Tradition

[TOmNossor]

Yes. In fact most of the concepts connected with the Jewish expectations of the Messiah are found in Jewish tradition.

While the Prophets and some of the Psalms mention God ushering in a Golden Age, and there are clear connections with this age being ruled under the Davidic dynasty, there are no direct references to the specific Messiah figure in the Hebrew Scriptures. We don’t find any texts specifically detailing the Messiah, his duties, how to identify him, etc. What Scripture texts do exist are actually limited and quite scattered. Most texts declared Messianic by both Jews and Christians do not even specifically mention a Messianic figure at all.

The theology of the Messiah that developed within Judaism came mostly out of the writings of rabbis in the Mishna, Midrash, and Talmud. The rabbis used these many and scattered Bible texts for inspiration in developing the Messianic concept into something far more concrete and specific than what we find in the Hebrew Scriptures. It was Jewish tradition that tied the many prophecies of a coming Golden Age with the different aspects and elements of the Messiah.

Jesus came to fulfill these expectations of the Jewish people that the Messiah would usher in the age or redemption, though they didn’t understand fully what God had truly planned. The entire concept of “Messiah” is a Jewish one, and it comes from a combination of Scripture and traditional Jewish exegesis that developed the subject.

Ceelos,
Thank you for your comments here and especially in the follow on comments.
Have you read (as a disclaimer, I have only discussed and read reviews from a friend of mine) Klinghoffer’s book:
amazon.com/Why-Jews-Rejected-Jesus-Turning/dp/0385510225

It is my position before and after my encounter with Klinghoffer’s book that the vast majority of Jew rejected Jesus precisely because their TRADITIONS indicated the Messiah would be the “Concurring King” not the “Suffering Servant.” Those who were believed by MOST Jews to be the authority figures, the definers/ of tradition, MOSTLY rejected Jesus because He did not align with the Traditional understanding of the Messiah.

Anyway, as Hebrew Catholic, I expect you have found great connection to the Catholic Christian worship that is absent in the non-Catholic Christian worship. I just thought I would ask if you had ever thought about the Tradition ideas I offer above.
Charity, TOm

 

[CeelosDeznos]

Ceelos,
Thank you for your comments here and especially in the follow on comments.
Have you read (as a disclaimer, I have only discussed and read reviews from a friend of mine) Klinghoffer’s book:
amazon.com/Why-Jews-Rejected-Jesus-Turning/dp/0385510225

It is my position before and after my encounter with Klinghoffer’s book that the vast majority of Jew rejected Jesus precisely because their TRADITIONS indicated the Messiah would be the “Concurring King” not the “Suffering Servant.” Those who were believed by MOST Jews to be the authority figures, the definers/ of tradition, MOSTLY rejected Jesus because He did not align with the Traditional understanding of the Messiah.

Anyway, as Hebrew Catholic, I expect you have found great connection to the Catholic Christian worship that is absent in the non-Catholic Christian worship. I just thought I would ask if you had ever thought about the Tradition ideas I offer above.
Charity, TOm

While I have never read the book, I did make reference to this very view in this thread in post #27.

As I mentioned in that post, the Catholic Church acknowledges that all of Israel’s hopes, Scriptures and oral traditions, regarding the Messiah still left an incomplete picture of what the Messiah was to do and why the Messiah was to come. As written in Hebrews 1:1: “In times past, God spoke in partial and various ways to our ancestors through the prophets.”–Italics added.

I quoted from the recent groundbreaking document released just this past December (2015) by the Holy See, in part:

Christian faith recognises the fulfilment, in Christ, of the Scriptures and the hopes of Israel, but it does not understand this fulfilment as a literal one…Jesus is not confined to playing an already fixed role — that of Messiah — but he confers, on the notions of Messiah and salvation, a fullness which could not have been imagined in advance…It would be wrong to consider the prophecies of the Old Testament as some kind of photographic anticipations of future events.–“The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible,” II.A. 5, the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

Believing that God grants humanity an exhaustive theology, most of my people have been shortsighted by confining God to the elements of his revelation to man, whether that revelation is part of oral tradition or Sacred Scripture, when it comes to the subject of the Messiah, as if God is going to fulfill a pre-designed schedule or follow a playbook that a select group of mortals are made privy to.

