Nov 20, 2018
9
0
1
17
United States
1024px-Talmud_set-1.jpg
This post will be addressing the concept of an Oral Torah, its legitimacy, its necessity, and its relationship to Scripture as well as its legal and historical aspects.

I'm creating this post mainly because in Christendom the concept of a divine "Oral Torah" (lit. "Verbal instruction") has been almost completely dismissed as a heretical invention by rabbinical Judaism. But as will be shown in this post, the concept of Oral Torah is found all throughout Scripture.

This can be shown in relation to the Torah of Moses, as we read in Exodus 24:12: ""And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Come up to Me into the mount and be there; and I will give thee the tablets of stone, and the Torah and the commandment, which I have written, that thou mayest teach them’" (Exo 24:12) with the "tablets of stone" being the Ten Commandments, the "Torah" being God's Law, and the "mitzvah" (commandment) being its oral explanation. And all these are said to be "written" by God within the Ten Commandments as all the Laws of God are implicitly contained in them and may therefore be regarded as having been written on them. But the reason an Oral Torah was needed regarding the nation of Israel was simply to carry out God's Laws. Like how the Torah of Moses says not to do "melakah" on the Sabbath yet it doesn't explicitly list what all counts as "melakah". But the commandment, which is the oral explanation of the Torah, Moses did not reduce to writing, but he charged the Elders and Joshua and the rest of all Israel concerning its observance, as it is said: "All the word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do" (Deuteronomy 23:1); therefore, this word of the commandment is called, "Oral Torah." And the judges and priests of Israel were given oral instruction as a measure to properly instruct and give judgement concerning the children of Israel as it is stated: "If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, even matters of controversy within thy gates; then shalt thou arise, and get thee up unto the place which the LORD thy God shall choose. And thou shall come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days; and thou shalt inquire; and they shall declare unto thee the sentence of judgment. And thou shalt do according to the tenor of the sentence, which they shall declare unto thee from that place which the LORD shall choose; and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they shall teach thee. According to the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do; thou shalt not turn aside from the sentence which they shall declare unto thee, to the right hand, nor to the left" (Deut 17:8-11).

Both the legal and historical aspects of the Oral Torah can be compared to the heading of an article and the article itself with the heading being the Holy Writings as the summarization of the article (the Oral Torah - its verbal explanation).

Accordingly, before Moses, many of the commandments pertaining to teachings of morality and dietary issues were taught orally from the time of Adam and Noah though it is not explicitly stated in Scripture. Proof of this can be found in Genesis 7:2: "Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee [Noah] by sevens, male and female: and of beasts that are not clean by twos, male and female." This dialogue presumes that Noah already knows what kind of animals are considered clean and what animals are not. This was later carried on and recorded in the Torah of Moses in Leviticus 11.

However, it must be noted that the "traditions of the elders" as discussed in the Gospels are not to be revered as God's commandments as they were not instituted by divine inspiration (i.e. through God's appointed prophets, apostles, and judges) but by men who thought themselves as God's representatives though they were self righteous and who ended up putting heavy burdens on the children of Israel with their man-made commandments which would indeed sometimes end up leading to the breaking of God's actual commandments. The classic Talmudic example of Jewish rabbis placing unnecessary burdens on the people is found in Shabbat 13 where the sages are quoted as encouraging a Nazirite to detour around a vineyard. It is not forbidden for a Nazirite to walk through a vineyard. However, if he does not walk through it it will be easier for him to resist the temptation of taking and eating from its grapes, something absolutely forbidden to him by Torah law. Yet God did not command that Nazirites had to detour around a vineyard but that they simply couldn't eat grapes. It's an unnecessary additon to God's actual commandment.

The concept of Oral Torah from God in the Bible which is not explicitly written can also be found in Genesis regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In Genesis 2:16-17 we read: "And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayst freely eat: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for on the day that thou eatest of it thou shalt surely die." Yet when Eve is having a dialogue with the serpent Scripture says: "And he said to the woman, Has God said, You shall not eat of any tree of the garden? And the woman said to the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, You shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it, lest you die" (Gen 3:2-3). So we can see here how God (according to Eve) commanded them not to eat or touch the tree of the knowledge of good and evil yet previously in Genesis chapter two it was only recorded that God commanded them not to eat it.

