Why do Christians reject the Talmud?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rabbi
  • Start date Start date
That’s fair, I respect that. I hope we can carry this onward, it’s interesting to chat intensely with a Reform Jew. By chance, have you read “One People, Two Worlds: A Reform Rabbi and an Orthodox Rabbi Explore the Issues That Divide Them”? It’s a great feast of reading and I believe you can get a cheap copy off Amazon or even perhaps your local Judaica if they have it.
 
Well, yours is a general question and you presume that Catholics even know what the Talmud is, can read it and understand it, etc.

Catholic policy is that a lot of knowledge can be gained from Jewish commentaries (and such) and I have about $1000 worth of such commentaries (JPS), The Jewish Study Bible (Oxford), and several specific books. I get a lot out of these books; I have respect for them, up to the point where they conflict with Catholic belief.

These books are not particularly written FOR Catholics or any non-Jews, as they contain a lot of Hebrew words – they are used as if the reader totally understood them, like “teshuvah.”

I guess the simple answer to your question is that the Talmud rejects Jesus as the messiah (to say the least) and Christians accept Jesus as the Messiah, and, in fact as God in the flesh – something which the Talmud violently rejects along with the Trinity (one God in thre divine persons).

The Talmud and the Christian New Testament are two conflicting interpretations of the Jewish scriptures.
 
Actually, my original question read more along the lines of “Why do Christians reject Judaism?”, but the mod thought that was a little too much, you know, it could’ve potentially offended Catholics as they don’t reject Judaism per se, just the rabbinic portion of it. Of course, to you and I, there is no “rabbinic portion,” but we don’t have to get into to it. Point is, they gave me an option: either shut it down or change the title to “Why Christians reject the Talmud,” and I’d imagine those somewhat familiar with Talmud Bavli, would answer regardless what the title was. After all, I don’t know about you, but if someone asked me “Why do Jews reject Hinduism,” and i’m not too familiar WITH Hinduism, per se, I’d rather not answer. So again, I assume these people know enough to have a respectful conversation in which all sides take away something of value. Regarding Jewish terms, I’ve already met a Catholic who is familiar with a lot of them, as well as Kabbalah, and if there’s something he doesn’t understand, or I think won’t understand, I’ll explain it. Simple.

Correct, Talmud Bavli does not concern itself with Jesus, nor did the New Testament concern itself with Talmud (which, practically, didn’t exist at the time anyways aside for halacha). With that said, there is a lot of Oral Torah in the New Testament, its just not recognized as much because they did not grow up with a Jewish education which would explain them.

You actually reminded me of something. I was going to prove why I believe the Essenes were actually Pharisees, better get to it, haha.

In the meantime, take care.
 
You cannot claim to be a educated man, and rabbi, if you are throwing around third hand sources, hearsay, as evidence, and using it on a public forum.
You are engaging in uninformed bigotry, ridicule and prejudice against your own people.
 
Last edited:
What do you mean? I am using primary sources from the Talmud and Josephus, I did not rely on a second-hand source as the author did.
 
What do you mean bigotry? Oh! Regarding the dog issue, ok, that’s just what I heard. I don’t have too much a problem with the Reform Jews. time for everyone to relax. Me and him are not enemies, as clearly seen in our correspondence.
 
Regarding reform Jews marrying their canines and disregarding Torah or Talmud.
That is a mighty big insult.
 
Last edited:
They do not hold to all of Torah, that’s true, just wiki it if you don’t believe me. The Torah said it was to be a heritage for all generations. So, are all Orthodox Jews bigots now for keeping all of Torah and reprimanding those who don’t, to do so?
 
Yes, there are a lot of Catholics and other Christians who study Judaism, in fact it’s a necessity to understand the Christian New Testament.

Judaism is a broad term and is larger than just the religious aspects. I’m so interested that I have spent $50 for a book on Reformed Judaism – to understand “something” about their point of view. $40 for a book on R. Akiva. etc. Rosh Hoshanah, Yom Kippur.

Comedian Lewis Black is not kidding when he says (to Gentiles) that he’ll explain what the Bible really means “but it will cost you,” Tell me about it. $$$

There are Catholics and other Christians who have studied the Talmud to get the nuances of the Hebrew Scriptures. Long ago St Jerome studied Hebrew from rabbis to produce his Latin translation of scripture’ so did reformer Martin Luther to produce his German translation.

The JPS commentaries cite Christian sources from time to time, without rancor.
 
Last edited:
You are out of line, on CAF, accusing a group of people beastiality, especially a religious group, who would know it is sinning.
 
That is gossip, and calumny, and a sin for Christians and Jews. Remember Acts of Mercy.
If a Catholic on this thread, accused a Jew of that, they would face a permanent ban, if not a suspension.
 
Last edited:
There are sinners and evil in all groups of people, in every generation, this should not be generalised to the entire group. You have a duty, we all have a duty, to stop uneducated fiction like this when it comes to us as hearsay.
 