On the contrary, as Jesus pointed out just prior to his Ascension as recorded in Acts 1:7, God does not share all the details regarding the Messianic kingdom with humanity, even the Jews. Much of what Jesus did to fulfill God’s purposes for the Messiah was equally hidden. As regards the Scriptures, not even a direct reading of them by any human being, no matter how holy or faithful could allow them to comprehend the Messianic details within unless first Christ “opened their minds to understand” them.–Luke 24:44-47.

The Jews were not blinded by their tradition or misconceptions from accepting Jesus as the promised Messiah. They were blinded by believing that God was limited to their expectations regarding the coming Christ. The same danger stands for us all, for we often think God will not act outside of denominational lines or is limited to act as only we expect, as if our limited minds can fully comprehend the grand mystery that is our powerful Creator. God can, does, and will act in often very unexpected and surprising ways.

As to what I find in the Catholic Church not found in other religions as a Jewish Christian, it is actually the reverse of what you have stated. Some of the people in my ancestral line were among the members of the original and first Church in Jerusalem. In 135 C.E./A.D. they were expelled from Jerusalem by the Romans when they crushed the Bar Kokhba rebellion and joined other members of my family already in Seferad (Spain) since the days of the Babylonian deportation.

As a consequence, I am not a Roman Catholic because it is similar to Jewish worship. I am a Roman Catholic because my Church in Jerusalem became the Roman Catholic Church. I have had family members In the Church since the beginning, before any Gentiles became members, for over 2000 years. So you are correct about the connection, but it is mainly historical more than anything else.

 

[rcwitness]

While I have never read the book, I did make reference to this very view in this thread in post #27.

As I mentioned in that post, the Catholic Church acknowledges that all of Israel’s hopes, Scriptures and oral traditions, regarding the Messiah still left an incomplete picture of what the Messiah was to do and why the Messiah was to come. As written in Hebrews 1:1: “In times past, God spoke in partial and various ways to our ancestors through the prophets.”–Italics added.

I quoted from the recent groundbreaking document released just this past December (2015) by the Holy See, in part:

Christian faith recognises the fulfilment, in Christ, of the Scriptures and the hopes of Israel, but it does not understand this fulfilment as a literal one…Jesus is not confined to playing an already fixed role — that of Messiah — but he confers, on the notions of Messiah and salvation, a fullness which could not have been imagined in advance…It would be wrong to consider the prophecies of the Old Testament as some kind of photographic anticipations of future events.–“The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible,” II.A. 5, the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

Believing that God grants humanity an exhaustive theology, most of my people have been shortsighted by confining God to the elements of his revelation to man, whether that revelation is part of oral tradition or Sacred Scripture, when it comes to the subject of the Messiah, as if God is going to fulfill a pre-designed schedule or follow a playbook that a select group of mortals are made privy to.

On the contrary, as Jesus pointed out just prior to his Ascension as recorded in Acts 1:7, God does not share all the details regarding the Messianic kingdom with humanity, even the Jews. Much of what Jesus did to fulfill God’s purposes for the Messiah was equally hidden. As regards the Scriptures, not even a direct reading of them by any human being, no matter how holy or faithful could allow them to comprehend the Messianic details within unless first Christ “opened their minds to understand” them.–Luke 24:44-47.

The Jews were not blinded by their tradition or misconceptions from accepting Jesus as the promised Messiah. They were blinded by believing that God was limited to their expectations regarding the coming Christ. The same danger stands for us all, for we often think God will not act outside of denominational lines or is limited to act as only we expect, as if our limited minds can fully comprehend the grand mystery that is our powerful Creator. God can, does, and will act in often very unexpected and surprising ways.

As to what I find in the Catholic Church not found in other religions as a Jewish Christian, it is actually the reverse of what you have stated. Some of the people in my ancestral line were among the members of the original and first Church in Jerusalem. In 135 C.E./A.D. they were expelled from Jerusalem by the Romans when they crushed the Bar Kokhba rebellion and joined other members of my family already in Seferad (Spain) since the days of the Babylonian deportation.