Another reason the Oral Torah was necessary was simply because of the way the Hebrew language was originally written in that it didn't have any vowels. The vowel system in Hebrew wasn't invented until centuries later in 600-1000 AD which is why you don't see any Dead Sea scrolls of the Hebrew Bible with those little dots (such as in אֱלֹהִ֑ים) which are the vowels. And if you've ever tried reading English without vowels you can understand the difficulty of trying to figure out what the words actually say which can in turn completely change the meaning of the text. It's like you know you have "did," "dad," "dead," etc which are only distinguished by the vowels. A perfect example of this in the Hebrew Bible can be found in Exodus 23:19 which says that you cannot seethe a young goat in the milk of its mother. The Hebrew word for "milk" is "חָלָב" (chalab). But the word "fat" in Hebrew is "חֵ֫לֶב" (cheleb). Now if take the away all the dots and dashes around the consonants that you see that these both share (חלב) you're left with the exact same word in the original text which both make sense in the context. The only way you would know the difference if you had the Oral Torah. Therefore the whole vowel system of the Hebrew text which translators use is completely Oral Torah.

The Oral Torah can also be found in the words of Jesus. We read in Matthew 5:27-28: "You have heard that it was said, ‘Thou shall not commit adultery,'" yet Jesus continues: "Moreover I say to you that everyone looking upon a woman to lust after her already has committed adultery with her in his heart." Thus Jesus defines what it means to commit adultery and expounds upon the meaning of this commandment in the Torah of Moses. This is the Oral Torah. Though it shouldn't be concluded that what we find in Matthew 5:27-28, other verses in the same chapter, and elsewhere in Scripture contain all of the records of the stories regarding the King Messiah and his teachings for the Apostle John says: "Now there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if every one should be written, I suppose not even the world itself to have space for the books to be written" (John 21:25). The Apostle Paul says in Acts 20:35: "In everything I showed you that by thus straining, it behooves [us] to aid those being weak, and also to remember the words of the lord Jesus, how he himself said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive'" - yet this occurrence cannot be found in the Gospel record but was instead taught orally by the Apostles as were all of the records of the life of Jesus until they were committed to writing. And furthermore the Apostle Paul also says: "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, whether by word, or by letter from us" (2 Thessalonians 2:15). And he also talks about Jannes and Jambres opposing Moses in 2 Timothy 3:8 which cannot be found in Scripture but is another example of a factual story being passed down orally from generation to generation. But if we were to take what the Apostle John says in John 21:25 and apply it to all of God's prophets and apostles we would soon have a massive collection of information regarding the teachings and the history of God's revelation (albeit we don't know all the information). It is according to this Biblical philosophy that makes the Oral Torah legitimate both in its legal and historical aspects.
 
Last edited:

Fish Catcher Jim

Inactive
Feb 7, 2015
10,797
13,209
113
Greetings David the Prince

Two quick things here.

1. Please be sure to visit your welcome thread and acknowledge that you have read through forum policies and topics which may not be posted in the forum.

2. In SHORT what is the point you are striving at with this thread?
Members may skim it at best.

Thank you Sir!
Blessings
FCJ
 
Nov 20, 2018
9
0
1
17
United States
Greetings David the Prince

Two quick things here.

1. Please be sure to visit your welcome thread and acknowledge that you have read through forum policies and topics which may not be posted in the forum.

2. In SHORT what is the point you are striving at with this thread?
Members may skim it at best.

Thank you Sir!
Blessings
FCJ
From my reading of the topics that cannot be posted I don't see anything related to what I've posted here but my point is to support the idea that God has divine verbal instruction which may not always be in Written Scripture.
 

Fish Catcher Jim

Inactive
Feb 7, 2015
10,797
13,209
113
From my reading of the topics that cannot be posted I don't see anything related to what I've posted here but my point is to support the idea that God has divine verbal instruction which may not always be in Written Scripture.
Such as?
Like I said many members won't even read long post like this and I was just trying to get your point clearly to them as well.
 

