• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Mosaic law still present?

sooda

Veteran Member
The Apostles basically believed that priests added false things to the laws given to Moses


Below is a list of the 613 mitzvot (commandments). It is based primarily on the list compiled by Rambam in the Mishneh Torah, but I have consulted other sources as well. As I said in the page on halakhah, Rambam's list is probably the most widely accepted list, but it is not the only one. The order is my own, as are the explanations of how some rules are derived from some biblical passages.

Judaism 101: A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments)
 

pearl

Well-Known Member

Matthew 23:…22And he who swears by heaven swears by God’s throne and by the One who sits on it. 23Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You pay tithes of mint, dill, and cumin, but you have disregarded the weightier matters of the Law: justice, mercy, and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. 24You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.…

Why is it that many times when Mt 23 is quoted it is done so selectively leaving out ' the following?



1 Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples,

2 saying, "The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses.

3 Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example. For they preach but they do not practice.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Unless religion drops the barbaric traditions of its past it will not survive the next century.
I think most have at least began to view certain things differently, so over my 73 years I've seen some quite substantial changes with many, including within my Catholic faith since Vatican II. Personally, I never would have converted to Catholicism if the Church still was pre-VII.

But also please realize that no church can stray too far from the Christian scriptures without making them and itself irrelevant. We can argue over which should be pretty much ignored and which shouldn't, but throwing the baby out with the bathwater is simply not an option, nor would it be sensible as morals must have some sort of base. Without some sort of base, anything goes.

So, it's trying to strike a compromise of sorts between what the scriptures say and what the use of "reason" should tell us, and we can disagree on what that "compromise" should be without chucking the whole thing into the garbage. I left my fundamentalist Protestant church many years ago because it failed to use enough "reason" as it took a largely anti-science position.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
My concern was that Solomon followed the gods of his wives in old age". Plus Deuteronomy 17:17 kind of limits the number of wives to less than "many". How many is "many"? Apparently 7 sounds good, as it is the number given in Isaiah 4:1. Plus in Isaiah 4:1, they take care of themselves. But that is "in that day", the day of the "Branch of the LORD", the branch/shoot of Jesse (Isaiah 11:1), who is the angel of the LORD, who is "My Servant" (Isaiah 42:1), "the "despised one" (Isaiah 49:7), the "arm of the LORD", by the right hand of Moses.

https://biblehub.com/1_kings/11-4.htm
For when Solomon was old his wives turned away his heart after other gods, and his heart was not wholly true to the LORD his God, as was the heart of David his father

Deuteronomy 17:14-20 14When you enter the land the LORD your God is giving you and have taken possession of it and settled in it, and you say, "Let us set a king over us like all the nations around us," 15be sure to appoint over you a king the LORD your God chooses. He must be from among your fellow Israelites. Do not place a foreigner over you, one who is not an Israelite. 16The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the LORD has told you, "You are not to go back that way again." 17He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold. 18When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the Levitical priests. 19It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the LORD his God and follow carefully all the words of this law and these decrees 20and not consider himself better than his fellow Israelites and turn from the law to the right or to the left. Then he and his descendants will reign a long time over his kingdom in Israel.

https://biblehub.com/isaiah/63-12.htm
. Darby Bible Translation. his glorious arm leading them by the right hand of Moses, dividing the waters before them, to make himself an everlasting name,
Excellent post.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Yeshua specifically called the Pharisees, and Herod (Mark 8:15), along with the Sadducees, hypocrites. Specifically over the giving of tithes of cumin before the weightier matter of caring for their parents (Matthew 23:23). Plus the Jewish leader, of the family of Herod, was from Idumean/Edom, and was not an Israelite, which is against Deuteronomy 17:15, as he is an offspring of Esau. Idumean has simply conquered by the Jews and incorporated into keeping the laws of the Jews. Herod was a fake Jew, but took his brother's wife, which was against the Law. Liberal Jews support killing, and burning of those killed, which is against the Law, and yet support it through the lying pen of the scribes (Jeremiah 8:8), the Talmud. I don't see the righteousness of that. (Isaiah 51:1) & (Isaiah 56:1). One must keep "his hand from doing any evil" (Isiah 56:2). The results of doing evil, are not good, and spelled out in Zechariah 13:9. If one does not learn from history, they are doomed to repeat it.

Mark 8:15
"Watch out!" He cautioned them. "Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and of Herod."

Matthew 23:…22And he who swears by heaven swears by God’s throne and by the One who sits on it. 23Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You pay tithes of mint, dill, and cumin, but you have disregarded the weightier matters of the Law: justice, mercy, and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. 24You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.…
The spice tax is part of the Oral Torah. That the bet Shammai Pharisees observed it shows they were not liberal. Jesus simply reminded them not to forget the essence of the law. He told them to obey the Torah FIRST, and THEN to obey the Oral Torah.

