db125/126/127: it seems these were not the only
OCCASIONS
ON WHICH YEHOSHUA
DEFENDS CONSERVATIVE HALAKHIC STANDS?!
In the socalled WOE~SAYINGS in Matai 23, YESHUA/'Jesus'
twice rails against pharisaic law & offers an alternative halakhic opinion!
In all matters, that of oaths (vv. 16-22) & the subject of purifying vessels (vv. 25/26),
Yeshu objects to the leniency of the Pharisees ànd offers an alternative/stricter ruling! We could
and would assert, moreover, that Yesh's Galilean Disciples were following their own accepted traditional practice
in their refusal of the (nonbiblical) notion that impure foods should render the body impure
& hence their refusal to wash their hands
before eating?!
Yesh's disciples
are upbraided by these upstarts
from YERUSHALAYIM for not observing the purity strictures that they then had introduced
& insisted to demand on their basis of
the "traditions of the elders!"
Yesh responds vigorously,
accusing them of hypocrisy & of ascribing to their own rulings
& practices an importance greater than that of the Torah!? There is thus nothing in Mark's version of this pas-sage, let alone Matai's,
that suggests that Jesus is calling for (any) abandoning the Torah at all!!
The Galileans were antipathetic to all
of the urban JUDAEAN/Jerusalemite
pharisaic innovations!
Thus,
when put into its historical context,
the chapter is perfectly clear:
MARK
was a Jew & his "Jesus"
DID
keep kosher!
At least in its attitude
toward the embodied practices of the Torah,
Mark's Gospel does not in any way con-stitute even a baby step
in the direction of the invention of 'Christianity' as a
NEW RELIGION
or as a departure from Judaism
at all!
ON WHICH YEHOSHUA
DEFENDS CONSERVATIVE HALAKHIC STANDS?!
In the socalled WOE~SAYINGS in Matai 23, YESHUA/'Jesus'
twice rails against pharisaic law & offers an alternative halakhic opinion!
In all matters, that of oaths (vv. 16-22) & the subject of purifying vessels (vv. 25/26),
Yeshu objects to the leniency of the Pharisees ànd offers an alternative/stricter ruling! We could
and would assert, moreover, that Yesh's Galilean Disciples were following their own accepted traditional practice
in their refusal of the (nonbiblical) notion that impure foods should render the body impure
& hence their refusal to wash their hands
before eating?!
Yesh's disciples
are upbraided by these upstarts
from YERUSHALAYIM for not observing the purity strictures that they then had introduced
& insisted to demand on their basis of
the "traditions of the elders!"
Yesh responds vigorously,
accusing them of hypocrisy & of ascribing to their own rulings
& practices an importance greater than that of the Torah!? There is thus nothing in Mark's version of this pas-sage, let alone Matai's,
that suggests that Jesus is calling for (any) abandoning the Torah at all!!
The Galileans were antipathetic to all
of the urban JUDAEAN/Jerusalemite
pharisaic innovations!
Thus,
when put into its historical context,
the chapter is perfectly clear:
MARK
was a Jew & his "Jesus"
DID
keep kosher!
At least in its attitude
toward the embodied practices of the Torah,
Mark's Gospel does not in any way con-stitute even a baby step
in the direction of the invention of 'Christianity' as a
NEW RELIGION
or as a departure from Judaism
at all!
30 jan 2013 - bewerkt op 31 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