Fish Catcher Jim

Inactive
Feb 7, 2015
10,797
13,209
113
Not all of God's revelation is what we have in Scripture would be my simple summarization.
OK so then you believe that there is a source of Gods Revelation flowing out there that is not a part of Scripture or His Most Holy Written Word?

To be clear we are not talking about prophecy that may be given
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cturtle
Nov 20, 2018
9
0
1
17
United States
OK so then you believe that there is a source of Gods Revelation flowing out there that is not a part of Scripture or His Most Holy Written Word?

To be clear we are not talking about prophecy that may be given
It could include prophecy. An example I could give you would be Jude's reference to a prophecy of Enoch which cannot be found in Scripture unless you accept the pseudepigraphical book attributed to Enoch which everyone knows is a fake. It's clear Jude simply received that prophecy from oral tradition. Probably the same tradition that the book which is falsely attributed to Enoch made reference to.
 
Last edited:

Fish Catcher Jim

Inactive
Feb 7, 2015
10,797
13,209
113
It could include prophecy. An example I could give you would be Jude's reference to a prophecy of Enoch which cannot be found in Scripture unless you accept the pseudopographical book attributed to Enoch which everyone knows is a fake. It's clear Jude simply received that prophecy from oral tradition.
Let's look at it in another light.
If Enoch is fake then anything spoken would also be fake and so could not be a part of Gods Divine Revalation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cturtle
Nov 20, 2018
9
0
1
17
United States
Let's look at it in another light.
If Enoch is fake then anything spoken would also be fake and so could not be a part of Gods Divine Revalation.
I'm not sure what you mean. Jude said that Enoch prophesied something which is not in God's written revelation therefore he received it by oral revelation. The Epistle of Jude is authentic but the book of Enoch is not yet they both borrowed from the same oral tradition.
 

Fish Catcher Jim

Inactive
Feb 7, 2015
10,797
13,209
113
I'm not sure what you mean. Jude said that Enoch prophesied something which is not in God's written revelation therefore he received it by oral revelation. The Epistle of Jude is authentic but the book of Enoch is not yet they both borrowed from the same oral tradition.
I apologize for not being more clear.
I was playing off of your
unless you accept the pseudepigraphical book attributed to Enoch which everyone knows is a fake.
As in saying if it is fake it could not be real as in a real Revelation of God.

But we know God took Enoch and he clearly walked with God.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cturtle

Fish Catcher Jim

Inactive
Feb 7, 2015
10,797
13,209
113
What I am trying to grasp is the importance of this oral revelation that you are pointing out over Gods Written Word.

Paul some times had some one write for him. So his writings would have been oral unto script.

Luke wrote a documentary, so again much of what was written first started out as oral.

As written in John....there is much more that Jesus did and said that was not recorded because it would take to many books to do so.

We know the Holy Spirit directed what was to be written.
So if the Holy Spirit did not see fit to have it written, what is the importance of trying to prove this unwritten oral revelation of God?

That's what I am trying to grasp?
What does it profit a man?
Blessings
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cturtle
Nov 20, 2018
9
0
1
17
United States
What I am trying to grasp is the importance of this oral revelation that you are pointing out over Gods Written Word.

Paul some times had some one write for him. So his writings would have been oral unto script.

Luke wrote a documentary, so again much of what was written first started out as oral.

As written in John....there is much more that Jesus did and said that was not recorded because it would take to many books to do so.

We know the Holy Spirit directed what was to be written.
So if the Holy Spirit did not see fit to have it written, what is the importance of trying to prove this unwritten oral revelation of God?