As a consequence, I am not a Roman Catholic because it is similar to Jewish worship. I am a Roman Catholic because my Church in Jerusalem became the Roman Catholic Church. I have had family members In the Church since the beginning, before any Gentiles became members, for over 2000 years. So you are correct about the connection, but it is mainly historical more than anything else.

Interesting post. I like how you have explained that! It’s something that I’ve never heard articulated this way.

 

[TOmNossor]

While I have never read the book, I did make reference to this very view in this thread in post #27.

As I mentioned in that post, the Catholic Church acknowledges that all of Israel’s hopes, Scriptures and oral traditions, regarding the Messiah still left an incomplete picture of what the Messiah was to do and why the Messiah was to come. As written in Hebrews 1:1: “In times past, God spoke in partial and various ways to our ancestors through the prophets.”–Italics added.

I quoted from the recent groundbreaking document released just this past December (2015) by the Holy See, in part:

Christian faith recognises the fulfilment, in Christ, of the Scriptures and the hopes of Israel, but it does not understand this fulfilment as a literal one…Jesus is not confined to playing an already fixed role — that of Messiah — but he confers, on the notions of Messiah and salvation, a fullness which could not have been imagined in advance…It would be wrong to consider the prophecies of the Old Testament as some kind of photographic anticipations of future events.–“The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible,” II.A. 5, the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

Believing that God grants humanity an exhaustive theology, most of my people have been shortsighted by confining God to the elements of his revelation to man, whether that revelation is part of oral tradition or Sacred Scripture, when it comes to the subject of the Messiah, as if God is going to fulfill a pre-designed schedule or follow a playbook that a select group of mortals are made privy to.

On the contrary, as Jesus pointed out just prior to his Ascension as recorded in Acts 1:7, God does not share all the details regarding the Messianic kingdom with humanity, even the Jews. Much of what Jesus did to fulfill God’s purposes for the Messiah was equally hidden. As regards the Scriptures, not even a direct reading of them by any human being, no matter how holy or faithful could allow them to comprehend the Messianic details within unless first Christ “opened their minds to understand” them.–Luke 24:44-47.

The Jews were not blinded by their tradition or misconceptions from accepting Jesus as the promised Messiah. They were blinded by believing that God was limited to their expectations regarding the coming Christ. The same danger stands for us all, for we often think God will not act outside of denominational lines or is limited to act as only we expect, as if our limited minds can fully comprehend the grand mystery that is our powerful Creator. God can, does, and will act in often very unexpected and surprising ways.

As to what I find in the Catholic Church not found in other religions as a Jewish Christian, it is actually the reverse of what you have stated. Some of the people in my ancestral line were among the members of the original and first Church in Jerusalem. In 135 C.E./A.D. they were expelled from Jerusalem by the Romans when they crushed the Bar Kokhba rebellion and joined other members of my family already in Seferad (Spain) since the days of the Babylonian deportation.

As a consequence, I am not a Roman Catholic because it is similar to Jewish worship. I am a Roman Catholic because my Church in Jerusalem became the Roman Catholic Church. I have had family members In the Church since the beginning, before any Gentiles became members, for over 2000 years. So you are correct about the connection, but it is mainly historical more than anything else.

I also enjoyed your post. Thank you very much.
I agree that we place human understandings over the top of our scriptures.
As a Christian, I of course agree with your understanding of the foreshadowing of Christ in the Old Testament. I would certainly recognize that looking back from today we can see a lot that should be there and say, “Ah ha!” Scriptural understanding often works like this. It seldom creates a “photograph.”
I will need to read that newer document from the Holy See.
Any chance it is Joseph of Arimathea from whom you are descended?
Anyway, thank you again for your post!
Charity, TOm

 

[rcwitness]

I also enjoyed your post. Thank you very much.
I agree that we place human understandings over the top of our scriptures.
As a Christian, I of course agree with your understanding of the foreshadowing of Christ in the Old Testament. I would certainly recognize that looking back from today we can see a lot that should be there and say, “Ah ha!” Scriptural understanding often works like this. It seldom creates a “photograph.”
I will need to read that newer document from the Holy See.
Any chance it is Joseph of Arimathea from whom you are descended?
Anyway, thank you again for your post!
Charity, TOm

A couple passages come to mind, which supports this understanding that Ceelosdeznos shared.

