CHAPTER SIX
Jewish Misconceptions of the Torah
Some years ago, there was a game show on television which consisted of a master of ceremonies, a panel of "experts" (well-known celebrities), and three contestants---one of whom was a special guest. It was the job of the other two contestants to assume the identity of the guest, while the panel members interrogated all three to find out who was telling the truth. When the questioning was over, the master of ceremonies called on each member of the panel to decide which contestant he or she believed. The host would then say, "Will the real ÎJohn Doeâ please stand up!" The panel members who had correctly discerned between the real person and the impostors rejoiced, and the audience applauded. Finally, we all knew who the real "John Doe" was.
The concluding chapters in this pursuit of Torah will be something like that game show. We will focus on some Torah deceivers that have developed over the centuries÷fraudulent "torahs" which some have attempted to pass off as the true Torah. We will look at one such impostor from the Jewish camp in this chapter. In the next chapter we will examine one from the "Christian" camp. We want our readers, the "panel of experts," to decide which is the true Torah.
The Dual Torahs - An Explanation
Let us begin with the Jewish concept of the "dual Torah." In Judaism there are two Torahs. One is called the written Torah, Torah
shâBichtav (cu,fca vru,), and the other is referred to as the oral Torah, Torah shâbeâal peh (vp kgca vru, ). Both are essential concepts of traditional Judaism, both ancient and modern. It is important to note, however, that the concept of dual torahs is not derived from the plural use of the word "torah." Keeping in mind the fact that "torah" means "teaching" will help us understand that, when used in the plural in Hebrew, "torah" simply refers to a section containing multiple instructions about a given subject, and not to the dual torah concept.Moshe is Fundamental
The primary authority in the life of a religious Jewish person is the Torah. (Although the Hebrew word Torah simply means "teaching" and can refer to any body of teaching, such as the whole Tenakh and the rabbinical writings, we are using the term here as it is most commonly understood÷to indicate the first five books of Scripture, Genesis through Deuteronomy.) Harvey Lutzke underscores the centrality of the Torah to the Jewish people when he writes,
The Torah, quite simply, is the backbone of the Jewish people. It is the source, the root, the basis for all Jewish life, and it is the very foundation of Judaism. The Torah is without parallel. From the Torah came all subsequent Jewish works.
Not only is the written Torah fundamental to Judaism, it is also the foundational document for all who follow the Brit Hadasha. We simply cannot have one without the other. The Brit Hadasha is built upon the teachings of the Torah.
"We Need to Know More"
Having established this basic tenet of Judaism, we immediately encounter a problem÷or at least, what seems like a problem. The written Torah is so basic that the reader may feel he needs more information in order to fulfill its commands as intended. For example, Leviticus commanded Israel to slaughter animals as sacrifices for sin. But the offerers were not told in what manner this was to be accomplished. How was the animal to be held? Where was the incision to be made? What, if anything, was to be said before slaughtering? These and many more details are absent from the written Torah.
This apparent information gap was filled, according to the sages, by the oral Torah. According to its simplest definition, oral Torah is that which was spoken by God to Moshe on Mount Sinai and which Moshe, in turn, spoke to the Israelites. Furthermore, sometime before he died, according to the Mishnah, Moshe "transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the Elders, the Elders to the Prophets, and the Prophets transmitted it to the Men of the Great Assembly." This quotation is from the Mishnah, tractate Pirke Avot 1:1, and is considered an introductory passage to all of Avot, one of the most respected tractates in all of the Mishnah. According to R. Pinchas Kehati, a modern Mishnaic scholar from Jerusalem:
The purpose of this opening statement is to teach us that every word cited in this tractate, as indeed the whole of the oral Torah, can in their systematic form be traced back through the Prophets to Moshe Rabbenu, the father of all prophets, who received the whole Torah÷its laws, rules of inference and interpretations÷from the Almighty Himself.
The Explanations, Too?
Up until Kehatiâs comments, it was relatively easy to grasp both the need for, and the idea of, an oral Torah. It is conceivable that God spoke more to Moshe than what he actually wrote down; moreover, it is even conceivable that Moshe passed down much instruction verbally to Joshua, and so on. But Kehati speaks of more than just explanatory or additional instruction from God. He said that when Moshe received the written Torah, he also received "laws, rules of inference and interpretations from the Almighty Himself." This means, among other things, that the proper interpretations for each Torah passage were also given to Moshe in the oral Torah.