Hypocrisy is not the same as liberalism. One can be EITHER a liberal OR a conservative and be a hypocrite. A hypocrite is simply one who says one thing and does another.

Yes, those from the area around Gallilee were originally forced converts. It is the only time in Jewish history that converts were forced. Herod was born to a convert, and raised in the faith, like other Jews. However, because he was born to a family that originally went through forced conversion, there were doubts about the sincerity of beliefs. This is the reason that those in Jerusalem didn't like those in Galilee.

It really had nothing to do with ancestry. Once a person converted, they were adopted into the Tribe. They were considered a child of Abraham. Consider that Ruth was born a Moabite, but died a Jew, and was the great grandmother of King David--David could never have been king if he had been from a Moabite line. Many Gentiles have the same problem as you do -- thinking it is DNA instead of understanding that it is a tribal thing -- people can be adopted into tribes and become full members. I hope this post helps you.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I was thinking of the differences in the acceptance of resurrection, after life and divorce.
The Torah never mentions life after death. The resurrection is never mentioned until the prophets. The Sadducees did not accept the prophets.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
1200px-Kingdoms_around_Israel_830_map.svg.png
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
The Pharisees believed the adage that the first thing you do is build a fence around the Torah. IOW not only do you obey the Torah, but you also don't do those things which bring you close to breaking the Law. That makes them more conservative than the Sadducees.
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
Why is it that many times when Mt 23 is quoted it is done so selectively leaving out ' the following?



1 Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples,

2 saying, "The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses.

3 Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example. For they preach but they do not practice.

And yet, you apparently do not "observe all things whatsoever they tell you". Except for in the case of the Pharisee, the false prophet Paul, who was Herodian, and a son of Edom, and not really a Jew, of the house of Judah, at all, despite what he might claim. He was a son of Benjamin, only in the fact that he acted as a "ravenous wolf" (Genesis 49:27) & (Matthew 7:15).

Romans 16:11 Paul writes: “Greet Herodion, my kinsman.”
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
The spice tax is part of the Oral Torah. That the bet Shammai Pharisees observed it shows they were not liberal. Jesus simply reminded them not to forget the essence of the law. He told them to obey the Torah FIRST, and THEN to obey the Oral Torah.

Hypocrisy is not the same as liberalism. One can be EITHER a liberal OR a conservative and be a hypocrite. A hypocrite is simply one who says one thing and does another.

In general, those that call themselves liberal or conservative, are generally hypocrites, but the liberals apparently win that race. Killing children on the basis of Talmud readers, will not end well. To say one keeps the Commandments, and then kill the innocent, that kind of smacks of hypocrisy to the worst degree. As for tithing versus honoring one's parents, the down side of not tithing is you will not apparently do well financially. The down side of not honoring your parents, is that "you will (not) live long upon the land which the LORD they God giveth thee". Since after Yeshua pointing out that the Pharisees were putting tithing above honoring one's parents, The "land which the LORD" "giveth thee" was taken away.
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
Yes, those from the area around Gallilee were originally forced converts. It is the only time in Jewish history that converts were forced. Herod was born to a convert, and raised in the faith, like other Jews. However, because he was born to a family that originally went through forced conversion, there were doubts about the sincerity of beliefs. This is the reason that those in Jerusalem didn't like those in Galilee.

By way of Deuteronomy 17:15, one must be a fellow Israelite, which would include the 12 tribes of Jacob, to be a ruler. Herod was not a true Israelite, and should not have been a ruler of the Jews according to the law. To do so would be like saying one thing, and doing another. I think bad things happen when one mocks God's word. Putting Herodians among the Jews, is like putting a ravenous wolf among the sheep.

New International Version Deuteronomy 17:15
be sure to appoint over you a king the LORD your God chooses. He must be from among your fellow Israelites. Do not place a foreigner over you, one who is not an Israelite.
 
Last edited:

sooda

Veteran Member
And yet, you apparently do not "observe all things whatsoever they tell you". Except for in the case of the Pharisee, the false prophet Paul, who was Herodian, and a son of Edom, and not really a Jew, of the house of Judah, at all, despite what he might claim. He was a son of Benjamin, only in the fact that he acted as a "ravenous wolf" (Genesis 49:27) & (Matthew 7:15).

Romans 16:11 Paul writes: “Greet Herodion, my kinsman.”

Saul/Paul was from the Jewish tribe of Benjamin... and so was King Saul.. Why do you say they were from Edom?

The Herodians were known for their desire to cooperate with Herod and his rule in exchange for political favor and peace.

Genesis 49:27, KJV: "Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf: in the morning he shall devour the prey, and at night he shall divide the spoil." (He was a warrior)
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
The Pharisees believed the adage that the first thing you do is build a fence around the Torah. IOW not only do you obey the Torah, but you also don't do those things which bring you close to breaking the Law. That makes them more conservative than the Sadducees.

