Rabbinic or Non-Rabbinic

[The Thadman]

Similar to the other poll, I was wondering what count we have here.

1) Rabbinic

Follow Jewish Oral Torah and Rabbinic writings such as the Talmud.

2) Non-Rabbinic

Sticks to the Tanakh alone.

I'm Non-Rabbinic, because of the neumerous rebuffs in Jesus' teaching to the Oral Law, the commands to not add or diminish from the Torah, and the whole scenerio that transpired in Acts 15.

What are you and why?

[Henaynei]

As to why.... see my signature ;)

[BenTsion]

I am non-rabbinic. Though I have a deep respect and interest about the Oral Torah, I
cannot really be sure about how faithful it is to the original, and therefore I do not
follow it. As for the other rabbinic Jewish writings, I cannot accept them as inspired
because they were either written or compiled after Yeshua's time. Though I can learn
from them, I am not bound by them. Yeshua Himself condemned the Halacha of the
Pharisees as being an excessive burden upon men's shoulders. I know however that
this is not the only possible interpretation, and we must learn to respect our different views. :)

[Pray4Isrel]

I am non-Rabbinic for the exact same resons that BenTsion just listed in his above post.

[Henaynei]

Query:

For those Messianic believers who "are not rabbinic" - what do you do with Yeshua's direct command in Matthew 23:1-3??

[Pray4Isrel]

Query:

For those Messianic believers who "are not rabbinic" - what do you do with Yeshua's direct command in Matthew 23:1-3??
I follow all that is written in the entire Word of G-d to the best of my ability.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.

[iitb]

A couple of weeks ago, I was listening to a study by Nehemia Gordon(non-believing Karaite) on the topic of "Moses Seat and Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew." In Shem Tov's translation, Matthew 23:2-3 is rendered as:
Upon the seat of Moses the Pharisees and sages sit. Now all which he says to you keep and do; but their ordinances and deeds do not do because they say, and do not.
I'm not 100% sure I'm going to jump on the Karaite bandwagon, and I have no doubt someone will show up to refute Nehemia's credibility, *glances at Higher Truth ;)* but this would make a little more sense in light of Y'shua's actual dealings with the Pharisees.

[Higher Truth]

Justin:

I'm not 100% sure I'm going to jump on the Karaite bandwagon, and I have no doubt someone will show up to refute Nehemia's credibility, *glances at Higher Truth * but this would make a little more sense in light of Y'shua's actual dealings with the Pharisees.

HT:

Nehemiah is a non-believing Jew, which he states upfront without any deception. He is also a scholar who has worked with Emannuel Tov on the study of the Masoretic text. He was one of the first people to publicly state that the name Yahweh was not correct, and that it was more correctly rendered as YeHoWaH according to the mss that he studied. I do, however, have a problem with the Shem Tob Matthew, and textual scholars agree that it is a copy from the 1500's, not anything ancient. It has also been corrupted for theological reasons. Currently there are no known ancient Hebrew or Aramaic NT mss, which is agreed upon by textual critics through out the world.

You're up next Thadman.

[Hix]

I am Rabbinic (as if everyone doesnt know by now). You said in your oppening post about adding and taking away from the Torah? Well without the Oral Torah you are taking away from it, it was given at Sinai and was intended to be used in harmony with the written Torah. After all teachings on texts have their limits, that is why HaShem gave the Oral Torah to be passed from generation to generation and for the most part that still continues today.

[Pray4Isrel]

What is not written in the Bible that I should be following?

[sojeru]

P4I,
I suggest to you, your excellency, in Humility, that you study Judaism first before condemning it- see if it does infact adhere to bible or not.
It is that simple.
first pick up a shulchan aruch and then test everything that is in it- and there you will find out if anything out side of bible has to do with talmud.

However, it seems to me that people so easily forget that the Writtings of the Nazarenes especially by the words of Messiah quotes many teaching and sayings found in the talmud.
If a person understood Judaism before Jesus, Judaism during his time and after and modern day Jewry- they would see how it is all one and compliments eachother.

shalom u'bracha

[The Thadman]

I am Rabbinic (as if everyone doesnt know by now). You said in your oppening post about adding and taking away from the Torah? Well without the Oral Torah you are taking away from it, it was given at Sinai and was intended to be used in harmony with the written Torah. After all teachings on texts have their limits, that is why HaShem gave the Oral Torah to be passed from generation to generation and for the most part that still continues today.

There are only mentions to -written- Laws in the Tanakh, never an Oral Law. The Muslims also have a similar tradition called "Hadith" which are supposedly the "oral laws" of Islam. They have as much disagreement in them as the Talmud has. Jesus spoke out against the Oral Law, and Paul and the other Apostles in Acts 15 say not to put that yoke upon people.

As for the command in Matthew, it is a debate upon translation. The Oral Law nullified the Law of Moses, and as I see the grammar of the verse, he was telling them to follow the Torah, and ignore the oral customs and ordinances.

Don't get me wrong. I do have respect for Rabbinic traditions, and I am reading through the Talmud. The more I read, however, I see what Jesus was speaking of, and am able to under his teachings on Torah in better context. I cannot, however, add or diminish from God's Law.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[Pray4Isrel]

Anyone willing to answer my initial question?

What is not in the Bible what I should be following?

Sojeru: I never ever ever ever condemned Judaism. Please post your evidence before making false assumptions. As a practicing Messianic of 7 years and a Jewish Studies Major, I indeed understand Judaism.

[sojeru]

what is not in bible?
well, i know this is becoming redundant, however, it seems that no one is listening.
for example- "the corners of your clothes"
we are to put on tzitziyot (the men) on the four corners of our clothing. However, what of our clothes have four corners?
Last time I looked there wasnt any on my T-shirt.

So, the elders of the rabbinate ordained that a garment should be made in order to keep the commandment of tzitzit today.
and that was the tallit kattan- this is Oral Torah. How do we apply the Torah in changing times where even everything is changed because of new Ideas.
This is the Spirit of the Torah and the Holy Spirit is always creating Oral laws.
Remember the 70 elders that Moses ordained by the advice of Reuel Yithro, the father in law of Moses. Anything they said was Torah. It was as if Moses had said it.
This is the seat of Moses.
It looks to me that the Karaite Judaism is wrong to say that the Torah she baal peh is nothing and full of nonsence.
without the Torah she baal peh- we are left with half a soul, like an unmarried man.

I believe that those who have the wisdom to ordain and apply the torah today in changing times have the Spirit of Holiness upon them (Ruach haKodesh)
and yes i know this will spark some rifts.

Everything that all the messianics have agreed with me on if not learned from me- I have learned from Orthodox un believing Judaism and the talmud.

So either deem me not to be trusted because i hold talmud or trust in where I get my knowledge from. Or is it half way because I believe in Messiah Yeshuah?

If people understood who infact has the roles to do in Messiah- then non of these things would be spoken.

shalom u'bracha

[Pray4Isrel]

So, Sojeru, are you saying that I should follow the above?
Are you saying Salvation is dependent upon what is not written in the Word?

[sojeru]

PS. remember the parable of Mr.Legalist and apply it to the post above

[sojeru]

People fail to also understand that Justification and sanctification are two seperate things- HOWEVER they do work together for your end.

We are not JUSTIFIED by the works of torah, however we are sanctified as it is written all in bible and in the Machzorim and siddurim.

We are made right (righteous) by faith- and by this we are also set apart (sanctified) by the works of Torah in obedience.

If this is applied then a person has endurance for the end.

now quoting Jesus
Those who endure will be saved

so, indeed, my belief does go very much against the norm

[Pray4Isrel]

People fail to also understand that Justification and sanctification are two seperate things- HOWEVER they do work together for your end.

We are not JUSTIFIED by the works of torah, however we are sanctified as it is written all in bible and in the Machzorim and siddurim.

We are made right (righteous) by faith- and by this we are also set apart (sanctified) by the works of Torah in obedience.

If this is applied then a person has endurance for the end.

now quoting Jesus
Those who endure will be saved

so, indeed, my belief does go very much against the norm
Sojeru, I am learning that there is no "norm" left in this world. ;)

I agree with sanctification and righteousness, as contained in the Bible.
I have not been given sufficient evidence as to make me believe that anything outside of the Word is to be adhered to with the same level of dedication.