Kehati did not invent this concept. Indeed, it existed from ages past. But one of the most forthright clarifications of this comes from the Rambam (Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon), the great twelfth-century Sephardic sage. In the introduction to one of his greatest works, the Mishneh Torah, Rambam wrote,
All of the commandments (mitzvot) that were given to Moshe on Mount Sinai were given with their meaning, as it is written: "And I give you the tablets of stone and the Torah and the mitzvah"; the "Torah" is the written law and the "mitzvah" is the oral law. Before his death Moshe wrote down all of the Torah. He gave one book to each of the tribes and one book was put in the Ark for all time·.He did not write down the "mitzvah," which is the explanation of the Torah, but taught it to the elders and to Joshua and to all of Israel.20
Thus, it becomes clear that the oral Torah is much more than a few additional teachings, passed verbally from God to Moshe and thence to the great sages. In addition to these verbal teachings, it is claimed that God gave Moshe the understanding and correct interpretation of all of Torah. This, too, was passed on by word of mouth.
The Waters Get Very Muddy
There is yet a third part to the total concept of oral Torah. The teachings in the oral Torah were great for Mosheâs generation, but what about the specific needs of subsequent generations? The rabbis answer this question by explaining that the written Torah gives each generation the authority to make binding rulings for that generation. The passage (That is) cited in support of this idea is Deuteronomy 17:8-13. Here, claim the rabbis, the written Torah grants the sages in each generation the power to make authoritative and binding halachic decisions. These rulings are also considered oral Torah.
Rabbi Simcha Cohen elucidates this idea when he writes, "In addition, since ours is a living law, binding on a Jew in whatever society he lives, the law must be clearly understood in the light of changing civilizations and different societies."
21 Cohen further illustrates this idea by citing Rambam, who decided to "update" the oral Torah for his generation.Rambam states that he studied all the important and available writings÷both Talmuds, the midrashim, the Tosefta, and others÷in order "to learn from them what is forbidden and what is permitted, and other laws of the Torah."
22 As a result, the Rambam made his own compilation of the oral Torah "so that there will be one complete oral law, comprehensible to everyone without need for questioning or dissection."23After the Rambam, R. Joseph Caro completed his update in the sixteenth century in the form of Shulchan Aruch. Consequently, others following him did the same, such as the Chafetz Chaim in the twentieth century in his Mishnah Brura.
Fixed and Fluid
Thus, the oral Torah is basically comprised of three different components. It was eventually written down in the form of the Mishnah by R. Yehudah haNasi (Rabbi Judah the Prince, or "the Rabbi" in the Talmud) around the year 200 CE. He saw a need to make the oral Torah somewhat standard for the diverse and dispersed Jewish community. Thus, the oral Torah is, on the one hand, a fixed entity. However, because it was intended to meet the needs of each generation, it is also a fluid entity. Hence, Rabbi Cohen asserts that Rabbi Yehudahâs Mishnah "was appropriate only for his generation."
24 Hence, the next generations of sages, called the Amoraim, produced the Gemarah. This commentary on the Mishnah was combined with it to produce the Talmud. The Talmud, then, is the most authoritative collection of oral Torah.When we say that the oral Torah is fluid, we mean that each generation must study, know, and use the previous generationâs oral Torah to formulate its halachic policies. At no point could a new oral Torah contradict an older one. What was binding for the Mishnah generation is also binding for us today.
Bearing in that this is the best brief explanation of the complex concept of oral Torah we can make. Let us now see if this oral Torah is the true Torah, or if we have an impostor here.
An Analysis
What are we to make of the concept of oral Torah? First, let us say that part of the concept seems to make sense. As we have mentioned, it does seem that Moshe taught Israel more than he wrote down. One question that can be posed, however, is how accurately all of this information was passed down by scores of mouths over a period of hundreds of years. Moreover, does the written Torah, in fact, actually teach that there was an oral Torah, as the rabbis insist? Finally, how much authority should we give to the body of literature known as the oral Torah?
The Torah itself hints against a divinely inspired oral tradition. One example is Godâs instruction in Deuteronomy 17:14-20 as to how a king of Israel must conduct himself while in office. God specifically told him to make a copy of the Torah for himself. Notice that the king was not directed to make a copy of a body of oral tradition and conduct his office from that. Rather, it was the written word that was to be his rule and authority. True, the king may have relied on traditional oral instruction, but if this was divinely inspired, one would expect God to have commanded him to conduct his kingship by that. God, however, gave no such instruction. The only authoritative guide for the kings of Israel was the written Torah.
