But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
James 2:20 (King James Version)
If faith without works is dead, what are works without faith? Answers that come to mind are magic or manipulation. Rather than pitting faith against works perhaps we should aim to avoid both faith without works and works without faith.
That makes me wonder what the Greek word ἔργων or the Hebrew word מעשים might mean besides “works”, “deeds” or “actions”? Could one understand this as “faith without practice is dead” or “faith without exercising it is dead”?
Regardless, Audrey Mack compares faith to muscles. We all have muscles, but some of us are weaker than others. Muscles become stronger as we exercise them. So does faith.
Weekly Parashah Readings
Parashah: Passover 15 Nissan, 5782 – April 16, 2022
Torah: Exodus 12:21-51; Numbers 28:16-25
Haftarah: Joshua 3:5-7; Joshua 5:2 – 6:1; Joshua 6:27
Brit Chadashah: Luke 22:7-20; John 1:29-31; 1 Cor 15:20-28
Resources: Chabad, Hebrew4Christians, Weekly Torah Readings, Calendar
Poetry, Short Prose and Walking 
Excellent Sunday insight. James is a straight shooter. I appreciate his letter.
Blessings for a stunning Sunday.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, Michael! Blessings!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Howdy Frank, have posted a systematic Oral Torah interpretation of the Parshat ויקרא. As ya can see, the Torah holds the new testament in low regard. Pesach its almost here.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, I have read your comments with interest, mosckerr. I am still trying to understand your perspective.
chag Pesach kasher vesame’ach
https://www.chabad.org/holidays/passover/pesach_cdo/aid/3584633/jewish/How-to-Wish-Happy-Passover-in-Hebrew-and-Yiddish.htm
LikeLiked by 1 person
Howdy Frank. Currently as i complete a chapter employing the Oral Torah logic format to interpret the distinction between exact, close, and distant precedents I intent to pass it on to your blog.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Torah learns by precedents from the Book of דברים also known as the משנה תורה/repetition of the Torah. The new testament failed to learn as Moshe the Prophet commanded. Hence this failure to learn Torah through common law precedents definitively proves the new testament as false.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We disagree about the New Testament (Brit Chadashah), but thank you for presenting your perspective.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The 11th chapter of Leviticus. The chapter contains 3 sugiot: ה: א – י.יא – יג. יד – יט.
Learning the Written Torah by means of משנה תורה and prophetic precedents requires an in-depth study of the logic of the Oral Torah middot system. The different Torah commandments, they compare to Mishnaic Case\Din Law. The contrast between the study of commandments as precedents to grasp the mussar Moshe the prophet commands the generations of Israel.
Contrast the statute law codes of positive and negative commandments and halachot. The distance which separates these divergent legal systems, as vast as the Pacific ocean that separates the United States from Japan. The latter separate the commandments into a simplified positive & negative “racial” division. This sh’itta fails to appreciate how one commandment amplifies and interprets other commandments – the most important and essential key to understanding the Torah as common law. The Reshon Rambam and those influenced by his error, the Baal Ha’Turim sits at the top of this long list of ignominy. This ירידות הדורות – Domino Effect caused Yosef Karo, and all his later commentators, an inability to grasp the Torah as the first common law codification.
Once Napoleon freed Western Jewry from our illegal ghetto imprisonment, almost immediately thereafter rabbinic Judaism fragmatized. This triggered a massive delegitimization of Rabbinic Judaism, especially coupled together with the introduction of citizen rights and separation of church and State. Rabbinic Judaism failed, to this very day, to address the assimilation of Jewish populations to modern Goyim societies, together with the explosion of technological innovations which has defined the reality confronted by post Ghetto Jewry unto this very day.
Rabbinic Judaism, its opposition to Zionism, has severely set back the effort to re-impose the Torah as the Written Constitution of the Jewish state. Delegitimated Rabbinic Judaism, has attempted to re-establish the Sanhedrin court system. Alas these rabbis, to which I initially joined, do not possess the slightest clue how to set up a lateral common law Sanhedrin courtroom. In dismay I personally witnessed a vote by which my peers decided to base the Sanhedrin court upon the Rambam statute code. My peers preferred the model of the Rambam statute law code over the Talmud common law code! At that point came the realization of the ineptitude of my rabbinic peers.
Rav Yoel Schwartz followed up this gross error with an attempt to cause the Sanhedrin to adjudicate a Benai Noach legal dispute abroad. The Sanhedrin court has a legal mandate limited to within the borders of Israel. The entire reason to promote Benai Noach abroad, to educate Goyim in Torah common law here in Israel, which would permit these Goyim to return unto their homelands and establish common law Benai Noach courtrooms abroad. My vocal opposition to Rav Schwartz got me expelled from the Sanhedrin.
Following the collapse of the Sanhedrin attempt to adjudicate a Benai Noach legal dispute abroad, my former peers then switched tracks and focused upon Benai Noach sacrifices. Even while a member of the Sanhedrin, this too I opposed. Korbanot involve making a Torah oath, they do not exist merely as making a barbecue unto Heaven. The Sanhedrin chose one Roger Gatton to dedicate korbanot. He successfully built an altar and made a bird sacrifice based upon the instruction given by Ben Shurr and myself.
Then the Sanhedrin under the “leadership” of Hillel Weiss, attempted another korban, this time the dedication of a whole lamb. The Chilul HaShem, Weiss demanded that a Goy place the slaughtered lamb intact, directly upon the altar – wool guts and all. Roger Gratton refused to participate in that stupid act of korbanot ignorance! The charred corpse of that blackened mutilated lamb, thereafter packed into a plastic trash bag and cast upon the garbage heap!
The complete and total ignorance of Hillel Weise on the Gemarah of זבחים forced the expulsion of Weise from the Sanhedrin; a similar “korban” attempted revolution within the government of Israel itself. Those rabbis simply lacked the required knowledge and skill necessary to organize lateral common law courtrooms. To which, Moshe the prophet set the precedent, before he passed from this world.
To establish a Federal Sanhedrin court system starts with the small Sanhedrin courtrooms – the purpose of the 6 cities of refuge. To re-established the Great Sanhedrin Federal Court, Israel must return and accept both the Republic, together with Capital Crimes punishments.
The Great Sanhedrin does not function as a lower Torts court, which judges cases of damages, both within Israel and abroad. The Great Sanhedrin, not organized around selected committees, as defined by the US Congress. The Great Sanhedrin does not compare to a legislature which votes on bills through a majority plurality.
A Great Sanhedrin judges Capital Crimes Cases. The judicial “buck” stops within the Great Sanhedrin. The Nasi splits the Court into Prosecutor and Defense judges who argue their case position before the opposition judges within the Court, and the Nasi. The objective of the arguments, to cause one or more of the opposition justices to validate the arguments of the opposing justices. To cause one or more of the opposition justices to leave their group, and join the other side. If no movement of this nature occurs among the justices, then the Nasi makes the final ruling.
The korban of purification addresses a broad spectrum of tumah guilt. Avodat HaShem revolves around the opposing poles of tohor and tumah. The Torah continually differentiates between form and substance. The substance of all Torah prophetic commandments – mussar applicable to all generations of Israel. Something like the iron sites of a rifle. Prophetic mussar represents the rear fixed substance site, while korbanot expresses the front moving site – that views ever changing forms of reality.
A slightly distant precedent דברים ב: ב – ח. Relations with Esau, fluid and always changing. Jealousy and fear define the relations with Esau and Israel. Moshe commands a mussar regarding relations with Esau based upon weary caution; trade but limited social interactions.
דברים does not have a precise precedent by which to understand the mussar applicable to this type of korban. ישעיה however instructs a precise mussar commandment: כח: ט – יג. To understand complex and abstract strategy requires much more than a superficial understanding and an emotional reactionary approach to living life.
Newspapers and Television opinionated news – from such empty propaganda a Man does not learn, much less develop strategic doctrines. Men such as Hillel Weise should never assume the mantle of leadership.
Another precise precedent ל: יב – יח. The wisdom of judgment does not come from platitudes and the power of Office. The forms of government do not make a Man wise. Trade with Goyim requires caution and restraint. Knowledge that Esau views Israel with jealousy and fear merits deep consideration. Obviously, for Israel to copy and duplicate the ways and practices of Esau – most unwise. Esau knows nothing of the tohor\tumah division which forever separates avodat HaShem from avodah zarah.
A distant precedent: מד: א – ה. The reverse equally merits strong restraint, when Esau pretends to call himself “the New Israel”. Esau knows nothing about the differences between tohor and tumah. Islam abhors pork but consumes camel products; it does animal slaughter with a knife, yet knows nothing of kashrut. The so-called ‘daughter religions’ worship alien foreign Gods.
