"As far as I am aware the Mishnah is the collection of oral tradition of the Pharisees which they commenced during the Exile - it was their own judgments - not something from the time of Moses.
I think I have acknowledged that.
I know that you said the quote which I provided. What I gave you showed that you were wrong about Oral tradition. It did not come from the Pharisees.
Yarddog said: "What I gave you proved that you are incorrect about the Mishnah, unless you want to prove the Jews of today know less than yourself about their traditions."
If you wonder about what I said, go back and read the information that I gave you in the prior post showing that Oral tradition came from Moses and not the Pharisees.
The Pharisees only came into existing at the time of the Exile. So what are you referring to here?
That Oral tradition preceded the Pharisees and originated with Moses and that is the Pharisees that say it.
That is the basis of your error because theology did not originate with Paul. If Paul created the theology then Jesus did nothing with the Disciples that preceded Paul in Christian theology. Paul "and" Barnabas teaching that Gentiles should not have to submit to all the Mosaic Laws does not equate into Paul creating the theology. Christian theology existed well before Paul
began teaching and writing.
Most people in 1st century Palestine could neither read or write. Only the select few achieved such a status. Clearly Jesus went to 1st university.
What was it that you said in the last post? Oh yeah, the below applies to your theories as well.
I am not interested in what one might 'believe' - I am not interested in what might have happened.
By maintaining your mantra as if the repeating 'Son of God' is the only answer you think I need.
You don't believe that God can read and write English, Russian, Hebrew, or any language? You put limitations, not me.
Because if that is all you can see you miss the message Jesus is trying to convey.
That's fine, enlighten us with your grand theology, on that subject.
My statement was neither snide nor as you claim. I said the Pharisees were the ones who tried to live perfectly under the law.
No you didn't. You said:
"What? That was the whole object of being a Pharisee - to live under the Law - perfectly."
You did not say they "tried", you said "perfectly". Your whole premise has been that Jesus was a Pharisee but you fail to establish any proof.
Exactly. Now all you have to work out is in what way they 'failed'.
They failed to understand the Spirit of the Law and the proper practice as well. Man cannot purify himself and attain righteousness through his own efforts, such as obeying the Mosaic Law. The only way that we can find righteousness is through trusting in God. We follow God's spiritual laws because we have faith and not because we are trying to make ourselves righteous.
Good - we seem to have that much established.
Establishing that has not been the problem, that has always been there. That Jesus was a Pharisee has been the question which you have been trying to push in many recent posts.
But what was Jesus 'speaking out' about? It was not the fact that they were trying to act perfectly within the law. What he demonstrated, using debate as his pedagogical tool, was while failing in their attempt to keep the law they expected others to be perfect condemning them for the failings which they themselves so able illustrated.
I agree, but that has not been the discussion. You have not established your claim that Jesus was a Pharisee. This is getting away from the point.