Hi, thanks for the clarification. So what would you recommend as a solid source for Orthodox Judaic beliefs?
Tips on the Talmud, or What Hoffman is not telling you
In reivewing the posts on this thread, a thought came to mind. After I converted to the Catholic Faith, I entered the Seminary. I was taught good solid theology from St. Thomas Aquinas. It was not as hard for me as for some of my classmates because of my Talmudic training as a youth.
St. Thomas and the Talmud may teach different things (although much of the moral teachings are the same) But if you compair the sturcture of the arguments in the Summa, with the arguments of the Talmud they are build in a similar manner, and easy to misinterpret or misrepresent. Why? Because they are constructed in the manner of a debate from the Middle Ages. Our structure for debates, let along writing has changed radically since that time.
Anyone who picks up a traditional copy of the Talmud in english or hebrew will notice that the pages follow a specific pattern. In the center of the page in larger bold letters, is the passage from the Torah, or Law of Moses. In smaller print on either side you will see the two major arguments from very learned and respected Rabbis. Many times they will take opposing views on the subject. In smaller scrit around those will be other arguments from each side, by still more Rabbis. Sometimes there will be an even smaller commentary on the perephery.
Why do I bother with telling everyone this? Because the Talmud and quotes from the Talmud (or misquotes and misleading quotes that are given by some) do not always carry the weight that the person who is attacking the Talmud wants you to believe.
An Example from Anti-Catholic Bashers
On another board there was a Russian Orthodox priest who claimed that the Catholic Church changed it’s teachings. As proof he quoted Cardinal Manning’s reply to allegations that the Catholic Church believed the Pope to be Infallible. Cardinal Manning replied in this book, published before Vatican I that Catholics did not believe the Pope was Infallible, and never had. Was Cardinal Manning a liar? No, and not for the reasons most would think. Not because the dogma had not been “Invented” as the protestant claim. But because at the time Protestants in England meant by stating that Catholics believed the Pope was Infallible to mean that the Pope could not Sin, or Error on any matter, including science, or what he wanted for Breakfast. What Cardinal Manning was saying was, In response to what the Protestant idea of Infallibility is, no we don’t believe that.
The same tactic as Hoffman uses was used by Bottiner, and Anti-Catholic Presbyterian Minister. He writes about Cardinal Newman making horrible statements against the Church in his book Apologia Pro Vita Sua. Yes Cardinal Newman did make those statements against the Church, and they are in the book, which he wrote after he was a Cardinal. But the truth is in the context. Cardinal Newman originally made those comments when he was a Protestant Minister. In the Apologia, he goes through his life and tells us, “At one time I beleived this about the Catholic Church.” then he tells us why he no longer believes what he wrote years ago. Bottiner like Hoffman, does not tell us that as a Catholic and a Cardinal, Newman is now rejecting what he once wrote, and wants you to believe that as a Catholic he still holds the old beliefs.
In Summary
So to with some of the rabbinic comments that appear in the Talmud. If you do not read them in context, or know the force or authority that is given them, you know nothing of how a Jew would interpret a comment isolated from the text. Something that leaves out the context, and can be mistranslated if done deliberatly would fall for Christians and Jews both as bearing false witness against ones neighbor. Not all comments in the Talmud carry the same weight, and some are statements that are included simply because they are erronious beliefs that are spelled out so the Rabbis can comment on why they are wrong.
This is why we need to look not just at isolated texts, like the Sola Scriptura, Evangelical Protestants do when they misquote the Scriptures against the Church, but we need to look at the whole argument.
I’ll have to look up some of Mr. Hoffman’s more outlandish quotes, (In context) the few I have already, so far don’t exist, and I wonder what his source is for them. However it is possible that some minor writer made an idiotic comment, or was quoted out of context, and held an extreme position that the rest of the Rabbis on the page denounced, and we are not informed of this by Mr. Hoffman.
