Lenox Internal Medicine

I’ve written here mostly about clinical medicine but I had other things on my mind this morning. Seeing as this is a blog, and I can post whatever I want, I thought I would put up this meditation on the origins of the idea of sin and redemption in the Jewish tradition. This is part I. In part II, I think, I will write about this from a more biological perspective.

Yesterday was Rosh Hashanah, the beginning of the Jewish New Year, which ends eight days from now with Yom Kippur. Between the two holidays, we focus our thoughts on repentance, and on returning to God.

An interesting thing about Judaism is that many of its essential themes were forged at a time of defeat and loss. The notion of a Covenant with a protective God certainly predated the sack of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in 586 B.C.E. In fact, the idea of a patron God who resided in a temple and protected the kingdom was commonplace in the Bronze Age. I think the Judeans and Israelites endowed this with a bit more of a Utopian character than their neighbors, but the basic theology was not terribly different.

It was not until the destruction of Solomon’s temple Jerusalem and the exile of most Judeans to Babylonia that Judaism took on its distinctive character.

One must imagine people who had faced the individual fear, deprivation and loss of a long siege, had seen their agricultural land laid waste, their cities razed, and their God desecrated. Then they were shipped off to exile in Babylonia.

There, for some reason, rather than adopting the gods and customs of the Babylonians, they reconstructed their religion. Now, however, they had no place to carry out animal sacrifices and other rituals, no physical space for worship – no temple in which their God could live among them. They were forced to think about the non-ritual aspects of their religion.

More importantly, their experience challenged the fundamental concept of an inviolable sanctuary protected by an all-powerful deity who would provide eternal protection to the descendants of Abraham.

The religious thinkers of the Judeans reconciled the dilemma this way: They maintained the belief in an omnipotent God, but they incorporated the new idea of a people who could sin. The people could turn away from God, could incur God’s anger and punishment. By turning back to God, they could also earn God’s forgiveness.

The Prophetic writings, which most directly address the exilic situation, are full of expressions of this relationship between God and Israel. God is presented (in patriarchal fashion) as a jealous husband who punishes an unfaithful wife; as a farmer pruning away diseased vines; as a merchant sorting the good fruit from the bad.

In the process, and almost by accident, the nature of God’s existence is re-conceptualized. He is not just the most powerful among a pantheon of deities associated with various nations. Rather, he has power over all nations: he sends an army from afar to punish his unfaithful people. By the same construct, God can be present for the Judeans in Babylonia even though there is no temple. The temple in Jerusalem is thus proposed to have housed God’s Name – not God Himself, who is omnipresent and cannot reside in a physical structure.

In this way, I think, the notion of sin and redemption was forged. It has been of central importance to Judaism and to the religions derived from it, Christianity and Islam.

I will write a bit more in a future post about the resonance this has for me, especially in relation to biology and the medical arts.