Still would like an answer to my question: What is not in the Bible that I should be following?

[sojeru]

as you learn you will see what you need to be observing:)

[Pray4Isrel]

as you learn you will see what you need to be observing:)
Then answer my question:
What is not in the Bible that I should be following?

[sojeru]

well, i would have to know you to tell you--- however, i do not know what you observe or not- so how could i tell you. I do not see what you do either.
The oral Torah is how to apply.
thats all

tell me, how do you tie tzitzit?

this is how to apply

tell me exactly how you observe and then if need be I will show you the/ or rather a completion as to how to observe the such

[Pray4Isrel]

well, i would have to know you to tell you--- however, i do not know what you observe or not- so how could i tell you. I do not see what you do either.
The oral Torah is how to apply.
thats all

tell me, how do you tie tzitzit?

this is how to apply

tell me exactly how you observe and then if need be I will show you the/ or rather a completion as to how to observe the such
I eat kosher, observe shabbat, observe the Jewish holidays/feasts/celebrations...
How long does one's list need to be in order to qualify?

I follow what the Bible tells me. I am not ashamed of that. I have been studying the Word since a child and have yet to see anything outside of G-d's Word that I need to follow in order to be saved/justified/redeemed/sanctified.

[sojeru]

anything that is added and no connection to was is written is no part of G-D and hos word.
All of the oral Torah has its root in Torah as do the prophets.

However, when you find inconsistancies between a prophet and the Torah- that where the Oral Torah comes to play.
for example...
the ONLY PLACE to make sacrifice is in Jerusalem...however, remember Eliyah, he fought the prophets of baal and made sacrifice at Carmel...so how could Eliyah do that when it has already been establised in his time that no one is to make sacrifice outside Jerusalem in its specified place?

[Pray4Isrel]

anything that is added and no connection to was is written is no part of G-D and hos word.
All of the oral Torah has its root in Torah as do the prophets.

However, when you find inconsistancies between a prophet and the Torah- that where the Oral Torah comes to play.
for example...
the ONLY PLACE to make sacrifice is in Jerusalem...however, remember Eliyah, he fought the prophets of baal and made sacrifice at Carmel...so how could Eliyah do that when it has already been establised in his time that no one is to make sacrifice outside Jerusalem in its specified place?
Thank you for your explanation, however, it still does not answer my question:

What is not in the Bible that I should be following?

[Higher Truth]

sojeru:

However, it seems to me that people so easily forget that the Writtings of the Nazarenes especially by the words of Messiah quotes many teaching and sayings found in the talmud.


HT:

When was the talmud written?

[The Thadman]

what is not in bible?
well, i know this is becoming redundant, however, it seems that no one is listening.
for example- "the corners of your clothes"
we are to put on tzitziyot (the men) on the four corners of our clothing. However, what of our clothes have four corners?
Last time I looked there wasnt any on my T-shirt.


I'd say that's a case of functional fixedness. If you lay a T-Shirt down there are at least 6 corners: Two on each sleeve (top and bottom), one on each side. Pick four, affix tzitzyot, you're done. :-)

Additionally, the word /kanaf/ can also mean wing, extremity, edge, winged, border, corner, or skirt.

Just to check, Strongs gives me this:

3671 kanaph kaw-nawf' from 3670; an edge or extremity; specifically (of a bird or army) a wing, (of a garment or bed-clothing) a flap, (of the earth) a quarter, (of a building) a pinnacle:--+ bird, border, corner, end, feather(-ed), X flying, + (one an-)other, overspreading, X quarters, skirt, X sort, uttermost part, wing((-ed)). see HEBREW for 03670


So, the elders of the rabbinate ordained that a garment should be made in order to keep the commandment of tzitzit today.
and that was the tallit kattan- this is Oral Torah. How do we apply the Torah in changing times where even everything is changed because of new Ideas.

God didn't ordain a talit. It's superfluous :-) The tzitzyot were supposed to be put on our everyday clothing, not only a ceremonial scarf (although I see that it would be appropriate).


This is the Spirit of the Torah and the Holy Spirit is always creating Oral laws.


But if these Oral Laws don't work with the Torah, their source is questionable.


Remember the 70 elders that Moses ordained by the advice of Reuel Yithro, the father in law of Moses. Anything they said was Torah. It was as if Moses had said it.
This is the seat of Moses.


Let me see what verses you're referring to, as the ones that I'm looking at don't seem to prove your point.


It looks to me that the Karaite Judaism is wrong to say that the Torah she baal peh is nothing and full of nonsence.
without the Torah she baal peh- we are left with half a soul, like an unmarried man.


??? Unmarried man?


I believe that those who have the wisdom to ordain and apply the torah today in changing times have the Spirit of Holiness upon them (Ruach haKodesh)
and yes i know this will spark some rifts.





Everything that all the messianics have agreed with me on if not learned from me- I have learned from Orthodox un believing Judaism and the talmud.

So either deem me not to be trusted because i hold talmud or trust in where I get my knowledge from. Or is it half way because I believe in Messiah Yeshuah?


I will give you the same trust as I would -anyone- who believes in the Messiah. If I don't agree with what you say, you're going to hear it from me, and if you don't agree with what I say, I expect to hear it from you :-)

Needless to say, we may butt heads once and a while. ;-)


If people understood who infact has the roles to do in Messiah- then non of these things would be spoken.
shalom u'bracha

I'm not sure I quite understand :-)

Shlomo u-taude,
-Steve-o

[sojeru]

I have been studying the Word since a child and have yet to see anything outside of G-d's Word that I need to follow in order to be saved/justified/redeemed/sanctified.
Your excellency should think about what you say.
You see no more?
Do you not have a "new testament"?
Is hanukah in the BIBLE (old tetament)?

I dont see where in the BIBLE ("old testament") it is written celebrate the feast of dedications?
However it is written in the "New testament " which was added to the cannon of being BIBLE in the 4th century (when it was canonized)

I am by no means saying that the "new testament" is not part of the Bible...however, if people knew what the "new testament" was, they would have no fight with the Oral torah found in the Talmud

[sojeru]

I never mentioned a tallit. I said a tallit kattan- which is to be used everyday in casual, working wear

[Pray4Isrel]

Your excellency should think about what you say.
You see no more?
Do you not have a "new testament"?
Is hanukah in the BIBLE (old tetament)?

I dont see where in the BIBLE ("old testament") it is written celebrate the feast of dedications?
However it is written in the "New testament " which was added to the cannon of being BIBLE in the 4th century (when it was canonized)

I am by no means saying that the "new testament" is not part of the Bible...however, if people knew what the "new testament" was, they would have no fight with the Oral torah found in the Talmud
Your addressing me as "Your Excellency" is very hurtful and makes me feel like I am being mocked. Will you please refrain from addressing me as such?
I am not Excellent... I only know One who fits that description.

I see that all I need is contained in the Bible.
I have both an "Old and New Testament".
Hanukkah is something I celebrate but it is not dependent upon my Salvation.

The Talmud and "New Testament" are not the same :)

[sojeru]

THADMAN:
But if these Oral Laws don't work with the Torah, their source is questionable.

Thing is non of the Oral torah works without thae Torah.
Its like a man running a red light without the proper appliance of Torah.
This person would be lawless or a legalist if he takes letter for letter and does not know how to apply it to circumstances in life

[Henaynei]

What is not written in the Bible that I should be following?
Well, I suppose the first question is have you reached the fork in the "road" where you decide whether to obey Torah or not not yet??:)

If, so, what did you decided for your present path, Torah or not yet Torah?:)

If you decided to take the path of Torah, how do you DO the WHAT that Torah tells us- such as writing the shema on you doorposts, or wearing the tzitzit on your four corners or slaughtering your animals "in the way" G-d said He showed our fathers? Among others....:)

All of these and more G-d told us the "what" to do in Torah, but He did not give us the "how" to do in Torah... that He gave in the Oral Traditions passed from Moshe to Joshua to the Elders to the Men of the Great Assembly.....all the way to Gamliel (of scriptural renown) the son of the Great Hillel.:D

[The Thadman]

THADMAN:
But if these Oral Laws don't work with the Torah, their source is questionable.