John 5
You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to me; yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.

Luke 24
And he said to them, “O foolish men, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

The Old Testament had “hidden” prophecies. It takes God’s actual Revelation to truly open our eyes to them. But they are enough to give direction and hope. The New Testament Revealed so much, but there, too, is prophecy about the end times. It’s not so that we will all know what is exactly going to happen and when, but that God’s plan is over all, and He wants our hearts to be ready and prepared.

John the Baptist was the last of this preparation in the O.T. The humble ones reacted to the call, while the ones who were proud thought they were secure in their places.

 

[Wannano]

While I have never read the book, I did make reference to this very view in this thread in post #27.

As I mentioned in that post, the Catholic Church acknowledges that all of Israel’s hopes, Scriptures and oral traditions, regarding the Messiah still left an incomplete picture of what the Messiah was to do and why the Messiah was to come. As written in Hebrews 1:1: “In times past, God spoke in partial and various ways to our ancestors through the prophets.”–Italics added.

I quoted from the recent groundbreaking document released just this past Decembuer (2015) by the Holy See, in part:

Christian faith recognises the fulfilment, in Christ, of the Scriptures and the hopes of Israel, but it does not understand this fulfilment as a literal one…Jesus is not confined to playing an already fixed role — that of Messiah — but he confers, on the notions of Messiah and salvation, a fullness which could not have been imagined in advance…It would be wrong to consider the prophecies of the Old Testament as some kind of photographic anticipations of future events.–“The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible,” II.A. 5, the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

Believing that God grants humanity an exhaustive theology, most of my people have been shortsighted by confining God to the elements of his revelation to man, whether that revelation is part of oral tradition or Sacred Scripture, when it comes to the subject of the Messiah, as if God is going to fulfill a pre-designed schedule or follow a playbook that a select group of mortals are made privy to.

On the contrary, as Jesus pointed out just prior to his Ascension as recorded in Acts 1:7, God does not share all the details regarding the Messianic kingdom with humanity, even the Jews. Much of what Jesus did to fulfill God’s purposes for the Messiah was equally hidden. As regards the Scriptures, not even a direct reading of them by any human being, no matter how holy or faithful could allow them to comprehend the Messianic details within unless first Christ “opened their minds to understand” them.–Luke 24:44-47.

The Jews were not blinded by their tradition or misconceptions from accepting Jesus as the promised Messiah. They were blinded by believing that God was limited to their expectations regarding the coming Christ. The same danger stands for us all, for we often think God will not act outside of denominational lines or is limited to act as only we expect, as if our limited minds can fully comprehend the grand mystery that is our powerful Creator. God can, does, and will act in often very unexpected and surprising ways.

As to what I find in the Catholic Church not found in other religions as a Jewish Christian, it is actually the reverse of what you have stated. Some of the people in my ancestral line were among the members of the original and first Church in Jerusalem. In 135 C.E./A.D. they were expelled from Jerusalem by the Romans when they crushed the Bar Kokhba rebellion and joined other members of my family already in Seferad (Spain) since the days of the Babylonian deportation.

As a consequence, I am not a Roman Catholic because it is similar to Jewish worship. I am a Roman Catholic because my Church in Jerusalem became the Roman Catholic Church. I have had family members In the Church since the beginning, before any Gentiles became members, for over 2000 years. So you are correct about the connection, but it is mainly historical more than anything else.

 

[Wannano]

While I have never read the book, I did make reference to this very view in this thread in post #27.

As I mentioned in that post, the Catholic Church acknowledges that all of Israel’s hopes, Scriptures and oral traditions, regarding the Messiah still left an incomplete picture of what the Messiah was to do and why the Messiah was to come. As written in Hebrews 1:1: “In times past, God spoke in partial and various ways to our ancestors through the prophets.”–Italics added.

