T
Ted_in_Charlott
Guest
Just wondering, if the Temple is rebuilt wouldn’t an order of priests have to established and would they have to be Levites?
- Status
H
HashemEchad
Guest
Where in the WORLD are you getting the idea that traditional Judaism holds that every word in the Tanakh is to be taken literally??? Traditional Judaism has never taught that!
H
HashemEchad
Guest
I’ve been in the shrine, and those are not ALL of the statues in there. There was one section in the middle, where there were statues lower to human level, and they even had kneelers placed right in front of them (which, of course, are used only to “remind” a person of that saint…)
It was there that we saw two elderly women talking to the statue, and in one case, grasping the hand of one of them.
I
inJESUS
Guest
i do not do as such but i can understand the intentions of people . It;s the same as talking to, hugging, and touching a photo of someone we love dearly. Am sure if the statue of mother Mary falls down and breaks, no catholic will claim that Mary just died
Am sure God does know the intentions…it’s not that He sees something and judges by the cover…making images is not prohibited by God…taken them for gods is…huge difference, and we all believe God know more that what people perceive in their eyes…
H
HashemEchad
Guest
But doesn’t the apostle Paul say in the NT, “Abstain from every APPEARANCE of evil”? (incidentally, this derives from the Jewish principle of marit ayin, which means to avoid doing anything that might be interpreted incorrectly by others.)i do not do as such but i can understand the intentions of people . It;s the same as talking to, hugging, and touching a photo of someone we love dearly. Am sure if the statue of mother Mary falls down and breaks, no catholic will claim that Mary just died
B
Bible_Reader
Guest
Hashem Echad: You are right. Not every word of the written law is to be taken literally. However, Jews believe that Moses received two Torahs at Sinai (you will be celebrating the anniversary of this on Sunday night – and staying up all night and studying, I trust.) One was the written law. The other was the oral law – which was redacted, most famously, in the Mishnah and the Babylonian Talmud (which take precedence over all other *halachic *[legal] authorities.) If the oral law unambiguously teaches that a certain interpretation of Torah is correct, then it cannot be overridden. (Unless, of course, you are a Reform Jew and believe that the oral law is not binding.)
If you believe an anonymous *mishnah *has been overruled (and I am not counting here *mishnah *that are simply suspended since there is no Temple) I am most eager to hear your description of it. Please give me an example of an anonymous *mishnah *that has been overruled and removed. Rabbi Steinsaltz (cited below) states that one can elaborate *mishnah *but not overrule them.
I suspect you have never studied Gemara – that is understandable since Talmudic study is traditionally strongly discouraged for women. I do not know if you can understand Aramaic and Hebrew, but if you can, you will find a basic introduction to the study of Talmud in the *Shacharis *[morning prayer] liturgy (braita d’Rabbi Ishmael) that should be in your nearby *siddur *[prayerbook]. But understanding a *braita *itself presumes knowledge of Talmudic methods – so a more basic source may be useful for you.
A well known beginner’s text is Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz’s Talmud Reference Guide. You may be aware that Rabbi Steinsaltz received the Israel Prize – the highest award granted by the government of Israel – for his work on basic Jewish education. Steinsaltz clearly explains the rules, including the rules forbidding overruling previous generations in the section on Halakhic Decision Making (the Hebrew edition is much better on this point, but if you cannot read Hebrew, you can find the information in the English translation on pages 295-300.)
(If you can read Hebrew, then the best source, of course, is the Encyclopedia Talmudit. I have a copy of all volumes of this standard reference work that are in print, so I am happy to discuss the entries with you.)
I am afraid that I regard Rabbi Steinsaltz as a more authoritative teacher of Talmud than you. However, if that is incorrect, and you believe yourself to be a greater expert than Rabbi Steinsaltz, please let me know. I have had many long discussions with Rabbi Steinsaltz (in Hebrew of course) and I find him to have an encyclopedic knowledge of Judaism.
For me, I am glad we Catholics received a New Covenant from the Messiah, so we are not required to follow the interpretations of the Pharisees who wrote (or, in the traditional Jewish view, “redacted”) the Talmud.