Another distant precedent: מה: ח – יג. Creeds, theologies, and dogma the church declares that these have replaced the authority of the Torah. As if the pot can give mussar to the Creator of the pot. Yet the so-called “daughter religions” do just that; they invalidate the Name revealed in the 1st Commandment and pollute the Name by “converting” the רוח הקודש unto words, just as did Aaron when he translated the Name unto the word אלהים.
This והארץ היתה תהו ובהו, precedent requires deep consideration. That, the opening פרק of the Written Torah goes from בראשית א: א – ה. Six times, like the Order of the Mishna, the word Name אלהים employed. To what does this opening sugia of the Torah compare? Perhaps the mitzvah to remove all חמץ the entire 7 days of Chag Pesach.
Why does חמץ carry the din of כרת, during the positive time oriented commandment of Pesach? All the rest of the year, eating חמץ, the basis of bread, quite preferrable. What mussar does the struggle to remove חמץ from our lives during this positive time oriented commandment, what k’vanna does this harsh commandment come to teach? Does חמץ compare to Capital Crimes? Answer: Yes.
How does חמץ compare to a Capital Crime? Answer: Avodah zarah. The commandment to remove חמץ teaches mussar by means of the sh’itta known as משל\נמשל — form/substance. Paro, together with the so-called daughter religions, all worship foreign Gods. The mitzva of counting the Omer, serves as a precedent by which to learn the k’vanna of the משל command to remove all חמץ from a persons’ domain prior to Pesach.
Prior to acceptance of the Torah, the k’vanna of Chag Shevuoth, Israel counts the Omer. Just as prior to Pesach the chosen Cohen nation removes חמץ from our domain, so too the Omer we struggle to do t’shuvah upon our Yatzir Ha’rah who entices us to worship avodah zarah.
Just 40 days after the terror of the revelation of the Torah @ Sinai, Israel translated the Name unto the word אלהים and therein worshipped avodah zarah as taught through the משל of the ‘Golden Calf’. Torah teaches the mussar of how to discern between substance and form.
This fundamental distinction serves as a יסוד by how the משנה תורה interprets the k’vanna of the language of the other 4 Books of the Written Torah. All of the תרי”ג mitzvot have no “legs” to stand – by themselves alone – without the living tohor Spirit of mussar which breathes life into these commandments as HaShem breathed life into clay and caused Adam Ha’Reshon to live.
The study of the common law Written Torah learns by way of precedents. These precedents both define and command mussar to all living generations of Israel. Just as the commentaries written by the Reshonim scholars have no legs to stand by themselves alone, so too the Written Torah commandments require the משנה תורה to breathe a living soul into those commandments.
Shabbot and the negative commandment not to do m’lachot requires the Oral Torah to define the k’vanna of this great Torah commandment. All the תרי”ג mitzvot separate and discern between substance and form. Worlds separate the forms of government from the real power welded by political leaders who rule a nation. Oral Torah requires living generations to interpret the k’vanna of the תרי”ג commandments forms.
Hence the colossal titanic error of codifying the תרי”ג commandments into statute law positive and negative commandments, which virtually all the Reshonim scholars after the Rambam Civil War failed to denounce. The perversion of Torah common law unto statute law compares to eating חמץ during Pesach.
A precise precedent מח: א – ב. HaShem eternally weighs the heart of man and discerns between truth of substance and the lies of external flattery. The 2nd סוגיה addresses the subject of the dedication of a meal offering, applicable to the poorest folk among our Cohen nation. It compares to the meal offering of a wife whose husband burns with jealousy, who suspects her of committing the Capital Crime of adultery.
A precise משנה תורה precedent: דברים כד: י – יג. All bnai brit Israel dedicate our lives before HaShem to respect and preserve the dignity of our people. The capital crime of adultery emphatically betrays this solemn dedication before HaShem. ישעיה too commands a precise precedent. מא: א – ז. The non bnai brit Goyim always confuse forms of faith for the substance of faith. Torah faith stands upon the יסוד of the oaths sworn by the Avot, HaShem in turn swore an eternal deed inheritance of the oath sworn lands given to the chosen Cohen nation. Esau and Ishmael reject this brit on par with their rejection of the Torah @ Sinai @ Horev.
The 3rd סוגיה of this פרק: the אשם ram offering. A slightly distant precedent, דברים ב: ח – טז. The Arabs promote a blood libel slander, known as ‘Greater Israel’. They foist their covetous eye upon the Jewish people and declare that we seek to conquer Arab lands.
In point of fact, Israeli foreign policy seeks to promote Arab sovereignty over their People and lands. Only in this manner can Israel gain the trust of our Arab and Muslim neighbors to cement an economic alliance of trade and establish the North African trade route.
A slightly distant precedent: טז: יח – כב. The tohor obligation to rule the land with Case\Rule common law justice stands in sharp contrast with the Yatzir which worships power and oppression of the weak and helpless.
A precise משנה תורה precedent: דברים כד: יד – כה: יב. The dedication of the אשם korban of purification, its k’vanna centers upon respecting and protecting the dignity of our Cohen people, regardless of their economic standing in this life.
A precise mussar precedent learned from ישעיה, מא: ח – טז. HaShem brings the geulah from g’lut and respects the dignity of his chosen Cohen nation. All the enemies and oppressors of Israel, their time basking in the Sun, the pride of their faith and religions shall permanently fade unto the dust, like the bones of a dead man.
A kosher Chag Pesach to all my people.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As I have clearly shown to you Exodus 34: 6,7 the 13 middot Moshe the prophet heard this Logic system Orally from HaShem. HaShem passed before him and declared HaShem HaShem El etc. The nation of Israel heard the Book of דברים also known as the משנה תורה on the last day that Moshe lived on this earth. They did not read a Book but rather heard this 5th Book of the Torah orally from the mouth of Moshe before he passed from this world.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’ve something, but I didn’t see it. Regardless, thank you for your comments. I am still trying to make sense out of them.
LikeLike
The Book of דברים appeared on the last day of the prophet Moshe’s life on this earth. All the Cohen nation has a Moshiach dedication. The Gemarah of Sanhedrin teaches this explicitly.
What inconsistencies? Please elaborate with specifics. The 5th Book of the Torah that’s the evidence of the Oral Torah. The Talmud teaches that Moshe taught the משנה תורה ie the Book of דברים Baal Peh. The Book of דברים an integral part of the Hebrew T’NaCH. The later prophets based their mussar commandments upon the 13 tohor middot which Moshe the prophet heard directly from HaShem in Exodus 34:6,7 and employed that logic system to fold the Torah of דברים back onto the 4 Books. Sometimes the משנה תורה does not supply a precise precedent of mussar instruction. Therefore the later prophets instructed a precise precedent by which they interpreted the mussar commanded by the Torah.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here is Exodus 34:6-7:
6 Then Adonai passed before him, and proclaimed, “Adonai, Adonai, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, and abundant in lovingkindness and truth, 7 showing mercy to a thousand generations, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, yet by no means leaving the guilty unpunished, but bringing the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, to the third and fourth generation.” https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+34%3A6-7&version=TLV
What are the 13 tohor middot which Moshe heard directly?
LikeLike
Those attributes of mercy – the 13 middot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Could you just list those 13 middot? I will try to find them in Exodus 34:6-7.
LikeLike
HaShem, HaShem, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love and truth, created love to thousands, and endures wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation
LikeLike
In the month of Elul prior to Rosh Ha’Shanna Jews across the world say סליחות. Chabad chassidus refers to this as “the King is in the field”. The Jewish Siddur refers to the 13 middot. On the month of סליחות the 13 middot, Jews say as a sort of confession of faith.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Could you provide a link to this confession of faith. I don’t know how to find it. I read very little Hebrew.
LikeLike
You can not understand Oral Torah without the Siddur, the Jewish Prayer Book. The influence of the Siddur upon the Talmud, its Order and how to learn Halachah and Aggaditah in contexts with the Standing Prayer, the Shemone Esrei. By the sh’itta taught to me, a person can affix any halachah throughout the Sha’s Bavli to a specific blessing within the Middle Blessings of the Shemone Esrei. 13 middot align up with 13 Middle Blessings 3 – 13 – 3 in the Order (Logic stands upon Order) of the Shemone Esrei.
LikeLike
In answer to your question in the Siddur, when they take out the Sefer Torah for the shabbot reading, there you will see the 13 middot.
LikeLike
These 13 middot function as a logic system. At the golden calf Israel who had only accepted the first 2 commandments at Sinai, thought Moshe had died after 40 days and nights on the Mount. We approached Aaron and demanded who will teach us the rest of the Torah?
Teaching Torah entails more than simply regurgitating words learned by rote. Learning means that a person understands how Torah mitzvot learn the k’vanna of other Torah mitzvot.