Thing is non of the Oral torah works without thae Torah.
Its like a man running a red light without the proper appliance of Torah.
This person would be lawless or a legalist if he takes letter for letter and does not know how to apply it to circumstances in life

Ok: I ask is it a sin to tie Tzitzith differently than what is in the oral law?

The written Torah only mentions tassels with a blue cord. Many rabbinic traditions remove the blue cord, no?

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[sojeru]

If you knew what branch of Judaism i am from I address you as your Excellency in a place of Honor- I am also known as "Excellency" by my Rabbis- and when being called they either address me as "your excellency" or "Adon Antonio"
I address my rabbis as "your Honor" or "your Eminence".

The way that you have recieved this is an example of how you treat anything authentically Jewish- even if you dont mean too

In Judaism i have learned how to observe people- and I observe your great discomfort with anything really Orthodox Jewish

[Pray4Isrel]

Well, I suppose the first question is have you reached the fork in the "road" where you decide whether to obey Torah or not not yet??:) Reached that fork at age 17 and decided to do the best I could with what I believe the Word says in reference to Laws - so I eat kosher, observe shabbat, observe feasts/celebrations, etc.

If, so, what did you decided for your present path, Torah or not yet Torah?:) I decide BALANCE. Law and Grace... not one or the other. :)

If you decided to take the path of Torah, how do you DO the WHAT that Torah tells us- such as writing the shema on you doorposts, or wearing the tzitzit on your four corners or slaughtering your animals "in the way" G-d said He showed our fathers? Among others....:) Once again, Grace should not be left out of the picture. I do the best I can knowing that He has justified me by His shedding of blood for my sins.


All of these and more G-d told us the "what" to do in Torah, but He did not give us the "how" to do in Torah... that He gave in the Oral Traditions passed from Moshe to Joshua to the Elders to the Men of the Great Assembly.....all the way to Gamliel (of scriptural renown) the son of the Great Hillel.:D
Maybe he left out the "how" because it is a heart matter, not a head matter.
;)
As for myself, many hint to me that what I do is not enough... when in fact, I am helping change this world one soul at a time and have chosen to leave the comfort and security of repetition and have fallen head over heals in love with a Messiah who loves me just as much in return.
We may sit here all day and judge who is appropriately observant...
Instead, I'd rather be out reaching my hands to those who are perishing and offering them the Hope of eternal life through Yeshua HaMashiach.

[Pray4Isrel]

If you knew what branch of Judaism i am from I address you as your Excellency in a place of Honor- I am also known as "Excellency" by my Rabbis- and when being called they either address me as "your excellency" or "Adon Antonio"
I address my rabbis as "your Honor" or "your Eminence".I do not know which branch of Judaism you are from.
Thank you for the honor but I am most uncomfortable with the words Excellency in the same sentence as my name - makes me feel weird.

The way that you have recieved this is an example of how you treat anything authentically Jewish- even if you dont mean tooDo you frequently go off spouting judgements upon others whom you don't even know personally?
The way you have spoken to me is an example of how you treat anyone you disagree with - even if you don't mean to.

In Judaism i have learned how to observe people- and I observe your great discomfort with anything really Orthodox JewishWhy not ask me how I feel about something instead of telling me how I feel?
It's your comments such as these that greatly repulse me from participating in a discussion where I am spoken for instead of spoken to.

[sojeru]

hehe, you have no idea of the strictness there is of the "blue" cord.
it also said that 40 years before the destruction of the temple the "blue" cord turned white...this is also is saying that the shell fish used to give the die for this blue ink was gone...funny it also happened around the time of the death burrial and ressurection of Messiah...this was the only blue die that was used for the cord- not any die was used...as Henaynei explained- this is part of the HOW to do.

so we do not remopve anything- however, we are rediscovering the animal again so that we can have blue cords.

:)

[The Thadman]

hehe, you have no idea of the strictness there is of the "blue" cord.
it also said that 40 years before the destruction of the temple the "blue" cord turned white...this is also is saying that the shell fish used to give the die for this blue ink was gone...funny it also happened around the time of the death burrial and ressurection of Messiah...this was the only blue die that was used for the cord- not any die was used...as Henaynei explained- this is part of the HOW to do.

so we do not remopve anything- however, we are rediscovering the animal again so that we can have blue cords.

:)

Where does it say that you -must- use mollusks?

And, is it a sin to do otherwise? This is the question I was hoping someone would answer.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[sojeru]

P4I,
you said:
Maybe he left out the "how" because it is a heart matter, not a head matter.

I must ask you, what does a person "THINK" with in the Bible?
In the Bible it is always reffered that the HEART does the thinking, yet we know scientifically the it is the mind that does the thinking...the heart has feelings that can be interpreted by the mind by certain nerves being affected in a certain way.

however, Biblically the Heart is the source of all type of thought...so indeed, it is a heart of matter----this is the biblical mind

[Pray4Isrel]

Where does it say that you -must- use mollusks?

And, is it a sin to do otherwise? This is the question I was hoping someone would answer.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o
Same question I have been asking yet to no avail.

[sojeru]

Oral Torah
plain and simple--- this mollusk was given by Moses- even if it isnt recorded in the Bible it was done...
the same is said for Messiah..
John said that Jesus had done more things (a prophet like unto Moses) yet it is not recorded (however, be sure that all these things were still in the mind of the apostles)
this these acts that Jesus had done were kept orally and ended with orally with the apostles.
However, with Moses it kept going unto the day of the apostles and today

[sojeru]

either dismiss the notion tht Jesus did more things which can also have an effect to how we observe because you wish to stay sola scriptura, or know that he did more things and this is extra biblical

i guess the question would be: which of you believe sola scriptura- because that is what the issure seems to be

[sojeru]

if any of you believe sola scriptura- then disregard history outside of the bible- even if it is attached to it or not- REASON: it is not in bible

forget archaeology
forget science
forget commentaries
forget culture
anthropology
biology
just forget everything and stick to everything solely in bible

if you wish to keep that simple- then that simple keep it to its extreme

I can agree that some scienetists can twist science
and the same goes for the rest.
And the same can be said for Rabbis
However, once a person understands the Talmud they will realize that all of it is in one accord with Messiah.
A person only needs to learn and then halachic discussions can be held as to which would be correct- and all of this is fine because even in Orthodox today there are great varieties in halachic observance

[The Thadman]

Oral Torah
plain and simple--- this mollusk was given by Moses- even if it isnt recorded in the Bible it was done...
the same is said for Messiah..
John said that Jesus had done more things (a prophet like unto Moses) yet it is not recorded (however, be sure that all these things were still in the mind of the apostles)
this these acts that Jesus had done were kept orally and ended with orally with the apostles.
However, with Moses it kept going unto the day of the apostles and today

But mollusks are unclean.

If the dye stayed in the Tztzith, they would be ritually unclean, as they are the remnants of the carcases of unclean animals, and the mollusks were not the only means of obtaining a blue dye in the ancient east.

The oral torah has abrogated the Law of Moses, and all tzitzyot tied with this dye have residual unclean animal carcasses on them.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[Higher Truth]

sojeru:

However, it seems to me that people so easily forget that the Writtings of the Nazarenes especially by the words of Messiah quotes many teaching and sayings found in the talmud.

Quote from Jewish sources:

This tradition was maintained in oral form only until about the 2d century C.E., when the oral law was compiled and written down in a document called the Mishnah.

Over the next few centuries, additional commentaries elaborating on the Mishnah were written down in Jerusalem and Babylon. These additional commentaries are known as the Gemara. The Gemara and the Mishnah together are known as the Talmud. This was completed in the 5th century C.E.

HT:

The Messiah walked the earth quite a bit earlier than the compilation of the talmud. Many have also tried to say that He was quoting from the Septuagint when quoting the OT writings because some NT quotes more closely resemble the Greek OT than they do the Hebrew Masoretic text. These kinds of statements need to be closely scrutinized.

[simchat_torah]

the mollusks were not the only means of obtaining a blue dye in the ancient east.
No, but it is the only source for that particular shade of blue...

anywho...


