|
|
Post by Mark on Mar 13, 2007 3:29:10 GMT -8
I apologize at being misunderstood. Paul taught Jewish tradition (paradosis). I believe this included many elements that we find now in the Talmud (though there is a significant portion of Talmud that is reactionary toward Christianity and not simply an application of  ). There is also a huge difference between applying to our daily circumstances and building hedge laws which we enforce upon our community. (Christians and Jews are equally adept at this). Whenever is used to allow one element of a community to lord over another, it is misuse. This is the problem Messiah Yeshua, and later Paul, had with the Parushim (Pharisees). |
|
|
|
Post by Mpossoff on Mar 14, 2007 10:41:37 GMT -8
Hi Mark, About 'hedge laws'... Are you implying a 'hedge law' is when Yeshua healed on the Sabbath and the Pharisee's said He broke the Sabbath when He really didn't? I think Oral can be used as a 'commentary' if you will. But in Mark 7 it's apparent that Oral Law isn't consistent. Marc I apologize at being misunderstood. Paul taught Jewish tradition (paradosis). I believe this included many elements that we find now in the Talmud (though there is a significant portion of Talmud that is reactionary toward Christianity and not simply an application of ). There is also a huge difference between applying to our daily circumstances and building hedge laws which we enforce upon our community. (Christians and Jews are equally adept at this). Whenever is used to allow one element of a community to lord over another, it is misuse. This is the problem Messiah Yeshua, and later Paul, had with the Parushim (Pharisees). |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 22, 2007 5:31:17 GMT -8
The arguments between Yeshua and the Pharishim were all within the definitive confines of Judaism. When you look at the phrase in the New Testament "not lawful", it is pretty consistently "oo-existee" (better rendered "improper") as opposed an ah-nomos (that which is anti or against ( ) Law). Hedge laws are not universal to all Judaism. The Tzadokim (Sadducees) rejected anything that was not literally or specifically written in (Sadducees were a significant force within Judaism between the time of Alexander the Great and the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD). The Pharishim were the relative new comers to Judaism in Yeshua's day (their position had only been codified for about a hundred years). This is why there is necessarily a distinction between oo-existee (Pharushim etiquette) and anomos (rebellion against ). If you have a chance to sit down with Talmud and a stiff cup of coffee (you'll need it); you'll find that oral Law is can't be considered as authoritative as many would like to suggest. Talmud is very often a collection of debate and varying/conflicting perspectives on how should be followed. This is brilliantly compiled to as to give a vast persoective and require the reader to make his or her own decisions as to how they should best live in obedience to Adonai. It is brilliant because it cannot be said (though it often is) Talmud says "such and such therefore this is what we must do" because very likely, another scholar will be quoted on the next page promoting something very much different. Talmud must be meditated upon and sifted through. How appropriate- to walk with the saages but have our ear tuned to the voice of Adonai. Hedge laws are good- if kept in perspective: that they are unique to us as individuals and not to be used as weapons of condescention against our brothers. They should be considered tools as opposed to rules and kept in the box when there is no leak. |
|
|
|
Post by R' Y'hoshua Moshe on Jun 5, 2007 23:12:32 GMT -8
Shalom chaverim! I have enjoyed how this conversation has unfolded. We managed to get off the diety subject (but had a good discussion  ) and are more focused on the subject of the thread. Good points. The Mishnah, Talmud, and Rabbinical Orthodox Judaism are not the authorities in the Beit Dein of Mashiach. The TeNaKh is. Also, on this forum we do not hold someone accountable and say they are wrong because it violates Mishnah, Talmud, Zohar, ect... Any whom make these claims will inturn be held accountable. The word of Elohim as found from Beresheet (Gen.) to Revelation is the only foundation for the authority we call "Scripture". The Oral traditions and halachah certainly in many areas serve to magnify and make it honorable, but we are by no means commanded by Yeshua our His talmidim to observe these things like we would the TeNaKh. Our only authoritative halachah flows directly from the Brit Hadashah (New Covenant writings). I am sure that some will disagree with me on this...But, as you all know, I will be happy to take someone to task on this particular subject. Shalom, Reuel |
|
).