That's what I am trying to grasp?
What does it profit a man?
Blessings
It's imperative to know that God's Oral Torah (Verbal instruction) is not "over" God's Written Torah but is simply accompanied by it. But the importance of proving an oral revelation from God is simply so God's people will follow God's oral revelation. From my observation it has been mostly protestants in general who are completely against the notion of God having any sort of oral revelation because they believe that if it wasn't written it must not have been important to know. But take into account that God's revelation was 100% oral up until the time of Moses and the pentateuch. The children of Noah before Moses who were priests of God such as Melchizedek, King of Salem, were completely reliant on God's Oral Torah which He had given up to that time. One example I could give you of the importance of believing in God's oral revelation in order to follow all His commandments would be the clear fact from Scripture that there were commandments given to Adam and Noah such as dietary laws which are not recorded in Scripture as I've shown by citing Genesis 7:2. Now it's a separate topic on its own on why God gave dietary laws and what they help with but the point is that the Almighty commanded them to be kept. And if you really think about it, it really doesn't make any sense why God wouldn't have given Adam and his descendants specific moral and dietary commandments. Like for example I don't see how the animals which God declared unclean to Moses would have been any more clean in the days of Adam and Noah so it doesn't make any sense that He wouldn't have made them aware of that if you get what I'm saying.
 
Dec 19, 2014
5,374
2,351
113
New Zealand
www.literatelibrarian.com
View attachment 4047
This post will be addressing the concept of an Oral Torah, its legitimacy, its necessity, and its relationship to Scripture as well as its legal and historical aspects.

I'm creating this post mainly because in Christendom the concept of a divine "Oral Torah" (lit. "Verbal instruction") has been almost completely dismissed as a heretical invention by rabbinical Judaism. But as will be shown in this post, the concept of Oral Torah is found all throughout Scripture.

This can be shown in relation to the Torah of Moses, as we read in Exodus 24:12: ""And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Come up to Me into the mount and be there; and I will give thee the tablets of stone, and the Torah and the commandment, which I have written, that thou mayest teach them’" (Exo 24:12) with the "tablets of stone" being the Ten Commandments, the "Torah" being God's Law, and the "mitzvah" (commandment) being its oral explanation. And all these are said to be "written" by God within the Ten Commandments as all the Laws of God are implicitly contained in them and may therefore be regarded as having been written on them. But the reason an Oral Torah was needed regarding the nation of Israel was simply to carry out God's Laws. Like how the Torah of Moses says not to do "melakah" on the Sabbath yet it doesn't explicitly list what all counts as "melakah". But the commandment, which is the oral explanation of the Torah, Moses did not reduce to writing, but he charged the Elders and Joshua and the rest of all Israel concerning its observance, as it is said: "All the word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do" (Deuteronomy 23:1); therefore, this word of the commandment is called, "Oral Torah." And the judges and priests of Israel were given oral instruction as a measure to properly instruct and give judgement concerning the children of Israel as it is stated: "If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, even matters of controversy within thy gates; then shalt thou arise, and get thee up unto the place which the LORD thy God shall choose. And thou shall come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days; and thou shalt inquire; and they shall declare unto thee the sentence of judgment. And thou shalt do according to the tenor of the sentence, which they shall declare unto thee from that place which the LORD shall choose; and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they shall teach thee. According to the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do; thou shalt not turn aside from the sentence which they shall declare unto thee, to the right hand, nor to the left" (Deut 17:8-11).

Both the legal and historical aspects of the Oral Torah can be compared to the heading of an article and the article itself with the heading being the Holy Writings as the summarization of the article (the Oral Torah - its verbal explanation).

Accordingly, before Moses, many of the commandments pertaining to teachings of morality and dietary issues were taught orally from the time of Adam and Noah though it is not explicitly stated in Scripture. Proof of this can be found in Genesis 7:2: "Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee [Noah] by sevens, male and female: and of beasts that are not clean by twos, male and female." This dialogue presumes that Noah already knows what kind of animals are considered clean and what animals are not. This was later carried on and recorded in the Torah of Moses in Leviticus 11.

However, it must be noted that the "traditions of the elders" as discussed in the Gospels are not to be revered as God's commandments as they were not instituted by divine inspiration (i.e. through God's appointed prophets, apostles, and judges) but by men who thought themselves as God's representatives though they were self righteous and who ended up putting heavy burdens on the children of Israel with their man-made commandments which would indeed sometimes end up leading to the breaking of God's actual commandments. The classic Talmudic example of Jewish rabbis placing unnecessary burdens on the people is found in Shabbat 13 where the sages are quoted as encouraging a Nazirite to detour around a vineyard. It is not forbidden for a Nazirite to walk through a vineyard. However, if he does not walk through it it will be easier for him to resist the temptation of taking and eating from its grapes, something absolutely forbidden to him by Torah law. Yet God did not command that Nazirites had to detour around a vineyard but that they simply couldn't eat grapes. It's an unnecessary additon to God's actual commandment.