I can't rightfully vote for either category. I think the poll is flawed.
Allow me to ask all of you non-Rabbinic people out there:
Do you women light candles on Shabbat?
Do you men wear Kippot?
Do you wear a Tallit?
Do you attend synagogue on Shabbat?
Do you have a mezzuzah?
Do you partake of Challah on Shabbat?
How about the Kiddush?

I could ask a thousand other questions.
How can you say you are non-Rabbinic? That just simply boggles my mind.

Furthermore, what do you mean by "Rabbinic" vs. "non-Rabbinic"? Every sect of Judaism only follows partial Talmud. Each sect allows their Beit Din to borrow from the Talmud that which they feel applies. As well, Messianic Judaism, though it doesn't have a Beit Din per se, also follows part of the Talmud.

Then there are other Rabbinic traditions that can not be found in the Talmud, such as the blessing over certain things, ect.

Ok, truth be told, I voted "Rabbinic"... but only because there were a lack of correct options. I would venture to say that those who voted either way are probably lying to a degree, albeit to their ignorance.

No Jew would ever say the Talmud is inspired as the Tenach is inspired. (I'll have to rehash my 'what is inspiration in the Jewish mind' topic later...) No Jew is truly 'rabbinic' to the degree you demand by this poll. Yet, we are all Rabbinic in a sense as well.

Ahh, I'm rambling at this point.

More later.
Shalom,
Yafet.

[simchat_torah]

man, I'm gone for one morning, and look at the mess you're in Willis.

*sigh*



;)


Seriously though, FIVE PAGES? oy vey.

[simchat_torah]

I also reason that aside from myself and Sojeru, there remains at least two others here who voted Rabbinic as well... interesting.

[The Thadman]

[/font]
No, but it is the only source for that particular shade of blue...


So God said to make a ritually unclean dye that would make anyone who touched it ritually unclean? How do we know that it was -specifically- that blue, instead of just blue like the Torah says?


Do you women light candles on Shabbat?


Another practice that goes against the Torah. We're not to kindle fire on the Sabbath. Fires that have been burning already are Ok, but most people who light candles on the Sabbath use matches or clickers to make new fire.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[Talmidah]

I also reason that aside from myself and Sojeru, there remains at least two others here who voted Rabbinic as well... interesting.
I wasn't trying to remain anonymous...I just figured that you, sojeru, and Henaynei would be much better to explain things than I would. ;)

[simchat_torah]

[qoute]So God said to make a ritually unclean dye that would make anyone who touched it ritually unclean? How do we know that it was -specifically- that blue, instead of just blue like the Torah says?[/quote]

Ahhh..
1) HaShem declared certain unclean animals are to be used in particular sacrafices.
2) The Torah doesn't specify what shade of blue.
3) HaShem instituted the Beit Din to interpret halacha to rule over the community. The Beit Din has ruled this particular shade of blue is to be used. ;)

Another practice that goes against the Torah. We're not to kindle fire on the Sabbath.Actually, you might be unfamiliar with the specifics of this practice, but the candle lighting is done just before sundown, thus it is not in violation of Torah as you suppose.

Shalom!
Yafet.

[Hix]

I eat kosher, observe shabbat, observe the Jewish holidays/feasts/celebrations...
How long does one's list need to be in order to qualify?

I follow what the Bible tells me. I am not ashamed of that. I have been studying the Word since a child and have yet to see anything outside of G-d's Word that I need to follow in order to be saved/justified/redeemed/sanctified.

You say you keep Kosher, but were do you find the law partaining to mixing milk with meat? The Talmud. It is not an addition to the Torah, it only explains and brings out what the Torah really says, it builds on it given the added freedom of being done Orally and not on paper. The law regarding milk and meat is but a subtle hint in the Torah and can only be interperated as a mitzvah from the Talmud.

If you think the Oral Torah, the Mishna part at least is wrong, then you are basically accusing an entire nation of lying about something that was unique among all world religions including christianity - national revelation, and the giving from G-d of HIS word, for a nation to preserve.

Like S_T said, its actually impossible to try to be Jewish and call youself non-rabbinic. Judaism is based around the Torah, the written and the Oral are both ONE and from Moshe to Yeshua to the Diaspora, they continue to both be taught in the Jewish household.

[The Thadman]

[qoute]So God said to make a ritually unclean dye that would make anyone who touched it ritually unclean? How do we know that it was -specifically- that blue, instead of just blue like the Torah says?

Ahhh..
1) HaShem declared certain unclean animals are to be used in particular sacrafices.
[/QUOTE]

No, he declared unclean animals who were not allowed to be eaten, and after handling their carcasses, if you did not wash with water, it would lead to sin.

Unless that blue mollusk die was washed out, it's carcass was still in the fabric.


2) The Torah doesn't specify what shade of blue.


Then we should not add or diminish from the Torah. Let blue be blue.


3) HaShem instituted the Beit Din to interpret halacha to rule over the community. The Beit Din has ruled this particular shade of blue is to be used. ;)


The Beit Din's ruling made sure that whenever someone were to even touch a Tzitzith they were ritually unclean. Since all men of Israel under this oral statue wore them, then all men of Israel who were under this oral statue were in a nearly perpetual state of uncleanliness, even in the Temple during sacrifices. We do not need to go into what God decreed concerning that.

Plus, why stop trying to use blue? Is it better to try to keep the Law of Moses, or say to God, "Well, we can't use this shade of blue, so we won't even use blue at all, contrary to the Law of Moses."

In other words you claim that the Beit Din disobeyed the commandment of God because of their tradition (Mt 15:3,6; Mk 7:9). It was either use an unclean blue (sin), or no blue at all (sin): catch 22.


Actually, you might be unfamiliar with the specifics of this practice, but the candle lighting is done just before sundown, thus it is not in violation of Torah as you suppose.


So then the Jewish community that I am familliar with is breaking the Torah.

Shalom!
Yafet.
[/QUOTE]

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[Pray4Isrel]

You say you keep Kosher, but were do you find the law partaining to mixing milk with meat? The Talmud. It is not an addition to the Torah, it only explains and brings out what the Torah really says, it builds on it given the added freedom of being done Orally and not on paper. The law regarding milk and meat is but a subtle hint in the Torah and can only be interperated as a mitzvah from the Talmud. So what you are saying is that the Word is not sufficient in and of itself, and needs additional interpretations?
I disagree.
John 1:1-3, as I quoted earlier, tells me that the Word in itself is sufficient.

If you think the Oral Torah, the Mishna part at least is wrong, then you are basically accusing an entire nation of lying about something that was unique among all world religions including christianity - national revelation, and the giving from G-d of HIS word, for a nation to preserve.I said no such thing. And never did I ever state that anyone was lying nor did I state that it is "wrong". I simply asked a question: What is not in the Bible that I should be observing? Do not put words in my mouth, nor make any assumptions on my behalf. I have great respect, understanding and love for Messianic Judaism. Just because I have a difference in opinion does not mean I am accusing an entire nation of lying.

Like S_T said, its actually impossible to try to be Jewish and call youself non-rabbinic. Judaism is based around the Torah, the written and the Oral are both ONE and from Moshe to Yeshua to the Diaspora, they continue to both be taught in the Jewish household.I don't try to be Jewish - I simply am what I am. I call myself a Messianic Gentile and I practice according to my knowledge of G-d's Word.

Once again, not everyone here will agree on every issue.
I have been redeemed, sanctified, justified and made whole. I abide by Law and Grace.

[simchat_torah]

Then we should not add or diminish from the Torah. Let blue be blue.
Which blue?

What is rest on the Sabbath?
What is considered work?

These are the types of things HaShem deemed the Beit Din to decide for the community.

Anywho....

Instead of hammering on one specific (tzitzit) the bulk of what I said still stands. Messianic Judaism does in fact honor partially halachic ruling and Rabbinic tradtion.

Shalom,
Yafet.

[simchat_torah]

Shalom P4I,

I don't try to be Jewish - I simply am what I am. I call myself a Messianic Gentile and I practice according to my knowledge of G-d's Word.

Funny thing is, many of the ways that you choose to practice are in fact Rabbinic in expression.

