Concerning the excellent research material you noted, I'd also add in
Reclaiming the Reputation of the Pharisees | Think Hebrew as well as articles such as the following:
There are other scholars with much valuable information which may be beneficial for anyone wishing to review further. For a good read on what Jesus may've held to, one book that may be a blessing to investigate is entitled "
Jesus the Pharisee: A New Look at the Jewishness of Jesus" by Harvey Falk. He did an excellent job on discussing the reality of what has often been said in Judaism when it came to the Noahide Laws. To see snippets of his work, one can go online/research an article that can be found under the name of
"Khirbet Qumran, the Essene Community along the Wadi Succacah near the Dead Sea -- The Essenes, the Hasidim and the Righteous Gentile of the Nations”"and here to
Rabbi Harvey Falk defends “Jesus the Nazarene’s Mission to the Gentiles: Divine Mission to Bring the “Good News” to the Gentiles
For more review on the book, one can go
here to
Book Review: Jesus The Pharisee by Harvey Falk | Grasping Mashi'ach.
As that Messianic stated:
Although subtitled as a “New Look at the Jewishness of Jesus”, Rabbi Falk’s work is a reintroduction of Jacob Emden’s original thoughts expanded and applied to Jesus teachings based on various Talmudic and historic rabbinic texts. In the 1700’s Emden wrote favorably of Christianity by expressing his view that Jesus and Paul had acted completely within halacha in creating a religion for the Gentiles based on the Noahide Commandments while yet considering Jewish law eternally binding upon the Jew.
From this thesis of Rabbi Emden — long forgotten and disregarded by scholars in general (yet brought to attention again in Rudolph’s Paul’s Rule paper) — Falk goes on to weave a fascinating and intriguing picture of Jesus as a Pharisee in the first century CE world in which he lived. Each chapter presents intricate details of various Talmudic and rabbinic writings that the author uses to present Jesus as an adherent of the school of Hillel and member of the sect of the Essenes. In Falk’s view the debate of the Eighteen Measures between the school of Hillel and school of Shammai, in which numerous prophets of Hillel were killed, followed shortly after by the death of Hillel in 10 CE, resulted in Hillel’s disciples going “underground” by joining the sect of the Essenes. This allowed the house of Shammai to gain dominance until the close of the first century.
Falk presents Jesus mission as the establishment of a religion for the Gentiles based on the Noahide commandments, a mission presented in both the Talmud and Maimonides as something Moses obligated Israel to accomplish once they had gained a position of prominence as a nation. Because Israel had not gained such a position by the time of the first century CE the obligation never went into effect. Jesus, in spreading the knowledge of HaShem and the Noahide commandments to the Gentiles did so as a means of creating Hasidim of the Nations, by going beyond the letter of the halacha as given to Moses.
.
did an excellent review on the subject as well
The book by Harvey Faulk has truly been a blessing/good way to build dialouge between those who are Christians and Jews----as its often the case that both sides miss the Mark when trying to polarize. Of course, I don't agree with all of his conclusions. In example,
I don't think he really grapples with those areas in which Jesus and the School of Hillel did most definitely part company---and for more,
go here.
Though I agree that Christ came to create something entirely new that would be inclusive to the Gentiles, there's the reality that Jesus often emphasized making certain that the Jews would come first in those he reached out to. This is seen, in example, when he gave the command to his twelve disciples to not "go in the way of the Gentiles or Samaritans," but instead to bring the gospel "to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (
Matthew 10:5ff /
Matthew 10:4-6 ) when ministry began.
I do not find Y'shua anti-talmud (Rabbinic teaching) at all. I find that he is arguing with the schools of thought and hashing out what is and is not the correct interpretation of following G-d. Nothing more, nothing less. If one is well steeped in Scriptural understanding, and they're handed the Talmud with a great scholar teaching them, I'm sure you'll find a lot of the same.
Thanks for noting such. One of the articles you shared is something I've shared before ( in #
54 ) when it comes to how Christ actually referenced the "Seven Types of Pharisees" within the Talmud when denoucing them in Matthew 23...for he was not coming up with new things altogether since he actually had many of his beliefs line up fully with the Pharisee system. Of course, to say that he was fully a Pharisee wouldn't make sense since he had differences with them on a couple of points--and as said best at
Essenes | That the World May Know - Follow the Rabbi and
Sons of Light - Follow the Rabbi, others have noted that that Christ (alongside John the Baptist) had significant connection with the Essene party on a host of levels. A good analogy for it would be someone saying that they support the Republican party..as just because they happen to have Republican beliefs doesn't mean that they support all aspects of the party..nor would it mean that they cannot support aspects of another party. They're support of a party would be be mutually exclusive of their ability to still have their own mind/thoughts..
I've not had a chance to sit down and study it as a whole document, but bits and pieces, nibbles and bites. And what nibbles and bites I've had, I'm seeing within Scripture and it makes a lot of sense
There are some things within it, from what I've studied, that do give me pause...but there are many other things which seem more than logical.
