Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
Response from a non zionist, regarding RAMBAN, and vilna gaon 600000
q_q_:
--- Quote from: jdl4ever on February 11, 2008, 07:26:58 PM ---Combine this "Once David was annointed King, he acquired the crown of kingship. Afterwards, the kingship belonged to him and to his male descendents forever..... Nevertheless , his acquisition of te monarchy was conditional, applying only to the righteous among his descendents" with what the Rambam writes at the end of the first chapter where he makes a distinction between the anointing process of a non-Davidic King and a Davidic King in the last 2 verses of Chapter one vs the other distinctions between the two types of Kings. It is possible to see from this the possibility that there is a big difference between a Davidic King and a non Davidic King and perhaps the Davidic King doesn't need both the Prophet and the Sanhedrin. As proof, David the King was appointed by only Shmuel the Prophet in secret without the Sanhedrin. Although this is not a solid proof but mere speculation. Also what the Rambam writes is that only those descendants worthy may become King; not everyone of them. How do we know who is worthy? Obviously they are appointed by the Sanhedrin who determines this. Perhaps this is an answer to the contradiction. I prefer the words of the Ramban since he makes sense. I wished the Rambam would have been clearer as to not leave any doubt as to what he meant; but I can still see the Ramban in the Rambam.
--- End quote ---
as i wrote this you posted a reply, so this refers to the post you wrote above the one above this. i.e. to the one i quote here.
You do not have to speculate on the distinction between a Davidic and Non Davidic Kings. (by the way, your speculation contradicts 1:3).
He actually gives the distinction.. Generally, Kings will come from David.
He says end of 1:9, it is possible for a King to come from other israelites, but the monarchy will cease from his descendents, for behold jeroboam was told 1 Kings 11:39 ""[I will afflict the house of David]... but not forever""
jdl4ever:
Well let's hear your answer to the contradiction. Is it still the same one you posted before or have you perfected it?
q_q_:
--- Quote from: jdl4ever on February 11, 2008, 07:44:41 PM ---There is a contradiction in the Rambam and I'm trying to answer it. It is between what he wrote about Bar Kochba and what he wrote in 1:3. It is a good question since the commentators themselves were bothered by it and it is worth trying to find an answer. My answers are pretty good attempts since they piece everything together, but are a stretch like you say. You are free to try to find better answers.
--- End quote ---
I did answer it. In the previous thread where we discussed RAMBAM, and you got upset. Because I insulted you! The thread where you said you were busy studying medicine.
--- Quote from: jdl4ever on February 11, 2008, 07:44:41 PM ---The source for the Rambam saying Joshua was considered a King is this verse in the first Chapter:
ד [ג] אין מעמידין מלך תחילה, אלא על פי בית דין של שבעים זקנים ועל פי נביא--כיהושוע שמינהו משה רבנו ובית דינו, וכשאול ודויד שמינה אותם שמואל הרמתי ובית דינו.
"4 (or 3) We don't appoint a King to begin with, unless it is on the mouth of a court of 70 elders and on the mouth of a Prophet -- like Joshua that Moses appointed and his court, and like Saul and David that Samuel appointed and his court. "
In this verse he calls Joshua a King even though he was never officially a King!
--- End quote ---
But that says that Joshua was appointed by a prophet and a court. So maybe he was saying that he was a King.
This is consistent with 1:3 that says a King can only be appointed by a prophet and a court of 71 elders.
q_q_:
--- Quote from: jdl4ever on February 11, 2008, 07:50:55 PM ---Well let's hear your answer to the contradiction. Is it still the same one you posted before or have you perfected it?
--- End quote ---
yes, same answer.
I can improve it
You were claiming from the example of the messianic king in chapter 11, that a king can be appointed in every generation, because from that example, he does not have to be appointed.
my answer was that ch11 refers to a King we presume to be moshiach.
We do not have that situation today. Furthermore, it does not say whether he was appointed or not. And there is a good reason to not bother saying, that being that it says in 1:3.
<forget this>And perhaps also, it is relevant that we do not know the exact order things will happen in the messianic era. </forget this>
Well, I can improve on all that..
The messiah king who we presume to be the messiah, is the presumed messianic King. So he is not a King until he is appointed. He can be appointed, since Eliyahu HaNavi will come beforehand.
q_q_:
from the bar kochba example, we see that rabbi akiva`s understanding was that eliyahu hanavi (may) not precede moshiach immediately.
But we know he will come. And when he does, he can be appointed. (as messiah king, or in a weird scenario, perhaps as King not messiah)
Until then, he is the presumed messianic king.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version