In other words, Messianics can not say they reject "Rabbinic", or that they are non-Rabbinic. They can say they partially accept that which they pick and choose.

Well, p4i, you get my drift, eh?

shalom,
yafet.

[Pray4Isrel]

/me is so tempted to write the following question in size 5000 font!

WHAT IS NOT IN THE BIBLE THAT I SHOULD BE OBSERVING?

[simchat_torah]

No one says you "should" observe anything. The fact is that you do in fact observe some Rabbinic tradition. So to say that you flat out reject Rabbinic tradition would be a fallicy.

Does this make sense?

shalom,
yafet.

[Pray4Isrel]

Shalom P4I,


Funny thing is, many of the ways that you choose to practice are in fact Rabbinic in expression.

In other words, Messianics can not say they reject "Rabbinic", or that they are non-Rabbinic. They can say they partially accept that which they pick and choose.

Well, p4i, you get my drift, eh?

shalom,
yafet.
Believe it or not, I totally catch your drift...
but your counterparts are not in agreement with you.
They are saying I am incorrect in my view of Law and it's observance.

[simchat_torah]

Oh, well... I would disagree with them on this aspect. I would never judge how one chooses to observe Torah. That is between them and HaShem (and possibly the beit din they submit themself too).

I am not arguing that point at all!

My dear, you choose how you want to observe!

I just have to correct those who completely deny Rabbinic tradtion, yet uphold it themselves! (to an extent) ;)

I hope I haven't offended you, and I hope I have made myself clear and not murky... (like always :) )

[Pray4Isrel]

No one says you "should" observe anything. The fact is that you do in fact observe some Rabbinic tradition. So to say that you flat out reject Rabbinic tradition would be a fallicy.

Does this make sense?

shalom,
yafet.
This totally makes sense to me...
and I agree.
Yet your counterparts do not concur. They are talling me that I am accusing an entire nation of lying, that I do not know Judaism, etc.

Which is it then?

[Pray4Isrel]

Oh, well... I would disagree with them on this aspect. I would never judge how one chooses to observe Torah. That is between them and HaShem (and possibly the beit din they submit themself too).

I am not arguing that point at all!

My dear, you choose how you want to observe!

I just have to correct those who completely deny Rabbinic tradtion, yet uphold it themselves! (to an extent) ;)

I hope I haven't offended you, and I hope I have made myself clear and not murky... (like always :) )
Yafet, you have no idea how relieved I am after reading this.
YOU have stated so clearly what others are missing.
It is not for anyone to judge but the L-rd Himself!
One can't tell the other that their observance is inadequate.
It is a heart matter... and that is between HaShem and the person involved.

Let's face it, we could all point to the other and say, "Yeah, well you don't do this, but I do because I am right!". One here could easily say, "Erin you do not do such-and-such correctly." I could then say "Yes, well at least I go and share my Faith with others... blah blah blah, etc etc etc".
It's an ongoing circle. How can man judge his fellow man's level of observancy?
To some in this very forum, my commitment to missions and sharing the Saving knowledge of Yeshua HaMashiach in foreign nations is viewed as a waste of time, yet I wouldn't dare tell my fellow brothers and sisters that they are inadequate in their calling and observances.
Isn't this why Paul describes the Body and how we all have different parts?

When will we look inward instead of feel the burden to tell others that their very personal heartfelt observance is inadequate? Who is anyone to judge his fellow man?

If you told me that G-d has told you to stand on your head, read Leviticus and sing HavaNagila, who am I to tell you that it is wrong?

If my observance of eating kosher is in line with my readings in Leviticus, who would dare have the right to tell me I am doing it incorrectly?

Work out your own Salvation with fear and trembling... and by george, let me work out mine.

[The Thadman]

Which blue?

Blue :-) There are many shades, but one general idea of BLUE. God asked for blue; therefore, we give him blue. A clean blue.


What is rest on the Sabbath?
What is considered work?


Look at the Takank :-) Anyone can read it. Jesus rebuked the oral traditions concerning several interpretations of work on the Shabbath.


These are the types of things HaShem deemed the Beit Din to decide for the community.


The Beit Din was not God's mouthpiece. God was. This is a summary of most of Jesus teachings. :-) If the Beit Din said to do something contrary to the Law, then we are to please God not man.


Anywho....

Instead of hammering on one specific (tzitzit) the bulk of what I said still stands. Messianic Judaism does in fact honor partially halachic ruling and Rabbinic tradtion.

Shalom,
Yafet.

I do not appreciate you dealing with this problem. Oral tzitzyot are sin as they are, correct? Why follow that tradition?

I will honor it and study it, but I will by no means follow it, especially when it demonstratably leads to sin. In my opinion, this is what Jesus saught to restore.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[Achichem]

I abide by Law and Grace.decide BALANCE. Law and Grace... not one or the other.I know your thoughts are true, but on a matter of suggestion, your wording here I do not think accurately reflects the terms, and since you are such a big promoter of the messianic faith in one way or another, may I suggest not saying finding both, or law and grace.

You see that is like coming before a judge and saying: “I tried to find a balance between the law and your leniency” it just doesn't pan out.

Rather I would suggest properly defining them as “under grace I live the law.” Or “in grace and in law do I walk” or something of that sort.

See that is because the commandments are a lifestyle, well grace is an “action towards us”, the charity of HaShem,

Anyways just a thought,
Shalom,
Datsar

[Pray4Isrel]

I know your thoughts are true, but on a matter of suggestion, your wording here I do not think accurately reflects the terms, and since you are such a big promoter of the messianic faith in one way or another, may I suggest not saying finding both, or law and grace.

You see that is like coming before a judge and saying: “I tried to find a balance between the law and your leniency” it just doesn't pan out.

Rather I would suggest properly defining them as “under grace I live the law.” Or “in grace and in law do I walk” or something of that sort.

See that is because the commandments are a lifestyle, well grace is an “action towards us”, the charity of HaShem,

Anyways just a thought,
Shalom,
Datsar
I consider the following verses:
John 1:16-17 And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace. For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Yeshua HaMashiach.

I believe that both are equally important.
It may seem like a dichotomy of sorts, but it's really not.
One is dependent upon the other.
Law without Grace? No way!
Grace without Law? No way!

Instead I come to the Father saying "I have followed your Law to the best of my ability." and He would then say, "My grace is sufficient for thee".

I believe that the law and grace are one lifestyle because both require the other.

[koilias]

What's not in the Bible, that I should be doing?

Going the extra mile.
Love your enemy.
Judge not lest you be judged, for the measure you give will be the measure you'll receive.
And other delicacies like that.

Yeshua arrives at these by answering first the question, "What's in the Bible that we should be doing?" And his answer is "Imitate God, in Whose image you are created."

So in effect, the ORAL Torah of Yeshua is nothing more than an observation about what the Written Torah says about the character of HaShem. Yeshua wants us to be sons and daughters of HaShem, a great step beyond simply fulfilling a given list of commandments.

[simchat_torah]

ThadMan,

While I could argue further specifically concerning the tzitzit, I would point you to something I stated earlier:Instead of hammering on one specific (tzitzit) the bulk of what I said still stands. Messianic Judaism does in fact honor partially halachic ruling and Rabbinic tradtion.


This is the heart of the matter.

Shalom,
Yafet.

[Hix]

This totally makes sense to me...
and I agree.
Yet your counterparts do not concur. They are talling me that I am accusing an entire nation of lying, that I do not know Judaism, etc.

Which is it then?

P4I you are very quick to go on the defensive, I apologise if I came across offensive I did not mean to. Personally you dont have to follow any laws, I was trying to point out for those that do under the eternal covenant, the Jews, they require the Oral Torah for the full understanding of the law and that is why it was given by HaShem at Sinai.
I was not targetting you when I said about calling a nation liers, I was simply stating that anyone who denies the importance of the Talmud is in the same vien denying a very important part of Judaisms history when they alone out of all the world were given national revelation.

