In fact it WAS a physical seat:
For the reader, Moses' Seat is revealed in Exodus 18:13+, along with the formation of the proto-Sanhedrin... And synagogues had an actual seat after that tradition, which the Pharisees sat upon to do judgment (pic'd above). One can certainly assume a greater Seat of Moses in the Temple itself.
[...] it is the position of authority over the Jewish people...Whatever came out of Moses' seat was to be authentic Jewish teaching, accepted by the religious Jewish community over the course of many years, decades or centuries... These people were in charge of overseeing the oracles of God as given to the Jews by God...
True. However, this shows a lack of a great prophet, or that the prophets were not being listened to... Jesus charges these Pharisees (y'know the ones everyone is to listen to, even if they are apostate) with murdering all the prophets, suggesting a long line of usurpers. (ref. Matt 23:29-35)
The idea is that whatever the Pharisees bid you do is the same as what was given by the Scribes and Pharisees thruout history...The oracles don't change from one group of Pharisees to the next...
True in part. The Torah (/Tenakh) did not change... But their oral law, their !!!TRADITION!!! (Mishnah) surely did (Gee, that sounds SO familiar). It has been many years since I read the Talmud/Mishnah, but I would bet money that every one of the things Christ used in His Matt 23 rant has it's place in that tradition.
This is the thing that got me going: Christ flatly defied the apostate authorities of the Temple, yet did not sin... As He says, "Which is greater, the alter or the sacrifice upon it?" It is my position that Christ defied the tradition, not the Torah. THAT is a substantial difference.
It's clear to me that Jesus told these folks to follow what the Pharisees are telling you as long as it's word for word out of historical Moses' seat...Ignore their embellished version and definitely don't do what you see them do whatever it is, that is contrary to historical teaching...
I must absolutely agree. It seems absurd for Christ to tell them to follow after a "pit of vipers" and "blind guides."
But, as you are probably painfully aware, these verses (Matt 23:2-3) are often plucked out of context to build "!!!AUTHORITY!!!" for other usurpers.
Looking at Christ's example, it must not be true. And further, His Apostles denied these same authorities outright - Perhaps giving us the best authority (outside of Christ Himself) in the matter:
Act 5:27 And when they had brought them, they set them before the council: and the high priest asked them,
Act 5:28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.
Act 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
If the Disciples had listened to "!!!AUTHORITY!!!" rather than Christ, the Church would have died that very day. THAT is precedent.
Thanks for the reply.