God says, the Pharisees say, and Jesus says, Part 2
November 18, 2012
G.D.O'Bradovich III
1
I am a terrible teacher. I came to this conclusion after reflecting upon fact that some people don’t make the connections to previous statements that seem obvious to me. For instance, my short essay “God says, The Pharisees say and Jesus says” where God says to not eat blood, do not kill and avoid immorality. Later Jewish leaders say there are seven commandments that are obligatory upon Gentiles. Jesus says to avoid the traditions of men when they are placed above the commandments of God. I understand this to mean that the additional four commandments should be ignored as they were added to God’s word. I suspect that most Gentiles follow the three commandments most of their lives. The implication of Jesus’ statement is painfully obvious-We must return to the original sources and discard any extraneous additions. When advising to go to the source and avoid the traditions and commentaries of men, Jesus gives good advice and has the flavor of a philosopher or researcher. I suppose in the larger scheme Jesus could be a practical philosopher-he prefers the company of men and we know that Saint John is young, only select people know what Jesus meant since he tends to speak in parables and has a tendency to use technical jargon (“Son of Man”), antagonizes the Jewish leaders through debates and heals on the Sabbath exclusively in the fourth Gospel.
Jesus admonishes the Sadducees in Matthew 22:29 where he accuses them of not knowing Scripture. Telling the most learned people of their time that they are unaware is an extraordinary statement and we must determine the validity, if any, of Jesus’ charge of ignorance. The scribes are reading the passage of Exodus 3:6 as “ I was the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.”, whereas Jesus is reading it as “I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.”
Jesus admonishes the Sadducees in Matthew 22:29 where he accuses them of not knowing Scripture. Telling the most learned people of their time that they are unaware is an extraordinary statement and we must determine the validity, if any, of Jesus’ charge of ignorance. The scribes are reading the passage of Exodus 3:6 as “ I was the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.”, whereas Jesus is reading it as “I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.”
"Biblical Hebrew is not a "tense" language.
Modern grammarians recognize that it is an "aspectual" language.
This means that the same form of a verb can be translated as either past, present,
or future depending on the context and various grammatical cues."
Modern grammarians recognize that it is an "aspectual" language.
This means that the same form of a verb can be translated as either past, present,
or future depending on the context and various grammatical cues."
We are left with several possible conclusions regarding Jesus’ statement and none of them are definitive.
1) He has translated it differently than the Sadducees. This does not mean the Sadducees are incorrect, or Jesus is incorrect. The only fact we know is there is a different translation, so we are at an impasse regarding the validity of the Sadducees’ teaching, that is, there is no resurrection of the dead.
2) Jesus is not using the Hebrew version of the Old Testament, but the Greek version. The Greek version uses the present tense, not the past tense. Only when one uses the Greek version is Jesus correct when he says the Sadducees do not know Scripture.
Returning to the discussion at hand, I feel that deductions that are self evident to me elude the understanding of others. I feel that if I were to write in the modern style, it would come across as talking down to the reader. I do not want to do this, however, I do want to bring new information and any insights to my readers. In re “God says, The Scribes say and Jesus says”, I think I have succeeded. These traditions of man, which include the Talmud and the Kabbala, are not necessarily to be rejected wholesale, but their importance must be secondary to the primary source material, that is, the Torah. If the Torah seems to contradict itself, Gentile Reader, then one needs to reflect upon the passages in question.
With Jesus’ radical approach to authority being the Torah alone, he has bypassed the authority of the Pharisees in one stroke. This simple and effective idea of using source material only, destroys the priest class and their volumes commentary that can allow almost any behavior through loopholes and exceptions. In effect, the Talmud allows the 613 commandments to devolve into only a handful of commands that have no exceptions. “The wisdom of this world is foolishness to God” becomes “The legalistic understanding of the Scribes is convoluted and ultimately silly, when compared to the simple, although not necessarily easy to follow, commandments of Torah.”
Saint Paul says that we must test all things. The careless and thoughtless reader will mentally agree, but will not apply this saying to the book they are reading. Gentle Reader, this is Socrates's sense of irony.
1) He has translated it differently than the Sadducees. This does not mean the Sadducees are incorrect, or Jesus is incorrect. The only fact we know is there is a different translation, so we are at an impasse regarding the validity of the Sadducees’ teaching, that is, there is no resurrection of the dead.
2) Jesus is not using the Hebrew version of the Old Testament, but the Greek version. The Greek version uses the present tense, not the past tense. Only when one uses the Greek version is Jesus correct when he says the Sadducees do not know Scripture.
Returning to the discussion at hand, I feel that deductions that are self evident to me elude the understanding of others. I feel that if I were to write in the modern style, it would come across as talking down to the reader. I do not want to do this, however, I do want to bring new information and any insights to my readers. In re “God says, The Scribes say and Jesus says”, I think I have succeeded. These traditions of man, which include the Talmud and the Kabbala, are not necessarily to be rejected wholesale, but their importance must be secondary to the primary source material, that is, the Torah. If the Torah seems to contradict itself, Gentile Reader, then one needs to reflect upon the passages in question.
With Jesus’ radical approach to authority being the Torah alone, he has bypassed the authority of the Pharisees in one stroke. This simple and effective idea of using source material only, destroys the priest class and their volumes commentary that can allow almost any behavior through loopholes and exceptions. In effect, the Talmud allows the 613 commandments to devolve into only a handful of commands that have no exceptions. “The wisdom of this world is foolishness to God” becomes “The legalistic understanding of the Scribes is convoluted and ultimately silly, when compared to the simple, although not necessarily easy to follow, commandments of Torah.”
Saint Paul says that we must test all things. The careless and thoughtless reader will mentally agree, but will not apply this saying to the book they are reading. Gentle Reader, this is Socrates's sense of irony.