Chag sameyach.
I
inJESUS
Guest
and what does any “appearance” of evil mean? we should be multiplying rules and commandments to infinite numbers in order to define precisely what “appearance” might mean in any particular situation. That would be a solid basis for the worst aspects of legalism,like the 30 something rules you invented for the sabbath, something surely refuted by Jesus and Paul on many occasions since it leads to judging the actions of others, as well as to set personal ethics in terms of external appearance or personal opinion and self righteousness…
Making images per se is not a sin. Worshipping it as your god is. God knows that we surely know the difference hence it is no evil.
T
tundramom
Guest
V
Valke2
Guest
The Torah is much more than a list of laws. A glance at the first verse should establish that.
So far, so good.
The Mishna, designed to be trasnmitted orally and memorized, uses highly symbolic and compact language. There is much that it teaches that is not readily apparent from its words, because those words were often meant to be used as a memorization tool and jumping off point to various other halachot that were not expressly stated. Keep in mind that the Mishna itself is redacted as you stated, that it was oral law that was passed on between teachers and students for centuries, many of them using their own oral memoirzation devices. In short, there is more of the Mishna that requires additional commentary then there is that speaks clearly and plainly.
Why of course? He speaks english very well.
A great many mishnas have two opposite interpretations with there being (usually) a final determination set forth in the Talmud to arrive a halacha. The fact that a mishna can have contrary interpretations renders the argument that it cannot be overruled as moot.
I’m sure you have read Steinsaltz’ “Essential Talmud”. I haven’t read anything there that would disagree with this post. But if you can recall something otherwise, I’d love to read it.
V
Valke2
Guest
Additionlly, the Mishna almost never (I’d say never but I’m leaving myself some wiggle room) associates itself with the written Torah. It does not expound on specific verses, although the Talmud does.
H
HashemEchad
Guest
Forgive me if I am wrong in this, but your posts come across to me as name-dropping, and as if you are trying to impress me (and/or perhaps others) with your knowledge. I just get these odd vibes every time I read your posts.
“Bible Reader”, Would you have any problem with my husband speaking to Rabbi Steinsaltz, to ascertain if in fact you do know him? You say you have had long discussions with him, which, if you live in the USA must cost you a fortune, since Rabbi Steinsaltz resides in the Holy Land.
My husband, via his rabbi, happens to know Rabbi Steinsaltz personally…and I’m sure he will recall a Gentile Catholic who can speak Hebrew fluently enough to converse with him.
H
HashemEchad
Guest
An “appearance of evil” is marit ayin, which means “as something appears to the eye”. Its a Jewish principle that we should never do something that might give unbelievers the wrong idea. What those ladies did, without realizing it, was to give my husband (an “unbeliever” in Catholicism) the idea that they were worshipping an idol. I’m sure their intentions were innocent, but not everyone would see it that way.
For instance, everyone knows religious Jews keep kosher. But let’s say a religious Jew was thirsty, and rather than go to a water fountain, he chose to go into McDonald’s to get a Coke (which is kosher.)
A nonreligious Jew might see him go in, and, not knowing why he went it, might wrongly assume he went in to eat unkosher food. Then, that nonreligious Jew might think, “Well, if an Orthodox Jew can eat in McDonald’s, so can I!” And so by doing something which was permitted to a religious Jew (drinking a Coke), he would give a wrong impression that might cause a less educated Jew to sin.
Your apostle Paul goes into detail about this very principle in the NT…he says that everything is lawful to him but not everything is expedient…and he says he will eat nothing that might make a weaker brother stumble. (Romans 14)
That is a Jewish principle worked into Christianity!
R
ralphinal
Guest
There are more than that one Jewish principle in Christianity. I was the one that asked about the Ark and its angels.
I understand avoiding the appearance of evil. I try in my own life to do the same, but I cannot tell what my brother would see as evil or a temptation in his own life. For instance, a man who has trouble with sexual desires may see any man talking to a woman that is not his wife as having lust for that women. I cannot have an occupation and not talk to women. I can avoid strip clubs and things like that, but there are times that I have to interact with women. For a man with a drinking problem, I should avoid all bars, but what about resturants that serve alcohol?