I quoted from the recent groundbreaking document released just this past December (2015) by the Holy See, in part:

Christian faith recognises the fulfilment, in Christ, of the Scriptures and the hopes of Israel, but it does not understand this fulfilment as a literal one…Jesus is not confined to playing an already fixed role — that of Messiah — but he confers, on the notions of Messiah and salvation, a fullness which could not have been imagined in advance…It would be wrong to consider the prophecies of the Old Testament as some kind of photographic anticipations of future events.–“The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible,” II.A. 5, the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

Believing that God grants humanity an exhaustive theology, most of my people have been shortsighted by confining God to the elements of his revelation to man, whether that revelation is part of oral tradition or Sacred Scripture, when it comes to the subject of the Messiah, as if God is going to fulfill a pre-designed schedule or follow a playbook that a select group of mortals are made privy to.

On the contrary, as Jesus pointed out just prior to his Ascension as recorded in Acts 1:7, God does not share all the details regarding the Messianic kingdom with humanity, even the Jews. Much of what Jesus did to fulfill God’s purposes for the Messiah was equally hidden. As regards the Scriptures, not even a direct reading of them by any human being, no matter how holy or faithful could allow them to comprehend the Messianic details within unless first Christ “opened their minds to understand” them.–Luke 24:44-47.

The Jews were not blinded by their tradition or misconceptions from accepting Jesus as the promised Messiah. They were blinded by believing that God was limited to their expectations regarding the coming Christ. The same danger stands for us all, for we often think God will not act outside of denominational lines or is limited to act as only we expect, as if our limited minds can fully comprehend the grand mystery that is our powerful Creator. God can, does, and will act in often very unexpected and surprising ways.

As to what I find in the Catholic Church not found in other religions as a Jewish Christian, it is actually the reverse of what you have stated. Some of the people in my ancestral line were among the members of the original and first Church in Jerusalem. In 135 C.E./A.D. they were expelled from Jerusalem by the Romans when they crushed the Bar Kokhba rebellion and joined other members of my family already in Seferad (Spain) since the days of the Babylonian deportation.

As a consequence, I am not a Roman Catholic because it is similar to Jewish worship. I am a Roman Catholic because my Church in Jerusalem became the Roman Catholic Church. I have had family members In the Church since the beginning, before any Gentiles became members, for over 2000 years. So you are correct about the connection, but it is mainly historical more than anything else.

I am also intrigued by what you are sharing here. Could you elaborate more on the first sentence of your second last paragraph? Does this answer reflect what you have found in other religions or does it relate only to the first sentence in the last paragraph?

You have ancestral roots to the first Church in Jerusalem. Do you have any information on what that Church looked like before it became Roman Catholic? Any info on what it was called before it became Catholic and how it came to be Roman Catholic?

You have a very interesting family history!

 

[rcwitness]

Wannano, welcome back…

I am curious if you saw my post number 56… I think it is directly related to your OP question. Unless I’m wrong, I don’t know how Jesus was not relying strongly on Tradition to assert what He said. Are we able to establish this explicitly from Scripture? And it is quite a forceful assertion!

Matthew 23
Then said Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice."

 

[wmscott]

I am also intrigued by what you are sharing here. Could you elaborate more on the first sentence of your second last paragraph? Does this answer reflect what you have found in other religions or does it relate only to the first sentence in the last paragraph?

You have ancestral roots to the first Church in Jerusalem. Do you have any information on what that Church looked like before it became Roman Catholic? Any info on what it was called before it became Catholic and how it came to be Roman Catholic?

You have a very interesting family history!

Hi Wannano, just a point of clarification here, the Catholic Church has always been the Catholic Church. The “Roman” designation is better defined as the “Latin Rite” of the Catholic Church along with 22 other “Rites” of the Catholic Church. All in union with the Pope. One Church. The Latin branch is by far the largest, and is so large, that most people are not aware of the other 22

 

[CeelosDeznos]

I am also intrigued by what you are sharing here. Could you elaborate more on the first sentence of your second last paragraph? Does this answer reflect what you have found in other religions or does it relate only to the first sentence in the last paragraph?

