah; some of them say that these precepts are Divine, but are not in force at present, and were never intended to be permanent laws; others maintain that they must not be taken literally, as they are mere symbols, the meaning of which has already been explained by Messiah. But when the true King Messiah will rise, he will prosper, be high and exalted; all will then at once know that it was falsehood what their fathers have inherited, and that their prophets and their teachers have misled them.