The concept of Oral Torah from God in the Bible which is not explicitly written can also be found in Genesis regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In Genesis 2:16-17 we read: "And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayst freely eat: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for on the day that thou eatest of it thou shalt surely die." Yet when Eve is having a dialogue with the serpent Scripture says: "And he said to the woman, Has God said, You shall not eat of any tree of the garden? And the woman said to the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, You shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it, lest you die" (Gen 3:2-3). So we can see here how God (according to Eve) commanded them not to eat or touch the tree of the knowledge of good and evil yet previously in Genesis chapter two it was only recorded that God commanded them not to eat it.

Another reason the Oral Torah was necessary was simply because of the way the Hebrew language was originally written in that it didn't have any vowels. The vowel system in Hebrew wasn't invented until centuries later in 600-1000 AD which is why you don't see any Dead Sea scrolls of the Hebrew Bible with those little dots (such as in אֱלֹהִ֑ים) which are the vowels. And if you've ever tried reading English without vowels you can understand the difficulty of trying to figure out what the words actually say which can in turn completely change the meaning of the text. It's like you know you have "did," "dad," "dead," etc which are only distinguished by the vowels. A perfect example of this in the Hebrew Bible can be found in Exodus 23:19 which says that you cannot seethe a young goat in the milk of its mother. The Hebrew word for "milk" is "חָלָב" (chalab). But the word "fat" in Hebrew is "חֵ֫לֶב" (cheleb). Now if take the away all the dots and dashes around the consonants that you see that these both share (חלב) you're left with the exact same word in the original text which both make sense in the context. The only way you would know the difference if you had the Oral Torah. Therefore the whole vowel system of the Hebrew text which translators use is completely Oral Torah.

The Oral Torah can also be found in the words of Jesus. We read in Matthew 5:27-28: "You have heard that it was said, ‘Thou shall not commit adultery,'" yet Jesus continues: "Moreover I say to you that everyone looking upon a woman to lust after her already has committed adultery with her in his heart." Thus Jesus defines what it means to commit adultery and expounds upon the meaning of this commandment in the Torah of Moses. This is the Oral Torah. Though it shouldn't be concluded that what we find in Matthew 5:27-28, other verses in the same chapter, and elsewhere in Scripture contain all of the records of the stories regarding the King Messiah and his teachings for the Apostle John says: "Now there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if every one should be written, I suppose not even the world itself to have space for the books to be written" (John 21:25). The Apostle Paul says in Acts 20:35: "In everything I showed you that by thus straining, it behooves [us] to aid those being weak, and also to remember the words of the lord Jesus, how he himself said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive'" - yet this occurrence cannot be found in the Gospel record but was instead taught orally by the Apostles as were all of the records of the life of Jesus until they were committed to writing. And furthermore the Apostle Paul also says: "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, whether by word, or by letter from us" (2 Thessalonians 2:15). And he also talks about Jannes and Jambres opposing Moses in 2 Timothy 3:8 which cannot be found in Scripture but is another example of a factual story being passed down orally from generation to generation. But if we were to take what the Apostle John says in John 21:25 and apply it to all of God's prophets and apostles we would soon have a massive collection of information regarding the teachings and the history of God's revelation (albeit we don't know all the information). It is according to this Biblical philosophy that makes the Oral Torah legitimate both in its legal and historical aspects.
Can I add..thank you for posting I believe everyone who posts a topic has something important they want to share.