Back to the ark, I still hold that the issue is intent. A man who makes a graven image to worship is committing the sin, along with those who worship it. If it is a sin at all times, why does God give some people the gift of artistry when they can never use it to praise him?
I understand avoiding the appearance of evil. I try in my own life to do the same, but I cannot tell what my brother would see as evil or a temptation in his own life. For instance, a man who has trouble with sexual desires may see any man talking to a woman that is not his wife as having lust for that women. I cannot have an occupation and not talk to women. I can avoid strip clubs and things like that, but there are times that I have to interact with women. For a man with a drinking problem, I should avoid all bars, but what about resturants that serve alcohol?
Back to the ark, I still hold that the issue is intent. A man who makes a graven image to worship is committing the sin, along with those who worship it. If it is a sin at all times, why does God give some people the gift of artistry when they can never use it to praise him?
E
Eden
Guest
Now it’s two elderly women? This story is getting more and more interesting with each successive post…
But the one thing you didn’t answer was my question about the Jews at the Western Wall. Are the people touching, stroking, bowing to and kissing the wall worshiping it? There are even chairs set up facing the wall to sit with the wall more comfortably for longer periods.
Take a look here at the wall worship that is obviously going on
:flickr.com/search/?q=pray…n%20wall&w=all
The appearance, without context, would certainly suggest the wall is being worshipped.
H
HashemEchad
Guest
I don’t remember the exact number of women, it was many years ago after all. I can check with my husband, since he was much closer to them than I was, and seemed more shocked by it than I was.
As for the Kotel, I do not any Jews who talk to the Wall itself, but they do pray to God in front of the Wall.
E
Eden
Guest
So, you gave a fuzzy, and perhaps false memory, of one or two elderly women who appeared to be worshiping a statue, and that is supposed to be the great indictment of Catholics and their “idolatry”?
Look at the pictures on the link of the people at the Western Wall. The people are touching it, bowing to it, kissing it, sitting in chairs facing it. Surely this gives the appearance (a word that is very important to you!)… the appearance of worshiping a wall. Isn’t this the same kind of “scandal of appearances” that you are so adamantly opposed to with statues?
H
HashemEchad
Guest
You are trying to call me a liar, and I am not. You may not like what we saw, but that is no reason to call someone a liar.So, you gave a fuzzy, and perhaps false memory, of one or two elderly women who appeared to be worshiping a statue, and that is supposed to be the great indictment of Catholics and their “idolatry”?
Look at the pictures on the link of the people at the Western Wall. The people are touching it, bowing to it, kissing it, sitting in chairs facing it. Surely this gives the appearance (a word that is very important to you!)… the appearance of worshiping a wall. Isn’t this the same kind of “scandal of appearances” that you are so adamantly opposed to with statues?
We’re talking about something that happened in 1995…do you remember the minutest details of everything you saw in 1995?
As for your snide statement that the word “appearance” is very important to me, actually, that word appears in your NT and was said by your St Paul. If you have a gripe with the word, take it up with him.
E
Eden
Guest
When it’s traumatizing or shocking, as you claim your experience was, I do remember.
And I am not calling you a liar, I am wondering if the story has been embellished for effect. I’ve never seen anyone in a Catholic church holding a statue’s hand and talking to it. You obviously have misunderstood what you saw, just as someone completely unfamiliar with the Western Wall would be shocked to see people talking and crying and stroking and bowing to a wall.
H
HashemEchad
Guest
My husband was the person who primarily saw it; I was looking around the church, when he called my attention to it. It did not traumatize or shock me, because I grew up around many Catholics and frankly, had seen women do that kind of thing before.
But my husband is originally from a very Protestant background and had very little experience with or exposure to Catholics, which is probably why it shocked him so much.
E
Eden
Guest
O.K. But he was *misinterpreting *what was happening. He thinks touching a statue means your praying to it. You still haven’t answered how Catholics praying in front of statues is any different than Jews praying in front of the Western Wall and touching it. Is your husband shocked by that?
- Status