I did not mean to attack you at all, please forgive me if it came across this way. At Sinai G-d communicated the 613 commandments, along with a detailed, practical explanation of how to fulfill them. At that point in time, the teachings were entirely oral. Information in the written form is, by definition, secondary and limited in scope. That's why the Oral Torah is 50 times the size of the Written Torah! (In actuality, the Oral Torah is infinite. It contains the totality of Torah, which - as the word of the infinite God - is by its very definition infinite. HaShem knows that without the Oral Torah to bring to light his Mitzvot then, inevitably there would be misinterperations, fighting amongst Jews about what to observe, and of cource worst of all, breaking the Law without even knowing it.

Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan has a good explaination on this:
"The Oral Torah was originally meant to be transmitted by word of mouth. It was transmitted from master to student in such a manner that if the student had any question, he would be able to ask, and thus avoid ambiguity. A written text, on the other hand, no matter how perfect, is always subject to misinterpretation.
Furthermore, the Oral Torah was meant to cover the infinitude of cases which would arise in the course of time. It could never have been written in its entirety. It is thus written (Ecclesiastes 12:12), "Of making many books there is no end." God therefore gave Moses a set of rules through which the Torah could be applied to every possible case.
If the entire Torah would have been given in writing, everyone would be able to interpret it as he desired. This would lead to division and discord among people who followed the Torah in different ways. The Oral Torah, on the other hand, would require a central authority to preserve it, thus assuring the unity of Israel..."

It should also be noted that Oral Teachings help you remember, The Torah is not something that should be put on a shelf, especially since Yeshua wrote it on our hearts. The Torah is laid out in writing, but the explainations, the advanced Torah if youd like is to be learned and reviewed so that it may be lived and internalized.

But anyway, it IS all down to opinion and that is mine at least. Once again I apologise for being so rude before, in alot of cases I find myself to immature, and I hope we can still be good friends P4I :) just think of me as another Chaver in Yeshua.

Shalom and G-d bless you
~Hix~

[Henaynei]

But mollusks are unclean.

If the dye stayed in the Tztzith, they would be ritually unclean, as they are the remnants of the carcases of unclean animals, and the mollusks were not the only means of obtaining a blue dye in the ancient east.

The oral torah has abrogated the Law of Moses, and all tzitzyot tied with this dye have residual unclean animal carcasses on them.

Shlomo,
-Steve-oThis is not true - but I can see you are truly trying to reason things out :)

There are many things that HaShem allowed the use of that were "unclean" for either consumption or sacrifice - the very first that comes to mind are the "badger skins" that HaShem *commanded* cover the Mishkan - no matter HOW you translate that it is an "unclean animal :)

Also, many things, when processed and extracted are judged to be significantly different and separate from the original source that they no longer carry the stigma of it's origin (kinda like us once we are washed in the miracle elixir of the mikvah and subjected to THE Light of His Son. I think it is rather significant that the blue dye could only be achieved by both adding some special chemical "mikvah" AND subjecting it to the light of the sun. The actual "pure" extract it self is in no way blue, just as we, in our natrual state are in no way holy either.

[Henaynei]

Ok, truth be told, I voted "Rabbinic"... but only because there were a lack of correct options. I would venture to say that those who voted either way are probably lying to a degree, albeit to their ignorance.


Shalom,
Yafet.
Pugh on you!! LOL When I say I am rabbinic I am saying that I support and believe in the value of the Talmud to the degree that when I am faced with a new revelation of observance I ask myself "is there any scriptural reason I should NOT do this?"

This is growth from where I used to be which was when faced with a enw revelation of observance I would ask "why should I do this."

For me, there is a VAST distance between those two questions and it directly reflects on my identification with Judaism and the G-d of Torah.

[Henaynei]

Another practice that goes against the Torah. We're not to kindle fire on the Sabbath. Fires that have been burning already are Ok, but most people who light candles on the Sabbath use matches or clickers to make new fire.

Shlomo,
-Steve-oThis reflects on a misunderstanding on your part - and on a very faulty selfish practice in many MJ congregations.:sigh:

First, you are QUITE right - HaShem clearly commands that no fire be lit during Shabbat!!

However, the Shabbat candles are ONLY lit BEFORE sunset!! No rabbinic source would allow lighting after sunset!! In fact, rabinically they are lit at least 18 minutes before sunset, but once lit in that place Shabbat is considered to have started (following the tradition that one is encouraged to ADD glory and honor to a commandment but never subtract).:clap: IF one did not get the candles lit before the sun sets one is FORBIDDEN to light them.

Far too many MJ congregations meet on Friday night, and as a result many light the "Sabbath" candles to "start" Shabbat at the beginning of their services and set their service times around 7pm. WRONG:mad: So, you see, it is the rejection of both Talmud and Torah that lights the candles after sunset.

G-d starts Shabbat with the setting of the sun - the ONLY influence man can have on the Shabbat is starting it early, NOT deciding to start it once every one is in their seats.:(

[Henaynei]

I wasn't trying to remain anonymous...I just figured that you, sojeru, and Henaynei would be much better to explain things than I would. ;)
Thanks for the vote of confidence LOL :hug:

But with my FIL still in the hospital, having various surgeries and with my computer still at the "doctors" I only get on for a very few minutes before work!!

Have a go at it - every voice counts!!! We learn from each other!! It is the Jewish way!

[simchat_torah]

In fact, rabinically they are lit at least 18 minutes before sunset
Off the top of my head, I recalled it was at least 15 minutes... hehe, but I couldn't remember the exact timing. thanks ma lady...

As a side note, I was speaking with a Rabbi in Jersalem a couple of years ago (atm, I forget which sect) on PalTalk. He pointed out to me that in Numbers 15 the man was "gathering" wood for the fire. The most literal interpretation of 'kindling' used in this scenario was that the man was 'working' by gathering wood... not that the fire itself, or the starting of it, was condemned by HaShem. Obviously gathering wood out in the desert would be considered work, nu?

Interesting note.

In other words, when one applies (as Messianics and Orthodox alike) that no fire is to be lit on Shabbat, it can not be verified by the literal torah, but only through interpretation (oral torah) ;)

Fascinating when you think about it...
I tend to agree, but yet I honor the 'not lighting of a fire' because of respect.

Well, shalom and all.
-Yafet.

[BenTsion]

I know I'm jumping in a little bit late to this discussion, but coming to think of it, I agree with Yafet that there are not enough options. Some of you rabbinic folks seem to think that those who voted for 'non-rabbinical' simply toss away the Talmud or any other tradition. That couldn't be farther from the truth. There was one comment about sola scriptura meaning you should disregard archaelogy. I guess what is lacking here is a definition of WHAT the Talmud and Oral traditions mean to us. One thing is to practice such tradition, and to know the value of it, another thing is to equate it
to the Word of HaShem. Let's take the Kippah for instance. I love the profound meaning of this tradition, I myself wear it, I find it nice when synagogues request that it be worn even by visitors, but IT'S UP TO ME, or at least UP TO THE CONGREGATION. If it is a tradition, then I can decide if I want to uphold it or not. Of course, I ought to choose a congregation accordingly, and I ought to respect the tradition of those who follow traditions I don't. So it's not right to say that we simply disregard the Talmud, by no means! Just like I wouldn't throw away, for instance, an R.C. Sproul book on Justification just because it isn't part of the canon. But if Sproul suggests something that is not clearly stated in the Bible, I can agree with his interpretation or not. It's up to me, and that is not a sin. I see the Talmud the same way. For instance, I keep the dietary laws found in the Bible, but I disagree with a lot of the kosher instructions, such as never mixing milk and meat (funny thing is Avraham didn't have a problem serving milk and meat in a banquet according to the Torah), I love cheeseburgers and I eat them without any worries, because I know it is not a sin (the Torah doesn't condemn it no matter what the Talmud says). I guess
this is how most of us who voted for non-rabbinical view rabbinic literature (which wouldn't make us exactly antagonic to rabbinic writings - like Yafet pointed out, there are gray areas here). All in my humble opinion, of course.

In Messiah,
Ben Tsion

[simchat_torah]

Another argument I strongly disagree with, and come against with all my heart, is the idea that simply because a Rabbi (or Jew, or whoever) doesn't have the added belief in the Messiah, then whatever they say we can just toss aside. I've seen this idea in this thread, and many others.

I can't express enough how wrong this is.

