Jews (and Noahides): Would Jesus be "sitting in the mizrach"?

[Ehav4Ever]

I once heard of a book called something like "Jesus the Pharisee", written by a rabbi who tried to prove that Jesus's teachings were right in line with those of Beit Hillel (the students of Hillel). For a rough example, Jesus was lenient. Hillel and his students were known for taking more lenient positions in Halacha.

So what do you think? Do you agree with the statement? Would Jesus have been welcomed today as a learned talmid chacham? Is it "all Paul's fault"?

I think the reality is that we have had a lot Jesus's in Jewish history, post exile so I think the real question would be: What version of Jesus does one consider to be valid to to assess in your question? Look, I have bumped elbows with Samaritans and Karaties here in Israel. There is a lot of types. In fact, I have met people who in one form or the other think they are a navi or mashi'ahh. There are some who are more destructive than others because of what they are able to inspire.

One note: the Jesus the Pharisee book has had a number of questions about the authorship of that book. The rabbi who is claimed to have written it was very hard to find information about. The book claims to quote some content from the Talmud which I could not find a source for. Also, it appears that pthe ublisher is some kind of Catholic publishing house.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Edit: The following thread was created for discussion/debate by Jews and Noahides.

Last shabbat, one of the rabbis at my yeshiva gave us a talk about the almost-forgotten Fast of the 9th of Tevet, probably created in the memory of Simon Kipa, which led to talking about some of the history of Jews and Christianity.

At one point he half-jokingly made a comment that were Jesus alive today, "הוא היה יושב ב'מזרח'", "he would be sitting in 'the mizrach'", which is an old Hebrew expression meaning that he'd be sitting (in synagogue or at communal gatherings) with all the important figures of the community. The reason that Jews nowadays don't revere him is because of how Paul messed up his teachings and made them anti-Torah, which subsequently caused the Roman Empire to oppress many Jews.

I once heard of a book called something like "Jesus the Pharisee", written by a rabbi who tried to prove that Jesus's teachings were right in line with those of Beit Hillel (the students of Hillel). For a rough example, Jesus was lenient. Hillel and his students were known for taking more lenient positions in Halacha.

So what do you think? Do you agree with the statement? Would Jesus have been welcomed today as a learned talmid chacham? Is it "all Paul's fault"?

Yes, "Jesus the Pharisee" had a profound effect on my views. I think Jesus is rolling over in his grave that Paul used and abused him to form a new religion. It is clear to me that the historical Jesus taught Torah, and engaged in the same sort of banter over the application of Jewish law that we find in the Talmud. Sure he thought he was the Messiah and failed, but so did bar Kochba. Yes, I think he would be seated in the mizrach.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Jesus says this,

The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.

And this means he supported Oral Torah as well as Torah, since that is included in "everything."

This is indicative of what we see if we remove the commentary and just look at the bare bones record of what Jesus actually did and said. It is only his comments about himself that are troublesome, and I strongly suspect that these are mere legends added by the later gentile Christian authors of the gospels.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Uh... It is... There's an actual problem of doing medical work on shabbat if it's not a life-threatening case.

First, I don't believe there is any prohibition on healing via prayer on the Shabbat.

Second, my understanding is that many of the Shabbat applications we have today were not hammered out precisely in that day. It is possible that healing was one of them.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Jesus narrowed down the 613 to 2, but so many of the 613 don't directly relate to interpersonal relationships and love of haShem, such as keeping kosher or observing Shabbat.

At least this is my take.

Hello, my friend.

Jesus narrowed it to two general categories, as do all the Rabbis. But just as Hillel instructed to go study the commentary, Jesus taught that not a brush stroke would pass away from the law until heaven and earth had passed away.

 

[metis]

Hello, my friend.

Jesus narrowed it to two general categories, as do all the Rabbis. But just as Hillel instructed to go study the commentary, Jesus taught that not a brush stroke would pass away from the law until heaven and earth had passed away.

Exactly, but Jesus was far less concerned about the letter of the Law versus the direction that the Law was pointing to. Thus, certain Commandments became unnecessary, such as those dealing with kosher.

Thus Jesus' approach basically dealt with love ["agape"] and "do no harm", whereas the 613 Commandments also dealt with many other matters. I know you know these, but some others may not, so... Judaism 101: A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments)

Take care, my friend.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Exactly, but Jesus was far less concerned about the letter of the Law versus the direction that the Law was pointing to. Thus, certain Commandments became unnecessary, such as those dealing with kosher.

That is not what I said and it is not true. In Matthew 23:1-2 Jesus instructs his followers to do and observe ALL that the Pharisees teach. That would include not only all 613 of the commandments, but the Oral Torah as well.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I rather like Lawrence Schiffman. His Is Jesus Really Kosher article is interesting.

 

[Jake1001]

Edit: The following thread was created for discussion/debate by Jews and Noahides.

Last shabbat, one of the rabbis at my yeshiva gave us a talk about the almost-forgotten Fast of the 9th of Tevet, probably created in the memory of Simon Kipa, which led to talking about some of the history of Jews and Christianity.

At one point he half-jokingly made a comment that were Jesus alive today, "הוא היה יושב ב'מזרח'", "he would be sitting in 'the mizrach'", which is an old Hebrew expression meaning that he'd be sitting (in synagogue or at communal gatherings) with all the important figures of the community. The reason that Jews nowadays don't revere him is because of how Paul messed up his teachings and made them anti-Torah, which subsequently caused the Roman Empire to oppress many Jews.

I once heard of a book called something like "Jesus the Pharisee", written by a rabbi who tried to prove that Jesus's teachings were right in line with those of Beit Hillel (the students of Hillel). For a rough example, Jesus was lenient. Hillel and his students were known for taking more lenient positions in Halacha.

So what do you think? Do you agree with the statement? Would Jesus have been welcomed today as a learned talmid chacham? Is it "all Paul's fault"?

Good post Harel. You are a zeisen mensch.

 

[Jake1001]

I rather like Lawrence Schiffman. His Is Jesus Really Kosher article is interesting.

In what sense is it interesting?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Edit: The following thread was created for discussion/debate by Jews and Noahides.

Last shabbat, one of the rabbis at my yeshiva gave us a talk about the almost-forgotten Fast of the 9th of Tevet, probably created in the memory of Simon Kipa, which led to talking about some of the history of Jews and Christianity.

At one point he half-jokingly made a comment that were Jesus alive today, "הוא היה יושב ב'מזרח'", "he would be sitting in 'the mizrach'", which is an old Hebrew expression meaning that he'd be sitting (in synagogue or at communal gatherings) with all the important figures of the community. The reason that Jews nowadays don't revere him is because of how Paul messed up his teachings and made them anti-Torah, which subsequently caused the Roman Empire to oppress many Jews.

I once heard of a book called something like "Jesus the Pharisee", written by a rabbi who tried to prove that Jesus's teachings were right in line with those of Beit Hillel (the students of Hillel). For a rough example, Jesus was lenient. Hillel and his students were known for taking more lenient positions in Halacha.

So what do you think? Do you agree with the statement? Would Jesus have been welcomed today as a learned talmid chacham? Is it "all Paul's fault"?

Jesus the Pharisee is indeed one of the best written books I have ever read. I really REALLY recommend it to anyone who wants to understand what it meant for Jesus to have been Jewish.