V
Vouthon
Guest
There are some, particularly amidst our Evangelical brethren, who believe that Jesus repudiated the Jewish Oral Torah and rejected it. Usually this stems from the “sola scriptura” theology of some strands of Protestantism.
I believe that this view is false. I propose instead that in its essence, when seen in light of the New Testament and Jesus’ understanding of Oral Torah, much of the Oral Torah is divinely inspired Word of God.
As is written on wikipedia:
"…Within Christianity, Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches see the oral tradition as being transformed by Jesus Christ both in content (Mark 7:7–9) and in agency (Matthew 18:18 and Acts 10:14) to become the new Sacred Tradition. This view sees a certain continuity in the tradition, with Jesus having the authority to break some traditions, as seen in Matthew 15:1, 2, 7–11, and to establish others, as in John 20:23. Protestant Christians tend to set the oral Law in opposition to the writings of Scripture. In this view, the Tanakh is of historical interest only…"
Catholicism is thus more compatible with Orthodox Judaism than is muc of Protestant tradition, whom I feel have more in common with Karaite Jews.
Scholars, have noticed that, “The teachings of Jesus show the closest affinity to that of the Pharisees.”
Mat 23:1 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples,
Mat 23:2 saying: "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat.
Mat 23:3 Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do.
Jesus recognised that the Pharisees were correct and the Sadducees who were anti-Oral Torah, were wrong. The Pharisees were the legitimate successors to Moses and sat on his “Chair”, not the Saducees who had become corrupted.
Jesus upheld Oral Torah, he was merely opposed to some Pharisees ABUSING AND MISUSING IT to further their own ends, that is why he said…
Jesus said, “The pharisees and the scribes have taken the keys of knowledge and hidden them. They themselves have not entered, nor have they allowed to enter those who wish to".
What “keys of knowledge” is Jesus suggesting the Pharisees had? The answer is obvious: The Oral Traditions from Moses that were passed down but not codified in the Written Torah that gave them the authority to interpret the Torah and provided them with the proper understanding of the written text. Jesus recognised that the Pharisees did indeed occupy Moses’ Chair - they were has successors and they did have access to “keys of knowledge”, the Oral Torah, which the Sadducee Priests did not. He merely objected to their misuse of it, their failure to properly educate common Jews in the oral Torah or too live by its precepts. He chastised them for hypocrisy but he did not reject the Oral Torah - on the contrary he recognised that they had access to this source!
Read the following, where the scholar Davies explains what Jesus meant when he spoke of the Pharisees having the “keys of knowledge” in the synoptic gospels:
"It assumed (by Jesus) that Pharisees and scribes do in fact have the keys of knowledge…and that they have not taken advantage of their possesion of those keys, and that they will let no one else take advantage either…The Pharisees claimed to have access to an ‘Oral Torah’ in addition to the written books of Moses…their knowledge of that special source of revelation about God’s Law was the ‘key of knowledge’ under discussion (by Jesus)"
Matthew 23:23
23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
Whilst He chides the Pharisees for their lack of perspective regarding more important issues, Messiah doesn’t chastise their judgement about tithing on herbs (in the context of a fully functional Temple and Levitical Priesthood). On the contrary: He endorses it… He tells them that THEY SHOULD uphold this Oral tradition as observant Jews, but that it shouldn’t be placed above the weightier matters of Torah.
Equally, there’s quite a compelling case for arguing that Messiah and His disciples observed a traditional Pesach Seder (“Old Testament Passover” tradition) in accordance with the Mishnah.
Christ certainly didn’t say: “and every syllable uttered by the rabbinic sages will remain until heaven and earth pass” but he also didn’t reject it.
The Scribes and Pharisees indeed did have a delegated judicial authority to interpret the application of scripture to specific cases. The Mishnah arguably contains material which would have been extant as “oral” Torah in the first century at the time when Christ endorsed (at least some of) the judgements of the Scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23:1-3.
Subject to the above qualifications, insofar as the Mishnah clarifies the specific application of scriptural principles without contradiction, or making additional (or indeed lesser) demands or building a “hedge around the law”, then they’re deemed valid by Matthew 23:1-3.