The Torah that Hilkiah found and Josiah obeyed was not the so-called oral Torah. Rather, it was the written Word of God, which worked a deep, spiritual work among the people. This is not to say that all man-made traditions are wrong. However, two things are certain. First, if there was an authoritative oral tradition in existence in Josiahâs day, there is no indication of it in the Scriptures; and second, it was the written Torah that God used to work spiritual reform among His people÷not a body of oral laws.
The Holy One was careful to ensure that all necessary and binding revelation was written down and preserved accurately. If the so-called oral Torah was just as binding, it would seem natural and reasonable that it too would have been inscribed by Moshe. However, the biblical evidence, especially in the Prophets and the Writings, strongly mitigates against it.
Challenging the Rambam
Earlier in this study we cited Rambamâs rationale for the oral Torah. He makes a distinction between Torah and mitzvot, saying that "the Torah" refers to the written Torah, while the oral Torah is comprised of the mitzvot.
This explanation seems reasonable on the surface. However, the Scriptures present a serious challenge to it. Consider the passage in which Joshua leads the people of Israel in a covenant renewal ceremony on Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal. When the service was over, Joshua "read all the words of the Torah, the blessing and the curse, according to all that is written in the book of the Torah." The person writing this account, apparently Joshua, provides his own important commentary on the event in verse 35: "There was not a word of all that Moshe had commanded which Joshua did not read before all the assembly." (Joshua 8:31-35)
Verse 35 provides us with two pieces of information which are valuable for our analysis of oral Torah. First, it says that all that Moshe commanded was written, and then read. Second, this includes the mitzvot! (The word "mitzvot" also appears many times in the written Torah.) The Hebrew word translated "commanded" is from the word tzaveh (
hwc), the word from which we get "mitzvot." What Joshua was saying is that everything Moshe had spoken was written and read÷including the mitzvot!Let us go to one last passage from the Book of Joshua. This time we will examine 23:6-8. Here, the Lord Himself is encouraging Joshua to follow Him and His Word. In doing so, He writes,
Be very firm, then, to keep and do all that is written in the book of the Torah of Moshe, so that you may not turn aside from it to the right hand or to the left, in order that you may not associate with these nations, these which remain among you, or mention the name of their gods, or make anyone swear by them, or serve them, or bow down to them. But you are to cling to the Lord your God, as you have done to this day.
If an oral Torah existed, why did the Lord not command Joshua to cling to it as well as to "all that is written in the book of the Torah of Moshe?" Could it be that God really did give instruction which Moshe did not inscribe, but which He did not intend to be passed from generation to generation? We would like to submit that this is exactly what happened. Each generation was to follow the written Torah under the direction of the Spirit of God, and not with a fixed, established interpretation called oral Torah.
Justified Interpretations?
The sages also claim that the oral Torah helps us to understand the written Torah by providing the authoritative interpretations of the written Torah. Rabbi Cohen provides a vivid example. He relates the story of Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai being secretly removed from Jerusalem by his disciples when Jerusalem was under Roman siege led by Vespasian. Rabbi ben Zakkai saw the handwriting on the wall, so to speak, concerning the downfall of Jerusalem, and felt he should do all he could to help preserve Judaism. But because of the policies of the Zealots, Jews were not permitted to leave the city unless they were going to bury someone. This is exactly how he escaped÷his followers carried him out in a coffin!
When he got to Roman lines, the rabbi devised a way to convince the officials to let him through. He pronounced a prophecy to Vespasian concerning his immediate future. In a short time, he said, he would become the new Emperor, which actually happened while ben Zakkai was still held by the Romans. But he worded this prophecy to Vespasian in very cryptic terms. Ben Zakkai told him, "You will be King, because if you are not, Jerusalem will not be yours, as it is written, Îand the Lebanon will fall to a mighty oneâ [Isaiah 10:34], and there is no mighty one but a King."
Ben Zakkai cited Isaiah 10:34 and connected "Lebanon" with Jerusalem and the Temple Mount. By making this connection, he revealed his allegorical method of Torah interpretation, using an existing interpretation of Deuteronomy 3:25 found in the oral Torah. This use of the oral Torah in interpreting the written reveals "how the sages penetrated the written with the help of the oral tradition."
