Are Jews Sola Sciptura?

[Tezza]

OT Scripture, anyway?

Sorry if this is a dumb question. I got into a debate with a Messianic Jew who accepted only scriptural evidence (his slant only, of course) for why the Catholic Church has rejected God’s laws and developed Her own. Anway, you know how it goes…blah, blah, blah.

But I was under the impression that there were other works Jews look to beside OT scripture. (Talmud?)

Anywho, just curious. Thanks for the insight.

Blessings!
Tez

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

Mainsteam Judaism was not ever sola scriptura. Messianic Jews are NOT JEWS, they are PROTESTANT CHRISTIANS. Perhaps the closest Jewish sect to being sola scriptura are the Karaites, but even they observe certain traditions. The Judaism of Jesus time was not sola scriptura, as the Pharisees and the Apostles cite nonbiblical Jewish texts in the New Testament, even the Sadducees had traditions.

Rabbinical scholar Risto Santala on Judaism notes

Shalom Ben-Chorin, the well-known Jewish writer and theologian, has said that Judaism is reminiscent of “Catholic divinity in which there are two fixed points: the Scriptures and Tradition”.

Yes the Talmud is a work used by Orthodox Jews.

Messianic Jews are opposed to tradition because they are opposed to some of the Rabbinical laws and additions added under tradition. Also Messianic Jews use sola scriptura because they are a Protestant denomination (and a relatively new one at that) an obvious fact that Messianic Jews never admit to. Their origin, their theology, their founders, their bible canon–all Protestants. hey are also probably opposed to using tradition since they have none, since they are so young.

When it comes down to it Catholicism is by far more of a continuation of Jewish thought than Protestantism

 

[Tezza]

Mainsteam Judaism was not ever sola scriptura. Messianic Jews are NOT JEWS, they are PROTESTANT CHRISTIANS. Perhaps the closest Jewish sect to being sola scriptura are the Karaites, but even they observe certain traditions. The Judaism of Jesus time was not sola scriptura, as the Pharisees and the Apostles cite nonbiblical Jewish texts in the New Testament, even the Sadducees had traditions.

Rabbinical scholar Risto Santala on Judaism notes

Yes the Talmud is a work used by Orthodox Jews.

Messianic Jews are opposed to tradition because they are opposed to some of the Rabbinical laws and additions added under tradition. Also Messianic Jews use sola scriptura because they are a Protestant denomination (and a relatively new one at that) an obvious fact that Messianic Jews never admit to. Their origin, their theology, their founders, their bible canon–all Protestants. hey are also probably opposed to using tradition since they have none, since they are so young.

When it comes down to it Catholicism is by far more of a continuation of Jewish thought than Protestantism

Thank you for your response.

Of course, he would argue that those holding to Jewish traditions but accepting of Jesus as the Messiah were always around, though a small group. Kind of an underground type existance due to the persecution by Christians who went astray by rejecting the Laws of the OT. He refused to read any of the early Church Fathers because some were anti-semetic. Thus, he only looked to his interpretation of the NT. Talk about having to skew scripture to make it fit your viewpoint!

 

[Kaninchen]

OT Scripture, anyway?

It’s called the Tanakh (what you call the OT).

So, cutting a very very long story very very short . . . .

Judaism doesn’t ‘work’ like Christianity at all.

The Tanakh is even organized differently - there’s Torah (Law - the first five books of your bible as well), there’s the Prophets and there’s The Writings and there’s a hint about how Judaism works in how it’s organized - the latter two could be described as ‘insights into Torah’.

Then there’s ‘Oral Torah’ which is ‘commentary, analysis and precedent’ (lots of old rabbis arguing about stuff) on The Torah (with insights gleaned from Prophets and Writings). Then, of course, there’s all the insights and arguments of famous rabbis ever since ‘Oral Torah’ was written down (the written form is called ‘Talmud’).

To us, you can’t understand ‘Torah’ without ‘Oral Torah’ - or, in Christian terms, without ‘Tradition’. To use an analogy, it works rather like lawyers today arguing about law using precedent and legal commentaries - the US started with a Constitution, Bill of Rights and English Common Law, on it has been built a mountain of Law and acres and acres of law libraries that people have to study in order to know how to understand and handle questions and cases.

‘Sola Scriptura’ is a meaningless concept from a Jewish perspective.

 

[Tezza]

It’s called the Tanakh (what you call the OT).

So, cutting a very very long story very very short . . . .

Judaism doesn’t ‘work’ like Christianity at all.

The Tanakh is even organized differently - there’s Torah (Law - the first five books of your bible as well), there’s the Prophets and there’s The Writings and there’s a hint about how Judaism works in how it’s organized - the latter two could be described as ‘insights into Torah’.

Then there’s ‘Oral Torah’ which is ‘commentary, analysis and precedent’ (lots of old rabbis arguing about stuff) on The Torah (with insights gleaned from Prophets and Writings). Then, of course, there’s all the insights and arguments of famous rabbis ever since ‘Oral Torah’ was written down (the written form is called ‘Talmud’).

To us, you can’t understand ‘Torah’ without ‘Oral Torah’ - or, in Christian terms, without ‘Tradition’. To use an analogy, it works rather like lawyers today arguing about law using precedent and legal commentaries - the US started with a Constitution, Bill of Rights and English Common Law, on it has been built a mountain of Law and acres and acres of law libraries that people have to study in order to know how to understand and handle questions and cases.

‘Sola Scriptura’ is a meaningless concept from a Jewish perspective.

Thanks Kaninchen! I suppose that’s why it is a meaningless concept to Catholics as well

Wow, my Messianic Jewish friend must really be conflicted…following the Tanakh (as he also refered to it) to the letter (thought not really–I think there’s more to it than being Kosher and observing the Sabbath) and yet being sola scriptura about the NT.

Peace and blessings,
Teri

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

He refused to read any of the early Church Fathers because some were anti-semetic.

Bad logic, often called Guilt by association or Poisoned well? This is foolish logic, some of the Church Fathers WERE Semites, most if not all the claims about the Church Fathers being anti semetic are bogus. The Church Fathers were not racists, they opposed Judaism as a religion and those seeking to incorporate Jewish practices into Christianity (ie Judaizing)

 

[chosen_people]

Bad logic, often called Guilt by association or Poisoned well? This is foolish logic, some of the Church Fathers WERE Semites, most if not all the claims about the Church Fathers being anti semetic are bogus. The Church Fathers were not racists, they opposed Judaism as a religion and those seeking to incorporate Jewish practices into Christianity (ie Judaizing)

What do you think is the source of Christian anti-Semitism and edicts denying Jews civil and legal rights? Which saint or saints can not be classified as anti-Semitic?

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

In some ancient countries you had fewer rights simply by not being the state religion, since Christianity was the state religion in much of Europe, people who were non Christians or other deemed heretics were given fewer rights.

 

[chosen_people]

In some ancient countries you had fewer rights simply by not being the state religion, since Christianity was the state religion in much of Europe, people who were non Christians or other deemed heretics were given fewer rights.

Study Church and Papal edicts which were in effect into the latter part of the 19th Century concerning Jews

Study the writings of Catholic Saints and Popes concerning the Jews

Now are you justifying this as something moral or natural or acceptable? Should the Jewish State of Israel limit the rights of Christians?

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

In the 21st century religious discrimination is not as common as it was in the middle ages and before, people tended to be the religion of the king, and other groups were discriminated against. I don’t see what this has to do with Israel now. In the past some Jews have taken advantage of religious discrimination, for example the Orthodox Jews around the 13th Century before the Spanish Inquisition even occurred, convinced the Spanish King to expel all the Karaite Jews from Spain, one of the rabbis was named Rabbi Todros Ha-Levi

Should the Jewish State of Israel limit the rights of Christians?

No that would further anger the UN, since they are big on religious freedom

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

Also the “Church Fathers” are Christian writers living in the first 700-800 years after Christ, so strictly speaking 19th century is not considered the era of Church Fathers

Regardless it is baseless to charge many early Christians and even Popes of being antisemitic, since antisemitism is a form of racism, not religious discrimination. Their bias was against follower of the Jewish religion, not the “Jewish” race, they had no problem with Hebrew converts to Christianity

This is going off topic, Messianic Jews are not considered to be Jews by anyone besides themselves. They are Protestants. Messianics have hardly been discriminated against since they are a new denomination, not to mention much of them are not even ethnically Jew

 

[yusterno]

OT Scripture, anyway?

Sorry if this is a dumb question. I got into a debate with a Messianic Jew who accepted only scriptural evidence (his slant only, of course) for why the Catholic Church has rejected God’s laws and developed Her own. Anway, you know how it goes…blah, blah, blah.

But I was under the impression that there were other works Jews look to beside OT scripture. (Talmud?)

Anywho, just curious. Thanks for the insight.

Blessings!
Tez

Welcome to the forum!

I’m very interested! I would love to find out more.

 

[chosen_people]

In the 21st century religious discrimination is not as common as it was in the middle ages and before, people tended to be the religion of the king, and other groups were discriminated against. I don’t see what this has to do with Israel now. In the past some Jews have taken advantage of religious discrimination, for example the Orthodox Jews around the 13th Century before the Spanish Inquisition even occurred, convinced the Spanish King to expel all the Karaite Jews from Spain, one of the rabbis was named Rabbi Todros Ha-Levi

No that would further anger the UN, since they are big on religious freedom

So when 5000 Jews were massacred in Catholic riots against Jews incited by a thousand plus years of Catholic teachings against Jews and led by Archdeacon Martinez in 1391 in Spain, was that morally acceptable in Catholicism in the fourteenth century or were the ten commandments not yet part your religion? Was that religious anti-Semitism or racial anti-Semitism and why does it matter? Did the Catholics and the Archdeacon murder the Jews to avenge the Karites in actions against them in the 13th Century?

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

So when 5000 Jews were massacred in Catholic riots against Jews incited by a thousand plus years of Catholic teachings against Jews and led by Archdeacon Martinez in 1391 in Spain, was that morally acceptable in Catholicism in the fourteenth century or were the ten commandments not yet part your religion? Was that religious anti-Semitism or racial anti-Semitism and why does it matter? Did the Catholics and the Archdeacon murder the Jews to avenge the Karites in actions against them in the 13th Century?

There is no such thing as “religious anti semitism”. Semitism is not a religion, never was, it refers to people descended from Eber. I don’t know why there was a mob against Jews, many people have hated Jews for many reasons as you know. Archdeacons are not bishops. Mobs rules not acceptable in Catholicism. I could turn the tables on you and ask you if the ten commandments were part of your religion when the Jewish Yemenite king Yūsuf Dhū Nuwas proudly burned and killed (upwards to 20000) Christians and their churches and encouraged others to do the same in the 6th century…?

This is still going offtopic since this is about MESSIANIC JUDAISM and sola scriptura

 

[Tezza]

Can you please keep this thread on topic?

Thank you.

 

[chosen_people]

There is no such thing as “religious anti semitism”. Semitism is not a religion, never was, it refers to people descended from Eber. I don’t know why there was a mob against Jews, many people have hated Jews for many reasons as you know. Archdeacons are not bishops. Mobs rules not acceptable in Catholicism. I could turn the tables on you and ask you if the ten commandments were part of your religion when the Jewish Yemenite king Yūsuf Dhū Nuwas proudly burned and killed (upwards to 20000) Christians and their churches and encouraged others to do the same in the 6th century…?

This is still going offtopic since this is about MESSIANIC JUDAISM and sola scriptura

I am glad to discover that there is no such thing as religious anti-Semitism. It therefore follows that there is no such thing as Catholic anti-Semitism It therefore follows that Catholic edicts against Jews such as placing them in ghettos or making them wear special clothing marking them as Jews or making them attend special classes to learn about Catholicism or preventing them any social or work interaction with Catholics were not anti-Semitic nor are the Catholic writings that served as the basis for these actions. Neither for instance were the Vatican instigated attacks against Jews in the Catholic press in Europe in the latter part of the 19th Century accusing the Jews of using the blood of murdered Christian children for use in their rituals or for making Matzah. Neither are the 20th Century attacks on the Jews of Fahey or Coughlin or Feeney. Since there is no such thing as religious anti-Semitism it therefore follows that these attacks against the Jews were done on the basis of what is termed racial anti-Semitism or attacking the Jews as the Jewish people. Now don’t you think as a Catholic given all these laws and edicts by the Church and all these writings against the Jews and all these persecutions that you should know about these things?

So how is all this connected to our subject? Why most Catholics probably haven’t heard about the Shulhan Aruch שולחן ערוך and couldn’t tell you the difference between the Babylonian Talmud and the Jerusalem Talmud or Mishnah or Gemmara or Tossefta or Rashi as compared to Rambam. However you might be surprised about how many non existent imaginary things some people “know” about what’s supposedly written in the Talmud concerning them. Now what is the basis for these lies and accusations? Anti-Semitism - which sort of brings us back full circle.

Nuwas by the way was a convert and probably a good argument for why we Jews do not actively encourage gentiles to convert.

 

[Tezza]

So how is all this connected to our subject? Why most Catholics probably haven’t heard about the Shulhan Aruch שולחן ערוך and couldn’t tell you the difference between the Babylonian Talmud and the Jerusalem Talmud or Mishnah or Gemmara or Tossefta or Rashi as compared to Rambam. However you might be surprised about how many non existent imaginary things some people “know” about what’s supposedly written in the Talmud concerning them.

QUOTE]

Thank you for this information. If you’d like to share more, in charity, that would be wonderful.

 

[chosen_people]

chosen people;6015632:

So how is all this connected to our subject? Why most Catholics probably haven’t heard about the Shulhan Aruch שולחן ערוך and couldn’t tell you the difference between the Babylonian Talmud and the Jerusalem Talmud or Mishnah or Gemmara or Tossefta or Rashi as compared to Rambam. However you might be surprised about how many non existent imaginary things some people “know” about what’s supposedly written in the Talmud concerning them.

QUOTE]

Thank you for this information. If you’d like to share more, in charity, that would be wonderful.

The problem for me in this discussion is that the basic structural concept of Judaism and Christianity are so diametrically opposed. However without understanding this difference its impossible to understand the answer.

Lets say I lived two thousand years ago at a time when there was no universal literacy and education was limited. I want to spread a religion that can be universal to any and all people, no matter what their intellectual ability or educational status. How could I go about doing this? I would have to formulate a series of simply learned dogmas, that with their acceptance would make that person an adherent to my faith. I would have to impose a rigid structure and hierarchy with the authority to impose and create these dogmas and I would need a rigid structure for the basis of the creation of these dogmas, like sola scriptura. I need a rigid dogmatic hierarchical structure.

Now let’s take the opposite situation. Let’s say I had come up with an original and complex concept of religion. That religion should not be only about man’s relationship to God but also about man’s relationship to his fellow man. That instead of concentrating about life after death and getting to the next world, religion should concentrate on how to live your life in this world. To do this I took societal laws and I elevated them to the level where they were divine commandments. Instead of simplistic dogmas I write down rules about taking care of your neighbours ox and the ramifications of whether the care was for consideration and whether the ox while under your care injured someone and whether it matters if you were aware of past behaviour of the ox and whether the status of the injured person affects the amount of damages. Now such a religion thousands of years ago, would have to be limited to a group of people who could grasp the nuances of the different situations, it would require universal literacy so that fathers would be able to pass on and teach these rules to their sons, it would have to reflect a particular society and it would demand the flexibility to adopt the laws to changing dynamic situations. The basic laws would receive a status of a constitution and would serve as a basis for the development of the other rules. A unique and original way of writing down legal developments would be made by including the discussion and reasoning of the various parties in formulating the rules, including counter opinions and in this way giving a basis for further dynamic growth of the law.

In our first example, that of Christianity, Sola Scriptura is a natural necessary development of a dogmatic religion.

In the second example, this rigid dogmatic concept cannot exist in the intellectual
religion of Judaism.

 

[Roman_Army]

OT Scripture, anyway?

Sorry if this is a dumb question. I got into a debate with a Messianic Jew who accepted only scriptural evidence (his slant only, of course) for why the Catholic Church has rejected God’s laws and developed Her own. Anway, you know how it goes…blah, blah, blah.

But I was under the impression that there were other works Jews look to beside OT scripture. (Talmud?)

Anywho, just curious. Thanks for the insight.

Blessings!
Tez

Sola Scriptura is exclusively of 16th century Protestant origin. No other religion in the world that I know of follows such a ludicrous and absurd belief, not even Judaism or Islam. Not even the most Sola Scriptura Protestants themselves do 100% of the time. It is illogical and impractical.

 

[Lev23]

OT Scripture, anyway?

Sorry if this is a dumb question. I got into a debate with a Messianic Jew who accepted only scriptural evidence (his slant only, of course) for why the Catholic Church has rejected God’s laws and developed Her own. Anway, you know how it goes…blah, blah, blah.

But I was under the impression that there were other works Jews look to beside OT scripture. (Talmud?)

Anywho, just curious. Thanks for the insight.

Blessings!
Tez

They do look to other sources, but are not under the authority of the Talmud, or any “oral law or tradition”.