Note: This thread is for Jews and Noahides only. If neither of those terms describe you, please refrain from posting here. Thank you.
"Rabbinical Judaism" is a term I see that's tossed around, mostly by Christians, but also by various academic scholars. It's something that's always bothered me. I always cringe when I see the term. To me, it's always seemed like a term that's meant to delegitimize post-exile Judaism as unbiblical nonsense invented by the evil Pharisees and their spiritual descendants, "the rabbis".
Recently, I read an article that was posted a couple of months ago here on RF (I don't remember by whom), that was written by a Jewish person, who contended that both modern-day Judaism and Christianity are two off-shoots of the Second Temple era interpretation of the Tanach and, at least from what I understood, neither held the entire truth, but at the end of days, Hashem will reveal the pure, perfect way to serve Him. Here are some quotes:
So what do you think? Do you think that modern Judaism is disconnected from the "ancient Hebraic religion" as an inherently different religion (even if one holds that the concept of an Oral Tradition from Sinai is true, that is) or not? Did later added rabbinical rulings really change the religion and split it off from pre-exile Judaism?
"Rabbinical Judaism" is a term I see that's tossed around, mostly by Christians, but also by various academic scholars. It's something that's always bothered me. I always cringe when I see the term. To me, it's always seemed like a term that's meant to delegitimize post-exile Judaism as unbiblical nonsense invented by the evil Pharisees and their spiritual descendants, "the rabbis".
Recently, I read an article that was posted a couple of months ago here on RF (I don't remember by whom), that was written by a Jewish person, who contended that both modern-day Judaism and Christianity are two off-shoots of the Second Temple era interpretation of the Tanach and, at least from what I understood, neither held the entire truth, but at the end of days, Hashem will reveal the pure, perfect way to serve Him. Here are some quotes:
"But Christianity did not come out of Judaism, whether for good (the Christian supersessionist view) or for ill (the Jewish supersessionist view). In truth, both Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism come out of, and thereby supersede, a religion based on the Hebrew Bible, plus some developments coming from the elaborative interpretations of Second Temple Jewish theology, the time after the final books of the Hebrew Bible were written but before the first century of Christianity. This religion could be called “Hebraic Monotheism.” It is neither Judaism nor Christianity, at least as we know them from the second century on. Judaism and Christianity have been continually superseding this ancient religion. Both have done so without forgetting their ever-present, ever-necessary foundation in Hebraic Monotheism.
Thus, it is incorrect to say that Jews only have the “Old Testament,” while Christians have both the Old Testament and the “New Testament.” Christians and Jews accept the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible as interpreted by Second Temple Jewish theology to be their foundational revelation. This is what we have in common. In addition, both Christians and Jews have a “new testament.” For Christians, this “new testament” is the book by that very name, plus the ongoing tradition of the Church (its magisterium) extending that new testament into the present. For Jews, our “new testament” is the “Oral Torah” (torah she-b`al peh), written down in the Talmud (and related canonical rabbinic texts) but constantly being extended as tradition up until the latest Jewish teachings. So, just as the Talmud could be called the “Jewish New Testament,” so also the New Testament could be called the “Christian Talmud.” In fact, in both the New Testament and the Talmud, there is nothing of any significance being taught that does not seek a basis in the Old Testament, or what Jews call the Written Torah (torah she-bi-khtiv).
Both traditions base themselves on the same foundational revelation of the Hebrew Bible or “Scripture” (kitvei ha-qodesh). Because of this insuperable commonality, the two traditions cannot be totally different (as Christian and Jewish “isolationists,” both past and present, assert). On the contrary, there is commonality and difference. The two traditions are separate but interrelated, and this dialectic must be maintained until the end of this world."
and:Thus, it is incorrect to say that Jews only have the “Old Testament,” while Christians have both the Old Testament and the “New Testament.” Christians and Jews accept the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible as interpreted by Second Temple Jewish theology to be their foundational revelation. This is what we have in common. In addition, both Christians and Jews have a “new testament.” For Christians, this “new testament” is the book by that very name, plus the ongoing tradition of the Church (its magisterium) extending that new testament into the present. For Jews, our “new testament” is the “Oral Torah” (torah she-b`al peh), written down in the Talmud (and related canonical rabbinic texts) but constantly being extended as tradition up until the latest Jewish teachings. So, just as the Talmud could be called the “Jewish New Testament,” so also the New Testament could be called the “Christian Talmud.” In fact, in both the New Testament and the Talmud, there is nothing of any significance being taught that does not seek a basis in the Old Testament, or what Jews call the Written Torah (torah she-bi-khtiv).
Both traditions base themselves on the same foundational revelation of the Hebrew Bible or “Scripture” (kitvei ha-qodesh). Because of this insuperable commonality, the two traditions cannot be totally different (as Christian and Jewish “isolationists,” both past and present, assert). On the contrary, there is commonality and difference. The two traditions are separate but interrelated, and this dialectic must be maintained until the end of this world."
"Usually, we think God will vindicate either Jewish supersessionism or Christian supersessionism in a zero-sum game. That is, either God will enable Christians to say to Jews, conclusively, “We have been right and you have been wrong all along,” or God will enable Jews to say to Christians, conclusively, “We have been right and you have been wrong all along.” But what if God Himself is a hard supersessionist? What if God’s final judgment, ushering in the world-yet-to-come, supersedes our human triumphalism that looks at the final judgment as an either/or proposition? What if God’s final verdict is beyond our expectations, and thus displaces all of them, replacing them with what our eyes and minds cannot imagine? Wouldn’t that cure us of our Christian and Jewish triumphalist supersessionisms, hard and soft?"
The notion struck me, not because I think it's true, but because it seems that even some Jews (barring Karaites and the like) appear to hold that modern-day Judaism is, at least in part, a (possibly) baseless invention of "the rabbis".
So what do you think? Do you think that modern Judaism is disconnected from the "ancient Hebraic religion" as an inherently different religion (even if one holds that the concept of an Oral Tradition from Sinai is true, that is) or not? Did later added rabbinical rulings really change the religion and split it off from pre-exile Judaism?
