The Talmud and We
There has been a great deal of discussion in the movement today over how
we as Nazarenes should view Jewish tradition, Oral Law and the Talmud.
Now it is important to understand the first century world from which
Nazarene Judaism emerged. There were three major sects of Judaism at the
time: Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes.
The first century writer Josephus writes of the Pharisees:
"...the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by
succession from their fathers, which are not written in the law of
Moses;..."
(Josephus; Ant. 13:11:6)
The Pharisees became what is known as Rabbinic Judaism and eventually
wrote these traditions (known as "Oral Law") down in the Mishna and later
the Talmud.
The Sadducees rejected these traditions, as Josephus continues:
"...for that reason it is that the Sadducees reject them, and say that we
are to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written
word, but are not to observe what are delivered from the tradition of our
forefathers..."
(ibid)
Then there were the Essenes, these are they who are believed to have
written the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Essenes did not reject the concept of
Oral Law, as the Sadducees did, but they did have an ALTERNATE set of such
traditions, many of which are recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Among the
Scrolls is a document called MMT ("Some of the Works of teh Torah). In
this document the Essenes point out some of their differences with the
Oral Law as recorded in the Mishna. For example in the Mishna (Hullin
4:1-5) there is an Oral tradition forbidding the eating of the fetus of a
slaughtered animal, while item 12 in MMT allows the eating of such a
fetus. Many of the points addressed in MMT are addressed directly at
points of Oral Torah found in the Mishna. Essenes did not reject the Oral
Torah, they had their own understanding of it.
Now our Nazarene forefathers had roots in Pharisaic Judaism and in Essene
Judaism but not in Sadduceean Judaism.
Yeshua's teachings often echoed those of the famous Pharisaic teacher
Hillel. When Yeshu was still a child Hillel taught "Do not do to others
what you would not have them do to you" while Yeshua grew up to teach "do
onto others as you would have them do to you." Moreover Paul, upon noting
he was a mixed group of Pharisees and Sadducees declared "I am a Pharisee"
()
The Nazarenes also clearly had roots in Essene Judaism. There is evidence
that Yochanan the immerser ("John the Baptist") came out of the Qumran
community. Several of Yeshua's Talmidim (including Kefa) had first been
talmidim of Yochanan. Both the Essenes and the Nazarenes called
themselves "The Way" and "Sons of Light".
The Esseneic and Pharisaic origins of Nazarene Judaism are easily
documented and could fill volumes. I have reduced them here to a short
paragraph each.
Now the second century Nazarene writer Rabbi Gish’fa (Heggissipus) made use
in his writings of these traditions. Eusebious writes of him:
“And he quotes some passages from The Gospel according to the Hebrews and
from ‘The Syriac’, and some particulars from the Hebrew tongue, showing
that he was … from the Hebrews, and he mentions other matters as taken
from the oral tradition of the Jews.”
(Eccl. Hist. 4:22)
Now this brings us to the question : What is the Talmud, and what does it
mean to Nazarenes?
The core of the Talmud is the Mishna. The Mishna was complied around 250
CE by Rabbi Y’hudah Ha Nasi from ealier oral and/or written traditions.
It cites the opinions or Rabbis and teachers who lived in the generation
immediately following Ezra and Nehemiah, up until the time of its
composition. The Talmud was compiled around 500 CE and consists of the
Mishna written in Hebrew and the commentary to the Mishna, known as the
Gemara, surrounding it in Aramaic characters.
The Talmud contains two types of Oral Law: Oral Law from Sinai and Oral
Law from the judges.
Oral Law from Sinai is the oral companion to the written law. The written
law says “do not go out of your place on the Sabbath” but the Oral Torah
tells us what “place” means. Moses certainly knew what it meant and so
our ancestors knew and passed down the information to us along with the
written Torah.
Oral Law from the judges is another matter. These are rulings in
difficult matters that have been made by the Rabbis (and Judges before
them) based on the powers given in Deut. 17:8-13 and passed along as Oral
Law as well. This is the authority to “bind and loose” which is spoken of
by Yeshua (Mt. 16 and 18) and given to his Talmidim.
Now we as Nazarenes do not believe that the Rabbis or Pharisaic/Rabbinic
Judaism held the power to bind and loose after the first century, perhaps
not even before the first century. Thus we should not simply accept these
rulings, on the other hand we should not simply reject them out of hand.
In may cases the Talmud or the related halachic Midrashim present the line
of logic which led to the decisions being made. We should look at these
lines of logic to determine if the decisions were valid and sound.
For example I heard one Messianic Rabbi bashing the Talmud and claiming
that the Rabbis had added thirty-nine rules to the simple commandment not
to work on the Sabbath. In fact the thirty-nine categories (given in
m.Shabbat 7:2) are drawn from the text of the Torah. In the Torah the
instructions concerning the building of the Tabernacle are interrupted by a
restatement of the commandment not to work on the Sabbath (Ex. 31:12-17).
The connection this section of Exodus has with the surrounding material
seems to be the word “work” (Ex. 31:14) and “workmanship” (Ex. 31:3) (same
word in the Hebrew). Thus the commandment not to “work” on the Sabbath
(Ex. 31:14) is restated as a reminder to abstain from the “workmanship” of
the Tabernacle mentioned in Ex. 31:3. Thus the term “work” in the
commandment not to work on the Sabbath may be elaborated and defined by the
thirty-nine categories of “workmanship” involved in building the
Tabernacle.
We as Nazarenes should not reject the material in the Talmud out of hand,
we should seek to understand it. Then we should “eat the date and spit
out the seeds”. The same approach should be taken to the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Nazarenes should not be modern day Sadducees.