25 This example illustrates for us the relationship of the oral Torah to the written. The key phrase in this example is the last statement by Rabbi Cohen, "Rabbi Yochananâs words reveal how the sages penetrated the written with the help of the oral tradition." (italics ours)However, does the oral tradition really help us to consistently penetrate the written Scripture in an accurate way? Take a closer look at Deuteronomy 3:25. Do we have any hermeneutical permission from the context to understand the word "Lebanon" as anything other than the literal geographical location just north of the land of Israel? By what authority do the ancient sages make such fanciful interpretations of Scripture, and call it oral Torah?
When a sage gave an interpretation of a Scriptural passage by following a series of qualifications, it was considered authoritative, and therefore part of the oral Torah÷whether or not it fit the context or plain meaning of the words! As we have already learned from Rabbi Cohen, the ancient rabbis÷and modern ones÷derive practices and understandings from Torah passages that do not seem to have any direct relation to the subject under discussion. Is this an honest and just way to handle Godâs precious words?
Yeshua challenged such erroneous interpretations of the written Torah in Matthew 5-7. Here Yeshua was discussing some Torah issues. Over and against the established oral tradition of His day, He provided the original, God-intended meaning of the passages under question. Every time we see the formula, "You have heard that it was said·but I say unto you·" Yeshua is debunking an interpretation of the Torah based on a so-called oral Torah.
Yeshua and the Oral Torah÷The Second Temple Period
According to Pirke Avot 1:1, the oral Torah was passed on to the generations after Moshe, including those of the late Second Temple period. In fact, Avot itself contains many quotations from distinguished sages who lived during that period. This, of course, was the age, in which Yeshua lived and taught. "Jesus lived in a Jewish world," according to Dr. David Flusser, professor emeritus at Jerusalemâs Hebrew University, "which was flourishing within the framework of the written law (the Bible) and the oral law (what later became the Talmud)."
26Flusser contends that Yeshua was in the thick of that worldâs religious conflicts. According to a growing consensus of modern scholars of the Brit Hadasha, Yeshua lived as an observant Jewish man and debated with many prominent rabbis of his day over issues related to both the written and oral Torahs. "Jesus was scrupulous in keeping the Jewish commandments," says Flusser. The question is, what was His relationship to the oral Torah?
Not His Authority
At least two things can be said about Messiah and the oral Torah. The first is that not only was He familiar with it, but in certain respects He followed it. In Yeshuaâs day, there were two schools of Pharisaism, the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel, representing two distinct understandings of oral Torah. (Shammai and Hillel were very influential rabbis of a generation just before Yeshua.) According to Flusser,
When we examine Jesusâ position on matters of Jewish law, it appears that on some things he accepted the view of the more stringent authorities÷the School of Shammai÷and on the others, especially on matters of ideology, he was closer to the School of Hillel, whose motto was, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." These views become evident when we examine Jesusâ teachings and compare them to the other rabbinical teaching of his day.
Apparently Yeshua agreed with some interpretations of the written Torah which the oral Torah provided. However, accepting some teachings of oral Torah is far different than accepting its divine origin. Nor does it mean that He accepted or agreed with its authority.
Manâs Laws Over Godâs Torah
Let us look at one example which provides a clue as to Yeshuaâs true attitude toward the oral Torah. In Mark 7:1-8, Yeshua discusses with some other Pharisees the issue of ritual hand-washing before a meal. Yeshuaâs disciples did not follow the teaching of this group of Pharisees, who took Him to task for it. Verse 3 explains the Phariseesâ custom: "For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they carefully wash their hands, thus observing the traditions of the elders·."
The final phrase, "observing the traditions of the elders," was conventionally used to denote the oral Torah. Yeshua was being reproved for failing to submit to the authority of oral Torah as observed by this group of Pharisees.
Yeshua gave His reasoning and His intended teaching, and then uttered these critical words in verses 7-8:
Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, "This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far away from Me. But in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men. Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men."
This was spoken as a rebuke to those who had criticized Him for breaking the oral Torah. It strikes at the very heart of the issue of written versus oral Torah. He tells them, as He would on other occasions, "Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men." Yeshua found no problems with the teachings of the oral Torah when they provided insights or explanations that were true and accurate to the written Torah. However, there were times when the oral Torah was granted authority equal to÷and even superseding÷that of the written.28 When this happened, Yeshua proclaimed the oral Torah to be merely the teachings of men, not of God! In issuing such a rebuke, He was also stating that He did not consider the oral Torah to be authoritative for the man of God, the man of Torah.