You have ancestral roots to the first Church in Jerusalem. Do you have any information on what that Church looked like before it became Roman Catholic? Any info on what it was called before it became Catholic and how it came to be Roman Catholic?

You have a very interesting family history!

It refers to the first sentence of my last paragraph.

Wmscott hit the nail on the head as to what I am saying. In reality all branches of the Catholic Church, despite the rites followed, and even the Orthodox and Oriental churches stem back to the original Jerusalem Congregation. The faith has been “Catholic” or “Universal” since its beginnings with the Great Commission of Matthew 28:19-20.

Scripture and history mark well the fact that the first bishop of the church in Jerusalem was the Apostle, St. James the Greater. (Acts 12:17; 15:13-21; 1 Corinthians 9:5; 15:7; Galatians 1:19) Jewish Christians were Torah-observant (followed the Mosaic Law) and publicly worshipped side-by-side with Jews who do not accept Jesus as the Messiah at the Temple as a sect of Judaism. (Acts 21:17-26) The Gospel of Matthew appears to be designed specifically for the Jewish Christian community, explaining why only Matthew adds Jesus’ council to obey the Law.–Matthew 5:17-19.

The Jerusalem church remained past the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 C.E., but since it was composed of Torah-observant Jews, the Romans expelled them along with all their other Jewish sisters and brothers in 135 C.E. when it crushed the Bar Kokhba rebellion. Judah Kyriakos was the last bishop of the Jerusalem church at the time.

My family line is composed of two groups from the same tribe, namely Judah. According to Scripture, some history, and tradition the royal inhabitants of Jerusalem, the House of David, were placed in Seferad (Spain) after the deportation to Babylon. (Obadiah 20) Some sources state that Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom stretched that far west and he chose this far away outpost to separate Jewish royalty from the common displaced folk.

Upon Babylon’s fall, Judah made the trek back to Jerusalem over the next several generations. But many members of the royal house refused to leave or turned back to Seferad when the Hasmoneans began to rule as a dynasty during the Second Temple era. When the Second Temple fell, they were eventually rejoined by many Jews of the Disapora.

According to documents from the Spanish Inquistion released to my family some 20 years ago which the help of the Roman Catholic Church, many of my ancestors were forced to convert to Catholicism under pain of persecution and/or death. Some who refused were tortured and killed, and interestingly some of the records have tormentors refuting the claim made by some in my ancestral lineage that they belonged to the House of David. Some survived, some converted under force, and some appear to have done so willingly. While the information is partial and sketchy as you would imagine, it seems that some of my line includes Judahites of the Jerusalem church.

But the “conversions” seemed to be a “Catch-22” ploy designed by those desirous of obtaining land and possessions these Sephardi Jews had acquired over the centuries in Spain. Because these “New Christians” still had Jewish cultural traditions and since all Jewish culture comes from Torah-centric teachings, the converted Jews could be charged with apostasy or returning to their “old” Jewish ways. Some did, of course, but there was no time for Jewish Christians to fully assimilate to Gentile Christian culture, and because of this it appears any Jew, converted or not, could be charged with “returning” to Judaism whether or not this was true. With the Alhambra Decree of 1492 all Jews were forced to leave Spain and Portugal (formally Seferad).

My family traveled south through Dutch Africa, across the Atlantic, through Puerto Rico and Cuba and settled in what is now Monterrey, Mexico, actually noted as being the first settlers and founders of the city. The Inquistion followed them however, and the four lines that led to me eventually moved to Texas when it was still its own republic.

As for how the Jerusalem church became noted with the Roman Catholic Church, many will debate this, and I am not here to challenge them. Our custom is that upon the death of our first bishop, St. James, the succession went to other Jewish Christians until Judah Kyriakos in 135. There were 16 Jewish Christian bishops in all. History is sketchy about what happened to Kyriakos after that.

The Roman, Orthodox and Oriental Catholic churches all historically stem from the Jerusalem church. So while I mentioned the connection with the Roman branch, I am not excluding the others.

