Is the Bible the Only Word of God? (Revised)
Many Christian denominations hold as a doctrine that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the only divinely inspired teachings that constitute the rule and faith of a Christian life.
In Jesus’ day, commentary on the Written Torah, which was only translated verbally through memorization, until 200 A.D. was also considered authoritative and divinely inspired? The Oral Torah, like today's printed commentaries, was used to offer direction for obeying God’s written Word where the instructions were not completely clear.
For instance, not working on the Sabbath is an instruction of God, but the definition of work is left for interpretation; that’s where the Oral Torah is given by teachers with the anointing to interpret the Scriptures for God’ people. These oral teachings are still known today, in written form, as the Mishnah.
Here is a rabbinical parable that was taught by Jewish sages during Jesus time and used to emphasize the importance of both the Written and Oral Torahs. It is taken from the works of Dr. Brad H. Young and his book The Parables: Jewish Tradition and Christian Interpretation, pg. 91.
The King’s Wise and Foolish Servants
My son, were not both Bible and mishnah spoken by the mouth of the Almighty? If so, what is the relationship between them? The distinction between them may be illustrated by a parable. To what may the matter be compared? To a mortal king who had two servants whom he loved with utter love. To one he gave a measure of wheat and to the other he gave a measure of wheat, to one a bundle of flax and to the other a bundle of flax. What did the wise one of the two do? He took the flax and wove it into a tablecloth. He took the wheat and made into fine flour by sifting the grain first and grinding it. Then he kneaded the dough and baked it, set the loaf upon the table, spread the tablecloth over it and kept it to await the coming of the king. But the foolish one of the two did not do anything to it.
After many days the king came into the house and said to the two servants: My sons, bring me what I gave you. One brought out the table with the loaf baked of fine flour on it, and the tablecloth spread over it. The other brought out his wheat in a basket with the bundle of flax over the wheat grains. What a shame! What a disgrace! Need it be said which of the two servants was the more beloved? He of course who laid out the table with the loaf baked of fine flour upon it.”When the Jewish listeners were hearing this parable, they would recognize the hard work that goes into making bread and cloth, which would “…remind the audience of the way the Mishnah refines the deeper meaning of the Bible.”—Young
Both the written and oral Torahs were considered to be the words of God.
Jesus often advocated the use of oral Torah, which can be seen when reading of his miracles. When He healed on the Sabbath, in most cases, he never touched the person and only healed with words, which was allowed by the Jewish religious authorities long before Jesus was born. In other cases Jesus used touch on the Sabbath to heal, despite the written Torah and the instructions of the Jewish religious authorities. In these cases, Jesus appears to be breaking the Sabbath until we are familiar with the teachings of the Oral Torah.
The Sadducees did not recognize the authority of the Oral Torah, but they did recognize the Judean (Jewish religious authorities in Judea) decision to break the Sabbath in order to keep the instruction to circumcise on the eighth day, due to the obvious need for compromise.
In John 9:14 we read that Jesus healed a blind man, using touch, on the Sabbath, which brings us to Jesus’ use of the oral Torah.
In the Bible, God says a person can not work on the Sabbath (Exodus 20:9-10, 23:12, 31:14-15, 34:21, 35:2: Leviticus 23:3; Deuteronomy 5:12-14). God also says that a child “must” be circumcised on the eighth day (Genesis 17:12, Leviticus 12:3). The Judeans had already settled the matter and stated that the keeping of the Sabbath will be broken in order to keep the mitzvah (commandment) to circumcise on the eighth day.
There is also a teaching of the Oral Torah which says that a person can break the Written Torah in order to keep the Spirit of the Written Torah, which is to give life. With that portion of the Oral Torah, along with the instructions that a person could break the Sabbath to circumcise, an Oral Torah observant Jew could surmise that a healing could take place, even with touch. Jesus could heal in the presence of Sadducees as long as He didn’t touch. In the presence of Pharisees, He could draw from the above commandments, both oral and written.
Because of the Pharisaical flexibility of the Oral Torah, a Rabbi with "authority," like Jesus, meaning that He was able to interpret the Torah and give commands for "binding and loosing" or "forbidding and permitting," he could draw from the command that a person could circumcise on the Sabbath and conclude that it is also allowable to heal a person of a childhood illness or physical defect, such as blindness.
Jesus used what is called a Kal v’ chomer (‘light and heavy’) argument to defend his actions. This is when a sage would remind an accuser that the mitzvah (commandments) must be weighed in order to keep the “spirit of the law,” which is to give life (not necessarily meaning the opposite of death, but a life that is more whole).”By reminding the Pharisees of their own oral traditions, Jesus was able to justify a healing on the Sabbath, as he was also an advocate of the Oral Torah.
If Jesus were being questioned by Sadducees, this would not have been as easy to defend, because Jesus used touch in the healing miracle. The Sadducees did not believe in the Oral Torah. They were very strict and rigid in following the Written Text.
Think of it this way: If you were living in the place and time of Jesus and you wanted to fish with your kids on the Sabbath, some Pharisees would say, “No problem. Have fun,” other Pharisaic sages would say, “You can fish, as long as you don’t clean the fish and prepare them for cooking.” This is knows as “binding and loosing.”All Sadducees would say, “Absolutely not! You are not allowed to fish, because it is a form of work. No exceptions.”