The Value of the Oral Torah
We do not accept the authority of the body of Jewish literature known as the oral Torah, nor do we view it as the inspired Word of God. However, there can be tremendous value in reading and studying rabbinic literature. In fact, even Yeshua followed some rabbinic traditions.
Dr. David Friedman is a Messianic Jewish scholar living in Israel. An expert on the Second Temple period, Dr. Friedman points out that the early rabbinic literature, such as the Mishnah and Talmud, can be invaluable in helping us to understand the historical and religious background of the Brit Hadasha. Friedman states,
As the Jewish talmudic scholar Shmuel Safrai of the Hebrew University has pointed out, rabbinic literature, and the Talmud in particular, is by far our best source for understanding the structure, priestly function, sacrificial methods, and festival ceremonies of the Second Temple. Since Yeshua lived in this world, since He carried out His teachings at the temple, and since He sacrificed and attended festival ceremonies there, it is worthwhile to be familiar with the Talmudâs description of these areas.29
Friedman then offers a useful chart that summarizes the areas of background information provided by various rabbinic texts:
| Rabbinic Text | Possible Background Purpose |
|
Mishnah Sanhedrin |
Justice and Court Systems of the Second Temple Period |
|
Mishnah Yadayim |
Pharisaic Purity Ideas of Second Temple Period |
|
Mishnah Succot |
Pharisaic Laws and Customs |
|
Mishnah Yoma |
Second Temple Yom Kippur Rituals |
|
Dead Sea Scrolls |
Understanding Dead Sea Sect Views on Purity, Serving God, Messiah, and Community |
|
Pirke Avot |
Rabbinic Worldview of Yeshua's Time |
|
Book of Maccabees |
History of Israel 150-100 Years Before Yeshua, Start of Chanukah Holiday |
|
Midot |
Temple Structure |
|
Tamid |
Second Temple Daily Ritual |
|
Shekalim |
Second Temple Taxation System |
In addition to aiding our understanding of the Brit Hadasha, the oral Torah can also serve to "heighten the appreciation of the church for the efforts that Jewish people have made throughout history to protect, preserve, spread, and interpret the Scriptures."
Moreover, the rabbinic writings have been extremely beneficial in teaching us how to follow many commandments of the Torah. For example: how do we affix a mezuzzah on the door? How do we celebrate Pesach? How do we properly slaughter a kosher animal for food? The oral Torah provides many excellent suggestions for following these and other teachings of the written Torah. And while we do not consider the rabbisâ instructions to be the only way to do these things, they nevertheless can prove very instructive. Furthermore, as we follow the rabbinic practices÷so long as they do not contradict either the Tenakh or the Brit Hadasha÷we are standing in solidarity with our people.
Finally, reading and studying the oral Torah lends tremendous insight into the minds of the great Jewish sages. As we learn what they thought, what they felt, and how they looked at life, we will be able to better appreciate the Jewish sensibility throughout the ages. It is hoped that this would help to curb the anti-Semitism which has run rampant through much of the Churchâs history.
It is now time for you, the members of our "panel," to render an opinion. Is the oral Torah a real, genuine Torah from the Holy One, equal to the written Torah in its power to transform a soul and in its spiritual authority? Does the written Torah permit us to assume an oral Torah, given by God to Moshe but authoritative for every generation? Or are we to depend on the leading and teaching of the Spirit of God to apply Torahâs precepts to our generation?
Spiritual Authority
At stake here, among other things, is the issue of spiritual authority. Are we to obey Godâs teachings as written, or are we required to obey the megalith of minute details outlined by the rabbis in the oral Torah?
Some believe that the oral Torah is a fixed entity. We must do, they say, only what the rabbis tell us we can do, as expressed both in the Talmud and in their offices today. But do their laws carry true spiritual authority, equal to the "Thus says the Lord" of the Tenakh?
For the believer, the key issue is to live the Torah as God actually gave it. The first saying in Pirke Avot provides a sad clue to the rabbinical idea behind oral Torah. After informing us of the genealogy of the oral Torah, the writer of this Mishnah exhorts us to "make a fence for the Torah." It must be said that the intentions behind this idea were beyond reproach. The sages, in search of a way to prevent their people from breaking the written Torah, decided to construct a fence around it. As Kehati writes, "The Torah charges the Rabbinical Courts to devise provisions, decrees, and restrictions which will prevent a person from violating a law of the Torah."