 

[CeelosDeznos]

I also enjoyed your post. Thank you very much.
I agree that we place human understandings over the top of our scriptures.
As a Christian, I of course agree with your understanding of the foreshadowing of Christ in the Old Testament. I would certainly recognize that looking back from today we can see a lot that should be there and say, “Ah ha!” Scriptural understanding often works like this. It seldom creates a “photograph.”
I will need to read that newer document from the Holy See.
Any chance it is Joseph of Arimathea from whom you are descended?
Anyway, thank you again for your post!
Charity, TOm

I can’t say exactly who I am directly related to the further we go back in time. It took 20 years to trace my family line backwards from South Texas to Monterrey to Spain and then to Israel.

Due to the governments of Spain and Portugal offering citizenship to descendants of Jews expelled during the Spanish Inquistion, the simultaneous release of documents regarding the Inquisition cases to the public by Catholic assistance, and a completely unrelated family run-in with a rabbi and an anthropologist–all happening at the same time–my family took this journey through our family tree which ended with Israel during the Second Temple era. It stops there for now however due to lack of documentation and the fact there is little reason to go further now that all that his been established. It was all very exciting but a bit exhausting too.

I can’t say I am related to Joseph of Arimathea. We can just barely verify the connection to the tribe of Judah, and then there is a bit of a matter of opinion with my grandfather’s line. He appears to have some Ashkenazi connection but it is hard to know.So there is a possibility of being Cohen (priestly) somewhere down the line in our family tree as well.

And except for the documents of the Spanish Inquisition trials, our connection to the House of David is based mainly on Oral Tradition. My family has kept the tradition that we are royalty down through the ages to me and subsequently Jewish tradition holds that the Davidic line is likely connected to the Sephardic families. It appears I am related to Maimonides, the great Jewish scholar, and some traditions hold him to be a descendant of King David, though he never personally claimed this.

It is really hard to say, but I get new information every so often verifying and clarifying what we already know. In the end it is not just where I came from that matters, but how I make the best of it matter in where I am going now and into tomorrow.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano, welcome back…

I am curious if you saw my post number 56… I think it is directly related to your OP question. Unless I’m wrong, I don’t know how Jesus was not relying strongly on Tradition to assert what He said. Are we able to establish this explicitly from Scripture? And it is quite a forceful assertion!

Hi rc, I need you to be more specific. Am I to reply to the bolded part or to Jesus’ whole saying?

In other words, 2hen you ask if we are able to establish this, what is the this?:ehh:

 

[rcwitness]

Hi rc, I need you to be more specific. Am I to reply to the bolded part or to Jesus’ whole saying?

In other words, 2hen you ask if we are able to establish this, what is the this?:ehh:

“The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you…”
Was this written in Scripture?

 

[rcwitness]

Maybe it doesn’t address your question? What do you mean by “establish His authority”?

 

[rcwitness]

I think several things probably established His authority. One being His virgin birth, another being the witness of John the Baptist, and His miracles were very significant. I don’t really recall Him using Scripture to establish His authority… can you explain what you mean? I understand that He “Revealed” the Father to His disciples and crowds and opened up the Scriptures to all.

I think His wisdom and understanding was in itself a testimony to His authority also. He seemed to plainly offer forgiveness, and people knew it was there only chance. They believed He was from God because they knew they needed to be forgiven.

 

[susanlo]

“The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you…”
Was this written in Scripture?

Exodus 18:13-27 speaks of Moses and those he will appoint sitting as a judge for the Israelites. This is the closest reference I am aware of.

Maybe it doesn’t address your question? What do you mean by “establish His authority”?

I don’t want to answer for Wannano.
However, I do think that in the NT Jesus references the Scriptures as if they are authoritative and were to be known by all. He expected His followers to know and follow the OT Scriptures and often used the statement “It is written.” I don’t know of many examples where He referred to the oral traditions and implied that they carried the same authority as Scripture. I don’t know anywhere where He or others acknowledged that the Jewish oral traditions were inspired by God and that God expected all to follow them.

Weren’t the Sabbath laws that Jesus disobeyed in Matthew 12, Mark 3, and John 9 part of the Jewish oral tradition? I don’t believe that Jesus would disobey a law created by God. But He had no problem disagreeing with man’s interpretation of Scripture.