The Pharisees, like Jesus, would “bind and loose” differently, according to their own interpretation of what it meant to work. They would “bind (forbid)” what they believed to be unacceptable and “loose (permit)” that which they deemed acceptable, such as fishing for fun on the Sabbath. The Sadducees were strict literalists. No work meant “No Work!”Jesus was being confronted by the more flexible Pharisees in John 9.
Today we will often hear or even say that the preacher or teacher is going to bring to us a “message from God.” By saying this, we are advocating an ancient belief that it is not only the written Word which is divinely inspired and given authority by God, but the oral teachings are believed to have the same inspiration and authority.
Should this not be the case, it would be difficult to expect a “message from God,” unless the teacher was to read strictly from the Bible. In that case, the teacher would be following the custom of the Sadducees who would only use the Written Word and did not believe in Oral Torah like the Pharisees and Jesus.
Forever learning,
Johnny
24 comments:
That's a lot of smacks just for some Godly teaching. $1200! Geez. I've actually never heard of the Mishnah. What kind of things did the Mishnah teach, you told us about the Sabbath law. Were they mostly laws or rules, stories, or something else?
I never looked at it like Jesus was breaking the Sabbath. When I read that I thought, well then healing must not be work and that the meaning of work had been lost over the years. However, there was one healing miracle committed on the Sabbath where He healed by touching. John 9:1-14.
Wanna Cookie?
Mr. Profile
You have just brought up an incredible teaching opportunity.
In order to understand this, we have to go back to John 7:22-23. It is very important that the writer of Matthew pointed to the fact that these were Pharisees and not Sadducees that are questioning the healed person’s parents. Sadducees would have obviously accused Him of breaking the Sabbath. Pharisees, if he had not touched the man, would not have debated it. This is also an important part of the text when we see that they continually question "how" he healed.
In John 7:22-23, Jesus defends his actions of healing on the Sabbath by referring to an ancient Oral Torah teaching which states,
"If circumcision, which involves only one of the 248 parts of the human body, suspends the Sabbath, how much more must [saving] the whole body suspend the Sabbath!" (Yoma 85b)
These verses prove that Jesus did not oppose the traditions of the Pharisees. Jesus was not opposed to the legislation that allowed the application of Torah to be subject to particular times and circumstances.
The Torah says that a Jewish male child must be circumcised on the eighth day of life, but work is prohibited on the Sabbath. Therefore, the Jews found themselves in a bit of pickle. Do we break the Sabbath or break the law of circumcision? They decided that it was best to break the Sabbath and keep the law of circumcision, when the eighth day of life fell on the Sabbath.
Jesus used this reasoning to heal this man on the Sabbath. This reasoning would not have been sufficient for the Sadducees. Therefore, it is important to note that He was defending himself to Pharisees who were more flexible.
By the way, the word "Pharisee" means "Protestant."
Forever learning,
Johnny
I don't really understand. The verse is still contrary to a statement that you made.
"When He healed on the Sabbath, he never touched the person and only healed with words."
I didn't feel you fully explained how this worked. Please explain to me.
Prayers,
Weaver X
do you know why this book you are speaking about is so expensive?
I agree that the written word is not the sole means of Gods communication with mankind. If it were than there would be no place for prophesy.
Hey Jason,
Good to hear from you. I hope everything went well on your trip.
Yes, I do know why the book is so expensive. It comes in about 10 volumes and is teachings from literally thousands of years from God's most gifted Jewish teachers. These teachings have guided God's people throughout their years in the Promise Land.
Grace and peace,
Johnny
Jason,
About your comment: I agree with you. If the Written Word was the only divinely inspired Words of God, then how could the prophets have said, "Thus says the Lord?"
I believe that we have been somewhat misguided because of our justifiable need to prevent other writings like the Book of Mormon and the Koran from sneaking into our belief system.
I really believe that the writers of the Christian doctrine of holy teachings meant to say something like, "We believe that no other religious beliefs, outside of the teachings of the God of the Old Testament and New Testament are given by the inspiration of God, et cetera, et cetera...
Grace and peace,
Johnny
Hi Weaver X,
Thanks for the question. I guess I did kind of go off and around with the assumption that everyone was following. Sorry.
In the Torah, God says a person can not work on the Sabbath; He also says that a child “must” be circumcised on the eighth day. The Judeans (Jewish religious authorities in Judea)had already settled the matter and stated that the keeping of the Sabbath will be broken in order to keep the mitzvah (commandment) to circumcise on the eighth day.
There is also a teaching of the Oral Torah which says that a person can break the Written Torah in order to keep the Spirit of the Written Torah, which is to give abundant life. With that portion of the Oral Torah, along with the instructions that a person could break the Sabbath to circumcise, a healing could be done in order to give abundant life to someone, even with touch.
Jesus could heal in the presence of Sadducees as long as He didn’t touch. That is what he would do in the presence of Sadducees. In the presence of Pharisees, He could draw from the above commandments, both oral and written.
Because of the Pharisaical flexibility of the Oral Torah, a Rabbi with "authority," like Jesus, meaning that He was able to interpret the Torah and give commands for "binding and loosing" or "forbidding and permitting," he could draw from the command that a person could circumcise on the Sabbath and conclude that it is also allowable to heal a person of a childhood illness or physical defect, such as blindness. Jesus used what is called a Kal v’ chomer (‘light and heavy’) argument to defend his actions. This is when a sage would remind an accuser that the mitzvah (commandments) must be weighed in order to keep the “spirit of the law,” which is to give abundant life.”