Interesting, I do believe that to teach someone how to do something involves not just writing it down but transmitting it verbally. The writing down is important though nobody is denying that because of Habbukuk 2:2 write the vision and make it plain so whoever runs with it may read it.
The Hebrew people did tell stories from generation to generation as traditions just like other peoples did and had customs and things they just KNEW. Like the maori people had stories of their ancestors told from generation to generation and this you only learn from handing it down they did not have a written language. The difference is the Hebrew people were commanded by God to write their stories down, not just for themselves but to bring light to the gentiles and the entire world. Of course not every single detail would have made it into the Bible! I dont think David is trying to say its more important than whats preserved in scripture. Just that its legitimate as part of oral biblical history and not to be dismissed. Does it profit us? Well yes it always helps to study the background to the Bible and the tradtions of His chosen people carried on right to this day. Its now part of our history after all if we are adopted into His family. If you go to Israel you can see it! Dont forget that Jesus was a jew! Before the gospels were recorded, everyone HEARD what Jesus had to say. He didnt actually write any book in the Bible. He was teaching orally.

For a Jewish person, it obviously means a lot, for those of us who dont speak a word of Hebrew. Well sorry if we cant understand it that much. I think thats just it, lack of understanding. The gift of the holy spirit, does that not include tongues. Well see God wants us to hear his Word and speak it out loud. When the Holy spirit was given, I mean it wasnt initially given in the form of a copy of the Bible for every new believer. I mean nowadays we are so blessed to have the Word readily available. But as always its spread by Word of mouth first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David the Prince

aha

Nov 18, 2011
1,414
376
83
Am posting this as a student of Bible Study: more of to seek to understand:

Thus, am also stating the "my reason to ask" for transparency or understanding the reason why I asked:
Some questions I have:

Question No. 1 : Who are the Subjects or Followers or Citizens of the "Oral Torah"?
  • Does it include Jews only or including Gentiles? (am using those words “Jews and Gentiles” in the light/usage of St. Paul letters differentiating or no differentiating the two.
  • My reason to ask: I see some verses that seems to me St. Paul and St. Peter (both Jews) need to observe, still, Jewish Traditions, but St. Paul letters and Acts verses seems to say that the Jews Tradition is not to be observe by the Gentiles.
Question No. 2 : Divorce: is it an Oral Torah?

From how I understand the definition of “Oral Torah” as quoted:

"Oral Torah" is as quoted from the OP:
  • "All the word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do" (Deuteronomy 23:1); therefore, this word of the commandment is called, "Oral Torah."
  • Both the legal and historical aspects of the Oral Torah can be compared to the heading of an article and the article itself with the heading being the Holy Writings as the summarization of the article (the Oral Torah - its verbal explanation).
Oral Tora is NOT:

However, it must be noted that the "traditions of the elders" as discussed in the Gospels are not to be revered as God's commandments as they were not instituted by divine inspiration (i.e. through God's appointed prophets, apostles, and judges) …..

My Reason to ask:
Am on the opinion, impression, or say understanding: there a major kind of laws (can be more or in betweens)
1. Divine Law
2. Man-made laws with Divine Authority
3. Man-made laws
Divorce falls in the category of no. 2 (that is how I understand the related Mark 10:2-12)

Question No. 3 is Semantics related.

Reason I asked:
  • Semantics is very important as I see it.
  • Day to day conversation seems to reduce it to semantics as not that important just get to the point.
  • But semantics, as I see it: helps us to divide the boundary of thoughts properly.
Thus: Question No. 3:

By Definition. Torah is an Instruction, Teaching or a Law.

Question No. 3 Prophecy: Prophecy is not an "Oral Torah", that is how I understand "Prophecy" is: ie: "events to come"
 
Nov 20, 2018
9
0
1
17
United States
Question No. 1 : Who are the Subjects or Followers or Citizens of the "Oral Torah"?
  • Does it include Jews only or including Gentiles? (am using those words “Jews and Gentiles” in the light/usage of St. Paul letters differentiating or no differentiating the two.
  • My reason to ask: I see some verses that seems to me St. Paul and St. Peter (both Jews) need to observe, still, Jewish Traditions, but St. Paul letters and Acts verses seems to say that the Jews Tradition is not to be observe by the Gentiles.
It depends because within God's Torah as a whole (both Oral and Written) you have laws which specifically pertain to the government of Israel that were given by Moses such as the judiciary, sacrificial, ceremonial, civil laws, etc. which can only be carried out if there is nation of Israel which has the Torah of Moses established as the law of the land. But the thing about the New Covenant is that it is no longer restricted to a single government and a single people but to an assembly consisting of people from all nations with various kinds of governments. And therefore from my current understanding we must follow the commandments which we can keep such as the moral and dietary laws - basically the laws that the children of Noah such as Melchizedek, King of Salem, were expected to keep before God instituted stuff like circumcision.

