Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jesus the Jew
March issue, 1995 pages 1-6 [I typed it in.] | Arthur Zamboni----Catholic Digest--condensed from Catholic Update

Posted on 11/06/2001 10:13:10 AM PST by JMJ333

*I know this is an extremely old article [I dug it out of the back of my closet} but it is well worth the read.

Jesus was a committed Jew of his day. And to truly understand Jesus, we need a solid background in Jewish religious, social, and political history.

Jesus, a rural Jew, lived in Galilee, in the northern part of Palestine. And in Jesus day, Galilee was divided into an upper and lower region. The lower region, where Jesus lived was a rich valley that stretched from the Mediterranean to the sea of Galilee, a distance of about 25 miles.

As far as we know, in Jesus' time there were four principle Jewish sects: The Essenes, the Zealots, the Sadducees, and the Pharisees.

The Essenes, whose name may come from an Arabaic word meaning "pious," had already withdrawn from Jerusalem and Temple participation by the time of Jesus. In isolated monastic communities established in the Judean wilderness, they studied scriptures and developed a rule of life. Essenes were known for their piety--daily prayer, prayer before and after meals, strict observation of the Sabbath, daily ritual bathing, emphasis on chastity and celibacy, wearing white robes as a symbol of spiritual purity, and sharing communal meals and property. Nowhere in the Gospels, however, is Jesus presented as adhering to the Essenes way of life.

Jesus was not a zealot either. Zealots were Jews who vehemently opposed the Roman occupation of Palestine. But there is no evidence in any of Jesus' teachings that he encouraged revolt against Rome.

Jesus also was clearly set apart from the Sadducees, whose name in Hebrew means "Righteous ones." These Jews believed in a strict interpretation of the Torah and did not believe in life after death. Jesus, of course believed in bodily resurrection (Mark 12:18-27)

Contrary to common understanding, Jesus may well have been close to the Pharisees, even if he did debate them vigorously. Many of Jesus' teachings and much of his style was similar to theirs. To understand this, we need to compare the central teachings of the Pharisees to Jesus' teachings.

The Pharisees were a lay reform group within Judaism. The name Pharisee itself means "separate ones" in Hebrew, which refers to a ritual observance of purity and tithing; the word Pharisee can also be translated as "The interpreter," referring to this group's unique interpretation of Hebrew scripture.

As reformers, the Pharisees did not oppose Roman occupation; rather their focus was on reforming the temple, especially with respect to its liturgical practices and priests. And the Pharisees turned their attention toward strengthening Jewish devotion to the Torah, which, they said, had to be continually readjusted within the framework of the contemporary Jewish community. While the Pharisees insisted that the 613 commandments found in the written Torah remained in effect, the commandments had to be carefully rethought in light of new human needs.

The temple priests, though, looked upon the precepts of the Torah more literally and primarily in terms of sacrificial observances at the Temple. The Pharisees, on the other hand, taught that every ordinary human action could become sacred--an act of worship. Doing a "good deed" for another human, a "mitzvah" in Hebrew, was accorded a status that in some ways, surpassed Temple worship. This was truly a revolution in religious thinking.

In addition, a new religious figure in Judaism--the teacher--or Rabbi--emerged within the Pharisaic movement. For their part, rabbis fulfilled a twofold role in the community: They served as interpreters of the Torah and, more importantly, they helped make its teachings relevant. Their principle task was instructional, not liturgical.

From the Pharisaic reform emerged what was later called the synagogue ("assembly of people"). The synagogue became the center of this movement, which quickly spread throughout Palestine and the cities of Jewish Diaspora. Unlike the Jerusalem Temple, the synagogues were not places where priests presided and sacrifices were offered; rather they were places where the Torah was studied, rabbis offered interpretations, and prayers were said. Thus, synagogues became not merely "houses of God" but far more "houses of the people of God."

The Pharisee also emphasized table fellowship--a way of strengthening relationships within a community. In the eyes of the Pharisees, the Temple altar in Jerusalem could be replicated at every table in the household of Israel. A quiet but far reaching reform was at hand. There was no longer any basis for assigning to the priestly class a unique level of authority.

The Pharisees saw God not only as creator, giver of the Covenant, and much more, but in a special way, as the Parent of each individual. Everyone had the right to address God in a direct and personal way, not simply through the temple sacrifices offered by the priests.

The Pharisees also believed in resurrection. Those whose lives were marked by justice would rise once the Messiah had come. Then they would enjoy perpetual union with God.

There is little doubt, then, that Jesus and the Pharisees shared many central convictions. The first was their basic approach to God as a parent figure. In story after story in the Gospels, Jesus addresses God in this way. And Jesus' central prayer begins by invoking God as "Our Father" (Matt. 6: 9-13). The effect of this emphasis was fundamentally the same for Jesus as for the Pharisees (although Jesus had a unique position as God's "Only begotten Son"). More than anything, this approach led to both an enhanced appreciation of the dignity of every person and ultimately to the notion of resurrection--and perpetual union with God.

Jesus' own public stance closely paralleled the evolving role of the Pharisaic teacher. Jesus on a number of occasions in the Gospels are filled with examples of Jesus teaching in synagogues.

