Pesach: Am I to take it you think Jews today have distorted the message of Pesach from what perhaps ‘real’ Jews accepted as valid at some time in the past?

Sages? My question: how do you know what is Jewish tradition or not if you don’t know what is meant when a Jew says ‘the sages’; the rabbis quoted in Pirke Avot? So, are you now claiming that at one time some of these rabbis taught Christianity?

What constitutes a poor reason differs depending on the religious tradition a person follows and is truly in the eyes of the beholder. Talmud includes both majority and minority opinions for ‘good reason’. One never knows the final value of either.

Time for me to take off and finish preparing for Shabbos. All of this stuff is way too serious anyway. I don’t get why only one interpretation, one POV, one story, is allowed in your world. Doesn’t that get kind of boring after awhile? What’s the point of studying? To prove that one thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over? Not my style at all, so guess it’s just as well I’m not a Christian. Barukh attah Adonai Eloheynu Melach ha-olam, shi-asani Yisrael. Good luck with your studies, Mike. No hard feelings I hope. We just walk different paths and view the world, Torah, and God quite differently.

You are right, and I appreciate your wisdom in naming a difference of opinion on one of the points. All i can do is offer a link to Gordon Wenham’s article on the composition of the Pentateuch

http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_pentateuch_wenham.html

in the meantime, can we agree that at the very least the implied author of the Pentateuch is Moses? By this I mean that at least the actual author wanted us to assume Moses wrote it, and so should lend us to the idea that there is thematic unity in the Pentateuch.

Yael,

“First off, Jews don’t read the sacrificial system into Pesach, that is totally a Christian reading of the texts. ”

They certainly dont today, but then, I never said they did.

“Second off, there is no proof that Moses wrote these books at all, only tradition says this is so.”

There is no proof that he didnt, and besides it is the Jewish tradition that he wrote it. So what exactly are you saying here?

“I don’t think it’s fair to say what the original audience thought of it at all, only what the sages thought about it, and only what Christianity thought about it, which are not the same things, obviously.”

You are really gonna have to qualify what you mean when you say “sages,” because depending on that I might agree with you or not.

“How does looking at any other interpretation do damage to the text?”

Looking at them does no damage at all (in fact it can often be fruitful), but accepting one over the others for poor reasons does.

First off, Jews don’t read the sacrificial system into Pesach, that is totally a Christian reading of the texts. Second off, there is no proof that Moses wrote these books at all, only tradition says this is so.

I don’t think it’s fair to say what the original audience thought of it at all, only what the sages thought about it, and only what Christianity thought about it, which are not the same things, obviously.

How does looking at any other interpretation do damage to the text? Are only Christian speculations as to the meaning of Torah allowed these days?

**events in Genesis 3 and in Exodus happened before Leviticus and its sacrificial system were instituted, but they were written by the same guy: Moses. He couched the events that occurred before in terms that were intended to invoke a sacrificial understanding in the minds of his readers. **

Hmm. This might be where the conversation halts, because I know I’m not operating under the idea that Moses wrote Genesis.

But if it was driven in sacrifical terms, why doesn’t the Eden text mention blood was spilt? Or that the animals were killed at all? Why tie it so directly to providing clothing for Adam/Eve?

**but OSS check it out cause you’ll be saying ‘oh no he didn’t (snap snap)’.**
Lol. I did. I have responses to him specifically below.

**As for spiritual death – I am not sure what that is. The term likely never appears in the entirety of the bible and is purely thought up (a philosophical idea).**

Okay, good. It’s not just me. Because I especially don’t see this notion in the Tanakh, with a spiritual death and so forth.

**The point MIke makes is Jesus died and resurrected – beating death for all humanity. **
Actually, I think there are quite a few segments where we can say that we all died and we resurrected, depending on how one reads Paul. The whole crucified with Christ idea. It’s not a matter of taking our place, but a matter of uniting us with him, and we all die, so we can all be resurrected. We still take part.

**I am not sure we owe a death in the sense we need to pay it to God – but that it was merely a result of sin entering the world (a Pauline idea) – and as result – we got used to death (and it quite the norm). **
Especially given teh framework: sin pays death. What is ‘owed’ is actually to those who sin.

Brad,

**Either way, as Mike recently commented on our blog, the expulsion from Eden was both a physical death (they would eventually die) and a spiritual death (they were separated from God). Jesus’ sacrifice accomplished an immediate spiritual redemption resulting in the giving of the Holy Spirit (Pentacost), and a sneak peak at a future physical redemption. **

I still don’t see, going back to the original comment, how this pays off the penalty owed to God. I see how you are defining death, in two segments. However, even for the physical/spiritual death: seperate in what way? What we see in Jeremiah 23 is that God is near, fills the whole heaven/earth. In Psalms 139, we can’t escape from God’s presence. Was everyone restricted from the Holy Spirit prior to the death/resurrection?

