Your second axiom is extremely important in the sense that Judaism recognizes that the meaning of many of the decrees given in the Torah (for instance the decree to take a knife to the biological serpent, i.e., brit milah) are what Judaism calls a "chok." A "chok" is a decree whose meaning isn't...
Didn't you say that you said to do both? If so, and if the Torah doesn't say to do one of them, where do you get your directive to do both? Or am I misreading you?
John
Fwiw, the written Torah says to do both. So we still have the very juxtaposition between what the written Torah says to do, versus what Jesus says to do. What Jesus says to do and what the written Torah says to do aren't always the same thing. Which kinda segues into the question of whether...
As I read you, you said that the right thing to do was to do what the written Torah tells you to do. I think part of your argument might be based on the idea that there's no distinction between what the written text of the Torah is interpreted to say, versus what might be argued elsewhere?
What...
Exactly.
Correct. Jesus isn't arguing with the Sanhedrin or the experts in the Law. As anyone familiar with these things knows, the experts in the Law are experts par excellent. They really are head and shoulders beyond mere mortals trying to understand the Law.
Jesus isn't arguing...
Jesus constantly says to his audience: "You have heard it written" (speaking of the written Torah), "but I tell you," (speaking of the oral, living, Torah). Which is to say that Jesus doesn't pit his statements against the written Torah, but juxtaposes his oral Torah, living breath, with the...
I should rephrase that. What I should have implied is that although two Talmudic Sages may agree on a meaning of a given verse, they rarely, if ever, assume that the text has just one meaning; they spend their lives seeking seventy or more hidden meanings from every iota of scripture.
John
Rabbi Horowitz makes this clear when he says:
Remember that if Adam had not sinned . . . Man would not have been required to bring himself close to G-d by means of an animal sacrifice; he himself would have been the sacrifice, much as is described by our sages when they tell of the archangel...
I had a verse like Psalms 2:6 in mind. In the literal Hebrew it says, "I have poured out my king upon my holy hill Zion." But that makes no sense in a Jewish context. Why would God be pouring out his king on the holy hill of Zion in a Jewish context? And the Jewish context was all there was...
I don't know how seriously you take the written text of scripture, but I think I speak for anyone who studies it daily and has for decades when I say that how I read a given scripture now is a far cry from how I interpreted it twenty years ago. What I now know, was "hidden" from me when I read...
God doesn't have a hand, and he doesn't really engage in a carnal sexual relationship with his bride, Israel. Throughout the Tanakh, we see hundreds of anthropomorphisms and anthropopathisms. Why is it that when the anthropomorphism of a divine phallus comes up, so to say, the metaphorical...
Cool animation! . . . But this concept of a set and established morality, be it concerning war and killing enemies, or other commandments etched in stone, is pretty much the basis for this thread since the Akedah is Abraham going against standard morality in his achieving of a spiritual status...
Did the Odyssey come with Cliff Notes? . . . That's my sarcastic way of asking who gets to say which interpretation of the story is canonical? Did Homer visit you or whomever determines what the story means in a night vision? From a different perspective, do you believe the orthodox...