By reminding the Pharisees of their own oral traditions, Jesus was able to justify a healing on the Sabbath, as he was also an advocate of the Oral Torah. This was known as a din-torah, which allows for a healing to take precedence over not working on the Sabbath.
If He were being questioned by Sadducees, this would not have been as easy to defend, because Jesus used touch in the healing miracle. The Sadducees did not believe in the Oral Torah. They were very strict and rigid in following the Written Text.
Think of it this way: If you were living in the place and time of Jesus and you wanted to fish with your kids on the Sabbath, some Pharisees would say, “No problem. Have fun,” others would say, “You can fish, as long as you don’t clean the fish and prepare them for cooking.”
All Sadducees would say, “Absolutely not! You are not allowed to fish, because it is a form of work. No exceptions.”
The Pharisees, like Jesus, would bind and loose differently, according to their own interpretation of what it meant to work. They would “bind (Forbid)” what they believed to be unacceptable and “Loose (Permit)” that which they deemed okay, such as fishing for fun on the Sabbath. The Sadducees were strict literalists. No work meant “No Work!”
Jesus was being confronted by the more flexible Pharisees in this situation.
A great resource for these cultural and contextual understandings is David H. Stern's New Testament Commentary. This book is life-changing.
Do you still need more? I don't mind at all.
Grace and peace,
Johnny
good talking with you last night. I will look forward to hearing more as you continue to learn. You can view my blogs at jason_stock@myspace.com.
blessings,
Jason
Hey Jason,
I have tried a few times to get to the site that you listed as your blog, but I am unable to get there.
Would you check and see if I have the wrong address? I really want to see it.
Thanks,
Johnny
sorry johnny
go to www.myspace.com/jason_stock
It isn't that I'm not following you. I understand what you have said, and it enlightened me on a few diffrent points, which I appreciated. You just didn't answer my question.
You made a statement and it isn't true. Jesus touched the man and healed him on the Sabbath : "Now the day on which Jesus had made the mud and opened the man's eyes was a Sabbath. John 9:14"
If I made a post about how you've never eaten cake in your life, and you posted a link to a video showing you eating cake on your fourth birthday all statements I based off of you never having eaten would be false. It wouldn't matter how the Dutch eat cake, or that a famous astronomer says you've never eaten cake. You've eaten cake.
I do believe that the validity of this point is important to the rest of the blog, otherwise I wouldn't be bothering you about it. There were no ifs in your statement, you said "When He healed on the Sabbath, he never touched the person and only healed with words." not "When He healed on the Sabbath, he never touched the person and only healed with words whenever only the Sadducees were around." This point changes the meaning of the whole discussion. It seems to me Jesus just used the Mishnah to trap the Pharisees in their own stupidity. He could come back today and use the Qur'an to refute a Muslim and it wouldn't make it one of my Holy books.
Weaver X,
Thank you for your input.
Please realize that we are all growing, developing, and learning.
The fact that Jesus did not heal with touch on the Sabbath is true and factual with regards to specific situations within his ministry and the Scriptures.
Thanks to further challenges and other Scriptures being brought to light, we have also realized that in the case of the blind man, he used touch. We now have to ask, "Why?"
Thanks to the challenges and deeper research of peers, we have learned to look further at the actions of Jesus with respect to specific occasions and cultural situations. This has added further understanding to our knowledge of why Jesus appears to contradict himself.
We now have clarity to these occasions.
Jesus used ancient teachings known as the Written and Oral Torahs. These are well known in the Jewish world, but rarely recognized, acknowledged, or even known to the non-Jewish world. Having an awareness of these two Jewish, Scriptural tools of God’s people, which were used by some and not by others, will help us to see that Jesus’ teaching and understandings of God’s will and ways are much more in line with the Pharisees than any other sect among the Jews of his time.
By knowing that Jesus used both of these tools, we can be sure of how and why he did as he did. The idea that he would have used them to manipulate may be due to my own inability to effectively and fully explain the use of these two Torahs. And it is not accurate to assume that Jesus used whatever “religious” tools would fit the occasion. Rather, it helps us to understand that Jesus was an advocated of the Oral Torah, as well as the Written Torah, just as the other rabbinical Jews of his time.
Your comments reveal a bit of frustration in the area of change. Please don't allow the development of further information to give you cause for undo criticism.
There are many fine books, which have been revised due to a growing understanding of the subject within the text. These authors are not accused of false teaching, but are recognized as growing in their knowledge.
These articles begin with what I know from research, and allow for the input of other men and women to bring us even closer to the fullness of the subject and its facts.
Thank you again for your comments.
Please be careful with tone, as I do not allow for a negative atmosphere within these writings.
Grace and peace,
Johnny
Weaver X,
Please note that I have revised the article.
Grace and peace,
Johnny
Just because your tone isn't negative doesn't mean you aren't insulting me. I'm sorry I have difficulty believing something I don't see enough proof for.
I'm gonna say a few things in no particular order, please feel free to discuss off of it in whatever way you see fit.
You haven't used any Old Testament scripture to back you up, and the only New Testament scripture that you used was tested and burnt to the ground. (1 Corinthians 3: 12-13).
I really have trouble with your paragraph about factual information. Situational fact does not seem to be the sort of thing that should be used in a discussion. In some situations I'm breathing, therefore in all situations I will be breathing... until the end of time. So I can use situational fact to say that I am going to live forever.