LikeLike
On Seder Night of Pesach, the emphasis rests upon hiding the Afikomen. This ritual dates back to Moshe the prophet. Where did Moshe hide the Oral Torah Afikomen? Right in front of your eyes – the Book of דברים.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I heard that the Passover Seder (perhaps even the Afikomen) was based on Yeshua’s Last Supper. Note the reference to Israel Yuval in the video below. The article in Hebrew can be found at https://www.academia.edu/37618673/Israel_Jacob_Yuval_The_Haggadah_of_Passover_and_Easter_Tarbiz_vol_65_no_1_1996_5_28_Hebrew_
LikeLike
What absolute narishkeit. That imaginary man has nothing to do with P’sach.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is where we differ, mosckerr. Yeshua fulfilled the Passover and His Last Supper was the model for later Rabbinic Passover Seders. after the temple was destroyed.
LikeLike
Not according to the Book of ויקרא nor to the Haggadah. The new testament only declare on its own authority that it over rides the Torah. And even there not so much.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t think the New Testament actually overrides the Torah although I agree with you that that is the way it is presented by some Christians. The idea of replacement theology runs deep in Christian culture, so deep it is sometimes hard to see how it guides behavior. In particular I am thinking of the Christian calendar (All Saints, Christmas, Easter) as compared to the feasts of Leviticus.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Worlds separate your bringing a non rabbinic or Jews for JeZeus opinions expressed by people living today or the recent past ie your Hebrew Gospels from ancient opinions on the same subject from the period which immediately occurred after Rome expelled almost all Jews from Judea. Rabbi Yechudah HaNasi codified the Mishna in about 210 CE based upon the realities of g’lut.
Attempts to supplant those sources with people expressing their opinions thousands of years after the fact, represents Revisionist history. Ya want to “believe” Revisionist historians? More power to ya, but we Jews have our masoret\traditions which have guided Jewry for over 2000 years and we refuse to dump that cherished masoret\tradition for modern day non sense speculations.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think it is good that you do not follow Christian traditions because many of them, especially those following the Christian calendar, are grounded on replacement theology. However, you might want to consider a Messianic synagogue. Forget JeZeus and consider Yeshua.
LikeLike
No way, the idea of entering a place of avodah zarah… during the Chag of Pesach no less … wow no way ewwwwww. The mitzva of countring the Omer … to distance oneself from all avodah zarah.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good. I don’t recommend that you go to those Christian churches either. If they follow the pagan calendar of Halloween, Christmas and Easter, be wary of them. However, I do recommend that you reconsider Yeshua, not from a Christian perspective, but from that of a Messianic believer.
LikeLike
Narishkeit. ewwwwwwwwww I am the Moshiach, my daughter and wife are the Moshiach, my neighbors are the Moshiach all the nation of Israel – the Moshiach. Ya Goyim your strange notions of messiah really rather funny.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just thought I’d give you some encouragement, mosckerr. But you are not the Moshiach. You are a member of the “chosen people”. That I will admit. And you still are chosen regardless what those promoting replacement theology might tell you.
LikeLike
Chosen Cohen nation. The house of Aaron the anointed Moshiach extends to all members of that chosen cohen nation, an explicit opinion taught in the Gemarah of Sanhedrin.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Frank its not like you ever even observed Passover celebrations. LOL
LikeLiked by 1 person
I never have attended a Passover Seder except watching parts of it in a video. You are right about that. However, I have many times attended a communion service which is the ritual remembrance of the Last Supper. Yeshua fulfilled the Passover. There is no need for any further sacrifice and the lack of a temple makes the sacrifice impossible today. I suspect many, if not most, Jews in the first century were Messianic believers. That is why the current Seder can be linked to the Last Supper.
LikeLike
Communion services can not represent Pesach b/c I personally witnessed the use of leavened bread. Listened to the Xtian speculation in the youtube presentation you presented. That presentation its absurd; it negates the book of mark.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think the original Last Supper used leavened bread because it occurred at the beginning of Passover and the first day of Unleavened Bread was the day after. However, many Christian uses use unleavened round pieces of bread.
Since matzah is served during the Passover Seder I assume it would be held during the first day of Unleavened Bread, but (I think) it is held the day before (14th of Nissan).
LikeLike
What does the Torah command on Passover? To remove all leaven from the bnai brit domains. As I have shown from your own gospel of mark, if your imaginary last supper myth employed leaven then it did not occur on Pass Over – just that simple.
As a non Jew attempts to divorce the Torah from Jewish culture and tradition — utterly absurd.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As I see it, the Last Supper occurred at the beginning of Passover, after sunset (14th of Aviv). However, I am confused by this chronology based on Matthew and John.
Unleavened bread was not required then, but that was the day the leavened bread was removed from the house. One way to get rid of that leavened bread would be to eat it. The days of Unleavened Bread started the day after.
LikeLike
Drop the I Frank. You do not qualify as an expert b/c you rely upon translations. This makes your scholarship … undergraduate level. Attempts by Goyim to divorce T’NaCH from Jewish culture customs and traditions — totally bankrupt.
LikeLike
What I am saying with “I” is that this is “my” best understanding at the moment.
What you should drop is your hostility. Talk to me rationally. Don’t bury your arguments in ad hominem attacks.
LikeLike
Frank I like you and have not attacked you, at least not to my knowledge.
LikeLike
Frank I hope that my assessment of your scholarship skills has not offended you. Its hard to communicate when a person can not read facial expressions. Its the most critical flaw of communicating only by means of letter type responses. I hope that if my analysis of your learning skills angered you … please accept my most sincere apologies. Had no intention to insult or belittle you.
To continue with my credentials. Rav Nemuraskii, demanded that I learn the classic Aramaic Targum/translations made by Tannaim scholars, the rabbis who inherited the Oral Torah mantle from the P’rushim whom the new testament Goyim so despised.
The most basic Aramaic primer being the targum written by אונקלוס. Hebrew and the Aramaic languages — so similar that if you do not understand the 4th word from the Onkelos targum, you can count the 4th word in the Hebrew and that’s the translation. Hence Targum Onkelos represents virtually a word for word precise translation from Hebrew to Aramaic.
Then comes the targum written by יונתן בן עוזיאל. Wow this Aramaic targum, made by the top talmid of Hillel, this makes this Tanna a generation prior to Rabbi Akiva! Rabbi Akiva was a very old man when the Romans destroyed Herod’s Temple in Jerusalem. The Midrash describes Uziel’s tefillah, that if a bird flew over him while he stood in the Shemone Esrei that the bird burst into flames. Torah teaches through the משל\נמשל method.
The Rashi commentary and theory of p’shat represents a revolution during the times of the Reshonim scholarship. But Uziel’s targum Wow it teaches the method of דרוש a key element in Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system. Targum Uziel opened my ears to how to learn Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס kabbalah.
The classic Midrashim developed by the post sealing of the Talmud scholars known as the Gaonim – 600 – 950, Rav Aaron made their scholarship one of my Primary focuses upon learning how to learn. The Midrashim developed by the Gaonim scholars, they serve to teach the sh’itta of how to learn the Aggadatah within the Sha’s Bavli. Persons who attempt to learn Aggadatah without a strong background in Midrashic scholarship, those folk have not the least clue how to delve into this דרוש\פשט diagonal of Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system. Learning how to learn classic Jewish legal sources takes years of learning sitting under a Rav who understands from his Rav how to learn and decode the Talmud and Midrashic sources.
Reliance upon the much later Reshonim commentaries fails to communicate the learning foundations taught by comparing Primary sources with other Primary sources.
Yosef Karo, the author of the Shulkan Aruk made this classic error of reliance upon Reshonim secondary sources of scholarship over learning the Primary sources of scholarship. Yosef Karo caused the Rambam statute law error to prevail. This set off a domino effect that destroyed how the generations after the Rambam code, how those rabbis lost the ability to correctly learn Talmudic common law.
As a Goy with no background in classic pre-Talmudic scholarship, you stand zero chance to develop the skills required to separate and distinguish between like and like… the Talmudic definition for understanding.
This assessment of your capabilities does not represent an insult to you in the least. Most American Jews – totally assimilated to the culture and customs of the US – they too do not have access to the Talmud. Attempts by Art Scroll and others to translate the Talmud into English, represents a total joke disaster. Reading the Talmud common law accomplishes zip, zero, nothing. Why? Because the Talmud teaches common law … and common law stands upon the יסוד of learning by precedents.
The Reshon French school, the Baali Tosafot, these Reshonim scholars predated the Rambam Civil War, their commentaries on the Talmud always learned by means of bringing external precedents. The post Rambam Civil War reshonim scholars, their commentaries focus upon learning the language of the page of the Gemarah they comment upon. Wow a vast distinction in learning skills.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I wasn’t able to find much about the “Ramban Civil War”. Do you have any reference?