 

[rcwitness]

Exodus 18:13-27 speaks of Moses and those he will appoint sitting as a judge for the Israelites. This is the closest reference I am aware of.

Thank you. I was going to check that chapter later. It does seem to be the establishment of “Moses’ seat”. Does it show how these were to “continue” as a perpetual office?

I don’t want to answer for Wannano.
However, I do think that in the NT Jesus references the Scriptures as if they are authoritative and were to be known by all. He expected His followers to know and follow the OT Scriptures and often used the statement “It is written.” I don’t know of many examples where He referred to the oral traditions and implied that they carried the same authority as Scripture. I don’t know anywhere where He or others acknowledged that the Jewish oral traditions were inspired by God and that God expected all to follow them.

right, I’m not sure of anything.

Weren’t the Sabbath laws that Jesus disobeyed in Matthew 12, Mark 3, and John 9 part of the Jewish oral tradition? I don’t believe that Jesus would disobey a law created by God. But He had no problem disagreeing with man’s interpretation of Scripture.

I think this wasn’t so much “breaking” or disobeying laws, but prioritizing them. I agree He distinguished laws of men and of God.

 

[Wannano]

Thank you. I was going to check that chapter later. It does seem to be the establishment of “Moses’ seat”. Does it show how these were to “continue” as a perpetual office?

right, I’m not sure of anything.

I think this wasn’t so much “breaking” or disobeying laws, but prioritizing them. I agree He distinguished laws of men and of God.

Hi rc, I had to be gone all day and I see you were asking things of me. Susanlo is smater than me and did a good job. Hope she answered your questions.

What I read of the Moses Seat is that it was the most prominent chair situated next to the Torah in the Synagogue. Apparently the Scribes and Pharisees liked to sit there and in the Chief Seats which in guess we’re the seats most important. All I know is what I can read about it.

 

[CeelosDeznos]

Exodus 18:13-27 speaks of Moses and those he will appoint sitting as a judge for the Israelites. This is the closest reference I am aware of…I don’t know anywhere where He or others acknowledged that the Jewish oral traditions were inspired by God and that God expected all to follow them.

Weren’t the Sabbath laws that Jesus disobeyed in Matthew 12, Mark 3, and John 9 part of the Jewish oral tradition? I don’t believe that Jesus would disobey a law created by God. But He had no problem disagreeing with man’s interpretation of Scripture.

The “seat of Moses” is the almemar (also called a “bema” or “bimah”) which is a platform in Synagogues that works similar to a pulpit/lectern in Christian churches upon which sits a desk from which the Jewish Scriptures are read. Jewish tradition holds that it’s elevation is more than practical, but also serves to impress upon all that what is being said from the bema is of prime importance.

Jesus was here supporting the tradition that those who taught from this “seat” had the authority to teach and should be viewed as teaching doctrine that came from God.

I mentioned in previous posts a few other references where Jesus acknowledged and followed Jewish tradition (#23–The Messiah cannot come before Elijah returns first. #26–A prophet must be marked as genuine by the Jewish authority in Jerusalem. #28–The Jewish practice of washing in water or baptism marks a new beginning and is mitzvot (a “righteous” or good work).

As for breaking the Sabbath, Jews find it confusing that Jesus would be accused of this as reported in the Gospels. Each of the “accusations” appear to reflect polemic speech from the time of composition more than genuine discussions. Christian scholars and Bible translators agree with the this view since Jesus cites traditions that Jews follow to this day which allow for people to eat as necessary when hungry on the Sabbath as well as care for the sick. For more information on this see the volume: The Jewish Annotated New Testament.

 

[CeelosDeznos]

Hi rc, I had to be gone all day and I see you were asking things of me. Susanlo is smater than me and did a good job. Hope she answered your questions.

What I read of the Moses Seat is that it was the most prominent chair situated next to the Torah in the Synagogue. Apparently the Scribes and Pharisees liked to sit there and in the Chief Seats which in guess we’re the seats most important. All I know is what I can read about it.

The “seat of Moses” isn’t literally a chair. It is merely a pulpit/lectern from which the Scriptures are read. The word “seat” means “center” or “base” as in the term “seat of power” which is not a chair either.