Comparing Judaism with Christianity: (moved from WR to Contro)

[Jerome1]

These questions are with SFASH in mind but anybody can feel free to respond.

I have noticed a lot of the criticisms aimed at catholicism could have also been aimed at Judaism.

People claim for example that the bible interprets the bible and God would'nt establish an outside body to interpret the law, whether you believe that is the Orthodox, Anglican,RCC etc....

The majority of Jews adhered to the oral Torah or the Mishnah which was used by the scribes and Pharisees to interpret the Torah. The Jews who rejected oral tradition were known as the Karaites. This group came to prominence in Babylon(present day Iraq). They rejected the priestly office established by God, and the oral law. Most Jews believe the oral Torah was given to Moses along with the written law on Mount Sinai.

Christ himself told the crowds to obey everything that the scribes and Pharisees taught them(Matthew23:2-3)

This is because the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God(Romans3:2-3). The key word here is were.

So those that accuse catholics of using sacred tradition and the magisterium to interpret the law, must also admit that the Jews used sacred tradition and their priestly heirarchy to determine the meaning of the Torah.

The person at the top of this heirarchy was the Jewish high priest.

[David Taylor]

What's your point here Jerome?

For us to say, 'yep, the leaders of Judaism' were wrong in some of their teachings; just like the leaders of RCC?

Or

Since the leaders of Judaism can't be wrong, then RCC must also be correct?


Can't really see the point of your comparison.

From a Protestant perpsective, both the Jewish leaders and the RCC get alot of teachings wrong, and that too is seen too often enough in many Protestant groups as well.

That's why this board does its best to put the focus on the Holy Bible and the teaching of the Holy Spirit; and not the traditions of men who are so flawed.

Judaism, RCC, and Protestantism all have many flawed doctrines and teachings. Holding to traditions however, external to Scriptures, only makes things worse off; not better.

I can only advise that we all follow the suggestion of Paul to the Colosse church:

Colossians 2:6 "As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."

We do this by following His Word which is truth, and the teaching of the Holy Spirit; not embracing the traditions of men we are warned to avoid.

[DanDMan64]

Jerome1, please forgive my ignorance, but could you tell me what SFASH stands for?

As to the post in general, I would like to offer these thoughts.

I don't know who are the people that "claim for example that the bible interprets the bible and God wouldn't establish an outside body to interpret the law" but I would guess they're probably us, the protestants, because I wholly agree with that statement.

In comparing Jews, the RCC, and sadly many of our own protestant denominations, I would argue that they all have fallen into the same trap, of establishing hierarchies or priestly schools of thought or theological seminaries or what ever you want to call them, but basically, establishing groups of men who were charged to try to interpret the scriptures on behalf of the rest of the people, thus setting themselves-up as more knowledgeable and more "enlightened" than the rest of us "dumb sheep", and in doing so they deprived the people from the joy of discovering the hidden treasures of the revelation of God's own mind that can only be experienced when each individual believer, in a personal relationship with his Creator and Saviour, is instructed by The Holy Spirit into all truth.

God gave the law to the Jews not only to keep it, but to memorize it and to meditate upon it day and night, and to delight in doing so. He established Levi and his sons as priests to perform the rituals mandated by the law, but He never charged them with becoming "interpreters" of the law to explain it to the people and to tell them what it all meant.

Paul and the Apostles didn't write their letters to a few appointed leaders here and there, to have them argue about what they thought was being said and then filter-out the parts they thought the rest of the congregation should know about, but they wrote them to the whole congregation, and many copies of their letters were made because that was the will of God, and I believe they understood it that way.

It is true that "Christ himself told the crowds to obey everything that the scribes and Pharisees taught them(Matthew23:2-3)" but in almost the same breath He told them not to honor their leadership by doing as they did, because they were hypocrites that taught the people one thing, but they themselves didn't do it and actually all they did was a religious show, they were so given to interpreting the letter of the law, they totally missed the spirit that was in the law. In fact Christ went on to tell them in the following verses, "But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. 9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. 10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. 11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant."