Also I am not offended by you. I criticized your style of argumentation, because it distracts from the points you want to make.
LikeLike
Rambam … an entirely different person than Ramban. The Ramban was the cousin of Rabbi Rabbi Solomon of Montpellier, Rabbenu Jonah, Rabbi David ben Saul in 1232 who put the Rambam into נדוי. Some say the ban only applied to the Book of Knowledge and the Book of Moreh Nevuchim.
But the ban of נדוי placed upon the Rambam, it appears to me involves the entire works of both the legal code and Guide to the Perplexed.
I have not read the actual language of the ban, if it continues to exist I have not read it nor seen it. But 10 years after the ban on the Rambam, the Pope and king of France decreed the burning of all Talmudic manuscripts in France. In 1290 all Jews in Britain received an edict of expulsion. In 1306 all the Jews of France likewise expelled. The German States imposed crushing taxation without representation and made all the Jews of Germany utterly destitute. Spain expelled all Jews in 1492, and followed that edict with the Inquisition of Jews who converted to Xtianity.
In 1516 opened the first ghetto in Venice. The illegal imprisonment of Western European Jews into ghettos caused a population transfer of Jews fleeing Western European oppression unto Poland and the Ukraine.
Jewish sources, Rambam’s position prevailed in the end, down play this period of chaos and anarchy. Most of the Jewish historians view each war crime separately. But I do not.
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/111904/jewish/Rabbeinu-Jonah-Gerondi.htm
After the burnings of 24 cartloads of hand written manuscripts (the printing press not yet invented) this action closed down the Rashi\Tosafot schools upon the Talmud. The expulsion about 60 years thereafter, it destroyed the Rashi\Tosafot schools utterly and completely. Meaning this sh’itta of learning the Talmud as a common law ceased to exist. Based upon the fact that the Baali Tosafot only brought the opinion of the Rambam twice in the whole of their Talmud commentaries, I argue that since the burning of the Talmud occurred in Paris that a majority of French rabbis agreed with the Spanish decree of excommunication upon the Rambam.
Only after the public burning of Talmudic and other books in Paris did the Zohar become widely known. The Ramban studied kabbalah extensively – yet knew nothing of the Zohar. Virtually all of Rabbinic Judaism that came from Spain – assimilated to Greek philosophy.
While Rambam won the “Civil War” … Jewish refugee populations did not field armies like as happened in the American “Civil War”. But as mentioned previously, when a people falls into social chaos and anarchy during this period where Jews divided over Torah and Talmud as Statute or Common Law.
Jewish historians did not hit the scene until after Napoleon freed the Jews from the ghetto war crime imprisonment in the 19th Century!!! So Jewish “history” … represents a “Wild West”. By the 19th Century many of the critical documents, manuscripts, etc got destroyed during the period of tumult, this evidence no longer exists.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for the link and explanation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Heinrich Graetz (also known as Hirsch, Hirsh, or Tsvi; b. 1817-d 1891) was the 19th century’s foremost narrative historian of the Jews. Graetz’s magnum opus, A History of the Jews, arguably the first comprehensive history of the Jewish people written purely from a Jewish perspective.
Raphael Hirsch. Hirsch, the founder of “Modern Orthodoxy”, born in 1808 in Hamburg, Germany. He exerted through his writings a strong influence upon Graetz. The writings of Schiller and Hegel had a strong influence upon Hirsch, who received his Jewish education at home.
In short, Jewish history hardly qualifies as a murky subject. Majored in History at Texas A&M. As a rabbi my opposition which denounces the Rambam represents a minority opinion among my peers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I found at least the first volume of Graetz work in English: https://archive.org/details/historyofjewsfro01graeiala/page/n5/mode/2up
LikeLike
You can visit the Jewish libraries in a synagogue.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Google scholar link which i sent to you Gaetz gives the Rambam’s philosophical take on astrology and the Aggaditah, based upon his explanation of the Rambam’s last work: The Guide for the Perplexed. In point of fact the Rambam never attempted to make a commentary upon the Aggaditah and Midrashic literature. Greek philosophical thought dominated his perspective completely.
The Rambam had no understanding of the fundamental basis upon which stands the whole of the Sha’s Talmud … פרדס. The kabbalah taught by Rabbi Akiva who taught the Oral Torah logic system which he received from the Pharisees.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Rambam code established the religion of Judaism like nothing ever had before it. Courtroom judicial rulings – the whole of the Talmud – do not establish the religion of Judaism. The Rambam religious code of halachot did attempt and did succeed in establishing the religion of Judaism. The religious codes Tur and Shulkan Aruch that followed thereafter — again focused upon Judaism’s religious law rather than the Talmud’s courtroom rulings which learned established legal precedents as the Way to understand the language of any given Mishnah.
Back to making subtle distinctions between like and like. Statute religious law developed starting with the Rambam code, its Universally accepted by Rabbinic Judaism today. The Rambam died in 1204 CE. In 1232 the greatest Spanish authorities placed the Rambam into herem – excommunication; punitive isolation and contempt, found in the במדבר יב: יד and was described as נדוי.
Ten years later, the Pope together with the king of France decreed the public burning of all the Talmudic manuscripts found within the borders of France. (Public book burnings by the Nazis – based upon Xtian abomination and criminal behaviors.) The question a person must ask: Did the French Rashi\Tosafot school of Talmudic scholarship, which learned the Talmud by common law rather than the Rambam’s statute religious law, agree and place the Rambam into נדוי?
If the French rabbis agreed with the Spanish rabbinic authorities that the Rambam’s statute religious law perverted Talmudic common law, (Common law courts do not necessarily judge only religious disputes. Common law courts as found in England, mostly address secular non religious disputes.), this would explain why the Pope/poop and the king of France agreed to burn all the Talmudic manuscripts in Paris in the year 1242.
The Rambam Civil War compares to the rapid spread of a forest fire. In 1290 after almost a Century of Xtian Easter blood libels, the king of England decreed the total expulsion of all Jewry from England. In 1306 the French monarchy followed up their public burning of all Talmudic manuscripts by issuing a decree which expelled all Jews from France. The German kingdoms imposed harsh taxation without representation upon the Jewish refugee populations scattered across the German kingdoms. This crushing criminal taxation imposed only on Jewish refugees pauperized all Jewish communities across German lands.
Western European Jewry had no choice but flee to less hostile lands. A huge population transfer occurred in the 13th, and 14th Centuries where whole Jewish population centers moved away from Western European oppression unto Poland and Ukrainian lands, which at that time did not impose such harsh laws upon Jewish refugee populations.
In 1516 opened the first Ghetto in Venice. For over 300 years Goyim illegally imprisoned Western European Jewish refugee populations into ghettos. This horrific hostility by Xtians against Jews, the Rambam who lived in similar conditions ie forced conversions of Jews to Islam. The statute religious law codes helped to establish a clear Jewish religious identity. In those Centuries of turmoil and injustice, religious statutory law established the religion of Judaism!!!
Hence in an entirely different Age, where secular Jews dominate Jewish society, as happened when Jews ruled Judea prior to the Roman forced exile. My minority opinion now challenges the validity of the Rambam’s statute religious law code, together with the Tur and Shulkan Aruch statute religious codes of law and favors the restoration of lateral common law courtrooms in Israel.
My Rabbinic peers invited me to sit upon an attempt to re-establish the Great & Small Sanhedrin lateral common law courtrooms in Israel early in the 2000s, but alas my rabbinic peers had by then lost the wisdom to discern between like and like; between Talmudic common law as opposed by statute religious law established beginning with publication of the Rambam’s religious statute law code.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I will look further into Tur, Shulkan Aruch and Rambam. Thank you for the explanation of your position regarding common law and how it is opposed to Rambam’s statute law.
LikeLiked by 1 person
To change the halacha you have to show that the conditions which prevailed no longer exist in the present. When the Rambam perverted the entire Talmud with his statutory religious laws\halachot/, the Goyim were attempting forced conversions upon Jewish refugee populations living in Arab countries.
Today Jews have defeated Arab armies on multiple occasions. Then Jews had no defined clear definition of Judaism. The Rambam code established Judaism as it exists today!
Today secular Jewry dominates, Jews rule the oath sworn promised lands and now we must re-establish the common law courts based upon the Talmudic model.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Graetz concludes his history of the Rambam by validating the split his code and guide produced upon Jews. One inscription on the Rambam’s grave writes: “Here lies a man, and still no man; If thou wert a man, angels of heaven Must have overshadowed they mother.” These lines were afterwards effaced, and the following substituted: Here lies Moses Maimuni, the excommunicated heretic.” These two inscriptions shadow forth the bitter differences which broke out after Maimuni’s death, and divided Judaism into two camps.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Graetz refers to the Rambam as the Jewish Aristotle.
https://books.google.co.il/books?hl=en&lr=&id=rr9KAwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=Heinrich+Graetz+the+history+of+the+Jews&ots=Kl9g5qHjj6&sig=B1wtpBUld4S17Lld90N-O99MjRc&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Heinrich%20Graetz%20the%20history%20of%20the%20Jews&f=false
Graetz writes: “The object of this work was to facilitate the study of the Talmud, which become difficult through its diffuse discussions, through the interpolated explanations of the Geonim, and through the commentaries of his predecessors, which were not always pertinent to the subject; to determine the right practice (Halacha) from the confusion of diverse arguments, and to define his position by short but comprehensive explanations of words and things.”
By the time Graetz wrote his history, Talmumic scholarship had greatly deteriorated. Pilpul scholarship had become the dominant sh’itta of Talmudic scholarship. Rabbis ceased all together viewing the Talmud as a common law codification.
Graetz perception of the Rambam’s take upon Judaism as a “revealed philosophy” merits consideration. Graetz writes: “He further explained the nature of tradition, maintaining that not all that is contained in the Mishnah is tradition. For a traditional doctrine must be positive, and ought not to be open to doubt or uncertainty. Unconsciously Maimuni by this theory put himself in opposition to the Talmud and undermined its firm position.”
The Rambam focus upon clear halachah supplanted the common law nature of the Talmud. Judicial cases base themselves upon doubt rather than a predominant belief system which so defines his statute code of law. Rambam sought to develop his own version of a viable belief system. As a monotheists the Rambam did not view Islam as a form of avodah zarah. He failed to make the critical דיוק that monotheism violates the 2nd commandment of Sinai.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The 12th chapter of Leviticus, Parshat ויקרא: ה: כ through כו.
This פרק concludes the Parshah of ויקרא. It makes a summation of the tumah connected with “guilt transgressions”, and the כפרה of dedicating a korban. This פרק addresses the type of Man who regrets his actions taken against his people. It addresses the subject of how to make amends to person(s) who have endured damages.
A slightly distant precedent דברים: ו:י – טו. The mussar of this sugia commands the negative commandment not to forget HaShem who brought our people out of Egypt. Par’o felt no regret deceiving Moshe and the nation with false claims concerning their freedom. Even after receiving 10 plague security deposits, Par’o repeatedly lied to Moshe. Swearing an oath, Par’o felt no compulsion to almost immediately thereafter negate. Hence the mussar which the משנה תורה understands and therefore commands Israel not to forget the deliverance from Egyptian slavery.
An even more distant precedent יד: כח – טו – ו This precedent addresses how a Man has an obligation to behave toward his people beginning honor directed toward the Tribe of Levi, comparable to the burden to respect the dignity of widows and orphans.
A closer yet still distant precedent יח:ג – ח. This precedent addresses the obligation to respect the dignity of both the House of Aaron, the Cohonim, together with the Tribe of Levi who does the avodat HaShem of teaching the Torah to Israel.
A precise and exact precedent כב: ה -כג: ג This precedent we have learned previously. It addresses the obligation toward animals and also to women, specifically wives. Another precise precedent כג: כ – כו. This precedent addresses the obligation of partnership loans. Swearing a vow exposes the measure of the Fear of Heaven within that man, as does respecting the property & goods of others. A precise precedent from ישעיה, יד:כח – יז: ג. The mussar of the prophet has clarity when compared to the משנה תורה. Woe to the nation whose leaders and people with power treat their own people comparable to a nation conquered by foreign armies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am still trying to make sense of the distinction between custom and statutory. You also seem to have had a problem where you are taking a minority view on some issue. I do not think I understand the point of division there, but maybe I will eventually.
I have a question about what day of the week the original Passover occurred on. I think it was the fourth day of the week (with Shabbat on the seventh). That would make it Tuesday evening to Wednesday evening. I was looking at Shabbat 88a (https://www.sefaria.org/Shabbat.88a.5?ven=William_Davidson_Edition_-_English&vhe=William_Davidson_Edition_-_Vocalized_Aramaic&lang=bi&p2=Tosafot_on_Shabbat.87b.1.2&vhe2=Vilna_Edition&lang2=bi ) for clarification, but I am confused by the various opinions. Is there today a standard opinion on what day of the week that first Passover occurred and what is the justification for that view?
LikeLike
Not custom vs statutory, but Common Law established by courtroom judicial rulings as oppose by statute law determined by specific authorities. Statute law among Goyim comes from governments, legislature, governors etc.
All the halachot ruled in the Talmud originate from courtroom rulings. The rabbinic codes written during the Middle Ages: the Yad HaChazakah, the Arba’ah Turim, and the Shulkan Aruch, these famous codes – exist as statute religious law.
במדבר כח:טז — טז וּבַחֹדֶשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן, בְּאַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר יוֹם–לַחֹדֶשׁ: פֶּסַח, לַיהוָה.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think I am beginning to see your point and agree with you. Weren’t the priests rather than rabbis assigned the job of making such courtroom decisions?
Consider the issue of ritual hand washing before eating. Is that common law or statutory law? Or just tradition?
LikeLike
The Cohonim headed the small Sanhedrin Capital Crimes courtrooms in the 6 Cities of Refuge. The Talmud of ברכות teaches on washing before eating bread.
All halachot should come straight from the Talmud. A Universally recognized error made by the Rambam, his statute laws had no Talmudic sources. Therefore all the commentaries written upon that Code attempt to find the sources within the Talmud for Rambams halachot. Needless to say, the Rambam created his own religion in many of his halachic opinions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Book of Judges clearly proves that leadership applies to all of the bnai brit people not just limited to Cohonim. Why did the 6 Levitical cities of refuge place a Cohen at the head of those small Sanhedrin courts?
This courts heard Capital Crime trials. Each of these courts prior to carrying out a Capital Crimes sentence be it guilty or innocent … the Cohen would make a burnt offering on a private altar. A burnt offering makes a huge plume of smoke that a person can see for 10s and 10s of miles all around.
This type of smoke communications the Great Sanhedrin likewise employed to declare the New Moon and advertise their ruling across to all Jews in Israel and Syria.
Only a Cohen of the House of Aaron can dedicate a korban upon an altar. What did the korban burnt upon this private altar communicate?
That the justices of the court ruled on the case heard before the court in a state of tohorah. That the justices took no bribes in reaching their decision. If a Cohen dedicates a korban and his court accepted bribes, this tumah would make the dedication of that korban an abomination to Heaven.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This history of the Rambam by Graetz, it fails to distinguish between courtroom common law Case\Rule judicial rulings with the Rambam code of statutory religious law. The forced conversions of Jews to Islam, common in the Rambam era significantly aroused a fundamental error of Talmudic understanding. Common law courtroom rulings do not establish a religion known as Judaism. The Rambam’s code of statutory law (law that made no distinction between Gemarah and Mishnaic sources) did in fact intend to establish the religion of Judaism – in the Middle Ages.
Furthermore Graetz, like the Rambam, had absolutely no awareness, much less so understanding of the פרדס kabbalah taught by Rabbi Akiva teaches the Oral Torah, and how it interprets the Written Torah. But even greater and more fundamental, Graetz history fails to grasp the consequences of the Rambam’s assimilated statutory law “replacement” of Talmudic common law. The Rambam’s “Replacement theology” closely resembles attempts to replace the T’NaCH with the New Testament. In 1232 Spanish Rabbinic authorities place the Ramban in נדוי excommunication. This action triggered a Jewish Civil War.
Jewish refugee populations scattered across Europe and the Middle East during the lifetime and thereafter of the Rambam, they do not compare to the armies that the Confederate States and the Union States raised to fight a war. Jewish stateless refugee populations had no such access to fight a military conflict. What connects the Rambam Civil War with all other Civil Wars? The repudiation of Talmudic common law in favor of religious statute law, as promoted by the Rambam code, and later by the Tur and Shulkan Akuch statute codes of religious law, this attempt reopened the old wounds of the Civil War fought between the P’rushim and the Tzeddukim which culminated in the mitzva of lighting the lights of Hanukkah. Graetz’s history fails to learn the Torah by means of bringing close precedents – essential to all common law.
The Torah through comparison of the תרי”ג mitzvot one to another, the Books of the Prophets within the literature of the NaCH, the Mishna and Gemarah, the B’hag, Rif, Rosh common law codes … all learn by means of Common Law – they all learn through prior precedents. Learning how to learn לשמה fundamentally requires a working understanding of Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס kabbalah which explains the logic of the 13 tohor middot revealed @ Horev (שמות לד: ו,ז). The other great commentary on the Talmud, the Tosafot – its sh’itta learns off the dof of any given page of the Gemarah in order to learn by means of comparative precedents from other Gemarah sources ie common law.
