[HiTech RedNeck]

And hey, those scriptures DO outline the way you ought to live. Christian theology is better planned than the caricatures made out of it by many Jews. Yes there are stumbling blocks in Christian theology for Jews, but there is no need to multiply the stumbling blocks beyond what they already are.

What the line of Pharisees that refused the Christ (some accepted — you are from the line that refused) got so hot and bothered over, is that this was God dressed in human skin telling them that a lot of their religious rules were nonscriptural and made up. He stole their show. Now when God wants to steal your show, that should be a pretty good clue that your show isn’t worth keeping.

I’ve followed Judaic thought enough to have a respect for where it is. If there was no Christ, that would be the best line available to mankind to take. However there is a Christ and I am personally in His supernatural sphere and can see the effects plainly in my life. Christ has reintegrated a shambles that was my life into a glorious whole that earnestly seeks God. The devil can’t do that.

Anyhow, Christianity teaches that the Old Testament was a training ground, and that its laws are tied to its covenant. But a new covenant came sealed by the sacrifice of the Christ. The way we learned to fundamentally live based on the Old Testament doesn’t change. But the worship framework does. It becomes much freer. Now anywhere you go you can pray. You can pray on the toilet or you can pray in a temple. I wouldn’t suggest purposing the toilet for serious devotions, but if the Lord puts something on your heart while there you can pray.

[ronnietherocket3]

What the line of Pharisees that refused the Christ (some accepted — you are from the line that refused) got so hot and bothered over, is that this was God dressed in human skin telling them that a lot of their religious rules were nonscriptural and made up. He stole their show.

Where does he say their rules are made up? In Matt 22:23-33 he makes it clear to the Sadducees they are wrong and explains why. Then we get to Matt 22:34-40, the Pharisees approach J*sus and J*sus informs them of the 2 greatest commandments. The first is nailed to doorposts and in tefillin that Jews wear during Shacharis. The second, according to Rashi, Rabbi Akiva (1st/2nd cent CE) said was the essence of Torah. J*sus then proceeds to inform them that the whole Law and Prophets (but not Ketuvim?) depend on this. Where else in all of literature is this seen? Tractate Shabbat 31a. In Mark 12:28-34, the Pharisees ask J*sus the same question; J*sus gives the same answer. A scribe then repeats that J*sus is correct and adds "is much more than all the burnt offerings and sacrifices." J*sus then tells him he is not far from the Kingdom of G-d. When J*sus asks them about whose son the Messiah is, they reply David. He does not say they are wrong, he challenges them to think more deeply.

Examining Matt 5:20, he says that people's righteousness needs to exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees. If they taught incorrectly, they would not be righteous and this would therefor be a simple task. Moving to Matt 9:14-15, the disciples of John ask J*sus why his disciples do not fast. According to Jewish custom, certain days are solemn and are to be fasts and so weddings (Joyous events) should not be held then. Bu J*sus says his disciples are at a wedding so they are not to fast. Interestingly, nothing is said about him fasting; it is reasonable to assume he did to comply with Jewish Law. As J*sus is the bridegroom, he is required to fast.

Using the famous Matt 12:1-7 passage, J*sus indicates that they need to think more deeply, not that they are wrong. Matt 12:9-12 pretty much quotes tractate shabbat 128b. Another oft quoted passage to contradict the Oral Torah is Matt 15. However, J*sus does not say the tradition of the elders is wrong; actually he ignores the question. He does condemn them for being hypcrites as they permit someone's vows (voluntary commandment) to override an involuntary commandment. Examining Tractate Nedarim Ch 9, we see that the Pharisees take vows very seriously. Does J*sus ever indicate vows are serious? Matt 5:37. What can be derived from this dispute? J*sus thinks they go too far not that they are wrong. Interestingly, J*sus specifically mentions this with respect to the Corbanot. Later in the Gospels he makes himself Corban.

In Matt 23, he calls the Pharisees hypocrites not preachers of false doctrine. Skipping ahead to Acts 23, Paul stands up and proclaims that he is a Pharisee and the son of a Pharisee. The passage makes it clear Paul is specifically referring to the Pharisaic belief in the Resurrection. However, the passage makes it clear that he is a Pharisee.

Interestingly Gospel records a division amongst the Pharisees (Jn 3 and Jn 7:45-52). At the time there were two groups, Bet Shammai and Hillel. The Pharisees at the time of J*sus were dominated by Bet Shammai. Interestingly, examining Tractate Shabbat 31a, we have Hillel saying, "What is hateful to you, do not to your neighbour:13 that is the whole Torah, while the rest is the commentary thereof; go and learn it.'". This is remarkably similar to Matt 7:12. Slightly earlier (in Talmud) both Shammai and Hillel affirm two Torahs.