In short what I'm trying to say is this, to try to justify the Hierarchy in the RCC and a lot of our protestant denominations as well, by comparing it to the priestly Hierarchy of the Jews, and claim that it must be OK, is totally missing the mark, that God is a personal God, who has to be experienced personally by each believer and related to personally, and we are not to leave any interpretation to others, but humbly give ourselves over to the task that Paul charged Timothy with when he said " Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." 2 Timothy 2:15. And I don't think he meant, in a seminary.

[Jerome1]

The point in comparing, is to show the inconsistent criticisms aimed at the RCC by some people, who claim that this is some kind of RCC invention(ie. having the magisterium interpret and promulgate laws)

Jews did exactly the same thing with the written law, they also believed the oral law was given to Moses on Mount Sinai to instruct them how to use the written law.

That is just one of many examples, Jews also circumcised infants, had purification laws before a person could participate in certain rituals, and had a heirarchical system with the high priest at it's head.

The point is that if you are going to critisize the RCC for it's observance of similar traditions, then you must accept that Judaism had similar traditions before the RCC ever existed.

From a Protestant perpsective, both the Jewish leaders and the RCC get alot of teachings wrong, and that too is seen too often enough in many Protestant groups as well.

How can the oracles of God delivered to Moses on Mount Sinai, which many Jews believe included the oral Torah be wrong?

[David Taylor]

How can the oracles of God delivered to Moses on Mount Sinai, which many Jews believe included the oral Torah be wrong?

Because the creation has been, was, continues to be, plagued by sin.

We all fall short.

The Jews practicing Judaism were way wrong...because many of them missed the day of their visitation, and crucified their King promised by the Fathers and Prophets.

But even throughout the failings of the Jewish rulers, God provided a way and a remnant to hold strongly to the truth, and to remain faithful to Him and reject the traditions that trapped and caused so many to miss their Messiah.

[IMINXTC]

Jerome1, please forgive my ignorance, but could you tell me what SFASH stands for?

Don't worry! Its just my username!

[Jerome1]

Because the creation has been, was, continues to be, plagued by sin.

We all fall short.

The Jews practicing Judaism were way wrong...because many of them missed the day of their visitation, and crucified their King promised by the Fathers and Prophets.

But even throughout the failings of the Jewish rulers, God provided a way and a remnant to hold strongly to the truth, and to remain faithful to Him and reject the traditions that trapped and caused so many to miss their Messiah.

The laws God gave to Moses were inerrant, and tradition holds that he recorded them and that is how we got the first five books in our Old Testaments.

Tradition also holds that God gave Moses the Oral Torah which was passed on faithfully, and eventually had to be written down when Judaism came under threat from persecution.

The Jewish rulers didn't fail in interpreting or teaching the laws of the Old Covenant, otherwise Jesus would not have told the crowds to obey everything the scribes and Pharisees taught them,(Matthew23:2-3). They did however fail to recognize that Christ was the fulfillment of the Old Covenant, and many of them as Christ taught, did not practice what they taught.

[Fenris]

Ah...a topic I can really sink my teeth into!

These questions are with SFASH in mind but anybody can feel free to respond.

Don't mind if I do...

I have noticed a lot of the criticisms aimed at catholicism could have also been aimed at Judaism.

Do go on...

People claim for example that the bible interprets the bible and God would'nt establish an outside body to interpret the law, whether you believe that is the Orthodox, Anglican,RCC etc....

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "the bible interprets the bible". Anyway, are you suggesting that multiple religious groups can be correct? Or are you saying that you're the only one who's right?

The majority of Jews adhered to the oral Torah or the Mishnah which was used by the scribes and Pharisees to interpret the Torah.

True...in a way. The oral law is used to interpret the written law. But it wasn't an invention of the rabbis. We believe it was given to Moses at Sinai- at the same time as the written law. The oral law are facts and a logical toolset that is used to divine the true meaning of the written law.

So Jews believe.

The Jews who rejected oral tradition were known as the Karaites. This group came to prominence in Babylon(present day Iraq). They rejected the priestly office established by God, and the oral law. Most Jews believe the oral Torah was given to Moses along with the written law on Mount Sinai.