Based upon the 10 year gap of Spanish rabbis placing the Rambam into excommunication to the public burning of all Talmudic manuscripts found in the whole of France, this strongly supports the premise that a majority of the rabbis of France agreed with the ban placed upon the Rambam. This absolute disaster in Paris France in 1242, it caused the opposition to Rambam’s statute religious law to collapse. The son of the Rosh, a harsh critic of the Rambam, wrote his now famous Arba’ah Turim based upon statutory religious law principles, irregardless that his father, the Rosh, based his common law halachic code upon how the Gemarah learns each and every Case\Rule common law Mishna.
Civil Wars invite foreign interventions. In the last 10 years of the 13th Century, Britain expelled all Jews from England. About 16 years thereafter France did the same. German states imposed crushing taxation without representation upon the Jewish refugee populations in those kingdoms. This in its turned caused another domino to fall; a huge population from western to eastern Europe, specifically Jews immigrated to Poland and the Ukraine. The next domino to fall, Europe through Jewish refugee populations into illegal ghettos for 300+ years.
Graetz’s history failed to connect the dots between the publication of the Rambam halachic code of statute religious law and the chaos and anarchy which through Jewish refugee societies into Civil War, which in its turn invited foreign intervention in Jewish confusion. After the destruction of the Rashi Tosafot common law sh’itta of learning, no other Jewish scholar has since written a commentary upon the Talmud based upon the principles of פרדס Common law. By which דרוש ופשט affix to the connection between Aggaditah and T’NaCH prophetic mussar, whereas רמז וסוד affix to the halachic portions within the Talmud.
Graetz’s history fails to address the elephant in the china closet … how to learn the T’NaCH, Talmud, Midrashim, Siddur לשמה. The Rambam code too fails to prioritize how to learn how to learn לשמה. Talmud by stark contrast – through its warp\weft relationship between the halachah and aggaditah – does attempt to teach this abstract concept of learning how to learn לשמה; it continually learns by making דיוקים ie משל\נמשל instructions that teach learning how to learn לשמה.
The Ramban in his introduction to his Chumash commentary refers to this manner of learning as Black Fire on White Fire. The Torah instructs by means of משל\נמשל דיוקים. This sh’itta defines the Oral Torah logic system by which the Book of דברים folds משנה תורה upon the other 4 Books of the Written Torah whereby the Torah learns Torah by way of common law precedents.
LikeLike
JeZeus did not take Israel out of Egypt. That the noise testament links Pass Over with the last supper proves nothing. All 2nd Temple period Jews observed the Chag of Pesach. From the time when Persia permitted Jews to return to the oath sworn lands Judea existed as a Banana Republic of the Persians, and Greek and later by the Roman empires. The Mishna with its Gemarah has a specific tractate on Pesach. These to dudes their complete and total ignorance of the Talmud – wow ya can not educate ignorant.
LikeLike
Israel Yuval is an historian of the jews in the middle ages. This hardly qualifies him as an expert authority on Classic Jewish Talmudic studies. The three gentlemen take a small quote from some unknown source, taken totally out of context, (a classic ploy of propaganda) by Israel Yuval. I have never seen this article, and the YouTube clip does not inform the Title of this article which they base there narrative upon. In a court of law such jibberish a judge would immediately dismiss as hearsay evidence ie gossip.
Dr. Golan Broshi is an Israeli born, Messianic believer in Yeshua and an active member of Or Ha-Sharon Messianic Congregation. He holds an MA in Social Education, MA in Jewish Education, and DMin in Middle East Leadership Ministry. He serves on the faculty of Israel College of the Bible in Netanya, Israel, as a full-time lecturer. This man has an ax to grind to support his belief in that fictional false messiah.
What do you do with Redemption for Chag Pesach. Another opinion on the Afikomen, on Moshe’s exclusion from the Pesach Haggadah, that Jews might dispare that they would remain in g’lut till a leader the like of Moshe came unto a particular generation. The Mitzvah of Moshiach learns from the opening Parshah of ויקרא. The mitzvah of Moshiach applies to all Jews living in every generation. The Gemarah of Sanhedrin teaches this understanding of the Parasha of ויקרא explicitly.
The new testament counterfeit attempts to replace the narrative of the Book of ויקרא. But the prophet Isaiah taught an explicit mussar touching such foolishness … shall the pot say to its maker, “You did not make me!”
The Dr. Seth Postell academic dean – One for Israel Bible College, a Jewish convert to Xtianity, declares: “The first actual mention of the passover seder in ”’jewish sources”’ is the new testament” LOL The New Testament is not and never has been a Jewish source. Dr. Golan Broshi then declares that Prof. Yuval says “that the first mention, (of passover) is the last supper”. This is most emphatically not true. The Gospels, not written by disciples. The Names to the Gospels were much later added in the 3rd or 4th Century! The Babylonian Talmud was sealed in the 4th Century, the Yerushalmi Talmud sealed in the 3rd Century. The Mishnah was sealed at the end of the 1st Century, or very early in the 2nd Century. Midrashim that predate the Mishnah date back to the early to middle 1st Century. These represent real Jewish sources, not the Roman\Greek counterfeits written by Goyim.
Sorry Frank, but this attempt to declare that a professor Yovul medieval historian theorizes that the last supper refers to the Passover … the language of the Gospels of Mark: “14:1–2: It was now two days before the Passover and the feast of Unleavened Bread. And the chief priests and … scribes were seeking how to arrest him … and kill him; for they said, “Not during the feast, lest there be a tumult of the people ….” 10–11: Then Judas Iscariot … went to the chief priests … to betray him to them … and he sought an opportunity ” … 22–25: … as they were eating, he took [ordinary leavened] bread, … blessed … broke it, and gave it to them …. “Take; this is my body ….” … he took a cup, and … gave it to them, and they all drank …. he said … , “This is my blood of the covenant … poured out for many ….” 26: And … they went out to the Mount of Olives.
The Greek word for matzah (azyma) absent, but regular leavened bread (artos) is present (instructively, we find the same in Mark 14:22 and 1 Corinthians 11:23). In the Second Paragraph, Jesus sends two disciples from Bethany to Jerusalem to prepare the Passover meal. Accordingly, when Jesus himself soon arrives, only ten disciples remain available to accompany him. Yet, in 14:17, we find that Jesus “came with the twelve,” with no indication that the two he had sent to Jerusalem ever rejoined the group. (Lest one argue that we should not be literal, note how this matter so disturbs Matthew and Luke that they set about, independently, correcting Mark’s arithmetic.
Mark 14:55-65 coincides Jesus’ alleged Sanhedrin trial with the Passover festival evening, presumably requiring the summoning of Jewish councilors to sit in court only shortly after (even interrupting?) their own Passover meals. Thus scheduled, a Sanhedrin trial (presuming that one took place at all) intrudes into the holy day celebration, which would have been highly unlikely.
Mark forgot, or did not know, to include the key components we would expect — lamb, bitter herbs, and matzah. A diaspora Gentile, e.g., if unpolished on this subject (and writing, perhaps, from as far away as Rome) could well fit this bill. Similarly, Mark’s unfamiliarity with things Jewish in the holy land per se is evinced elsewhere in his Gospel.
[[ Personal unfamiliarity with the land of Israel best accounts for Markan topographical and geographical errors (e.g., 7:31 [towns are encountered in reverse order]; and 11:1 [Jesus follows an implausible route]). Also consistent with a Western diaspora provenance: Mark translates Aramaisms that readers near the holy land would not have needed him to do, and explains Greek by Latinisms more so than other Evangelists (Mk 12:42; 15:16); see P. Feine, J. Behm, and W. Kümmel, Introduction to the New Testament (Nashville: Abingdon, 1966), 70; Ralph Martin, Mark (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976), 64. Cf. 6:27, 7:4,8; 15:39,44,45. Mark’s unbalanced definition of the Pharisees (7:3-4) buttresses these impressions.]]
Both Matthew (ca. 85 CE) and Luke (ca. 95 CE) assume that Mark has committed a subtraction error, so they each set about to correct him: Matthew adjusts Jesus “came with the twelve” to “Jesus sat at table with the twelve” (26:20). Luke not only incorporates Matthew’s change but then also substitutes for “he came” instead “the hour came” (22:14). Without Mark’s crafted Second Paragraph, there would be no Passover meal to prepare, and hence no sending of two disciples ahead to do so. Now Jesus could indeed arrive for his Last Supper literally “with the twelve,” and neither Matthew nor Luke would spot anything to correct. The oddity of a Sanhedrin trial convened the same evening as that of the Passover meal, Anomaly E, likewise vanishes since now the Last Supper would have transpired on a day before the Passover meal.
Meanwhile, Paul’s lone mention of the Last Supper itself implies a non-Passover meal. John sets the Passover meal twenty-four hours later than the Last Supper. So the case for identifying the two occasions — the Last Supper and the Passover meal observance — rests solely with Mark’s Second Paragraph, 14:12-16, with all the anomalies he bequeaths (some glaring and others more subtle) instantly vanishing when we remove his Second Paragraph.