Josephus says of the Essenes, “The third sect, who pretends to a severer discipline, are called Essenes.” But who are more severe? “The Pharisees are those who are esteemed most skillful in the exact explication of their laws.” [1] Though it is true that he did state, “The Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances [fences] by succession from their fathers, which are not written in the law of Moses.” He also called them the most accurate of interpretation, in his own words, [they] “interpret the laws more accurately.” [2]

Interesting enough, the Essenes and Pharisees shared a lot of legal traditions. In some places, however, the Essenes were more strict: for example, they would place “bread and wine before the Priest for it is he who shall bless the first-fruits of bread and wine and shall be the first to extend his hand over the bread.” [3] Josephus then adds, “It is unlawful for any one to taste food before grace is said.” [4] Again, we see that both the Essenes and Josephus mention the Oral Law! Remember, nowhere is it stated in the Written Torah to say a blessing prior to consumption.

May we know compare the Essenian tradition to that of the Pharisaic one. For time’s sake, we will only look at how they observed Shabbos. We will now know once and for all if this group of observant Jews practiced the same oral traditions modern Orthodox Jews do today (aside, for, perhaps, a few discrepancies)…
 
  1. No man shall work on the sixth day from the moment when the sun’s orb is distant by its own fullness from the gate wherein it sinks; for this is what He said, `Observe the Shabbat to keep it holy’ Deuteronomy 5:12. (Interestingly, we find that this law closely matches what’s found in Tosephos Shabbos, which is about adding time to Shabbat before it gets dark).
  2. No man shall speak any vain or idle word on Shabbat. (The Essenes just extended their law beyond the oral one, which prohibits communicating business deals on Shabbat).
  3. He shall make no loan to his companion. He shall make no decision in matters of money and gain. (Ibid).
  4. He shall say nothing about work or labor to be done on the morrow.
  5. No man shall walk abroad to do business on the Shabbat. He shall not walk more than one thousand cubits beyond his town. (More stringency by the Essenes when it comes to Tachum Shabbat’s Oral Law as our distance from our dwelling place is to be no more than 2,000 cubits).
  6. No man shall eat on the Shabbat except that which is already prepared. (Forbidding cooking on Shabbat; Josephus adds, “They will not remove any vessel out of its place”). [5]
 
  1. He shall eat nothing lying in the fields. He shall not drink except in the camp. If he is on a journey and goes down to bathe, he shall drink where he stands, but he shall not draw water into a vessel. (Again, like Jeremiah, forbidding to carry things on Shabbos).
  2. He shall send out no stranger (Gentile) on his business. (Similar in scope to the Talmud, no Jew should ask a non-Jew to perform tasks a Jew would normally not do).
  3. No man shall wear soiled garments, or garments brought to the store, unless they have been washed with water or rubbed with incense. (A “fence” for the Oral Law so one couldn’t forget their ritual hand washing by oral decree).
  4. No man shall willingly mingle with others on the Shabbat (No one, to my knowledge, has been able to point this to an oral decree, perhaps it is another fence to help remind people not to speak certain things on Shabbos)?
  5. No man shall walk more than two thousand cubits after a beast to pasture it outside his town. (Again, Tachum Shabbat).
  6. He shall not raise his hand to strike it with his fist. If it is stubborn he shall not take it out of his house. (The Oral Law against touching animals).
  7. No man shall take anything out of the house or bring anything in. And if he is in a booth, let him neither take anything out nor bring anything in. (Again, against carrying objects).
  8. He shall not open a sealed vessel on the Shabbat. (A sub-category of `tearing down’).
  9. No man shall carry perfumes on himself whilst going and coming on the Shabbat. (A sub-category of washing).
  10. He shall lift neither sand nor dust in his dwelling. (Orally, we’re not allowed to use certain objects on Shabbos, this is called Muktza).
  11. No man minding a child shall carry it whilst going and coming on the Shabbat. (Carrying on Shabbos).
  12. No man shall chide his manservant or maidservant or laborer on the Shabbat (Not sure).
  13. No man shall assist a beast to give birth on the Shabbat. And if it should fall into a cistern or pit, he shall not lift it out on the Shabbat. (Against using animals).
  14. No man shall spend the Shabbat in a place near Gentiles on Shabbat (Not sure, perhaps another fence for number 8 on this list).
  15. No man shall profane the Shabbat for the sake of riches or gain on the Shabbat. But should any man fall into water or fire, let him be pulled out with the aid of a ladder or rope or some such utensil. (Just like the Oral Law, a Jew is allowed to break Shabbat when it comes to saving a life).
 
As a bonus, both the Essenes and our oral tradition make notice of two Messiahs.

It’s beyond hypothesis now. Our very same halachic sources were known to the Essenes. All of these are non-biblical sources, meaning, both groups drew their legal traditions heavily from the same Oral Torah. The one from Moshe Rabbeinu. The only group that didn’t were the aristocratic Sadducees, who, like our modern day Karaites, totally rejected any resemblance to the Oral Law - but the former took it a step further, they rejected the prophets also. [6]
Footnotes:
  1. Josephus, Jewish Wars Book II 8.2, 8.14
  2. Josephus, Antiquities Book XIII 10.6; Wars Book I 5
  3. Geza Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls (England: Penguin, 1987) p.102
  4. Josephus, op. cit. 8.5
  5. Ibid. 8.9
  6. Josephus, Antiquities, Book XVIII 1.5
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top