James Trimm
we as Nazarenes should view Jewish tradition, Oral Law and the Talmud.
Now it is important to understand the first century world from which
Nazarene Judaism emerged. There were three major sects of Judaism at the
time: Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes.
The first century writer Josephus writes of the Pharisees:
"...the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by
succession from their fathers, which are not written in the law of
Moses;..."
(Josephus; Ant. 13:11:6)
The Pharisees became what is known as Rabbinic Judaism and eventually
wrote these traditions (known as "Oral Law") down in the Mishna and later
the Talmud.
The Sadducees rejected these traditions, as Josephus continues:
"...for that reason it is that the Sadducees reject them, and say that we
are to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written
word, but are not to observe what are delivered from the tradition of our
forefathers..."
(ibid)
Then there were the Essenes, these are they who are believed to have
written the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Essenes did not reject the concept of
Oral Law, as the Sadducees did, but they did have an ALTERNATE set of such
traditions, many of which are recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Among the
Scrolls is a document called MMT ("Some of the Works of teh Torah). In
this document the Essenes point out some of their differences with the
Oral Law as recorded in the Mishna. For example in the Mishna (Hullin
4:1-5) there is an Oral tradition forbidding the eating of the fetus of a
slaughtered animal, while item 12 in MMT allows the eating of such a
fetus. Many of the points addressed in MMT are addressed directly at
points of Oral Torah found in the Mishna. Essenes did not reject the Oral
Torah, they had their own understanding of it.
Now our Nazarene forefathers had roots in Pharisaic Judaism and in Essene
Judaism but not in Sadduceean Judaism.
Yeshua's teachings often echoed those of the famous Pharisaic teacher
Hillel. When Yeshu was still a child Hillel taught "Do not do to others
what you would not have them do to you" while Yeshua grew up to teach "do
onto others as you would have them do to you." Moreover Paul, upon noting
he was a mixed group of Pharisees and Sadducees declared "I am a Pharisee"
()
The Nazarenes also clearly had roots in Essene Judaism. There is evidence
that Yochanan the immerser ("John the Baptist") came out of the Qumran
community. Several of Yeshua's Talmidim (including Kefa) had first been
talmidim of Yochanan. Both the Essenes and the Nazarenes called
themselves "The Way" and "Sons of Light".
The Esseneic and Pharisaic origins of Nazarene Judaism are easily
documented and could fill volumes. I have reduced them here to a short
paragraph each.
Now the second century Nazarene writer Rabbi Gish’fa (Heggissipus) made use
in his writings of these traditions. Eusebious writes of him:
“And he quotes some passages from The Gospel according to the Hebrews and
from ‘The Syriac’, and some particulars from the Hebrew tongue, showing
that he was … from the Hebrews, and he mentions other matters as taken
from the oral tradition of the Jews.”
(Eccl. Hist. 4:22)
Now this brings us to the question : What is the Talmud, and what does it
mean to Nazarenes?
The core of the Talmud is the Mishna. The Mishna was complied around 250
CE by Rabbi Y’hudah Ha Nasi from ealier oral and/or written traditions.
It cites the opinions or Rabbis and teachers who lived in the generation
immediately following Ezra and Nehemiah, up until the time of its
composition. The Talmud was compiled around 500 CE and consists of the
Mishna written in Hebrew and the commentary to the Mishna, known as the
Gemara, surrounding it in Aramaic characters.
The Talmud contains two types of Oral Law: Oral Law from Sinai and Oral
Law from the judges.
Oral Law from Sinai is the oral companion to the written law. The written
law says “do not go out of your place on the Sabbath” but the Oral Torah
tells us what “place” means. Moses certainly knew what it meant and so
our ancestors knew and passed down the information to us along with the
written Torah.
Oral Law from the judges is another matter. These are rulings in
difficult matters that have been made by the Rabbis (and Judges before
them) based on the powers given in Deut. 17:8-13 and passed along as Oral
Law as well. This is the authority to “bind and loose” which is spoken of
by Yeshua (Mt. 16 and 18) and given to his Talmidim.
Now we as Nazarenes do not believe that the Rabbis or Pharisaic/Rabbinic
Judaism held the power to bind and loose after the first century, perhaps
not even before the first century. Thus we should not simply accept these
rulings, on the other hand we should not simply reject them out of hand.
In may cases the Talmud or the related halachic Midrashim present the line
of logic which led to the decisions being made. We should look at these
lines of logic to determine if the decisions were valid and sound.
For example I heard one Messianic Rabbi bashing the Talmud and claiming
that the Rabbis had added thirty-nine rules to the simple commandment not
to work on the Sabbath. In fact the thirty-nine categories (given in
m.Shabbat 7:2) are drawn from the text of the Torah. In the Torah the
instructions concerning the building of the Tabernacle are interrupted by a
restatement of the commandment not to work on the Sabbath (Ex. 31:12-17).
The connection this section of Exodus has with the surrounding material
seems to be the word “work” (Ex. 31:14) and “workmanship” (Ex. 31:3) (same
word in the Hebrew). Thus the commandment not to “work” on the Sabbath
(Ex. 31:14) is restated as a reminder to abstain from the “workmanship” of
the Tabernacle mentioned in Ex. 31:3. Thus the term “work” in the
commandment not to work on the Sabbath may be elaborated and defined by the
thirty-nine categories of “workmanship” involved in building the
Tabernacle.
We as Nazarenes should not reject the material in the Talmud out of hand,
we should seek to understand it. Then we should “eat the date and spit
out the seeds”. The same approach should be taken to the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Nazarenes should not be modern day Sadducees.
James Trimm
Comments
Post a Comment