I said what I did to draw a strong distinction between cultural norms and some sort of 'holy tradition' which was purely a Pharisaical invention, and which, Yeshua denounced entirely. He threw it out: Lock, stock, and barrel.
Here is a non sectarian Biblical Archeology Site that looks at the DSS and the MT. Again, there is as the site knows a “relative stability” of the MT, but it does show that the MT is not entirely in agreement with the DSS.
Like I said, I think the evidence now suggests that the MT comes from 1 mainstream Hebrew Textual tradition but that there were other textual traditions in Jewish circles, also mainstream, from where the LXX came from. I think scholars have called this one an Alexandrian-Hebrew textual tradition.
There's a sense in which every single word of the Tanakh is dependent upon Oral Tradition, because each and every word needs spoken vowels which do not occur in the written text. The text is incomprehensible without the vowels, and the vowels are supplied by Oral Tradition. Thus the intelligibility of each word of the Bible is entirely interwoven with Oral Tradition.
I think this is beautiful, and deeply significant. It causes me to praise God even more for the way He has caused His truth to be manifest.
" 'holy tradition' ...was purely a Pharisaical invention... which Yeshua denounced entirely. He threw it out: Lock, stock, and barrel.Let me begin again with the caveat that I have only a goyishe kopf and Peanut Gallery-level knowledge of Jewish oral tradition (and wish I knew a whole lot more). However, I suspect that distinctions to be made between different levels of non-written transmission--- cultural norms, "Holy tradition," preaching with commentary, Oral Torah and probably more --- would be very, very important.
That's why I cannot agree that Jesus threw out ALL "tradition" "lock, stock, and barrel." "Tradition" just means "transmission" and transmission of a truth could be by preaching, by parchment or by practice. (I chose the word "parchment" to get three "3p's" in there for mnemonic purposes --- heh-- old preachers' trick.) :o)
It's in this sense that St. Paul can say,
2 Thessalonians 2:25
"So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us."
And then again:
1 Corinthians 11:2
"I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you."
And again, the many times Paul tells his Christian converts to be imitators of him, thus retaining practices as well as the preached and written message:
1 Thessalonians 2:14So those who do seriously attend to the oral teaching and the practical imitation as well as written texts, are not, I think included in the "lock, stock and barrel" repudiation of Pharisaic tradition that you speak of. At the very least, they are being told to
"For you, brothers and sisters, became became imitators of God's churches in Judea"1 Thessalonians 1:6
"You became imitators of us and of the Lord ..."Hebrews 6:12
"Be imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises...."1 Corinthians 11:1
"Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ..."
1 Corinthians 4:16
"Therefore I urge you to imitate me."Philippians 3:17
"Join together in following my example, brothers, and watch carefully those who are living this way, just as you have us as an example."1 Peter 3:13
"Who is going to harm you if you become imitators of that which is good?"
In factg, even in reference to the Pharisees, Jesus sometimes says to DO what they preach, but not to follow their example because
Matthew 23:3
"All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not according to their works: for they do not practice what they preach."
This why I can';t agree that Jesus threw out ALL tradition, "lock, stock and barrel." Paul is certainly exhorting Christians to "stand firm and hold onto" the traditions they were taught by the Apostles. So, unlike Pharisaic tradition, Apostolic Tradition must have some authority.