db119 that is to say, the classical Rabbis them-
selves maintained a distinction between what was written in the Torah & what had been added by them or by their pharisaic forebears.
They explicitly remark that here we have a pharisaic extension of the Torah, thus confirming what Yesh said. According to the Torah, only that which comes out of the body {fluxes of various types and of course evil words and actions} can contaminate, NOT foods that go in!
Thus, if the Pharisees argue that food itself contaminates, that is a change in the law? The attack on hand washing in the Story is, moreover, consistent with Yesh's subsequent attack on the vow that releases one from supporting ones' parents:
'BUT YOU SAY THAT IF ANYONE TELLS FATHER OR MOTHER, "Whatever support you might have had from me is Corban [THAT IS
'AN OFFERING TO GOD']" then you no longer permit doing anything for a father or mother, thus making void the word of G d through your tradition that you have handed on. And you do many things like this!'
YESHUA here accuses the Pharisees of having abandoned the plain common sense of the Torah, which requires that Jews support their elderly parents. They have allegedly done this sacrilege by asserting that one who takes a vow not to allow his parents to have use of anything he has as if it were a sacrifice dedicated to God has effectively prohibited himself from providing such support.
The later Rabbis, at least from the second century on, developed a method for invalidating such a vow, which indeed goes against the Torah: it is hard to assess the historical validity of the Markan Jesus' claim against the Pharisees, but it cannot be denied that it might very well have been the case, especially given his accuracy in other matters of Jewish, & especially pharisaic, practices.
This represents another instance in which the Pharisees apparently supplant the Torah with their "tradition of the Elders!"
They explicitly remark that here we have a pharisaic extension of the Torah, thus confirming what Yesh said. According to the Torah, only that which comes out of the body {fluxes of various types and of course evil words and actions} can contaminate, NOT foods that go in!
Thus, if the Pharisees argue that food itself contaminates, that is a change in the law? The attack on hand washing in the Story is, moreover, consistent with Yesh's subsequent attack on the vow that releases one from supporting ones' parents:
'BUT YOU SAY THAT IF ANYONE TELLS FATHER OR MOTHER, "Whatever support you might have had from me is Corban [THAT IS
'AN OFFERING TO GOD']" then you no longer permit doing anything for a father or mother, thus making void the word of G d through your tradition that you have handed on. And you do many things like this!'
YESHUA here accuses the Pharisees of having abandoned the plain common sense of the Torah, which requires that Jews support their elderly parents. They have allegedly done this sacrilege by asserting that one who takes a vow not to allow his parents to have use of anything he has as if it were a sacrifice dedicated to God has effectively prohibited himself from providing such support.
The later Rabbis, at least from the second century on, developed a method for invalidating such a vow, which indeed goes against the Torah: it is hard to assess the historical validity of the Markan Jesus' claim against the Pharisees, but it cannot be denied that it might very well have been the case, especially given his accuracy in other matters of Jewish, & especially pharisaic, practices.
This represents another instance in which the Pharisees apparently supplant the Torah with their "tradition of the Elders!"
30 jan 2013 - bewerkt op 30 jan 2013
- meld ongepast verhaal
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.
- O 05 jan 2026 50352 Deze Schermutseling vormt het Begin van een
- O 05 jan 2026 50351/111 Toen YESJ de Stad naderde, stuurde hij 2
- O 05 jan 2026 50350/110 YEROESJALAYIEM ‘Op dat moment kwamen er
- O 05 jan 2026 50349 Vandaag heb ik jou verwekt! Die op een mens
- O 04 jan 2026 50348/109 ‘t Staat onderhand wel vast dat YESJ
- O 04 jan 2026 50347/108 De opvatting dat uitvoerders v/h Laatste
- O 04 jan 2026 50346 In één v/d esseense treedt fragmenten treedt
- O 04 jan 2026 50345/107 Volgens ‘t Testament van Avraham is deze
- O 03 jan 2026 50344 In alle bronnen werd ‘t op ‘n mens gelijkend
- O 02 jan 2026 50343 Voor Daniël was “Mensenzoon” ‘n symbool van
- O 02 jan 2026 50342106 Laat ons echter alvorens dit onderwerp te
- O 02 jan 2026 50341/105 We hebben opgemerkt dat Yesj deze titel
- O 02 jan 2026 50340 Volgens die uitspraak (Luke 9:44) zei Yesjoe
- O 02 jan 2026 50339 In déze en andere uitspraken uit de derde
- O 01 jan 2026 50338104 Mattai’s Versie van wat YESJ tegen Petrus