Jesus clearly picked up on another central feature of Pharisaism as well, that of the oral Torah, which refers to interpretations given by the Pharisees to various Torah texts. Throughout the Gospels, Jesus offers interpretations of Scripture quite similar to those of the Pharisees.

Finally, Jesus also embraced the table fellowship notion of Pharisaism. The meal narratives in the New Testament are an example of this. In the end, He selected table fellowship for a critical of his ministry, the celebration of the first Eucharist.

Then why, in the Gospels, do the Pharisees appear as the archenemies of Jesus? Here is gets complicated. For one thing, some Pharisees were praised by Jesus (for example the scribe of Mark 12:32). And we know that Jesus ate with Pharisees (Luke 7:36; 14:1).

But there was still conflict between the Pharisees and Jesus, nevertheless. And here scholarship offers three possible explanations.

The first sees Jesus and his teachings as quite similar to the Pharisees. The animosity in the Gospel results from subsequent interpretations of Jesus' action. For example, Jesus' practicing healing on the Sabbath or his disciples picking grain in the holy day were actions clearly not supported by the Pharisees.

Another possible explanation results from our enhanced understanding of the Talmud, the collected teachings of the Pharisees and their rabbinic heirs. In the Talmud are references to some seven categories of Pharisees, which clearly shows that the Pharisaical movement encompassed a wide range of viewpoints and, more important, that internal disputes, often of the heated variety, were quite common. The Gospel portraits of Jesus disputing with the "Pharisees" were examples of "hot debates" that were common in the Pharisaic circles rather than examples of Jesus condemning the Pharisees.

A third scholarly approach stresses positive connection between Jesus' central teachings and those of the Pharisees. In light of these, one becomes suspicious about the so-called texts of conflict. Surely Jesus would not denounce a movement with which he had so much in common.

Hence, either Jesus was speaking in a very limited context, or what are commonly called "the conflict stories" represent religious tensions existing in the latter part of the first century when the gospels were written. The Christian community--now formally expelled from the synagogues--was engaged in intense competition for Jewish converts. The New Testament statements about conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees may reflect that competition.

Regardless, one fact remains. Jesus' own Bible was the Hebrew Scriptures. His attitude toward the sacred writings is summed up in the assertion "Do not think I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish the Law but fulfill (Matt. 5:17).

On the whole, Jesus' teachings were wither literally biblical or filtered through the Pharisaic use of the scripture, or both.

The way the Pharisee and Jesus used the Hebrew Scriptures becomes more clear when Jesus argues his position by using so-called "proof-texts." Here, Jesus quotes from the Hebrew Scriptures to prove a point or refute a critic (See the Sermon on the Mount Matt 5, 6, & 7). In such instances, Jesus was drawing on a technique used by the Pharisees in trying to make a point.

The "Proof-Texting" that Jesus used did, at times, pit him against the Pharisees--such as when He challenged certain claims they made about the unwritten law and called them hypocrites for placing higher value on teachings of humans than of God (Matt. 23: 1-36).; such as when He used scripture to refute the Pharisaic teachings about plucking grain on the Sabbath (Matt 12: 1-8). or unwashed hands (Matt. 15:20).

At other times though, Jesus' "proof-texting" placed him on the side of the Pharisees. Once in an impressive debate with the Saduccees, He used Hebrew scripture to reinforce his belief, and that oft he Pharisees, in an afterlife. Jesus was so impressive he won the Pharisees' applause (Matt. 22: 23-33).

Possibly the best example we have of Jesus' use of Hebrew Scriptures is his teaching on love. "Teacher," one Pharisee asked, "which commandment is greatest?" And Jesus responded by quoting Deuteronamy 6:5, "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and first commandment" (Matt. 22: 36-39). Them Jesus went on quoting Leviticus 19:18, "The second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself." In brief, Jesus was proof-texting his answer.

Jesus' use of the Hebrew Scriptures, therefore, was unabashedly Jewish. And it was similar to that of his contemporaries, particularly the philosophy of the Pharisees.

Knowing and appreciating the Jewish origins has at least three advantages: First, it helps us revise negative understandings of the Pharisees. It also helps us to avoid anti-Semitism. Finally, it allows us to better appreciate the Jewish roots of Christianity. Ultimately, understanding Jesus as a Jew will help us to better understand both our own faith and that of the contemporary Jews.

TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 301-303 next last
To: wimpycat
Huzzah, huzzah, huzzah. Ten points and a Kewpie doll for you.

I probably shouldn't have been showing off, but I've been to so many Messianic Jewish worship services that I can quote that passage better in Hebrew than in English. That's about the only Hebrew I know, except for the Aaronic blessing and the blessing over the wine and bread.


81 posted on 11/06/2001 12:54:31 PM PST by ArGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
And don't forget Moses as a prince of Egypt, son of the daughter of Pharoah.

And Robert E. Lee being asked to command the Union Army by Abraham Lincoln.

God does work in mysterious ways, doesn't He?

82 posted on 11/06/2001 12:56:30 PM PST by wimpycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: gone_to_heck_back_soon
He'd speak that way to many Jews, Christians and Muslims.