I don't believe that just because you continue to say that Jesus used this teaching makes it true, I don't believe you used a very good example if in fact there is proof in the scriptures. Please use another.
I'm really not trying to be a huge jerk, but I get from other people that I'm wrong because I'm not as old as they are and can't say fancy things alot. Please don't take any insult, I would like to continue to discuss this.
If nothing else, please only answer why it wasn't work to heal the blind man. It wouldn't matter who was around him, it would still be breaking a commandment, as far as I understand.
Dear Weaver X,
I'm going to answer one final issue, and then I'll give you a list of books that you can buy to help. That is up to you, but I would highly suggest that you do, assuming your obvious desire to learn.
It "was" work to heal on the Sabbath. The issue was one of weighing the good of either obeying the Written Torah or obeying the Spirit of the Written Torah, which was to give abundant life. To obey the Written Torah would be to leave this man blind. Jesus, as an Oral Torah, observant Jew, would appeal to the Oral Torah, which allowed Him to heal on the Sabbath with touch, if it would give a better life to the man who was blind.
The Sadducees would only allow this, if he did not touch the man. But the Pharisees who observed the Oral Torah, like Jesus, would understand that it is better to heal and break the Sabbath, than to keep the Sabbath and ignore the need for healing a child of God, even if it requires touch.
I really can't say it any clearer than that.
Here is a list of books that will give you some wonderful insights on the world and ways of Jesus. These are all books by Christian professors, theologians, and scholars.
Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith, by Dr. Marvin R. Wilson
The Parables: Jewish Tradition and Christian Interpretation, by Dr. Brad H. Young
Yeshua: A Guide to the Real Jesus and the Original Church, by Dr. Ron Moseley
Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus, by Dr. David Bivin
New Light on the Difficult Words of Jesus, by Dr. David Bivin
Jesus the Jewish Theologian, by Dr. Brad H. Young
Some helpful Websites include,
www.followtherabbi.com (free)
www.jerusalemperspective.com ($60 per year to join)
I pray that you will find the answers that you are seeking. And I pray that I have been helpful.
Grace and peace,
Johnny
Hey Johnny.
I read your revised post. I'm going to try something new here, I'm going to list out some of the things you said in very clear precise one-liners. After that I'm going to show you the things that need clarity. Hopefully this can shine some light on what exactly is being asked of you. Okay then, lets go:
[1] God commands us not to work on the Sabbath (Written Torah).
[2] Jesus supported the use of the Mishnah (Oral Torah).
[3] The Mishnah states that healing on the Sabbath is only allowed if it is with words and without touch. No touchy, only wordy.
[4] The Sadducees didn't believe in the Mishnah.
[5] The Sadducees did allow the work of circumcision so that the Written Torah was not broken.
[6] John 9:14 shows that Jesus healed with touch.
[7] The Mishnah says that you may break the Written Torah in order to give abundant life.
[8] Jewish Authority were allowed to create their own rules based on rules previously given to them by God.
[9] Jesus used the Kal v' chomer argument to defend his actions to the Phariesees, by reminding them of the Mishnah.
Number 3, 2, and 1 are in contradiction. If Jesus thought that the Mishnah was the Word of God as he did with the written torah, then he would not have broken its commandment. You could argue that with Number 7, he was allowed to heal with touch, except he didn't give abundant life, but the ability to see (Number 6). If then, you choose to argue that abundant life meant better life then that opens up many new doors.
That means that I could, without sinning, rob a bank and then take all that money and give it to someone who needed back surgery, or stop world hunger, or get a homeless man a place to live. See, I did this so that someone else could live a better life, nullifying any sin I may have committed otherwise.
Is this correct? Of course not.
Open up your Bible to the following verses: Matthew 12:3-5, Matthew 12:11-12, Mark 2:25-26, Luke 13:15-16, Luke 14:5, and JOHN 7:22-23. Look at all the times Jesus justified him healing on the Sabbath and one thing should become very clear. He mentions Old Testement Scripture, their hypocrisy, that doing good is lawful, but take note of the fact that he doesn't once mention the Mishnah, Oral traditions, or anything else.
You mentioned, in a response to Weaver X, that it was work to heal on the Sabbath. Matthew 12:12 clearly states that doing good on the Sabbath is lawful, meaning not against the law. Working was against the law, therefor, doing good is not work.
Where in the Old Testement is the Mishnah every mentioned or even eluded too?
It seems to me that you are taking information from the Mishnah and finding a place for it in the Bible, rather then finding the Mishnah in the Bible. I don't say any of this as a personal attack but I find that what your teaching isn't lining up with the Bible, and wanted to provide you with a chance to defend yourself.
Wanna Cookie?
Mr. Profile
Hello Mr. Profile,
Your number five is not correct. The Judeans made a decision long before Jesus that Circumcision was more important than keeping the Sabbath. The Sadducees recognized that the Sabbath could be "broken" in order to keep the instructions to circumcise on the eighth day, but Sadducean understanding only allowed the healing to happen without touch, as originally stated by the Judeans. The oral Torah, which existed long before the Judean decision, said that to give a better, fuller, life…to offer compassion to an image of God, a child of God, is better than keeping the written Law, because the written Law is ultimately given by God to “Give Life” not to keep rules. That is what the oral Torah does, and what Jesus is constantly trying to enforce. Basically, Jesus is saying, God’s law, unlike government, city, country laws, is to give us a better life. The other laws cannot be broken, such as speeding or killing, because they go against the strictly held “written rules” of the community. That’s why they can’t be compared to God’s laws, which can be broken, if they give life.
To compare and use the “Robin Hood” philosophy would be to say, Jesus could kill someone and take their money, so that a poor family could have their house to live in and buy food. You and I, and everyone reading this knows that that is not what I or anyone else is supposing. It is more like saying, “I can refuse to give an offering in church, if I know someone who needs me to help them with their medical bills, because they don’t have insurance.
Also, Matthew 12:12 is not the Written Torah. The Written Torah is the first five books of the Old Testament, which gave Israel the way to live as God's people.
The Oral Torah is not "mentioned" in the Written Torah, that's what makes all of this so interesting.
If you are a Jew, you know about the Oral Torah, also known as the rabbinical commentary or explanation of the Written Torah. For instance, "You are not to work on the Sabbath" is a clear enough statement, until you have to define "work." That's when the spoken explanation or "Oral Torah" comes in.
One good reason that the Oral Torah is not mentioned is that it was against Jewish tradition to actually "write" any commentary of the Scriptures. The value of memorization was highly regarded above written text. The only reason it was written in 200 B.C. was because of the fear that their present exile, which began with the first ten tribes of Israel in 722 B.C., was a reminder that their traditions could be lost.
Here are some words from Dr. Ron Moseley's book, Yeshua:
"According to Josephus, the Pharisees were distinguished from the other sects in that they were the most rigidly observant and most skilled in interpreting the Mishnah, the Oral Law. The Pharisees believed that the oral Law was the detailed explanation of how to keep those sections of the written law, such as the feasts, sacrifices, and disciplines, that are mentioned but not explained According to tradition, the Oral law was handed down form Moses to the elders and then to the people, and consisted of some thirty-one customs that covered every law and tradition.
The strict code of the Pharisees governing the keeping of Sabbath was compared to 'mountains hanging on hairs.’ A listing of some twenty-two works forbidden on the Sabbath was known to have existed as early as the Hasmonaean period, and later an expanded list of thirty-nine became the code that remains until today. Although the Pharisaic rules were often contested by the Sadducees, who lived only by the written Law, the Pharisees were able to designate many new rules related to the original written precepts. These included declaring the Sabbath a day of joy, as well as a day of reading Torah, reciting prayers, and delivering sermons.”
A few more things:
1. As American, 21st century, Western humans, we can not forget that the Bible was written by Jewish people, in a Jewish world. Though it would eventually be shared with the non-Jews, that action would not take place until long after 70 A.D. "Everything" is not in the Bible. It didn't need to be, because just like Jesus taking a poop, it's understood without words.
2. These writings are to give you a hunger to learn; hopefully, a hunger to invest in literature. I don't want to come off as lazy, but I don't have the ability to reprint millions of pages so that "every answer can be given." You'll have to start purchasing and reading as well.
3. The reason that Jesus mentions "doing good is lawful" is because of the oral traditions or oral law, or oral Torah, or oral commentary on the written Scripture, which was understood, without saying, "according to the Oral Torah." He also said that it is lawful, meaning “it is permitted.” Remember “Law” is a poor translation of “Torah.” “Torah” does not mean “law” in the way we know it. It means loving instructions; “A map of directions showing us how to get where we need to go, as opposed to “a book of driving rules not to be broken.”—Ray Vandaar Lan
4. The Bible never assumes that you and I are going to read it and not be aware of the customs and traditions of the Jews. It was written for Israel, by people of Israel, in the land of Israel, where customs, contexts, and common practices are understood by its original readers. It's not unlike reading an American book, by an American author, for American readers and the writer mentions someone eating a hamburger. He doesn't tell you that a hamburger is ground beef made into a patty cooked to a particular temperature and placed on a bun...you get the picture. It is expected that the reader will know what a hamburger is. The author is not expecting an Aborigine to read the book, without the Aborigine first finding an Aborigine translation, and then the Aborigine will be required to do a little research when a cultural misunderstanding arises. The Bible does not tell us how Jesus dressed, so we have to look into Jewish historical culture to find out.
5. Let’s not forget that Jews are still here in the world, in our own country, in our own neighborhoods. Those who are orthodox Jews have held on to the ancient customs and all we have to do is talk to them (maybe even make friends with them) and they will tell us more than we will ever need to know about the world in which Jesus lived.
6. Jesus reminds the Pharisees of what the oral traditions are because they seem to be forgetting them at times.
7. Go back to the previous blog article, and take down the list of books I mentioned, buy them, and I promise you, you will have a greater understanding of the world and ways of Jesus.
Grace and peace,
Johnny
Thanks for the quick response, and for the rewrite of the post. That definitely cleared up a boat load of stuff.
Sorry Johnny. I should have been more clear on the robbing of the bank thing. I used that example not because it was against governments law, but because its against God's. It doesn't matter if your supposing this "Robin Hood" philosophy or not. If the Oral Torah is God's Word, and it says that any law can be broken in order to give someone a better life, then that means I can do those things. I can rob banks, not give offering, kill, rape, steal, it all doesn't matter, just as long as through this process I help someone else have a better life.
I never said that Matthew 12:12 was the Written Torah, I only said that Jesus taught that doing good is not against the law. He showed us a more precise definition of work, that doing good does not fall under.
The point still stands, if the Oral Torah is God's Word, you would think that it would be mentioned, referenced, alluded too, its history spoken of, or any other kind of mention somewhere in the entire Bible. The Oral Torah speaks of the Bible, so should the Bible speak of the Oral Torah.
You say that its not mentioned because it was against the law to write commentary, regardless, it could still be mentioned by name, at the very least. You say not everything is mentioned in the Bible, but the important things are. Something as important as Gods Word would must definitely be mentioned.
Your quote from Mr. Lan, at best, confuses me. Why is it that the Law cannot be both? God's Law tells us what to and what not to do. God's Law also teaches us how to walk down his path, his way. Both must be done. To look at as if it is not a book of instructions is to dismiss that we have to listen to God, it changes the ten commandments to the ten suggestions.
I don't really understand the whole thing about the Jewish customs. Why does that matter? The Catholics have plenty of customs that go against God. Why is it that if they are Jewish that their customs automatically become God's customs? Did you forget of the hundreds and hundreds of years that the Jews did not follow God, when they followed Baal and other false idols. The Jews have made plenty of mistakes including one really big one, denying Christ.
Couldn't these Oral Traditions be the very things that the Pharisees get in a big huff about when Jesus and his disciples break them. Check out Matthew 15:1-6. Could these traditions of the elders that they speak of be this Oral Torah? So far, everything that I have heard the Oral Torah say has nullified the word of God.
I plan on speaking to my Pastor about the Mishnah and see if he has any information on it as he has a large collection of books on just about everything under the sun.
I look forward to your response. I hope that this can be settled because, if the Mishnah is the Word of God, I would really like to read, study, and learn from it.
Wanna Cookie?
Mr. Profile
One issue I need to clarify is that the oral Torah was not written until 200 A.D., not 200 B.C. as I had earlier mistyped.
“As the name implies, the Oral Torah was transmitted orally and in the time of Jesus, was still unwritten. It was only after Jewish life in Israel had been nearly extinguished that this literature was recorded in writing in the Mishnah, compiled by Rabbi Yehudah ha-Nasi around A.D. 200. The Mishnah records the sayings of sages who lived and taught during the previous several hundred years and, except for isolated words or sentences, it is written entirely in Hebrew.
Once Rabbi Yehudah broke with tradition, other collections of the Oral Torah were made, notably the Gemara, which is a commentary on the Mishnah. In time, the Gemara and Mishnah were printed together as the Talmud. Although these works contain rabbinic traditions unwritten before the third century A.D., these traditions can be reliable testimony for the historical reality of the Second Temple period, when Jesus lived.
The Talmud exists in two versions: the Jerusalem Talmud, compiled in Israel in about A.D. 400; and the Babylonian Talmud, compiled by Jewish rabbis in Babylonia about one hundred years later. This second work is a gigantic sea of rabbinic learning, consisting of two and one-half million words, filling 5,894 pages. Today the Babylonian Talmud is still central in Jewish religious education.” –David Bivin, New Light on the Difficult Words of Jesus: Insights from His Jewish Context
I want you to answer these questions for me:
1. What is the difference between the words translated “law” from Hebrew, and the word translated “law” from Greek?
2. Where does the phrase, “True Vine,” originate in John 15:1?
3. Why did Peter cut off the ear of the high priest’s assistant in Mark 14:47?
4. Where does the phrase “If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away” in Matthew 5:29-30 come from? Have you obeyed it; it’s the law!
5. What does Jesus mean by, “Sound the trumpets” in Matthew 6:1-4?
6. What are “traditions of men?”
7. What is a yoke?
8. Why do so many say prayers that bless food?
9. Where does the name Jehovah come from?
10. What does it mean to abolish and fulfill the “Law (Matthew 5:17-18)?”
11. What is the “righteousness of the Pharisees in Matthew 5:20? Has yours; it’s the law?
12. What is a God-fearer?
13. What is a “good eye” and what is a “bad eye” from Matthew 6:22-23? Do you have one?
14. Why does Jesus say that we have to “hate” our mother and father and brother and sister, in order to follow Him?
Here’s a clue: You will need more than the Bible.
Blessings,
Johnny
Hey Johnny, again thanks for the quick response. I just wanted to let you know that I am looking into all your questions, but they may take some time. So I didn't want you to think that I was ignoring you.
Some of them I know the anwser to you right now, some I need to look into, and still others I may not be able to anwser. I'll try and do this all as quickly as possible.
Thanks again.
Wanna Cookie?
Mr. Profile
Mr. Profile,
Thanks for looking into this.
Don't get frustrated if you find out that the answers you find are not actually the correct answers. Many commentators have been led astray in the area of fist century, Second Temple Period Palestine.
The books that I recommend will give you fantastic insights.
Grace and peace,
Johnny
Hey Johnny!
I tried to answer all the questions to the best of my knowledge and understand and hope that I did not forget anything that I wanted/needed to say. I also hoped that when you sent me these questions you had a point, so that you could answer all the points I had made previously.
[1] There are many different Hebrew words that are translated 'law'. I think this is the one your looking for however, Towrah (Strong Number 8451). I think the Greek word your looking for is Nomos
(Strong Number 3551). The Greek word has many meanings, but again I think your looking for something specific. It's used to mean the Pentateuch, or the entire collection of the Old Testament. The Hebrew word means the Mosaic Law. So the difference is obvious, the instruction given to Moses and the entire Old Testament.
[2] This phrase, to say the least, is interesting. There are a few things it could mean. The first is that on the front of the temple was a golden vine. The vine symbolized the nation Israel, Psalm 80:8-9 but sometimes was used in a negative way (Isaiah 5:1-2,7 Jeremiah 2:21).
Personally I like this next one better and think it makes more sense. Read Isaiah 11:1. A shoot is another word for a vine. He was informing them that he is the very vine that Isaiah was talking about.
[3] There are many many many different possibilities. I'll just touch on a few. The man, Malchus, insulted Peter and in the heat of the moment cut off his ear. Peter wanted to protect his Master, even if that meant disobeying his Master. Peter tripped.
[4] Are you trying to suggest that this verse should be taken literally. Fine, by me. You first. ;-)
I couldn't tell you where the expression comes from. It may have been something Jesus came up with or something he heard someone else speak of. Maybe it was a semi-common practice that certain sects performed. I really don't know.
I do, however, understand the meaning. First, how can your eye cause you to sin? How can anything cause you to sin. It can make you weak, to the point that you fall, but you fell. God said that no temptation is too strong for him to help you out of. He always provides a way out (1 Corinthians 10:13).
Then what does it mean? It teaches commitment. It teaches that we have to be able to go that far for God. It teaches that we must cut off those things in our life that are sinful.
[5] To draw attention to ourselves.
[6] Like I suggested earlier, the Oral Torah or Mishnah is a possibility.
[7] A yoke can be many things, it depends on its context, I take it you mean the one in Matthew 11:28-30. A yoke is a kind of harness that you place around an animals neck to pull the plow. It was a common practice to yoke together two oxen, one experienced the other not, so that the less experienced one could learn what to do.
[8] It's almost as if your asking a very broad question but expecting a very specific answer. I'm going to jump to some conclusions so that you can receive the answer I think your looking for.
The reason Christians pray over their food has its roots in many different things. A lot of it is because of tradition. Next time someone prays over their food, ask them why. Very few can give an answer. Others pray to thank God that they have given them this meal, like Jesus did when he feed the multitudes (Mark 6:41).
Asking for a blessing specifically though has its root in the fact the the previous mentioned verse was translated as 'bless' in King James.
[9] I've heard things as weird as, some people misspelled YHWH and Adonay and got Yahowah and then in German that gets the word Jehovah. I dunno, it sounds doubtful.
[10] Some were saying/thinking that Jesus was here to abolish or get rid of the Law (the commandments). Jesus informed them that, no that is not the case, he was there to fulfill or do the things needed to be done so that the law was complete. Example, there were many laws about sacrifices and how they are to be done. When Jesus died he was the final sacrifice, the very thing that all those rules pointed too.
[11] They weren't very righteous, if at all. It doesn't take but a quick glance to see this. This isn't about exceeding their righteousness in degree, but in kind. Check out Philippians 3:6-9. Here Paul teaches of two kinds of righteousness, one obtained by following the law, which he was found faultless, the other found in Christ, the righteousness that saves.
[12] To respect the LORD, his commandments, his promises, his protection, to have faith in Him.
[13] This is speaking of spiritual blindness. Light enters through the eye, if its good, and you are able to see. However, if you are blind, then no light enters the body and you cannot see.
[14] Both the Old Testament and Jesus teach us to love everyone. So then, what does it mean to hate your family in light of these teachings of love? It shows us that Jesus is using an expression. It shows us that our love, our desire, our priorities, should all be towards him first, not our family.
Feel free to address anything that doesn't make sense or that I did not elaborate on enough. I sort of assumed you would understand what I was trying to say.
Wanna Cookie?
Mr. Profile.
Hey Johnny!
I had forgotten to thank you. Some of those things I had never thought about. Now that I have dug and found some answers I have new insight on what the Bible teaches. So, thanks!
Wanna Cookie?
Mr. Profile
In Hebrew the word Law is translated Torah. You did well here. The missing aspect is that Torah is more like getting an ice-cream from your Dad, and your Dad saying, "Hold on to it well, for if you drop it, you will have no more ice-cream," as opposed to the Greek word for "law," which is more like your Dad saying, "Hold on to the ice-cream, because I paid for it, and if you drop it, I'm going to beat your @#$%@&*." Torah means Instruction or Way, not "Law."
2. You did well on the True Vine question as well. There was a golden vine, which was draped across the four columns of the Temple at that time. People would give an offering to buy a gold leaf, grape or other part of the vine. Often their names would be inscribed on one of the golden leaves.
Jesus was saying that if people would value giving themselves to him as much as they valued this vine, they would bear abundant spiritual truth.-Dr. Ron Moseley.
3. Cutting off the ear of the high priest's assistant was strategic. This man was known as the segan hacohaneem. He was the chief assistant to the high priest. Cutting off his ear would disqualify him for service in the Temple. This is derived from Leviticus 21:18-21. This was not the first time that this approach had been taken to disqualify a Temple servant. In 40 B.C. Antagonus, a Persian candidate for high priest, had the ear of his uncle, Hyrcanus II, cut off to shame him and disqualify him for the office. -Moseley
4. Cut off your eye if it offends comes from a common Jewish teaching method of Jesus' day. This method is known a kal-ve-chomer, light and heavy. It contrasts two stages of sin, the first stage being the lighter and the second stage the heavier (Matthew 23:23). The purpose behind this method was to teach the principle that if we nip a sin in the bud while it is still in the light stage, or as Jesus says, "pluck it out" or "cut it off," it can be prevented from ever reaching the far more destructive heavy stage.