Question No. 2 : Divorce: is it an Oral Torah?

From how I understand the definition of “Oral Torah” as quoted:

"Oral Torah" is as quoted from the OP:
  • "All the word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do" (Deuteronomy 23:1); therefore, this word of the commandment is called, "Oral Torah."
  • Both the legal and historical aspects of the Oral Torah can be compared to the heading of an article and the article itself with the heading being the Holy Writings as the summarization of the article (the Oral Torah - its verbal explanation).
Oral Tora is NOT:

However, it must be noted that the "traditions of the elders" as discussed in the Gospels are not to be revered as God's commandments as they were not instituted by divine inspiration (i.e. through God's appointed prophets, apostles, and judges) …..

My Reason to ask:
Am on the opinion, impression, or say understanding: there a major kind of laws (can be more or in betweens)
1. Divine Law
2. Man-made laws with Divine Authority
3. Man-made laws
Divorce falls in the category of no. 2 (that is how I understand the related Mark 10:2-12)
I would definitely agree with your assessment especially in regards to Mark 10:2-12. This would be a perfect example of the divine authority God gives to his appointed judges and magistrates to make decisions. As we read in the Law of Moses: "If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, even matters of controversy within thy gates; then shalt thou arise, and get thee up unto the place which the LORD thy God shall choose. And thou shall come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days; and thou shalt inquire; and they shall declare unto thee the sentence of judgment. And thou shalt do according to the tenor of the sentence, which they shall declare unto thee from that place which the LORD shall choose; and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they shall teach thee. According to the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do; thou shalt not turn aside from the sentence which they shall declare unto thee, to the right hand, nor to the left" (Deut 17:8-11). This type of legislative authority is also needed simply to accommodate for changing times. Like how for example in ancient times God's people didn't have laws for things that weren't invented yet like certain drugs such as heroin. Well how do we know if it's a sin to do heroin or not? Someone has to make the decision but unfortunately due to various historical blunders God's Church has been arguably corrupted with various false doctrines and has been fragmented in many denominations with each having their own belief system so it's kind of hard to have proper discussions and councils which would have any meaningful effect on the teachings of Christendom though it worked in the days of the early Church and ancient Israel which had a centralized authority.



Question No. 3 is Semantics related.

Reason I asked:
  • Semantics is very important as I see it.
  • Day to day conversation seems to reduce it to semantics as not that important just get to the point.
  • But semantics, as I see it: helps us to divide the boundary of thoughts properly.
Thus: Question No. 3:

By Definition. Torah is an Instruction, Teaching or a Law.

Question No. 3 Prophecy: Prophecy is not an "Oral Torah", that is how I understand "Prophecy" is: ie: "events to come"
Prophecy can be a matter of Oral Torah. I would suggest that the prophecy of Enoch we find Jude referring to is a completely oral tradition though nontheless true.

Hoped that answered your questions and if you have thoughts or anything else you would like to input feel free.
 

Fish Catcher Jim

Inactive
Feb 7, 2015
10,797
13,209
113
And therefore from my current understanding we must follow the commandments which we can keep such as the moral and dietary laws - basically the laws that the children of Noah such as Melchizedek, King of Salem, were expected to keep before God instituted stuff like circumcision.
We were never invited unto the old covenant. Therefore those laws are not for us.

Well how do we know if it's a sin to do heroin or not?
It kills and destroys people.
It causes one to not be sober minded.
though it worked in the days of the early Church
We are to continue forward walking in Gods power even more then the church of acts but instead the church has become wimpy in the power of God.