No he wouldn't. No he wouldn't. Jesus was all about peace. Jesus was all about turning the other cheek. Jesus was all about love and warm fuzzy feelings. Don't you remember learning about "Gentle Jesus, Meek and Mild" during Sunday School? Jesus would never assail the Pharisees with "Woe to thee" and call them a brood of vipers and stuff like that. Jesus would never appear as a warrior with a sword in His mouth such that He scared the Apostle He loved half to death.



83 posted on 11/06/2001 12:57:47 PM PST by ArGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
.....And Henry VIII being entitled "Defender of the Faith" by the Pope.
84 posted on 11/06/2001 12:58:25 PM PST by wimpycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
I'm sorry, could you be just a tad more cryptic? I almost understand what you're saying.


85 posted on 11/06/2001 1:03:45 PM PST by BibChr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: JMJ333
Jesus the human was a Jew, Jesus the God's son wasn't. God has no nationality.

The excerpts quoted by you don't make Judaism a religion of love.

86 posted on 11/06/2001 1:11:35 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wimpycat
He raised Lazarus from the dead,
that He cast out demons,
that He walked on water,
that He multiplied the loaves and fishes,
that He cured the blind man,
that He was tempted by the Devil for forty days,
that He was crucified and rose from the dead

That makes him Jewish? :)

87 posted on 11/06/2001 1:14:12 PM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
Jesus was not Roman. There is no suggestion of that.
88 posted on 11/06/2001 1:17:55 PM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: JMJ333
Yahweh, call your office.
89 posted on 11/06/2001 1:18:42 PM PST by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nephi
Actually, Jews were one tribe of the (Christian) House of Israel, anticipating Christ's arrival. When He, the Messiah arrived, they rejected Him, splintering from the (Christian) House of Israel. Then, they conducted the first holocaust against their own people for accepting Christ as the Messiah. Later, their descendants were to be saved from another holocaust by the nation founded by men seeking to worship Christ freely, America, 2,000 years later. America has no obligation other than brotherly love toward Israel and Her lost, reorganized (Christian) House of Israel, tribe of Judah brothers and sisters. Christianity is the oldest religion, with Judaism being the oldest Christian splinter group, followed by Islam the modern pagan religion that remains as a thorn to keep Christians humble.

Well, that's quite a story you have there. The only problem is its complete and utter disconnection with reality.

90 posted on 11/06/2001 1:31:57 PM PST by malakhi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Curious to know what you think.
91 posted on 11/06/2001 1:32:36 PM PST by geaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: hopespringseternal
The old covenant no longer exists.

God said that His covenant with Israel would be EVERLASTING. Is God a liar?

92 posted on 11/06/2001 1:32:40 PM PST by malakhi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: JMJ333
It would be interesting to compare and contrast the meaning of the word 'neighbor' in the Jewish and Christian faiths. Care to give it a shot?
93 posted on 11/06/2001 1:38:56 PM PST by AshleyMontagu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
Jesus the human was a Jew, Jesus the God's son wasn't.

There are two different Jesus's?

94 posted on 11/06/2001 1:44:07 PM PST by malakhi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
The excerpts quoted by you don't make Judaism a religion of love.

you shall love your neighbor as yourself (Leviticus 19:18)

95 posted on 11/06/2001 1:45:36 PM PST by malakhi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: wimpycat
God does work in mysterious ways, doesn't He?

82 posted on 11/6/01 1:56 PM Pacific by wimpycat


96 posted on 11/06/2001 1:49:58 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: JMJ333
As far as I can tell, the law given to the Hebrews only pertains to a Jew's behavior while dealing with other Jews.

There is no penalty, and does not apply to a Jew's behavior towards a Gentile.

97 posted on 11/06/2001 1:51:41 PM PST by Dallas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: wimpycat
the Jewish Jesus was some sort of cover up for something else

There has been some mention lately [on FR even] that the Muslims, or some of them, say that Jesus was a prophet, but a liar. What are they talking about? I think many of them do believe so. This being the situation, how can Christianity possibly defeat Islam? We're going to need to do better if we are going to change any minds over there. I don't think Islam has a corner on the truth market, but how can they be persuaded at this late date when they weren't persuaded way back when?

98 posted on 11/06/2001 1:57:21 PM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Dallas
As far as I can tell, the law given to the Hebrews only pertains to a Jew's behavior while dealing with other Jews. There is no penalty, and does not apply to a Jew's behavior towards a Gentile.

Read a little further-- Leviticus 19:34 says that if a "stranger" (non-Jew) lives among you, you must love him as yourself.

99 posted on 11/06/2001 2:00:12 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
Jesus (Y'shua in Aramaic) apparently had a close and friendly relationship with at least two Pharisees, Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus.

When I ask people what Jesus' real name was, they are astounded, thinking that the name Jesus is correct. Y'shua was also thought to be a form of Joshua or Jehosua. The Greeks could'nt easily translate the name Y'shua so they made it Iesu and so did the Romans, thence to Jesus in English. Any flames?

100 posted on 11/06/2001 2:04:17 PM PST by Paulus Invictus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 301-303 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson