Israel and Humanity - Moses and the later times

From Hareidi English
Jump to: navigation, search

§ 3.

MOSES AND THE SUBSEQUENT TIME.

We know what words Moses, in his prophetic blessing speaks of the tribe of Benjamin in the territory of which should rise one day Jerusalem with its temple, "Of Benjamin he said, is the beloved of the Lord He will dwell in safety by him the LORD will always cover and resides between his shoulders [1] ". Although the name of Jerusalem is not mentioned, the allusion is made is so transparent that the rationalistic criticism, unwilling to admit that the prediction mosaic could answer so exactly to the events of history and not taking appears he, no account of the numerous facts which, independently of any prophetic inspiration, already designated many centuries before the location of the holy city, was forced to give the writing of this passage a later date. But this is an argument that involves all the times it is the end of resources and by repetition and obvious bias of which he testifies, loses any serious value. A thorough study of the first appearance of Jerusalem on the stage of history at the time of David, as head of Mosaic worship, proves that it is impossible that this city has become the political and religious capital of Israel, without his past has had a major influence on the choice that was made at that time. It can not be reasonably assumed that no prior history of Jerusalem has remained without any action in a decision if [2] important, or that everything past is a legend invented at a time when size and role of this city were already recognized by the facts. It is therefore much more logical to let the words of Moses and natural meaning so as to recognize a clear view of the future based on undisputed history.

Besides this passage so remarkable mosaic of the blessing, we still find in the Pentateuch two phrases which, with slight variations, repeated constantly when talking about the great legislator of the future religious capital. He refers to as "the place that God will choose, the place where he will place his name." Curiously, these same words come back to the sacred writers, after the founding of Jerusalem, when they talk about David's intentions regarding the holy city, before his election. Not only are they more or less a reproduction of the exact words of Moses, but they show clearly that Jerusalem by the context, from the time Mosaic was already in the mind of God. We read, for example in the book of Kings: "Let your eyes be open day and night on this house, the place where you said: Here is my name! [3] "As these words are in the books of Moses, it is clear that the sacred writer for Jerusalem already existed in the divine plan. And in the same solemn prayer, Solomon said a few verses later: "When your people go out to fight his enemy by following the path you'll have prescribed it if they send prayers to the Lord, all eyes turned to city which thou hast chosen, and the house that I built to thy name, hear their prayers from heaven [4] ".

It is true that there are other texts that seem to prove that Jerusalem was chosen at the time of David: "Since the day I brought my people out of Egypt to Israel, I don 've chosen point of the city among all the tribes of Israel there was built a house where my name should reside, but I chose David to be reigned over my people Israel [5] ". The Chronicles reproduced this passage and adds: "I have not chosen a man for him to be ruler over my people Israel, but I chose [6] Jerusalem that my name should reside and I chose David to be reigned over my people Israel [7] ". But besides that this text may well understood in the sense that although the site of the holy city and the sanctuary was already arrested in the designs of God, the execution of this plan was deferred, however without any modification until 'at the time of David, it should be noted also that the approximation is made between the chef's choice of Israel and Jerusalem. However, there is no doubt that the tribe of Judah who was giving his king to Israel, it follows expressly from the blessing of Jacob: "The scepter shall not depart from Judah nor the ruler's staff from between his feet until Shiloh come, and that people submit to him [8], and as the royal dynasty of David is attached to the Jewish belief in the election of Jerusalem, it is clear that this city was destined for the honors of capital as the family of David to the royal dignity. We find the two ideas closely united in this verse from the Book of Kings: "I give one tribe to his son (he is Solomon's question), that David my servant may always have a royalty to me Jerusalem, the city that I have chosen to make live my name [9] ".

It is therefore impossible to understand these texts in the sense that the idea of Jerusalem as the capital had come to anyone's mind before the time of David. It can be seen at most to achieve that time of what had long been decided in the decrees of Providence.

The centuries that separate the advent of Moses the Davidic kingship are not without giving us also allusions to the future destiny of Jerusalem. Thus, at the time of Joshua, the location of this city seems to represent the shrine center of worship since the thirteen cities designated for the residence of the priests are all located nearby. This is so true that Munk concludes therefore that the book of Joshua is after the founding of Jerusalem. Do we not see that in our system, things can be explained much more naturally? Munk himself pointed out that Jerusalem was situated at the point [10] The highest Palestine "However, this feature should not remain unnoticed and she explains why Moses speaks of ascending to the place chosen by the Lord. The location of the Temple is represented as a mountain in the song of the Red Sea: "You bring them in, and you will drive on the mountain of thine inheritance, instead of fear you have prepared your house, O Lord! the sanctuary, O Lord! thy hands have established "Wogue Also, commenting on the words of Deuteronomy:" Thou shalt rise up, and come up instead of the LORD thy God shall choose [11] ", rightly says he comes to mount "Either because they are always supposed to go when we approach God, or rather there is a prophetic allusion to the topography of Jerusalem designated beforehand in the mind of the legislature, as the metropolis of Worship [12] ".

The Psalms, even those of David, require the knowledge of high destiny of Jerusalem. About the verse: "Praise the Lord that you live in Zion," Kimchi says, "Although Zion was still in power of the Jebusites, we knew by tradition that there must have been living the divine majesty and that the sanctuary was to be built. And the verse of the Book of Samuel I Samuel [13] where it says that David built a tent for the ark, the same commentator adds, "At home Abinadab Obed Edom and the ark was been housed under one roof who, because she was there only temporarily, but when David carried it to Jerusalem, they knew that this was his final seat because they had learned by tradition that Jerusalem was the Holy City and the Temple was destined to rise, although it was ignorant to what part of town, until David, on the order of the prophet Gad, an altar built in the area Araunah, the Jebusites, and the fire went down from heaven. Then David knew that this was the location of the Temple. "

If there were no serious historical reasons motivating the election of Jerusalem, this choice would remain without explanation, since Scripture is silent in this regard. The truth is that the emergence of the holy city as the seat of Judaism and religious center of the world, is suddenly in the story, not because before it was completely unaware of its glorious destiny, [14] but because this issue is like many others, most important, there has been no written tradition is responsible to inform us about it.


References

  1. Deuteronomy XXXIII, 12.
  2. Page 522
  3. I Kings VIII, 29.
  4. Ibid. 44-49.
  5. I Kings VIII, 18.
  6. Page 523
  7. II Chronicles, VI, 5-6.
  8. Gen. XLIX, 10
  9. I Kings, XI, 34.
  10. Page 524
  11. Deuteronomy xvii, 8.
  12. The Pentateuch, vol. II, p. 370
  13. VI, 17
  14. Page 525