The Law requires one honors their parents. Apparently that wasn't being done. That would make them hypocrites, if they kept tithing herbs above honoring their parents. As they were soon thrown out of the "land which the LORD thy God giveth thee", I would suspect that the parents weren't being honored. Circumstantial, true, but I wasn't there, and I have to go by the evidence presented. If they had been killing their children, then I could assume that might be another weight on the scales of justice. God generally acts for a reason, not by chance. (Hosea 5:10 & 14).
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
Saul/Paul was from the Jewish tribe of Benjamin... and so was King Saul.. Why do you say they were from Edom?

The Herodians were known for their desire to cooperate with Herod and his rule in exchange for political favor and peace.

Genesis 49:27, KJV: "Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf: in the morning he shall devour the prey, and at night he shall divide the spoil." (He was a warrior)

"Benjamin was a ravenous wolf" (Matthew 7:15) & (Genesis 49:27) and he apparently dressed as a sheep, and led the sheep to "destruction" (Matthew 7:13 & 15). As per Ezekiel 34, the shepherds, such as Paul did not feed, or heal the flock, but apparently like the ravenous wolf, ate the fat of the sheep, and divided the spoil among his appointed leaders, and will be brought to justice (Ezekiel 34:16-20). As for the "fat and strong", "I will destroy", and "feed them with judgment ) (Ezekiel 34:16).

As with king Saul, Paul was also apparently possessed, by way of a gift from Satan, which possession showed itself through the means of a pain in the side. King Saul's "evil spirit" (1 Samual 16:14) apparently appeared as a headache. Both men tried to undo the branch of Jesse, unsuccessfully in the long term.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
The Torah never mentions life after death. The resurrection is never mentioned until the prophets. The Sadducees did not accept the prophets

And that was my point, they only accepted the written Torah, and literally, while the Pharisees believed an oral tradition open to interpretation, which they believed went back to Moses.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Let me just mention that there were several Pharisee groups according to historians, and one was so liberal that at least one theologian that I know called them "Love Pharisees".

I prefer to often refer to the Pharisees as a "movement" because of this, especially since they more emphasized Torah than the ritualistic Temple sacrifices. But when one does that, different interpretations can all too lead to conflict, thus forming division.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
In general, those that call themselves liberal or conservative, are generally hypocrites, but the liberals apparently win that race. Killing children on the basis of Talmud readers, will not end well. To say one keeps the Commandments, and then kill the innocent, that kind of smacks of hypocrisy to the worst degree. As for tithing versus honoring one's parents, the down side of not tithing is you will not apparently do well financially. The down side of not honoring your parents, is that "you will (not) live long upon the land which the LORD they God giveth thee". Since after Yeshua pointing out that the Pharisees were putting tithing above honoring one's parents, The "land which the LORD" "giveth thee" was taken away.
Let's be clear about this. The definition of hypocrisy is saying one thing and doing another. If a Reform Jew says it is not wrong to have an abortion and then goes out and has an abortion, there is absolutely no hypocrisy there. It is Reform Jews who are the liberals, and I have not found them to be hypocrites.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
By way of Deuteronomy 17:15, one must be a fellow Israelite, which would include the 12 tribes of Jacob, to be a ruler. Herod was not a true Israelite, and should not have been a ruler of the Jews according to the law. To do so would be like saying one thing, and doing another. I think bad things happen when one mocks God's word. Putting Herodians among the Jews, is like putting a ravenous wolf among the sheep.

New International Version Deuteronomy 17:15
be sure to appoint over you a king the LORD your God chooses. He must be from among your fellow Israelites. Do not place a foreigner over you, one who is not an Israelite.
When one converts to Judaism, one becomes 100% Israelite (a Jew). Indeed Abraham becomes one's father and Sarah becomes one's mother -- one takes on a new name that includes "ben Avraham" (son of Abraham) or bat Sarah (daughter of Sarah).

Ruth was born a Moabite but died an Israelite. If she had not become an Israelite, her great grandson David would have been ineligible for the kingship of Israel.

The Edomites and Idumeans that became Jews (including Herod's family) BECAME Israelites, no different than Ruth. What you are doing is harassing the convert, which is forbidden by Jewish law. As a Gentile, Jewish law does not bind you, but it does appear from your statements that you are trying to give it weight.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
The Law requires one honors their parents. Apparently that wasn't being done. That would make them hypocrites, if they kept tithing herbs above honoring their parents. As they were soon thrown out of the "land which the LORD thy God giveth thee", I would suspect that the parents weren't being honored. Circumstantial, true, but I wasn't there, and I have to go by the evidence presented. If they had been killing their children, then I could assume that might be another weight on the scales of justice. God generally acts for a reason, not by chance. (Hosea 5:10 & 14).
Of course they were hypocrites. But they were not liberals.
 
Top