This phrase is used in other ancient Jewish literature, where a phrase such as, The hand that promotes self-abuse among men, let it be cut off." This simply refers to stopping the act at an early or light stage. -Moseley
5. Sounding the Trumpets comes from the collection boxes in the Temple where people would place their offerings. The tops of the boxes were shaped like trumpets, and when money was dropped into them, they would make noise. Some of the givers would drop great amounts of coins, a few at a time to let everyone hear how much they were giving. Today this could be compared to having a plaque made or getting a formal award for giving.
6. Traditions of men, is the Greek translation of the Hebrew word for "hedges." Hedges were rules that were made by some of the religious leaders of Jesus day to protect people from disobeying the actual instruction of God. This is another area where the oral Torah is evident. Some teachers would say that in order to prevent breaking the Sabbath, you can't even fish for fun on the Sabbath. This is a "hedge." Fishing isn't actually a sin, but to some it may cause you to break the actual mitzvah (commandment) to not work. There were many hedges and eventually the leaders would treat the hedges as if they were commandments. This is seen today, when we hear things like, "Don't whistle in the chapel; it's not respectful." This hedge of not to whistle does not mean that whistling is a sin, but some believe that it is a prevention for breaking the real commandment to show reverence for God.
7. A yoke is a rabbi's interpretation of the Written Torah. Jesus' Yoke was easy, he said. His Yoke is "Love God with all that you are, and love your neighbor as yourself." As he stated: "Everything else in the Scriptures hangs on this." That's what a Yoke is; it is the phrase of a rabbi that encompasses his overall interpretation of the Scriptures. Today we call them denominations, but really they are a person’s yoke that we are following. They guide our lives, like the yoke of an ox guides the ox. We walk beside our Master, as his yoke is attached to us and guides us through life, just as the yoke of an ox allows for a man to walk by the ox and guide the ox.
8. Blessing food. Blessing food comes from a mistranslation of the Scriptures that speak of Jesus taking bread, blessing "it," et cetera. The actual wording says, "Jesus took the bread, He blessed, and...
A blessing was always given after a meal to thank God for it and to give recognition to Him as the giver and owner of the bread.
A blessing is a gift or recognition of authority. Bread does not have authority. When we give food authority, it takes control of us. When God created the heavens and the earth, He only blessed (gave authority) to two parts--humans and the Sabbath. Humans had the authority to create and take care of things and the Sabbath had the authority to offer rest.
We are to bless God for everything, not bless everything.
9. Jehovah, you were on to something with this one.
After 300 B.C., while the Jews were still in exile in Persia, they began to take a literal rendering of the third commandment, "You shall not take the name YHWH, your God in vain."
No longer would they use the tetragrammaton, YHWH. Instead they used other names like Elohim, Elokim, Adonai, et cetera.
When the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D., a scribe used a common writing technique to prevent future discoverers of the Written Torah from saying YWHW. He superimposed the name Adonai with YHWH and by changing the letters to their Latin equivalents, the name JeHoVaH appears. Hebrew is a language without vowels, so placing the vowels from Adonai between the consonants of YHWH was not difficult. This name did not appear in English translations of the Bible until the 16th century when a French theologian came across the "warning device" and assumed it to be another name for God.
10. Abolish and fulfill comes from rabbinical teaching language and methods for interpreting the Scriptures. To abolish means to misinterpret, and fulfill, means to correctly interpret. There are many ancient examples of rabbis teaching disciples how to properly "fulfill" the Torah, as opposed to "abolishing" it.
Read the next article on this blog.
11. The righteousness of the Pharisees. At this time the word for alms (offerings given for the poor) had begun to be called by the same Hebrew word as the righteousness equated with holiness. No longer would they ask, "Did you give alms today," but "How much "righteousness" did you give today?" The word was interchangeable. Jesus was using a word play, which we can't detect from the English or even Greek translations. He was saying, unless your righteousness comes from God, then you have a problem. We see this kind of attitude today, when we no longer give to serve, but to receive. We even preach this way sometimes by saying, "Give and God will give back 100 times what you have given." Righteousness does not come from the gift, but from the heart of the giver.
12. A God-fearer was a proselyte into the Jewish faith who worshiped only YHWH and did good deeds in His name, but was not circumcised.
13. Good eye and bad eye comes from a Hebrew idiom and means you are either generous or stingy with your giving. If your eye is bad, then you are selfish. Selfishness is very offensive to God.
14. You are on target with this one. Hate in Hebrew has many meanings that are able to be translated in Greek, so we only translate the one Greek word for "hate" into "hate."
In Hebrew, the word for "hate" often means "to put second."
The point I am making is that without this knowledge we are not correctly interpreting the Word of God for His people. And without the history of Jewish culture, much of which has been printed in Jewish literature, such as the Mishnah and Talmud, we would continue to “abolish” God’s Word. The Bible alone does not give you and me as English speaking, American, Western, 21st century human beings, the ability to correctly interpret unless we are willing to dig into the culture and context of the world and time in which Jesus lived.
Grace and peace,
Johnny
Post a Comment