[The Thadman]

As a side note, I was speaking with a Rabbi in Jersalem a couple of years ago (atm, I forget which sect) on PalTalk. He pointed out to me that in Numbers 15 the man was "gathering" wood for the fire. The most literal interpretation of 'kindling' used in this scenario was that the man was 'working' by gathering wood... not that the fire itself, or the starting of it, was condemned by HaShem. Obviously gathering wood out in the desert would be considered work, nu?

Interesting note.

In other words, when one applies (as Messianics and Orthodox alike) that no fire is to be lit on Shabbat, it can not be verified by the literal torah, but only through interpretation (oral torah) ;)

Fascinating when you think about it...
I tend to agree, but yet I honor the 'not lighting of a fire' because of respect.

Well, shalom and all.
-Yafet.

Exodus 35:3: You shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations on the Sabbath day.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[The Thadman]

ThadMan,

While I could argue further specifically concerning the tzitzit, I would point you to something I stated earlier:

This is the heart of the matter.

Shalom,
Yafet.

Tzitzith is one of many Rabbinic traditons (most of them, in fact) that I have issue with, as they add and subtract from God's Torah. THIS is the heart of the matter.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[simchat_torah]

No, you are missing the point. You can't say that you reject all Rabbinic'ism and yet uphold a lot of it in your expression of faith.



This is illogical and contradictory.

[The Thadman]

There are many things that HaShem allowed the use of that were "unclean" for either consumption or sacrifice - the very first that comes to mind are the "badger skins" that HaShem *commanded* cover the Mishkan - no matter HOW you translate that it is an "unclean animal :)

Notice how the badger skins were the outermost covering, and would not have defiled the Tabernacle, as they were not placed in the sacntuary. You wouldn't handle them, make yourself unclean, and then make a sacrifice. The badger hides were also placed "above" the Tabernacle, and there were no regulations or measurements for them. Suspiscious.

Notice the progression from the most beautiful (dyed twisted linen and gold, then fine goat's hair, like cashmere) on the inside, to the lesser and lesser attractive (red ram skins), to the unclean (rough undyed badger/dugong/sea cow skins). The Tabernacle was a holy place, and it's design looks like it expresses this (the inside his holy in an unholy world).

My problem with the unclean tzitzith is that they were taken INTO the sanctuary, and whoever would touch them would be unclean. Unclean people in the sanctuary making sacrifices = sin.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[simchat_torah]

I believe it was a donkey used in a particular sacrafice. This animal is unclean.

The problem, Steve-o, is that you misunderstand the idea of 'cleanliness'. For example, a cat is an unclean animal. Yet touching one does not make you unclean. It is the consumption of this particular animal that makes you unclean.

The same goes with mussels, dogs, horses, etc.

In other words, the Tzitzit does not make one unclean. The animal is not fit for human consumption, yes, but touching one does not make one unclean.

Many times HaShem chooses to use unclean objects to represent spiritual meaning... from sacrafices, to the building of the temple, etc.

[The Thadman]

No, you are missing the point. You can't say that you reject all Rabbinic'ism and yet uphold a lot of it in your expression of faith.

This is illogical and contradictory.

First, what do I uphold? I am a gentile, and have only been exposed to Rabbinic tradition through Non-Messianic Jewish groups on campus. I do not model my life after their practices. :-)

Second, I reject it as God's Torah. Breaking oral tradition (traditions of men) does not equal sin. Following it as God's Torah breaks Torah.

If I want to tie a Tzitzith, I would never use a specific procedure out of obligation to oral tradition. I've tied tzitzyot many different ways, and I've found a procedure that works for me which, although it does have the same number of knots and wrappings borrowing some things from Rabbinic tradition, I am in no way REQUIRED to tie them as such, and as a matter of fact if it causes someone to "stumble" I'll tie them differently. It is of no problem because all God laid down in the Torah was tie tassles with a blue cord and stick them on the edges or corners of our clothing. Nothing more, nothing less.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[simchat_torah]

Second, I reject it as God's Torah.
No Jew views the Talmud as the Torah, or as ordained by the mouth of G-d. It is a rule of thumb for the community on how to apply the Torah to one's life.
Breaking oral tradition (traditions of men) does not equal sin. Following it as God's Torah breaks Torah.
Again, no Jew would ever say you 'sin' when you break an oral command. However, when you submit yourself to a Beit Din, you are placing yourself under that authority... as it was set up IN THE TORAH.

No Jew follows the Talmud as Torah either. The Beit Din will use the Talmud to help them make decisions (halacha) on how the community should uphold the written commands in today's times.

I see you have a great misunderstanding of the Talmud. Maybe before opposing it so strongly, you should study its application in a Jewish lifestyle before making snap judgements?

Shalom,
yafet.

[The Thadman]

Acts 15
1 Some men came down from Judea and taught the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised after the custom of Moses, you can’t be saved.” ((Note: Custom/tradition)) 2 Therefore when Paul and Barnabas had no small discord and discussion with them, they appointed Paul and Barnabas, and some others of them, to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders about this question. 3 They, being sent on their way by the assembly, passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles. They caused great joy to all the brothers. 4 When they had come to Jerusalem, they were received by the assembly and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all things that God had done with them.
5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to charge them to keep the Law of Moses.” ((Note: LAW. Pharisees did not differenciate between oral and written.))
6 The apostles and the elders were gathered together to see about this matter. 7 When there had been much discussion, Peter rose up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that a good while ago God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, testified about them, giving them the Holy Spirit, just like he did to us. 9 He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why do you tempt God, that you should put a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? ((Note: This MUST be the oral law, enforced as though it is the Torah, as we read in Leviticus 11:36, God "{broke} the bars of {our} yoke" giving us the Torah.)) 11 But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they are.”
12 All the multitude kept silence, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul reporting what signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 13 After they were silent, James answered, “Brothers, listen to me. 14 Simeon has reported how God first visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. 15 This agrees with the words of the prophets. As it is written,
16 ‘After these things I will return.
I will again build the tent of David, which has fallen.
I will again build its ruins.
I will set it up,
17 That the rest of men may seek after the Lord;
All the Gentiles who are called by my name,
Says the Lord, who does all these things.
18 All his works are known to God from eternity.’
19 “Therefore my judgment is that we don’t trouble those from among the Gentiles who turn to God, ((Note: In refernece to the oral law)) 20 but that we write to them that they abstain from the pollution of idols, from sexual immorality, from what is strangled, and from blood. ((Note: The four "foreigner" Laws in the Torah, the bare minimum for Gentiles among Israelites)) 21 For Moses from generations of old has in every city those who preach him, being read ((Note: read)) in the synagogues every Sabbath.” ((Note: Start with the milk, work up to the meat. They would learn more about Torah each week.))


This is my understanding.

If the oral law is not followed as God's law I have no issue, and I will retract any words I have made that are contrary, as I was not aware. If oral law -is- used, however, under circumstances where it abrogates or nullifies the Law of Moses, then I have a problem.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[simchat_torah]

Steve-o, I respect your humble attitude and your willingness to grow and learn.

Please do not think that I take your words lightly either... I highly respect your work in the linguistic arena, and I thank HaShem we have your resources available to us on these forums.

The best scholar is one who knows and admits he does not know it all... heheh, something for me to keep in mind.

shalom,
yafet.

[simchat_torah]

5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to charge them to keep the Law of Moses.” ((Note: LAW. Pharisees did not differenciate between oral and written.))

Yes, and this was their downfall.

Example: Mark 7
They said the food was 'unclean' until they washed their hands... nullifying the Word of G-d. By stating food was unclean until the ritual of washing was complete was in effect stating that HaShem did not have the power to make the food clean by the Torah declarations, and only man, by his 'magical' man made tradition made the food clean through this tradition of 'washing of hands'.

However, keep in mind, that the washing of hands is not inherrently evil. Instead, it is the application of making it higher than Torah that made it evil.

We must view the Talmud, and other halacha, in this exact manner.

Shalom,
yafet.

[Henaynei]

Tzitzith is one of many Rabbinic traditons (most of them, in fact) that I have issue with, as they add and subtract from God's Torah. THIS is the heart of the matter.

