|
|
Post by David Ben Yosef on Dec 21, 2010 21:44:41 GMT -8
This excerpt has been taken in part from THIS article at aish.com WHY DO WE NEED THE ORAL  ? The Written lists the commandments for daily living, and the Oral explains how to carry them out. In effect, the Written is a form of summary notes of the Oral . For example: Totafot (better known as Tefillin) are mentioned in the Bible: "And you shall place Totafot between your eyes." But how do we know what they are? What color are they? What size? Shape? What about the straps? How many compartments? What parchments go inside? How should they be worn? Who should wear them? When? None of this is written in the Bible. For these important details, we need the Oral . Has the message been successfully transmitted? One only needs to look at an older pair of Tefillin, worn by every adult male throughout Jewish history. If the message hadn't come through clearly, one guy would be wearing a shoe between his eyes, and another would have a blue ribbon, and another would... Shalom |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 22, 2010 11:03:13 GMT -8
Matt 23:15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
It appears to me that Jesus took issue with quite a bit of the oral “law” or traditions of men. Though he kept the Law of God the scribes and Pharisees still found fault in him through their oral law and traditions.
Matt 15:6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.
Deu 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
Jews add to God’s word while Christians take away form it.
|
|
|
|
Post by David Ben Yosef on Dec 28, 2010 17:59:59 GMT -8
Matt 23:15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves. It appears to me that Jesus took issue with quite a bit of the oral “law” or traditions of men. Though he kept the Law of God the scribes and Pharisees still found fault in him through their oral law and traditions. Well, concerning proselytes, surely Yeshua didn't have a problem with that, seeing as how he himself, and his talmidim made millions of them. What he took issue with, and who he had contentions with, were the Shammaite Pharisee's, as he was a Hillel Pharisee. It was "in house" arguments we read of in the NT. That is also the entire theme of the book of Acts if you pay attention. There are many examples of Yeshua upholding the Oral . He rarely taught otherwise. Matt 15:6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye. Where are these commandments in the Oral ? If your going to cite this passage as an example of the Oral nullifying the written , then you should be able to quote it, right? Deu 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Jews add to God’s word while Christians take away form it. The Jews haven't added a single jot, or title to the word of G-d. The Oral was given first, then the written, according to tradition. Historical evidence seems to agree with that assertion too. One's personal perspective of the Oral has much to do with how we read the NT when touching upon that subject. Why no comment on the first post of this thread, when it was pointed out [clearly] that we need the Oral to properly apply the written ? Surely that gives it some validity, doesn't it? I think it's important that we look at things from as many different angles as we can. You can find truth in the darnest places, I'm finding out. Especially in those places that Christianity tells us is "taboo." The Oral is just one such example. Shalom |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 29, 2010 14:28:28 GMT -8
John 5:10 The Jews therefore said unto him that was cured, It is the sabbath day: it is not lawful for thee to carry thy bed.
11 He answered them, He that made me whole, the same said unto me, Take up thy bed, and walk.
Either Jesus told this man to brake the law, which he expressly said that he did not come to do, or the Jews had an oral law that Jesus disregarded because is was no law. If the first case is true, then you and I should look for a different savior. If the second case is true then you must admit that the Jews added an oral law and made it equal to God’s Law and thus added more than a jot or tittle.
The Talmud was added to build a wall of seperation between the Jews and Gentile. Thus cutting off salvation to the Gentile and preventing the Jew from doing his duty seeing that salvation is of the Jews. But Jesus destroyed that wall. Praise be to God.
Eph 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity
|
|
|
|
Post by David Ben Yosef on Jan 1, 2011 17:07:18 GMT -8
This is a one way conversation I'm afraid, because apparently you wish to ignore all my questions, concerning the validity of the Oral . Why is that? John 5:10 The Jews therefore said unto him that was cured, It is the sabbath day: it is not lawful for thee to carry thy bed. 11 He answered them, He that made me whole, the same said unto me, Take up thy bed, and walk. Either Jesus told this man to brake the law, which he expressly said that he did not come to do, or the Jews had an oral law that Jesus disregarded because is was no law. That is an assumption on your part. One I happen to disagree with too. There are more options to properly interpret this text, than the two choices you have offered. Obviously, verse 10 above cannot possibly be taken literally, because not all Jews regarded healing on Shabbat a violation of the covenant. Rav Hillel certainly did not. But again, if your convinced that the Oral teaches against healing on Shabbat, then please quote exactly where that's taught in the Talmud. If the first case is true, then you and I should look for a different savior. I'm not certain as to what you think constitutes a "savior" so I cannot comment on that. However, Yeshua most certainly did not teach anyone to break the [Written or Oral]. If the second case is true then you must admit that the Jews added an oral law and made it equal to God’s Law and thus added more than a jot or tittle. Well no, I don't believe that for a second. It depends on ones own perspective. From my own perspective, I see Yeshua in compliance with the Oral . The Talmud was added to build a wall of separation between the Jews and Gentile. Thus cutting off salvation to the Gentile and preventing the Jew from doing his duty seeing that salvation is of the Jews. I couldn't agree less. Where is this doctrine taught in the Talmud? Have you ever heard of the 18 measures of Shammai? If not, then I encourage you to study what it is, because it explains a lot concerning Jewish relations with Gentiles, in the first century. But Jesus destroyed that wall. Praise be to God. Can you please define what wall your speaking of, along with Scriptural quotes? Thank you. Shalom |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Jan 3, 2011 10:43:35 GMT -8
CHAPTER XXIV.
1. REGULATIONS CONCERNING A MAN WHO IS OVERTAKEN BY DUSK ON THE EVE OF SABBATH WHILE TRAVELLING, AND CONCERNING FEEDING OF CATTLE.
MISHNA: One who (on the eve of Sabbath) is overtaken by the dusk on the road must give his purse to a Gentile (while it is yet day). If there is no Gentile with him, he must put it on the ass. As soon as he arrives at the outmost court (dwelling of the first town or village he reaches), he must take off all such things as may be handled on the Sabbath; and as for the things which must not be handled he must loosen the cords, so that they fall off themselves.
Why does the Talmud (oral law) allow the breaking of the sabbath?
Deut 5:14 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thine ox, nor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou.
The Gentile nor the ass should bare the burden if the man himself can’t.
Luke 11:46 And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.
Now concerning your insistence that the oral law has some valid points. So does my science book but I will not elevate it to God’s word.
Every thing that I know about the oral law is an attempt to circumnavigate or adds to the Law of God. Like selling your land to a gentile and renting it back on the Sabbath year of rest, selling your yeast factory to a gentile during Passover. Non-believers should not be necessary for believers to be righteous. Not eating milk and meat at the same meal when you are only told not to soak a kid in its’ mothers milk.
|
|
?
