Debate in the 999AD!

[Guest guest]

Dear Friends:

 

As we enter the next millennium (which is actually the

calender-method of one particular religion) we may take a look

at something that happened at the beginning the millennium we

just left. The millennium concept did not go unchallenged and

the debate carries echoes of the debate within our own three

VedAntic traditions. Kindly read below.

 

 

A SAMPLING OF A DEBATE THAT TOOK PLACE IN DECEMBER 999 AD AT

JERUSALEM BETWEEN A JEWISH RABBI AND A LEARNED CHRISTIAN

NOBLEMAN WHO HAD SOLD ALL HIS PROPERTY AND HAD COME TO THE

HOLY CITY IN ORDER TO BE A WITNESS TO THE SECOND COMING OF

CHRIST AND THEN TO ASCEND WITH HIM TO HEAVEN FOR EVERLASTING

LIFE. (AND OF COURSE NO SUCH THING CAME TO PASS! CHRISTIANS

ARE STILL WAITING FOR HIS SECOND COMING HOPING THAT HE WILL

COME AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE SECOND MILLENNIUM)

 

 

RABBI: Have you come like others of your faith to the holy

city to witness what you people believe to be the second

coming of the Messiah?

 

CHRISTIAN: Yes indeed.

 

RABBI: Jesus the Nazerene could not have been the Messiah for

when the Messiah comes the Scriptures say that " the lion shall

eat straw like the ox " (Isaiah 11:7) and that " men will beat

swords into ploughshares " (Micah 4:3). Jesus has come and gone

and it will soon be a 1000 years since his death. As you

can see, neither of the aforesaid prophecies have been

fulfilled. Unfortunately, lions still eat meat and men still

slay each other with swords. Therefore, Jesus was not the

Messiah.

 

 

CHRISTIAN: Those Scriptural prophecies you mention will be

fulfilled only upon the Second Coming of Our Lord.

 

 

RABBI: There is nothing in the Tanakh (i.e. The Hebrew Bible,

or what Christians call the Old Testament) which mentions the

second coming of the Messiah.

 

 

CHRISTIAN: The Second Coming is mentioned only in the New

Testament of Our Lord and Savior. The Gospel of Matthew 24:30

points out that " they shall see the Son of Man coming in the

clouds of Heaven with power and great glory. " The Tanakh was

valid only until the advent of Our Lord. After His First

Advent, the Gospels have superceded the Tanakh.

 

 

RABBI: The Tanakh contains the eternal words of God which are

immutable. They cannot be abrogated, amended, added to or

deleted from in any manner whatsoever. This the Tanakh itself

makes clear with the words " Ye shall not add unto the word

which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it,

that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which

I command you. " (Deuteronomy 4:2)

 

 

CHRISTIAN: That is precisely the point. Jesus is the Lord

Incarnate. He alone has the authority to amend the Tanakh for

as the Gospel of John 1:14 points out that " the Word became

flesh and dwelt among us. " Further, Jesus is one with the

Father. This He Himself makes clear in John 10:30 with the

words " I and my Father are one. " [My note: Compare this with

the Shankarite interpretation of the UpaniShadic passage " aham

brahmAsmi " (BRhadAraNyakopaniShad I:4:10) meaning " I am God. " ]

 

 

RABBI: This is sheer blasphemy. How can God become Man? How

can the Creator become the creature? Moreover, the Scripture

says that " Hear, O Israel! the Lord our God is one Lord "

(Deuteronomy 6:4). [My note: Compare this with the Madhvite

interpretation of the UpaniShadic passage " ekamamevAdvitIyam "

(ChAndogyopaniShad VI:2:1) meaning " one only without a second. " ]

 

 

CHRISTIAN: Our Lord Jesus is not a creature. He is Creator

from Creator, Light from Light, the sole begotten of the

Father (John 3:16) not made like Adam, albeit in His image

(Genesis 1:26). Adam is creature, but Jesus is Lord. We

humans, being descendents of Adam, are born with his sin until

we are cleansed of it in baptism in the name of the Holy

Trinity. Also, because of Adam's Fall and God's Infinte Mercy

to man, there was only one way that the reconciliation between

God and Man could have taken place. Since man was too puny

and powerless to become God, therefore God became man in order

to redeem the latter. This is the meaning and purpose of the

Incarnation. [My note: Quite a different purpose indeed when

compared to the Hindu view of Divine Incarnations. For us

Hindus, the Incarnational purpose is three-fold: " paritrANAya

sAdhUnAm (1) vinAshAyaca duShkRtAm (2) dharmasamsthApanArthAya (3)

sambhavAmi yuge yuge " {BhagavadgItA 4:8} meaning " for the

protection of the virtuous (1) for the destruction of the

vicious (2) for the establishment of righteousness (3) I

manifest myself from age to age. " ]

 

 

RABBI: The Lord is omnipotent. He doesn't have to go through

this drama of the Incarnation in order to reconcile with man.

He can forgive by the sheer fiat of His Will. [My note:

Compare this with the RAmAnujite interpretation of the GItA

passage " aham tvA sarvapApebhyo moxayiShyAmi mA shucah "

(BhagavadgItA 18:66) meaning " I will redeem you from all your

sins, grieve not. " ]

 

 

And the debate went on........

 

Anyway, it is interesting to note that somebody else was also

engaging in scholastic debates over a different set of

religious issues citing from a different set of Scriptures for

very different ends in a very different land at a different

time and in the context of a different culture from that of

ancient India. Yet there is a commonality, i.e. the propensity

in human nature to dissent and debate in trying to get at

the truth! And ultimately, God only knows what that TRUTH is!

 

regards,

Hari-vAyu smaraNa

B.N.Hebbar