Matthean and Lukan chronologies replicate Mark’s, their primary source; whereas John and, before him, Paul take other directions. Simple solutions, if adequate, may be preferable to convoluted solutions suspect for that reason alone. John chose to present Jesus’ death as coincident with that of the paschal lamb. Since the lamb had to die before the Passover meal, John had to set the Passover meal on Friday night, after Jesus’ death that previous afternoon. Cf. John 19:36 with Exod 12:46; Num 9:12; Ps 34:20(21). Paul likewise employed “paschal lamb” imagery with reference to Jesus (1 Cor 5:7).
In summation, Mark appears to employ a pattern of editing-by-interpolation, paralleling stylistically.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for the analysis, mosckerr. I am puzzled about when the Last Supper took place (Tuesday evening or Wednesday evening after sunset), but your comments may help me understand this better. There are also Hebrew manuscripts of the Brit Chadashah: https://www.hebrewgospels.com/
Israel Yuval’s article can be found at https://www.academia.edu/37618673/Israel_Jacob_Yuval_The_Haggadah_of_Passover_and_Easter_Tarbiz_vol_65_no_1_1996_5_28_Hebrew_
LikeLike
The Birth of the Synoptic Gospels , translated from French by Michael J. Wrenn.) Claude Tresmontant believed that all four Gospels were originally written in Hebrew. Hugh J. Schonfield suggested the Hebrew or Aramaic origin of Matthew, Mark, John and Revelation in his introduction to his translation of the Du Tillet version of Matthew.
So “believer” translate the new testament into Hebrew 2000 years after the fact. What does that prove? Nothing. In a court of law, such “evidence” would not merit any consideration. The Torah commands Law.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for the references to Tresmontant and Schonfield.
LikeLike
I do not have an account with Academia. so I do not have access to it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have only the basic, free account there.
LikeLike
As do I and it does not give me access.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I could not get the translation, but the Hebrew version I was able to download.
LikeLike
Frank what do you know about Hebrew? LOL
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very little. But I am learning it.
LikeLike
Therefore you rely upon people to translate books.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes. I also rely upon dictionaries and commentaries as you do. However, I know enough Hebrew to make sense out of the original.
LikeLike
What original?
LikeLike
The sh’itta of learning as taught by my Rav. Read the original Hebrew texts over and again till I can read them like an English newspaper. Would finish the Mishna every 30 days, the T’NaCH every 52 days, the Torah every 50 days, based upon the counting of the Omer, its the 4th day of the Omer today. We completed my first reading of the entire Talmud Bavli in 4 months. The Midrashim together with the Yerushalmi Talmud Rav Nemuraskii employed these sources as the primary commentaries to the Gemarah of the Bavli. The Mishna, learned the Sifra, Sifre, Mekhilta, and Tosefta. The Tosefta, consists of opinions of Tannaim not included in Rabbi Yechudah’s Mishna. The Sifra, Sifre, and Mekhilta – Midrashic early sources which predate the Mishna.
The Yerushalmi Talmud predated the Babylonian Talmud by about 150 years. Both sets of Talmud based upon the פרדס kabbalah taught by Rabbi Akiva, a famous rabbi who lived some 120 years before the Romans murdered him.
The Talmud that Jews learn today came from Rabbi Akiva and his talmidim\students. The Romans killed some 24,000 of Rabbi Akiva’s students. But 5 of Rabbi Akiva’s students survived Roman attempts to kill all Oral Torah scholars.
Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Yehuda Bar Ilai, Rabbi Yossi, Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai (Rashbi), and Rabbi Elazar Ben Shamoa. Rabbi Yehuda Bar Ilai is the most prominent scholar of the Mishnah. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi (a student of Rabbi Akiva’s five great students) finished the Mishnah.
My point, classic Torah learning does not rely upon dictionaries and commentaries like non Jews learn. Yes you have many great and impressive commentaries. They were composed after Rav Ashi and Rav Ravina sealed and closed the Sha’s Bavli. The Yerushalmi, sealed and closed around 300 CE. The Mishnah sealed and closed around 210 CE. As mentioned above the classic halachic Midrashim predate the sealing of the Mishna. The Toseftah, organized immediately after Rabbi Yechuda sealed the Mishna.
The period known as the Reshonim 950 – 1400 CE, they wrote many secondary source rabbinic commentaries upon the Primary sources listed above.
Ya see Frank the way you got an education on non Jewish new testament sources does not in the least resemble the education Jews learn the common law legal system of Torah Prophets & Talmud.
Goyim rely upon Greek logic as the basis by which they base their logic. Plato and Aristotle dominated Renaissance European church learning.
Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system which teaches specifically how to learn Oral Torah precedents shares no common ground with the ancient Greek philosophers. The lights of Channukah, a mitzva that predates the new testament, Jews under the leadership of the P’rushim (Your new testament despises these great leaders of Yiddishkeit. Your tumah books refer to the P’rushim by the Greek translation name of Pharisees.), dedicated to learn precedents by which to interpret the depth of the Torah’s prophetic mussar by only relying upon the Oral Torah logic as found in Exodus 34: 6,7. Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, this genius system of logic explains the Oral Torah logic system (Exodus 34: 6,7), and how it learns and interprets the k’vanna of the first 4 Books of the Written Torah. The פרדס logic system, never taught to Goyim … to this very day. All the rabbis included in the Talmud Yerushalmi and Bavli learned the Mishna based upon Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system format.
So ya see Frank, how you learn and how my Rav taught me (Rav Nemuraskii studied under Yosef Shalom Elyashiv the gadol ha’dor, the most authoritative rabbinic authority of all Ashkenazi Jewry. Rav Nemuraskii appointed me to clean the Shul of Rabbi Elyashiv every shabbot for 7 years. Two of rabbi Elyashiv’s sons danced at my wedding. Every week i’d see his sons and we would learn together). My father said to me that a professional Man has to have a set of credentials. As you can see my credentials do not in the least resemble your credentials. When an Ambassador introduces himself to the Head of a foreign government, that Ambassador hands over his credentials to the Allied-Government. Diplomatic relations – classically an expression of an alliance held between two countries. The allied government wants to see the credentials of the Ambassador sent to their country by that opposing Allied partner.
LikeLike
Based upon this יסוד of learning, most of my rabbinic peers, they instead rely upon Reshonim commentaries to learn the Talmud. The consequence to the two totally different learning approaches … my rabbinic peers can not discern between Statute Law from Common Law. They fail to grasp how the Rambam’s halachic codification perverted the entire Talmud.
I bring this as witness with the intent to prove that how a person learns, this shapes his perceptions of what he understands. Specifically, your perception of classic Jewish sources in no wise resembles my perception of classic Jewish sources. Something like the 5 blind men describing what they feel as they touch different parts of an elephant.
Let me apologize if you feel that I have made an ad hominem attack against you. Never had any desire to personally attack you. Rather I wrote how I size up your credentials of scholarship. I did so not as a put down but to express how I perceive you as a Man.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t claim to have any “credentials of scholarship”.
I am trying to understand what you meant by “the Rambam’s halachic codification perverted the entire Talmud”. Would you have a link to a source that might give me more information?
LikeLiked by 1 person
An excellent question. The Rambam code as mentioned previously does not learn like the B’hag (late Gaonim period) and Rif (early Reshon period), and Rosh (post Rambam period) Talmudic scholarship. These halachic poskim, especially the Rosh who compiled his super commentary to the Rif posok halachah, denounced the Rambam’s statute law perversion of Talmudic common law.
Alas the disaster of the burning of all the Talmudic manuscripts in Paris in 1242 CE caused rabbi Yoni, the gadol ha’dor of Spain to renounce his din of נדוי placed upon the Rambam. Thereafter all rabbis thereafter embraced the statute law Rambam perversion. The son of the Rosh wrote his halachic code, known as the Tur, based upon the Rambam code. Yosef Karo, the first generation of Auchronim scholars made his super commentary upon the Tur, known as the Beit Yosef. The Shulkan Aruk exist as kind of the cliff notes of the Beit Yosef. All scholarship followed thereafter the model of established by the Tur and Shulkan Aruk.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My generation however does resemble your learning background. Assimilated Jewry has an addiction to modern translations just as do you. I oppose translations b/c translating a word to another language does not define the word so translated. For example the term ברית translated into the word “covenant”. An exceptionally bad translation on par with tohor and tumah translated as clean and unclean by the KJB. LOL. The term ברית means “alliance”. To swear an oath alliance requires the Name of HaShem revealed in the 1st Commandment of Sinai. Neither the new testament nor the koran has the Name of HaShem, revealed in the 1st Commandment. The Name — not a word that can be translated. The Name revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment this רוח הקודש Name, no word can pronounce. Spirit does not equal words. Words can exist despite the fact that a Man who writes words dies. Man cannot live without Spirit. A dead body has no Spirit.