Shlomo,
-Steve-oTzitzit are NOT a rabbinic tradition - they are strictly biblical - see leviticus


Having questions about the blue is very Jewish and the subject of a lenghty (several centuries long actually) discussion among the rabbis - so you are in good company.

How they are tied IS a rabbinic tradition - but since how they are tied in no way contridicts any scripture - but actually is a Hiddur Mitzvat (beautification of the commandment) tying them according to the tradition (there are about 6, so you have several from which to choose) only serve to show honor to a community which you seem to respect.

Also of note is the it is SCRIPTURE that the tzitzit be worn on a four cornered garment. When fashions changed the learned Jewish fathers developed the prayer shawl and the tallit Katat so that the commandment might be obeyed as G-d gave it - worn on a four cornered garment - not shirt tails or belt loops :)

[The Thadman]

Tzitzit are NOT a rabbinic tradition - they are strictly biblical - see leviticus

Deuteronomy and Numbers, actually (otherwise I probably wouldn't be wearing them right now :-) ). I was referring to Tzitzyot dyed with unclean pigment. Ambiguity on my part, sorry :-)


Having questions about the blue is very Jewish and the subject of a lenghty (several centuries long actually) discussion among the rabbis - so you are in good company.


That's what I'm seeking to understand.


How they are tied IS a rabbinic tradition - but since how they are tied in no way contridicts any scripture - but actually is a Hiddur Mitzvat (beautification of the commandment) tying them according to the tradition (there are about 6, so you have several from which to choose) only serve to show honor to a community which you seem to respect.


I've always entertained the idea of having tzitzith tying as a family tradition, which is something that I'd like to do with my future kids some day.


Also of note is the it is SCRIPTURE that the tzitzit be worn on a four cornered garment. When fashions changed the learned Jewish fathers developed the prayer shawl and the tallit Katat so that the commandment might be obeyed as G-d gave it - worn on a four cornered garment - not shirt tails or belt loops :)

Not necessarily. /Kanaf/ does not just mean "corner" it can mean "side," "skirt," "fringe," "edge," "wing," "quarter," etc. along the general idea of "outermost edges." The earth does not have corners, as it is a sphere, yet the same word is used to describe it that way. Additionally, the word for "garment" (/beged/) has similar range as to what it means, but all definitions have one thing in common: regular clothing.

I understand that the talit katat is part of many Messianics' wardrobe, but I prefer them, for the sake of their use (which was so that you look upon them to remember the commands of YHWH) in places that I look upon more often (i.e. four quarters on my cargo pants). When I reach for my keys, I see them. When I reach for my wallet, I see them. When I reach for my PalmPilot, I see them. When I'm just sitting down, I see them. :-)

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

[Henaynei]

De 22:12 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=de+22:12&version=str&st=1&sd=1&new=1&showtools=1)

Thou shalt make (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=06213&version=kjv) thee fringes (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=01434&version=kjv) upon the four (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=0702&version=kjv) quarters (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=03671&version=kjv) of thy vesture, (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=03682&version=kjv) wherewith thou coverest (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=03680&version=kjv) thyself.

Strong's Number: 03671 from (03670 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=3670&version=kjv))
Kanaph

Phonetic Spelling kaw-nawf'

Parts of Speech Noun Feminine
Definition

wing, extremity, edge, winged, border, corner, shirt
wing
extremity
skirt, corner (of garment)


Family tradition?? Why YES - the Family of Israel has a long standing family tradition of how to tie them - and tying them in a way that enlightens the commandment, making the tyings actually speak the name of G-d AND number the commandments! Why would you want to seperate yourself from THAT family and it's traditions to re-create the wheel?? (confusion reigns :confused: )


For many many centuries the Rabbis have honestly and earnestly sought ways to obey and honor the commandments. If there was something wrong with the way something is done - I mean really truly antiscriptural - then by all means don't do it. But if you must slog through making your OWN tradition because you don't understand the existing tradation may I meekly suggest you earnestly study the reasons and background of the halakah that lead to these traditions??

Why create a pushme-pullyou when you already have a camel??

I honestly don't understand people who want to take on the commandents given to the Jewish people but reject the centuries of Jewish family traditions (Oral Traditions) and have to go about making new ones.

Yeshua actually upheld most of the Oral Traditions. He corrected the ones He saw needed change - but He left the vast number of them unchanged.

Yeshua wore tzitzit, dyed blue by the sea snail, on the four corners of his garment. (Historic and rabbinic liturature support that this was long standing). Yeshua would have been charged with rejecting the traditions, long before anyone got around to charging His with blasphemy, if He had not done so. If it was good enough for Him, why not us??

All Torah, except the 10 Sayings, were originally Oral!! All of it! :) Yesuah IS the spoken Word, made tangible, flesh Word. (aka the Oral AND Written Torah! LOL^_^ )

[P_G]

HT:

Nehemiah is a non-believing Jew, which he states upfront without any deception.Thadman.

Wow! When I read that did my hackles go up! Glad I read it a second time and got it right!

FWIW this Nehemiah is a beliving non-jew :D

Blessings PG

[sojeru]

who are his counter parts?
I would guess that you are speaking of me and Hix or possibly even Henaynei

However, if you go back you will see that we only hold that Rabbinic is not wrong,
and as brought to you by me, I say that your observance will grow as you grow- and i cannot tell (encourage and inspire by teaching and life) you what to observe since I do not know you or in what area you are observant.

I actually that Simchat for bringing clarification, it seems that i work better with him for he says things that I wish to say but much better.:)

Blessings to you and all you,

Shabbat shalom
Antonio

[Pray4Isrel]

P4I you are very quick to go on the defensive, I apologise if I came across offensive I did not mean to. Personally you dont have to follow any laws, I was trying to point out for those that do under the eternal covenant, the Jews, they require the Oral Torah for the full understanding of the law and that is why it was given by HaShem at Sinai.
I was not targetting you when I said about calling a nation liers, I was simply stating that anyone who denies the importance of the Talmud is in the same vien denying a very important part of Judaisms history when they alone out of all the world were given national revelation.

I did not mean to attack you at all, please forgive me if it came across this way. At Sinai G-d communicated the 613 commandments, along with a detailed, practical explanation of how to fulfill them. At that point in time, the teachings were entirely oral. Information in the written form is, by definition, secondary and limited in scope. That's why the Oral Torah is 50 times the size of the Written Torah! (In actuality, the Oral Torah is infinite. It contains the totality of Torah, which - as the word of the infinite God - is by its very definition infinite. HaShem knows that without the Oral Torah to bring to light his Mitzvot then, inevitably there would be misinterperations, fighting amongst Jews about what to observe, and of cource worst of all, breaking the Law without even knowing it.

Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan has a good explaination on this:
"The Oral Torah was originally meant to be transmitted by word of mouth. It was transmitted from master to student in such a manner that if the student had any question, he would be able to ask, and thus avoid ambiguity. A written text, on the other hand, no matter how perfect, is always subject to misinterpretation.
Furthermore, the Oral Torah was meant to cover the infinitude of cases which would arise in the course of time. It could never have been written in its entirety. It is thus written (Ecclesiastes 12:12), "Of making many books there is no end." God therefore gave Moses a set of rules through which the Torah could be applied to every possible case.
If the entire Torah would have been given in writing, everyone would be able to interpret it as he desired. This would lead to division and discord among people who followed the Torah in different ways. The Oral Torah, on the other hand, would require a central authority to preserve it, thus assuring the unity of Israel..."

It should also be noted that Oral Teachings help you remember, The Torah is not something that should be put on a shelf, especially since Yeshua wrote it on our hearts. The Torah is laid out in writing, but the explainations, the advanced Torah if youd like is to be learned and reviewed so that it may be lived and internalized.

But anyway, it IS all down to opinion and that is mine at least. Once again I apologise for being so rude before, in alot of cases I find myself to immature, and I hope we can still be good friends P4I :) just think of me as another Chaver in Yeshua.

Shalom and G-d bless you
~Hix~
I greatly respect your opinions and I thank you so much for your understanding.
I apologize for being defensive... when I feel I have been given differing views and judgements, I am quick to get frustrated.
After all, Messianic Judaism is not quite easy to pinpoint :)
Anyway, thank you again and I very much appreciate your contributions here.