31This system of prevention, however, as admirable as it may seem, possesses an inherent flaw. What actually happens in this process is that the true Torah (Godâs teaching in regard to His righteousness) is changed into man-made laws which, not being the words of life, cannot bring forth life. Rabbi Shaâul of Tarsus, himself thoroughly trained in the oral Torah, aptly says concerning the Torah teachers of his day: Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God, they seek to establish their own; and in so doing, they do not submit to Godâs righteousness. (Romans 10:1-8, our paraphrase)
"Law" Versus Torah
God has revealed His mind, heart, and righteousness in the written Torah. The original writers recorded what He spoke to them with 100% accuracy. No one has the right to make even one change in this written revelation. If a halacha is developed which does not match the Torah teaching exactly as written, it ceases to be consistent with the words of life, and hence cannot bring forth the life of Messiah in the believer.
When God gave the Torah, He also instructed us in how to view it. He specifically advised us that its commandments were not impossible to obey. Because this is true, and knowing the tendency of man in his flesh, God was warning us not to develop a mentality that says, "You must obey exactly as the Îexpertsâ say it must be obeyed, because their explanation is binding for their generation."
Oral Torah consists of an interpretation of the written Torah and, according to the rabbis, an authoritative halacha based on that interpretation. Our loving Father knew what men would try to do to the written Torah, perverting it into an oral one. He knew that the oral Torah experts would pronounce the believer unable to understand the Torah without their help. Knowing this tendency in people, the Lord wrote a safeguard for us in Deuteronomy 30:11-14. He said,
For this commandment which I command you today is not too difficult for you, nor is it out of reach. It is not in heaven, that you should say, "Who will go up to heaven for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?" Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, "Who will cross the sea for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?" But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it.
Rabbi Shaâul exhorts Messianic believers to this effect in Romans 10. Here, quoting Deuteronomy 30:11-14, he explains how one who has Godâs righteousness views the Torah. He says, "But the righteousness based on faith speaks thus, ÎDo not say in your heart, "Who will ascend into heaven?"·or "Who will descend into the abyss?" Why does the righteousness based on faith speak in this way? Because such a person knows what Godâs original instructions to us were and still are. They are very clear.
Shaâul was well versed in the oral Torah. He knew its pitfalls. He also knew that those who fostered the oral Torah were, in reality, turning the Torah into "law." This law did not reflect the righteousness of God; rather, it was the codification of manâs righteousness. But Shaâul said that one who has Godâs righteousness does not need to look high or low for its proper interpretation or application. Instead, Godâs Torah is always accessible to him.
Romans 10:2 teaches us that a person can be zealous for God with a zeal not based on knowledge. Does zealousness confirm or establish truth? According to Shaâulâs teaching in Romans 10, such a zealot merely establishes his own righteousness, while ignoring Godâs righteousness as expressed in the written Scriptures.
It is important to bear in mind that Judaism, as known by some of its most prominent scholars, does not purport itself to be a legalistic religion. Indeed, some of its most ardent spokesmen would cringe at that idea. The eminent Jewish New Testament scholar Pinchas Lapide affirms this idea when he says, "The rabbinate has never considered the Torah as a way of salvation to God·[rather we] regard salvation as Godâs exclusive prerogative, so that we Jews are the advocates of Îpure grace.â " That may be true, at least in theory. But most of the Jewish world has either lost sight of that biblical understanding, or practiced their faith in such a way as to convey that the purpose of their obedience to Torah is to earn a place in the world to come. Thus, we also concur with Bean when he says, "In spite of this [Judaismâs purported emphasis on grace], one of Paulâs main problems was the teachings of Judaisers, who insisted that both Jewish and Gentile believers must obey the letter of the Law." 36
Being well versed in the traditional rabbinic thinking of his day, therefore, Shaâul deemed it essential to counteract any semblance of legalism both within and without the believing community. Thus his characterization of Judaism in Romans 10 was not only accurate, but central to his point: zeal and sincerity notwithstanding, works-based righteousness has no place in Godâs kingdom.
Has the true Torah been distorted by the assignment of divine authority to the oral torah, and by legalistic obedience to the written? Members of the panel, render your decisions. When the master of ceremonies intones, "Will the true Torah please stand up," will the oral torah arise÷or another?