Yes, true. very good!

Christ himself told the crowds to obey everything that the scribes and Pharisees taught them(Matthew23:2-3)

This is because the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God(Romans3:2-3). The key word here is were.

I can't comment on this.

So those that accuse catholics of using sacred tradition and the magisterium to interpret the law, must also admit that the Jews used sacred tradition and their priestly heirarchy to determine the meaning of the Torah.

The person at the top of this heirarchy was the Jewish high priest.

This is actually untrue. The Jewish High Priest was a Temple functionary- no more than that. The legal issues were settled by the Sanhedrin, a body where the High Priest (and the king, for that matter) had no power.

[David Taylor]

I moved this thread from WR to Contro, because Fenris being a non-Christian is allowed to engage in discussions in Contro; but shouldn't be doing to in WR.

Want him to have a chance to participate in this discussion with Jerome; and Jerome can post in Contro just as easily as WR.

..continue..

[Fenris]

Thank you, David!

[Fenris]

Ah, here's the quote I was looking for. In the Talmud, it is said that "A bastard who is a Torah scholar takes precedence over a High Priest who is an ignoramus". This is not only a statement about the value of Torah study, but also a dig at the High Priests of the First Century, who were ignoramuses (and Roman toadies!)

[DanDMan64]

[quote=SFASH;1773629]

Jerome1, please forgive my ignorance, but could you tell me what SFASH stands for?

Don't worry! Its just my username!

Thank you for the clarification, I thought it might be a user name, but I wasn't sure since it also sounded like an acronym for something.

[Jerome1]

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "the bible interprets the bible". Anyway, are you suggesting that multiple religious groups can be correct? Or are you saying that you're the only one who's right?

No i'm saying that God established the Levitical priesthood and gave Moses the Oral Torah as well as the written Torah for them to correctly interpret the written law.

This is actually untrue. The Jewish High Priest was a Temple functionary- no more than that. The legal issues were settled by the Sanhedrin, a body where the High Priest (and the king, for that matter) had no power.

He had specific functions that only he could carry out, for example the high priest was the only one who could appear before the ark of the covenant during the day of atonement. It is fair to say that he was regarded as the most important functionary in the priestly heirarchy.

[Fenris]

No i'm saying that God established the Levitical priesthood and gave Moses the Oral Torah as well as the written Torah for them to correctly interpret the written law.

Yeah, that's what I think too.

He had specific functions that only he could carry out, for example the high priest was the only one who could appear before the ark of the covenant during the day of atonement. It is fair to say that he was regarded as the most important functionary in the priestly heirarchy.

That he did...

[Jerome1]

Thanks for moving this David, as Fenris would probably be the best person to confirm what i was saying.

Hi Fenris iv'e seen you posting before, what is your background, are you an Orthodox Jew? If so you're probably in a better position to answer some questions on a discussion i'm having with a fellow catholic(i think he is catholic).

The point of the thread was to look at the Jewish roots in Catholicism, i'll get back to that, hopefully after you answer some of these questions.

Jewish males have to go through the formal process of circumcision as an infant, either a male born to a Jewish Mother, or a person who wants to convert to Judaism. Is circumcision obligatory for all Jewish males(born to Jewish parents, or converts) if they want to participate in all the Jewish rituals/festivals?

I know there is a formal process for Jewish males(ie. circumcision), but are females simply considered Jewish by ethnicity(ie. their Mother is Jewish)?

Would a non circumcised Jew, whether they have converted, or were born to Jewish parents be allowed to participate in all Jewish festivals(ie passover), or would they have to be circumcised before they could participate?

Can children of converts choose to renounce their Judaism when they reach an appropriate age(ie. i believe they can around the age of 12/13)?

Can children who are also born to Jewish parents also formally declare(ie. at a Bar Mitzvah for example) that they no longer wish to practice Judaism? Would this be considered a formal declaration that they are no longer regarded as Jewish?

If you have any references from the Mishnah/Talmud, or other references from Rabbi's it would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.