To find out more got to: judianity.info/pharisaic-…raditions.html
I believe that this view is false. I propose instead that in its essence, when seen in light of the New Testament and Jesus’ understanding of Oral Torah, much of the Oral Torah is divinely inspired Word of God.
As is written on wikipedia:
"…Within Christianity, Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches see the oral tradition as being transformed by Jesus Christ both in content (Mark 7:7–9) and in agency (Matthew 18:18 and Acts 10:14) to become the new Sacred Tradition. This view sees a certain continuity in the tradition, with Jesus having the authority to break some traditions, as seen in Matthew 15:1, 2, 7–11, and to establish others, as in John 20:23. Protestant Christians tend to set the oral Law in opposition to the writings of Scripture. In this view, the Tanakh is of historical interest only…"
Catholicism is thus more compatible with Orthodox Judaism than is muc of Protestant tradition, whom I feel have more in common with Karaite Jews.
Scholars, have noticed that, “The teachings of Jesus show the closest affinity to that of the Pharisees.”
Mat 23:1 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples,
Mat 23:2 saying: "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat.
Mat 23:3 Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do.
Jesus recognised that the Pharisees were correct and the Sadducees who were anti-Oral Torah, were wrong. The Pharisees were the legitimate successors to Moses and sat on his “Chair”, not the Saducees who had become corrupted.
Jesus upheld Oral Torah, he was merely opposed to some Pharisees ABUSING AND MISUSING IT to further their own ends, that is why he said…
Jesus said, “The pharisees and the scribes have taken the keys of knowledge and hidden them. They themselves have not entered, nor have they allowed to enter those who wish to".
What “keys of knowledge” is Jesus suggesting the Pharisees had? The answer is obvious: The Oral Traditions from Moses that were passed down but not codified in the Written Torah that gave them the authority to interpret the Torah and provided them with the proper understanding of the written text. Jesus recognised that the Pharisees did indeed occupy Moses’ Chair - they were has successors and they did have access to “keys of knowledge”, the Oral Torah, which the Sadducee Priests did not. He merely objected to their misuse of it, their failure to properly educate common Jews in the oral Torah or too live by its precepts. He chastised them for hypocrisy but he did not reject the Oral Torah - on the contrary he recognised that they had access to this source!
Read the following, where the scholar Davies explains what Jesus meant when he spoke of the Pharisees having the “keys of knowledge” in the synoptic gospels:
"It assumed (by Jesus) that Pharisees and scribes do in fact have the keys of knowledge…and that they have not taken advantage of their possesion of those keys, and that they will let no one else take advantage either…The Pharisees claimed to have access to an ‘Oral Torah’ in addition to the written books of Moses…their knowledge of that special source of revelation about God’s Law was the ‘key of knowledge’ under discussion (by Jesus)"
Matthew 23:23
23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
Whilst He chides the Pharisees for their lack of perspective regarding more important issues, Messiah doesn’t chastise their judgement about tithing on herbs (in the context of a fully functional Temple and Levitical Priesthood). On the contrary: He endorses it… He tells them that THEY SHOULD uphold this Oral tradition as observant Jews, but that it shouldn’t be placed above the weightier matters of Torah.
Equally, there’s quite a compelling case for arguing that Messiah and His disciples observed a traditional Pesach Seder (“Old Testament Passover” tradition) in accordance with the Mishnah.
Christ certainly didn’t say: “and every syllable uttered by the rabbinic sages will remain until heaven and earth pass” but he also didn’t reject it.
The Scribes and Pharisees indeed did have a delegated judicial authority to interpret the application of scripture to specific cases. The Mishnah arguably contains material which would have been extant as “oral” Torah in the first century at the time when Christ endorsed (at least some of) the judgements of the Scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23:1-3.
Subject to the above qualifications, insofar as the Mishnah clarifies the specific application of scriptural principles without contradiction, or making additional (or indeed lesser) demands or building a “hedge around the law”, then they’re deemed valid by Matthew 23:1-3.
To find out more got to: judianity.info/pharisaic-…raditions.html