**Jesus immediately reconciled spiritual death. NT authors do not seem to expect an immediate erasure of sin from this world, but a spiritual redemption that connects us to God. **

You mentioned this in terms of debt, but again, I still don’t see what penalty was paid off — a death, yes. But we have a physical death, which still occurs, so we still ‘do’ that portion. Yet Jesus paid off a physical death. Did he also “pay off” a spiritual death? I think I get stuck on this, because if we say he was seperate for a time, he was then not seperate, so what was the point of the pay off? Our punishment, based on my understanding, is that we were to be permanelty seperated from God — spiritual death. Jesus makes it so a reconciliation is possible. So if Jesus took our place, shouldn’t the seperation be permanent? Something just doesn’t add up for me here.

esus reconciled spiritual death, in that we are no longer seperate from God. But where in the Tanakh do we have a huge emphasis on this seperation unless they sacrifice an animal? Or sacrifice anything?

**How are you, or these Jewish websites you are visiting not doing anything different? **

I’ll again tie into what Hebrews says — without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins. Where is that in the Tanakh? Or to take the virgin birth propehcy: could anyone, prior to the New Testament, read that and say that it related to a birth of a Messiah/Jesus? Or that it related to Jesus life at all? Or would they have said it was specific to that point in time? Or even Genesis, and saying that the serpent was Satan. Or even the nature of Satan himself, based on the Tanakh.

I know I’ve asked this question previously, but shouldn’t a prophecy be clear cut before it happened? How effective is a prophecy if it can only be interpreted after the event occured? It’s suppose to help give anticipation for an event. That’s what I mean by not letting the Tanakh stand on its own.

For example, to answer my questions about the death/life, and sacrifical nature, you provide answers from a New Testament book. Why not support from the Tanakh itself? It’s like the New Testament books are provided because they’re saying “Here’s what the Tanakh *really* means.” But why isn’t that “real meaning” above and beyond obvious in the Tanakh itself? It just seems that when Christians look for an explanation into Judaism, rather than using the same texts Judaism uses, it uses the New Testament.

“The text says that God made clothes of skin for Adam and Eve, but never says what the skin is or where God obtained the skins. It is our assumption that God killed animals but does that have to necessarily be the case? Is this not also reading back into the text the teaching that death is required for transgressions?”

Actually no, at least no more than reading the sacrificial system into the Passover. The events in Genesis 3 and in Exodus happened before Leviticus and its sacrificial system were instituted, but they were written by the same guy: Moses. He couched the events that occurred before in terms that were intended to invoke a sacrificial understanding in the minds of his readers. So it is fair to say that his original audience understood these events as examples of the sacrificial system, and that imagining God creating the skins out of nowhere or as snake skins does more damage to the text than the interpretation of the original audience.

I agree – and I include myself in this category – I don want to add to God’s words but interpretation has a funny way of allowing us this privelege. So I think the warning is grand – we need to consider what we are saying God is saying – lest we put some people out with such claims.

“A good lesson for teachers? To not feed misinformation to their students even with good intentions?” (Yael)

Agreed…we may not have all the answers and this is something worth noting. I was just on a Christian blog the other day and I could not believe the dis-repsect they have for someone that says something like ‘I think the bible says…’. I thought ‘hey…I do that a lot’. But i also know why I do it – because I am an aspect of interpretation (not getting it all) and that I do not want to speak for God – aware this is ‘using God’s name in vain’ on some level.

“A good lesson for transgressors and for those who so readily dismiss mitzvot? That just because we think we got away with one thing, does not mean we’ll be able to keep going on the same path with no consequences?” (Yael)

So true – once we start making excuses for one slip – then we enter the realm of breaking commandments based on that excuse. It’s not good – it’s like lying to ones-self to do something we know we shouldn’t.

I intentionally avoid the term spiritual in my long break down of Mike’s idea – because I don’t think that is what Paul is saying – I think he is being figurative (which he does a lot) about a future event for humanity being in the ‘now’ (Jesus being the first person in this case to actually do this – die and resurrect). Paul is using that langauge to compare conversion/committment to Christ (for the Gentiles) – so that it will stick in their heads and make sense…die to sin – live to a new life type thing.

As for spiritual death – I am not sure what that is. The term likely never appears in the entirety of the bible and is purely thought up (a philosophical idea). Adam is never signified to have died spiritually – nor is anyone ever given that moniker. Paul’s writings come the closest to saying this but he even uses variables of the flesh and spirit (not both spirit – like spirit dead is now spirit alive).

The point MIke makes is Jesus died and resurrected – beating death for all humanity. However, since the Torah and Prophets are not completely fulfilled and Jesus has to come again to complete the process – at that time death will be beaten and resurrection will also occur for all. Jesus was the ‘first-fruits’ as Mike pointed out from Paul in 1 Cor 15. I tend to agree with that.

This ‘owing a death to God’ thing is part of payment atonement (or whatever it is called) and I don’t quite buy into it (iunless it is in regards to settling the sins aspect of ignorance we once walked in). I am not sure we owe a death in the sense we need to pay it to God – but that it was merely a result of sin entering the world (a Pauline idea) – and as result – we got used to death (and it quite the norm).

As for the animal sacrifice thing – I tend to agree with you on this OSS (and I take my cues form Judaism on this one) – not always was animal sacrifice needed for the sins of the people (and does not exist now at all). God has provided a way for atonement – and prior to the Torah – it does seem people had relationship with God (outside of animal sacrifice) – but then again God destroyed things then (since there was no sacrifice – my new theory – LOL).