The new testament counterfeit and koran false prophet failed to make this critical discernment which separates like from like … spirit from words. The Book of John for example stumbled over this exact distinction, it opens by declaring the word as God. LOL What a moronic blunder made by a silly Goy dressed as a Jew.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What do you think of Justin van Rensburg’s translation of the Hebrew manuscript of the Gospel of John 1:1-2 in the Vatican Library: https://www.hebrewgospels.com/john
In the beginning the Son was Eloah. The Son of El was both with El, and the Son of El was Eloah. This one was in the beginning with El.
LikeLike
אל the 3rd middah of the Oral Torah revelation of logic. LOL Therefore ignorance of this basic fundamental proves this work as utter narishkeit.
LikeLike
Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system explains how to understand the 13 tohor middor revelation @ Horev. All Torah scholarship that exists today validates this premise. Through the 13 middot logic system as explained by Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, scholars like myself can easily bring prophetic mussar precedents wherein we can affix mussar commandments unto the written Torah, making positive time oriented commandments.
LikeLike
The new testament forgery exists as a tumah bastard illegitimate source. Like the saying goes: “You cannot get a silk purse from a sows ear.”
LikeLike
Mark translation in the year 2020. Translating the new testament to Hebrew does not prove or validate the new testament abomination any more than does calling JeZeus Yeshuah. Treif remains trief. Avodah zarah remains avodah zarah.
LikeLike
Beyond Ishtar: The Tradition of Eggs at Easter … a proof on par with your claim about JeZeus and Pesach. LOL.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree with you about those eggs and Ishtar or Semiramis or whoever the Easter goddess was.
See the next Exploration 89 for more on that. I even referenced JeZeus. https://frankhubeny.blog/2022/04/17/exploration-89-easter/
LikeLike
“”if the Hebrew manuscript he was using from the Vatican Library is an authentic copy of the original Hebrew autograph””
Bunk their never existed a Hebrew text until post WWII. Utter narishkeit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The one is the Vatican Library is older than WWII, but the age of the manuscript is not the criteria of authenticity. Even very old manuscripts can be corrupted.
LikeLike
Age of the manuscript determines the distinction between a primary and a secondary and a tertiary source. LOL
LikeLiked by 1 person
Age is deceptive. One way to tell that something is derived is to see puns literally translated from one language to the other. See the commentaries on the works being translated at https://www.hebrewgospels.com/ .
LikeLike
No. A Primary source far different than a commentary made on a Primary source or a super commentary … a commentary on a commentary on a Primary source. Basic 101 in research.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I suggest you read the arguments for the authenticity of those manuscripts in https://www.hebrewgospels.com/ .
LikeLike
All Hebrew translations have come in the last 30 years.
LikeLike
Scholarship goes on witnesses. Have shown that the Pesach Haggadah … there exists many and multiple versions. Before the Roman g’lut Jews slaughtered the Pass over lamb. The Haggadah came after that above mentioned g’lut of Judean Jewry by the Romans. The seder meal does not include lamb just as the Haddadah removes all mention of Moshe the prophet.
The Judean king Josiah, who ruled from 641 to 610 BCE, is described as having sponsored a lavish Pesach celebration. The Gemarah of Pesach tells the blood of the Pesach offerings reached to the level of the ankles of the Cohonim.
There the Gemarah debates the possibility of Cohonim scupping up that blood and pouring it upon the altar. The sages reject that blood b/c no proof exists that its blood gathered while the heart of the goat or sheep still beated. This latter type of blood a sacrifice requires. It goes by the name ‘living blood’.
Clearly after the Romans destroyed the Temple in 70 CE passover sacrifices ceased. When confronted by g’lut despair, how did my people respond? To continue to rejoice and be grateful for a time when God historically redeemed my people from oppression and injustice?
The rabbis of the period faced the monumental task of re-imagining Judaism as no longer centered on the Temple offering sacrifices to the realities of g’lut. Judaism focused the spirituality of the faith of g’lut Jewry to studying and interpreting the laws of the Torah. In other words, Judaism became intensely text-based, through the study of the Holy Scriptures, and our sages therefore introduced the Seder Night Haggadah story based upon Passover traditions of discussions between rabbis who lived before the g’lut disaster. Hence the Haggadah dates back to people who remember the Passover seder meal discussions of Rabbi Akiva and other rabbis who lead the revolt against Rome that failed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting point about “living blood”.
LikeLike
That’s why the Shulkan Aruk rules that if a person cooked raw liver in a pan, that the liver is kosher but the pan is treif. By the time they cut out the liver from an animal … that animal has long since died.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Its interesting that all the YouTube comments come from Xtians. LOL Asked a priest once, when I was a student @ Texas A&M why they used leavened bread for the body blood narishkeit. That priest told me: “leavened bread makes less crumbs”. LOL what a total joke.
LikeLike
The search for the Afikomen highlights the Seder of Pesach. Moshe the prophet, he’s the Star in the Pesach story?
Yet the Haggadah purges Moshe Rabeinu from its pages. The Haggadah stand upon the יסוד of the Book of דברים.
Hence the search for the Afikomen, a משל which inspires the children to search for the hidden treasure. The נמשל of that hidden treasure … the Oral Torah which Moshe taught baal peh to Israel on the last day of his life on this earth.
Where exactly exists the Oral Torah Afikomen within the Written Torah? The Book of דברים or משנה תורה. The 13 middot of logic teach how to employ the משנה תורה to understand the prophetic mussar which the other 4 Books of the Torah command.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting view why Moshe was not mentioned in the Haggadah.
LikeLike
The translation of Greek back to Hebrew in modern day parlance does not change the fact that the new testament writers did not know how the Torah defines the word ברית. This key term, found within the first word of the Torah בראשית\ברית אש means alliance through a Torah oath. A Torah oath – אש. The term ברית does not mean “covenant” as the noise testament authors suggest. Why? A Torah oath requires swearing that oath in the Name of HaShem … and the new\noise testament no where within its emptiness has the Name of HaShem. Instead the new/noise testament has only translations of the Name ie avodah zarah.
LikeLike
Church denial of the existence of the Oral Torah totally and irrefutably refuted.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Audrey Mack posts on her facebook blog…. We GO and TELL the amazing, wonderful GOOD NEWS of Jesus Christ. He saves, He heals, He delivers and He gives. Ya see attempts to foist the pretense of revisionist history yet offers nothing but pie in the sky stories that have no physical evidence that can validate their accuracy. Church history has a long bloody history of presenting false witness testimonies as facts. LOL.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I am glad you read that post. In your orthodox Jewish environment do you have demonic deliverance or healings? Many Christians don’t, but I wonder what your experience is with that. How do you pray for healing?
LikeLike
As an atheist praise G-d i resemble that remark. 🙂
When I meet “religious orthodox” our encounters tend to cause them to walk away quite offended b/c of my tendency to mock their religious beliefs.
No mitzva to pray. The mitzva of tefillah dedicates defined tohor middot by which a man interacts with his bnai brit allies so that Jews can dwell together in shalom.
Health issues have plagued all generations. Tefillah dedicates future tohor social interactions among and between my people holy to HaShem. This tefillah calls in this manner that HaShem blesses our people, specifically HaShem protects and restores life and health to our souls.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for sharing about the need to exercise our faith. Blessings this Holy Week!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, Mark! We need to exercise our faith.
LikeLike
This is what I have been saying!!! Thank you for this! How are you doing with your move?!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am glad you liked this, Mandy!
Our move has been very smooth and I am grateful for your prayers and the Lord’s guidance. Every day blessings manifest more and more. Every morning the sound of birds remind me to get up and give praise. Thank you!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Amen, Frank!!!!!! Are you a music person?!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I enjoy listening to music, but I do not play any instrument.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good analogy of faith to muscles
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you!
LikeLiked by 1 person
YW!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great post and it bring the issue of love to mind . . . words and deeds without love are meaningless as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good point about love. Thank you, Mark!
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is the second time in two days that I’ve read or heard this sentiment: “Muscles become stronger as we exercise them.” The first was in reference to optimism and now this to faith. I’m not a big believer in coincidence so I have something to think about.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t believe in coincidence either. Optimism seems to fit in there with faith and muscles. Thank you, Michael!
LikeLike
Whenever I experience this, I know I need to listen up!
LikeLiked by 2 people
We go with this meaning that faith, alone, will not mean salvation. One must also serve.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good point – we must also serve.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Now the Xtian church stands in exile waiting for the 2nd coming of their imaginary man myth folk God. LOL
LikeLike